The resident big game Tag allocation confusion continues in Colorado under the direction of CPW Director Jeff Davis and CPW Commissioners.

For the past two years, we have watched the CPW Commission lead efforts to “simplify” the Colorado big game draw, but in 2025 the results show that largely the opposite is happening.  Not only did the CPW pass a new hybrid draw process in January 2025 that will likely increase point creep and double preference points requirements in hard to draw units, but they failed to remove a very confusing and unfair soft tag allocation cap that filters 6,510 resident big game tags each year to nonresidents.  (CPW slide attached)

In 2024, the Colorado Draw Process Working Group recommended removing the soft tag allocation cap that applies to the current big game primary draw for deer, elk, pronghorn, bear and turkey.  Many educated resident hunters call this the “fake cap”.   While nearly all western states have a 90/10 tag cap for their residents, Colorado has the worst big game tag allocation in the west for its resident hunters at 75/25 (75% to residents and 25% to nonresidents).  Additionally, the Colorado non-equitable tag allocation is protected by a fake cap which currently allows 6,510 limited big game tags to be sold to nonresidents above that tag allocation limit.  This $4.2 million financial windfall (see CPW slide) for CPW and Outfitters is achieved on the backs of residents because the soft/fake cap only applies to the first of four draw choices in the Colorado big game draw.  No state in the country does this to its residents; it is one reason resident youth and resident adults are drawing over 17,000 fewer elk tags over the past 10 years.   The soft/fake cap has been exposed over the past 10 years because 46,000 additional nonresidents have been added to the Colorado limited big game draw.  In most limited big game units, there simply are not tags left for the second, third, and fourth choices as nonresidents scoop up the remaining tags at the end of the first choice of the draw.  So if residents fail to draw a first choice hunt, the fake cap fails to protect their allocated allotment of tags throughout their draw selections in primary draw.

In the January 9, 2025 CPW Commission meeting, the early discussions amongst CPW Commissioners were leaning toward removing the soft/fake cap once and for all, until CPW Director Davis changed the discussion to focus on the loss of revenue and this was backed by some Commissioners.  This is when the confusion started at the January meeting you can watch here start at point 6:40:00. The result was the Commission voted to adjust the soft/fake cap to apply to residents first two choices of the primary big game draw and leaving the fake cap in place for residents in the third and fourth choices of the primary draw.  This is positive for residents, but most estimate that only half of the 6,510 stolen resident big game tags will be restored to residents.  Additionally, without a public comment process, the CPW passed a new preference point fee for nonresidents and residents that will bring in as much as $9 million for CPW.    If we estimate that CPW will only lose $2 million in revenue by the soft cap adjustment to the second choice, this means CPW came out ahead by as much as $7 million in January and residents still have a fake cap.  We can’t forget that the 46,000 new nonresident big game applicants over the past 10 years bring in a minimum of $6 million per year without even issuing a tag, that’s just the qualifying tag and fees needed to apply.

In the March 5, 2025 CPW Commission meeting (start watching a 3:06:30) the confusion and chaos continued on this situation and although CPW Commissioners Robinson and Otero tried to remove the fake cap again by offering up an amendment, ultimately all the Commission agreed to do was to offer more discussion on how much to charge for the new preference points fees for deer, elk, pronghorn and turkey.  Resident hunter, Steve Hilde pointed out that a $15 preference point fee for residents is a price increase of over 30% for deer and elk.

The CPW Commissioners are yet to recognize that the soft caps are a form of theft of a resident resource.  Instead, the focus is on potential lost revenues, and no one is pointing out how removing the soft/fake cap will undo a wrong perpetrated on residents for decades.  It’s time to restore equity to the residents of Colorado.  CPWs’ focus should be on regaining resident public trust vs expanding the bureaucratic budget.

During the February 19, 2025 CPW Southwest Sportsman’s Roundtable (start at 1:21:10) it was revealed that CPW will not be reducing Nonresident Hunter numbers in the archery hunts that were formerly Over-The-Counter (OTC).  While residents were pleased that the CPW Commission voted in June 2024 to preserve OTC archery for residents, we can’t forget that the purpose of the nearly 2-year public discussion was to reduce overcrowding in the archery OTC units.   It was proven during the two-year debate that 100% of the overcrowding in archery season was from the surge of nonresident hunters to Colorado.  Colorado hunting pressure on public lands is about 6 times higher than other western states.  CPW has failed to address the overcrowding caused by nonresidents and has chosen not to drop Nonresidents archery tags by 10% (as discussed) in the former OTC units for nonresidents.  Bureaucracies like CPW continue to neglect the residents they serve if it means a drop in revenue regardless of overcrowding.

