TERK in the News

I don't think having landowners and ranchers on the board have much to do about this, and well if they do, well its about damn time this Terk law is gone!!!
 
I'm a resident. I think it is BS to give 12% of the tags to outfitters and guides!! Just a way for big business to hijack three more species! Did any NM residents draw desert big horn tags this year?
 
LAST EDITED ON May-11-13 AT 11:14AM (MST)[p]>I don't think having landowners and
>ranchers on the board have
>much to do about this,
>and well if they do,
>well its about damn time
>this Terk law is gone!!!
>

Perhaps not but with the complaints about who was on the Board I thought it was worth mentioning this new Commission is the one that finally decided to try and fix the issue. None of the others did anything and the AG made his feelings known in early 2011.
 
WB you just love to cause drama and confuse the issue. I understand it is just who you are.. Sadly, I think that the commission and the dept were forced to act.

We have been working on this for a long time and we finally got them to a place where they had to act.

1) We have two separate Legal Opinions from the AG that we can challenge and win. I wish I could say that this commission had the initiative to do the right thing but I think they were backed into a corner.

2) EVERY time we had a new commissioner appointed we made the effort to educate them on the Opinions but nobody wanted to take it because the Dept has already lost twice prior to the opinions. We have been on them for years on this. When asked point blank EVERY Commissioner that I have talked to said that they were in favor of getting quota applied to all species. As a group, it just never was a priority.

3) Last year in Ruidoso we FINALLY were able to get them on RECORD to do something about it. Jeremy asked them point blank how they felt about it and if they would do something about it. I don't think they would have done anything unless we pushed the issue.

4) Last year 15 of 16 Desert Big Horn sheep tags went to NR... My gut feeling is that the Commission and the Dept are putting this out because the draw numbers are just as bad as last year. They know they are going to get a ton of heat when the numbers come out.

5) After all the work we have done with this and previous commissions they have no choice but to do something.

All this being said, we still have a ton of work to do and it isn't a slam dunk.

As far as the LO and OF on the Commission go, well we have over 50% of the commission now benefiting from LO tags. You can make your own assumptions. Not to mention nobody knows who is representing each seat.
 
>LOL, butthurt and chest thumping in
>the same post. Classic.

Pretty much.

Jason said hunters were going to "get hosed" with the new Commissioner but lo and behold, one of the first things they do is take on the Terk ruling.
 
WOW... This always turns to attack on me.. No biggie I get it... You guys will always be pro-LO,OF,CG,SG.. I get it..

I said we were going to get hosed on LO tag issue.. that it would never be brought up.. Time will tell. It will be interesting to see if these guys recuse themselves from any Tag votes..

We have been pushing the commission for years on the Terk ruling. Stuff like this doesn't happen overnight... If you think that is the case then you really have no idea how long we have been pushing this and how hard we have fought just to get them on record.

Again it isn't about me... Just getting this part has been a big step. We still have a lot of work to do..

505 = who do you guide for or what is your outfits name? You always hide behind you handle.. What is your real name? You can PM me...

WB = I hope you fight for you owns states Resident rights as you do for NR right in NM..
 
Jason
Thanks for the time and effort you put into this... allot of us appreciate it. Now if we can just get the Jennings Law repealed...

CC
 
"It looks like the Chairman on the Game and Fish Commission is now Scott Bidegain... he represents the cattle growers and the Ag seat on the commission. Dicky Salopek was the Vice-Chair and he was next in line but it looks like sportsman are going to get hosed in this deal."

Nothing in there about LO tags but if that's what you meant, fair enough. I would expect the Commissioner to bow out if it's a vote and direct conflict. Time will tell.

Yea, I'm pro Land Owner, pro Outfitter, and pro Guide. Pretty much pro business all the way around. I think a guy that's done well enough to buy a 100,000 acre ranch, or is smart enough to hold on to it if it's been in the family, deserves some admiration.
 
I usually restrain myself from posting on MM, but since we are quoting Jason.

