Colorado needs your help!!!

elks96

elks96

Long Time Member
Messages
3,851
LAST EDITED ON Feb-27-13 AT 01:05PM (MST)[p]There is an extensive thread being built in the Colorado Section of MM on this. But please take the time to provide input the representative listed below. There is a new bill that will be introduced tomorrow in the senate that will have a net increase in Landowner vouchers at the cost of public hunting opportunities. This net increase will result on a loss of 8,425 tags that are currently available to public hunters.

In some trophy units it will eliminate the only remaining Nonresident Tags available for draw and shift the one tag that was available to landowners. (basically if there are not enough public tags available there will not be any separated out for the 20% nonresident).


You can see the ongoing discussion here:
http://www.monstermuleys.info/dcforum/DCForumID32/3425.html#.US5Ri_L76ik

You can contact the reps here:

Sen. Gail Schwartz (co-sponsor)
Phone: 303-866-4871
[email protected]

Sen. Greg Brophy
Phone: 303-866-6360
[email protected]

Sen. Angela Giron
Phone: 303-866-4878
[email protected]

Sen. Ted Harvey
Phone: 303-866-4881
[email protected]

Sen. Matt Jones
Phone: 303-866-5291
[email protected]

Bill sponsors not on the committee:

Sen. Lois Tochtrop
Phone: 303-866-4863
[email protected]

Rep. Ed Vigil
Phone: 303-866-2916
[email protected]
 
I just sent my letter.... We will see what sort of response we get. I hope this will die in committee...
 
Judas priest! Just when I thought the legislation affecting hunters out in the Rockies was about done for this year along comes another dousy of a Bill. When the heck is enough enough?
 
This will have some serious repercussions on point creep in Colorado if passed. It is also going to make unit-wide vouchers more expensive and harder to get for those of you who partake.

Just a correction to what was posted above. The calendar for the Senate Ag, NR and Energy Committee has been changed, and this bill is scheduled for NEXT week, March 7th at 1:30pm in Senate Committee Room 353. Public testimony will be heard. Keep an eye on the calendar to make sure it does not change again, if you are interested in testifying. Also, if you think you might go to testify, it might be good to coordinate. Please email me if you think you will be going (voucher.proposal at gmail.com). It would be really great to have a good turnout.

>In some trophy units it will
>eliminate the only remaining Nonresident
>Tags available for draw and
>shift the one tag that
>was available to landowners. (basically
>if there are not enough
>public tags available there will
>not be any separated out
>for the 20% nonresident).

It will actually not eliminate the non-resident allocation for hunts that have at least 5 tags. I believe that covers all of the premium hunts.
 
Letter sent to all, thanks. Hopefully landowners don't get an increase, money is already to big of an issue with hunting. This will only make it worse :-(
In addition to the draw odds...

Mntman

"Hunting is where you prove yourself"


Let me guess, you drive a 1 ton with oak trees for smoke stacks, 12" lift kit and 40" tires to pull a single place lawn mower trailer?
 
Bump again. this means a loss of several thousand tags to public hunters....

Send those emails and make those phone calls.
 
"Letter sent to all, thanks. Hopefully landowners don't get an increase, money is already to big of an issue with hunting. This will only make it worse
In addition to the draw odds..."


I have a friend in Colorado that is a landowner. He puts in for four tags a year. He hasn't gotten drawn in seven years. He doesn't care about money. He just wishes his sons could go hunt on their own land for once in their life.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-05-13 AT 06:23PM (MST)[p]Tough to understand the lack of sportsmen interest on this issue. Same deal on every hunting site where this comes up....very few comments.

Once this gets approved, in the next couple seasons guys will start looking at the "PP Required" reports on the CPW site for their favorite hunt, and we'll surely hear some squawking then. Of course by that time, it will be WAY too late.

Maybe guys think this is a done deal and there's nothing they can do that will make a difference. That's not true at all IMO. Right now is the time to act.

Or maybe guys think it is no big deal, because it's only 5% of tags being taken from the public draw. Better keep in mind that 5% will magnify PP creep over the large number of years it already takes to draw most high-demand elk and deer tags. This problem is bad now, and is guaranteed to get worse under this bill.

Or perhaps a few guys think this bill will mean more vouchers are available for them to purchase. HOLD ON THERE. In reality, even that aspect of the bill is a genuine loser for all. Here's why:

Note that for all GMU's west of I-25, the unit wide vouchers would be reduced by one-third. This reduction will make vouchers harder to get, and more costly to purchase. The new "private land only" vouchers can be used ONLY on private property. Access is assured ONLY for the property to which the voucher was issued. Unless you find or purchase access on other private land, you could buy a unit 201 elk voucher and have as little as 160 acres on which to hunt. This opens up all kinds of potential complications. One of which being that if you shoot an animal and it leaves the private property, you CANNOT legally pursue it onto public land.

