Colorado wilderness crowding

[JuddStrow]

Ive always been conflicted on it.

More hunters means more tags and more tags mesns more revenue for the Game and Fish dept. to squander.

And for non.res. their higher cost tags help drive down the cost for residents tags.

Is it frustrating? Yes, but it usually makes me push harder to get further off the beaten path and try new places.

 

[JWP58]

I like late season bird hunting for the same reason.

Main reason I won't pheasant hunt anymore. Early sharptail and late huns/chucked I never see a soul.

 

[5MilesBack]

20K hunters represents .13% of the license sales in the US last year, that’s basically 1/8 of a percent. What would you classify that as?

A LOT of extra bowhunters in Colorado........which is exactly what this thread was all about from the start. Duh.

 

[RockinU]

A LOT of extra bowhunters in Colorado........which is exactly what this thread was all about from the start. Duh.

You like to remove things from their direct context. I already addressed that it was a local subset, and never argued that it wasn't significant locally. The part you quoted was addressing someone who said it wasn't a local subset, and now here you are, pointing out what a local subset it is...and I get a duh?

 

[5MilesBack]

You like to remove things from their direct context. I already addressed that it was a local subset, and never argued that it wasn't significant locally. The part you quoted was addressing someone who said it wasn't a local subset, and now here you are, pointing out what a local subset it is...and I get a duh?

That's because you misinterpreted what he said.

 

[RockinU]

That's because you misinterpreted what he said.

1. What's because I misinterpreted what he said?

2. How do you propose I misinterpreted "Increase of 20,000+ bowhunters is definitely not 'one subset of hunters in one locale' "

He made an assertion with numbers, I refuted it with other numbers....there's no interpretation involved, just reading comprehension.

 

[KHNC]

Also, and I ask in all seriousness, as a Cajun watching as folks from all over the country pay a few measly bucks to catch all our fish (happily I might add, the more the merrier!), - how can I help prevent declining elk numbers, and habitat encroachment (both human traffic and development) out west? I have a little disposable income and a tiny amount of free time I'm willing to devote to it. If someone could point me in the right direction, I'd be happy to make an effort to help with the problem.

I suspect that most folks who get involved with resource management at the state and federal level didn't do it for money. And they are working with the resources we give them, via vote or complacence. They might be incompetent, or inadequate, but much of that blame doesn't rest on their shoulders. So thanks to those folks for putting in more effort than most of us!


As far as the hunting equipment companies who are exploiting natural resources for securing wealth is concerned, it seems a bit hypocritical to be a member of a forum sponsored by said companies...

Another thing to keep in mind is those companies, by and large, are owned or being bought up by private equity. You know who's money is backing private equity? A large portion of the common folk in this country.

I think a better idea would be to do all we can to expose as many folks as possible to wild places (hunting or not) in an effort to recruit folks willing to fight for them. When you're born in a big city, and you're never exposed to nature at a young age, and you grow up thinking it's Disney land out there, of course you'll have a jacked up perspective on things. Getting mad at folk's ignorance doesn't do nearly as much good as eliminating it. We should also understand that there simply is no way to win the battle long term. As long as human beings collectively think they have a right to do with the planet as they please, and that all other life here is less valuable than our own, we continue down this path. That's a completely different conversation way too deep for a fun hunting/outdoor forum! But keeping it in perspective helps us realize that the goal is much shorter term. We are protecting these resources for ourselves, and our kids/grandkids. Impart in them the wisdom to do the same for theirs, and keep it as long as we can.

Great post! I must say, i love coming from NC to catch your fish. LA is a great fishery. The Delta down there is definitely something to be proud of. Years ago, I could not fathom doing a DIY elk hunt. I had hunted whitetail my entire life but an elk hunt on my own was out of my league, in my mind. Now, with all of the hype and online info, I itch for the day i get to jump in my truck and head west. I cant wait to put in for the draws and see the results. I cringe when i have to go OTC still. I am 50 now. Probably not a lot of years left for me to climb mountains. I try my best to stay out of OTC and the crowds. But I will go before i will stay home. Many out there feel as i do, the backcountry is much more obtainable now, with all the online knowledge. As for the private equities buying up all the gear companies, i personally despise that. More than one archery accessory company has been abandoned by me for this reason. There are just some i refuse to support. Hopefully the companies i love will hold out as long as they can. One more weekend of fishing before i leave for NM next week. Im stoked!