"I have talked to Bidegain and when I asked him his thoughts on the exotic quota he claimed to have NO IDEA what I was talking about... That was right after a fellow sportsman talked to him about it.. I actually sent him the Opinion that we got from the AG, He should have had it...

Bidegain is more than an employee.. His dad owns the ranch and he is inline for it to be passed down.. "

I really believe that in the absence of the Ag seats on the commission this motion would have been filed after the Wyoming ruling with the first AG opinion. This is something they were shamed into when the small amount of desert sheep tags going to residents was publicized.

I am not aware of anyone who has done more for public land resident hunters in NM than Jason. Keep up the good work.
 
Good to see the TERK law finally being addressed.
Looking forward to seeing someone on the NM forum drawing a Sheep tag.

Recently a CA year rounds sheep tag got auctioned off for $170K

I would rather see one sheep tag auctioned off than all the vast majority of sheep tags going to NR.
NMG&F would be money ahead.
 
Where I work is neither here nor there. Not hiding anything, my name is on this website for everyone to see.
 
J, let me know if I can help with anything to get this Terk BS outta the books so residents can draw more of our states sheep tags...time, effort, money, let me know.

NMBIGHORN
 
Took a look at last years Desert Sheep draw. It looks to me like non-residents put their $3260 in at much greater numbers than residents did with their $161. With the present system all but one tag went to the group with the greatest odd, in this case NR.
 
This is the BEST news I've heard in a long time!

Congrats to Jason and others who have tirelessly hammered this issue for years!

I will refrain from entering the arguement with those posting who will never be swayed from their belief.

I firmly believe that the Commission was backed into a corner and had to do something after it became public that nearly every single desert bighorn tag went to NRs.

Keep up the good work all!
 
>J, let me know if I
>can help with anything to
>get this Terk BS outta
>the books so residents can
>draw more of our states
>sheep tags...time, effort, money, let
>me know.
>
>NMBIGHORN


We might take you up on this.. We have been talking to the Dept., but it is still pretty early with all this... Now that it is almost in the legal system it is out of our hands except for the lawyers..
 
i'll second that. let us know who to write letters to and anything the sportsmen of NM can do to be able to join the rest of the states and have fair rights for its Residents. I'm glad yall are standing up for the people you represent and are willing to take the heat from the NR that are fine with their states favoring their own residents but think its atrocious for NM to finally do the same! Thanks to you all!
 
NMBH
We are still waiting for the Dept to file a few legal forms but the Fed has/is securing an attorney to help support the cause. I will see if I can find out an update. One thing I am learning is that this stuff takes time... Frustrating..


BUT at least it is progress... We have been pushing to get the draw results for this year. I will let you know when we get them..

J
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-04-13 AT 03:00PM (MST)[p]Seems like the system works just fine as it was. I went O-4
on Ibex, Oryx, Antelope and Barbary. While all my buds back in the Pecos valley have a bundl;e of tags.... Seems like my 25 years of NM resedency should have been worth somethin other than never getting to go hunting again when I had to move.
 
Jamaro:

Please explain for us unwashed masses exactly what NMWF is doing.

Are you paying the legal fees for G&F, or are you supplying counsel for them?

All I see is a lot of chest thumping, when NMDGF is doing the heavy lifting.

And for the record, before I get accused otherwise, I personally am glad NMDGF is addressing this issue.
 
I don't know how much of this should be public because you never want to play your legal hand but we are providing legal support. I am not sure if you know but the Dept has tried to overturn this twice and has lost both times. If we don't win this time we might never be able to challenge it again. Right know we have 1/3 of a lawyer for the dept and that is stretching it, they are going to need ALL the help they can get.

I will just leave it at that until all the "Briefs" have been filed.
 
Good. Let us know how much you spent when it is all said and done.

Too bad you couldn't do the same for the trapping lawsuit.
 
The spirit is consistent with other states, BUT if this goes through, New Mexico will be second only to Oregon in being horribly unfriendly to non-resident hunters. 6% sucks, I know a lot of you New Mexico residents hunt other states. Heck why not just eliminate ALL non-resident unguided draw tags; if NR want to hunt, they can buy a landowner tag or put in the draw with an outfitter, right?
 
