Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission Meeting - January 15 - 16, 2020

This is valid point. However, if I'm reading this correctly, all the numbers you cited are for "wounded" animals. A wounded animal often does not succumb to those wounds. We just need to make sure we're talking apples or oranges (wounded or fatally wounded).
Indeed. My reading of the stats posted was wounded, died, not recovered by hunter. The inherent uncertainty of this allows the #s to be manipulated by estimating methods, combined w road kill for recording purposes; generally disregarded as a fact of archery hunting. My point is that the high rate (compared to rifle) of archery-caused kills not harvested should be a factor in assessing the impact of archers on herds. That impact is clearly higher than harvest stats for archery demonstrate, at least 25% higher if not more.

It is very possible that poachers kill as many animals as licensed hunters, and that archery kills are 1/3 higher than harvest reports. Those are animals gone from the landscape, lost opportunities for licensed hunters, and big question marks for CPW biologists in managing all CO elk, not just the herds in decline.
 
That impact is clearly higher than harvest stats for archery demonstrate, at least 25% higher if not more.
From the link you shared:
1580508460042.png
Granted, that is Oklahoma whitetail deer, but 4% is lot different than the 25% you stated above. What am I missing?
 
From the link you shared:
View attachment 127018
Granted, that is Oklahoma whitetail deer, but 4% is lot different than the 25% you stated above. What am I missing?
COEngineer, thanks for the heads up and careful reading of my flawed post. I left out a link, which is much more relevant than the one I included.

This link includes the paragraph I quoted in post #79, showing the much higher unrecovered rates that Colorado CPW biologists use in estimating herd size and determining license #s in limited units.


I killed a bull this year during rifle season with an arrow in him from archery season. That elk would be wounded, but recovered? 🤷‍♂️
Congratulations on your bull. Your ? goes to the heart (pun intended) of the statistical challenges of including wounded game. Your bull was alive and available for you to kill, statistically that is straightforward: one happy hunter, one bull for the freezer, no statistical uncertainty.

Consider a bull fatally wounded but not recovered. It doesn't count in harvest statistics, even though it is dead and unavailable for the next hunter to harvest. The hunter that fatally wounded that bull reduced the herd by one dead bull. He is statistically unsuccessful, even if those stats were 100% accurate (the stats are not even close). If that hunter then kills another elk and recovers it, statistically he counts as one successful hunter, however 2 elk are dead, only one included in harvest stats. Or more; the hunter may have wounded, killed and not recovered more elk.

The article linked above reports CPW biologists estimate 25% more cow elk are killed/unrecovered in CO that archery harvest statistics report.
 
Please don't bring up wounding on any public forum. Anti-hunters are just looking for another reason to shut down all methods of take. Why would you ever bring that up?

And then you describe it as an archery issue? WTF? Most archers get one shot. A rifle hunter has one in the chamber, and a magazine full of lead. I have seen herds get unloaded on by a hillside army in orange. It is one of the ugliest things you ever witness, wounded animals everywhere, mass confusion, and more hit animals then hunters afield.

Broadheads cut tissue, bullets destroy it. Which has a higher likelihood of recovery? cut tissue or destroyed shredded hamburger

Just stop ever bringing this up, your only loading the chamber and magazine of anti-hunting orgs for no valid reason whatsoever.
 
The article linked above reports CPW biologists estimate 25% more cow elk are killed/unrecovered in CO that archery harvest statistics report.
C’mon ED. The article you linked and the quote you placed in post #79 clearly state that the estimates are from “lumping the wounding averages from ALL METHODS OF TAKE”. There is no mention of those numbers being attributed to only archery hunters.
 
C’mon ED. The article you linked and the quote you placed in post #79 clearly state that the estimates are from “lumping the wounding averages from ALL METHODS OF TAKE”. There is no mention of those numbers being attributed to only archery hunters.

Gentleman, I think the larger issue is that unlimited tags for any weapon, makes it extremely difficult for CPW to manage herds.

The new reg gives them more flexibility to do their jobs and should be extended to rifle seasons.

If as @grasshopper argues and archery doesn’t effect the herd there is no reason that CPW couldn’t set the quota so high that it was effectively OTC. There would be left over tags through the last day of the season and hunters could simply apply for a preference point and then buy a leftover tag. This is exactly what hunters do in the 1st and 4th seasons in the flattops.
 
