# Loma Boat Ramp - License Required



## Cubuffs85 (Feb 28, 2011)

Just saw this notice on Recreation.gov while printing my Ruby-Horsethief permit:

Facility Message:
Beginning July 1 Colorado Parks and Wildlife will require all persons 18 and older to possess a proper and valid Colorado hunting or fishing license to access State Wildlife Areas. This includes the Loma Boat Launch State Wildlife Area.


----------



## mkashzg (Aug 9, 2006)

Wow that is going to be super hard to enforce! 

Any idea if the Colorado outdoor search and rescue card that can be purchased for five years for $12 will satisfy the requirements? The fishing license has that component attached to it and I am assuming that is what they are trying to fund by this new rule but that is only a guess.


----------



## ptwood (May 4, 2004)

This also has some serious impacts to the trail system west of Salida, we have been talking with CPW about an exception. So far they have been friendly but not terribly receptive. 

There is little doubt it will be an enforcement nightmare and most likely the cost will out weigh the benefit. We will see...


----------



## raymo (Aug 10, 2008)

That suck's if they apply that to non-resident boaters. A five day fishing license is like 45$ and an annual is like 110$, per person.


----------



## PoppyOscar (Jul 8, 2012)

Is this about that State Wildlife Area fee we heard about earlier this year?


----------



## ptwood (May 4, 2004)

CPW's statement is here https://mailchi.mp/state/cpw-commis...ldlife-areas-and-cpw-leased-state-trust-lands


----------



## twmartin (Apr 3, 2007)

So I Just ;looked up Picnic Rock on the Poudre and it is a Natural Area, not a Wildlife Area. Why don't we just get it re-designated a Natural Area?


----------



## twmartin (Apr 3, 2007)

Has anyone ever seen a Colorado DPW Ranger at Loma? I've only seen BLM Rangers.


----------



## IntrepidXJ (Jun 27, 2008)

FAQ here: https://cpw.state.co.us/Documents/LandWater/SWA/License-Requirements-SWA-STL-Access-FAQ.pdf


----------



## smhoeher (Jun 14, 2015)

There is a big difference between a state wildlife area and other state managed areas.
The Loma boat ramp is not a state wildlife area. It is managed by the BLM. We do need a park pass is we want to utilize other state park amenities, like the boat ramps at Corn Lake, Connected Lakes, and the brand new ramps in Fruita here in the Grand Valley. We can bike or walk through these areas but not sure about others.
You've always needed a license to fish anywhere in Colorado - probably in any state.


----------



## IntrepidXJ (Jun 27, 2008)

Actually, the Loma boat ramp is on a parcel owned by "COLORADO GAME FISH & PARKS"

http://adventr.co/files/SWA.jpg

And it is indeed a SWA: https://cpw.state.co.us/swa/Loma Boat Launch SWA



smhoeher said:


> There is a big difference between a state wildlife area and other state managed areas.
> The Loma boat ramp is not a state wildlife area. It is managed by the BLM. We do need a park pass is we want to utilize other state park amenities, like the boat ramps at Corn Lake, Connected Lakes, and the brand new ramps in Fruita here in the Grand Valley. We can bike or walk through these areas but not sure about others.
> You've always needed a license to fish anywhere in Colorado - probably in any state.


----------



## smhoeher (Jun 14, 2015)

I stand corrected. Thanks. Should have checked my sources.


----------



## stinginrivers (Oct 18, 2003)

Please do not shoot the messenger here as I know this is probably going to be unpopular, but I just called CPW to verify if you launch upstream from loma like at the state park and simply float through their Loma State Wildlife area, you DO need the fishing or hunting license as well.

I have no idea how they would check or verify that unless you pulled over at Loma, or CPW starts patrolling that area and does license checks.

But that is the skinny for the new law, all adults putting in or floating past loma need licenses.


