Idaboy
WKR
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2017
- Messages
- 554
Some of this was already known.....40 minute mark discussing that OTC archery elk could go away in 2025.
Last edited:
Wasn't trying to solve any problems, I wasn't aware it was in the works.....it seems something should be considered to reduce pressure. I do find it interesting these states don't seem to collaborate more on whats working vs what fell apart despite best intentions.Which is better/worse?
Threads about CO OTC?
Threads about WY and 90/10?
Threads about WY wilderness areas and NRs?
Threads about “which unit”?
Threads about “not looking for your honey hole”?
Threads about wolves?
Hmmmm? Decisions decisions. No worries, all can be solved by starting a thread. Maybe you should start a thread, “which is worse?” Or “worst threads”? @cnelk
- an idea for you……
View attachment 693125
Anyone think there are going to be NR OTC tags anywhere out west 20 years from now for deer, elk or antelope?
Agree, the trend is disheartening.Nope. For residents either.
Listened to the podcast. One of the CPW folks mentioned the perception of archery being over-crowded is the expectation that you should see less people in the back country during archery seasons vs rifle.
I think the perception that there are more archery hunters is the rapid growth of archery hunting since 2002, nearly doubled in the past 20 years, although only a 6% increase since 2009. An interesting data point is that since 2014 resident OTC archery tag sales have gone down by 20% and non-resident tag sales have increased by 28%.
https://cpw.state.co.us/Documents/Commission/2023/August/Item.23ppt-Siegfried.pdf
If you look at the data from CPW, since 2009 and more recently, the numbers for rifle hunters have been increasing +10% (see link from CPW). Additionally, the overall total number of rifle hunters exceeds the total number of archery hunters by 61+% from the most recent data point.
CPW has been chipping away at OTC archery units over the past several years. First in the southwest units but also in making some units OTC on private land only. This further compressed hunters into the OTC archery units that were left. This years, a number of units in the northwest part of the state also went to draw or OTC on private land. Making archery units OTC will also bring the 75/25 split of res to non-res into play and will potentially spread hunters back out. For the units in the southwest part of the state, CPW set quotas high enough that drawing these units wasn't an issue. Some areas could be had as a second choice or went to left over.
The unit we muzzleloader hunt went draw for archery last year. Funny thing is there were hundreds of leftover tags and you could get one in the secondary draw no problem. Not sure what the point was other than to say it was draw now and not OTC.
Knowing how many hunters are hunting, keeping those hunters in that unit, potentially "herd management", reducing hunter numbers in other units.
I think the changes proposed address a lot of the complaints people have been vocal about.
Yup, way too many licenses for 421,41,and 42 even though it was “Draw” onlyThe unit we muzzleloader hunt went draw for archery last year. Funny thing is there were hundreds of leftover tags and you could get one in the secondary draw no problem. Not sure what the point was other than to say it was draw now and not OTC.
Wait are they cutting tags in the land of make believe?! No more 30 point bucks?! AhhhWhich is better/worse?
Threads about CO OTC?
Threads about WY and 90/10?
Threads about WY wilderness areas and NRs?
Threads about “which unit”?
Threads about “not looking for your honey hole”?
Threads about wolves?
Hmmmm? Decisions decisions. No worries, all can be solved by starting a thread. Maybe you should start a thread, “which is worse?” Or “worst threads”? @cnelk
- an idea for you……
View attachment 693125