New Mexico Elk Hunters (Non Residents)

[Gila]

Non residents who do not want to hunk elk using an outfitter/guide. Completely do it yourself with a tag drawn from the public draw. If so, would you be willing to pay a tag increase of around $100 or some other amount to fund access to private property. Outfitters/guides need not participate. Thank you!

 

[WRO]

Don’t we already get it for free with the eplus system?

Secondly how do you propose to make up for the loss in revenue to NMFG via non resident vs resident tags by removing the eplus tags and private only tags?

 

[yfarm]

Don’t we already get it for free with the eplus system?

Secondly how do you propose to make up for the loss in revenue to NMFG via non resident vs resident tags by removing the eplus tags and private only tags?

I am confused, I believe he is proposing an additional fee to NR to go into a fund to pay for access to private land. Now the NR private land hunter pays the owner or his intermediary for that access then pays for the license to hunt there. Given what I hear bandied about for those “ lease” fees suspect it would cost more than $100 to make the landowner even with the current system unless there were a large number of NRs entering this draw. There is nothing free in the current system.

 

[WRO]

I am confused, I believe he is proposing an additional fee to NR to go into a fund to pay for access to private land. Now the NR private land hunter pays the owner or his intermediary for that access then pays for the license to hunt there. Given what I hear bandied about for those “ lease” fees suspect it would cost more than $100 to make the landowner even with the current system unless there were a large number of NRs entering this draw. There is nothing free in the current system.

Actually there’s a ton of private land currently accessible to all hunters with a unit wide tag, across the state via the eplus program, shot bulls in it both times I drew tags.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[yfarm]

Understood.

 

[WRO]

Understood.

It’s a longer play here with the op not telling the whole story, his goal is to end uw landowner tags and cut the NR allocation from 15% to 10% and remove the opportunity to buy vouchers because life isn’t fair.

Then there’s no consideration for the financial impact from both state revenue and loss of employment. When actual costs are quoted it becomes crickets because the plan isn’t financially feasible at all.

And no I’m not an outfitter, I just like to buy tags when I don’t have other options.

 

[wapitibob]

NM wildlife federation nonsense.

 

[Ten Bears]

Enough of this BS.

It’s getting concerning that the mods allow BHA/NMWF to anonymously make things up and pass it off as helping the poor DIY hunter.

It’s exactly as what many others repeatedly have to post in response to this guys crap.

 

[Gila]

I am confused, I believe he is proposing an additional fee to NR to go into a fund to pay for access to private land. Now the NR private land hunter pays the owner or his intermediary for that access then pays for the license to hunt there. Given what I hear bandied about for those “ lease” fees suspect it would cost more than $100 to make the landowner even with the current system unless there were a large number of NRs entering this draw. There is nothing free in the current system.

Today, only 6% of the tags in the public draw are allocated to non-residents without an outfitter contract. Those 6% have access to only the private properties in a GMU that have unit wide landowner tags. Conversely, all Unit Wide land owner tag holders can hunt any public lands in the GMU with their choice of seasons. Some private properties (most) are ranch only and don’t accept public access. 10% of the tags in the public draw are allocated to non-residents that have an outfitter contract. Most of the e-plus private property is either owned by outfitters, contracted out to outfitters, or have their own outfitters. Most of the non-resident tags end up with an outfitter. Those hunts go for 8K -20K plus. Almost half of all tags for a GMU go to non-residents.

With the proposed E-Plus system, land owner tags would go away. Those tags would go into the public draw. There would not be any tags allocated to a non-resident with an outfitter contract. The tag allocation would be 90% residents….10% non-residents like in Wyoming. The landowner would be offered a program to allow public hunting access for critical habitat and if they meet certain other criteria. Very similar to South Dakota’s walk-in program. South Dakota has enrolled most of the best pronghorn and mule deer private ranches for public hunting (1.3 million acres).

If the e-plus landowner doesn’t want to opt into the program then they would be allowed to book through a hunting service like Infinite Outdoors to a hunter that is a valid tag holder. There are other like services available to the landowner. In some states if the ranch is large enough and there actually are resident elk herds, the land owner can apply for tags for his immediate family.

I wouldn’t believe these guys on here…they are a bit math challenged.

Infinite Outdoors

The movement that's making private land access more affordable for all.

infiniteoutdoorsusa.com

 

[Gila]

Enough of this BS.

It’s getting concerning that the mods allow BHA/NMWF to anonymously make things up and pass it off as helping the poor DIY hunter.

It’s exactly as what many others repeatedly have to post in response to this guys crap.

You are the one trolling and making things up.

 

[TheYukiYama]

Landowner tags that can be resold has always felt kind of wrong to me. Growing up in South Dakota, I definitely used and appreciated the walk in program. I do think there could be some NR price increases but honestly most tags in most states go to residents and tags are too cheap. I would support resident price increases in almost all states for draw hunts.

This said, your poll doesn't really ask if one would be willing to pay,, just if someone would like to diy elk hunt in NM... Poll should include more details regarding what you are actually suggesting, otherwise it is meaningless.

 

[Ten Bears]

You are the one trolling and making things up.

Come on man. Does everyone need to go through this with every couple weeks ?

Is everyone else trolling too ?

You turn existing posts in your LO tag and guide BS. You start your own posts about LO and guides. It never ends.

