OTC Colorado tag?

this is probably a dumb question but I cant seem to find the answer online. I was reading you can hunt 93 of Colorado's 184 Units with an over the counter archery bull tag. My question is, how do they come up with harvest statistics per unit if you can hunt multiple units per season with an OTC tag. example. they say 77 had 132 hunters and 8 bulls taken for 22% success rate.

Melman said:

this is probably a dumb question but I cant seem to find the answer online. I was reading you can hunt 93 of Colorado's 184 Units with an over the counter archery bull tag. My question is, how do they come up with harvest statistics per unit if you can hunt multiple units per season with an OTC tag. example. they say 77 had 132 hunters and 8 bulls taken for 22% success rate.

Click to expand...

all the harvest info in Colorado is based on surveys sent to a sample of hunters. take the results with a shaker I mean grain of salt.

I think that's a good question but then again I'm the king of dumb questions. My best guess is hunters report which unit they killed their Elk in. Last I hunted in Colorado was 2012 and I don't recall if I was required to complete a survey. However, last year when I hunted Idaho I did complete a survey which they require and I think I heard Idaho and maybe other states levy some kind of penalty if you don't complete a survey. Maybe Colorado does the same?

ok thanks. sounds like there could be a lot of room for error. I wonder what percentage of people actually fill out the survey. Probably higher for the successful hunters than the non successful ones.

Melman said:

ok thanks. sounds like there could be a lot of room for error. I wonder what percentage of people actually fill out the survey. Probably higher for the successful hunters than the non successful ones.

Click to expand...

I’ve always thought the same thing which would make success rates higher then they truly are. But who knows maybe successful hunters lie on reports so “there” unit doesn’t have high success rates making it look less desirable for those e scouting.

Unless I am mistaken, Colorado does not require hunters to report elk harvests..... they only ask nicely.

I have been called twice now by colorado a few months after season and thats how they do their survey, but my buddies that hunt with me have never recieved the survey yet.

Like montana , I've been called three years in a row about deer harvest but only once about elk , and my dad has had deer and elk tags ten years in a row and has never been called

I am honest, if they take the time to call me I tell them. And they have called.

Sowhntr said:

I am honest, if they take the time to call me I tell them. And they have called.

Click to expand...

same here

Just to confirm - there's no mandatory check-in for Elk in Colorado, right? I've scoured the regs and can't find it - but that seems really strange. Especially coming from Ohio where we have to check in everything, including turkeys.

No, there is no mandatory check for Elk. There are some areas where there are mandatory CWD checks but I think that is just for Deer.

AtenJones said:

Just to confirm - there's no mandatory check-in for Elk in Colorado, right? I've scoured the regs and can't find it - but that seems really strange. Especially coming from Ohio where we have to check in everything, including turkeys.

Click to expand...

Same for NY .. check in everything. But it's all online or by phone and it takes 30 seconds.

A few years ago, I dropped off a doe at the processor while I was on my way to my northern hunting camp and they were slammed with guys dropping off deer. The DEC biologists will set up shop there to record ages, if the deer were in generally good health, and pick off a few heads for CWD testing. Some knucklehead was in front of me checking in his deer and the processor asked him if he called in his deer yet, "Nope, what for?" Another knucklehead was standing a few feet away and chimed in, "I never do that chit." The processor looked at these guys and calmly explained that it was the law, they use the data to set harvest rates, and that the regional DEC biologist was standing a few away. I don't know if anyone would ever be charged for not reporting their kill (provided that was the only thing they did illegally), but I do know that the biologists can generate some relatively accurate population estimates and harvest rates with 30-50% reporting.

Considering the value of the elk harvest, and the relatively low numbers, I'd think that the western biologists would want mandatory reporting. But they're probably fairly happy with the data that they have. Even though hunters gripe about the number of tags being too high, too low, season too long, too short, etc. regardless of what the biologists say.