Can Colorado OTC Elk Last Forever?

[sndmn11]

A word of caution, any capping of NRs (I am NR (former Res) and in favor of caps) will almost certainly spike the cost of Res OTC tags

Why?

 

[sneaky]

Why?

Because they'll lose their cash cow. You cut NR tag numbers and someone has to foot the bill. Unless you cut tag numbers AND raise NR prices. CPW isn't going to take that kind of financial hit without some govt math getting involved.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[EJFS]

It will all collapse when they make crossguns legal in the archery season. I foresee that change in the future and THAT will be the beginning of the end of it.


I also think that having a split OTC Archery season will also happen in the future.

OTC Archery Sept 1-15
OTC Archery Sept 16-20

I wish this change would have happened years ago to be honest.

I really don't like that idea. The nonresident hunters generally come for one week anyway, that rule would just hurt residents who can't take a bunch of time off and have to rely on weekends.

 

[Kwa_bena]

I really don't like that idea. The nonresident hunters generally come for one week anyway, that rule would just hurt residents who can't take a bunch of time off and have to rely on weekends.

This is why I'm looking into being a nurse. But Still it's 3 days that I'm not out there.

 

[sndmn11]

Because they'll lose their cash cow. You cut NR tag numbers and someone has to foot the bill. Unless you cut tag numbers AND raise NR prices. CPW isn't going to take that kind of financial hit without some govt math getting involved.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

I've never read anything that says CPW must make $X, so I have never bought into the fear mongering of less NR tags means higher Res prices to get to the same amount of $. There is nothing factual that I have seen about the concept either in past action or written policy either.

So, I was asking "why?" Because I wanted to learn what fact(s), and not guesses, were used to arrive at the conclusion in question.

 

[fatlander]

I've never read anything that says CPW must make $X, so I have never bought into the fear mongering of less NR tags means higher Res prices to get to the same amount of $. There is nothing factual that I have seen about the concept either in past action or written policy either.

So, I was asking "why?" Because I wanted to learn what fact(s), and not guesses, were used to arrive at the conclusion in question.

Non residents pay the bills in the West. If you think states aren’t counting on the money coming in from NR to cover the lions share of their budgets, I’ll sell you some ocean front property for a steal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Maverick1]

I agree with you. Once the impact of wolves is fully realized, the number of tags that can be issued will fall. I think it will become 100% limited draw and the residents will become more vocal to have a higher percentage of the tags. The unknown is when that scenario transpires. Is it 10 years from now, 15, 20?

If the wolf reintroduction really takes of across the state, look to Idaho as a possible example of what things could look like:

The Lolo elk population dropped from 16,000 elk in 1989 to roughly 2,100 elk in 2010, and possibly fewer than 1,000 in 2015.

That type of impact would probably outweigh the amount of archery hunters in the field for 30 days, splitting the archery season, introducing a crossbow season, rising tag prices, etc.

Will be interesting to see. Most (not all) will continue to elk hunt in CO regardless of the price of the tag. Likely that most would elk hunt elk elsewhere depending on the wolf populations. How will that impact the OTC hunting?

 

[Maverick1]

I've never read anything that says CPW must make $X, so I have never bought into the fear mongering of less NR tags means higher Res prices to get to the same amount of $. There is nothing factual that I have seen about the concept either in past action or written policy either.

So, I was asking "why?" Because I wanted to learn what fact(s), and not guesses, were used to arrive at the conclusion in question.

https://cpw.state.co.us/Documents/About/Reports/WAFWA-License-Fee-History.pdf

 

[sndmn11]

Non residents pay the bills in the West. If you think states aren’t counting on the money coming in from NR to cover the lions share of their budgets, I’ll sell you some ocean front property for a steal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What happened in Colorado when mule deer went limited? (License cost stayed the same) What has happened since bear went to a draw? (License cost went down) What happened when recent elk units went limited? What happened when recent pronghorn units went limited? Turkey?

What real life example supports the idea that limited licenses means higher resident license cost?

I don't care who "covers the lion's share", the statement was that capped licenses meant higher resident costs. The opposite has shown to be true or there has been no change.

 

[sndmn11]

https://cpw.state.co.us/Documents/About/Reports/WAFWA-License-Fee-History.pdf

Did you read it?

 

[fatlander]

What happened in Colorado when mule deer went limited? (License cost stayed the same) What has happened since bear went to a draw? (License cost went down) What happened when recent elk units went limited? What happened when recent pronghorn units went limited? Turkey?

What real life example supports the idea that limited licenses means higher resident license cost?

I don't care who "covers the lion's share", the statement was that capped licenses meant higher resident costs. The opposite has shown to be true or there has been no change.

As long as non residents continue to cover the lion’s share of the budget, you won’t have to care.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[sndmn11]

As long as non residents continue to cover the lion’s share of the budget, you won’t have to care.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That didn't answer any of my questions.

 

[Ultraheight]

I've never read anything that says CPW must make $X, so I have never bought into the fear mongering of less NR tags means higher Res prices to get to the same amount of $. There is nothing factual that I have seen about the concept either in past action or written policy either.

So, I was asking "why?" Because I wanted to learn what fact(s), and not guesses, were used to arrive at the conclusion in question.

