OTC coming to an end in COLORADO???

[Btaylor]

The feds can't even manage the land out here correctly you think they could handle wildlife?

It is our land. If it is not being managed properly, we are in large part to blame for not holding our elected officials accountable for doing their part to hold the agencies accountable. I know for a fact that I am guilty of not being as involved as I could be in communicating with my elected officials. I also know that we need to do a better job communicating issues and that is where an organization like BHA can have a major impact. I am not opposed to reaching out to my elected officials as it relates to an issue in another state but I first have to know what the issue is.

To answer your question, no I do not think the Feds can or should manage wildlife without the assistance and or imput of local agency personnel.

 

[CorbLand]

I dont know all the particulars either but it has been my understanding that the state did not make that rule and in fact lobbied against it. It seems to me there should be a better way to manage things than it currently is done. Further I am adamantly opposed to any state's legislators having authority of wildlife management decisions. Those decisions should never been made by politicians or potential decisions be used for political gain. In my mind that is a fight that should be viewed on the same level as protecting public land.

This is where we will have respectively disagree. I am all for keeping land under Federal management but I think the States do a great job on wildlife as a whole. There are things I dont like about it but overall, the chance of me advocating for the Feds to take over wildlife management, nope. Way to much would have to change for that to work and thats not happening anytime soon.

 

[jmann28]

Living in Michigan and lucky enough to have an uncle in CO, I've had a very accomplished 30+ year elk hunter teach me the ropes. Hunts OTC when he doesn't draw our preferred unit and gets an elk virtually every year. He's had a handful of guys request his help when drawing big units, I would admittedly state I'm VERY fortunate to have a free guide .

There's elk everywhere and getting farther away from the trailhead is key. I started going back in 2010 and every year I too see more and more non Colorado License plates. But, being one of those non residents, I can tell you the price of the tag is irrelevant as it's a state that gives us an option to chase elk with a bow, every year I want. If they cap the OTC tags, I would be a little disappointed but would understand. I do see bears every year and would GLADLY be forced to pay another 25-50 a tag to have a bear tag included. I would love to have a bear tag but cant justify another 600 when I'm there for elk.


From what I know, the CBA has a pretty strong influence on things out there right? Anyone know what role they're playing in this?

 

[orionthehunter1]

Killing elk is not the point, I notch my tag pretty much every year. No there are not elk everywhere and no offense but someone who has only hunted here for 8 years has no idea what they are talking about when it comes to herd health, especially when they didn't experience the huge herds we used to have.

 

[Btaylor]

This is where we will have respectively disagree. I am all for keeping land under Federal management but I think the States do a great job on wildlife as a whole. There are things I dont like about it but overall, the chance of me advocating for the Feds to take over wildlife management, nope. Way to much would have to change for that to work and thats not happening anytime soon.

What I was trying to get at there was that wildlife management decisions should be made by the state wildlife agency not at the state capitol by legislators like is the case in some states. Where I think there is an opportunity would be for the USFWS to have a unified random draw process for all federal lands with tag allocations for each unit specified by state F&W personnel.

 

[5MilesBack]

Dont live out there but I have never understood why the Feds have allowed the states out west to make such a clusterfrick out of the hunting regs and tags.

It's because the Feds don't have anything to do with the state's hunting regs and tags.......and thank goodness they don't.

 

[Jqualls]

Really, guys complaining about the tag price are ridiculous we pay 46 dollars making it a hundred is not a big deal. I love when guys driving 50,000 dollar trucks with 10,000 dollar razors on a trailer behind it whine about a tag increase

For most of us on this site you are right, but I know many people who truly rely on the meat each year and $100 is a lot of money and making it harder for these people goes against the true nature of hunting in my opinion.

 

[orionthehunter1]

I get what your saying but the tag price is still a great deal and way cheaper then buying a beef

 

[MuleyFever]

Really, guys complaining about the tag price are ridiculous we pay 46 dollars making it a hundred is not a big deal. I love when guys driving 50,000 dollar trucks with 10,000 dollar razors on a trailer behind it whine about a tag increase

Well, its hard to pay for tags when you have all those payments to make.