Ditto: I feel bad for DIY NRs being held to a measly 6%, but it was NOT the residents fault for that.

Got notice from NMWF that the Terk process is moving forward - good news.
 
If Terk is overturned, the NM quota for sheep will be 6% unguided nonresidents, 10% guided residents or nonresident, and 84% residents, all guaranteed quotas. While the 10% guided quota is available for nonresidents and residents, history indicates that 2/3 or more of the applicants and lucky applicants will be nonresidents. The NM nonresident quota will be about 12 to 16%. This is higher than the quota of most states at 10% max, and it is guaranteed. . It many states (AZ, MT, etc) the 10% nonres quota is a "maximum" and quite often less than 10% goes to nonresidents. In other states (Colorado) the nonresident tags are set aside in only specific units. Many of the best units are not available for nonresidents In AZ nonresidents are limited by the rules to drawing in hunts where there are at least two tags (non res limited to a maximum of 10% of all sheep tags and 50% of a given hunt's tags). That prohibits nonresidents from drawing in over half of the sheep units.

In NM the quotas are guaranteed. Overall, NM will have one of the highest percentage of tags available for nonresidents, behind only wyoming and washington I believe. CA has a quota of 1 nonres tag for the entire state. MT has nonresidents apply for specific units prior to setting tag numbers. Often one of the few units available for nonresidents to apply doesn't end up having a nonresident tag available. Any nonresidents that apply for the unit have zero chance of drawing. Whether NM quotas sans Terk would be fair or not is a separate issue, but compared to other states, they would have to be considered generous.

Perhaps it is time to start thinking about how to allocate the tags for the nonresident and guided quotas if Terk is set-aside.
It will be complicated and there are many possible options. There are 37 sheep tags, (9 rocky ram, 12 rocky ewe, 16 desert ram). For other species, the quotas are applied by hunt code. Since the tag numbers are so small per hunt code .06 or .1 times the tag number yields a fraction for all hunts except latir ewe with 11 tags. which would yield one guided tag for the guided quota. If they just multiple the quotas times all the tags do the include the ewe tags in the total and give 2 nonresident tags and 3 guided tags and just let them be drawn in whatever hunt they end up being drawn in or do they set up quotas for ewes and rams nad have 1 guided ewe tag and 2 guided ram tags and 1 nonresident ram tag? Do they apply the quotas separately to rockys and deserts?
There are a lot of factors to be worked out.

I kind of think they should apply the quotas across each species and sex and allocate specific tags for the guided and nonresident quotas. That would be the "Colorado" model. Any thought on how this should work?
 
>In NM the quotas are guaranteed.
> Overall, NM will have
>one of the highest percentage
>of tags available for nonresidents,
>behind only wyoming and washington
>I believe. CA has
>a quota of 1 nonres
>tag for the entire state.
> MT has nonresidents apply
>for specific units prior to
>setting tag numbers. Often
>one of the few units
>available for nonresidents to apply
>doesn't end up having a
>nonresident tag available. Any
>nonresidents that apply for the
>unit have zero chance of
>drawing. Whether NM quotas
>sans Terk would be fair
>or not is a separate
>issue, but compared to other
>states, they would have to
>be considered generous.

That's BS and you know it. Its outfitter welfare at a 2:1 rate for non-residents. And then you guys wonder how and SWF type organization can have the gall to come in and try and do every tag grab possible for their rich clients. It starts with this type of garbage, when only the wealthy can get involved, then they start saying "hey, why play by the rules, we'll just lobby to get some more tags up for auction so we don't have to play by this dumb system." How do Utah's drawing odds look to you guys?

I don't have a problem with a 16% quota, the problem is the outfitter tags and screwing the 6% DIYers. And its glossed over with the baloney you are spewing.
 
How about the baloney that has been going on for 35 years and residents getting screwed for all those years with this Terk Law, especially last year where 93% of NM desert sheep tags went to Non-Res. It is about time this law is done away with and quotas are set, 16% to non-res is more than fair, anyway that you break it down NM will still be the state with the highest percentage given to non-res and will be more than fair for non-res to draw from. 90% of non-res hire guides anyway, so the 6% will be above par from what other western states offer currently.

