2020-2024 Colorado Big Game Season Structure Info

[MuleyFever]

But, it makes more sense to limit the number of OTC rifle tags than it does to limit the archery tags. Many, many more rifle tags are sold than archery.

Not from a herd management perspective. The rifle hunts are when most elk are killed.

 

[timekiller13]

Not from a herd management perspective. The rifle hunts are when most elk are killed.

Very true. That in lies the issue. If the problem is decreased calf recruitment, then it would seem the time frame and method of take in which most of your elk are killed would be your focus. If it can shown that increased archery pressure and increased archery harvest is the main reason for this downturn, then by all means, do what you need to do to curb the issue.

There is no one single reason for decrease in numbers or decrease in calf recruitment. Predators, habitat, hunter pressure, winter kill, disease, etc all play into it. The DOW can only somewhat control some of those things. Predator management is difficult and with the barring of spring bear seasons, that would a tough fight and probably not worth their time. Hunter pressure is the easiest item for them to control. Rifle hunters has the biggest presence and biggest voice, so going after their tags would be a huge uphill battle that would have many negative effects. Archery hunters, while growing, are still a much smaller percentage and less influential voice, which makes them and their season an easier target.

In the end, I am all for what is best for the herd. If it means I only get to hunt elk every 2-3 years, then so be it. That's much better than not getting to hunt them at all. I have been building points in Colorado for the last couple years, just for sole reason that I anticipated something like this may happen in the future. I have no desire to try and draw one of the top tier units. If I have to burn points every couple years to hunt, then that's ok. I really hate the points system anyways. A man like me who got into the points game late has little chance of ever drawing a top tier tag. I like the completely random draw aspect that New Mexico has. It may be a long shot, but I have the same chance as any other Joe Blow at getting a top tier tag. Of course, with an established points system in place, you could never really go back to a completely random draw without completely screwing over those people who have dedicated 2 decades of point building.

 

[Wapiti66]

If all of this is about opportunity because of elk numbers and calf recruitment, then the discussion should begin with predator control issues. Very few hunters are going to shoot a calf. Bears however make a living on them. This coming from an outfitter that's been in the business for decades, "the bears hang out in the calving grounds and wait for the baby elk to hit the ground, then they go eat the baby elk. I watch this happen in my pastures every spring." SPRING BEAR HUNTS! I hunted the same unit the outfitter guides in, and I saw groups of cows with not a single calf among them. That is a much bigger issue than putting 1000 elk hunters in one unit to me. If there are not enough calves making it to adult age we have a big problem brewing. Making all units a draw will not help IMO because they will give out way to many tags because their main objective is financially driven. If an OTC unit goes to a draw and they give out 500+ tags does that sound like an awesome opportunity because they've limited the hunters? I don't like the argument that the antis will put up a fight against spring bear hunts so it is not worth pursuing. That is exactly what the antis want, to deter people because its not worth the fight. Most hunters I talk to don't complain about hunting pressure if they are seeing elk. The issue is they aren't seeing any elk to hunt, not that they bumped into other hunters along the way. I don't mind sharing archery season with muzzy hunters, but you can't lump the two together for a primitive season. Drawing a bow to get a shot is much harder than lifting a rifle and shooting.

 

[ckleeves]

If all of this is about opportunity because of elk numbers and calf recruitment, then the discussion should begin with predator control issues. Very few hunters are going to shoot a calf. Bears however make a living on them. This coming from an outfitter that's been in the business for decades, "the bears hang out in the calving grounds and wait for the baby elk to hit the ground, then they go eat the baby elk. I watch this happen in my pastures every spring." SPRING BEAR HUNTS! I hunted the same unit the outfitter guides in, and I saw groups of cows with not a single calf among them. That is a much bigger issue than putting 1000 elk hunters in one unit to me. If there are not enough calves making it to adult age we have a big problem brewing. Making all units a draw will not help IMO because they will give out way to many tags because their main objective is financially driven. If an OTC unit goes to a draw and they give out 500+ tags does that sound like an awesome opportunity because they've limited the hunters? I don't like the argument that the antis will put up a fight against spring bear hunts so it is not worth pursuing. That is exactly what the antis want, to deter people because its not worth the fight. Most hunters I talk to don't complain about hunting pressure if they are seeing elk. The issue is they aren't seeing any elk to hunt, not that they bumped into other hunters along the way. I don't mind sharing archery season with muzzy hunters, but you can't lump the two together for a primitive season. Drawing a bow to get a shot is much harder than lifting a rifle and shooting.

I agree predators (bears more then anything) are responsible for the calf recruitment issues more then anything. I don’t know why we don’t go to a unit by unit bear quota much like lions. It’s very simple, it allows them to hit exact harvest numbers and bears are already mandatory to get sealed so it’s not like it requires extra work on their part to check them in and track harvest.


