Phurley, do you have an in or are they opening an easment to Thornburgh mountain? I remember being camped at the STL and seeing lots of elk grazing on the private land then going back into Thornburgh. Always was a sore spot that a large parcel like Thornburgh was inacessable to the public, but the same people keeping the public out were free to hunt it as their own. When I asked the Game Warden, he just shrugged and said one of the landowners was an outfitter. Don't know if it's true or not, but I don't doubt some big tresspass fees are being charged to cross into the BLM there.

Good luck this year.

org

org ----- I was lucky to get an "in" in 1992 and have been able to hunt a part of it ever since. All the access is controlled by ranchers or the outfitter you mentioned. They know what they have and you either pay or don't hunt. We pay an access fee to a rancher that does a good job controling the numbers and management. We hunt on our own. The list is very long for any new people the last two seasons. Good shooting.

We just got back from Co
in and around the Meeker area lots of Elk

you are within an hours drive to Meeker

we got 2 Bull tags for the first Elk rifle season

I have hunted in the National Forest there. There were lots and lots of hunters and very few elk.

You may have good luck on some private land in that area but, the public land is nothing more than a good place to camp out.

Good Luck!

Reloader

I guided for an outfitter in the Meeker area for a number of years, and we had very good success. The elk may not be as big as in some areas, but we got lots of 4- and 5-pointers. The deer hunting has also improved the last few years. We hunted mostly private land. I have quit guiding due to other commitments, but would definitely recommend this outfitter. I have never seen another outfitter who worked as hard to see that his clients had a good time. Combination deer/elk hunts run about $2500. Send me an e-mail if you are interested and I will get you in contact with him.

Dale

Dale,

I don't see an email addy, I sent you a PM.

Thanks,

Bill

I've hunted about 20 miles south of Craig 5 times; two of those hunts were on public land and 3 were on private. I would see on any given day on the private land hunts more elk than I would during my entire period on public land hunts combined. The private land hunts might cost a bit more, but in terms of your chances of finding a nice bull, they are worth every penny and will end up SAVING you money in the long run because you will see elk there and your chances of success will be about 100% as compared to maybe 20%. Would you rather hunt with crowds in an area that has relatively few elk or in near seclusion with loads of them?
The only problem with NE Colorado is that the elk are small when compared to AZ and NM. The elk coming out of the park into southern MT are also much bigger. But if you want a high success ratio, hunt near Craig on private land and you will have a blast!

Spring

Actually, I want to hunt!!!! To me, that means not being guarenteed anything. To me, that means maybe coming home with nothing.

Blue

Nothing is ever guaranteed, but given a choice of hunting in spot that has very little game, as compared to place that will give you the opportunity to see a lot, I'll take the latter anytime!

Sprng

this comment is not directed specifically at you. Its just that my opinion is that people expecting to see game every time they hunt has in turn caused the whole hunting sport to become more and more about money every year. Its closed down trememdouns amounts of land, its made the cost of licenses go higher and higher, its made states and provinces require guides, and its has basically made fair chase and fairness in general go out the window. I guess I would rather go hunting on public land and see nothing rather than pay a couple of thousand dollars to see and shoot a trophy on some private land somewhere.

Blue

Blue,

I can certainly understand and appreciate your thoughts. I'm just curious if you think hunting in an area that receives a lot of hunting pressure and as a result has less game is more of a natural and normal environment than one that is protected from the hoardes of hunters and enjoys a large and healthy game population like might have been the case hundreds of years ago? I'm not talking about any of these fenced in properties that I would not touch with a ten-foot pole. I'm talking about private tracts of land, 100,000 acres or more that border national forests properties and are simply reserved for those hunters that are willing to pay the outfitter that owns or leases the tract.... One choice is to hunt with lots of other hunters in an area which causes game to be sparse, or and the other is on properties where the pressure on the animals is significantly less, which allows the elk to florish. Which is the more natural setting in your opinion?

Blue,

Here are a couple of interesting things you might enjoy reading. First, here's an interview with Jim Crumley about the private land hunt near Craig where I have hunted 3 times. You'll get to read about how the hunt took place as well as what it was like when he shot his elk with his bow. And then he'll discuss the nature of this kind of hunt as compared to the very noble effort of trying to get one the hard way on public land. No doubt both approaches have merit. As you'll see, he was hunting on a 300,000 ranch.

Secondly, here's an article by Jim Zumbo about the high cost of hunting, especially for out of state elk hunters.

All the best to you.

Spring

You see, where I have the problem is not with the guy that owns the land. Where I have the problem is that the animal doesn't belong to the guy that owns the land!!!! That animal belongs to all of the people of the state or province where it is located, and therfore I have a problem with that landowner having more of a say as to how that animal might be taken, and by whom, especially when the criteria might be who has the most money!!!!

Blue

The good thing about these properties near Craig is that you're still getting to hunt the animals that roam naturally through the area. There are no high fences. The excessive pursuit of the animals found in the national forest is absent. Do you really think it might be better to hunt where the aninals are overly pursued?

It is becoming more and more common for game found on public land to head to adjacent private land on the first day of the first season, and remain on private land until the hunters depart and the end of the final season.I know of no good workable solution to this other than greatly reduced hunting pressure which is unacceptable to the DOW since it is their source of income.Frank.

Hunted around Craig several times on Ranching for Wildlife cow hunts. Didn't see a whole lot of big bulls, but the first morning of the first time I hunted there I witnessed something truly unforgettable. The whole hillside about a mile away was moving - and when I finally got the binos on target, I realized I was watching a huge elk herd. I stalked to a ridge over the valley they disappeared into and and put the rifle down and enjoyed the view. I counted, yes COUNTED, over 1,000 head of elk in the herd - all within 200 yards.

Shot 3 cows in 3 trips up there when I was a resident (and eligible for Ranching for Wildlife tags). Always saw elk, mule deer and antelope - good country for glassing.

The elk do get pushed very quickly out of the national forest on towards the private lands that have less pressure. On the place that I hunted near Craig, they have a section they call "The Sanctuary" that gets a remarkable influx of elk from the public land. Hunting in this spot is almost nonexistant, causing the elk to hide from the crowds across the property line.