----------



## Bleugrass (Feb 5, 2018)

stinginrivers said:


> Please do not shoot the messenger here as I know this is probably going to be unpopular, but I just called CPW to verify if you launch upstream from loma like at the state park and simply float through their Loma State Wildlife area, you DO need the fishing or hunting license as well.
> 
> I have no idea how they would check or verify that unless you pulled over at Loma, or CPW starts patrolling that area and does license checks.
> 
> But that is the skinny for the new law, all adults putting in or floating past loma need licenses.


Really interesting. CPW's online map shows the SWA boundary in the middle of the river. So if you pull into Loma to use the john or float too close to the ramp you're in the SWA and need a license, but if you're way off to river left you're clear. :roll:


----------



## kengore (May 29, 2008)

OK, I am really confused now. 

I called the Grand Junction BLM office and they told me the fishing license requirement will not go into effect until next year. AND that I could launch at Loma this July without one. Perhaps BLM is out of the loop? They manage the ramp don't they?

Any one have first hand knowledge?


----------



## villagelightsmith (Feb 17, 2016)

Yep. "All persons." Every. Stinkin'. One of us. The expressed intention on Colorado's website is to reduce non-hunting/fishing usage in areas set aside for those sports. As a LIFE-long hunter/fisherman and lover of landforms and waters, I understand how this could happen. There are so very many pressures AGAINST the "blood sports" that have been tolerated, and now somebody finally sees fit to push back. When those among us spread the bad-mouth about the others' use of the land, this is the foreseeable, predictable, and repeatable result. Those bad-mouthers and perpetually unhappy activists are NOT our Friends! They now have the hunter/fisher folk pushing back to carve out an exclusive preserve for their own little clubs. And it isn't just this one little piece. Read the regs.
The requirement will not go into effect for a year or so, in order that nobody gets upset right off. By kicking that can down the road a piece, people are less upset about it. I'm here to tell you, it's just as urgent as if it happened over the whole state (_or the whole West!_) and happened _yesterday_. That's how things are taken from us.
The Imperial nature of States will see this as another potential revenue grab for their greedy selves, and you know how that will go over in the Bureaucracies! Kinda like punching a hole in the bottom of Grand Coulee Dam, then trying to plug the durned thing.
I've sat by in silence while vegans and others bad-mouth these sports around many "campfires," increasingly among my guests and acquaintances. I can see 80 and 90 years coming over my own personal horizon, and hope to pass those numbers like Stirling Moss or Dale Earnhardt reaching for the redline. 
We've all seen litter-box fights over such things as motorized use on rivers and most everything else people can tangle over, but there's one thing we all need, and one thing we all better agree upon: _access._ Unless we can agree to allow other people's access to the resource of downhill-running water, we're _all_ whipped.
I believe we've heard the first shot fired. And we've got our work cut out for us. Those who watched have seen it before; once a scintilla of access or freedom is lost to Government or Grabbers, Heaven itself will have a job to get it back. Now, _sic'em!_


----------



## jonseim (May 27, 2006)

I can see both sides of this. Managing wildlife is majority supported by the Pittman Robertson Act as a tax on hunting and fishing equipment, licenses, etc. Managing them for other users is an uphill battle, especially in CO, which is growing larger every moment with people that want to change to how it was where they came from.
Colorado is a hunting and fishing state and accounts for quite a bit of income for many months a year for small towns. 

I like access, I like to hunt, fish, recreate and just enjoy! 

See you on the river, I might be hunting, rafting, or both. 

Heading to AK this fall to float and hunt Caribou, putting two of my favorite things together. Should be fun, and yes I have a fishing license.


----------



## ArgoCat (May 14, 2007)

*Loma Boat Ramp*

Yep. CPW property to the middle of the river. See Mesa County GIS here:

https://emap.mesacounty.us/assessor_lookup/Assessor_Parcel_Report.aspx?Account=R085474

One hefty launch fee especially since the order says anyone over 18 years of age has to posses a 1-day license or annual. Pays to use Rimrock shuttle and launch at their boat ramp. The only problem is right after high water when it is a mud pit. Hate to say this, but I would rather give them money then adhere to an unreasonable policy in an area that has some really great fishing and hunting...NOT. Perhaps they should just impose a reasonable launch fee on every permit, which should be easy to do as it is al controlled through Rec.gov.