Please don't bring up wounding on any public forum. Anti-hunters are just looking for another reason to shut down all methods of take. Why would you ever bring that up?

...ugliest things you ever witness, wounded animals everywhere, mass confusion, and more hit animals then hunters afield.
Says not to mention it...
...brings up the thing he said not to mention.
 
Gentleman, I think the larger issue is that unlimited tags for any weapon, makes it extremely difficult for CPW to manage herds.
This. Flawed data makes for bad management, exacerbated by a planning cycle so long, done by so few biologists, that a statistical error can become a noticeable absence of elk relatively fast.

I disagree that we should avoid online discussion of taboo topics, including E* and W*, because of anti-fear. They can find or invent all the ammo they need, without us lying by denial. However, I won't derail this thread by pursuing W* further.









E*, ethics in general, recently long range hunting ethics.

W*, wounded, not recovered.
 
Why do we give archery hunters the prime time to hunt elk? Even with the best time to hunt elk they still post up pathetic harvest %. Let’s give the prime times to the user group that gets it done. #buglebangem
 
This. Flawed data makes for bad management, exacerbated by a planning cycle so long, done by so few biologists, that a statistical error can become a noticeable absence of elk relatively fast.

I disagree that we should avoid online discussion of taboo topics, including E* and W*, because of anti-fear. They can find or invent all the ammo they need, without us lying by denial. However, I won't derail this thread by pursuing W* further.

E*, ethics in general, recently long range hunting ethics.

W*, wounded, not recovered.

I think discussions of ethics and wounding loss are important, if done in the context of hunters in general. I think it becomes problematic when the conversation shifts to a "well that group wounds so many animals, so therefore I should have more access to those animals then they do"
 
Wow, great news about the OTC archery tags! Hopefully they'll split the season in the future. At some point everything will be 5 day hunts like NM. Its the only way to have enough tags to keep up with demand without hurting the health of the herds. Basically sacrificing efficacy (by shortening the seasons) for the sake of opportunity.
 
Wow, great news about the OTC archery tags! Hopefully they'll split the season in the future. At some point everything will be 5 day hunts like NM. Its the only way to have enough tags to keep up with demand without hurting the health of the herds. Basically sacrificing efficacy (by shortening the seasons) for the sake of opportunity.
As a resident this is the worst idea I could ever see happened. I would hunt out of state more than I was capable of hunting the state I live in
 
As a resident this is the worst idea I could ever see happened. I would hunt out of state more than I was capable of hunting the state I live in
If you debruced CPW, a $12 license plate tax would cover the all the revenue lost by reducing CO elk tags down to WY levels, ostensibly giving you the ability to hunt archery and rifle season on the same tag like WY and MT.
Just saying ;)
 
If you debruced CPW, a $12 license plate tax would cover the all the revenue lost by reducing CO elk tags down to WY levels, ostensibly giving you the ability to hunt archery and rifle season on the same tag like WY and MT.
Just saying ;)
I'm only half college edumacted. so I dont debruce anything but if your saying I could pay an extr $12 to my $1000 worth of license plates i buy every year to hunt both seasons I'm all in. Hell i would buy a whole new tag to get to hunt both seasons but according to CPW that would put too much pressure on the animals even tho it is unlimited already
 
I'm only half college edumacted. so I dont debruce anything but if your saying I could pay an extr $12 to my $1000 worth of license plates i buy every year to hunt both seasons I'm all in. Hell i would buy a whole new tag to get to hunt both seasons but according to CPW that would put too much pressure on the animals even tho it is unlimited already
Debrucing, refers to Doug Bruce that ass hat and felon, that gifted us TABOR. What I described is actually what both MT and WY do to pay for parts of their wildlife budgets, Colorado cannot do the same because of stupid tax legislation.

Don’t worry I will find a way to wedge this argument into every thread even tangentially related to CO wildlife, it’s kinda my shtick... I’m not actually a pro-tax commie I just hate crappy legislation.
 

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
110,805
Messages
1,935,062
Members
34,883
Latest member
clamwc
Back
Top