General Discussion n: (Will NM ever have a straight 80/20 or 90/10 Draw)

[Mike76]

The 80-20 or 90-10 base would be great for not just the Nonresident but also the Resident.
I can't see why anyone would complain about that. The issue with the LO is that in my opinion when receiving the number tags issued to them, is fine but! Your issued so many tags for elk on your property.
Then take the Rich hunter's money, then have them hunt the property for which those tags were given, YOUR PROPERTY.
It is not a unit wide property tag. Nonresidents and Residents hunter put in for those unit Hunts.
Then we have the Outfitters Draw. So why in the hell does an outfitter have a better Draw % than an out of state hunter? If that one makes any Damn sense. Therefore, if anyone cannot see the fact that a straight across the board draw is better for everyone. and I mean everyone. then lets here it. (Straight Across the Board 80/20 - 90/10) There won't be any crying then because everyone has a better chance to Draw. Every State should follow suit every one of them.
This one should be fun.

 

[Stubborn_bowhunter]

Incoming "don't cry because you can't afford LO tags." And every variation of that posts.

As a NM resident. I believe the E plus needs to be revamped entirely.
Outfitter pool should be killed off to weed out the shady outfitters that use it for welfare. Good outfitters will retain clients. NR should get those tags allocated to their pool.

Tax breaks and/or other incentives could be given to landowners to open land to hunting if the elk are a problem.

Even if they raise tag fees for everyone to compensate. Providing more opportunities for average people to hunt should be a priority.

Technically NMGF only gets the license fees. Everything else is being pocketed on those 10k unguided tags.

 

[Mike76]

I have heard so many things pertaining to the situation.
The outfitter pool only in my mind is ridiculous to say the least. They should put in for the draw like everyone else, on the straight and narrow line. Why should they get a benefit to the draw because there an outfitter why?
Like you stubborn_bowhunter I have heard so many horror stories about outfitters/guides its actually crazy.
The sad thing is nothing is done about it.
For Both sides of this thread pertaining to the 90-10 split across the board, I don't think any Nonresident would complain whatsoever and surely the Residents would not complain. Every single one of us would have a better chance to draw a tag. After the outfitters draw pool the average joe Nonresident is damn lucky to have 0.5% up to possibly 1.5% maybe 2% if they are lucky. Its literally crazy percentages the way it works for both sides.
If NMGF only gets the License fees, as you say then that's on them as they help put this plan together in some way or another.
The landowner will not open land in most cases for us to hunt as they draw too much money on the tags allocated to them. The big dollars would not be there from the rich and famous if they opened their land to us when someone pays the high dollar to hunt there. More power to the landowner.
But I do not agree that a landowner if outfitters work out of their property should have a unit wide tag for both.
My biggest complaint is the outfitters having more of the draw than the NR. Like you said there are huge issues with the outfitters. We all hear it more than I like. But! as most will say it is what it is. LOL
This was put together to see what most hunters on both sides of the isle have to say about it.
Thanks for the reply

 

[Z Barebow]

Put your wishes in one hand and your cr@p in the other and see which one fills up first.

Special interest groups have always been VERY strong in NM.

NM used to have a 78/10/12 split for elk tags. (R/NR DIY/Outfitter) Residents wanted more tags for residents (Understandable) Some well intentioned folks fought for a 84/16 split (If my memory serves)

In the 9th inning of legislative "bargaining", 84/6/10 was passed. (You can figure out which special interest group grabbed the ear of legislators) The DIY guy has always been at the back of the line in NM (Along with other states) I don't see any indication this will change in the future.

 

[Mike76]

As long as we see that it will not change for the better of the Hunters your right, it probably will not.
This is where the resident and nonresident alike have to come together as one and quit the squabble between the two.
We are all hunters, and yes from other states looking out for the best for all hunters. If we sit back and complain as I have heard many and I do mean many it will not.
every time it is brought up, the outfitter come into the mix. So, someone please tell me why? an outfitter has more say in a draw than the normal joe Nonresident.
Along with that there are the big powerful landowners Dollars like the Turner/Sinatra Ranches who own literally hundreds of thousands of acres in NM and CO against all hunting.
It's about the Special Interest groups Dollar making these decisions and until the hunters come together it will continue as much as I hate to say it.
I can see the argument with a 78/10/12 which is ridiculous as the state is taking away from their own residents.
Next 84/16 again I can see where it would be a fight between the two. It has to benefit both sides to work at all. It seems like the special interest groups are basically controlling the state and taking away from their own residents and don't stand up for them.
As said to pacifies the situation it has to be fair for all Residents and Nonresidents and keep the damn outfitters out of it. The statistics show the outfitter draw is high with many out of staters entering then having to pay that huge dollar to hunt with unqualified outfitters. Thats the Big complain I hear all the damn time.
Each state should be between the Residents and Nonresidents and the Landowner who always will get so many of the tags off the % of land owned. In my mind if a ranch does not allow any hunting at all then why should they be issued a tags, I will tell you why to keep hunters from entering the field. The State owns the animals with in it they need to start acting like it.
It's not just NM, CO, UT, OR, WY, AZ, WA. My take and only Mine. 80-20 90-10 across the board
Sorry if you do not like what I have to say.

