Home Forums Hunting & Shooting General Big Game Colorado Big Game Draw Starts Today

Should get my archery Deer, Over The Counter archery either sex Elk and will probably will put in for leftover archery Bear. At 69 years young hope I can get a couple more years archery hunting Colorado. Tom

Waiting for the cc hit! Should draw bear and deer. If I'm lucky I'll get a muzzleloader elk tag as well.

I was looking at the CPW licensing site and noticed that all my preference point additions and takeaways were posted mid May each year. So the drawing has likely been done and just not posted. No back door to find out if you drew in advance anymore. Happy Trails

Just got hit for moose preference point fee

People are getting hit for moose now.

Got hit for a moose point as well. 16 weighted points and counting......

Today must be revenue day charging cards for beaucoup points! LOL

Yeah, the state needs to make that money.

Yep, and I’m ok with that!

It's what's needed to make it all work.

Good luck gents!

Colorado game and parks makes as much as any 2 western states combined, before this pp fee nonsense started. Do you really believe they needed more money?

C’mon man we’re in the slightly eastern version of California, there’s always a way to waste/spend money in liberal utopia. I’m still trying to figure out where all the money they charge us for vehicle registrations and marijuana tax goes, cuz the roads suck azz and the schools are all hurting for money!

Yeah, the roads suck and the schools haven't seen any revenue coming in, but there sure are a lot of cats walking around with huge wads in their pockets.

If you look at historical budgets of the Division of Wildlife before it merged with Parks, you'll see that Colorado was right on par with Montana and Wyoming, with less expensive tags.

Fact is, we have many more resident and non-resident hunters than either one of those states.

Yep, they shouldn't be able to keep that money, they should fork it over to the state. Right?

Smokepole you might want to look up national hunting license data on the usfws site. Colorado makes more than any 2 western states combined.

Look up the prices Colorado charges for NR licenses. The reason they pull in more license revenue isn't the cost of licenses, it's the number of licenses sold.

I never said anything about the cost of a license. What I said was Colorado makes as much as any two western states combined.

Good.... they should! It’s a great state to hunt in, and there a schitt-ton of public land/access. There’s quality critters in almost every unit in the state... and if you’re willing to ride some boot leather.... there’s not a lot of hunting pressure.

Don’t like it.... don’t hunt here.... seems pretty simple.

Pardon me, I thought you said something about preference point fee nonsense.

Must have been somebody else.

Deer tags are dropping right now.

I pulled a buck antelope tag

Yep, my card got hit for a deer tag. Pref point only app for elk.

My card just took a deer hit

Two hits on my card for deer.... one 3rd season buck tag for me.... and my son’s first deer tag, also a 3rd season buck.

Nice!!

I'm sure I have a hit....

Just don't know unit....

Bear tag here, missed on high country deer.... now just waiting on the elk draw!

Got my bear tag, then shortly after got hit for deer. Waiting on elk

Got me a deer tag just don’t know if it’s first or 2nd choice.

Got my cow tag for 2nd season, but no deer for me...

Just saw the cc hit for elk this morning! Good year for me, came away with the three tags I was hoping for - muzzleloader cow, rifle bear, and 4th season deer

I didn't draw antelope, but I was swinging for the fences with the hybrid draw being my only hope. Can't be disappointed when that doesn't work out

Are the deer results posted anywhere yet? I don’t have online banking so I can’t watch my debit card.

You';ll get an email if your credit card is charged.

I got the email..... plains deer on the ranch

Now that's a great tag !!!

I just barely received my bear and Antelope unsuccessful draw emails.... looks like the emails are a couple days behind the CC hits.... but who knows.... it’s CPW.

Jealous here.......nice snag.

Looks like you guys are gettin some tags, nice work and congrats!! I love this time of year, or hate it, usually don’t draw schitt so I hate it!!! 🤣🤣

My CC was hit for both deer and elk, but no idea which choice. CPW site still shows me as entered in draw and no changes to PP.

I got hit for deer last night and elk early this morning, no clue if they are 1st or 2nd choice and nothing has updated on CPW website.

