Colorado Fisherman Forum banner

1 - 20 of 73 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,427 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
if I fish 3 days a month and buy a resident license here at 85.00, or do I go to NM and buy a non resident for $56.00 and fish a 3 day weekend where I know I can catch a limit of keeper walleyes with a bunch of white bass a few smb and a couple of 3-5 lb cats and a couple of lmb. I think I can do that 2 or 3 times a year and have a lot more fun, and even join Texas walleye assn. who fish most of their tourneys at Ute or Conches. those lakes do not have near the crowd that the lakes here have. even if I only want to go there only one time and fish 5 days for 24.00, or do I just quit fishing and sell my boat
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,945 Posts
I have friends who have Kansas and Nebraska licenses but don't bother buying a Colorado license.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,180 Posts
^^^^^^^^^^^^^

That's just money!!!


HILARIOUS.


That is how I feel, just like D.C.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,128 Posts
i fish out of state more than i fish in state anyway. i would much rather put money toward states (kansas/nebraska/Wyoming etc) that really care about improving fisheries instead of paying double the money toward a state that could care less about the anglers voice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,192 Posts
Where are you getting the $85 total from? That with a double rod stamp? Other bs stamps we HAVE to buy that they don't take into account on fees raising.

I wouldn't be so against if they actually took care of our fisheries vs the kill campaign they have going on. They have natural reproducing species and they want those dead and want stocker in there place.

I'm sure $85 would make it the most expensive state for freshwater angling. What about day fees, non resident etc?
California fees for reference:

Resident Sport Fishing $47.01 Available for any resident 16 years of age or older.
Nonresident Sport Fishing $126.36 Available for any non-resident 16 years of age or older.
Reduced-Fee Sport Fishing License - Disabled Veteran $6.95 at CDFW Offices
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,554 Posts
I've barely had time to fish in the last couple months.....and when I do I seem to get harassed by the dickhead fishpigs. This makes it easy for me to just give that **** up completely. Who wants some fishing gear? :grumpy:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,693 Posts
Well if I fish 100 times per year in Co. (which I usually do), thats only $0.85 per day.

No biggie.

Maybe it'll thin out some of the shore scum around here-
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,164 Posts
Poorer people will just fish without a license especially when they figure out they won't get with from the lack of enforcement.. Just like people on western slope/mountain lakes will just throw smallmouth/pike into their favorite lakes when the CPW tries to poison them out to save worthless fish that nobody but tree hugging PC losers care about anyways.

I'll pay the fee but oh well. At the end of the day what power do i as a fisherman in Colorado really have aside from illegal means? As walleye seeker said I like to do my real fishing out of state. I primarily fish here when I wanna take my kid with me to drown worms. Only thing that makes the fee worth it is the lake trout fishing, and aside from lake county spots... You don't see the CPW doing any favors for us on that end. Just means I'm gonna be putting more miles on my car and paying Wyoming and NE more of my money. screw the CPW management... we pay more to get less and I'm effing sick of it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,427 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Where are you getting the $85 total from? That with a double rod stamp? Other bs stamps we HAVE to buy that they don't take into account on fees raising.

I wouldn't be so against if they actually took care of our fisheries vs the kill campaign they have going on. They have natural reproducing species and they want those dead and want stocker in there place.

I'm sure $85 would make it the most expensive state for freshwater angling. What about day fees, non resident etc?
California fees for reference:

Resident Sport Fishing $47.01 Available for any resident 16 years of age or older.
Nonresident Sport Fishing $126.36 Available for any non-resident 16 years of age or older.
Reduced-Fee Sport Fishing License - Disabled Veteran $6.95 at CDFW Offices
the 85.00 came from a meeting in den. and it was on the news as being approved yesterday
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
428 Posts
Nobody wants a fee increase but quit because of it? Not me, I'm gonna fish till I can't fish no mo. Hope everybody sacks up quick, spend what little time you have doing whatever makes you happy before it's too late...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,634 Posts
Nobody wants a fee increase but quit because of it? Not me, I'm gonna fish till I can't fish no mo. Hope everybody sacks up quick, spend what little time you have doing whatever makes you happy before it's too late...
this...

Plus buying a license is still at $85 is still the cheapest part of a hobby i love...most of the locations mentioned above are 460 to 600 miles round trip and at current "cheap" gas prices that is in the neighborhood of $50 to $75 for a single trip...doesnt take many of those to dwarf the cost of a license...Slayer is down to 85 cents per trip for a license...really what in life gives you better value?...a bottle of water costs more than that...and something you can get out of your tap and no one bitches about that...and yes cpw needs to get their ish together...and I believe the increase still needs to be approved by the legislature...here is a column written in today's Denver Post by State Senator Leroy Garcia of Pueblo and it is titled:

Don’t double the price of Colorado hunting and fishing licenses

Protecting Colorado’s lands is a mission I take very seriously. The protection of our air, water and natural environment is not only critical to the Colorado way of life, but it’s also crucial to ensuring the continued growth of our booming tourism and outdoors industries. One major reason visitors come is for the excellent hunting and fishing that residents like ourselves enjoy across the state.

