Colorado actually going to change things?

[bayoublaster7527]

Just exactly what states are racing to keep out NR hunters? ID and MT have had the same number of NR tags for decades, nothing's changed there. WY has a set amount of NR tags, nothing's changed there. UT still gladly sells unlimited archery tags for elk, and NR can draw deer tags easier than residents in a lot of units. NV has always been hard. I'm guessing you're talking about NM and AZ?

Well for starters every state is looking to go to 90/10, then when residents are still unhappy that will probably move again. How about outfitter preference in NM and MT and being seriously proposed in WY? Resident tags are unlimited, general OTC in many states like ID, MT, and WY with NRs capped yet residents are still unhappy with increased crowding and decreased quality. How are NRs causing increased crowding and decreased quality when their tags are already capped? Yet residents in these states still blame DIY NRs for all the issues there. CO really offers the only true OTC NR tag for elk.

 

[arock]

I think 80/20 would be a good split. I think for OTC picking a unit and having a cap or quota is a decent idea. Not necessarily for herd health but more for giving residents better opportunities.

I thought I read somewhere (of course can't find the article now) that one problem is that the food sources in the winter ranges for both mulies and elk is an issue. So there's grass and stuff but it isn't something that is particularly nutritious for those types of animals.

The lack of burning in a lot of areas is an issue.

Basically there's a lot of stuff other than hunter numbers or predators that are causing herd issues in some areas and I would guess that habitat management is probably more significant then a lot of the other stuff that has been complained about. Something simple like food could be a bigger factor that doesn't seem to get a lot of discussion from a holding number perspective.