Looks like I got my archery Elk tag and Antelope pref point, still waiting on Deer pref point . Can't wait for September now !

Real depression will set in when the WA (no)tags are posted! LOL

I got a feeling I’m gonna get a sheep or goat tag this year!!! 🤣🤣

I drew deer but not antelope or elk. Draw results are what I expected going in.

Got my email for successful draw of cow elk,ML a few minutes ago

Drew a 3rd Season Muley tag. Looking forward to fall now.

Finally got the email. No 3rd season buck tag for me again this year. Hoping for a leftover but probably end up hunting a bull again.

I'm thinking I've struck out. No email or CC hit for either moose or elk.

Nice. Long season??

Everybody I hunt with drew their first choice buck tags this year..... gonna be a lot of bone hitting the ground this fall.

Got my Archery Deer and OTC either sex Elk for GMU63. Will put in for leftover Bear GMU53/63 in Aug.

Got my PP for deer (as requested) and 4th Rifle cow tag. Expect everyone in group got same. Looking forward to 3rd (bull) and 4th (cow) rifle seasons.

Got the elk email, too. So I drew first rifle bull elk and late plains deer. I knew antelope would be a point as I drew last year, it usually takes 3 to 4 here. My youngest boy will be hunting elk with me this year.

I got a third combined buck tag in unit 12.

Both sons hit on ML tags for antlered elk.

Early rifle unit 76😀

After the dust cleared

I drew a rifle tag for a buck pronghorn and my wife Tricia drew a 3rd season buck deer tag.

Looks like a couple trips to see old friends this fall.

I struck out on Pronghorn and Moose but I drew a 2nd season buck tag and a unit 61 cow elk tag. I will also buy a B list muzzleloader cow tag.

Me, too. But I’ll be hunting in 13 and maybe north edge of 12. Elk PP only. I’ll buy an OTC bull or leftover cow tag. I’ll decide about October 30th. Happy Trails

Got hit for plains deer and antelope, first choice for both.

Did not get any tags for colorado.

No deer, no elk, and no antelope tags for Colorado.

4 cow tags that we know of - Daughter #1, 2 SILs and myself. Waiting for results on SILs brother, who is coming home on leave from Navy any day now. Expect to end up with 5 total.
1 deer tag for Daughter #1, the only deer tag applied for (and it was 2nd choice after Preference Point for first).

Deer and Elk Preference Points for all,

So if SIL's little brother gets his elk tag, as expected, 100% success in our applications.

Hope we do as well for WY antelope.

Just out of curiosity, were all the cow tags B list ? I applied for PP last year as first choice and cow tag as second choice and got it for 2nd Rifle. I just applied for elk PP only this year. There are tons of leftover cow tags where I hunt and bull is OTC. I had to buy that danged small game license to apply for deer. There were zero deer tags on the leftover list even though some were drawn as second choice. I chose not to gamble with a second choice deer application this year as my landowner buddy is using the landowner vouchers himself / family. I’ll roll the dice again next year with zero points . Good hunting!

Drew my RFW cow elk tag for Kiowa Creek, and my Either-sex Whitetail tag for the farm, SE CO. This season is going to be a freezer-filler for sure!!

I'm glad you chose Montana and Wyoming as a comparative. Let's punch in the numbers for 2018 from the USFWS to see how they stack up.

Colorado has 104,185 sq miles
Montana and Wyoming combine for 244,954 sq miles

Colorado has 294,319 licensed hunters
M&W combine for 383,716 licensed hunters

Colorado took in $57,056,595 in hunting license revenue
M&W combined for $48,331,587

Now someone explain to me how letting them create new revenue streams, when they have 140,769 fewer sq miles to cover, 89,397 fewer hunters to deal with, and already take in $8,725,000 more than Montana and Wyoming combined, is a good idea? And please, save the "if you dont like it dont hunt here" arguement for my 8yr old nephew. He'd gladly respond with how his dad could beat up your dad. Give me an intelligent response. They've become another government bureaucracy that spends money like drunken sailors! Bowing to new revenue streams just makes us enablers.