For residents in Southern Colorado and across the state, going hunting and fishing is a way of life. For some, they are means to providing food for themselves and their families through an affordable license. For others like myself, hunting and fishing are great American traditions we grew up with and carry on with our kids. That was why I was dismayed to learn about the financial struggles and budgetary shortfalls Colorado Parks and Wildlife is facing, as reported in The Denver Post last week, and what that could mean for sportsmen and women.

As a member of the Senate Agriculture Committee, I am 100 percent committed to working with the Parks and Wildlife towards solutions to prevent such outcomes like hatcheries being shut down or state lands being gated. But I struggle with the conclusion presented by the department that the only way to preserve our identity as a premier hunting and fishing destination is to double the cost of in-state hunting and fishing licenses for Colorado residents.

I attended one of the department’s public meetings on the subject of increasing fees on residents at a Lake Pueblo office recently. Based on the numbers presented, I can appreciate the steps they have taken so far to trim their budget. But I came away frustrated that I couldn’t get clear answers of how the department got into such a deep hole to begin with, and if they’re using their funding effectively and efficiently.

If Parks and Wildlife is going to ask for a 100 percent fee increase on in-state hunting and fishing licenses for residents, the people of Colorado should know exactly where the money is going, how it is being used, and how the department is taking steps to keep costs down. These are just a few of the questions I have before I would even want to consider a request by the department to enact such an enormous fee increase that could prevent Colorado sportsmen and women from accessing this way of life.

As any avid hunter or fisher would attest to, the equipment and supplies we purchase are quite expensive as it is. While Colorado remains home to a robust outdoors industry, there is still a slow decline in the number of people across the country who hunt and fish. I am seriously concerned that such a massive fee increase would cut access to traditions that are integral to our identity as a state and as a country. By raising the costs of hunting and fishing through fees for in-state residents, we would only make the decline worse.

I am fully committed to working with Colorado Parks and Wildlife on constructive solutions that will preserve our outdoors way of life. However, to me, the department concluding that the only way to preserve our outdoors industry is to increase fees by 100 percent on our in-state hunters and fishers is not acceptable.

State Sen. Leroy Garcia is a Democrat from Pueblo.

http://www.denverpost.com/2016/08/30/dont-double-the-price-of-colorado-hunting-and-fishing-licenses/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
485 Posts
Just a prediction, but I see this as having disastrous consequences for CPW in their war against non-native fish. Already they are having problems with bucket biologists putting warm water species into bodies of water where they are spending big bucks trying to get those fish back out. Now with a doubling of fees, those same bucket biologists are going to double their efforts. Does CPW not think those folks who want to fish for their favorite species are going to pay double and not have access to their choice of fish.

An increase of fees, okay. But double - that's a bit short sighted. And only for the in-staters. Why not an increase for the out-of-staters as well? I think the article above by Sen Garcia is right on when he says this will hurt the chance of more folks getting involved in outdoor sports. Already the current policies for hunting and fishing are driving youth away and this helps how?

I'll pay my money to keep fishing but I, like Sen Garcia, would sure like to see an accounting of how the CPW is spending their money. Several years ago when these two agencies joined into one entity they were already having problems accounting for the CDOW shortfalls. Why hasn't that been resolved? Perhaps CPW thinks we haven't been paying attention. Hopefully, the state legislature thinks this over and if necessary grants an increase of fees, but certainly not double the current rate.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
413 Posts
When it comes down to it, I'll pay the fee. That's the cost of two rounds of golf. It would be nice, though, to get some transparency from the CPW. I'd like to know where the old money has gone, and where the new money will be going.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,804 Posts
this...

Plus buying a license is still at $85 is still the cheapest part of a hobby i love...most of the locations mentioned above are 460 to 600 miles round trip and at current "cheap" gas prices that is in the neighborhood of $50 to $75 for a single trip...doesnt take many of those to dwarf the cost of a license...Slayer is down to 85 cents per trip for a license...really what in life gives you better value?...a bottle of water costs more than that...and something you can get out of your tap and no one bitches about that...and yes cpw needs to get their ish together...and I believe the increase still needs to be approved by the legislature...here is a column written in today's Denver Post by State Senator Leroy Garcia of Pueblo and it is titled:

Don’t double the price of Colorado hunting and fishing licenses

Protecting Colorado’s lands is a mission I take very seriously. The protection of our air, water and natural environment is not only critical to the Colorado way of life, but it’s also crucial to ensuring the continued growth of our booming tourism and outdoors industries. One major reason visitors come is for the excellent hunting and fishing that residents like ourselves enjoy across the state.

