The Ghost of Colorado Point Creep Future

[rtraverdavis]

What’s your over/under on NR point creep for Colorado’s deer seasons once the new season schedule sets in next year? Planning for the worst, hoping for the best, I think it will be—

2nd: static
3rd: +/- 2
4th: +/- 3

Of course, it will vary with the changing windows of season dates. This is based on the science of pure conjecture with absolutely nothing but my own lack of knowledge or experience to back it up.

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

What units? 1-2pt units or like 15pt units?

 

[rtraverdavis]

What units? 1-2pt units or like 15pt units?

Since I only have a few points, the 1-4 point units are particularly what I have in mind.

 

[Bluffgruff]

No change in the 2nd and third seasons next year in units taking 0-3 pts now, maybe a 1 point increase in 4th seasons in those units. Don't care about high point units. All bets off in 2021. Everyone banking points will be after a tag then as seasons will be as late as they ever will be, and tags may be reduced due to increased harvest, or so the detractors of later seasons have said.

 

[rideold]

I think it'll be a complete crap shoot.

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

Yeah I think it's gonna be squirrelly for the low point deer hunts, I bet some 1 pt 2nd season tags go to 2pts and some 3pt 3rd season go to 2pts... probably forth season with gain a point.

But all bets are kinda off.

I have a feeling for the super hard to draw tags some max point holders will bleed off into third season.

 

[vanish]

Bluff, your post seems to imply the changes won't take affect in 2020, but they do.

Many people are making the assumption quotas won't change. I have a feeling many 4th season deer tags will be 0 quota and 3rd season will get this year's 4th season quota. 2nd season will get many more tags added and be even more crowded. 3rd season tags are going to skyrocket on creep.

 

[Hunt West]

Everyone keeps saying reduced tag numbers for 3rd and 4th but I’d honestly be surprised. Colorado is about revenue and I don’t see them dumping several hundred more tags into second season to make up the difference, but I’ve been wrong before.

 

[TOGIE]

3rd is gonna have to get reduced to some extent. next year is likely gonna be a trial to see how much they really need to. notwithstanding the fact that colorado loves to sell tags, cpw is an agency charged with managing wildlife that exists and thrives for current and future generations, and they will have to do what it takes to make sure that happens.

 

[Hunt West]

Why would it have to be reduced? Until bucks start having fawns the buck harvest really has no overall effect on populations until buck to doe ratios drop below levels that does aren’t getting bred. Now if you want to talk about quality/age class that’s an entirely different subject.

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

Why would it have to be reduced? Until bucks start having fawns the buck harvest really has no overall effect on populations until buck to doe ratios drop below levels that does aren’t getting bred. Now if you want to talk about quality/age class that’s an entirely different subject.

Colorado manages its deer and elk very differently. The money is in NR elk not deer. The state wants to maintain buck doe ratios and quality so it will lower 4th season quotas to keep hunters from killing too many older bucks.

 

[Hunt West]

4th season is pretty dang low already and I agree with you about NR elk being the money maker. If they were really concerned with quality/age class they wouldn’t be shooting a couple hundred bucks on the ranching for wildlife hunts in the sagebrush in November/December.

 

[rtraverdavis]

Crap shoot it is then. Going to be interesting no matter how it comes off.

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

4th season is pretty dang low already and I agree with you about NR elk being the money maker. If they were really concerned with quality/age class they wouldn’t be shooting a couple hundred bucks on the ranching for wildlife hunts in the sagebrush in November/December.

Yeah I just roll my eyes at people who complain about RFW or Landowner tags... sure it's not prefect, but give a solution. It's all "boo hoo all the deer and elk are on private, those are all deer we should be allowed to hunt them" and then the state negotiates a system and it's all "boo hoo they are talking all the tags, boo hoo I didn't get to hunt there." Fact is there are a ton of deer and elk who spend their entire lives on these ranches, the only way they would be hunted is through these programs, they do provide a mechanism for public access, and they are conducted with the same herd goals as the rest of the DAU.

This doesn't mean I don't think there are some abuses and that there aren't some changes that should be implemented, but I do hear a ton of people complaining, who have no first hand knowledge of the system and who don't have a better solution.

 

[Hunt West]

So you are fine with RFW tags shooting deer in November/December but when the new season dates allow public hunters in regular gmu’s to hunt similar dates tags need to be cut, moved to second season, hunts eliminated etc.... makes perfect sense to me.

 

[bushman13]

I'll bite. Make the landowners obtain tags just as everyone else would. If they want to profit from the wildlife on their property they can lease it. A season length lease or a year long lease on private sure beats the current over valued, pay to play, single animal model.
As far as the public land hunter, the walk in stuff seems like an awesome idea.

Yeah I just roll my eyes at people who complain about RFW or Landowner tags... sure it's not prefect, but give a solution. It's all "boo hoo all the deer and elk are on private, those are all deer we should be allowed to hunt them" and then the state negotiates a system and it's all "boo hoo they are talking all the tags, boo hoo I didn't get to hunt there." Fact is there are a ton of deer and elk who spend their entire lives on these ranches, the only way they would be hunted is through these programs, they do provide a mechanism for public access, and they are conducted with the same herd goals as the rest of the DAU.

This doesn't mean I don't think there are some abuses and that there aren't some changes that should be implemented, but I do hear a ton of people complaining, who have no first hand knowledge of the system and who don't have a better solution.

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

So you are fine with RFW tags shooting deer in November/December but when the new season dates allow public hunters in regular gmu’s to hunt similar dates tags need to be cut, moved to second season, hunts eliminated etc.... makes perfect sense to me.

