Log In


Reset Password
Columnists View from the Center Bear Smart The Travel Troubleshooter Dear Abby Student Aide Of Sound Mind Others Say Powerful solutions You are What You Eat Out Standing in the Fields What's up in Durango Skies Watch Yore Topknot Local First RE-4 Education Update MECC Cares for kids

Parks and Wildlife aims for public input and guidance to help with budget woes

We tend to associate hunting season with fall. The pastime goes hand in hand with frost on fallen leaves, longer nights and the crisp days of autumn.

Actually, the first big-game season, for bowhunters, opens in August. Many of those hunters are well into their preparations now.

Colorado Parks and Wildlife has another compelling reason to consider hunting season early this year: The agency is deep into a budget crunch and is calling on folks who hunt and fish to help them consider how to resolve it.

For the most part, hunters and anglers understand what non-sporting residents do not: CPW does not receive general tax dollars to operate. Fish and wildlife management programs are primarily funded by the people who fish and hunt; the money comes from the sale of licenses.

But while the expense of wildlife management continues to rise, revenues are not keeping pace. Interest in hunting, especially in the younger generations, is falling. Since 2009, CPW has had to eliminate 50 positions and cut $40 million from the wildlife side of its budget. Going forward, the agency has projected another $25 million shortfall by 2023 without increased revenue.

Thus, the agency is facing some tough decisions and is asking the public for guidance. Some of the choices are stark: Should CPW spend more of its limited funds on its hatchery programs to continue stocking fish, or put that money into keeping invasive species out of aquatic wildlife habitat? If existing programs have to be cut, which ones should get the ax?

A bigger question, for many folks, is whether they would be willing to pay more for licenses in order to maintain current levels of fish and wildlife management. Would the sporting public support a doubling of the price of a resident fishing license to $50 and $90 for an elk tag?

So far, support for this proposal has been forthcoming from hunters. Denny Behrens, chairman of the Colorado Mule Deer Association, recently described the cost of an elk tag as a bargain, even at twice the price. “That’s dirt cheap,” he said, “especially when you put in perspective that there are people who play golf for $80 a day.”

Any increases in license fees will have to get the green light from the state Legislature, so CPW is doing the right thing to seek input from the state’s hunters and anglers now. The agency should also find a way to include more residents in the discussions and the solutions because the benefits of effective wildlife management extend past the benefits to sportsmen. Anyone who enjoys hiking, camping, birdwatching or mountain biking in the state is in some way enjoying the results of efforts funded by hunting and fishing license fees. Even those who rarely venture outside are beneficiaries. Fishing contributes nearly $2 billion to the state economy every year, and hunting nearly $1 billion. And CPW estimates that wildlife viewing in itself adds an additional $2.3 billion more.

Locals have two ways to join this discussion, and should take part. The CPW questionnaire can be found online at cpw.state.co.us. Click on the “About Us” page and proceed to “Funding the Future.”

There will also be a meeting to discuss this issue at 6:30 p.m. Aug. 9 at the public library in Bayfield. Please attend.



Reader Comments