BHA- eplus

NMBOWHNTR27 · Apr 20, 2018

Just wanna see what people think about back country hunters and anglers putting This out; it was on face book.

BHA:
Did you draw an elk tag this year? Everyone knows there's lots of competition for those tags, but did you know that only half of the roughly 40,000 elk tags available in New Mexico go into the draw? The other half are given directly to landowners who enroll in the E-PLUS program managed by NMDGF.
The board of NM Backcountry Hunters & Anglers encourages Game and Fish to tackle this issue in 2018. We want to see a major overhaul of the E-PLUS program, specifically aimed at making more elk tags available through the draw in the future.
We encourage hunters like you to join NM BHA and add your voice to the growing chorus of New Mexico hunters who want a positive change in the elk draw.
Starting May 1, we will start a membership drive aimed at doubling or even tripling our numbers. We will give away a Yeti cooler and a guided fly fishing trip with Taos Fly Shop to some lucky new or renewing member. So hold your fire for now, but be ready on May 1 to join New Mexico Backcountry Hunters & Anglers. Then let's tackle the elk problem in New Mexico and see if we can't improve everyone's draw odds next year.

505 · Apr 20, 2018

73k apps last year for 22k public elk tags, everyone can't draw. Same old schtick. New faces crying.

Nobody mentions the number of LO tags that aren't converted. That's a figure that doesn't fit the agenda.

Sounds a lot like the old "landowners are stealing your tags, join NMWF".

The fact of the matter is, New Mexico's depredation program is broken. They can't pay damages for elk. NMDGF pays landowners depredation through LO tags.

If these orgs have that much of a beef with NMDGF and landowners, fix depredation (not just Jennings, make payments for depredation legal) and LO tags can be phased out.

I've told the last two exec directors of NMWF face to face to fix depredation, but they won't listen. More hunters get riled up when they say landowners are stealing your tags. More membership, more lobbying money, et al. Furthering political goals. Don't be a sucker.

Watch what happens when pronghorn goes OTC for LO, and draw tags start to suck. OMG, the greedy LO won't give me access. Pronghorn herd gets demolished. Another couple years of no spring rain and we won't have to worry about antelope hunts any more. The public tags will be next to nada.

Is that the end game for elk tags? LO gets OTC? Cut your nose off to spite your face?

And here we go

hank4elk · Apr 21, 2018

Ditto
I am a public lands hunter, landowner & BHA member,but will not support NMWF anymore.Might even quit BHA if they do not come up with a better solution than just blame greedy LO's.
Seems like a lot of folks want all the tags,twice the number of hunters on the same public lands & more locked gates.
The E-plus system does need some tweeks, but works.
Ask if I & the other LO's will just let the general public have open access to our lands.

elkhunternm_13 · Apr 21, 2018

Hank did you finally draw your elk tag?

NMPaul · Apr 21, 2018

LAST EDITED ON Apr-21-18 AT 06:13AM (MST)[p]I agree with Hank and 505.

If there is not a value to elk for LO the elk will be hammered. I am also getting a little tired of the division politics that NMWF uses. Trying to make hunters hate landowners and outfitters is the wrong move. As a political force hunters on their own in this state are like herding cats, pretty much impotent. I don't agree with landowners and outfitters on everything, but, they do much to protect hunting issues coming out of Santa Fe.

hank4elk · Apr 21, 2018

LAST EDITED ON Apr-21-18 AT 06:56AM (MST)[p]>Hank did you finally draw your
>elk tag?

LOL...nope,nada. But I gave my few LO tags to some deserving folks.

SLM · Apr 21, 2018

I'm not for doing away with E-plus completely, but it needs an overhaul. SCR needs to go away.

ORIONTHEHUNTER · Apr 21, 2018

As a non-resident I would much rather see the DIY non guided allocation go up

RoughCountry · Apr 21, 2018

Guys cry every year how the landowner tag program stole my tag. Hell I have been putting in for Arizona elk for 15 straight years and have never drawn a tag so should AZ put out more tags so I can draw easier ? NM has a good elk draw system IMO and everyone has an even chance.......Luck of the draw !! Don?t screw up a good thing go buy a landowner tag and go hunt elk.