And for the plains vouchers, keep in mind the additional 10% voucher allocation are NON-TRANSFERABLE vouchers. They can be used ONLY by family members of the landowner. This means the public draw tags are being cut by 10% but with no additional vouchers available to buy. Another big hit to Point Creep and offering a benefit to neither Public hunters nor voucher buyers.
 
I agree 5% is and will have a ripple effect through out the Points base.

People just do not seem to care. Eventually all hunting will be only for those with big money... Start at 15% then to 20%, then???
 
I've been very surprised that this isn't getting much attention anywhere and it could be that many aren't looking at the actual ramifications of what will happen. Maybe the great explanation just posted tonight will get MMers on their keyboards to send out alot more emails than we've had go out to CO so far!
 
"Tough to understand the lack of sportsmen interest on this issue. Same deal on every hunting site where this comes up....very few comments."

I think sportsmen are starting to see through the standard class warfare BS. They realize that the more important issue isn't who or who doesn't get tags. The real issue is the fact that there is more demand each year with less supply. Increasing the supply is the only thing that will make a difference in this whole battle, not fighting with other hunters. Remember those landowners are hunters to and they are the public. They have just as much word as how tags are allocated as you do. What is the use of holding a deer tag if the conservation model is in a downward spiral? How can you call yourself a conservationist if the species you want to harvest is annually in the red?
 
Tristate,

Here is the real issue. We are seeing more tags sent to higher bidders and those in a class up. That is the simple fact. Locally a landowner voucher for Mule Deer goes for a little over $700 for just the voucher. Landowners do not need anymore preference over the public! There are units and areas where it goes over $10,000. It could easily be that the class warfare is the driving factor behind the mismanagement of our wildlife.

When ever greed, money and profit enter into any model there is corruption. Since we seem to ride on the backs of the very animals we are supposed to conserve. I have watched landowners and outfitters use ATV, snow machines, vehicles horses to herd animals off of public land and to their hunters. I have seen landowners charge $2000 for trespass fees than later that winter shoot elk and kill them off of his haystack. I have seen where landowners will lease out their ground to outfitters for some really good money, then later in the winter get caught gut shooting antelope with a .22, leaving them to die a slow death(this same land owner sold vouchers the fall before he had around $13,000 he made from his vouchers).

So if you really want to fix/save/conserve then you do not sell out our wildlife to big money!

Landowners are not owed a single thing. they already get plenty and they should not get more. They should be treated the same way everyone else and if they want to hunt they need to play by the same rules.
 
I think the reason this particular issue isn't getting much attention is because most people are nonresidents of Colorado, and for many, buying landowner vouchers or hunting private land with guaranteed tags allows them to hunt Colorado more often. Now, combine that with the fact that many folks who frequent sites like this and think of hunting everyday, are also the same guys willing to spend the money every year to buy a landowner voucher or pay for a prviate land hunt (cause that's their passion).
SO, most don't really want to fight to see landowner vouchers go away.

In addition, I think many also feel that landowners do deserve something for what they bring to the table in all this, and feel landowners should be compensated for helping to support our wildlife.

I'll be honest with you, I think 15% of tags going to landowners is plenty. I don't think they need more, but I also don't want to see landowner vouchers go away either. So, a nonresident hunter like myself who loves hunting Colorado, probably ain't going to jump on the bandwagon of "let's get rid of landowner vouchers". I'm guessing there are lots of other guys on this site who think as I do.

I understand this current issue isn't about "getting rid of landowner vouchers", just a fight over how many is appropriate. I hope the current percentages of unitwide and private land vouchers remain as they are.

That's just my opinion. Now, someone send me a good voucher for this year!!! HA HA HA

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
 
One last thing, I don't think it's a class warfare thing. Heck, I don't make that much money, but do spend a larger percentage of my disposable income on hunting. Other people choose to spend there extra money of other things. Most landowner vouchers are not bought by "wealthy" dudes, but guys like myself who have $10,000 a year extra and we choose to buy a landowner voucher with some of that "extra". Other people people buy lift kits and big tires for their trucks, or go on vacation to Europe, etc.

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
 
>I understand this current issue isn't
>about "getting rid of landowner
>vouchers", just a fight over
>how many is appropriate. I
>hope the current percentages of
>unitwide and private land vouchers
>remain as they are.

Do you even know what the current percentages of unitwide and PLO vouchers are?

Let me explain to you how this might affect those who want to purchase a voucher every year while they build points. Say for example a non-resident typically purchases a 2nd season unit 44 voucher. There are 7 unitwide vouchers available. Under the proposed rules there will be an increase to 10 vouchers, but only 5 will be unitwide and 5 will be PLO. What do you think the reduction of unitwide vouchers will do to the price of those vouchers? Something to think about for those who are so excited to see "more" vouchers on the market.
 