And for the record, I drew a buck antelope tag, a buck deer tag, and a bull elk tag. I think CP&W is doing a fine job. I just dont see these new revenue streams converting to better habitat, and better quality and number of animals.

Yup!

Here’s why: BECAUSE THEY CAN.

Seriously... Colorado has a ton of out-of-State Hunters.... people want to hunt here. Simple economics man.... supply and demand.

Colorado has a bunch of seasons: archery, MZ, 4 general seasons, and a late season (in some units).... so a guy can hunt his home state, and also slide in one of the Colorado seasons.

Due the multiple seasons, there’s also less hunter pressure in any given unit at any given time.... because only 15-25% of the total hunters are “hunting” during any particular season.

Colorado also leases hundreds of thousands of acres of “State Trust Lands” for the exclusive use of hunters/fishermen. They pay the state for this access using funds derived only from license sales.

I’ve definitely seen an improvement in quality/quantity of critters over the past 5 years. I have no issues with accessing massive tracts of public land, and we’ve shot a number of nice animals in the STLs.

PS.... if you don’t like it.... I hear Utah is a lovely place to hunt...

Nearly 500 000 acres is the figure for huntable stl's in Colorado. Montana and Wyoming combine for nearly 9 million acres of state trust lands allowing you to hunt all of it so long as you can access it without trespassing.

And my nephew said his dad could beat up your dad!

State Trust lands are a very small fraction of the huntable public and in Colorado so focusing on them is disingenuous, at best. But in reply to this:




Let's talk about two things: First, the concept of "letting them create new revenue streams." Who is "letting them," and who would do you think should stop "them?" The federal government perhaps? Other states perhaps? Who do you believe has the "right" to regulate the price of hunting licenses in Colorado, other than the people of Colorado??

Second, as to why it's a good idea for Colorado to raise license fees for non-residents my answer is, because we have too many non-resident hunters and not enough public land to spread them all out. If higher license fees = fewer hunters I'm all for it.

I wasn’t focusing on them.... I was simply stating that there’s additional access beyond the simple “public land”.

I guess I have a question..... how much should it cost to hunt Colorado?

I'll answer yours when someone answers my original. Why is giving Colorado department of wildlife more money justified when they already make more than any 2 western states combined?

By "letting them" I'm referring to no pushback, hell to a couple of the posters I originally replied to on this thread, out right applauding them!

To your second point, so rather than limit the number of hunters you suggest we make it a rich mans game? I've got a niece that will elk hunt with me for possibly the last time this fall as she recently turned 18 and her license fee will now jump 7x higher than it has been over the past few seasons. Only the wealthy can hunt the kings game is the wrong direction in my opinion.



Did the numbers I presented you surprise you at all? I noticed you made no mention of them.

Sadly the problem with Colorado is that everyone, everywhere that wants to hunt Elk knows that Colorado is the most obvious choice. This state affords opportunity to anyone who wants to buy the tag, there in lies the problem. Unlike many western states that have caps or limit the number of non-res hunters, Colorado is happy to and dependent on that Non-Res money at whatever price to the experience. It blows my mind going through draw Hunt statistics not just for elk but for deer too how much Colorado caters to Non-Res hunters. If you are i the business of making money , which CPWD clearly is, you don’t bump the price and restrict the number of tags sold, you have to figure out a way to convince people that there’s plenty of animals and sell as many tags as possible. I’ve read so many articles that claim that Colorado fudges the numbers on Animal counts, greys the area of success percentages and keeps folks thinking that the $600 + tag is really valuable. My question is where does all that money go......

Statistics and counts from gummint agencies are always suspect, so who knows? I suspect they will continue to raise prices and require qualifying small game licenses and such as long as folks are willing to pay. As long as revenues are increasing, they will continue. One of CPW’s schemes is to create an early bull season and longer breaks between seasons. More hunts = mo money! If it gets too expensive, I’ll hunt single species, not deer and elk, or just go to camp and mind the stove.

