Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting Gunnison season meeting

Was curious what the residents over here and those that hunt here think.

My family has been hunting here every year for almost 60 years minus a year or two. My biggest concern is that could potentially cease to happen with a draw only for tags. Can't imagine not getting in our time there every year. I really don't think the elk herd there is in any trouble and doesn't need to be managed to this degree. Some tweaks could go a long way, but no need for this. In my opinion. Its rough country and hard hunting. Many elk make it every year to see winter thru. I'd like to hear your thoughts? Trying to get off work to go to the meeting. Going to be tough since I live so far away.

http://wildlife.state.co.us/NewsMedia/PressReleases/Press.asp?PressId=5935


Big Game Season Structure Topic of Gunnison Meeting




GUNNISON, Colo. -- The Colorado Division of Wildlife will present and explain the proposed alternatives for its five-year Big Game Season Structure, 6:30-9:30 p.m., May 20, at the Fred Fielding Western Heritage Center multi-purpose room at the Gunnison County Fairgrounds.

Every five years, the Colorado Wildlife Commission adopts a Big Game Season Structure to provide an overall framework for annual hunting regulations. The five-year structure addresses a variety of issues, including the timing and length of hunting seasons, legal hunting methods, the general proportion of licenses that will be limited or unlimited, and the balance among different kinds of hunting opportunities. The current structure ends in 2009. The new five-year cycle will determine guidelines for the 2010-2014 seasons.

Two other presentations will be made. The Gunnison Stockgrowers' Association will make a presentation on its proposal to limit elk licenses in Game Management Units 54, 55 and 551. Another group will make a presentation on its proposal to offer over-the-counter elk licenses in those units using a system that would cap the number of hunters based on license sales.

The planning process started a year ago and the agency continues to accept comments from the public. Final consideration of the new season structure is scheduled for a wildlife commission vote in September.

To read about the proposed alternatives, got to: http://wildlife.state.co.us/bgss.

Anyone wishing to submit comments is urged to do so as soon as possible. Comments can be sent via e-mail to wildlife.bgssstate.co.us; by regular mail to Big Game Season Structure, Public Involvement Unit, 6060 Broadway, Denver, CO 80216; or fill out the online form on the DOW web site, http://wildlife.state.co.us/bgss.

I sympathize as I have hunted 55 myself. I'm not sure what their motivations are in this case, couldn't say. I know that units can see high numbers of hunters in some seasons.

Part of CDOW specific unit management plans are geared towards managing hunters and not the wildlife. That is why "trophy units" exist. In that case it is to create a public land trophy opportunity for people willing to put the time in earning points. Clearly the units would support more hunting, but CDOW reserves them to offer the public a different experience. I also know of an instance where a very good State Wildlife Area for Turkey that is currently Over The Counter may be turned into a draw unit next year. Why? not becausse of the turkeys, but because 50 hunters showed up on opening day and crammed into a small area. I opted to hunt elsewhere knowing this many guys would be there. I'm sure safety concerns exist. To my knowledge no one was injured and all hunted safely. I would be curious to hear from some of those folks and know what their experience was like with that many folks running around with decoys, hen calss and gobble calls! Perhaps that could be the influencing factor to make this turkey area draw. Again CDOW has their reasons and I do not claim to fully understand all the factors in these decisions.

Might be the same for Gunnison. There may be issues that are not open and on the table - be them from the public, the ranchers or CDOW. just a thought.

To me from my experience, is there is over crowding during the 2nd and 3rd rifle seasons. This didn't happen until the CDOW closed other units down to draw only. I think before this happened you used to see the hunting pressure more spread out throughout the state. This is just from my viewpoint though. Draw areas are good but does the whole state need to be that way? I don't think it does.

Kelk:

I have hunted in unit 54 since 1985. That's not 60 years like your family, but still a long time. Hunting is a major income source for the Gunnison community. The elk herd is strong and currently living in balance with its' range.

