[Joe 6-pack]

I have a slightly different take on it. If these areas are dedicated gamelands for hunting and fishing, and have been historically maintained through hunting and fishing license fees, why should others be able to enjoy them on the backs of the hunters and fisherman who are paying for their maintenance?

[Hot Tabasco]

I have a slightly different take on it.

I agree......

[Hot Tabasco]

For what it's worth, I don't hunt or fish here in Michigan but I purchase the permits anyway as a senior.........

It allows me to shoot invasive species of house sparrows and starlings as well as tray nuisance animals such as coons and possums..........

[glennaro]

(Sorry Joe ... Meant to respond to you instead of to me! Getting old ... and excited ... sometimes creates a small problem!)

Good point ... I was just exploring the possible reasons for such a significant overnight change. Cheers!

[Alberta's Child]

I’d also point out that this will do even more to keep minorities out of the Colorado backcountry. LOL.

[ResponseAbility]

Is this not a free country?

There is no king to own all the deer.

Maintenance of the forests happen real well in California where they don’t remove debris and wildfires kill people. Where did all the fees go?

[Mastador1]

Well if they are State lands then aren’t they maintained by every taxpayer in Colorado, not just hunters and fisherman during those seasons?

[dartuser]

I have a slightly different take on it. If these areas are dedicated gamelands for hunting and fishing, and have been historically maintained through hunting and fishing license fees, why should others be able to enjoy them on the backs of the hunters and fisherman who are paying for their maintenance?

I agree with you 99% ... the other 1% of me doubts the state government will use the extra revenue to do anything constructive for those pristine areas.

[grcuster]

I agree, hunters and fisherman cover the expense of maintaining the outdoors while others enjoy at our expense. In Colorado we have to pay an additional fee for their hunting licenses just so the DOW can place ads telling the public who pays. If others want to use the SWAs then they should pay the same fee hunters/fisherman pay.

[goorala]

You honestly think it’s possible that the area is funded 100% by licenses and no tax dollars?

[Grampa Dave]

I have a slightly different take on it. If these areas are dedicated game lands for hunting and fishing, and have been historically maintained through hunting and fishing license fees, why should others be able to enjoy them on the backs of the hunters and fisherman who are paying for their maintenance?

These are like the spandex bike riders wanting wider and wider bike lanes built on our roads and maintained by our gasoline taxes and them paying nothing.

[Labyrinthos]

Excellent point.