While we’re at it I don’t know why we don’t allow hunters to use a unfilled deer or elk tag on a bear. Lots of non-res aren’t going to put the money out for a chance at a random bear encounter but let them put their elk tag on a nice bear and I bet some would jump at the chance.

Just some random ideas. I know we’re not getting back a spring season, dogs or bait so things like this could raise bear harvest where needed without the the uproar of certain people.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[30338]

We've killed 7 bears the last 7 years. Everyone needs to be buying a bear tag or if non-resident elk hunters, they should have a bear tag attached for free to their elk tags. Kind of like the fishing license.

I'd suggest a split archery season. A guy could buy a tag for the first half or the second half, not both. I do think there is a relatively high wounding rate on archery. And in many areas, I think archery pressure pushes elk off public and onto private. So 30 days of archery hunting actually is affecting rifle success rates in my opinion.

Increase lion quotas and every non-resident elk tag comes with a bear tag.

The ridiculous drop in application fees also needs to be immediately reversed. And they need to implement the same policy as other western states. To apply for any and all tags, you must buy a non-resident hunting license. That is a no brainer.

 

[MallardSX2]

Personally, I believe that the wounding rate is astronomical in the archery season in Colorado and is WAY under reported.

I dont know what they want to do for sure. But I do know that they need to do something because the pressure in the OTC areas is getting ridiculous. To the point that it isn't even fun to hunt there any more.

Personally, I think they should go to a draw for every unit to limit the amount of pressure. They could still let a lot of people hunt with a bow. But limit it all at the same time. More along the lines of what Wyoming does.

Colorado has a wealth of statistics from the past 25 years. They should be able to manage the pressure and population very effectively providing people are not false reporting. This is why I feel it is VERY important to report kills. If "hunters" have lied on your report for the past 25 years then you are really shooting their program in the foot and "hunters" are part of the problem.

This would get the points back down to a reasonable number. If I could only hunt there as a non-resident every three years I would be ok with that. Thats all I hunt there anyhow.

I also believe that they need to address the muzzleloader during archery season. It currently is a disaster in the areas I have hunted.

 

[MallardSX2]

I also agree with the bear tag idea. The population is very high and to get it under control they should issue a bear tag free with every archery elk license.

 

[cuerro viejo]

Nailed it!!! No biologist is going to state Archey hunters are causing low recruitment. Calves are no longer momma dependent, second recruitment is essentially a survival percentage. Recruitment percentage is a summer spring predation issue first, habitat second, just like every other ungulate in every state in the union, recruitment success is based on lack of predation; Bears, cats(lion/bobs), yotes, dogs, and a few birds.

CO has a predation issue, not a hunting issue. The high bear cub recruitment is a direct correlation to low calf recruitment

If all of this is about opportunity because of elk numbers and calf recruitment, then the discussion should begin with predator control issues. Very few hunters are going to shoot a calf. Bears however make a living on them. This coming from an outfitter that's been in the business for decades, "the bears hang out in the calving grounds and wait for the baby elk to hit the ground, then they go eat the baby elk. I watch this happen in my pastures every spring." SPRING BEAR HUNTS! I hunted the same unit the outfitter guides in, and I saw groups of cows with not a single calf among them. That is a much bigger issue than putting 1000 elk hunters in one unit to me. If there are not enough calves making it to adult age we have a big problem brewing. Making all units a draw will not help IMO because they will give out way to many tags because their main objective is financially driven. If an OTC unit goes to a draw and they give out 500+ tags does that sound like an awesome opportunity because they've limited the hunters? I don't like the argument that the antis will put up a fight against spring bear hunts so it is not worth pursuing. That is exactly what the antis want, to deter people because its not worth the fight. Most hunters I talk to don't complain about hunting pressure if they are seeing elk. The issue is they aren't seeing any elk to hunt, not that they bumped into other hunters along the way. I don't mind sharing archery season with muzzy hunters, but you can't lump the two together for a primitive season. Drawing a bow to get a shot is much harder than lifting a rifle and shooting.

 

[cuerro viejo]

Your ignorance is really showing in your first point. Just because a tag is draw doesn’t mean you won’t get one annually. It just gives CPW way more control over tag allocations. For some units the tags might be harder, for some they will remain the same. They can still issue as many tags as they want...they can also adjust the control as necessary.

I can see where you are coming from with your second point.

Regarding your third point, New Mexico has a split structure, and success rates are higher than Colorado, so I don’t see your argument as valid. Further, it would create more drawing options for archery, if it went to a draw.