 

[RockinU]

It seems like the original point I was trying to make in this thread has been lost in petty BS, so I'd like to clear it up.

I really get what the CO guys are saying, and I understand their feelings. I live in Texas, where we've had the biggest growth in total license sales over the last 20 years, and we don't have public ground, so what that has done has driven the cost to lease private ground through the roof. That has impacted my opportunity, not eliminated it, but moved it. Instead of bemoaning my individual loss of opportunity, I step back and see it as a net positive for the sport, the resource, and the landscape. There are more people supporting the things I care about, which helps protect and preserve those things.

It's different in CO I know. There are people in your spots who didn't used to be there. I myself feel it when I've put a lot of time and effort into scouting, and prepping to hunt an area, then can't find a place to park at the trailhead. I don't like it when I'm trying to move in on a bedded elk that I've been waiting out all morning, only to see them blow out of the drainage because a couple of random guys are walking out his ridge. But I recognize the selfish nature of feeling that way, and I recognize that even though my individual opportunity has been impacted, that more people who are invested in the mountain, and the things that we hunt there, means there are more people who are working and paying to preserve and protect those things, and the right to do them.

There are those out there who, if given the chance, would take what we have. There are those who want to transfer lands, who want to outlaw hunting, who want to limit access. We need a healthy and engaged base to combat that. If that means I have to scoot over and share a little bit, I'm going to be good with that.

 

[GregB]

It's interesting that for the most part the guys that believe the hunter numbers are declining and we need more hunters are from the east, while those that feel the opposite are from the western states where all the deer and elk hunting is.

 

[RockinU]

It's interesting that for the most part the guys that believe the hunter numbers are declining and we need more hunters are from the east, while those that feel the opposite are from the western states where all the deer and elk hunting is.

Well, that's probably because most of the decline is happening in the east (or midwest), but this isn't about feeling, it's quantifiable. Even in the west where the hunter numbers are growing slightly, they are on the decline per capita.

I think part of the problem is looking at it regionally, we need to recognize that it's a bigger issue. Pretty much every sportsman's/conservation organization out there has identified this as a concern, and there's a reason for that.

 

[Newtosavage]

It's interesting that for the most part the guys that believe the hunter numbers are declining and we need more hunters are from the east, while those that feel the opposite are from the western states where all the deer and elk hunting is.

Actually, most of the deer hunting in the US is back east.

 

[GregB]

Well, that's probably because most of the decline is happening in the east (or midwest), but this isn't about feeling, it's quantifiable. Even in the west where the hunter numbers are growing slightly, they are on the decline per capita.

I think part of the problem is looking at it regionally, we need to recognize that it's a bigger issue. Pretty much every sportsman's/conservation organization out there has identified this as a concern, and there's a reason for that.

Every sportsman's/conservation organization that is trying to get new members to join and pay a fee?

 

[GregB]

Well, that's probably because most of the decline is happening in the east (or midwest), but this isn't about feeling, it's quantifiable. Even in the west where the hunter numbers are growing slightly, they are on the decline per capita.

I think part of the problem is looking at it regionally, we need to recognize that it's a bigger issue. Pretty much every sportsman's/conservation organization out there has identified this as a concern, and there's a reason for that.

Every sportsman's/conservation organization that is trying to get new members to join and pay a fee?

Actually, most of the deer hunting in the US is back east.

Mule deer

 

[RockinU]

Every sportsman's/conservation organization that is trying to get new members to join and pay a fee?

Exactly! Declining hunter numbers is a major concern for conservation dollars. Not just in terms of fees directly to the organizations, but also in Pittman Robertson money generated and paid out. Remember that it's doled out to the states partially based on license sales numbers, so states selling fewer licenses get less P/R money.

