NM landowner tags under fire

[Btaylor]

Are the ranchers trying create habitat or raise a hay crop? Both seem to have been argued, as has making a profit off of elk tags. So first off, the elk dont belong to the rancher. Second if the rancher's goal is to be a profitable hay farmer, hay is the asset. If someone or something is stealing your assets, might want to do something about that. NRCS has programs to co-op the cost of fencing. If a business anywhere else cant protect its goods for sale, they will go out of business. They dont get to catch and sale the thief to the highest bidder but that's what seems to be SOP for LO tags. I applaud NM for not having preference points and all that crap but the system is not perfect. Habitat is important, private property rights are without question important and the animals are obviously important but so is opportunity. Looking for ways to keep opportunity available at a reasonable cost isnt socialist if the animal belongs to the people.

 

[KHNC]

No you are just too jealous of money to understand or see the evolution of certain depredations programs.

I’m multi generational ranch/farm owner that has seen hundreds of animals laid over and wasted because of conflict. When I see a programs that not only buys tolerance and also opens up access to hunting public, with no waste of wildlife, I view that as HUGE win for wildlife and over all conservation.

so talk all the smack you want, but you are clearly ignorant on this subject.

Ok Senor Juan, you clearly know all about me too. I assure you im not the slightest bit jealous of money. If i was dumb enough to pay 20k for a LO tag, i would do it. I am far from that.

 

[yfarm]

So NM goes to OTC for private land and draw for public land? Landowners are free to charge what the market will bear, or maybe all otc with no limits on tags? Private ranches become refuges ala Wyoming while public is overrun with people. Hunted 51 one year 1st rifle, unit was overrun with people, utv and atvs everywhere, can’t imagine OTC in that unit.

 

[cuerro viejo]

Ok Senor Juan, you clearly know all about me too. I assure you im not the slightest bit jealous of money. If i was dumb enough to pay 20k for a LO tag, i would do it. I am far from that.

You whole original objection as been what landowners sale the vouchers for..

 

[KHNC]

You whole original objection as been what landowners sale the vouchers for..

Correct, you finally got something right. That doesnt mean im jealous of rich people. Im not just thinking of myself here. Although i think its dumb as fk what those bull tags sell for.

 

[Fredcohunter]

I never said it did. I was responding to a comment about half the plates saying Texas.
No the land owner does not have to reside in NM to be a part of the Eplus program. But they do have to reside there to be considered RESIDENTS. You want to speak about draw break downs and land owner tags its germane to the conversation where the landowner resides as it relates to RES or NON RES.

thanks for the response. I guess the thought I had was does it really matter if a landowner is resident or non resident to place land in the program and receive a landowner tag. My thought is that it shouldnt really matter since its the land in the program that is at issue. As a non resident I have never hunted NM, I would like to but dont know if I ever will. I have hunted with guides and diy and have enjoyed both. As a hunter I am always interested in learning more about programs that promote habitat and open access, even if they are less than perfect.

 

[OKHunter84]

You said:



So, when government has the most resources, they get the most. The very definition of State Socialism...

You're taking it out of context and gaslighting.

If you own land, that's a resource and if you have money, that is also a resource.

If you get tags to do with as you please because you provide habitat for publicly owned game animals, that is you getting something for the resources you have. If you have 20k extra money to spend on an elk tag, that's you spending your resources earned on whatever you want. Both of these things are not state socialism. Private property wouldn't exist in state socialism.

We're kinda getting off in the weeds.

 

[ddowning]

While we are having the cost/riches/assets discussion along with the capitalism/socialism (communism) discussion, it is important to consider the principal of laissez-faire in capitalism. The system of "captilism" we have now is very much compromised by government interference. The extent of such is so great that the brightest minds in economics will argue in perpetuity as to the quantitative effect on our society.

 

[satchamo]

Landowner tags are fine but they should be just that - the landowners tags. We have landowner tags in IL and they’re only allowed to be issued to landowners and dependents living under the same roof and they cannot be sold or transferred. It’s just a way for the state to save tax paying landowners a few bucks to hunt their own land.

The idea that New Mexico just lets landowners sell them to the highest bidder is wild to me.

 

[cuerro viejo]

Landowner tags are fine but they should be just that - the landowners tags. We have landowner tags in IL and they’re only allowed to be issued to landowners and dependents living under the same roof and they cannot be sold or transferred. It’s just a way for the state to save tax paying landowners a few bucks to hunt their own land.

The idea that New Mexico just lets landowners sell them to the highest bidder is wild to me.

It’s not just NM, add in CO, UT, Okla, Tx, NV, Ca, Idaho, KS, MT, OR, WA, and I’m sure I’m missing a couple more.

I wouldn’t have thought CO had bighorn landowner tags, then I read up a couple of those ranch are ones that footed the bill for relocation. It also a pretty cool they do guided public draw hunts also for res on a rotation.

LO tags are pretty common in migratory states

 

[RS_Non-Res]

Let's not pretend that what works in the midwest works in NM. NM is different. For example, water doesn't fall from the sky in NM. A humid day is 15% RH. The live pine trees growing in the forests of NM are drier than the kiln-dried lumber in Home Depot.

New Mexico has a land area of 121,280 square miles and a water area of 281 square miles (that's not a typo). Thats 0.2% (zero point two percent) wet. Illinois takes up about 58k square miles and and 2000 square miles of inland lakes and wetlands (not Lake Michigan). Thats about 3.5% wet. So... IL has 1/2 the land area and 10x the water, or about 15 times more surface water as NM. There are 4 marinas in NM and 3 are on the same reservoir (and its currently lower than it has ever been since it's first filling).

NM is different. There's never going to be too many game animals.

NM ranch owners could, if they chose to, kill all the big game in NM in a few months, simply by fencing the tiny part of their property that holds surface water because publicly accessible water is limited to several large reservoirs, in a few drainages.

If "landowner tags" were to be valid only on private land, it would quickly devolve into draw tags only being valid on public land. In NM there's lots of public land 34k square miles but the little bit of water that NM has is on private land. So...one guess where the deer and elk and antelope are.

The eplus system works for wildlife, even if it doesn't work for every hunter or landowner.

 

[ELKMO]

Seems like SOP for NM….the number one welfare state.