One thing to note during this CPW Southwest Sportsman’s Caucus meeting is you will observe CPW biologist Jamin Grigg give a presentation with a slide (picture below) that shows resident hunter OTC archery participation has declined over the past 13 years.  Mr. Grigg testified at the April 2024 CPW Commission meeting that the resident hunter’s testimony/ CORA data showing the decline of resident participation in OTC archery was a “fallacy” and he declared that residents and nonresidents in OTC archery had doubled over the past 20 years.   Through an additional CORA request, this statement by Mr. Grigg was proven false and CPW staff changed their staff recommendation shortly afterward.  It’s restorative justice to now see Mr. Grigg presenting data that confirms residents did not participate in the archery OTC overcrowding, and the overcrowding issue over the years has 100% been caused by nonresidents.

In summary, CPW and the CPW Commission have failed to address the overcrowding and failed to simplify the draw process associated with big game hunting in Colorado.  What is abundantly clear is that those in charge of these decisions are guided by poor data by CPW staff and many of the commission lack a basic understanding of Colorado’s big game draw process.

 

The average Western state has a 90/10 big game tag allocation split for resident / nonresident hunters on all limited licenses.  90% of the elk, deer, and pronghorn licenses go to the residents of the average western state and only 10% are reserved for the visiting nonresidents.  Big game and the meat they provide families is a resource that should be managed for the benefit of the residents of the state and 90/10 is the equity standard all states should aim to achieve.  There are still some states that only offer leftover tags to nonresidents, now that’s preserving the resident public trust (Public Trust Doctrine).  What about public lands- do nonresidents have equal hunting rights to federal lands??  No, since the states hold legislative jurisdiction over big game on nearly all federal lands within their state boundaries the fact that there are federal public lands in the state holds no bearing on a nonresident’s status for preference on a state resource.  This is a great website for learning about jurisdiction on federal lands.   Nonresidents are visitors to a state’s big game draw system and they hold no seat at the table just like they have no voting rights in a state they do not reside in.

Then there is Colorado, Yes, things have slightly improved based on residents shining a light on things in the past three years.  This 2021 article helped procure some positive change and the CPW commission improved tag allocation to 75/25 for limited deer, elk, bear, and pronghorn (see this 2023 article) in Colorado.  However, Colorado still treats its resident hunters with less tag equity than any other western state, it’s a statistical fact. On top of that, the CPW has finally recognized that overcrowding on unlimited over-the-counter (OTC) elk hunts is real and they are considering removing all OTC elk hunts this year with the CPW Commission – sign the petition, over 5,000 signatures.  However, CPW is not sharing the fact that resident OTC elk hunters have declined by 8,000 (20%) since 2014 and nonresident elk hunters are up by 10,000 since 2014.  The numbers show that Residents are not contributing to overcrowding because they are getting out of hunting likely because of the overcrowding procured by nonresident hunters.  See the OTC Table below.

The (16) sixteen voting member CPW Draw Process Working Group is off and running in Colorado, google them on YouTube.  The meetings and discussions are directed by two nonvoting CPW staff.  This group has only (5) five resident hunters and (1) one CPW Commissioner (Otero) who represents the approximately 100,000 Colorado resident hunters who apply in limited license and OTC license hunts each year.

The other (10) ten voting members consist of  (5) five active CPW state employees, (1) one Utah nonresident (outfitter with Hunting Fool Magazine), (3) three Colorado Licensed Outfitters (CPW Commissioner Haskett, Burbey – President of the Colorado Outfitters Association and Znamenacek who is former CPW staffer and active outfitter), and (1) one other Commissioner that is retired CPW (Skiba).  You could say it is 12-6 voting members, likely in favor of more nonresident money/tags.

The approximately 200 Big Game Outfitters in Colorado have 4 “Outfitter” financially motivated representatives lobbying for them within the CPW Draw Process Working Group.  If Residents Hunters had an equitable seat at the table, when compared to outfitters, they would have 2000 Resident Hunters within the working group (.02) for their 100,000 residents.  However residents have only 5 representatives’ and when you read the bios of the 5 residents you will see many have been a part of outdoor organizations that have a long history of partnering with the CPW vs standing up to the CPW tag allocation equity debacle, like the Colorado Backcountry Hunters and Anglers groups have done.  Colorado outfitters depend largely on nonresident dollars for payment so they are not going to restore 30 years of stolen tag equity for Colorado Residents Hunters.