I remember when the DOW reduced the number of unit 54 mule deer buck licenses by 90%. Several articles on the DOW web site stated that the action was NOT based upon science or good management practices, rather it was a response to demands from local residents. They wanted unit 54 to be managed for trophy bucks so that local guide/outfitter companies could entice high-dollar out of state clients. I haven't been able to get a unit 54 buck tag since the change.

Now it looks like the stock growers association is trying to do the same thing with elk licenses. If units 54, 55 and 551 become managed for trophy bulls it will encourage high-dollar out-of-state hunters to hire guides/outfitters, but it will limit opportunities for local elk hunters and other in-state elk hunters because there won't be enough licenses to go around. That's pretty selfish of the outfitters. It's even more selfish when you consider that many of the outfitters companies are NOT owned by Gunnison locals. But Gunnison locals will be shooting themselves in the foot if they agree to the change. Because it will also result in fewer in-state hunters and reduced revenues for local businesses. In other words, there will be a few more high-dollar out-of-state hunters and and a lot less in-state hunters.

The other proposal to limit over-the-counter elk licenses based upon a cap will favor Gunnison local elk hunters because they should be the first to buy licenses. It would make it more difficult for out-of-state hunters and in-state hunters to buy licenses. There will be fewer hunters feeding dollars into the Gunnison economy. This would also reduce local employment opportunities. So the whole community will suffer.

I hope they keep things pretty much as they are and limit changes to only those that are based upon good science and best management practices.

KC

Good points for sure KC. It seems that a lot of management practices are towards dollars and less towards the overall best interest of wildlife or residents. As pointed out by Kelk, some other unit, some other community, some other elk herd will have to take up the slack for some of the proposed changes. It just seems wrong tht you never draw a buck tag there. 4th season would take 9 years to draw a buck according to the preference point issue. I see why you are discouraged. Not every unit needs to be managed for trophy outfitters.

Great points KC. I'd agree with everything you said. It's for sure a money market. It's just a matter of who's pocket the money is going into. Like you, I've waited, and waited for enough points to draw a tag in our home Unit. Unfortunately due to mother nature we probably never will hunt this unit now that we have enough points to draw. I would agree that there was never a need to manage for a pure trophy unit even for deer. Once the tags were restricted the deer here rebounded almost over night in our area. Watched it grow from little 2 and 3 points and very few deer to huge bucks and deer seemingly on every hillside. They sure could have upped the quotas without hurting the herd. However, they wanted to quietly institute the trophy unit mentality here.

Hopefully there will be enough support to shoot down both ideas. We could tweak the current regs to make things better. No need to go to these extremes.

Our current system of seasons is geared to the outfitting industry as it is. Sure it creates more opportunity by having 4 different rifle seasons, MZ, Archery and 2 months worth of late seasons. It sure helps the outfitters fill multiple camps with multiple clients. But the DIY guy only having a 5 to 7 day season isn't exactly quality for the average hunter. Obviously we all seem to find a way to kill some game, but the short time span is hardly easy.

I like the idea of 1st and 4th being draw only while the 2nd and 3rd are OTC in most areas. However, what if they made the first 9 days, draw tags, the 2nd rifle 2-3 weeks as a general season for bulls OTC, limited cow tags OTC, and then draw tags on cows, then the late seasons open to those with unfilled tags and draw tags for both sexes and a week to 2 weeks long. Just a few ideas and any combination could work of the above could work well. Any added thoughts here guys?

Don't think it is the DOW that is pushing the limited licenses. If you noticed there will be a counter argument presented also. Anyway, yes it is about hunter management. The success rate in 54, 55 and 551 is extremely low, combine thiat with the overcrowding during 2nd and to some degree 3rd season and you create an unpleasant hunting experience. I'm not willing to put money on it, but I doubt the DOW would be willing to close off that many elk to limited drawings only. There's just way too many people hunting those three units, especially 54 and 55.
Anyway, if you remember, they've been soliciting input from all of us on the limited(and delimit) elk unit nominations. You better make your voice heard.

