Colorado Overcrowding Elk Hunting

Joined
Feb 25, 2012
Messages
2,361
What's even more sad is that of the almost 36k bowhunters, we have less than 2k Colorado Bowhunter members. It goes to show you, all these shows, wannabes, experts have little regard for bowhunting in CO other than exploiting it for gain.
When the CBA was using pics of elk from other states on their website it turned me off. Reminded me of false advertising. Then most recently the CBA pushed so hard for change they screwed over archery deer hunters and lost some of the archery season in the process.

Now more units are going limited during archery. And it will be a domino effect as seen with 80/81 going LE this year.

After all that I’m surprised there are even 2000 members.
 
Joined
Nov 27, 2013
Messages
1,966
When the CBA was using pics of elk from other states on their website it turned me off. Reminded me of false advertising. Then most recently the CBA pushed so hard for change they screwed over archery deer hunters and lost some of the archery season in the process.

Now more units are going limited during archery. And it will be a domino effect as seen with 80/81 going LE this year.

After all that I’m surprised there are even 2000 members.

The CBA was pushing for a 15 August opener for deer, it was almost there but a “figure” on the CWC shot it down.

The bottoms line, more members = more influence. We have a 5 year structure coming up, some giant issues at hand. One being everything going to legislative process. The CBA is trying to get seasons set as we/they know after this next go around, everything will be set in stone with no possible changes on the horizon.

Bottom line, more members, more influence. Less members, less influence. You’re either part of the solution, or part of the problem.

Without them, we'd not even be a discussion in CO take that to the bank.

Edit........... Speaking from a bowhunter's point of view, on a forum dedicated to all manners of take.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 27, 2013
Messages
1,966
I stopped being a CBA member when around 2015ish the CPW liason stated at multiple CPW meetings that bowhunters wanted two separate seasons and a break in between.

I'm sure you're referring to Bowhunters wanting their own season. Two seasons, one for Archery, one for ML. No CBA board member has every pushed split archery seasons that I'm aware of.

Again, Bowhunter point of view.

Anyways, crowding is an issue all manners of take.
 

sndmn11

"DADDY"
Joined
Mar 28, 2017
Messages
10,611
Location
Morrison, Colorado
I'm sure you're referring to Bowhunters wanting their own season. Two seasons, one for Archery, one for ML. No CBA board member has every pushed split archery seasons that I'm aware of.

Again, Bowhunter point of view.

Anyways, crowding is an issue all manners of take.

No, I'm not referring to that. Around 2015, CBA's CPW liason proposed to CPW that bow hunters wished for two separate two week archery elk seasons with a break in between.

Edit: it was 2017 the CBA Liason made the recommendation in an August CPW Board meeting. 2015 was the year he supported crossbows and more landowner vouchers.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 25, 2012
Messages
2,361
Bottom line, more members, more influence. Less members, less influence. You’re either part of the solution, or part of the problem.

CBA pushed the elk issue so hard archers lost part of their season and lost the best time to archery hunt deer. Why would anyone be proud to be part of that solution?
 
Joined
Nov 27, 2013
Messages
1,966
CBA pushed the elk issue so hard archers lost part of their season and lost the best time to archery hunt deer. Why would anyone be proud to be part of that solution?

No issue, like anti hunters, no need in trying to convince them. If your mind is set, that's fine.
 

5MilesBack

"DADDY"
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
16,205
Location
Colorado Springs
Just about every organization that I have supported in my lifetime has eventually come up with some seriously warped thinking and pushed for policies and changes I don't agree with. I think it's just a sign of diversity and getting watered down with differing opinions. Just look at the political parties these day. They're both way more liberal than they ever used to be. Funny how that happens.......organizations never change for the better in the long run, they always degrade. Kind of like bodies and machinery......they all break down over time.
 
Joined
Feb 17, 2013
Messages
2,363
I’m not saying that CO shouldn’t cut back the non resident percentage of tag allocations.


BUT, CO does have at least twice as many elk as all the other states listed. Numbers, especially when you get to this scale can say whatever you want them to say.


State, Tags Sold ,Elk Herd, Tags/elk
NM, 37000, 80000, .46
WY, 55817, 112900, .49
UT, 61359, 75000, .82
MT, 109570, 135000, .81
WA, 56199, 60000, .94
OR, 98977, 133000, .74
ID, 100000, 120000, .83
CO, 218782, 290000, .75


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Apples to apples. It’s not about the overall number. It’s about elk densities. Elk per square mile. Colorado has elk habitat from north to south and east to west. More elk habitat than any other state. Unlike Montana or Wyoming whose main mountain ranges are on the west side with smaller isolated patches of elk habitat in the east. Trust me your chances of finding elk every day are way better in states with less overall numbers.
 
Joined
Aug 4, 2019
Messages
1,377
Location
North Carolina
As a NR who goes to CO each year, I'd actually be OK with doing unit specific OTC tags.
Maybe a few years later implement a cap?
Maybe even go to a draw a few years after that but with relatively high draw odds?
I certainly don't have all the answers but there's no doubt overcrowding is a huge issue.
Maybe even trade these changes for shitcanning the wolf reintroduction?
 
Joined
Jul 7, 2019
Messages
63
I haven't looked into all the data but it would appear that data was cherry picked since there are weird gaps in years used. Have you looked at the years not listed?

Regardless of the point above, the elk pressure in Colorado is ridiculous. But, i guess, if people are willing to continue to pay for tags with crazy high hunting pressure, why not keep selling them the tags.
Also doesn't take into consideration herd pop., target pop., or revenue to the state.
 

Tightwad

FNG
Joined
Feb 7, 2022
Messages
31
As a NR who goes to CO each year, I'd actually be OK with doing unit specific OTC tags.
Maybe a few years later implement a cap?
Maybe even go to a draw a few years after that but with relatively high draw odds?
I certainly don't have all the answers but there's no doubt overcrowding is a huge issue.
Maybe even trade these changes for shitcanning the wolf reintroduction?
I hunted CO pretty much every year from 2011-2017, and it seemed every year I saw fewer and fewer elk (or sign thereof) and more people in the woods. The most frustrating part for me was the Forest Service closing off access roads to areas I had previously hunted. Being charged continuously higher fees for access to less and less area each year just left a bad taste in my mouth - I haven't been back since.
 

Viper*6

FNG
Joined
Feb 14, 2022
Messages
69
Location
Washington
Wow, impressive numbers that reveal a lot about elk hunting in other states and why we see more hunters afield. They just break it up into multiple and shorter seasons. Interesting to note is what the general people population increase has been over the last several decades which continues to reduce wildlife habitat.
 

Elest98

FNG
Joined
Mar 29, 2022
Messages
30
Location
West Virginia
As a new elk hunter Colorado makes it easy and doable. However I could easily get behind making otc tags unit specific and even possibly limiting them.
 
Top