Do you think the nonresident voting member from Utah (also an outfitter) will vote for a 90/10 tag allocation (hard cap) like the one they have in Utah or do you think he will vote for more nonresident tags?  I would place that bet over an NFL bet any day.   Does Colorado allow nonresidents to vote in its elections?  — No, then why does Colorado give nonresident hunters a voting right within the CPW Draw Process Working Group?   No state has ever allowed nonresidents the right to control or make recommendations on how to manage a state resource that the state holds all legislative jurisdiction over.  The fox is in the hen house and once again CPW has breached the public trust by not serving the residents equitably.

If its 12 to 6 voting members in favor of more nonresident money/tags, residents of Colorado will continue to see the historical effort to hold down resident tag equity.   CPW staffers will likely not vote to improve resident tag equity because reducing nonresident hunting will reduce their yearly budget and could lead to lower salaries or staff cuts.  Does CPW really need 1100 employees?

 CPW Commissioner Ethics and Voting Conflicts

Isn’t it a conflict of interest for a CPW Commissioner to benefit financially by voting in favor of more nonresident tags?  A Commissioner/Outfitter Association Member voted against the 75/25 tag allocation improvement last year.  “Voting members of the Commission shall not perform an official act which may have a direct economic benefit on any business, including nonprofits, in which such member has a direct or substantial financial interest.” CRS § 24-18-108.5(2)   —​Conflict of Interest.

“Appearance of impropriety” means an official act that would lead a reasonable person to conclude the Commissioner has engaged in conduct that reflects adversely on the Commissioner’s honesty, impartiality, temperament, or fitness to serve the public trust. An appearance of impropriety may exist even though the facts and circumstances of the matter do not constitute an actual conflict of interest as defined by CRS § 24-18-108.5(2).

 

 

Colorado’s FAKE Big Game Caps 75/25

The first real test for the Draw Process Working group comes at hour 3, minute 01 of session 1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCLlxtPqtB8. The CPW fake tag allocation caps are discussed and no one brings up the fact that resident allocation caps should apply to all 4 draw choices vs just 1st choice in the state’s primary limited tag draw.  It’s brushed over, this fake tag cap is a breach of public trust, no other state does this to its residents.  Check out this 2023 example, during the 1st Rifle Season in Unit 21- 70% of the tags go to nonresidents and over 300 residents and Resident Youth! are ignored in their 2nd, 3rd, and 4th choices of the primary draw.

There are no hard caps in place for the limited deer and limited elk hunts in Colorado like we see in Arizona, Utah, Wyoming, Idaho, Montana, etc.  The current soft (fake) tag caps in Colorado only apply to the resident 1st Choice Draw.  There are 4 Draw Choices in the CO Big Game limited primary draw.  If there are not enough residents to claim 75% of all the limited tags in Choice 1 draw, the remaining tags are given to all remaining nonresidents within Choice 1.  The resident state-mandated tag allocation caps are not honored (hard cap) throughout the 4 draw choices of the primary draw.   This is a breach of public trust for all residents of Colorado.

Linked is a document that shows two limited elk hunts in unit 41  (there are many more) from the 2020 limited elk draw results, it shows nearly 50% of limited elk tags went to nonresident hunters last year in unit 41– Grand Mesa.  Over 500 resident and resident youth hunters were not able to draw the tag for their 2nd, 3rd, or 4th draw choices because all the tags (over the nonresident cap) went to nonresidents in the 1st draw.  This is the result of what is called the “outfitter loophole”.  Another example of this is unit 43 mule deer in Colorado, in 2019, 60% of the muzzleloader-limited deer tags in this Gunnison Basin area went to nonresidents.  There are many examples like this whether deer or elk limited big game units in Colorado, especially with muzzleloader and 1st rifle elk seasons. Here is a link to thirty-four (34) limited deer unit hunts that gave 41% to 71% of deer tags to nonresidents.  In the application column of each page, you see (in some cases) hundreds of resident deer hunters were denied a tag because they put in for 2nd, 3rd, or 4th choice.  Here is a link to fifty (50) limited elk unit hunts that gave up to 83% of the tags to nonresidents.  Be sure to notice all the hundreds of 2nd, 3rd, and 4th choice residents and resident youth that never drew because Colorado fake big game tag allocation caps.