Justified to whom?

It’s perfectly justifiable to me.... the money is there, it’s derived from funds dedicated to it.... so they should get it.

Why should they have less dough..... just because other states don’t have as much?

Hunting socialism! That'll work....

Yes, they did.




I'll offer a couple of observations in response. First, as a non-resident you are not entitled to hunt in my state at a cost you believe to be fair. Just the same as I'm not entitled to hunt in your state at a cost I believe to be fair. Would you agree?

Second, in no way did I suggest that we make hunting a rich man's game and I really don't appreciate your insinuation. In a perfect world CP&W would limit the number of tags allotted and charge a nominal fee but that's a pipe dream, not reality. It all comes down to prioritites and if an extra $100 or $200 is going to prevent someone from buyimg a tag then hunting is obviously not a priority for them and that's not really my concern. Plenty of people choose to drive a ten year-old truck and go hunting out of state, others don't. It's a choice, and the world is not "unfair."

And I think it's interesting that you mentioned elk hunting, Montana, and Wyoming. If you look at non-resident elk license fees and how they've changed over the last 10-15 years you'll see that it's not Colorado leading the charge in fee increases. Not too long ago we were at $250 for a bull elk tag, now we're on par with Wyoming and still less than Montana. We just recently caught up.

No offense intended, I guess I had a hard time interpreting your statement, "If higher license fees = fewer hunters I'm all for it.", any other way. Again, my beef is with generating new revenue streams when they're already taking in more than any 2 western states combined. And for the record it's not simply a couple hundred bucks, it's over $600 more now that shes 18. In a year or two there will be pp fees for all species, gotta maximize that new revenue stream to feed that government bureaucracy! And for the record, my truck is 27yrs old and I hunt out of state!

Or you could just do what I do. Hunt in your own state and save up for the occasional out of state tag if you think the price is too high to go every year. I'd love to hunt elk in Montana but I havent done it yet, mostly because of the price of a NR tag.

But that's not Montana's problem, and it's not rocket science.

PS, when I was 18 I worked all summer and still probably couldn't have swung a western elk hunt even with the lower priced tags then. Never crossed my mind that I should be able to do it every year, that's for certain.

Maybe I haven't asked the right question. If they make as much as any 3 western states, will that be enough? 4?

Yep, that's the wrong question. If Colorado raised the price of a NR elk tag to $900 like Montana, would more NRs hunt in Montana instead?

Well, allow me to present you with a sure-fire method to interpret any statement you might encounter as it was intended. And that is, read the whole thing, and then think about what you just read:

I’m still wondering how much it SHOULD cost, for a NR Buck tag.... or a NR Bull tag?

If you’re saying it’s too much.... then how much should it be?

Again, I'm fine with tag prices as they are. But I see no reason to create new revenue streams when they're already taking in more than any two western states combined. Now answer mine. How much is enough? Do they need to take in more than any three western states combined? 4?

They need to maximize the revenue..... so yes.... they need to “take in as much” as all the rest of the states combined... if the market will support it.

That’s how the North American model of Game Management works. The animals are held in trust for the people of the state.... not the people of the country. Each state should seek to maximize the value of the game animals it manages... and it should cost more for a NR to hunt those animals... as they “belong” to the residents.

Again... if you thinks it’s too much.... you’re free to not pay for the opportunity to hunt them. As long as people are continually willing to pay more.... the State should get more. Once that balance is upset.... then they aren’t maximizing the People of the State’s resources, and a market correction should be made.

If you’re fine with the prices.... WTF are you complaining about?

Colorado Deer + Elk license is $1058 + $10 Habitat Stamp + $81 Small Game to apply for Deer = $1,149. Montana Deer/Elk Combo is $1065 so not much difference in the total for deer and elk hunts. Since Montana limits NR combo license to 17,000 a year, don't think there will be a mad rush to Big Sky.... Happy Trails

You're leaving out an important fact and that is, if you want to hunt elk in Colorado you don't have to buy a deer tag and lots of NRs don't. So for a NR the cost of and elk tag is the cost of an elk tag, not the cost of a combination of elk and deer tags.