Those organizations do a lot of good work with those fees as an aside...

 

[Newtosavage]

Mule deer have bigger problems right now than how many people are hunting them. If they don't get a handle on this CWD problem, none of us will be hunting them.

As for the sportsman/conservation org. using hunter stats just to get more members, I have seen this reported by the USFWS and NPR (and many others), neither of whom have anything to gain by reporting reduced hunter numbers.

https://www.fws.gov/news/ShowNews.cfm?ref=new 5-year-report-shows-101.6-million-americans-participated-in-hunting-&_ID=36136

https://www.npr.org/2018/03/20/593001800/decline-in-hunters-threatens-how-u-s-pays-for-conservation

 

[GregB]

Exactly! Declining hunter numbers is a major concern for conservation dollars. Not just in terms of fees directly to the organizations, but also in Pittman Robertson money generated and paid out. Remember that it's doled out to the states partially based on license sales numbers, so states selling fewer licenses get less P/R money.

Those organizations do a lot of good work with those fees as an aside...

You miss the point. If someone is trying to sell you something they have to create a need. By saying hunters are declining and the sport is in jeopardy it gets people to sign up recruit friends and generate more revenue. I have yet to see a post about "I see less hunters than I used to". But there are plenty about more hunters. You even posted that in your home state license sales have gone through the roof and made it more expensive to get land to hunt.

 

[RockinU]

You miss the point. If someone is trying to sell you something they have to create a need. By saying hunters are declining and the sport is in jeopardy it gets people to sign up recruit friends and generate more revenue. I have yet to see a post about "I see less hunters than I used to". But there are plenty about more hunters. You even posted that in your home state license sales have gone through the roof and made it more expensive to get land to hunt.

I did, and I also posted a link to a detailed article that shows where and how hunter numbers are declining, and the reasons it appears that trend is going to continue. You may have to go back a few pages to find it, but this isn't anecdotal evidence based on what people see, this is real, hard data about license sales.

As for the point, I don't think those groups are creating the need, I think they are demonstrating it, and if you don't think the sport is facing some serious challenges, then you haven't been seeing the same things I have, there are things creating real jeopardy out there that it's going to take dollars and support to combat.

 

[GregB]

I did, and I also posted a link to a detailed article that shows where and how hunter numbers are declining, and the reasons it appears that trend is going to continue. You may have to go back a few pages to find it, but this isn't anecdotal evidence based on what people see, this is real, hard data about license sales.

As for the point, I don't think those groups are creating the need, I think they are demonstrating it, and if you don't think the sport is facing some serious challenges, then you haven't been seeing the same things I have, there are things creating real jeopardy out there that it's going to take dollars and support to combat.

Yup saw the baby boomer article. They age out, the number of hunters takes a dip because of that but once they age out it's going to remain stable, all the hunters are not going to go away it's not all doom and gloom. If you're used to hunting shoulder to shoulder on 20 acres cramming another 20k hunters into an area might not seem that bad. Keep doing that every year and you will eventually have the same thing.

 

[Lawnboi]

To continue on my theory that the problem is everywhere;

I don’t know how this relates to CO but I think part of the problem is that more and more people are being pushed to public land. People are not willing to let people hunt their land like before. Lease prices are becoming ridiculous. People still want to hunt and gravitate to public.

 

[RockinU]

Yup saw the baby boomer article. They age out, the number of hunters takes a dip because of that but once they age out it's going to remain stable, all the hunters are not going to go away it's not all doom and gloom. If you're used to hunting shoulder to shoulder on 20 acres cramming another 20k hunters into an area might not seem that bad. Keep doing that every year and you will eventually have the same thing.

Well, I wish I had the confidence in your prescience that you do, and while it may not be all doom and gloom (which I don't think it is), there are some serious challenges on the horizon.

Not sure what the shoulder to shoulder on 20 acres snark is about, but I can assure you that's not a concern where I live, and I don't think that 20K number is an annual increase.

Either way, here's to hoping that the things we love continue to endure regardless of the number of people working for their benefit.