----------



## jbolson (Apr 6, 2005)

This really sucks. I take pride in Colorado's usual even handed approach to things, but this is wrong on so many levels.


----------



## kengore (May 29, 2008)

If I interpret the various fishing license options correctly.

It looks like you can get a resident single day license for $10.75. 
They will waive the Habitat stamp for your first 2 days. 
So eleven bucks a head more or less? 
$16.94 for a non-resident.


----------



## yesimapirate (Oct 18, 2010)

My assumption would be that this policy was on the desk of, and approved by, the lawmakers prior to COVIID times. With the safer-at-home logic still in place, anyone that's not a resident of the area is supposed to avoid contact with locals at all costs, right? I know that the verbiage on this new policy is saying they will "educate" first before writing tickets, but I think it would be in law enforcers' best interest to not send any of us river rats into the local gas stations or walmarts to pick up a license and risk more spread of the virus. 

Just opinion, but my guess is this won't be enforced too often (if at all) until things COVIID related are officially back to as close to normal as we'll get.

All the same, I guess I should pick up that annual fishing license I've been meaning to get.


----------



## BLM Ruby Horsethief (Dec 21, 2011)

Good Morning! 

The Loma Boat Launch is not a BLM managed launch. We do provide check in's and the occasional LE support but the ramp is in fact a CPW managed State Wildlife area. Feel free to give us a call with any questions! 970-244-3000


----------



## PoppyOscar (Jul 8, 2012)

Colorado should combine a State Wild Life license with a search and rescue fee. I'd be good with that as I'm not a fisher person.


----------



## caverdan (Aug 27, 2004)

You would think that a CPW parks pass would work like it does at the reservoirs in the state. You don't need a fishing license to launch on any of the lakes they manage.


----------



## jonseim (May 27, 2006)

PoppyOscar said:


> Colorado should combine a State Wild Life license with a search and rescue fee. I'd be good with that as I'm not a fisher person.


When you buy a hunting and I believe a fishing license, there is a search and rescue fee attached. I don’t remember as I buy both each year.


----------



## smhoeher (Jun 14, 2015)

I've been a life long fisherman and hunter and support the intents of the new regulations. I feel that there should be exceptions and than the Loma boat ramp is one of the exceptions. An adversarial relationship with the CFW will not solve anything. Discussion and compromise will be the only way to solve our legitimate challenges.


----------



## Beeks (Aug 22, 2011)

caverdan said:


> You would think that a CPW parks pass would work like it does at the reservoirs in the state. You don't need a fishing license to launch on any of the lakes they manage.


Pretty sure that you do now....


----------



## Bleugrass (Feb 5, 2018)

Beeks said:


> Pretty sure that you do now....


Agreed. The CPW links provided above make it pretty clear that all of the SWAs listed in the State Recreation Lands Brochure will be subject to the new regulation.


----------



## Kirby (Aug 14, 2013)

So if you put in at Rimrock to float Ruby everyone needs a fishing license?


----------



## QuietHunter (Jun 8, 2010)

Pretty sure the same laws that apply to "Navigable waterways", private land and all apply to the ability to float past Loma. As long as you don't touch the ground you don't need a license. I would suspect the same for those floating the Gunnison from Delta as it goes through the middle of a real Wildlife area.


----------



## billhoblitzell (Mar 20, 2017)

This fee now applies to boaters running Dowd Chute on the Eagle River and using the scramble trail and CDOT pull-out parking at the River Run bus stop.


----------



## co_bjread (Oct 26, 2004)

So, did anyone else notice on the map of the Loma SWA that the other side of the river is the Horsetooth Canyon SWA? That map makes it look like there is a narrow passage between the 2, better bring your GPS. As a hunter also, this regulation doesn't bother me that much, as these lands don't have another source of funding, and most of the ones I have seen really are just for wildlife recreation. Loma is a bit of a weird one, as wildlife recreation seems like a minor use of it. 