Some call it a “soft” big game tag allocation cap, most Coloradans call it a FAKE tag cap, and behind the scenes, it siphons hundreds or thousands of tags to nonresidents.   All at the expense of the unsuccessful first-choice residents and 1st choice resident youth.  If a resident does not successfully draw a limited tag in their first choice, they should not be ignored in their 2nd, 3rd, or 4th choice of the primary draw.  An honest big game cap would protect the residents’ rights to their resource until that allocation was filled.  There is no reason Coloradans should not be ensured of every tag that is due to them based on the Equity, Colorado Constitution, and the Public Trust Doctrine.  Our state representatives and state employees work for the Colorado residents, not nonresident money.  This fake cap loophole must be closed, the idea that resident youth are not able to hunt each year because their tag was siphoned off to a nonresident is offensive.

 

Disclosure -This data is from various sources (CORA, online and print (some data can be very fragmented to collect)).  All info is subject to errors and you should verify all numbers with your own research.  It is desired that CPW someday validate this information to share the trends of Westerns States compared to Colorado to show the equity status for the residents.

 

  Colorado Sells More Nonresident Elk Licenses

Than All Western States Combined

Recent research shared by the Colorado Resident Hunter Association Facebook group reveals that Colorado sells more nonresident elk tags than all seven western states combined.  The numbers are staggering when you look at this table.

 

Even though these seven western states have an elk population that is 2.5 times that of Colorado (742,000 elk vs 280,000 elk), the 7 western states collectively sell 5,100 less elk licenses to nonresidents, than Colorado sells to nonresidents.  How can one state sell its resident hunters equity like this?  Clearly Colorado find nonresident dollars more valuable than resident hunters since Colorado resident Over The Counter elk hunters have declined by 8,000 since 2014, this is the result of overcrowding by nonresident elk hunters within OTC units, as the nonresidents are up by 10,000 since 2014.  The nonresident surge has been going on for 20 years+ and this is why Colorado brings in more hunting dollars than any other state in the Country.  Even with a $52 million dollar surplus in 2022 they continue to sell resident equity for nonresident dollars.

Disclosure -The data within this article is from various sources (CORA, CPW Stats, online research and print (some data can be very fragmented to collect)).  All info is subject to errors and you should verify all numbers with your own research.  It is desired that CPW someday validate this information to share the trends of Westerns States compared to Colorado to show the equity status for the residents.

Can resident hunters of Colorado apply for Governor Polis’s Equity Grants to help pay for a nonprofit that will properly sue to restore equity for resident hunters?   This is the biggest “Apples to Oranges” hunting tag allocation comparison of all time; it shows an unmatched bias against Colorado residents. 

If CPW commissioners or state legislators were to demand equity for residents, Colorado would have to fall in line with the western states’ averages for nonresident tag sales.  This would be done either based on actual elk populations or based on total elk tag sales.  Colorado sells 72,000 elk tags to nonresidents each year—based on “total elk tag sales”, Colorado would only be able to sell (201,000* 14%) = 28,140 elk tags to nonresidents each year if it were to treat residents equitably.  Based on “elk populations”, Colorado would only be able to sell (280,000*9%) = 25,200 elk tags to nonresidents each year to meet equity guidelines.

Be sure to read these other articles (below) to understand how the overcrowding in Colorado is caused by ever surging nonresident elk tag sales.  Resident participation has been declining 10-25%, since 2014, while nonresidents have increased 21-28% during that time, and now residents would rather stay home than battle the sea of orange/camo in Colorado’s public land OTC units.  See this data research that shows how Colorado has 3-6 times the hunting pressure observed in other Western States.  This 2022 CPW OTC Study shows Resident OTC elk archery hunters in Colorado are down 25% since 2016.  Since 2014 resident OTC hunters are down 8000 and nonresident are up 10,000.  No other state in the country is replacing its resident hunters with nonresident dollars. 