NMBOWHNTR27 · Apr 21, 2018

LAST EDITED ON Apr-21-18 AT 10:45AM (MST)[p]Well if u care to comment it's on the New Mexico Chapter of Back Country hunters and anglers FB page. Seems to be a lot of people upset which is to be expected this time of year. I agree that maybe some tweaking does need to happen with the e-plus system, but my argument is the fact that there ?opportunity? units in the state already. I don't wanna have more hunters on the public land we already have. I like the ?quality? and the experiences we have hunting. I also like the quality or trophy(upper age class/maturity) quality of animals we hunt. I don't wanna lose this just award people with more tags. I've heard comments that they don't use 8,000 of the private tags or it's against the NA model of management because the LO program turns it into the European model of the ?kings deer.? Frankly, it kinda ticked me off.

NMBOWHNTR27 · Apr 21, 2018

It's pretty much a sh*t storm on the subject on FB.

hank4elk · Apr 21, 2018

>It's pretty much a sh*t storm
>on the subject on FB.
>

I just asked where they get the LO tags come OUT of the Draw allotment stuff and they can never answer it.Everyone does not apply for 50k,80k tags and the number drop to 40k or whatever, available right before the draw. BS is BS.
I am looking for reasonable answers to the LO tag tweak.

NMBOWHNTR27 · Apr 21, 2018

I seen that you had ask and no answer. I just think some of it is a bad idea.

TLowell02 · Apr 23, 2018

>>It's pretty much a sh*t storm
>>on the subject on FB.
>>
>
>I just asked where they get
>the LO tags come OUT
>of the Draw allotment stuff
>and they can never answer
>it.Everyone does not apply for
>50k,80k tags and the number
>drop to 40k or whatever,
>available right before the draw.
>BS is BS.
>I am looking for reasonable answers
>to the LO tag tweak.
>

Your question is one that I have never seen definitively answered. My understanding is tags are not immediately halved for landowners but rather each unit's elk population is estimated and then the proportion of private land that holds elk habitat is then used as the basis for determining the number of landowner tags. Do you have any idea if that is true?

hank4elk · Apr 23, 2018

>>>It's pretty much a sh*t storm
>>>on the subject on FB.
>>>
>>
>>I just asked where they get
>>the LO tags come OUT
>>of the Draw allotment stuff
>>and they can never answer
>>it.Everyone does not apply for
>>50k,80k tags and the number
>>drop to 40k or whatever,
>>available right before the draw.
>>BS is BS.
>>I am looking for reasonable answers
>>to the LO tag tweak.
>>
>
>Your question is one that I
>have never seen definitively answered.
>My understanding is tags are
>not immediately halved for landowners
>but rather each unit's elk
>population is estimated and then
>the proportion of private land
>that holds elk habitat is
>then used as the basis
>for determining the number of
>landowner tags. Do you have
>any idea if that is
>true?
It was & still is where I am. Carrying capacities & depredation included. We had most of our tags cut in half 3 yrs ago without warning & the draw was doubled. OK,elk numbers have grown. They say (NMG&F)they monitor things closely.I have sat in SF office with several of the Dept. heads at one time or another.
I have my doubts on how well things are under control personally. For instance,the simple ? that gets asked all the time,how come there are no maps of said LO UW property available to view ,that it says there is, & why is the said land locked to public hunters? Here's a personal one. What happened to half the maps & discriptions of my land/contract now missing from my file? I provided them when entering in program & they where there in Cruces office 6 yrs ago. 2 yrs ago in SF they were missing from my file. Simple clerical ##### is falling thru cracks I think. I could be wrong.I spent a career as LEO working with game dept's before.I go to meetings or did. I ask ?'s & never get answers. Maybe my questions,report poachers,report off road violators & bringing up stuff is why it seems I do not draw tags like I used to. Maybe it is more greedy greedies....

nmhunter01 · Apr 23, 2018

rockn9858 · Apr 23, 2018

I think the way to correct the SCR is to allow who ever wants to sign up into a CO-OP. that Acreage will be added up and signed up as unit wide tags. that money sold from the sale of the tags will go to the co-op and distributed how ever the co-op wants to divide it. it opens land and all SCR co-op members get a check every year instead of when ever they draw.

SLM · Apr 23, 2018

Why should anyone with 1,3,5,20 acres receive anything? A lot of those ?mini ranches? are what is eating up a lot of winter range in the West.

WapitiBob · Apr 23, 2018

LAST EDITED ON Apr-23-18 AT 08:43PM (MST)[p]"Sounds a lot like the old "landowners are stealing your tags, join NMWF"."

That's not a coincidence.

"I just asked where they get the LO tags come OUT of the Draw allotment stuff and they can never answer it."