I like the float through suggestion, but also wondered if they treated it like a State Park, and placed one of their credit card readers at the parking lot, and charged $9 to park there, like the others is there would be as much push back. 

I think we need to convince the BLM it is in everyone's best interest if the BLM buys the Loma SWA.


----------



## Matt329 (Jun 11, 2004)

Why isn't there any CPW signage at Loma?


Posts: 1

1 minute ago
Why no CPW signage at Loma boat ramp?
I was just there and all signage indicates this is a BLM resource. Absolutely nothing regarding it being CPW land. The BLM has extensive signage...a Stop sign at the gate stating necessity for permits, extensive "display" map at the launch showing campsites, permit information etc. I'm attempting to be a responsible user, but a user should not have to download a detailed state parcel map to determine who manages what land especially when the public signage says nothing about CPW and gives every indication it's BLM land.


----------



## rafterflyfisher (Jun 26, 2020)

*Clarification on license requirements for SWA's like Loma*

I contacted a CPW official and this was his reply about the change at the Loma Boat Ramp (and other SWA's)lease bear with me because I want to give you a full answer including relevant history and background.

Colorado’s SWAs were originally acquired, and are managed today, primarily to restore, conserve, manage and enhance wildlife and wildlife habitat. Some of the important habitats protected by SWAs include wintering areas for big game, calving and fawning areas for big game, spawning habitat for fish, and nesting habitat for a variety of birds. These properties were also acquired to provide compatible wildlife recreation for hunters and anglers. 

The funds used to acquire these areas were derived from the sale of state hunting and fishing licenses. 

Historically, SWAs have been used by some people who did not hunt or fish for activities like wildlife watching, hiking, etc. At one time, those uses were limited enough that they remained compatible with the purposes for which the SWAs were acquired. Unfortunately, as Colorado’s population has grown and physically expanded into closer proximity with many of these SWAs, public uses have increased and are reaching the point where they are not compatible with the original wildlife purpose. Furthermore, these other public uses have placed increasing pressure on the property infrastructure and habitat, resulting in wildlife being pushed off the properties, habitat degradation and increased costs for CPW.

In some extreme cases, certain hunting programs had to be discontinued due to conflicts with users who did not purchase hunting and fishing licenses and were using SWAs for non-wildlife related activities like dog walking, running, etc. We do not believe it is fair to ask hunters and anglers to forego hunting and fishing opportunities because other uses are becoming incompatible. Nor do we believe it is fair to ask anglers and hunters to pay the increased costs for management and operation of these areas resulting from these other uses.
The change was made by the CPW Commission after studying how other states manage their State Wildlife Areas. Some states that require a valid hunting or fishing license to access State Wildlife Areas include: Louisiana, Oklahoma, Tennessee, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Delaware, South Carolina and North Carolina. 

The license requirement is an effort to limit multi-use recreation on these properties, not encourage it. While hikers, photographers, birders and others may, in fact, be recreating by watching wildlife, only those with a hunting or fishing license are contributing to the purchase and maintenance of these properties. 

A parks pass is not the same as a hunting or fishing license. Funds generated by the parks side of the agency are strictly segregated from the wildlife (hunting/fishing) side. When you buy a Colorado hunting or fishing license, you are contributing directly to wildlife conservation.

CPW's income from hunting and fishing licenses supports all wildlife programs in Colorado, including: programs for nongame, threatened, and endangered species, as well as hatcheries, habitat protection, education, law enforcement, wildlife research, big-game and small-game management, fisheries and aquatic management, and more. That is why a parks pass is not adequate. 

All proper and valid hunting and/or fishing licenses will be acceptable for access to SWAs for the license year from April 1 through March 31 of the following year. A 1-day and/or 5-day fishing license would ONLY be valid the day(s) specified on the license.

Here are the current 2020 prices of resident licenses that are most cost-effective: Adult fishing, $35.17; small game, $30.11; combo small-game and fishing, $50.37. Senior fishing is $9.85. A person 18 years of age and older and under 65 years of age will also need a Habitat Stamp when applying for or purchasing a hunting or fishing license. No Habitat Stamp is required for applying for or purchasing a person’s first two one-day hunting or fishing licenses. The 2020 charge for a Habitat stamp is $10.13. That is a one-time charge in a 12-month period, so that is not charged on the purchase of another license(s). 