So the reality is that $56 for a res elk tag is absurdly low, and is actually being subsidized by NR tags, which cost more than 10x as much. I moved back to Virginia (after being a Co resident) and a set of whitetail tags for a resident (with permits/use tags/tax) costs more than a CO res elk tag. The game department doesn't have a set revenue quota, but they have to pay the bills. The reality is that is pretty reasonable for residents to pay $100 or $200 for an elk tag, given they are probably now the most sought-after game in the West. It's pretty amusing to me to listen to residents who probably blow $700-$1000 on new gear per year (averaged between new optics, bows/rifles, ammo/arrows, tents, clothes, stoves, GPS, GoHunt, OnX, etc, etc.) have a fit with the idea of paying more than $56 for an elk tag.

 

[sndmn11]

So the reality is that $56 for a res elk tag is absurdly low, and is actually being subsidized by NR tags, which cost more than 10x as much. I moved back to Virginia (after being a Co resident) and a set of whitetail tags for a resident (with permits/use tags/tax) costs more than a CO res elk tag. The game department doesn't have a set revenue quota, but they have to pay the bills. The reality is that is pretty reasonable for residents to pay $100 or $200 for an elk tag, given they are probably now the most sought-after game in the West. It's pretty amusing to me to listen to residents who probably blow $700-$1000 on new gear per year (averaged between new optics, bows/rifles, ammo/arrows, tents, clothes, stoves, GPS, GoHunt, OnX, etc, etc.) have a fit with the idea of paying more than $56 for an elk tag.

The reality is that past examples of limiting licenses has not resulted in a decrease in revenue or an increase in resident license cost. The reality is that there is not future plan outlining a resident license cost increase due to limiting any licenses. Prove me wrong.

Factually, see the examples of licenses in Colorado being limited with license cost decreasing or remaining constant above, and check out the leftover list to see the surplus of licenses still available to both residents and non-residents, many of which will be available at the conclusion of their season. I could care less what the number is after those dollar signs, that is irrelevant. It is flat out false to state limited licenses will result in higher resident costs.

 

[CO Mountain Man]

If the wolf reintroduction really takes of across the state, look to Idaho as a possible example of what things could look like:

The Lolo elk population dropped from 16,000 elk in 1989 to roughly 2,100 elk in 2010, and possibly fewer than 1,000 in 2015.

That type of impact would probably outweigh the amount of archery hunters in the field for 30 days, splitting the archery season, introducing a crossbow season, rising tag prices, etc.

Will be interesting to see. Most (not all) will continue to elk hunt in CO regardless of the price of the tag. Likely that most would elk hunt elk elsewhere depending on the wolf populations. How will that impact the OTC hunting?

If that same scenario develops in Colorado then I believe OTC will cease to be an option for CPW. Eventually residents will reach a tipping point and actually apply pressure to the agency.

 

[Jaquomo]

I've never read anything that says CPW must make $X, so I have never bought into the fear mongering of less NR tags means higher Res prices to get to the same amount of $. There is nothing factual that I have seen about the concept either in past action or written policy either.

So, I was asking "why?" Because I wanted to learn what fact(s), and not guesses, were used to arrive at the conclusion in question.

CPW presents their budget/revenue projections to us in the Sportsmans Roundtable meetings. Their bigger concern is the prediction of potentially 20% fewer hunters in 10-15 years as more hunters age out without compensatory recruitment. NR elk hunters are the answer to declining revenue from fewer hunters overall. OTC elk hunting is a key component of that. I don't see it going away anytime soon.

 

[CoHiCntry]

On a side note… anyone remember when OTC elk started in Colorado? It’s been going on for a long time.

Edit: after thinking about it, I’m assuming all licenses were OTC to begin with? Maybe the better question is when did limited draw areas come into existence? I think when I started hunting 35 years ago you could get a unit 61 bull tag for just a couple points.

 

[sndmn11]

CPW presents their budget/revenue projections to us in the Sportsmans Roundtable meetings. Their bigger concern is the prediction of potentially 20% fewer hunters in 10-15 years as more hunters age out without compensatory recruitment. NR elk hunters are the answer to declining revenue from fewer hunters overall. OTC elk hunting is a key component of that. I don't see it going away anytime soon.

I have never said there should be less non resident hunters. I never even said there should be less hunters of any type. I did however allude to the need for more hunters when I brought up the fact that there is and will be licenses leftover.
What I said was there is no evidence that limited licenses equates to higher resident license costs.

 

[Jaquomo]

I have never said there should be less non resident hunters. I never even said there should be less hunters of any type. I did however allude to the need for more hunters when I brought up the fact that there is and will be licenses leftover.
What I said was there is no evidence that limited licenses equates to higher resident license costs.

Sorry for the misunderstanding. I was addressing your comment that you've never read anything that said CPW must make X$. They are pretty forthcoming and transparent with their budget needs and projections on the wildlife side of CPW. The cash cow is NR elk licenses. That was what I was referencing.

 

[sndmn11]

Sorry for the misunderstanding. I was addressing your comment that you've never read anything that said CPW must make X$. They are pretty forthcoming and transparent with their budget needs and projections on the wildlife side of CPW. The cash cow is NR elk licenses. That was what I was referencing.

Exactly, and nowhere in the forthcoming transparency has it been stated that limiting a license means higher resident license costs. However, that is the first thing many folks bring up to argue against a limited license despite all available previous examples not supporting their position.