HM 94

cantgetdrawn · Mar 6, 2017

I just noticed this. I doubt that much will come of it but I do see it as a way to keep the pressure on G&F for those of us who are unhappy with the way LO tags are distributed. I had not heard of it until now and it seems it will be heard in House Energy, Environment, and Natural Resources committee tomorrow March 7th.
https://www.nmlegis.gov/Sessions/17 Regular/memorials/house/HM094.pdf

NMBOWHNTR27 · Mar 6, 2017

Maybe for antelope, but not elk. I would probably vote against it unless they allowed public hunters to hunt on private land. Part of the reason IMO is maybe some outfitters that lease the tags from land owners or the land owners themselves don't use all the tags is for quality. I wouldn't want more elk tags in the public draw and have more competition on public land. It would take away the quality of hunt. IMO game and fish in a few units need to take away tags. For better age class and quality of hunt.

hank4elk · Mar 6, 2017

Cut off your nose to spite your face bill.
I have enough problems with idiots shooting my windmill from adjacent BLM lands.My water is for wildlife. But there is no way in hell I'll just let average NM Joe willy nilly set foot on my property.
There would not be half the elk spread across NM without NMG&F working with landowners.
Go ahead.See how much access you get where I live.

hank4elk · Mar 8, 2017

Got an e-mail from my Congresswoman.It has been rolled.
Take that to mean sent back to commitee? For now.

NMBOWHNTR27 · Mar 8, 2017

What's that mean lol? Rolled forward or backward???

live4muleys · Mar 8, 2017

Rolled is "not heard that day". Moved to a further date. This bill has not passed a single committee. It has not been heard in a single committee yet.

NMBOWHNTR27 · Mar 8, 2017

>Rolled is "not heard that day".
>Moved to a further date.
>This bill has not passed
>a single committee. It has
>not been heard in a
>single committee yet.

Good!