Hope this explanation answers your questions. If not, I'd suggest checking out this page on our website that goes into greater detail about the decision: https://cpw.state.co.us/Documents/LandWater/SWA/License-Requirements-SWA-STL-Access-FAQ.pdf

Best,

Bill Vogrin


----------



## ejeannette (Aug 3, 2006)

So if you do a 1 night, 2 day trip and launch at Loma do you need a 2 day fishing license?


----------



## Riverwild (Jun 19, 2015)

Anyone know where all this landed. I seem to remember that this wasn't going into effect for a year or so at the time. Just trying to get some up to date beta.

Thanks.


----------



## Bleugrass (Feb 5, 2018)

Riverwild said:


> Anyone know where all this landed. I seem to remember that this wasn't going into effect for a year or so at the time. Just trying to get some up to date beta.
> 
> Thanks.


Per the CPW website, Loma and other SWAs will require fees starting 5/1/2021. I haven't been to Loma yet this year, so I'm not sure if there have been any signs installed or other changes that reflect this.


----------



## villagelightsmith (Feb 17, 2016)

So, as long as we're going to be charged and required to obtain individual "permissiones" to enter these publicly owned "State" lands, we'd might as well kill some fish. And thus, the State Fish and Wildlife people had better make the fishing worth the while for all of us who enjoy the rivers and canyons for other reasons. Think you can do that, Colorado?


----------



## villagelightsmith (Feb 17, 2016)

smhoeher said:


> I've been a life long fisherman and hunter and support the intents of the new regulations. I feel that there should be exceptions and than the Loma boat ramp is one of the exceptions. An adversarial relationship with the CFW will not solve anything. Discussion and compromise will be the only way to solve our legitimate challenges.


When the Imperial State fires a shot across the bow of all users of publicly owned lands and waters, it hardly calls toward discussion and reasonable compromise. Truth be told, it stems from a mentality that needs to be de-funded in its entirety, regardless of whether we carry a fishing pole or a paddle in our hands.


----------



## villagelightsmith (Feb 17, 2016)

I cannot say this strongly enough. Please ... hear me out ...
Why do we love the canyons and the rivers, the mountains and the land?
The incremental building of Power and the State's micro-management has all been seen before. The Camel's Nose has never taken us anywhere we want to go. There are plenty of places that are full of petty control freaks. If we do not want to live in such places we should be loud and active in purging them from our legislatures. Compromise only means surrendering ground to those who would ever tighten their needless, onerous control over all things without regard for those harmless, silent souls who only want to be left alone. I can tolerate the occasional dung-heap a lot more easily than I can tolerate even one that is wearing a badge and a Baden-Powell hat. I love our rivers because they are largely free of such intrusion. Keeping the bureaucracy off the rivers and the land provides us with a much needed respite, an island of solace, a place in time and space that at least provides the illusion of escape from the oppressive nature of The State's "presence." Enforcing the "Presence" of The State is like spreading the map of our state and taking a butter-knife, spreading a large, soft, warm turd across the land that so many have once loved. And once it is so defiled, it becomes very hard to tear it loose from the self-perpetuating metastasis of the Power of The State.


----------



## villagelightsmith (Feb 17, 2016)

rafterflyfisher said:


> *Clarification on license requirements for SWA's like Loma*
> 
> I contacted a CPW official and this was his reply about the change at the Loma Boat Ramp (and other SWA's)lease bear with me because I want to give you a full answer including relevant history and background.
> 
> ...


So, what you're saying is that those people who do not engage in hunting and fishing are otherwise so narrow-mindedly opposed to those whose pleasure and usage of the land differs from their own, that they are able to close it off, even to themselves? Hilarious! What _DO_ they teach children in school these days? Reminds me of the drunk who pissed in his own boots and crapped in his own hat because he couldn't find the toilet.


----------