>Most landowner vouchers are not
>bought by "wealthy" dudes, but
>guys like myself who have
>$10,000 a year extra and
>we choose to buy a
>landowner voucher with some of
>that "extra". Other people people
>buy lift kits and big
>tires for their trucks, or
>go on vacation to Europe,
>etc.

I'm guessing most guys who buy vouchers don't have an extra $10,000 laying around. More like an extra $1,000-$3,000.
 
There's plenty of data that will show you average "disposable income" for families and individuals. I'm not going to argue over that. Many people spend $10,000+ a year on "extra" stuff in life. Diehard hunters like to spend theirs on hunting. Diehard Nascar dudes might spend theirs on going to races. Some people go to Europe, some buy drugs, some buy huge homes, some buy paintings, I spend mine on hunting.
Just cause I spend my extra on hunting doesn't mean I'm in a class above the average. I'm definitely not!!! Wish I were....ha ha ha

As for voucher prices.....I appreciate you being concerned that I might not be able to afford one if this new percentage thing happens. I know you wouldn't want me to be left out. LOL
That is partially why I posted, "I hope the current percentages of unitwide and private land vouchers remain as they are." in my previous post. From a personal standpoint, I like them all to be unitwide vouchers cause I have no interest in hunting private land, but understand the split.

I don't really need you to explain to me how all this effects my life and hunting. I can GUARANTEE to you, I'll be fine and get plenty of hunting in.....and in great spots. Thanks though.

PS - 44 is the place and everyone should apply there and buy lots of vouchers.....LOL

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
 
>I don't really need you to
>explain to me how all
>this effects my life and
>hunting. I can GUARANTEE to
>you, I'll be fine and
>get plenty of hunting in.....and
>in great spots. Thanks though.


Well Blake, I hope you and your buddy Brownlee both kill really nice bucks. Maybe you can even get a grip and grin with his big pearly whites in the photo!

http://www.monstermuleys.info/dcforum/DCForumID5/20222.html
 
But there are also many people like myself who have limited disposable income and there is not a chance in hell I have $10,000 to spend at will. As a resident in the state I have seen my hunting opportunities decrease. Especially for both Antelope and Deer. This will only add to that problem. No matter how you cut in 6 years everyone with out thousands to pay for vouchers or without land will miss out on over 30,000 tags!!!

I simply do not see this as being a good move for Colorado at all.
 
"Tristate,

Here is the real issue. We are seeing more tags sent to higher bidders and those in a class up. That is the simple fact."

So why is it easier to cry to the government than it is to either find a way to increase your discretionary income, or find a way to increase the resource?

" Locally a landowner voucher for Mule Deer goes for a little over $700 for just the voucher. Landowners do not need anymore preference over the public!"

Says you. If the landowners are doing more for conservation than what you refer to as the "public", then they get prefernence.

" There are units and areas where it goes over $10,000. It could easily be that the class warfare is the driving factor behind the mismanagement of our wildlife."

How would you say it is the mismanagement? If you give anyone a choice between a landowner tag or a public property tag nine times out of ten they will pick the private land. Generally herd management and conservation is way better on private property.

"When ever greed, money and profit enter into any model there is corruption."

Bull. There are thousands upon thousands of businesses that operate under a capitolist system, you know the greed, money profit one, that aren't corrupt in the least little bit.

" Since we seem to ride on the backs of the very animals we are supposed to conserve. I have watched landowners and outfitters use ATV, snow machines, vehicles horses to herd animals off of public land and to their hunters. I have seen landowners charge $2000 for trespass fees than later that winter shoot elk and kill them off of his haystack. I have seen where landowners will lease out their ground to outfitters for some really good money, then later in the winter get caught gut shooting antelope with a .22, leaving them to die a slow death(this same land owner sold vouchers the fall before he had around $13,000 he made from his vouchers)."

I have seen "public" hunters do a ton of bad things to the environment too. SO does that mean anyone with a "public" tag doesn't deserve one?

"So if you really want to fix/save/conserve then you do not sell out our wildlife to big money!"

THATS EXACTLY WHAT YOU DO!

"Landowners are not owed a single thing. they already get plenty and they should not get more. They should be treated the same way everyone else and if they want to hunt they need to play by the same rules."

They are playing by the same rules. The same governments that decided the public should have those tags is now deciding that the landowners should have those tags. Doesn't mean anyone got cheated. Just means that the government has finaly noticed that landowners are part of the public too.
 
I understand where you're coming from elks96, and I agree that having too many landowner tags, conservation tags (Utah), etc. can hurt the sport. I just posted my opinion in response to the concern about why this topic doesn't get much attention.