 

[Gila]

The first step to change is discussing the issues amongst all of the “stake holders”. In NM where elk tags in general are very limited, a 90-10 split makes sense. I don’t think point systems are working out very well. People who enter the public draw in all of the elk states that have a point system are complaining about point creep and other issues. Really, NM outfitters don’t make any investment into management of the resource. An outfitter is a business that makes money off of elk hunters. No different than a motel or restaurant. So in essence, outfitters cannot be considered “stake holders” therefore they should not be allocated any tags what-so-ever!

BUT it is all about the money when we are dealing with the outfitters and that is a tough row to hoe as always. The E-Plus system has turned out to be a quagmire of adversity. I don’t have a problem with Land Owner’s tags. Unit Wide tags are another matter. The larger ranches have their own outfitter business or they contract out to another outfitter. Once again the outfitters are making money off a public resource with little to no investment into the managment of that public resource. I don’t have a problem with DGF paying the ranchers fair market value for the UW tags but those tags belong in the public draw! The way it is now some of those UW tags are resold three or four times and that is just ridiculous!

 

[Mike76]

Hi there Gila.. Very well said. I agree 100% of those facts. Thank you, sir, for your reply.

 

[Gila]

As long as we see that it will not change for the better of the Hunters your right, it probably will not.
This is where the resident and nonresident alike have to come together as one and quit the squabble between the two.
We are all hunters, and yes from other states looking out for the best for all hunters. If we sit back and complain as I have heard many and I do mean many it will not.
every time it is brought up, the outfitter come into the mix. So, someone please tell me why? an outfitter has more say in a draw than the normal joe Nonresident.
Along with that there are the big powerful landowners Dollars like the Turner/Sinatra Ranches who own literally hundreds of thousands of acres in NM and CO against all hunting.
It's about the Special Interest groups Dollar making these decisions and until the hunters come together it will continue as much as I hate to say it.
I can see the argument with a 78/10/12 which is ridiculous as the state is taking away from their own residents.
Next 84/16 again I can see where it would be a fight between the two. It has to benefit both sides to work at all. It seems like the special interest groups are basically controlling the state and taking away from their own residents and don't stand up for them.
As said to pacifies the situation it has to be fair for all Residents and Nonresidents and keep the damn outfitters out of it. The statistics show the outfitter draw is high with many out of staters entering then having to pay that huge dollar to hunt with unqualified outfitters. Thats the Big complain I hear all the damn time.
Each state should be between the Residents and Nonresidents and the Landowner who always will get so many of the tags off the % of land owned. In my mind if a ranch does not allow any hunting at all then why should they be issued a tags, I will tell you why to keep hunters from entering the field. The State owns the animals with in it they need to start acting like it.
It's not just NM, CO, UT, OR, WY, AZ, WA. My take and only Mine. 80-20 90-10 across the board
Sorry if you do not like what I have to say.

Actually, oligarchs own millions of acres in New Mexico.

 

[Gila]

Even if they raise tag fees for everyone to compensate. Providing more opportunities for average people to hunt should be a priority.

That is a key that could unlock the door to better hunter opportunity! I don’t think $500 For a resident tag would be too much…$1,000 maybe for a non-resident. Better than paying $5,000 to $15,000 for a UW wide tag!

 

[Mike76]

With the many that are or have complained about the issue at hand, is nothing compared to the Point system. The only guy that does not complain are those with many points left to use. Once those points are gone you start to hear their complaints also.
Why would any one person complain about the 90/10 split? Every single person has the same chance to draw.
In Utah you had better have a minimum of 24+ and higher in some units to draw their premium tags. CO and WY are two others. The States would actually make more dollars and yes more hunters applying, but we are all on the same page sort of speak.
Now why would anyone complain having a straight across the board chance to draw a tag like that.
That means in most cases another 24+ years to draw. some will say well we have a chance to draw without all those points and the answer in some cases is yes depending on the number of non res tags and that % is like 2% if you're lucky.
Gila makes good sense on the issue at hand. The Landowner to me should get as they do something from the State and in some cases Federal Government. As they can get subsidized if their crops are down as a write off. one way or another they are subsidized. But if used for hunting their land that's their priority.
My belief is though, if they are not using those tags for an income on their own property for hunting then sorry Charlie, your just taking tags away from a local res hunter that may need that tag to support his family. Another way to look at it is if a Landowner doesn't use the tag, then that tag could go to a local individual within that unit. There are many ways to look at these situations just to make it right for the hunter, Resident and Nonresident. Only my take.

 

[roadrunner]

The only guy that does not complain are those with many points left to use.

And most of the time, the guy that decries the point system is the one that pulls a [decent] tag every year.

