FYI - DOW staff tried to push through more 80/20 units without discussion or public involvement or explanation of it and the ramifications it would have, they called for a vote to approve it and that's when Commissioner Bray made a motion to put a freeze on any new 80/20 units until it was discussed further.
If any of you knew the history of the allocations both times when they were voted on - the allocations were supposed to be a hard cap (and commissioners who voted on them knew how they voted), and came out of regulations as a soft cap. After that process it was stated that this would cause the DOW to go broke - consequently they are. Politics and greed was the only reason for an allocation change in the first place by special interest groups. A cost analysis was requested as well as a business analysis and was determined that there would be a significant reduction in income.
The parks side of CPW at the time of the merger made the necessary cuts to remain in the black, DOW never made cuts until they had to and they were out of compliance on their reserve, they voted to lower the reserve amount and consequently now again they are out of the reserve.
For the record it should be noted that DOW revenues and expenditures stay with DOW, and Parks revenues and expenditures stay with Parks - there is no co mingling of funds or one draining the other, they stand on their own.
Friends, educate yourselves on some of the facts that have led to these discussions.
There is a great deal of politics in wildlife today and have made many issues complex and in reality divided sportsmen to where we are today. However in reality though it is a supply and demand issue and everything revolves around the supply, this 5 year season structure process should have made bigger strides and gains in obtaining those goals but election year politics has kept it suppressed and leaned another direction. Its too bad that sportsmen couldn't have banded together and pushed for some significant changes to improve overall wildlife benefits and opportunities. we had many ideas out there from a few different groups but staff kept them suppressed and we basically ended up with a status quo except for a few nuggets.
By legislative statute title 33-1-101 it is the policy of the state of Colorado that the wildlife and their environment are to be protected, preserved, enhanced, and managed for the use, benefit, and enjoyment of the people of this state and its visitors. It is further declared to be the policy of this state that there shall be provided a comprehensive program designed to offer the greatest possible variety of wildlife-related recreational opportunity to the people of this state and its visitors and that, to carry out such program and policy, there shall be a continuous operation of planning, acquisition, and development of wildlife habitats and facilities for wildlife related opportunities.
The bottom line though is it comes back to the dow and how they manage or mismanage wildlife, there are many differences of facts and opinions within dow that don't align with the majority of sportsmens. When populations of animals are reduced and are struggling to recover such as mule deer, antelope and elk in some areas - then all of these other issues become passionate and emotional for sportsmen and they look to point fingers and fight among each other about who should get the opportunity to hunt.
There have been multiple reasons why these discussions become more emotional such as,
DOW going broke - went from a 60 million dollar surplus to a 12 million dollar deficit in 8 years
Population declines
Increased Predation - DOW, bears, coyotes, lions, eagles, poachers, ravens, crows, etc...
Management for opportunity
Increased Mortality - highway, cwd, ehd, fences, etc...
Loss of non resident dollars - Colorado has lost over 40,000 non resident hunters since 2000, it currently takes 13 residents to equal 1 non resident. With more hunters in the field and fewer dollars coming into dow programs wildlife management suffers. Non resident license fees have almost tripled since 2000 with minimal increase in resident fees.
There is no tax money that comes to dow for wildlife management except Pittman Robertson and Dingel Johnson Funds and can only go for habitat and research etc...- not operating money, so the dow depends on the non resident hunter - always has. Out of the 59 million dollars that dow receives annually 45 million comes from the nr hunter, they pay for every program dow has and without it would cease to exist.FY 13-14 Q3 Financial Report
The problem is the average sportsman doesn't know enough details and they get on a rant, but the motive for dow is to get away from traditional funding and let the non consumptive user pay for wildlife management from a tax of some sort.
SCORP
Of Colorado voters
responding to the 2012
Conservation in the West
Poll, 86 percent said that
“Even with state budget
problems, we should still
find money to protect and
maintain Colorado’s land,
water and wildlife.” 82
percent said the same about
state parks.
—Conservation in the West Poll:
Colorado College State of the
Rockies Project.
Increase in resident hunters - moving here
Politics
It is really a supply and demand issue with no easy fixes until both populations of animals and quality increases,
The people who scream the loudest appear to have an entitlement mentality to the wildlife and are some of the ones who moved here and became in essence part of the problem, there is more burden upon the resource, animals, water, habitat etc... especially from the native resident standpoint, We didn't have any problems drawing licenses until more people started moving here, before the year 2000 when allocations were introduced and were supposed to be a 60/40 hard cap, 53% - 57% of the licenses went to Non residents! And you could get leftovers and hunt every year in almost every unit and still apply for a point in the limited units.
Now with the sheer number of them that moved here the native residents will never get an opportunity at some of the sheep, goat, moose and limited elk and deer licenses.
Residents currently get 50% of the landowner vouchers total.
The North American Model for Wildlife Conservation also calls for equal opportunity on public lands of which there are 23,000,000 million acres in Colorado.
A solution to it is if you don't want non residents to fund it for you then you need to pony up and pay for it, most residents will squall like a mashed cat over a $5 dollar increase - when some used to pay the NR fee.
Now some of these same people want to take away other hunters opportunities, talk about standing in a glass house casting stones!
Just remember you want sportsmen to pay for wildlife management not non consumptive users - you can figure out why.
Another one of the solutions would be to redefine residency as,
Native residents - 50% of the licenses hard cap
Non native residents - 25% hard cap
and Non residents - 25% hard cap
Given the fact that public land belongs to all people regardless of where one lives there should be an equal opportunity for both residents and non. Some of these groups that scream the loudest about these allocations believe in this fact and post it in their mission statement and websites.
People who have represented this country and fought and died for it to give us the freedoms we enjoy shouldn't be discriminated against, they represented the United States and the people who live in it - not their home state. Say the pledge of allegiance - do you believe it?
And the biggest reason of all for equal opportunity is that God created all men equal - without discrimination - such as loving your neighbor as yourself. Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul and all your mind This is the first and great commandment, and the second is like it - Love your neighbor as yourself which on these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
