View Full Version : CPW Raising prices
Sorry if this is a repost.
2019 Fee Changes (http://cpw.state.co.us/aboutus/Pages/Our-Story-2019-Changes.aspx?utm_source=CPW-Web&utm_medium=Feature1&utm_campaign=Fee-Changes#BigGameLicenseFees)
We've discussed this before, but why in the world didn't they raise the fee for non-residents?
Odd. They actually lowered bear for NR.
They sure won't attract more bear hunters with a lower price when you can't bait bears here.
Total bullshit. The fucking state parks does such a shitty job managing money and now we (me, wife, kids, family, friends) and you guys are getting fucked over. I get it’s only $8 a license, but when I typically draw several tags a year and purchase several B and C list licenses now they are upping my costs close to $50 a year, which will only grow as my kids get older. They need to start charging every subaru registered in the state $250/yr for their hippie fees.
Wish we could go back to separate DOW and parks...but that ain’t gonna happen with the fudge packer polis. He is promising some crazy ass educational goals, and coming from a family of teachers not a single one of us voted for his stupid ass. This state is full of absolute fucking dipshits
theGinsue
11-28-2018, 21:15
I got an email yesterday with the complete breakdown of prices, I wasn't surprised as I expected this when I first heard that DOW was merging with CO Parks which is still bleeding money. Increasing the Permit Draw fee from $3 to $7 is just greedy. I'll give it a few more years of appling for Pref Pts until I can draw for a once-in-a-lifetime elk hunt like Forbes Ranch/Trinchera - then I'll probably just go to over the counter permits.
If enough people get fed up and quit applying then the DOW side will start loosing money because of this BS (thus no longer able to carry the Parks side, financially speaking), maybe they'll learn from it and adjust back to fair pricing. Just kidding - this state hasn't learned a damned thing from it's mistakes for many years.
Moose, sheep, etc all went up $50. The points went up from free to $50 as well.
Moose, sheep, etc all went up $50. The points went up from free to $50 as well.
Wow, just saw that now that you mentioned it. That’s $300 a year for my wife and I. Up to $600 when both kids are applying.
Guess Colorado only wants the wealthy to hunt as the average guy can’t justify $600 a year just to apply....
My only hope is if you actually apply for a license and don’t draw you aren’t hit with that $50 fee, I doubt it but slightly hopeful
hurley842002
11-28-2018, 21:37
Guess Colorado only wants the wealthy to hunt as the average guy can?t justify $600 a year just to apply....
Of course that's what they want, and with the new "regime" it's only going to get worse.
But if all of this saves just one animal, then isn?t it worth it?
Why should one department be fiscally responsible? I'm know nothing about the parks budget. I do know they seem expensive. Camping sites are getting expensive enough that it might be getting out of reach for lower income folks. Lots of extra charges too. Like a dog pass fee. What? Isn't nature built for dogs? I'm almost to the point that camping and hunting might not be the value it once was. If I was a random guy considering getting into hunting I'd think twice. I've invited not hunters to come along, last guy was overwhelmed and had to tap out.
Why should one department be fiscally responsible? I'm know nothing about the parks budget. I do know they seem expensive. Camping sites are getting expensive enough that it might be getting out of reach for lower income folks. Lots of extra charges too. Like a dog pass fee. What? Isn't nature built for dogs? I'm almost to the point that camping and hunting might not be the value it once was. If I was a random guy considering getting into hunting I'd think twice. I've invited not hunters to come along, last guy was overwhelmed and had to tap out.
The state merged the wildlife and parks divisions a decade or so ago. The parks side always lost money, the wildlife side always had a surplus. They thought merging the two would solve the parks problem. Campers and hikers basically aren’t paying for what they are getting so hunters are now picking up the tab.
Giving up on going into public lands is a great way to consent to just selling it all and turning Colorado into Texas.
The state merged the wildlife and parks divisions a decade or so ago. The parks side always lost money, the wildlife side always had a surplus. They thought merging the two would solve the parks problem. Campers and hikers basically aren’t paying for what they are getting so hunters are now picking up the tab.
Oh, I know. Just being sarcastic. I had a heck of a time when they merged the online ordering as my accounts collided and wasn't allowing me to book campsites. Instead of a merge, how about a few pointers on balancing a budget, spending less.
emiller35
11-28-2018, 22:56
Instead of a merge, how about a few pointers on balancing a budget, spending less.
You do know we?re talking about an arm of the government right?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
GilpinGuy
11-29-2018, 01:55
Giving up on going into public lands is a great way to consent to just selling it all and turning Colorado into Texas.
It's becoming the Kings Land and you have to pay an exorbitant fee to access it to hunt, or just camp (aka just sit there) for that matter. Can't blame folks for not wanting to get ripped off by government over and over and over..........
The swirling around the bowl continues faster and faster.
There was a politician several years ago who tried to run on the idea that the US should just sell all public land to pay off the national debt Having public land is part of what makes America what it is. It's one thing to pay to camp, but another to have every piece of land privately owned and completely inaccessible. Can't hunt in national parks, but at least you can go there.
GilpinGuy
11-29-2018, 02:07
And who's fault is it if people refuse to get ripped off and "give up on going into public lands"? I don't want all public land to be sold off, of course. What if they charged you $58 to access a public library for one week a year? Not analogous, but you get the idea.
Government will milk the public like cows of as much money as absolutely possible. Period. If they can get away with it.
Edit: If Wildlife was truly running surplus (I've read this but haven't checked it out) then fees should have been reduced, not raised. The scam is obvious.