The ones who don't pull a tag but every 7 to 10 yrs will say they don't want a point system, but silently are not opposed to it. They just don't want to get roasted on an internet hunting forum .
_________________________________________

The best outcome for NM is a 90/10 split. Outfitters; go earn your business like everyone else. (I know too many people that have abused the outfitter pool to their own benefit.). The other portion would be to figure some kind of dollar value to "lost graze" and assign that fee to to the overall tag price all the while putting RO/UW tags into the draw.

LO gets just compensation, R's and NR's get more options to apply for and draw tags.

It's not rocket science.

Edit: imposing a 1 year waiting period between tags for all non OIL species would be more than adequately fair in sharing the public resouce...

 

[mooretitan]

I dont see it getting any better for a NR

 

[hunting1]

It won't matter after the wolves move south. On a series note the landowners hold to much power. It was a battle to get what we have now. NM is still the best system in the west.

 

[Gila]

It won't matter after the wolves move south. On a series note the landowners hold to much power. It was a battle to get what we have now. NM is still the best system in the west.

We already have wolves in the South. Don’t ya mean wolves going North? A female crossed I-40 last month…but most of them don’t go very far. I don’t see wolves becoming a problem on public lands anyway. So far the calf recruitment in the Mexican Wolf units is remaining the the same or even increasing.

 

[Mike76]

I wrote a small Piece. pertains to the wolves and Bears that was put in my ear from a lady who hunted guided the Gila's 16B for 55 years.
Miss Becky Cambell guide/outfitter, Ranch Owner near the Gila Hot springs with wilderness all around her ranch.
What this young lady whom I call Miss Becky, was so interesting to chat with and with all the other sighting made some sense if not a lot of sense.
She indicated over the years she has seen the Wolves' sightings killing as getting less each season.
Asked why? in most cases the packs get larger, and the wolves packs become stronger.
She then indicated her thought were that the food in the wilderness is getting less as each season comes around. So, the food is less.
Again, her thoughts were that the Bear population in the wilderness are becoming so abundant that when the cow elk have birthed, the After Birth is so strong that the bears with their Keene scent attack the herd and do a job on the elk population killing the newborn elk calves.
She also indicated that her last outfitter job was this year in 23. She says is that the elk populations are in her mind low enough that she is all but done outfitting. If I don't feel I'm doing my job for my clients, then it's time to be done. Now that is an outfitter and not about the Money.
This lady Knows the wilderness well, so very well. as one hunter that ran into her on the trail, said he was turned around, so she invited him into camp then directed him on his way the next morning. He said with blow down and the obstacles she knew ways around it all. Here is a lady that was born and brought up in the wilderness, so you can listen or come to your own conclusion.
I have also heard from many about the numbers of bear sightings in the wilderness.

 

[roadrunner]

NM is still the best system in the west.

No, it's really UT that does. UT's issue is not offering enough tags because of irresponsible season dates for things like bull elk any legal weapon in Sept of all times, or too many rifle tags and not enough archery or muzzleloader tags.

UT could revise theirs a though because the dynamic of the draw process and applicant count against tag availability has changed drastically.

 

[Gila]

In the wilderness areas the bears do get thick because they aren’t being hunted very much. The calf recruitment shows that there isn’t a bear problem or any other predator issues in the Gila units. Having said that, too many bear units rarely make their quotas. There is a fall archery season but no bait allowed so the hunt usually ends up an exercise of futility. I would like to see a spring archery season using bait. Before anyone jumps on the ethical bandwagon, NM has a fall “running of the dogs” season. The black bear mating season is during the summer.

 

[Brooks]

I hate the politics in New Mexico but I love the elk hunting! Don’t think it could get much better. New Mexico G&F must be doing something right people from all over trying for tags. Not only is the elk hunting tops in the country you can buy a LO tag if you can’t draw. Win Win! I’ll be putting in for the draw soon and if I don’t draw I’ll be calling LO’s .

 

[BBob]

Then we have the Outfitters Draw. So why in the hell does an outfitter have a better Draw % than an out of state hunter? If that one makes any Damn sense.

This goes way back to USO/Taulman lobbying his buddy’s in the corrupt state legislature into giving him and his pals a leg up on everyone else. It’s the old “I’ll scratch your back if you scratch mine ”.

 

[Gila]

I hate the politics in New Mexico but I love the elk hunting! Don’t think it could get much better. New Mexico G&F must be doing something right people from all over trying for tags. Not only is the elk hunting tops in the country you can buy a LO tag if you can’t draw. Win Win! I’ll be putting in for the draw soon and if I don’t draw I’ll be calling LO’s .

As a resident if you want to hunt anything every year, you have to buy a LO tag. You might get lucky on a draw once in a while. Not very many residents can afford 5-15K for a bull tag. For pronghorn in a decent unit $2,500. For a decent mule deer tag 4K. When there are just as many UW tags as there are public draw tags, then something is awry! The quintessential question needs to be asked: “How much of all this money goes back into managing the public resource?”. The answer is very little!