In MT, you have to buy both to hunt elk.

Smokepole,
Not being argumentative, but I looked it up and there is still an Elk Combination-general license for $885 that does not include deer in Montana. Also a separate deer license. Both are included in the 17,000 cap.

Colorado is comparable to most other western states on price but way ahead on opportunity! I hope our local game ranger got a new Dodge truck out of the deal this year. LOL

I haven't done any research but I think tags (any State) should be priced at a level high enough so that demand is not hurt by it, generating the most revenue possible. In other words, they should "get all they can get" without hurting demand. That's what I'd do anyway.

Should F&G eBay all the tags? That maximizes revenue. Bunding first access to the unit to the highest bidder will generate even higher bids. How about the approach where applicants blind bid all tags then everyone pays the lowest price that is needed to sell out that tag?

Be aware, the sheep tags will go for around $30,000 each in the blind bid and around $40,000 average in the eBay scenario. Teddy Roosevelt will not be happy, though, as will turn the Big 3 tags into the playground of only what most current big game hunters would view as the wealthy.

Or, keep the current process but drop the resident preference so more tags go to non-residents which pay more for each tag sold?

Do people deserve a sheep tag that are not wealthy? If the goal of F&G is merely to maximize revenues then the answer needs to be you as a hunter earn a Big 3 tag by first accumulating wealth that exceeds all but a few folks that hunt. If F&G wants to offer a chance for a wide variety of hunters of varied socio-economic classes of hunters to participate then needs to keep the tag price as low as possible.

Colorado is experiencing the growth in a voting population majority which is not hunter nor trapper friendly. A revenue-maximization scheme is short-sighted and will hurt recruitment of resident big game hunters which in turn accelerates the pace of imposed restrictions on hunting and will lead to the voter-approved introduction of wolves and grizzly bears.

The first part is true. The rest is doubtful. Raising NR fees does not affect rectruitment of resident hunters, or the price they pay for tags.

LopeSticker, like I said, I haven't researched it, but I definitely did NOT say it should be a bid system. I don't have any problem with raffling a few tags here and there though.

No offense dude but you went way off the reservation in the above assessment.

Colorado’s struggle is not a bad one to have if you are in charge of the coffers, they are caught in between not wanting to reduce opportunity at the expense of losing revenue but they know that they have to do something in the name of wildlife management because right now there is just too much pressure in the field and it’s growing. How they curtail the flood gate to non res has to be balanced so they don’t lose revenue, the question is how do you do that without losing money. That’s where discussion of trying to price people out of the game comes from. If you are used to selling 75,000 non resident licenses at $660 but you only want to allow 50,000 non res to hunt you gotta figure out how to not lose money so you’d have to raise the fee several hundred dollars to keep making the same money. It will be interesting to see what they do in the coming years. 250,000 people hunt elk in Colorado annually to the tune of a overall 17% success rate, it would be nice to see less hunters and bump that success rate some, because 17% ain’t very good if you take into account, private land hunts, guided hunts and outfitted hunts all offer much higher success rates than the public land DIY hunter.

Many of you have said the animals belong to the people while you say we need to pay a healthy ransom to the king to hunt his game? SMH

Nope... you need to pay a healthy ransom to the People of the State... who own the animals you want to buy.

The People of the Country own the land... they do not own the critters.... the People of the State do. You’re free to use YOUR Federal Public Lands, in another State, as you see fit (more or less)... without any exorbitant fees, regardless of where you reside.

If you aren’t a resident of that state.... you SHOULD have to pay market value.... or “ransom” if you will.... for the opportunity to hunt their animals.

If you are a resident of that state... you SHOULD be able to hunt them at a rate that allows for their continued protection... no more. After all.... they’re your friggin animals.

Pricing a percentage of the citizens out of the opportunity to hunt is part of the north American model of wildlife management? I'll have to go back and read it again, maybe they changed it?

No one is being priced out by the cost of a non-resident tag. Theres always the home state, where most do their hunting.