For residents in Southern Colorado and across the state, going hunting and fishing is a way of life. For some, they are means to providing food for themselves and their families through an affordable license. For others like myself, hunting and fishing are great American traditions we grew up with and carry on with our kids. That was why I was dismayed to learn about the financial struggles and budgetary shortfalls Colorado Parks and Wildlife is facing, as reported in The Denver Post last week, and what that could mean for sportsmen and women.

As a member of the Senate Agriculture Committee, I am 100 percent committed to working with the Parks and Wildlife towards solutions to prevent such outcomes like hatcheries being shut down or state lands being gated. But I struggle with the conclusion presented by the department that the only way to preserve our identity as a premier hunting and fishing destination is to double the cost of in-state hunting and fishing licenses for Colorado residents.

I attended one of the department’s public meetings on the subject of increasing fees on residents at a Lake Pueblo office recently. Based on the numbers presented, I can appreciate the steps they have taken so far to trim their budget. But I came away frustrated that I couldn’t get clear answers of how the department got into such a deep hole to begin with, and if they’re using their funding effectively and efficiently.

If Parks and Wildlife is going to ask for a 100 percent fee increase on in-state hunting and fishing licenses for residents, the people of Colorado should know exactly where the money is going, how it is being used, and how the department is taking steps to keep costs down. These are just a few of the questions I have before I would even want to consider a request by the department to enact such an enormous fee increase that could prevent Colorado sportsmen and women from accessing this way of life.

As any avid hunter or fisher would attest to, the equipment and supplies we purchase are quite expensive as it is. While Colorado remains home to a robust outdoors industry, there is still a slow decline in the number of people across the country who hunt and fish. I am seriously concerned that such a massive fee increase would cut access to traditions that are integral to our identity as a state and as a country. By raising the costs of hunting and fishing through fees for in-state residents, we would only make the decline worse.

I am fully committed to working with Colorado Parks and Wildlife on constructive solutions that will preserve our outdoors way of life. However, to me, the department concluding that the only way to preserve our outdoors industry is to increase fees by 100 percent on our in-state hunters and fishers is not acceptable.

State Sen. Leroy Garcia is a Democrat from Pueblo.

http://www.denverpost.com/2016/08/30/dont-double-the-price-of-colorado-hunting-and-fishing-licenses/
I am pretty sure this is what people are trying to say though. Sure, in the grand scheme of things, 85.00 for a year isn't that much. HOWEVER, bordering states have much lower fees for their residents with better fishing and fish management. Doubling the license fees, while destroying quality fisheries and cutting access to places just doesn't leave a good taste in one's mouth. IF that $85 was going to improve things, and give fishermen a voice in the state, I'm sure people would be happy to pay it. But again, the short sighted CPW only sees right now, and right now they're poorly managed and clearly not good at fiscal responsibility.

Speaking on short sightedness, and I know it's been brought up before, South Park COULD be a PREMIER pike destination for people who can't afford or don't want to travel to places like Canada. But is that resource being used to spur on tourism? Nope! For what reason, I do not know. Believe it or not, there are people who would come here simply for a chance to fish a beautiful lake, and for the potential for a once in a life time catch. If they really wanted to do more, they would listen to the people that fish here, and look at what resources we have beyond trout to encourage more out of state fishermen.

There have to be other ways to generate revenue. Raising the fees will only cause more people to fish without a license. If I had to guess, I'd say they'd actually lose a bit of revenue, or just barely break even to where they are now anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
I spent $50 some on a non-resident WI fishing license this year. That is really troubling to me that I will spend $85(if passed) on a resident license here in Colorado.

And speaking as a dad with young girls who love to fish, the day I will shell out $255 for the three of us to go fishing is fast approaching.

I'm afraid the only result of this would be pushing down the numbers of licenses sold and a corresponding jump in fines for fishing without licenses.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,945 Posts
If I had to guess, I'd say they'd actually lose a bit of revenue, or just barely break even to where they are now anyway.
Bingo!


Maybe it'll thin out some of the shore scum around here-
Whom are you calling scum? :mad::D Well, if you boating scums were charged for the real cost of launching your toys in the water, maybe there would be a smaller deficit. >:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,779 Posts
Geez....
I only spent $5 on mine this year...
Hope it don't go up next year...
For us "RETIREE'S anyway...::)
 
1 - 20 of 73 Posts
Top