BushMasterBoy
11-29-2018, 02:47
And I quote the OP's link
"Full Hookup Campgrounds $28-$30 per night $32-$41 per night*"
I went to one of these, and didn't get anything. Not even an ugly illegal. I could done better on Colfax for $20
And I quote the OP's link
"Full Hookup Campgrounds $28-$30 per night $32-$41 per night*"
I went to one of these, and didn't get anything. Not even an ugly illegal. I could done better on Colfax for $20
41 bucks a night, it better end happily, right?
ChickNorris
11-29-2018, 08:34
Hehehe, instead of 'hug a hunter' ...
Fees went up and what did we get for the hike in price, nada! Just lighter wallets.
It would be one thing if this state was increasing fees and was also opening more lands to hunt such as state trust lands or finding ways/limiting license sales to NR, to reduce hunter crowding. But no, just charge more with nothing to show for it.
Last year they got flooded with new applicants, so my guess is they look at the increase of $5/ea. for all those new applicants, as money, money, money.
Just think, now you get charged $50/ea when you apply for sheep, moose, goat. Lets say it takes you another 10 years to draw just one of those tags. You'll have spent $1500 just to draw one of those tags. At that rate, I'm out of the game.
Residents get hit with a 20% increase while non-residents get nada. I'd join a 1 year hunting/fishing/camping "boycot" to tell them where to stick it.
In the past it was easier to be happy to drop money on tag attempts because you knew that money was being wisely spent. Now that parks is involved, is tough to make that argument.
Yep, horrible decisions continue to be made. Like the duck split (season closes for 3 weeks) which is when the best duck hunting is. I don’t think any other state does this. If they are going to raise the waterfowl stamp price there better be some improved access, improved properties, and improve the season by getting rid of the split.
emiller35
11-29-2018, 13:11
Yep, horrible decisions continue to be made. Like the duck split (season closes for 3 weeks) which is when the best duck hunting is. I don?t think any other state does this. If they are going to raise the waterfowl stamp price there better be some improved access, improved properties, and improve the season by getting rid of the split.
The spilt is a nationwide thing, usually 2-3 weeks everywhere. But I agree with you.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
emiller35
11-29-2018, 13:22
Just think, now you get charged $50/ea when you apply for sheep, moose, goat. Lets say it takes you another 10 years to draw just one of those tags. You'll have spent $1500 just to draw one of those tags. At that rate, I'm out of the game.
The issue with this that most of the people that want to/and do target sheep/goats will happily pay this even if they have to spend over the next 10+ years to get a crack at it. When a guided hunt for one or the other often cost north of 10x that no matter where you are.
Sadly, It?s only a matter of time before I see them phasing this in across the board once they see how many NR and Residents pay for the chance at a ram or goat and think it will be replicated with elk/deer/antelope
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Somewhere recently I was reading about sheep tag auctions. Maybe Montana? The prices reported were in the lots of thousands. I think the record for the auctions is near half million. That's crazy.
Somewhere recently I was reading about sheep tag auctions. Maybe Montana? The prices reported were in the lots of thousands. I think the record for the auctions is near half million. That's crazy.
Sheep has a very Rich following. Huge dollars are spent for coveted tags
emiller35
11-29-2018, 17:59
Somewhere recently I was reading about sheep tag auctions. Maybe Montana? The prices reported were in the lots of thousands. I think the record for the auctions is near half million. That's crazy.
That is absolutely correct, Sheep Show in Reno brings in millions for tags every year. It was a Montana Big Horn rag that went for 560,000 that I believe was the record. Usually every tag goes for 6 figures regardless of location
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So who's the real sheep in that case?
AND something like 85-95% of that money goes directly to managing those animals.
What *is* management of wildlife?
I'm sure someone like Steven Rinella (who is always making that point) could tell you better than I could, but I'm pretty sure it's not getting all the park rangers Mercedes-Benz G500s to cruise around in and stuff.
Last year they got flooded with new applicants, so my guess is they look at the increase of $5/ea. for all those new applicants, as money, money, money.
Just think, now you get charged $50/ea when you apply for sheep, moose, goat. Lets say it takes you another 10 years to draw just one of those tags. You'll have spent $1500 just to draw one of those tags. At that rate, I'm out of the game.
Technically, it's $57/ea. You forgot the $7 application fee. But we're just talking crumbs here.
UrbanWolf
11-29-2018, 22:04
We've discussed this before, but why in the world didn't they raise the fee for non-residents?
They don?t want to discourage the tourists. Locals like us get shafted.
Shooter45
11-29-2018, 22:28
We've discussed this before, but why in the world didn't they raise the fee for non-residents?
Don't want to scare away all the non-residents that travel here to hunt big game paying over $600 a tag vs the local peasants who only have to pay $47.
Singlestack
11-30-2018, 07:27
We've discussed this before, but why in the world didn't they raise the fee for non-residents?
Because the progressives thought non-residents meant illegal aliens.
ChickNorris
11-30-2018, 10:06
Hahaha SingleStack
Little Dutch
11-30-2018, 11:48
I am looking at the wording on the "Annual ANS Stamp - Colorado Resident Vessels* "
* Vessels registered in the state of Colorado, or Colorado resident motorboats or sailboats documented by the U.S. Coast Guard or otherwise exempt from in-state registration.
That asterisk includes all vessels "otherwise exempt from in-state registration". I suspect that means they now want a $25 fee to put your kayak, float tube, canoe, etc on the water.
I am looking at the wording on the "Annual ANS Stamp - Colorado Resident Vessels* "
* Vessels registered in the state of Colorado, or Colorado resident motorboats or sailboats documented by the U.S. Coast Guard or otherwise exempt from in-state registration.
That asterisk includes all vessels "otherwise exempt from in-state registration". I suspect that means they now want a $25 fee to put your kayak, float tube, canoe, etc on the water.
Oi, where's your "critical thinking" license?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.