I'm ok with CPAW setting up a system to hunt deer, create seasons, and set quotas. I expect the quotas for RFW to fall in line with overall management goals. So yes if the hunt dates are changed, and that increases efficacy then I expect the quota to be dropped.

I expect RFW to be managed using the same exact yard stick, but I acknowledge that vast tracks of private land with largely undisturbed animals will have different on the ground conditions than public lands so achieving the same goal may be done with slightly different rules. So for instance my FIL shot a deer this year on his private property that was on the property from mid June - 2nd season. I'm sure if he had had a 4th season tag he would have killed the exact same animal, he has told me many times that for his small property 4th season isn't any better than 2nd, he never sees any new animals show up in Nov-Dec... it's just the same resident deer. Some properties have big bucks that you could just as easily kill in Muzzy season as in late December, CPAW needs to set quotas/dates in a way to manage those deer, just the same as those deer that are mostly living on public.

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

I'll bite. Make the landowners obtain tags just as everyone else would. If they want to profit from the wildlife on their property they can lease it. A season length lease or a year long lease on private sure beats the current over valued, pay to play, single animal model.
As far as the public land hunter, the walk in stuff seems like an awesome idea.

For the most part they do, the system is very complicated... in a lot of ways more complicated than the regular draw and it really depends how big your places is 1000 acres is way different than 80,000. But for someone with 500 acres, you can 1. Draw an regular tag for your unit, 2. Draw a Private land only tag for that unit if that is an option. 3. Get a landowner voucher if applicable.
You can't get a voucher if there is an OTC season in your unit for that species, you have to have contiguous acreage over 160 acres, you have to be able to demonstrate that there is habitat and that the species you are getting a voucher for is on your land using it. Then you have to apply in a draw and there are quotas. You might be able to get a 2nd season voucher every year a 3rd season voucher every couple of years and a 4th season voucher every 10 years. You can use that voucher yourself or sell it to someone, which gives them the rights to hunt your place and a tag.

Ranching for wildlife is a whole different system and I don't know it well enough to defend or explain the details.

Hunting leases, just aren't a part of CO culture like they are back east, with lot of public land people would likely choose not to pay for private access, they would just complain to the state. Then on the other hand ranchers would complain about elk and deer on their crops and advocate for increased quotas and for the state to have smaller herds. (See Montana, ask BuzzH about shoulder seasons, etc)

There has to be systems to get people to work together towards common goals, and it's important for people to consider the greater picture not just how it effects there personal chances at killing a deer, this certainly goes both ways.

Something to consider there are tons of landowner that have land in trophy units, under 1000 acres more than 300, they will never get a voucher or draw a tag to hunt their own property during 4th season deer, or maybe ever if it's a premium elk season. The quota and odds at a voucher are about as bad as the regular draw and it might be 20 years for them to draw in the regular draw.

Name me one place west of the Mississippi that someone couldn't hunt their own 500 acre property. So on the other side of the fence there are lots of landowner that think the system is BS.

Two sides to everything, the system isn't perfect which is why it's important for people to have these discussions and learn about the issues and then show up to the annual meetings and engage with the process.

 

[bushman13]

I think this is all of product of culture. Out west you guys have been provided one convoluted system after the other and gotten used to it. All while ignoring the elephant in the room. These herds are managed for the benefit of Agriculture and the exclusivity and therefore perceived value, is just a myth. Mange the herds for the Hunter benefit and all this goes away.

For the most part they do, the system is very complicated... in a lot of ways more complicated than the regular draw and it really depends how big your places is 1000 acres is way different than 80,000. But for someone with 500 acres, you can 1. Draw an regular tag for your unit, 2. Draw a Private land only tag for that unit if that is an option. 3. Get a landowner voucher if applicable.
You can't get a voucher if there is an OTC season in your unit for that species, you have to have contiguous acreage over 160 acres, you have to be able to demonstrate that there is habitat and that the species you are getting a voucher for is on your land using it. Then you have to apply in a draw and there are quotas. You might be able to get a 2nd season voucher every year a 3rd season voucher every couple of years and a 4th season voucher every 10 years. You can use that voucher yourself or sell it to someone, which gives them the rights to hunt your place and a tag.

Ranching for wildlife is a whole different system and I don't know it well enough to defend or explain the details.

Hunting leases, just aren't a part of CO culture like they are back east, with lot of public land people would likely choose not to pay for private access, they would just complain to the state. Then on the other hand ranchers would complain about elk and deer on their crops and advocate for increased quotas and for the state to have smaller herds. (See Montana, ask BuzzH about shoulder seasons, etc)

There has to be systems to get people to work together towards common goals, and it's important for people to consider the greater picture not just how it effects there personal chances at killing a deer, this certainly goes both ways.

Something to consider there are tons of landowner that have land in trophy units, under 1000 acres more than 300, they will never get a voucher or draw a tag to hunt their own property during 4th season deer, or maybe ever if it's a premium elk season. The quota and odds at a voucher are about as bad as the regular draw and it might be 20 years for them to draw in the regular draw.

Name me one place west of the Mississippi that someone couldn't hunt their own 500 acre property. So on the other side of the fence there are lots of landowner that think the system is BS.

Two sides to everything, the system isn't perfect which is why it's important for people to have these discussions and learn about the issues and then show up to the annual meetings and engage with the process.

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

I think this is all of product of culture. Out west you guys have been provided one convoluted system after the other and gotten used to it. All while ignoring the elephant in the room. These herds are managed for the benefit of Agriculture and the exclusivity and therefore perceived value, is just a myth. Mange the herds for the Hunter benefit and all this goes away.

I have to disagree, there are tons and tons of book animals that come off of public land on OTC tags. If anything I think the west has the only true egalitarian hunting system in the world. Where else can a average joe renting a trailer spend $50, put in hard work and get a BC critter.