# Colorad's opinion of limiting licenses



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

During the past 15+ years, management of mule deer in Colorado has shifted away from a system focused on maximizing hunter opportunity. Largely driven by an apparent decline in the total number of deer, management shifted from one of unlimited opportunity in most Data Analysis Units (DAU) to being limited statewide. The first year of statewide limited draw deer licenses occurred in 1999, with reductions on the magnitude of 50%-90% occurring in most DAU's. Despite an overall trend of increasing posthunt fawn:doe ratios between 1999 and 2006, our post hoc analysis indicates that the statewide limited draw system has likely had a negative impact on fawn:doe ratios.. However, between 1999-2006, both total mule deer population, as well as buck:doe ratios have steadily risen[but declined considerably since]as a result of limiting buck licenses statewide. Our analysis indicates that the majority of population growth is attributable to the mature buck population segment and there is little or no indication that herd productivity has been improved by harvest management actions. An overall trend of increasing buck:doe and buck:hunter ratios has made Colorado an increasingly desirable place for deer hunters to draw tags. Colorado deer hunters appear to be very supportive of totally limited deer licenses and current sex ratio objectives that approach a statewide average of ~30 bucks/100 does posthunt. Despite being a limited draw state, ~95% of deer licenses in Colorado can be drawn with 0 or 1 preference points. As such, it appears that hunter opportunity did not decline as expected. Rather, we feel that a large number of hunters stopped hunting deer as a result of statewide limitation of deer tags. The immediate economic impact from implementing the statewide limited management process was a reduction in deer license revenue by ~50%.


----------



## lobowatch (Apr 23, 2011)

What conclusion do you draw from this w2u? And where did you get the info please?


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Putting my GoogleFu skillz to the test i found this:

http://www.muledeerworkinggroup.com/Doc ... edings.pdf

-DallanC


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

lobowatch said:


> What conclusion do you draw from this w2u?


My conclusions are simple:
1) Reducing deer tags to increase our deer herd is a feel-good solution for hunters but will not help out.
2) Reducing buck tags and inflating the buck/doe ratio can actually and has been hampering recruitment and could hurt our fawn/doe ratios...which are vital for growth.
3) Hunters rave about Colorado's hunting not because of deer numbers but because of buck numbers...there is a false sense of "all's well". Colorado hunters have been tricked on fool's gold and are buying it up!
4) Severely reducing tags like Colorado may make many smile, but, like Colorado, the danger is simply eliminating a large portion of the hunting constituency who simply will stop hunting and stop passing that legacy on...a scary though for future generations.


----------



## TopofUtahArcher (Sep 9, 2009)

Agreed analysis W2U, I've witnessed the same in UT, NV, AZ and CO in my travels and interaction with thousands of hunters yearly. False security, a govt. smoke/mirrors show much like having a wildlife board and RAC meetings...


----------



## willfish4food (Jul 14, 2009)

> Despite being a limited draw state, ~95% of deer licenses in Colorado can be drawn with 0 or 1 preference points. As such, it appears that hunter opportunity did not decline as expected. *Rather, we feel that a large number of hunters stopped hunting deer as a result of statewide limitation of deer tags.*


 :shock: :shock: :shock:

Let me see if I understand this logic. In the past, we offered unlimited somethings and that resulted in 300,000 participants. we reduced the number of somethings to 50,000. Many people were discouraged enough to quit all together resulting in only 52,500 applicants. 95% of those applicants can obtain the something that they applied for. Therefore, the reduction of somethings didn't really limit opportunity... WOW

Or in other words: despite the grocery store not providing enough food for everyone in town most people still looking for food can find it. As such, it appears that eating opportunity did not decline as expected. Rather, we feel that a large number of people starved to death and no longer need food.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

I never hear someone from Colorado envy Utah's deer hunting. Or from any other state for that matter except California. But the envy from Cali is not specific to Utah just anywhere but Cali. 

I'd feel better if I were tricked by some fools gold regardless weather WY2 thought my hunting was better or not. At least I could focus my efforts on something else rather than whining about Utah's deer herd.


----------



## Longfeather (Nov 27, 2007)

willfish4food said:


> > Despite being a limited draw state, ~95% of deer licenses in Colorado can be drawn with 0 or 1 preference points. As such, it appears that hunter opportunity did not decline as expected. *Rather, we feel that a large number of hunters stopped hunting deer as a result of statewide limitation of deer tags.*
> 
> 
> :shock: :shock: :shock:
> ...


There is a push for this in Utah, it isn't out in the open but there is a push for it. There are a lot of so called sportsman (little s not capital s) that do not like the fact that many of the deer hunters in Utah are not spending all of their time focusing on deer etc. Many of these "sportsmen" consider a large part of the Utah deer hunting community freeloaders and encourage anything that limits tags because limiting tags will push these so called freeloaders out of the industry.


----------



## Longfeather (Nov 27, 2007)

Iron Bear said:


> I never hear someone from Colorado envy Utah's deer hunting. Or from any other state for that matter except California. But the envy from Cali is not specific to Utah just anywhere but Cali.
> 
> I'd feel better if I were tricked by some fools gold regardless weather WY2 thought my hunting was better or not. At least I could focus my efforts on something else rather than whining about Utah's deer herd.


Nevada hunters go years without getting a tag...many of them come to Utah, Colorado, Idaho etc just so they can hunt.

I'll bet the 250,000 former Colorado hunters envy Utah's deer hunting..


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

Iron Bear said:


> I never hear someone from Colorado envy Utah's deer hunting. Or from any other state for that matter except California. But the envy from Cali is not specific to Utah just anywhere but Cali.
> 
> I'd feel better if I were tricked by some fools gold regardless weather WY2 thought my hunting was better or not. At least I could focus my efforts on something else rather than whining about Utah's deer herd.


No problem Iron and to make it work the way it has in Colorado half of the deer hunters on this forum need to quit hunting deer forever in Utah. Volunteers? It'll make it better for those that don't quit so come on, don't be selfish Iron. Will you volunteer to quit?


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

bullsnot said:


> Iron Bear said:
> 
> 
> > I never hear someone from Colorado envy Utah's deer hunting. Or from any other state for that matter except California. But the envy from Cali is not specific to Utah just anywhere but Cali.
> ...


Or we can do what Nevada did last year and issue only 10.6% buck tags based on the Nevada Department of Wildlife's mule deer population count, (11,536 buck tags/109,000 deer). Or even 23.1% based on the Nevada Wildlife Commission's (Wildlife Board) population claim, (11,536 buck tags/50,000 deer)!

That's 30,316 Utah buck tags per the DWR count (286,000 Utah deer x 10.6%). (Or 21,200 buck tags per SFW's population claim, (200,000 Utah deer x 10.6%). That's only a 65% reduction in tags. That oughta take care of the problem! It did in Nevada, didn't it? I guess we'll know in May when they meet.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> My conclusions are simple:
> 1) Reducing deer tags to increase our deer herd is a feel-good solution for hunters but will not help out.
> 2) Reducing buck tags and inflating the buck/doe ratio can actually and has been hampering recruitment and could hurt our fawn/doe ratios...which are vital for growth.
> 3) Hunters rave about Colorado's hunting not because of deer numbers but because of buck numbers...there is a false sense of "all's well". Colorado hunters have been tricked on fool's gold and are buying it up!
> 4) Severely reducing tags like Colorado may make many smile, but, like Colorado, the danger is simply eliminating a large portion of the hunting constituency who simply will stop hunting and stop passing that legacy on...a scary though for future generations.


 This type of management works about as well as federal government stimulus programs.......


----------