Because the LO tags don't come out of the "public draw" and never have.

hank4elk · Apr 23, 2018

>LAST EDITED ON Apr-23-18
>AT 08:43?PM (MST)
>
>"Sounds a lot like the old
>"landowners are stealing your tags,
>join NMWF"."
>
>That's not a coincidence.
>
>
>"I just asked where they get
>the LO tags come OUT
>of the Draw allotment stuff
>and they can never answer
>it."
>
>Because the LO tags don't come
>out of the "public draw"
>and never have.

That's what I understand & have not seen any evidence to contrary ever from NMG&F.
Co-ops have worked with the outside COER program & opens up options for hunters.
I do not see how any place without tons of water & or year round feed for wildlife should be in program, with acreage less than 20.They could be fenced out that small.
There was a berry grower in Reserve who got tags for a few acres of berries that the elk always hammered.That place could have been fenced easy.They went out of business due to no pickers I heard.
I want to see a serious open discussion on this topic with facts or ideas that promote wildlife habitat & co-operation with all involved parties. That's why I have poked @ NMBHA & NMWF.I want them to SHOW ME. NMG&F too if I am mistaken on how the E-plus system works. I have every part I can find online from NMG&F E-plus programs & have met with the Dept heads of E-plus & Elk in person to talk about the programs & concerns. I am done with BHA & NMWF tho....

Reuben_Soady · Apr 24, 2018

The Small Contributing Ranches (SCRs) system is already managed like a coop by NMGF. There are a limited number of tags available to the SCR pool in each GMU. There is a lottery to allocate those tags among the SCRs where larger properties and properties with better resources (water & feed) have a better chance of drawing tags. The SCR tags are ranch only (RO) or unit wide (UW) under the same restrictions as the big ranches. For example, if my buddy's 20 acre property just outside the village of Cabezon ever draws a tag, it will be RO because it's outside the COER, he will have a hard time selling it, and he will likely never see an elk. Tags drawn on SCRs within the COER can be RO or UW.

I looked at an 80-acre property in GMU 51 that had a perennial creek, five ponds, and about 60 acres of pasture (and about 50 elk and four muley bucks on it when I visited). Historically that SCR received about one tag every two to three years. I would have taken the UW option on those tags, b/c people trespass on that property all the time.

I think the SCRs are not making out like bandits.

Ropinfool · Apr 24, 2018

the draw was good to me this year so I can't complain. I think the landowner system could use some overhaul. I wish all the hunts either public or private fall on the same dates. weapons by unit should be the same for public and private. I think in general we have too many hunts and the animals never get a break. I'm surprised that the G&F doesn't charge the land owners more for the tags since most go to out of staters and non residents have to pay more for public tags.

Muleman · Apr 24, 2018

I would like to see the unit wide land owner permits go away. All private land tags should be private land only. I am all for private land owners getting tags, they feed and provide habitat for elk. But allowing private land tags to go unit wide and hunt on public is BS. If a land owner doesn't have enough elk to hunt on there own land then they shouldn't be getting tags.

Everyone wants more tags in the public draw. So lets say for argument sake G&F puts 10,000 private land licenses and put them in the public draw. Where are you going to hunt these licenses? Amount of public land doesn't change, private land worth hunting will still charge big $ to hunt You would have to increase license in each unit thus driving quality down. The elk population in the Gila can easily sustain 400-500 more bull tags but the days of killing the big boys will be over.

G&F can put out a bunch more tags but it comes at a price, hunt quality and success goes down, just look at what Colorado is like.

Elk hunting is great in NM because there isn't a lot of tags.

hank4elk · Apr 24, 2018

LAST EDITED ON Apr-24-18 AT 03:19PM (MST)[p]Getting the LO authorization is the depredation pay in outside the COER units,or mine.You sell or give that number you get from G&F to hunter & they turn it into tag to hunt any weapon, any 5 consecutive days, from Oct 1st to Dec.31st. I did not ask for bow tags,but bows can be used,AW.NR & Res. fees in book apply for lic......that is the tag you will use.
The Sept. bow hunts are in high demand as are the new extended rifle tags in this unit.
Elk numbers here have exploded in 10 yrs.Still same amount or less of public lands to hunt as noted above.

BUGLEnmIN · Apr 24, 2018

I would agree I'd love to see uw landowner tags gone!!

