New Mexico public draw

[CMF]

To allocate more tags to residents and non-residents alike, we ,re suggesting that 90% of the tags go to residents and 10% of the tags be allocated to non-residents.

You can't allocate more tags to both groups without actually increasing the number of tags. You are just moving people from one pool to the other. Since 90% of the guided pool is nonresidents, you'd have to do a 85/15 split to keep the status quo allocation to nonresidents and residents. Just like WRO mentioned...

It would depend on the specific unit (if those rules remain the same) but broadly speaking the DIY NR tag pool would increase by about 4%. I can get behind that.

That sounds good on the surface, but it doesn't math out. You would actually see a decline in odds..
At least, with some basic assumptions that:
If the guide pool goes away, those people still apply in either the r or nr pool
The data stays similar to that of previous years.

If the guided/outfitter pool is eliminated and replaced with a straight 90/10 split (90% of all tags to a resident-only pool and 10% to a nonresident-only pool), nonresident odds would worsen significantly.

Here’s the exact impact, based on the actual 2026 draw numbers and the assumption that everyone who applied in the guided pool simply reapplies in their correct residency category (guided nonresidents move to the new nonresident pool; guided residents move to the new resident pool):

• Current situation (2026 actual results)Total tags issued: 60,719Nonresidents actually drew: 9,059 tags (≈14.92% of total)→ This came from the 6% DIY nonresident pool (≈3,643 tags) + the portion of the 10% guided pool that went to nonresidents (≈5,416 tags).
• New 90/10 structureResident pool: 90% = 54,647 tagsNonresident pool: 10% = 6,072 tags
• Key point: The total number of nonresident applicants does not change under your assumption. All previous nonresident applicants (DIY + guided) would now compete together in the single 10% nonresident pool.

Result for nonresidents:They would receive only 6,072 tags instead of 9,059 while facing the same number of applicants.

Their overall success rate (odds) would therefore drop to ≈67% of current odds (a reduction of about 33%). Exact calculation:6,072 ÷ 9,059 ≈ 0.670 (or 67.0%).

This is an overall average across the entire big-game draw.

• On popular species like elk and deer, where the guided pool is used almost exclusively by nonresidents, the drop would be very close to this 33% reduction.
• On species like bighorn sheep (where more residents use the guided pool), the impact on nonresidents would be slightly less severe, but still a net loss of tags.

In short: Nonresidents would be competing for roughly one-third fewer tags in a single larger pool, making every hunt code noticeably harder to draw. Residents, by contrast, would see their pool grow from ~85% to 90% of tags, improving their overall odds.

 

[Gila]

You can't allocate more tags to both groups without actually increasing the number of tags. You are just moving people from one pool to the other. Since 90% of the guided pool is nonresidents, you'd have to do a 85/15 split to keep the status quo allocation to nonresidents and residents. Just like WRO mentioned...

10 percent are allocated to the outfitter pool. It is probably going away. The state doesn’t have to allocate any tags to non-residents. But they certainly will change the weight. 90% residents and 10% non-residents is suggested by many. South Dakota doesn’t give out any elk tags to non-residents. Most of the elk hunting there is on the National Forests. States can do whatever their state legislature wants them to do. You could fill up blackboards on 4 walls with your math and it won’t change the residents vote. We know how many times we see red which is more often than not.

 

[CMF]

10 percent are allocated to the outfitter pool. It is probably going away. The state doesn’t have to allocate any tags to non-residents. But they certainly will change the weight. 90% residents and 10% non-residents is suggested by many. South Dakota doesn’t give out any elk tags to non-residents. Most of the elk hunting there is on the National Forests. States can do whatever their state legislature wants them to do. You could fill up blackboards on 4 walls with your math and it won’t change the residents vote. We know how many times we see red which is more often than not.

Your statement "To allocate more tags to residents and non-residents alike, we are suggesting..." is false, that's a fact. We could fill up blackboards with your false statements from this and other threads.

There is no deception here. That’s ludicrous.

That's exactly what it is when you knowingly make false statement.


