Colorado Survey

D_Dubya

Active Member
Aug 8, 2012
374
746
South Texas
I think they should:

Eliminate OTC tags, still have high volume opportunity units, but limited to maybe 80% of last 3 year average # of hunters.

All tags be unit specific

Make all tags drawn/purchased (leftovers/returns) use all your points for that species

Double or triple NR license prices

Require 100% payment upfront for all apps

75/25 or 80/20 R/NR split
 

Granby guy

Active Member
Nov 5, 2012
315
171
Grand Lake, Colorado
I think they should:

Eliminate OTC tags, still have high volume opportunity units, but limited to maybe 80% of last 3 year average # of hunters.

All tags be unit specific

Make all tags drawn/purchased (leftovers/returns) use all your points for that species

Double or triple NR license prices

Require 100% payment upfront for all apps

75/25 or 80/20 R/NR split
I agree with all of that but the split should be 85/15 or 90/10.
 

ScottR

Eastmans' Staff / Moderator
Staff member
Feb 3, 2014
6,951
1,842
www.eastmans.com
I think they should:

Eliminate OTC tags, still have high volume opportunity units, but limited to maybe 80% of last 3 year average # of hunters.

All tags be unit specific

Make all tags drawn/purchased (leftovers/returns) use all your points for that species

Double or triple NR license prices

Require 100% payment upfront for all apps

75/25 or 80/20 R/NR split
100% up front would change the landscape wry quickly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 00BUCK

youngbuck2

Member
Nov 4, 2016
90
21
Minnesota
I also took this survey and agree it was a bit too shallow to accomplish anything. After reading the comments in this thread, Im confused as to what most of you are after....Do you want to eliminate the number of opportunities overall with OTC, or just limit the opportunities for NR to come and hunt colorado? Increasing the tag pricing for NR would only hurt CPW in my opinion. CO is already high priced in terms of "bang for your buck" I.e. I spend $700 on my 4th season bull tag and get 5 days to try harvest an animal....for <$1000 in Montana, I can hunt most the entire state, during all weapon seasons until I harvest. Just my 2 cents.
 

Colorado Cowboy

Veteran member
Jun 8, 2011
7,410
2,793
80
Dolores, Colorado
For me just limit the number of OTC tags and leave the NR/Res split the way it is now.

There is no question that Colorado P & W lives on the NR fees it gets. If the tag numbers are cut, I am sure they will raise the price for tags to NR/Res alike.
 

JimP

Veteran member
Mar 28, 2016
6,148
6,328
68
Gypsum, Co
I think they should make Doe/Cow tags a random draw like Wyoming does instead of having to use points and just make points for Buck/Bull tags.
I actually like the doe and cow draw. It makes a person have to decided just what they want to hunt and keeps people from taking a cow or a doe while still putting in for a bull or buck in the harder to draw units. Perhaps even going as far as saying that if you draw a tag for a elk or a deer in the second through fourth draw that you loose all your points and then start back at zero.

This would keep hunters from drawing a cow or doe tag every year and hunting while still putting in for that limited season bull or buck tag. I also think that it would move people through the system faster.

I have to admit that I used the system as I was building points for a elk tag but as the hunter numbers grow something needs to be done.
 

Hilltop

Veteran member
Feb 25, 2014
3,514
1,582
Eastern Nebraska
Crazy off the wall thought- what if Wyoming and Colorado worked together and made hunters choose to apply for only one or the other for each species. They would still easily sell all their tags but would reduce points required to draw for both states. I know it won't happen but it would help offset point creep.
 

D_Dubya

Active Member
Aug 8, 2012
374
746
South Texas
Crazy off the wall thought- what if Wyoming and Colorado worked together and made hunters choose to apply for only one or the other for each species. They would still easily sell all their tags but would reduce points required to draw for both states. I know it won't happen but it would help offset point creep.
I have often thought about this, what if multiple Western states entered into some kind of system like this for NR’s, no more than 1 buck or bull tag/year/person. I’m sure there would be issues, but with current point creep/free falling draw odds some “out of the box” solutions might need to be floated around and tried out. The days of a NR spending weeks hunting the west on multiple tags are drawing to a close, too many people and not enough game - good for you older guys who got theirs, but now we need to pump the brakes and spread some opportunity around. Or maybe go straight to an auction system for NR tags…
 

ColoradoV

Very Active Member
Oct 4, 2011
719
558
I wonder if co and wyo worked together if we could get a 90-10 split in co and hunt wilderness in Wyoming while excluding all but wyo residents from wilderness here… 💰😂

Colorado needs to eliminate otc elk and change the process to anytime you hunt elk you burn your points. Tags for both resident and non resident tags as well as lip rippin tickets should have the price doubled as well as all application fees.

90-10 is fair in other states so fair for Colorado. How to fund it is above..
 

Slugz

Veteran member
Oct 12, 2014
3,351
1,520
52
Woodland Park, Colorado
This idea of me or anyone in any state being to get 2 elk tags every year and still build points is ridiculous in my opinion. I do it most years but it still doesn't make it right. That's where I think the point creep comes from. I'm a big fan of points go away when you have a tag in your hand. I support raising the prices also for all.