Also, remember, this is about improving calf recruitment and hunter satisfaction...it’s not just about the hunter.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

NM only has two peaks over 13k and 7 over 12k. CO has close to 50+ over 12k. Success rates in NM are high because hunter access/terrain is easier as a whole, exact same same reason CO has high PP LE units w/high success

Please research what calf recruitment actually means before you blame Archery hunting or call someone ignorant

 

[ElkElkGoose]

I'm sorry but there are a ton of arm chair biologists on this thread that don't have any idea what they are talking about. Not that I'm necessarily an expert but I do understand enough of the background and know a lot of the people who make these decisions to pass the baton to the experts.

 

[5MilesBack]

That's part of the problem. The "experts" may only understand one aspect of the equation where their expertise is. But they may also fail to grasp all the other factors which contribute. So final decisions can and......with the CPW........often do fail to encompass all factors. Logic and reason usually escapes these folks as we've seen many times over the years, and especially so since Parks was merged with Wildlife. Politics come into play quite often, and included in that is of course.........the money.

 

[cnelk]

If the CPW wants more bears harvested, they will need to adjust a few things - i.e. extend the season, allow electronic callers, bonus tags, etc.

Spring season/baiting aint gonna come back

 

[cnelk]

that's part of the problem. The "experts" may only understand one aspect of the equation where their expertise is. But they may also fail to grasp all the other factors which contribute. So final decisions can and......with the cpw........often do fail to encompass all factors. Logic and reason usually escapes these folks as we've seen many times over the years, and especially so since parks was merged with wildlife. Politics come into play quite often, and included in that is of course.........the money.

bingo

 

[orionthehunter1]

Not spring bear, but starting the season August 1st would be huge to help the bear problem. People are fools if they don't think the bear population has ballooned here. Also someone stated something about the surveys CPW conducts. Those are a joke I have not been contacted in over 10 years so how are they remotely accurate, same with their winter counts they are a joke. OTC hunting needs to end like I've said before I and many others would pay more ($100 for an elk tag) if the hunting and quality was better. If not I will continue hunting Wyoming and quality units on the re-issue list because OTC is a joke.

 

[cnelk]

Per statute bear season cant start before Sept 2. I researched this already

 

[ckleeves]

Per statute bear season cant start before Sept 2. I researched this already

Yep. That’s why we have the bear opener not align with the archery deer/elk opener. Very strange but I guess that’s the way things were written.

Unfortunately I see the chances of getting a August bear season about the same as getting a spring hunt. I wish that wasn’t the case.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[orionthehunter1]

yes you are correct it does have to go for a vote, but I think it might stand a chance albeit very small. Where as the spring season has a snowballs chance in hell of passing with the way this state has turned blue

 

[ElkElkGoose]

That's part of the problem. The "experts" may only understand one aspect of the equation where their expertise is. But they may also fail to grasp all the other factors which contribute. So final decisions can and......with the CPW........often do fail to encompass all factors. Logic and reason usually escapes these folks as we've seen many times over the years, and especially so since Parks was merged with Wildlife. Politics come into play quite often, and included in that is of course.........the money.

Well, they are self funded practically, so if we all want to hunt they do have to make money to pay for their existence.

However, there a number of comments here that show that some people value getting to hunt over the conservation and continued sustainability of the species they are hunting. Everybody loves to say they are a conservationist because its real trendy right now. That is, until it either hits their pocketbook, time, or ability to hunt when, where, and what they want to.

 

[5MilesBack]

Well, they are self funded practically, so if we all want to hunt they do have to make money to pay for their existence.

It was a whole different ballgame before they merged the Parks Department and the Wildlife Department. That's pretty much when everything went to heck in a hand basket. They say the funds don't commingle, but I'm not buying that. The CDOW was doing just fine every year before the merger, then they merge and it all goes to heck. So IMO we're also paying for the existence of the parks department now, that's why they've become so money hungry. They have more money now than they've ever had before, but can't seem to make that work. Sounds like every other bureaucracy in our country these days. So not only has everyone become an idiot these days, but no one can seem to manage money intelligently either.

 

[ElkElkGoose]

Man...I started to write a page explaining why their costs have gone up and revenue has stagnated but at some point its up to you to do a little research on your own before spewing opinions everywhere. Attend CPW meetings where they actually discuss these things and you can speak if you really think they are that incompetent.

Id start by googling the increase in invasive species costs....specifically zebra muzzles, cost of bucket biologists, general inflation, cost of dealing a massive increase in people in the mountains and cleaning up after them, etc. On the revenue side they havent been able to raise fees to keep up with any of this. Your general anger is pointed in the wrong direction and should be directed more towards the massive nonconsumtive croud using CPW resources and refusing to contribute anything.

Also, if people want to blame anyone for limited archery seasons you can easily find the culprits scrolling through your instagram feed.