KREMMLING — More than 10,000 acres of prime hunting and fishing habitat leased by Colorado Parks and Wildlife from the state land board around this hook-and-bullet mecca could soon be gated. Hatcheries across the state could be de-watered and shut down. Hunting licenses could be curtailed. Inspections for invasive aquatic species at Colorado lakes and reservoirs could end. And payments to conserve land for future generations of sportsmen could stop.
The doomsday scenario unfolded last week in a wood-paneled room next to the Middle Park rodeo grounds, where 4-H posters on the walls detailed the construction of a .22-caliber bullet and the joy of hunting with mom and dad.
It’s a dire-straits story wildlife officials have been sharing across the state this summer in Funding the Future, a series of 18 public meetings aimed at fostering support among sportsmen and women for doubling the cost of in-state hunting and fishing licenses.
“No one wants to see raised fees,” wildlife manager Lyle Sidener said during his presentation in Kremmling this week. “But if we are going to remain a premier destination for hunting and fishing, we have to make a choice about funding the future of our wildlife management and conservation.”
Wildlife management work is at a crossroads in Colorado. The wildlife managers at Colorado Parks and Wildlife have spent years cutting the budget, trimming $40 million since 2009, including $10 million last year, and eliminating 50 jobs. The division has raised pay-to-play fees for preference points that hunters gather for a better chance to pull coveted permits and offered a nonresident big game-fishing combination license, raising $2.4 million a year. They’ve recovered $1.1 million a year by changing refund policies, and they tweaked license prices to sell more tags in areas that need larger harvests. They’ve upped the number of hunting and fishing licenses sold so Colorado can get back more of the federal excise taxes collected from makers of outdoor equipment, which are returned to states based on license numbers.
But it hasn’t been enough.
Costs are soaring. The division — the largest owner of dams in Colorado — is falling behind on dam and fisheries maintenance. Even if the agency keeps cutting services, costs and maintenance schedules, the budget will be short $15 million to $20 million by 2023. The shortfall grows to $31 million to $36 million if hunters and anglers want more access, improved habitat, increased conservation and healthier wildlife populations.
Colorado Parks and Wildlife last raised residential hunting and fishing license fees in 2005, boosting, for example, the price of a residential elk permit to $49 from $34. In the decade since, the cost of fish food has doubled at the 19 hatcheries where it raises 90 million fish a year for stocking rivers and lakes. The cost to lease water used by the hatcheries has tripled. Helicopter surveys of big game herds — which anchor the scientific process of determining license numbers — run $1,000 an hour. Cut the helicopter census, and licenses numbers will drop too, officials said.
The division, which takes no taxpayer money, counts on licenses to meet more than 60 percent of its annual $151 million budget, which is why wildlife officials are pondering up to a 100 percent increase in the cost of hunting and fishing licenses.
In fiscal 2015, the agency sold more than 67,800 elk permits to out-of-state hunters, collecting $37.3 million, which amounted to more than half of its total harvest for fishing and hunting licenses. The agency sold almost 156,000 in-state elk permits, collecting $6.4 million. Doubling the price of resident elk and fishing licenses alone would raise almost $16 million.
And to prevent another steep hike that could double prices in another decade, the division is hoping to secure legislative approval to tie its in-state license fees to the consumer price index, which would add a few dollars every year. Nonresident licenses are tied to that index, and elk licenses for out-of-state hunters cost $649.
If the $10 hunting license the division offered in 1964 was connected to the national rate of inflation, it would cost $88 today.
Budget deficits for wildlife departments are common across the country, forcing agencies to cut programs and cast wider nets in their hunt for more revenue. A long-term decline in hunting and fishing participation is reducing the flow of money in, while costs climb for agencies tasked with duties beyond managing elk, pronghorns and sport fish.
A few states have broken the century-old model of relying solely on license fees and excise taxes paid by the sporting community and added taxpayer support. But most state wildlife agencies go through a fee increase process every few years. For states such as Colorado, where fee increases require legislative approval, the process has a layer of political complexity.
“A lot of states are looking to broaden their source of funding,” said Ron Regan, executive director of the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, which this summer helped craft the Recovering America’s Wildlife Act, which would direct $1.3 billion in revenue from energy and mineral development toward state fish and wildlife conservation efforts. If federal lawmakers pass that legislation, Regan said, Colorado’s wildlife management budget would grow by “tens of millions,” which could help the agency keep threatened animals off the budget-breaking endangered species list.
“State fish and wildlife agencies have increased costs, larger missions and more complex issues to manage than ever before,” he said. “Most all of them get a majority of their support from sportsmen, 75 percent of their budget or more. They are looking for new opportunities to bring in new money.”
After 16 meetings with sportsmen across Colorado — and two more to go, Tuesday in Fort Collins and Wednesday in Evergreen — response shows support for the fee hike, northwest region spokesman Mike Porras said, being careful to note that the support he has seen has been in his region.
With that backing, the division hopes to find legislative support for a license increase next year, which could deter pending cuts to division programs. If support is strong enough, the division might ask legislators to rethink the free-fishing-for-seniors policy that has distributed 679,000 free fishing licenses since 2006 — none of which count toward license numbers that increase the federal excise tax distribution.
“Basically anything that helps hunting and fishing in Colorado, we support,” said Jeremy Bock, a third-generation Kremmling native. “Unfortunately, you gotta double-up to catch up. When you get behind is when things get bad.”
Bock said he’d pay $200 to hunt if he had too. He can’t hide his enthusiasm for taking his 7-year-old daughter on hunting and fishing adventures — just as his dad did with him.
“Just look at the value of our hunter dollars,” he said. “I’d pay $1,000 to spend a week in the woods with my daughter. There’s nothing better.”
Colorado wildlife revenue:
66 percent: licenses
17 percent: federal excise tax
6 percent: sales, donations, interest
4 percent: Great Outdoors Colorado
4 percent: federal and state grants
3 percent: severance tax
If you go: Colorado Parks and Wildlife will hold two more Funding the Future meetings: 6 p.m. Tuesday at the Marriott Hotel, 350 E. Horsetooth Road in Fort Collins, and 6:30 p.m. Wednesday at Evergreen Fire Rescue, 1802 Bergen Parkway in Evergreen.
