Hunting House » Hunting Season » Colorado Draw Proposal by CBA
Colorado Draw Proposal by CBA
Question:
The easy way to get rid of the farmer allocation is to do what is done back in NJ. A farmer may hunt on his, or an adjacent farm without purchasing a licence. Of course he must follow all the other laws pertaining to seasons and bag limits. The thing that would have to be changed is in NJ a farm is property of at least 5 acres, and sustaining at least a $500 profit/year. Out west a typical home owner has 5+ acres, so the size should be larger. I agree that the outfitters shouldn’t be alloted any licences. If they didn’t take their "share" up front, there’d still be buck licences avail for the third season and the customer need only to show up with his rifle and licence. samg Hewlett Packard/Colorado Springs
Response:
: (Please Read Whole Post Before Commenting, Thanks) : The last ‘The Colorado Bowhunter’ newsmagazine that I read : mentioned that the CBA is going to propose that at least 50% of the : limited tags go residents. As far as I know, this is just in the : planning stages and it hasn’t gone in front of the Wildlife Commision : yet, but I’m just wondering how my fellow hunters, both resident and : non-resident, feel about this? I think the outfitters should be "guaranteed" exactly *ZERO* licenses. Why should their clients not have to apply for licenses like the rest of us do? Pretty soon they’ll want 20%, then 25%, then 50%…..soon, unless you hire an outfitter you won’t have a chance to hunt…..all indications are this is exactly what they want. Just look at NM. I feel that AT LEAST 50% of the licenses should go to residents. In fact, I feel that resident BOWHUNTERS should not even have limited areas….heck, there’s only about 9,000 of us. Then they should have limited draw units for non-residents to spread them out. There are reportedly 13,000 or more non-resident bowhunters…. more than residents. With something on the order of 250K rifle hunters, I guess that’s a different story. : Anyway, it just struck me that 15% of the limited tags go to : landowners (for totally limited units) and another proposal had 15% of : the tags going to outfitters. Both of these proposals are WRONG, IMO. Why should either group get a guaranteed percentage of the licenses? Problem is that landowners give these licenses to friends, relatives, and DOW personnel so they can hunt on their land WITHOUT having to DRAW a permit like the rest of us do. This is as bad as lease hunting. I think perhaps landowners should be given licenses FOR THEIR OWN USE, but they should not be transferrable. If they are, it should be illegal for landowners to sell the licenses for more than the DOW charges for them. I see a guy offering a NM elk tag for something like $2K. That’s scalping!! : Fifty percent of the 70 percent left : doesn’t seem like much. Also, does anyone have any hard data showing : that non-residents are getting MORE than fifty percent of the Colorado : tags in the current system? Isn’t it 50% of the TOTAL? Non-residents outnumber residents in the bowhunting season. Just call the DOW for the numbers. the stats book shows total hunters, but doesn’t break it down by resident/non-resident. Maybe the CBA is just trying to protect us against future hordes of non-residents. : Wouldn’t the fifty percent rule mess up the : hunt codes with only a couple of tags available? What’s a New Yorker : going to do if he wants to apply in a group for a hunt code with two : tags (I’m thinking of Wildlife ranching)? Who cares 
? What hunt codes only have a couple of tags, besides sheep and goats? I believe only 10% of the sheep and goat licenses go to non-residents currently. : Also, if I apply in a group : with a person from Wyoming, am I hurting my chances of getting drawn : since I’m a Colorado resident? All of these question only apply if the : fifty percent rule is adopted by the commision. I know the answers : under the current system. I don’t know how that would work. I suppose it would go against you, just like applying with someone with fewer preference points than you. : I was very pleased with the last draw even though I didn’t draw : anything. I credited my failure with the popularity of my hunting spots : rather than non-residents getting ‘my’ tag. How do you know that? I’d bet you have stiff competition from NR hunters. Just look at the license plates on all the trucks. Colorado is about the only state that still allows unlimited hunting in many units. This HAS TO stop. I think residents should get some kind of preference in draw units…..in all states. Plus, I know that I’m going : to draw for my areas eventually (except for Sheep & Goat GRUMBLE). I’m : leary of having the draw changed if you couldn’t tell. I’ve been told : Colorado has the most confusing limited draw, would the fifty percent : rule make it worse? How would it make it worse? The computers take care of it for you. Laszlo Member: Wildlife Legislation Fund of America National Rifle Association Colorado Bowhunters Association Ft. Collins Archery Association PETA– People for the Eating of Tasty Animals I still miss my ex…..but my aim is improving! : Comments welcome. First time posting with this newsreader, hope : everything formats alright. : Brandon : PS I’m an Archer BTW, so don’t take it as a slam on the CBA. I : generally agree with the organization but the above proposal may affect : my decision to become a member. Like the CBA needs me, bleah.
Response:
(Please Read Whole Post Before Commenting, Thanks) The last ‘The Colorado Bowhunter’ newsmagazine that I read mentioned that the CBA is going to propose that at least 50% of the limited tags go residents. As far as I know, this is just in the planning stages and it hasn’t gone in front of the Wildlife Commision yet, but I’m just wondering how my fellow hunters, both resident and non-resident, feel about this? Unfortunately, I didn’t pay too much attention to the magazine, so I don’t know how current the issue is. May be OLD news and if so, so sorry ;P Anyway, it just struck me that 15% of the limited tags go to landowners (for totally limited units) and another proposal had 15% of the tags going to outfitters. Fifty percent of the 70 percent left doesn’t seem like much. Also, does anyone have any hard data showing that non-residents are getting MORE than fifty percent of the Colorado tags in the current system? Wouldn’t the fifty percent rule mess up the hunt codes with only a couple of tags available? What’s a New Yorker going to do if he wants to apply in a group for a hunt code with two tags (I’m thinking of Wildlife ranching)? Also, if I apply in a group with a person from Wyoming, am I hurting my chances of getting drawn since I’m a Colorado resident? All of these question only apply if the fifty percent rule is adopted by the commision. I know the answers under the current system. I was very pleased with the last draw even though I didn’t draw anything. I credited my failure with the popularity of my hunting spots rather than non-residents getting ‘my’ tag. Plus, I know that I’m going to draw for my areas eventually (except for Sheep & Goat GRUMBLE). I’m leary of having the draw changed if you couldn’t tell. I’ve been told Colorado has the most confusing limited draw, would the fifty percent rule make it worse? Comments welcome. First time posting with this newsreader, hope everything formats alright. Brandon PS I’m an Archer BTW, so don’t take it as a slam on the CBA. I generally agree with the organization but the above proposal may affect my decision to become a member. Like the CBA needs me, bleah.