 

[gbflyer]

It is our land. If it is not being managed properly, we are in large part to blame for not holding our elected officials accountable for doing their part to hold the agencies accountable. I know for a fact that I am guilty of not being as involved as I could be in communicating with my elected officials. I also know that we need to do a better job communicating issues and that is where an organization like BHA can have a major impact. I am not opposed to reaching out to my elected officials as it relates to an issue in another state but I first have to know what the issue is.

To answer your question, no I do not think the Feds can or should manage wildlife without the assistance and or imput of local agency personnel.

Heck with the new CO governor, there might be a season on rainbow ponies

Sorry, couldn’t help it.

 

[SummitsCalling]

I get what your saying but the tag price is still a great deal and way cheaper then buying a beef

You should lookup what a non resident license, and tag costs, won't even touch fuel costs to get to co vs driving in state. Buy a whole beef is cheaper, much much cheaper. Non residents supplement resident tags, always have and always will and I normally hunt out of state (NV). If residents really want something to complain about, peg the price of resident tags to half of non resident and sit back and watch all the snowflakes melt

 

[TravisIN]

I get what your saying but the tag price is still a great deal and way cheaper then buying a beef

Haha I say stuff like this too but I know I’m lying. By the time I have spent all the money on gear and gas and tags I’m definitely in it for way more than a beef. Hahaha even more so when I come home empty handed. But that’s my story and I’m sticking to it!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[tdhanses]

I can promise that would increase OTC numbers. Everyone I know would rather go hunt than sit at home and build points.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk

Hard to say, I don’t know the stats on who participates currently or doesn’t, otc may not change much but le might be easier to draw if your patient and willing to not hunt each year.

Based on your example your crew is adding to point creep and still hunting each year, really all that would change is your group would no longer build pts.

 

[ckleeves]

I can promise that would increase OTC numbers. Everyone I know would rather go hunt than sit at home and build points.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk

I don’t know how it would increase OTC numbers. It’s already been stated, but everyone who is building points now is also hunting OTC. So unless people who have only been building points and not hunting suddenly decide they want to abandon the points they have been building and out of the blue start pursuing OTC hunts that they haven’t been previously then the numbers don’t increase.

The people holding a good amount of points wouldn’t be hunting OTC so numbers decrease the way I see it. Some of these people would want to get back to hunting every year and therefore burn their points on lesser units to get out of the point game and back into the OTC game that they have always been a part of anyway.


Just speculating (it’s not like this is part of the season structure as far as I know)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jmez]

My comment was in regards to a proposal that you couldn't both hunt OTC and build points at the same time. You pick one or the other. If that were the case then I think most would opt to hunt rather than stay home.

td, I agree and think the LE areas would then become easier to draw if you were willing to wait.

 

[WV Mountaineer]

I don’t get why so many are anti ML during archery, in the 7 or 8 years I’ve hunted CO it has been during the ML season and I’ve never really ran into one other then when packing out to a TH. This year was the first time I saw a bear rifle hunter.

To me it seems that some worry over a non issue.

It would be interesting if they changed it to you either apply or buy an OTC tag and no buying points. If you apply and don’t draw you get a point but can’t buy an otc tag. I wonder if this would increase otc unit numbers.

I've been to Colorado a few times since 2008. I have never laid eyes on one single muzzle loader hunter in the woods. And, I hunt a very popular unit. I have saw the same bow hunters I saw since 2008. Literally the exact same three bow hunters while in the woods over those trips. Now, if you drive along the roads going to town, you'd think it was a county fair going on. But, in the woods, nothing but stinking sheep and Mexican cowboys that act like they can't speak English.