NMBIGHORN
 
>How about the baloney that has
>been going on for 35
>years and residents getting screwed
>for all those years with
>this Terk Law, especially last
>year where 93% of NM
>desert sheep tags went to
>Non-Res. It is about time
>this law is done away
>with and quotas are set,
>16% to non-res is more
>than fair, anyway that you
>break it down NM will
>still be the state with
>the highest percentage given to
>non-res and will be more
>than fair for non-res to
>draw from. 90% of non-res
>hire guides anyway, so the
>6% will be above par
>from what other western states
>offer currently.
>
>NMBIGHORN


Dont believe for one second anywhere close to 90% of non-residents hire guides. Do you have evidence of that? How many applied in the draw with guides vs no guide?

The issue is the 6% and you know it. That is a very low number for non-residents who dont want to or dont have the means to hire a guide.
 
The splits were agreed to by parties in NM, to benefit NM residents and businesses. It's the State's resource and they're free to manage that resource as they see fit. Not surprising that NM chooses to use that resource to benefit outfitters and all the other businesses that derive income from those dollars.
As a NR, we choose to play within their rules, or not.
 
Cmbbulldog, why don't you pm greatwestern, he will give you the scoop on the percentage hiring outfitters that did not necessarily apply with outfitters last year, as last year was the the most desert tags NM has ever offered, or maybe he will chime in on here.
And as for the 6%, this is on par with other western states. How long have you applied for a sheep tag in NM?

Bob, that is the point! By the way how is the scouting on your AZ elk hunt going?

NMBIGHORN
 
Numbers
MORE NR apply then Resident, NR pay more then Resident, Rocket science stuff.Now if this tag is only used on state land I agree with ya that resident should have the most tags, BUT if the tag is used on Federal lands that belong to every one then everyone should have the same chances even if those chances cost more.

"I have found if you go the extra mile it's Never crowded".
>[Font][Font color = "green"]Life member of
>the MM green signature club.[font/]
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-19-13 AT 09:12AM (MST)[p]Maybe you are referring to desert sheep, in which case you are probably right about the 90. I was talking about all species. I have never applied for a desert sheep tag in nm.

And 6 percent is not on par with other states. I'm talking all species. Most states have at least 10 percent set aside for NR.


>Cmbbulldog, why don't you pm greatwestern,
>he will give you the
>scoop on the percentage hiring
>outfitters that did not necessarily
>apply with outfitters last year,
>as last year was the
>the most desert tags NM
>has ever offered, or maybe
>he will chime in on
>here.
>And as for the 6%, this
>is on par with other
>western states. How long have
>you applied for a sheep
>tag in NM?
>
>Bob, that is the point! By
>the way how is the
>scouting on your AZ elk
>hunt going?
>
>NMBIGHORN
 
Isaac, it's going well. I have some spots picked out and I've been talking to the guys on the Western border of the unit about access from their land.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-19-13 AT 06:47PM (MST)[p]cmbbulldog,

Yes I am talking about sheep here in NM and that is what this Terk Law affects and what this thread is about.

Yes you are correct, most states are not on par with the 10% for sheep, some are just up to 10% which could very well mean that you may just have 1% NR chance at a sheep tag. Pathetic Right!

NMBIGHORN
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-19-13 AT 06:45PM (MST)[p]Gator, so what you are saying is all NM tags, deer,elk, antelope, sheep,ect, if drawn and used on federal land, Res and Non-Res should have equal 100% chance at drawing them? I certainly hope you were not against what was going on in AZ, because that is exactly what you are saying above!

I believe there should be quotas put in place for all species, I apply for most western states and this is the case for all of them, I play by their rules, whether I like it or not!

NM is now keeping your history of applying for tags in your account on the website, soo, they may just use that information a few years from now to issue bonus/preference points to res. and non-res for some of these hard to draw tags and maybe for all species, who knows, might be a good idea to be applying for all species as you may be behind the game as we speak.