I can understand residents pushing for more tags, but do you really think you're going to start seeing green every year if you go from 84% allocation to %100? No, you're still going to see red, cause you have no sensible draw strategy.

 

[cal30_sniper]

I take it you haven’t spent much time there..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You take it wrong. But I wouldn’t expect you to let facts get in the way of the rabid slinging contest you and @Gila are once again mutually involved in at the expense of everyone else on here.

 

[Jethro]

You could fill up blackboards on 4 walls with your math and it won’t change the residents vote.

I don’t believe @CMF is trying to change the residents votes. What he is saying is don’t come on here claiming 90/10 in the public draw will improve draw odds for both res and nr. That’s impossible without an increase in tags or a decrease in applicants. Don’t need a blackboard for that math.

 

[WRO]

You take it wrong. But I wouldn’t expect you to let facts get in the way of the rabid slinging contest you and @Gila are once again mutually involved in at the expense of everyone else on here.

Too bad there’s wasn’t an option to scroll by or ignore a user or users..

Which I should do to honestly..

Thanks for the reality check.

 

[cal30_sniper]

Too bad there’s wasn’t an option to scroll by or ignore a user or users..

As expected.

 

[cuerro viejo]

Eliminate land owner tags that are transferable, get rid of the outfitter pool and split the tags 90% to residents and 10% to nonresidents. That would effectively double resident odds and triple nonresident DIY odds. The landowner/outfitter pool in NM getting access to 55% of the pie is nuts and problem #1.

You get rid of Eplus you are closing access to a lot of public land that’s accessible through Eplus UW properties. And on RO tags the Sec of Ag will get pushed to give out depredation tags any way

50% of NM is private land, a lot of the high number eplus tag numbers are Ranch only on private land with limited unit public . Most the opponents to the Eplus often use numbers from private land units like 55’s .

It’s funny a good friend of mine is resident and normally his family of three pulls no less than 4 tags a year. They have 5 this year.

If NM was a PP state how many times would a resident pull a 16a elk tag? Maybe twice in a life time. Some peoples exceptions just arent realistic

 

[Kurts86]

You get rid of Eplus you are closing access to a lot of public land that’s accessible through Eplus UW properties. And on RO tags the Sec of Ag will get pushed to give out depredation tags any way

50% of NM is private land, a lot of the high number eplus tag numbers are Ranch only on private land with limited unit public . Most the opponents to the Eplus often use numbers from private land units like 55’s .

It’s funny a good friend of mine is resident and normally his family of three pulls no less than 4 tags a year. They have 5 this year.

If NM was a PP state how many times would a resident pull a 16a elk tag? Maybe twice in a life time. Some peoples exceptions just arent realistic

Private land heavy units will logistically favor outfitters and favorable draw odds regardless of how advantaged they are in the tag system. Plenty of Eastern Wyoming or Eastern Colorado are the same way. They are hunts you can do every year or 2 without a true outfitter carve out.

The biggest issue are the private land tags valid on private land that get sold for $$$$$ and outfitting occurs on desirable public.

Anecdotally as a non resident I know one person that’s ever pulled a NR DIY tag, I’ve never pulled one in a decade of applying for easier units but every C suite executive I talk to that hunts goes to a NM frequently on an outfitter/land owner tag elk hunt. For NR’s the pool to go outfitted in NM versus DIY is 18 times larger.

New Mexico will always be hard to draw and I have no illusions that it’s easy. For that reason alone hunters will contract with an outfitter if they draw because almost any hunt in that state is once a decade to once in a lifetime for any NR. Just look at Arizona there is a thriving outfitting business there despite no advantage in the draw for being outfitted.

 

[WRO]

Private land heavy units will logistically favor outfitters and favorable draw odds regardless of how advantaged they are in the tag system. Plenty of Eastern Wyoming or Eastern Colorado are the same way. They are hunts you can do every year or 2 without a true outfitter carve out.

The biggest issue are the private land tags valid on private land that get sold for $$$$$ and outfitting occurs on desirable public.

