Just saw this

JimP

Veteran member
Mar 28, 2016
4,830
3,004
67
Gypsum, Co
I saw that yesterday in a local newspaper.

They are finally trying to get others to pay for what they use instead of having us license holders foot the whole bill for these areas. I'd like to see them do it to a lot more areas along with the hiking, and biking trails.
 

mallardsx2

Veteran member
Jul 8, 2015
2,478
1,005
Great news for hunters, bad news for the hippies.

I wonder how many "Lovers of animals" will refuse to buy a license and still go there. I hope they fine the heck out of them if they catch them without a license. Lot of people riding the coattails of hunters and fishermen....

I have to buy a small game license just to get preference points and most years I dont even step foot in the state...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bonecollector

mosquito

Active Member
Nov 1, 2012
167
199
NE ohio
Yep I love it . Why not the cost of maintaining are parks is astronomic. Every one should help with the cost.
 

Colorado Cowboy

Veteran member
Jun 8, 2011
6,647
1,256
79
Dolores, Colorado
I totally agree that everyone who uses these areas should help in the cost of public use. But....I also believe they should come up with another type of permit not called a hunting or fishing license. A user permit or fee that the user can purchase without them bitching of "I don't hunt or fish, so why do I have to buy a license?"

This is a step in the right direction of getting everyone to pay for public use areas and the maintenance of it.
 

mallardsx2

Veteran member
Jul 8, 2015
2,478
1,005
Personally, I like the idea of forcing a potential anti-hunter having to buy a permit.....but thats my sick sense of irony... lol

I guess as long as the money 100% ends up in the right place they could call it whatever they want to call it.

WIth this new potentially large source of income I would assume that the hunting license costs will be reduced now right............? Also a BIG LOL.
 

nv-hunter

Veteran member
Feb 28, 2011
1,212
540
Reno
I totally agree that everyone who uses these areas should help in the cost of public use. But....I also believe they should come up with another type of permit not called a hunting or fishing license. A user permit or fee that the user can purchase without them bitching of "I don't hunt or fish, so why do I have to buy a license?"

This is a step in the right direction of getting everyone to pay for public use areas and the maintenance of it.

After watching a discussion on another board I agree with you, this will inflate hunt/fish license sale and allow for more Pit/Rod funds to Co. The should do a parking permit like Fish and wildlife does on Federal refuges that I've been on, Permit or duck stamp to park and use, I know Oregon does something like that on some State areas too. That makes the bird watchers and dog walks pay their share
 

Yell Co AR Hunter

Very Active Member
Dec 10, 2015
541
244
Yell County Arkansas
This would not be good for all States. I do not know the funding process for Colorado. In Arkansas there is an 1/8 cent tax that is applied to all outdoor related items which funds such things.
 

highplainsdrifter

Very Active Member
May 4, 2011
687
73
Wyoming
I totally agree that everyone who uses these areas should help in the cost of public use. But....I also believe they should come up with another type of permit not called a hunting or fishing license. A user permit or fee that the user can purchase without them bitching of "I don't hunt or fish, so why do I have to buy a license?"

This is a step in the right direction of getting everyone to pay for public use areas and the maintenance of it.
I agree. A separate permit would be better. If a nonresident comes to Colorado and wants to visit state land while not hunting, he/she will have to buy an expensive nonresident hunting or fishing license. How about a $10 or $20 annual permit required for all users regardless of resident or non resident status and regardless of type of use...hunting, hiking, sight seeing, etc? The fee they are proposing is a good idea, but poorly targeted.
 

JimP

Veteran member
Mar 28, 2016
4,830
3,004
67
Gypsum, Co
Right now this rule only affects a few state wildlife areas and not the whole state.

However I would like for it to go state wide and as was mentioned they may need to look at it a different way and not make people purchase a hunting/fishing license but perhaps a access permit. They already do this for the state parks in Colorado.
 

nv-hunter

Veteran member
Feb 28, 2011
1,212
540
Reno
I agree. A separate permit would be better. If a nonresident comes to Colorado and wants to visit state land while not hunting, he/she will have to buy an expensive nonresident hunting or fishing license. How about a $10 or $20 annual permit required for all users regardless of resident or non resident status and regardless of type of use...hunting, hiking, sight seeing, etc? The fee they are proposing is a good idea, but poorly targeted.
The folks with the hunting and fishing licenses have already pad to access these lands
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bonecollector

dan maule

Very Active Member
Jan 3, 2015
568
360
Upper Michigan
Totally agree with what they are trying to accomplish, but I would not want to be one of officers trying to enforce this. I can just imagine all of the BS they are going to have to listen too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 88man