NMBIGHORN
 
NMbighorn
The sheep tags show How many more NR put in then Residents and look how much more they are willing to pay,if you shut the NR out with stupid numbers (6% and outfitter %)like you guys did in the Big Game draws, what is happening in AZ will happen over in NM next, sooner then later, NM hunters should be wanting NR to get 10% draw to keep them fat and happy, that 6% crap is what going to be the down fall of the draws.
One day soon the fed's will wake up and get that Fed license thing going because right now it's a cash cow they are missing out on or they will make the State pay them to lease that same land for hunting.
Rocking the boat by taking draw chances from NR on Fed land is what will start the down fall, too many unhappy voters in other states pulling the chain of their dogs in the Govt spots. Then they will in turn band together and pass crap that no one will like.
Hell you see it starting in places already, states charging NR the same fees that is charged for hunters that come from that state charge them to hunt Exp: NM charges $1000.00 for a NR license so Az charges anybody from NM the same to hunt in AZ.
Now this will come to pass before long.

If I can't draw a NM tag. Why wouldn't I like a Fed land license to hunt on Fed land or have NM pay the Feds for the grazing rights for all those state owned animals. Now that would really start some $hit.
I'm sure you have heard the old saying throw enough $hit on the wall some of it will stick.

"I have found if you go the extra mile it's Never crowded".
>[Font][Font color = "green"]Life member of
>the MM green signature club.[font/]
 
When you buy a tag, You aren't paying the state anything to hunt on any land. You are paying the state to hunt their animals! The whole federal land argument holds no water. Geesh....
 
All I know is everytime I buy a license of any kind, and all my fishing or hunting gear I am supporting the states economy and the G&F thousands a year so how you figure your one time NR money is out weighing that is beyond me. My local money is not refunded like your NR attempt to draw money. And thousands of people do the same here NM can hold their own. We are just looking to get a fair odds share.
 
DoeNob,
Please read my post more closely. I did not get into the issue of whether the 6% nonres/10% guided resident or nonresident split of the tags that are available for nonresidents to apply for is fair or not. I specifically avoided the issue "Whether NM quotas sans Terk would be fair or not is a separate issue". I don't like the split. However, up to 16% for nonresidents is generous compared to most states at 10%. My point is that if Terk is overturned the quota is what it is so it behooves the interested parties to start discussions with the game commission about how to apply the quotas. For the record, I hate SFW and am appalled that Espinosa is on our Game Commission. He is nothing but a spokesman for SFW.

Many residents here in NM agree that the split is not fair. The latest bill that set the quotas (SB196) was originally set at 10% nonresidents (like most states), no guided set aside. Our legislature amended the bill to be 6% nonresident unguided and 10% guided resident or nonresident. I was in the committee room when they amended the bill and the vast majority of the residents in the room at the time thought it was unfair to unguided nonresidents and we spoke out against the amendment. If you look at it from a resident's standpoint, 16% of all the public draw tags are available to nonresidents and that is 60% more than most states at 10%.
 
The outfitter 10% is only for NR??????????????
Or can Residents get in on that same draw if they hire the outfitter.

State animals on Federal lands doesn't cut any water. LOL
Can I bring my Horses and Mules down and let them graze for freeanywhere I want. Thanks
I should be able to right since the grazing is free.
State animals grazing for free on Fed Land shouldn't cost nothing because WHY.
Why does Private ranchers have to pay for their cattle to graze on Fed land but the state animals get a free pass so the STATE hunters can hunt them on FED land.hell don't get started on private land that has STATE ANIMALS on it born and raised on that private land by the landowner.The state pays the private landowner monies/tags for them to let the STATE animals graze on their private landsfor what those animals use, so why don't the STATE have to pay the Feds for letting them graze on My Fed lands. Now that a sword that can and should cut both ways. Now the State should start paying the Feds for grazing fees per head if they want to graze all those state animals on MY Fed land. LOL.
It comes back to being a numbers game THERE are more NR hunters (49 states) more then resident hunters (1 state NM), see how that numbers game works Federal lands open to 49 states worth of hunters for hunting in that 1 state(NM) on their Federal lands hunting state anmials that they(NM) haven't paid to FED'S to let them graze there. LOL
We would call that a eviction order.
Now what does a Rancher do when they don't pay him for the food those State animals eat. HE evicts them also ,BUT in a same way that the Fed hunter will. BANG, bang,bang,bang, I'm reloading Bang,bang,bang.