Conflict of Interest on CPW Commission Board

 

If Colorado removed all nonresident big game tags it would be safe to say outfitters would go out of business.  So we know outfitters benefit financially from more nonresident tags, this is an undisputed fact.   The Colorado Constitution declares Colorado government officials shall carry out their duties for the benefit of the people of the State (residents).   Should appointed outfitters on the CPW Commission that benefit financially from expanding tag allocation for Nonresident hunters, recuse themselves from voting on big game tag allocation and on OTC hunting in Colorado?  The Colorado Constitution is clear on this issue.

Article XXIX, Ethics in Government, Section 1 of the Colorado Constitution reads (1) The people of the State of Colorado hereby find and declare that:

(a) The conduct of public officers, members of the general assembly, local gov’t officials, and government employees must hold the respect and confidence of the people.

(b) They shall carry out their duties for the benefit of the people of the state.

(c) They shall, therefore, avoid conduct that is in violation of their public trust or that creates a justifiable impression among members of the public that such trust is being violated.

(d) Any effort to realize personal financial gain through public office other than compensation provided by law is a violation of that trust.

Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission Policy- A.“Conflict of interest” means a situation where a Commissioner’s personal interest is incompatible with a Commissioner’s public duty. Voting members of the Commission shall not perform an official act which may have a direct economic benefit on any business, including nonprofits, in which such member has a direct or substantial financial interest. CRS § 24-18-108.5(2)   —​Conflict of Interest

 How to file a complaint with the Colorado Ethics Commission.  Click Here

We Believe Hunters are Equal, Regardless of  Residency

A draft letter from the Colorado Outfitter Association, as a member of the Colorado Wildlife Conservation Project (CWCP), addressed to Jeff Davis-Director of the Colorado Park and Wildlife (CPW), Dan Gibbs – Executive Director Colorado Department of National Resources (DNR), and the CPW Commission was recently shared on the Colorado Resident Hunter Association Facebook Group.  In the letter, they plead with the Directors and Commissioners and declare “We believe hunters are all equal, regardless of their means of take, season, or residency”.

This letter reveals what many Colorado resident hunters have known since the 1990’s, that many conservation groups and outfitters associations are loyal to nonresidents and their money.  Many Colorado residents also feel that CPW is loyal to the nonresidents dollars as well, don’t forget no state brings in more hunting dollars and no western state has tag allocation with less equity for residents.

This nonresident loyalty does not apply to any other State “privilege”.  We would never consider a nonresident with an equal voice to vote and it makes no sense that nonresidents have an equal opportunity to Coloradans’ limited resources.  Under the most basic tenets of the Public Trust Doctrine and the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation, wildlife is a state resource managed and allocated for the benefit of its residents.  Nonresidents are not trust beneficiaries in any way, shape or form. 

Many nonresidents feel they have a right to hunt in Colorado because of federal public lands.  If you spend some time on this website you will learn that 97.2% of Colorado federal lands are not federal enclaves, which means Colorado holds legislative jurisdiction over tag allocation within its border just like the other 49 states.  The elected legislators of all states work on behalf of their residents to enhance the health, safety, and security of our communities.  Wild game is a natural resource managed by the states, not the federal government. 

The Colorado Outfitter Association draft letter (link),(written as a Colorado Wildlife Conservation Project Member), claims they are trying to “counter the movement that requests that all Over the Counter (OTC) licenses be reserved for Resident hunters alone”.  This of course is not true, because if you read the online Resident Hunter OTC Petition (link), which has over 3000 signatures, it says “By signing this petition, you are expressing your support for preserving all remaining OTC elk hunting (archery and rifle) for Colorado Residents only, starting in 2024. We believe this measure will restore equity without infringing upon the rights or experiences of non-resident hunters who can still participate through limited draw hunts and non-resident caps on all OTC hunts“.  If you haven’t signed the above-linked resident hunter petition please do so and share the link with your friends.  This petition still allows nonresident opportunity at OTC hunts, just with a quota cap like nearly all other western states.

The letter also states the following, “The Colorado Wildlife Conservation Project (CWCP) is an alliance of diverse wildlife organizations with a common interest in conserving and sustaining wildlife and wildlife habitats and preserving our hunting, angling, and conservation heritage. We are steadfast in our efforts to continue the state’s long history of responsible, science-based wildlife management. CWCP comprises organizations representing tens of thousands of outdoor enthusiasts across the state and country. “

google-site-verification: googlebd6e25fabcdbb6f2.html

 

 

 

 

 

Colorado Petition to Save Over-the-Counter OTC Elk Hunting for Residents Only

 

 

 

Colorado’s Fake Big Game Tag Allocation Caps, Stealing Resident License Equity

 

 

 

The Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission is meeting on August 25, 2023, in Steamboats Springs to discuss the possible removal of Over The Counter (OTC) elk tags in Colorado.  Resident OTC elk hunters (rifle + archery) have declined by 8,000 since 2014, but nonresident OTC elk hunters in Colorado are up by 10,000 since 2014.  Many residents OTC hunters have quit hunting in Colorado because the OTC units have been overrun by nonresidents in Colorado.  See this detailed report https://publiclandjurisdiction.com/colorado-sells-more-nonresident-elk-tags-than-all-7-western-states-combined/ .