I understand you saying you don't have $10,000 to spend at will, but we all say that, but the vast majority of Americans waste that much on fast food, over sized homes, expensive automobiles, etc. You might really live well within your means and still be poor, but most people aren't. Most people spend more money than they really need to on lots and lots of different things.

If Colorado raised license fee's by $5, people would complain that it's becoming a "rich man's sport". Yet those same people will buy the triple cheeseburger at Wendy's for lunch for $5 and complain about the fee increase while they're stuffing their face with crap they don't need.

Anyway, fight your fight. I was just sharing my opinion on why more people aren't giving the subject much attention.

ColoradoOak - You're just jealous cause Brownlee is a better hunter than you, can out hike you, has more money than you, a larger p**** than you, whiter teeth, and could kick your butt. And probably even steal your wife!!!! LMAO You poor guy.
(I'm a comedian and didn't even know it)

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
 
"One last thing, I don't think it's a class warfare thing."


I understand your logic but the problem is class warfare in itself is illogical behavior. You see yourself as spending money on hunting but not considering yourself wealthy. They look at it as anyone who spends more money than I can on hunting, is a threat to me getting to go hunt. If you don't believe me look at post #20.
 
The discussion on the merits of this bill has nothing to do with class warfare. Not for me anyway. Hell I bought a RFW Bighorn Ram tag last year. I've bought landowner vouchers in the past.

No, the question is simply whether or not this is a good bill. From the standpoint of outfitters, average-Joe hunters, voucher-buyers, and even landowners, I see very few winners coming out of this bill. Honestly I'd love to know who (other than some of the Voucher Committee members, and the director of CPW) are actually in favor of this bill, and their logic?
 
"The discussion on the merits of this bill has nothing to do with class warfare. Not for me anyway. Hell I bought a RFW Bighorn Ram tag last year. I've bought landowner vouchers in the past."


Many of the wealthiest people in the world engage in class warfare. Warren Buffet and Barack Obama do it all the time and they ain't hurtin for money.
 
>ColoradoOak - You're just jealous cause
>Brownlee is a better hunter
>than you, can out hike
>you, has more money than
>you, a larger p**** than
>you, whiter teeth, and could
>kick your butt. And probably
>even steal your wife!!!! LMAO
>You poor guy.
>(I'm a comedian and didn't even
>know it)
>
>Brian Latturner
>MonsterMuleys.com

Pretty low class statement there Founder. Showing your true colors. Nice way to represent and promote your website...

"Courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway."
 
"Pretty low class statement there Founder. Showing your true colors. Nice way to represent and promote your website..."


I found it funny.

If people on here believe that attacking ones friends or unnassociated threads because they think that somehow substitues for logic in a internet debate then they should expect nothing else than an internet kick to the balls.
 
Low class......cooooooool.... I've got class and color baby! .... "true" color too! And here I thought I had none. That's my first compliment today. Thanks man! LOL

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
 
Pretty simple answer to why there are very few responses to this post.It's called HUNTER APATHY.The biggest threat to hunting there is.
 
So where does it go from here waygoner? It's not law is it?

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
 
No it passed first reading in Committee. Now it goes to floor, if it passes there is goes to the other house for final approval. We basically have 2 chances left to stop it.
 
RE: Colorado needs your help!!! NEW INFO!!!

These are great discussions, but most are speaking to the crowd. PLEASE call or email these folks above or this goes for not. Remember that just to change the computers system will cost the wildlife fund $51,800 alone. This does not include the lack of monies that the DOW will lose from lost revenue of the increased LO tags given on the first draw. Call Call Call and get your voices heard.

The figure is from the "State Fiscal Impact" that can be downloaded from the Colorado Legislative Council Staff Fiscal Notes. (SB13-188) Noted on page two that this is an estimate for 700 hours of programming changed that will be made to update the draw system. None of these funds will be allocated to wildlife conservation.

Current law allows landowners to apply for up to 6 big game licenses free of charge, other than the $3 application fee. Subsequent leftover applications cost $25 to $40, depending on the license. The proposed regulations in SB13-188 will increase the maximum number of "free" licenses from 6 to 19, before having to pay the fees. Therefore, landowners may not be required to pay the fee for up to 13 licenses that would be required under the current law.

I hope this helps.
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

B27C8281-E54F-43BF-93C5-17B0935965FE.jpeg
IMG_0119.jpeg
6870F21F-9830-4528-B0A5-C435D6B693B3.jpeg
elk10.jpg
Great Looking Bull!
Deer finished.jpg
3AF249DC-2009-4261-A14E-D0D007C2EBD7.png
20211127_145401.jpg
Canon city buck.jpeg
Lots Extra Stuff!
elk16.jpg
Screenshot_20221113-065922_Gallery.jpg
Back
Top Bottom