You give different scenarios mentioning only parts of your goal and hide your intent.
You lie about who you represent or omit it completely.
You misrepresent the facts over and over and get called out for it.
You delete your own posts.

Luckily a handful of folks on here check you ever. single. time.

 

[Gila]

Landowner tags that can be resold has always felt kind of wrong to me. Growing up in South Dakota, I definitely used and appreciated the walk in program. I do think there could be some NR price increases but honestly most tags in most states go to residents and tags are too cheap. I would support resident price increases in almost all states for draw hunts.

This said, your poll doesn't really ask if one would be willing to pay,, just if someone would like to diy elk hunt in NM... Poll should include more details regarding what you are actually suggesting, otherwise it is meaningless.

South Dakota Wildlife Federation was one of the architects of the walk-in program. What details would you like to see?

 

[Gila]

Come on man. Does everyone need to go through this with every couple weeks ?

Is everyone else trolling too ?

You turn existing posts in your LO tag and guide BS. You start your own posts about LO and guides. It never ends.

You give different scenarios mentioning only parts of your goal and hide your intent.
You lie about who you represent or omit it completely.
You misrepresent the facts over and over and get called out for it.
You delete your own posts.

Luckily a handful of folks on here check you ever. single. time.

Yes there are a few trolls besides you…I do not represent any conservation group…donated to dozens of groups though. And even started some local chapters but have not been an officer of any group since 1994. But you are right about one thing…it will never end until the privatization of our hunting ends.

You don’t need to read my posts you know…because I have had it with your troll replies. Anyway I am ignoring your content. Reading your crap isn’t worth my time.

 

[WRO]

Today, only 6% of the tags in the public draw are allocated to non-residents without an outfitter contract. Those 6% have access to only the private properties in a GMU that have unit wide landowner tags. Conversely, all Unit Wide land owner tag holders can hunt any public lands in the GMU with their choice of seasons. Some private properties (most) are ranch only and don’t accept public access. 10% of the tags in the public draw are allocated to non-residents that have an outfitter contract. Most of the e-plus private property is either owned by outfitters, contracted out to outfitters, or have their own outfitters. Most of the non-resident tags end up with an outfitter. Those hunts go for 8K -20K plus. Almost half of all tags for a GMU go to non-residents.

With the proposed E-Plus system, land owner tags would go away. Those tags would go into the public draw. There would not be any tags allocated to a non-resident with an outfitter contract. The tag allocation would be 90% residents….10% non-residents like in Wyoming. The landowner would be offered a program to allow public hunting access for critical habitat and if they meet certain other criteria. Very similar to South Dakota’s walk-in program. South Dakota has enrolled most of the best pronghorn and mule deer private ranches for public hunting (1.3 million acres).

If the e-plus landowner doesn’t want to opt into the program then they would be allowed to book through a hunting service like Infinite Outdoors to a hunter that is a valid tag holder. There are other like services available to the landowner. In some states if the ranch is large enough and there actually are resident elk herds, the land owner can apply for tags for his immediate family.

I wouldn’t believe these guys on here…they are a bit math challenged.

Infinite Outdoors

The movement that's making private land access more affordable for all.

infiniteoutdoorsusa.com

So do you work for infinite outdoors and are doing business development?

How do you intend to deal with the massive amount of lost revenue to nmfg with your proposal?

Also how do you propose to compensate all the lost income to ranchers, guides, and outfitters?

Or just **** them and their businesses is your solution?

You do realize your dream screws non residents and selling at as anything else is misleading at best.

It’s funny your anti privatization of hunting, but you support influencers that whore out our public resources for a profit.

 

[WRO]

Enough of this BS.

It’s getting concerning that the mods allow BHA/NMWF to anonymously make things up and pass it off as helping the poor DIY hunter.

It’s exactly as what many others repeatedly have to post in response to this guys crap.

He’s also doing business development for infinite outdoors..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ten Bears]

Yes there are a few trolls besides you…I do not represent any conservation group…donated to dozens of groups though. And even started some local chapters but have not been an officer of any group since 1994. But you are right about one thing…it will never end until the privatization of our hunting ends.

You don’t need to read my posts you know…because I have had it with your troll replies. Anyway I am ignoring your content. Reading your crap isn’t worth my time.

I’ll keep responding and calling you out for your well noted lies on here every time.

I am sure all the “trolls” will do the same.

Ignore it all you want. It’s gonna be there.

 

[Ten Bears]

He’s also doing business development for infinite outdoors..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That’s hilarious. Thanks for that one.

 

[WRO]

Yes there are a few trolls besides you…I do not represent any conservation group…donated to dozens of groups though. And even started some local chapters but have not been an officer of any group since 1994. But you are right about one thing…it will never end until the privatization of our hunting ends.

You don’t need to read my posts you know…because I have had it with your troll replies. Anyway I am ignoring your content. Reading your crap isn’t worth my time.

Trolling would be saying “look it’s the business development guy from infinite out doors that won gold at the special Olympics”

Your agenda being challenged isn’t trolling.

 

[BBob]

Then there’s no consideration for the financial impact from both state revenue and loss of employment. When actual costs are quoted it becomes crickets because the plan isn’t financially feasible at all.

Exactly

There's no way in hell the NM legislature will ever vote for what he's proposing.