I don't know the answers. There is a part of me that feels for the resident that wants more perks from their home state. But, there is a larger part of me that says suck it up. You got the greatest thing going and don't seem to realize it. You could live in any almost any part of Colorado and be within an hour of an OTC elk hunting. Where else can this be done? To be able to elk hunt every year on $30 worth of gas is priceless. And, if I can come to CO and kill elk, surely being a scouting resident that lives with the elk, could do the same.

I hunt a million acre national forest here that is foot travel only. The adage that most of the hunters stay within a mile of the road does not hold credence here for the residents. I see hunters from time to time in the woods and many days the miles are approaching or above the 7-8 mile round trip in and out. That's just trail miles too. Not counting climbing the mountain and such. So, imagine my dismay and irritation this year when I passed 14 Amish men and women packing deep into the wilderness area to hunt where I do. I was pissed, upset, and scared for what the future holds for my hunting area with that many determined people now hunting there. But, when I thought about it with a more calm head, I realized I was more scared of the potential then the effects. I never saw, heard, or even knew these people were alive the rest of my hunt.

So, given my experiences in CO and now here, it can't be as bad as some of you are making it out to be. If I can go out for 10 days of hunting and kill elk while not seeing people, surely CO residents could find a place where the hunting crowds do not affect their hunting either. FWIW, the problems I see in CO affecting elk hunting have nothing to do hunter numbers during September. They are being caused by hikers, backpackers, and all other users of public lands. Add in way to many grazing permits, dry summers, competition for forage with these huge herds of domestic sheep and cattle, increased cats populations, and a booming bear population, there seems to be a lot of things to blame for decreased hunter satisfaction besides the NR hunter.

 

[5MilesBack]

My comment was in regards to a proposal that you couldn't both hunt OTC and build points at the same time. You pick one or the other. If that were the case then I think most would opt to hunt rather than stay home.

Ya, except those that would rather hunt than stay home are already hunting every year........while they collect points. Those that are just collecting points and not currently hunting OTC will continue to collect points and still not hunt OTC. But I can't imagine that we have that many actual "hunters" that do that. If anything, I think we'd see less hunters hunting OTC at least initially, because they're already in the points game and won't just scrap that to choose OTC until they've used their points. Anybody with more than a few points will still want to use those points before committing to "OTC only".

 

[orionthehunter1]

WV Mountaineer and how long do you think it will last with an unlimited number of tags? Again it is not about killing elk plenty of guys commenting on here, myself included that notch plenty of tags. The concern is the dwindling number of elk, I mean you know it is noticeable when CPW actually admits there is an issue publicly. Yes, bears, drought, dwindling winter range all play a toll, but until CPW can actually manage units and get a true grasp of hunter numbers and harvest per unit then nothing will get better. I feel the only way they can truly manage on a unit to unit basis is by making it all a draw because right now they have no clue. For instance I have 7 different OTC units within an hour of my house sometimes I hunt one, sometimes 2 or more and I'm not the only one so how can CPW keep an accurate count on how much pressure a unit is getting with this happening, not to mention I haven't been contacted for a survey in years so how accurate are the harvest stats? I also don't see why we can't go to some type of mandatory harvest reporting like New Mexico its all online and takes a few minutes, also if you don't fill it out you are ineligible to apply the next year.

 

[5MilesBack]

The concern is the dwindling number of elk

So I guess you don't believe their herd estimates for the state? Back in the 80's they used to say we had about 180k elk in Colorado, and we used to see a lot of elk every hunting season. These days they say there are around 280k elk in the state, a 55% increase in numbers, and we still see a bunch of elk every season. So where is the disconnect? I will agree that there are a lot more elk living on private land year round these days than in the past, but that can't take up the entire 100k extra elk they're estimating. Or do you think their estimating is just WAY off?

Seems odd that they managed the population for around that 180k mark for years, yet these days with all the development that has taken place, the elk have even less holding ground than they used to have..........while the state tries to keep a herd of around 280k. That doesn't add up.

 

[cnelk]

I agree orionhunter1

It wouldnt take much to put in place mandatory harvest reporting. Ive been saying that for years

I bet we see that before 'All Draw for elk'