65° A Few Clouds
See complete forecast
You are not logged in. (Log in • Create account)
29 October 2010
at 12:18 p.m.
I don't understand?!?!
Why is is ok to manage deer outside the city limits, but it's not ok to manage them within? It's no different. If their numbers are too high in a certain area, they need to be reduced. Nobody is talking about totally eliminating them, but they do need to be managed, something that has not been done at all. I suspect the lack of management is what has contributed to the over population of diseased deer.
28 October 2010
at 5:18 p.m.
I don't live in town, I live in Ridgeview. We moved into our current home over 30 years ago when there were only 4 houses here and surrounded by fields. Even then we didn't have a problem with deer in our yard, and didn't for about 20 years. They stayed in the fields around us, and did not bother our newly planted yard. On the overall, I don't think Ridgeview has as big a deer problem as downtown Craig does. I believe the deer in town have simply acclimated to humans. If they are indeed being fed by people, that needs to stop immediately and anyone feeding them should be heavily fined! Deer are wild and should remain that way, feeding them is harmful.
No longer have kids or dogs at home. Deer do jump fences and bucks get a bit crazy during the rut. I was challenged by one last fall in my own yard.
I love the wildlife here, but there needs to be some distance between humans and wildlife. There was in the past, and I'm not sure what has changed, other than the deer find the food in yards easier pickings than foraging in the fields. So in that respect, I do believe the deer in town have developed some very bad habits.
28 October 2010
at 1:27 a.m.
I'm going to guess that most of the responses on here are from people who do not have yards. It's not a mere $20 worth of petunias that they eat in a yard, they are capable of eating hundreds if not thousands of $$ worth of shrubs, trees, perennials, annuals, etc., Not to mention the damage they do when they rub their velvet off their antlers. My yard has scarred trees, as do many in Craig.
And before anybody gets excited and tells me that deer were here before I was, I'll tell you that I have lived in my house for 30+ years and it has not been a problem until the last 10 years or so.
Take a look around Craig, we're not a metropolitan area - we're surrounded by thousands of acres of open land. The problem is that we've allowed the deer to become comfortable in town and they became too tame and used to people. They do not belong in town.
And for all the comments that they're not dangerous, I disagree. Deer can be very dangerous during their fall rut and when does have new fawns. They are very capable of stomping a dog to death. What do you think would happen if a child innocently approached a threatened deer?
Don't get me wrong, I thoroughly enjoy all our wildlife. It's always been a thrill to have them so close to watch, but they need to be retrained so they stay on the outskirts of town where they belong. Sadly the deer that have made downtown Craig their home, don't know anything else. They've been allowed to raise many generations in town.
Lastly, the deer I see wandering around downtown really do not look healthy. Don't know if it's all the inbreeding or their diet of flowers and shrubbery.
I'm glad the problem is finally being addressed.
18 October 2010
at 1:43 p.m.
I've always supported a lodging tax, what I don't support is the high rate that is proposed. I was ok with the 1.9% and would have gone along with 2.9% - but not 6.9%! Does Craig really want to be known for the highest rate in the state? People do pay attention to tax rates and do shop around - I do.
I encourage everyone to vote NO! This bill needs to be revised with a more sensible tax rate.
15 October 2010
at 9:50 p.m.
wellwell, There were quite a few items that I felt should not be funded by lodging tax dollars, one is anything EDP related. Most of the items in the “plan” sounded more like a very extravagant wish list. A $25,000 website? Obviously not planning on using a local web designer.
The lodging tax dollars should be used to promote tourism - and that's it. Though it's been argued that a rec center could bring in or enhance tourism, it really is more for local use than anything else. It may be appropriate to funnel a small amount of the tax funds into that type of project if it includes an events center. I don't believe it should be funded solely with lodging tax dollars.
And by the way, according to the tax rate documents included in the “plan” - Craig would indeed be the highest taxed municipality in Colorado. Denver comes in with a total of 13.25% and Craig's would be 14.05%!
14 October 2010
at 9:33 p.m.
I did read it, all of it. Regardless of how you sugar coat this, it's still a very steep tax increase.
14 October 2010
at 2:53 p.m.
I agree with the Loopers 100%! I'm not opposed to a reasonable lodging tax rate - the keyword here is reasonable! 6.9% is NOT reasonable!
Our city council members and mayor did receive feedback from the local lodging industry, they chose to ignore it. Now this needs to be voted down, and they need to go back to the drawing board and come up with a more sensible plan.
Does Craig really want a reputation for having some of the highest tax rates in the state? The prevaiing idea of this being free money and it's no big deal since we are not paying for it is very distasteful to me and should be to every citizen in this town.
30 September 2010
at 1:15 a.m.
The lodging industry needs to wake up and start “educating” the public. I tell anyone and everyone about this tax and how obscene the rate is, and I'm not associated with the lodging industry. But generally the public does not seem to care because they think it's “free” money for Craig.
I'm opposed to this tax primarily because too many entities are already overtaxing, and fiscal responsibility must start on a local level. vote no!! Maybe next time around the city will be more sensible and go for a more reasonable lodging tax rate. Keep in mind that most communities in Colorado don't even have a lodging tax, so 1.9-2.9% is more than enough.
25 August 2010
at 3:18 p.m.
This article like all previous articles on the lodging tax is misleading. You failed to state the total tax would be 14.05%! The 6.9% is ADDED to the state, county, etc., taxes. Craig would have the highest lodging tax in Colorado, and indeed it would be higher than many other tourist destinations.
I agree nimrod, stopping an expanding government has to stop first in our own backyard. VOTE NO!!
14 August 2010
at 11:32 p.m.
I never said my relatives didn't want to pay, I said I didn't want to pay the extra $5.
Lodging taxes affect everyone, not just corporations. Imposing a high tax just to get even with corporations is ridiculous.
or see results without voting.
This site is best viewed with
or the latest version of Internet Explorer
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2013 Craig Daily Press. All rights reserved.