Anecdotally as a non resident I know one person that’s ever pulled a NR DIY tag, I’ve never pulled one in a decade of applying for easier units but every C suite executive I talk to that hunts goes to a NM frequently on an outfitter/land owner tag elk hunt. For NR’s the pool to go outfitted in NM versus DIY is 18 times larger.

New Mexico will always be hard to draw and I have no illusions that it’s easy. For that reason alone hunters will contract with an outfitter if they draw because almost any hunt in that state is once a decade to once in a lifetime for any NR. Just look at Arizona there is a thriving outfitting business there despite no advantage in the draw for being outfitted.

My concern is tolerance for elk from land owners. They’re hard on fences, and compete with cattle.

When they have no value they get killed, nm has the most heinous laws on the books with regards to landowners and elk damage. What’s going to stop a lo from just slaughtering a herd that’s in their alfalfa, laws not going to.

And I’m not blind to the abuses either, but if its an scr with a big pivot, and they get to make 20k on elk tags for example, probably less likely to kill a pile in July even they’re causing damage, if there’s no value they’ll just get murdered.

It’s not just nm this occurs in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Gila]

You take it wrong. But I wouldn’t expect you to let facts get in the way of the rabid slinging contest you and @Gila are once again mutually involved in at the expense of everyone else on here.

He trolls every thread I start or am part of, doesn’t matter what the subject matter is. Fraud doesn’t stop him either. He forged the AP CEO’s signature on a fake donation receipt on my behalf. I try not to reply to his manure but sometimes when he and 10 bruins gang up with dis-information, it is difficult not to respond. Actually in this thread I was just trying to give a heads up for residents to contact their state legislators and support them to look into changing the system. BHA is providing a form letter to make it easier to contact them which I provided. The discussion about the issues is going on over here:

Post in thread 'new mexicans not happy with res / non res splits'

Friday at 3:29 PM

The public hunters is better off if the landowner kills all the elk. As opposed to the landowner profiting off public wildlife.

You really think this?
Like they used to do.
Wholesale murder anything that walks across private and then left to rot
You need some history lessons on how pronghorn nearly went extinct.
And some history lessons on conservation through commerce.

• Reburn

• 

 

[cal30_sniper]

He trolls every thread I start or am part of, doesn’t matter what the subject matter is. Fraud doesn’t stop him either. He forged the AP CEO’s signature on a fake donation receipt on my behalf. I try not to reply to his manure but sometimes when he and 10 bruins gang up with dis-information, it is difficult not to respond. Actually in this thread I was just trying to give a heads up for residents to contact their state legislators and support them to look into changing the system. BHA is providing a form letter to make it easier to contact them which I provided. The discussion about the issues is going on over here:

Post in thread 'new mexicans not happy with res / non res splits'

Friday at 3:29 PM

The public hunters is better off if the landowner kills all the elk. As opposed to the landowner profiting off public wildlife.

You really think this?
Like they used to do.
Wholesale murder anything that walks across private and then left to rot
You need some history lessons on how pronghorn nearly went extinct.
And some history lessons on conservation through commerce.

• Reburn

• 

It takes two to tango.

 

[Kurts86]

My concern is tolerance for elk from land owners. They’re hard on fences, and compete with cattle.

When they have no value they get killed, nm has the most heinous laws on the books with regards to landowners and elk damage. What’s going to stop a lo from just slaughtering a herd that’s in their alfalfa, laws not going to.

And I’m not blind to the abuses either, but if its an scr with a big pivot, and they get to make 20k on elk tags for example, probably less likely to kill a pile in July even they’re causing damage, if there’s no value they’ll just get murdered.

It’s not just nm this occurs in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Does this occur in a world where a trophy bull is worth $20k, a normal bull $10k and a cow worth $2500 or is this something that happened decades ago?

The value of elk is only going up especially compared to the economic viability of most ranching/ag operations.

