As Howler said, I think the Colorado DOW knows best about what number of elk is appropriate. I think this question involves mediating the interests of several parties -- private landowners who may bear the brunt of damages caused by wintering elk, state agencies that may either reimburse private landowners for damages caused by wintering elk or have to provide food for wintering elk, hunters who want to have better/more elk hunting opportunities, etc.

I am a non-resident and a novice to elk hunting. I will hunt elk for the first time in first rifle season this year in GMU 75. Still, it appears to me that there is a lot to like in the Colorado elk hunting picture. If you want a high quality hunt for a big trophy animal, there are some limited entry units which provide, at least in some way, for this interest. If you want a high probability of hunting elk, albeit with low expectations for a trophy bull or exclusive hunting privileges, this desire is also satisfied by the present system. If you are willing to work harder, you can improve your hunt -- for example by going into a remote wilderness area. While this is not my interest, for those who want higher quality bulls, the standards might be raised for bulls from a minimum of 4 points per antler to 5 points per antler or even 6 points per antler (I acknowledge that there may be reasons against this change -- for example, too many animals dieing due to natural causes before they achieve the minimum number of points, this is a notional idea).

I think if I wanted to focus on a problem area to address I would lookat the issue ofhunter access to quality hunting lands. While I do not have this problem with my planned hunting area this year, I have read that some people have difficulty accessing public lands because of a strategy of buying up private land bordering public lands, essentially removing these lands from use as commons by enclosing them. This seems a greater issue for concern to me than the Colorado elk herd management philosophies.