"I have found if you go the extra mile it's Never crowded".
>[Font][Font color = "green"]Life member of
>the MM green signature club.[font/]
 
Like gator, my understanding was that the guide pool was for nonresidents AND residents. Is that incorrect?
 
Technically the guided pool is open to both Residents and Non-Residents. I glanced over last years draw odds. In the majority of units a Resident has better odds applying in the Resident pool, this seems especially true in the high demand units.

So if you are a Resident and want a guided hunt in the "better" units of NM , you are better off applying in the resident pool then hiring the guide after you do get drawn. This is why the guided pool is mostly Non-resident hunters.

I have not seen a tally of the amount of Residents vs. Non-residents guide applications. However, he percentage of tags that goes to NR hunters is much closer to 16% than to 10%, if not I would be very surprised.
 
Why would anyone apply in a pool with ten percent of the have available, instead of 86 ? Doesn't make much sense.

Gator,
I am not going to waste my time picking apart such a weak argument that your last post is full of. I had to make sure it was yours and not some garbage Tristate wrote.
 
Outfitter 10% draw cost $ how much more then the regular NR 6 % draw, So why don't the State just have a Regular season type draw for NR and then a Higher price Premium NR draw and keep those extra dollars for new trucks instead of handing off that money to the outfitters. Can't they book with a outfitter no matter which draw they pull a tag in.
I keep hear HOW great the 16% is for NR, BUT in real life it isn't 16% year to year because you never know how many resident put in year to year. DIY NR would be happy to see that 6% and 10% lumped in one draw we could live with that. Cantgetdrawn I'm sure it is closer to 16% then 10% But is it closer to 12% then 16%, As long as you aren't holding the $hitty end of the stick, Those are good numbers. BUT for us NR that got handed the $hitty end of the stick, WE can only think maybe the FED hunting license idea would be better for us in the long run, Hell we could end up hunting several states a year with the same fed lic maybe we would have to buy state stamps. Just remember all things start with a idea, then some-one comes along and like it and the ball starts rolling, Maybe the Fed lic wouldn't happen quick, the idea will be repeated over and over until some-one goes, Now there is a Cash cow waiting to be milked.
Are you starting to see the numbers yet.

"I have found if you go the extra mile it's Never crowded".
>[Font][Font color = "green"]Life member of
>the MM green signature club.[font/]
 
Gator,
I have never heard of a single resident being happy over how the nr got screwed over. The only ones happy with that 10% are the ones benefiting from it. I will let you draw conclusions who that might be.
About the federal license, its unconstitutional. You still believe in that, right?
 
Gator,

NR DIY hunters did get the short end. I wish I could change that, but as it is Outfitters and Landowners have a lot of political power in this state and its unlikely to change anytime in the near future.

I do think the actually number of NRs who get drawn for elk is above 15%. I do not know that for a fact since I have never seen the statistics. Unfortunately most of those NRs have to pay an outfitter.
 
Unconstitutional
Please print out that part that shows the FEDS can't charge for the use of their land. Next time I go to a National park I will tell they can't charge me. LOL
Because out here we have to buy a adventure pass $25.00 just to park on a road in the NF lands, so I would guess for them to make it so you would have to have a hunting license wouldn't be a hard thing for them to do either. Every person in office loves a cash cow.

"I have found if you go the extra mile it's Never crowded".
>[Font][Font color = "green"]Life member of
>the MM green signature club.[font/]
 
The 10th Amendment states that any power not specifically given to the Federal Government shall be the responsibility of the states. This is why wildlife management has historically been left to the states. My understanding is the courts have upheld that precedence.