 

[WRO]

He trolls every thread I start or am part of, doesn’t matter what the subject matter is. Fraud doesn’t stop him either. He forged the AP CEO’s signature on a fake donation receipt on my behalf. I try not to reply to his manure but sometimes when he and 10 bruins gang up with dis-information, it is difficult not to respond. Actually in this thread I was just trying to give a heads up for residents to contact their state legislators and support them to look into changing the system. BHA is providing a form letter to make it easier to contact them which I provided. The discussion about the issues is going on over here:

Post in thread 'new mexicans not happy with res / non res splits'

Friday at 3:29 PM

The public hunters is better off if the landowner kills all the elk. As opposed to the landowner profiting off public wildlife.

You really think this?
Like they used to do.
Wholesale murder anything that walks across private and then left to rot
You need some history lessons on how pronghorn nearly went extinct.
And some history lessons on conservation through commerce.

• Reburn

• 

I didn’t forge anything, I donated 25.00 in your honor.

My kids really enjoyed the packet they sent out.

If asking questions to make a lobbyist justify their position is trolling then I’m guilty.

I don’t have any minions or bruins, although the comment does seem to correlate with my Tin foil hat theory.

Maybe it means that even though you think you speak for everyone, there’s atleast 11 of us that you don’t speak for.

Anyways I’m out for a while.

 

[WRO]

Does this occur in a world where a trophy bull is worth $20k, a normal bull $10k and a cow worth $2500 or is this something that happened decades ago?

The value of elk is only going up especially compared to the economic viability of most ranching/ag operations.

It does a lot more than you think. Other states where there’s no value or the lo chooses not to participate it happens a bunch. 2 years ago a land owner in Oregon killed 30 and left them to rot. I have a friend that kill 15+ a year at night with thermals as a volunteer for fish and game.

If you look at AZ, the number 1 limiting factor of elk populations currently is agricultural interests not habitat.

It takes a big place to hold elk all year long. It’s really bad in other states but there’s articles out there on Jennings law being used in nm. The scrs will just kill them in many cases.

 

[Timberline001]

Michigan resident. Always DIY

Who took the time to learn the state and meet some great friends doing so.

Hunt almost every year there and love the place.

Then why fight for outfitters and less tags for yourself?

 

[Gila]

I didn’t forge anything, I donated 25.00 in your honor.

My kids really enjoyed the packet they sent out.

If asking questions to make a lobbyist justify their position is trolling then I’m guilty.

I don’t have any minions or bruins, although the comment does seem to correlate with my Tin foil hat theory.

Maybe it means that even though you think you speak for everyone, there’s atleast 11 of us that you don’t speak for.

Anyways I’m out for a while.

Liar!

 

[cuerro viejo]

Private land heavy units will logistically favor outfitters and favorable draw odds regardless of how advantaged they are in the tag system. Plenty of Eastern Wyoming or Eastern Colorado are the same way. They are hunts you can do every year or 2 without a true outfitter carve out.

The biggest issue are the private land tags valid on private land that get sold for $$$$$ and outfitting occurs on desirable public.

Anecdotally as a non resident I know one person that’s ever pulled a NR DIY tag, I’ve never pulled one in a decade of applying for easier units but every C suite executive I talk to that hunts goes to a NM frequently on an outfitter/land owner tag elk hunt. For NR’s the pool to go outfitted in NM versus DIY is 18 times larger.

New Mexico will always be hard to draw and I have no illusions that it’s easy. For that reason alone hunters will contract with an outfitter if they draw because almost any hunt in that state is once a decade to once in a lifetime for any NR. Just look at Arizona there is a thriving outfitting business there despite no advantage in the draw for being outfitted.

the large private land units aren’t relative to any draw because they are prominently private land. Funny, No one has an issue with unlimited private land mule deer tags in NM…. But they cry about private land elk tags

Antidotal, I’ve never not drawn a big game Tag in NM in the NR pool, and that includes two OIL tags.

 

[cuerro viejo]

Then why fight for outfitters and less tags for yourself?

That’s the funny thing, the expectation as a NR is no different in NM then any other state. Are you chasing hunting opportunity or trophy opportunity?

 

[Ten Bears]

Then why fight for outfitters and less tags for yourself?

I am not fighting for outfitters.

I am living in the reality that this will do nothing or make things worse for Non Residents

and the slimy person pushing this for the past 4 years with hidden agendas sure doesn’t help