380bull · Apr 24, 2018

I think the system does need some tweaking. I agree it is odd that the SCR program is even a thing, I would be willing to bet most small ranches provide little to no benefit to the wildlife! I think the landowners should receive tags for helping provide quality habitat for the wildlife. Many of the ranches make good money off the tags and it provides for their families, it would be a though sell to tell them the program is ending. It's not easy to make money on a cattle ranch in the desert southwest and the tags help them out. Many ranches I know put up a ton of money to maintain the roads on BLM and dirt tanks on BLM, this is not something they would have to do. And who benefits greatly from this?? The Wildlife and hunters! I know many of the ranches are not family owned anymore, but if they provide added benefit for the wildlife I feel this is a way to give back. Just some thoughts....

OCHO · Apr 25, 2018

What I would like to know is how many of the issues LO tags go unused? I used to go hard at trying to get tags and was shocked how many people wanted $5 - $7k or it would go to the trash!! So I definitely could see some better accounting and monitoring on this alone. I mean if LO complain about elk and get 20 tags but only sell 5 how should a LO be able to complain about this? I think this happens WAYYYY more than people believe.

The other thing is the LO very rarely have people hunt their land in most cases it's public on UW. What is the thought on that? As long as we are hunting elk and lowering tags that's sufficient? Kind of seams like if your ranch has elk issues or high numbers they should be hunted off that property and my experience has been they want to sell the tag to you but not so big on hunting my lands. Kind of interesting how the demand for tags goes for some LO yet unwilling to do much other then sell the tag IF they sell the tag.

live4muleys · Apr 25, 2018

I was not a fan of the UW tags until recently. I was made to think about it deeper. I am now not sure how I feel, but it really made me think more.

A rancher has a piece of property and during summer months elk move onto it to use it as calving grounds. They stick around there for May June July some of August before they start moving to more breeding grounds. The rancher has had elk on his land and provides great oppurtunity for the elk to live and calve there for 4 months. During this time the elk have ate his grass, run down his fences, drank out of his tanks, so on and so fourth, but come hunting season there are very few to no elk to be found. Should this rancher be compensated the same as one who has elk there during September, October, November?

Made me think differently about the UW tags. Still think there are some taking advantage, but cases like these make me think they should have some UW tags.

Ropinfool · Apr 25, 2018

"any 5 consecutive days, from Oct 1st to Dec.31st."

why wouldn't you coincide the hunts with the public hunts? What would be the reason not to? Afraid to chase the animals to the public land?

ELKMAN · Apr 25, 2018

Wasn't the NM Landowner Elk System originally designed to create more hunting opportunities? Did it then morph into a reimbursement program for depredation issues?

SLM · Apr 25, 2018

>LAST EDITED ON Apr-23-18
>AT 08:43?PM (MST)
>

>
>Because the LO tags don't come
>out of the "public draw"
>and never have.

I would disagree with that statement. Harvest objectives are set per unit so all tags have to be figured.

NMBOWHNTR27 · Apr 25, 2018

>>LAST EDITED ON Apr-23-18
>>AT 08:43?PM (MST)
>>
>
>>
>>Because the LO tags don't come
>>out of the "public draw"
>>and never have.
>
>
>I would disagree with that statement.
>Harvest objectives are set per
>unit so all tags
>have to be figured.

That's because this tags are figure in with the harvest objective.

22250 · Apr 25, 2018

I don't like the divide and conquer either. Being said I think that e-plus started out with right idea but is lacking when it comes to the actual beneficiary it was designed for which was elk.
1. Eplus is only here because of a bad law by the name Jennings
2. Eplus is implemented to entice landowners to allow elk on their land.
3. Eplus has been heavily abused and the elk are paying the price
4. The tags that landowners receive should not go into the public draw because there is already too large of an over harvest in elk each year.
5. If you want to fix it, repeal Jennings law, make landowner tags otc like deer, oryx, Barbary etc. Make all licenses valid for specific hunt dates on public and private land coencide. Implement the current depredation system on "problem" elk to ease the burden on landowners.

Problem solved now we can get down to real wildlife management and not this cash cow reparation style management.

cantgetdrawn · Apr 26, 2018

NM has the worst LO system in the West. No other state come close to issuing the amount of tags NM does.

I would love to see a few thousand of those tags go to the public draw. Landowners can then charge a trespass fee.

I know it will not increase the odds much, but having a few thousand more New Mexicans able to hunt is worth it.

GilaCoues1 · Apr 26, 2018

Hunters need to understand why NMDGF have rules, specifically the elk landowner rule. Compensation? really? I don't see where it says NM should compensate LO's? If it is for access to private land, then where are the Unit Wide maps on the NMDGF website???? Just some honest questions..........

Not calling out Oryxrus, just referencing......... what will it take to get hunter's involved in wildlife management.......