I went to that meeting a few years back and spoke up my opinion, the stats at that time was higher bull to cow ratio than wanted and higher herd size then wanted so limited draw was a stupid Idea,

Here is the minutes from that meeting it doesn't have the details of the what was said.
http://wildlife.state.co.us/NR/rdonlyres/5938D983-B712-4A21-B606-2AAD252D9CC7/0/attach1.pdf

It is the outfitter association that is pushing for limited only license because there is a lot of elk in the area but they are not the "Trophy Class" elk that they can charge the premium buck for.

This is the most recent herd management data I could find on the herd I hunted in gunnison

GMU 55&551
Herd size 4580
targe size 3000-3500

bull to cow ratio 20/100
current target ratio 20/100
new target ration 25/100

http://wildlife.state.co.us/NR/rdonlyres/0285BDB8-DE4D-4F3D-AD97-1038818339E1/0/E43FINAL.pdf

With the bull to cow ration being down I could see an argument for limiting some bull tags, but the better option would be to lower the cow numbers wich in turn would lower the herd numbers and raise the bull to cow ration. I would take this information and go to the meeting if you plan on keeping hunting the area.

GOOD LUCK

KC, some good points, but it is not the out of staters that are limiting your oportunities, it is severely limited tag numbers. At worst, residents will get 65% or more of the tags. And if they turn it into a real trophy area, residents will get at least 80% of the tags. So blame the very limited tag numbers, not nonresidents for your woes.

The last two meetings I have attended ,the DOW has stated that they put a LOT of emphasis on what the Stockgrowers want.

If the DOW don't cave into thier desires,the stock growers give them a lot of problems concerning access by hunters and winter range forage on the provate ranches. You can bet the outfitters are in parallel with the Stock growers because the stock growers are more and more leasing thier ranches to outfitters and make more money that way.

More limited draw areas only benifit theoutfitters and agricultural community.Limited draws means less tags to the OTC guys amd more hunter pressure in the areas still open to OTC. Sooner or later we will see CO as a draw only state as more and more hunters cm e inot the sport.

Everyone needs to sit adown and read the proposed Big Game Season structure.Once you do that you will come to realize that all big game mamgement in Co,is really about big game money management. A lot of decisions are made that have no relavence to the betterment of the wildlife

Saddlesore and others, it is Always About MONEY!

The stock growers control most of the access into the national forest. The southern units 66,67 have become trophy units and the stock growers wish to have a similar demand on their land up north. The tags can sell for good money and they do not have to allow access even still, as they will be public land tags. Their theory is that with less hunters, more elk will be killed and a better hunt will be enjoyed. There actually may be some merit to the idea as less pressure will not move the elk so they may be more accessible. Of course elk actually live for a long time so how many years will it take for that to pan out. If the land owners were really interested in reducing elk numbers, they might allow some late season cow hunts, but alas, they don't.

As a local, I certainly see the economic impact involved and also don't like the idea of having to leave the area to hunt elk if I don't get drawn. It is always about money.

txhunter58:

I have no problem with out-of-state hunters. The high license fees that they pay contribute a lot to game management. I have hunted several times in TX and had a great time. I don't see any reason why TX hunters can't do the same here. They often contribute more to local economies because they rent hotels, eat in restaraunts, buy trinkets, etc.

I do agree that limiting the number of licenses is a problem in units where game populations exceed management objectives. As indicated by the stats contained in a previous post in this thread, unit 54 herds are above management objectives. If you want to reduce herd size, you issue tags for females. The draw licenses now offered in unit 54 are either sex licenses and not all of them are issued. There are left over tags each year. They use to offer a cow tag through the drawing and then you could buy an over the counter bull tag. So hunters had an opportunity to take both a cow and a bull and they were more likely to take a cow because that didn't eliminate their opporrtunity to take a bull. I think they should return to that strategy.

KC