A non-resident in any state has equal access to Federal land, but only those people with state issued tags have the right to hunt protected wildlife, regardless of the who holds title to the land. The Federal government can restrict access to Federal land but the management of wildlife is the responsibility of the states.
 
Thanks cantgetdrawn.

Gator,
has someone hacked your account?
If you want to come and look at your federal lands, so be it. If you want to hunt our animals, then play by our rules. And you wonder where the sense of entitlement comes from in our country?
 
Just making sure you boys are look at the other side,As I said a idea gets started it will be hard to stop it. Like they say the animals are State owned, But the ACCESS to them are in some-one else hands. Units shutdown due to fires months afterwards start slow and deny access for longer and longer periods.

So Don't let them get access to some of the greatest land that you have in Valles Caldera. It is happening now during your watch.It's up to you to make sure Valles Caldera is put into the right hands, and is around for your's to use for hunting in the years to come, Not just for looking at wildlife.
NR resident hunters can't help you now or wouldn't it all means the same thing, So it all falls on your shoulders to do this right and get this done right.
NMWF or RMEF one is the right choice, one is the wrong choice
Choices you all will have to make.
Now you all claim the CHOICE on making it 6% or 16% wasn't your choice, BUT it was taken from you and now you have live with it. Well hope you do a better job on this choice, because that last one sucked.
Wilhille playing by your rules got us into this mess that no-one claims so it time to look to the outside of the box. Power starts at the top kind of like $hit and it rolls downhill Fed's State,County,City,Town
Ask AZ how they passed laws and then had the Fed's come in and change them.

Remember it all about the numbers.

"I have found if you go the extra mile it's Never crowded".
>[Font][Font color = "green"]Life member of
>the MM green signature club.[font/]
 
Gator,
I get it sir. I was just as pissed as you NR were about that whole fiasco. We were sure that the 90-10 proposal wasn't going to happen, but the 10% crap blew us away. They (I will let you guess who) had kids talking how it was going to ruin their lives if "they" didn't get the allotment. It was just another way for them to force people by law to use their services.
 
Gator:

The Resident quota went from 78% to 84%. I think most resident hunters supported this.

Of that added 6%, 4% came out of DIY NR quota, which means NR DIY went from 10% to 6%. The other 2% came from the outfitters quota. That went from 12% to 10%. I don't know anyone who is not an outfitter that supported that change.

There is nothing I can say, you got screwed.

BTW I think when NMWF got the quota applied to VC it was still at the 78-12-10% split.
 

Similar threads

JakeH
May/June RAC & Wildlife Board meetings.
Replies
13
Views
773
JakeH
JakeH
Founder
Would you take the 56 yard shot?
Replies
14
Views
2k
fatrooster
fatrooster
H
16C FINALLY!!!!
Replies
9
Views
1k
Jgill19
Jgill19

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

WEBPAGE_20200902_104054.jpg
Screenshot_20201016-150921_Photos.jpg
IMG_5310.JPG
79925EEE-1A61-43B2-8BF3-B189EC9DFB78.jpeg
20211127_171507.jpg
Screenshot_20240124-101853.png
B927644A-FA28-45D9-9C7D-6C94E07EDCBA.jpeg
IMG_0231.jpeg
1623208369525.jpeg
06695BC2-F078-4A31-9FFB-EC72323AC797.jpeg
Lane's bull.JPG
DF2847E4-D3EA-4A7B-9A1A-6CAC779425EE.jpeg

New Mexico Guides & Outfitters

H & A Outfitters

Private and public land hunts since 1992 for elk, mule deer, sheep, pronghorn, black Bear & lion hunts.

505 Outfitters

Public and private land big game hunts. Rifle, muzzleloader and archery hunts available. Free Draw Application Service!

Sierra Blanca Outfitters

Offering a wide array of hunt opportunities and putting clients in prime position to bag a trophy.

Urge 2 Hunt

Hunts in New Mexico on private ranches and remote public land in the top units. Elk vouchers available.

Mangas Outfitters

Landowner tags available! Hunt big bulls and bucks. Any season and multiple hunt units to choose from.

Back
Top Bottom