One concern of many resident hunters in Colorado is that their voices are not being heard during public forums and surveys. No officials at CPW are discussing the declining resident hunter trends since 2014 in both rifle and archery OTC elk hunts.  Since 2014, Non-Residents have continued to flood Colorado’s public lands during OTC elk hunting (rifle and archery) and residents are dropping out because of the overcrowding.    A perfect example of this is what we just saw on the five Grand Mesa units (421, 421, 41, 52, 411) in Colorado in 2022.   Nonresidents OTC archery hunters were up 250% since 2014 and residents were down 20%.  Yet in 2022 CPW took away all archery OTC hunting on the Grand Mesa, when the numbers clearly showed that non-residents are the cause of all the overcrowding.  This was in Eastmans Hunting Journal Blog regarding the story.

Is CPW missing the mark and ignoring the residents that they are supposed to work for?   If you review the CPW’s mission statement you won’t find any reference to serving the residents of Colorado- none.  All elected officials and the governor have a duty to represent their constituents (residents) and ensure they are treated fairly (equity) when compared to other states.  During CPW public forums and surveys the nonresidents have more than one seat at the table because most outfitters are also fighting for the nonresident dollars. Why are nonresidents even at the table, no other western state serves up such a seat to nonresident hunters.  This 2022 CPW tag allocation survey report is a perfect example, by including nonresidents it waters down the wishes of the residents because they are on opposite sides of most issues.  Do you actually think nonresidents would support OTC for residents only?  Colorado holds full legislative jurisdiction over big game tag allocation on all public and private lands in Colorado just like all other states.  Just because there are federal lands in Colorado does not give a nonresident a “right” to hunt in Colorado, they have an equal right to visit the federal public lands but the state and its voting residents have the authority over the tags, just like all other western states, many of which have millions of acres more federal lands and provide only 10% of their tags to nonresidents and cap all general season nonresident tags in general season/otc hunts.  Residents in Colorado have not had a fair seat at the table since the 1990s when CPW past the worst tag allocation split in US history which gave nonresidents 35% of limited big game tags when all other western states average a tag allocation of 10% to nonresidents.

Colorado is selling about 72,000 nonresident elk tags each year, this is more than all western states combined, most western states only sell 5,000 to 17,000 elk tags to non-residents each year.  2021 acres per elk hunter western states public land

This August 2022 CPW OTC Report confirms the declining trends of resident hunters in all OTC hunts in Colorado since 2013/2014 and it confirms the surging Nonresident trends by nonresidents in all OTC hunts in Colorado.  Its also show that 54% of OTC archery elk hunters in Colorado are nonresident.  Compare this to Utah which in 2022 had 45,000 general season resident elk hunters and 2500 nonresident general season elk hunters or compare it to Wyoming which only sells about 5000 elk tags each year to nonresidents.

 August 2022 Presentation for Over The Counter OTC Distribution Workshop

All residents of Colorado need to sign this OTC petition to save OTC hunting in Colorado for residents and residents need to join the Colorado Resident Hunter Association Facebook group to stay informed.  It’s time for resident hunters to stand up and be heard.

 

Does Colorado Sell more Nonresident Elk Tags than all other Western States Combined?

Disclosure -The data within this article is from various sources (CPW website, online research, and print.  Some data can be very fragmented to collect.  All info is subject to errors and you should verify all numbers with your own research.  It is desired that CPW someday validate this information to share the trends of Westerns States compared to Colorado to show the equity status for the resident hunters.

 

 

 

Colorado Petition to Save Over-the-Counter OTC Elk Hunting for Residents Only

No State Treats Resident Big Game Hunters Worse than Colorado- Tag Allocation- Hiding in Plain Sight. The Secret to the Elk and Deer Tags in Colorado.