Report Finds That New Mexico’s Elk Licensing System Favors Wealthy Landowners and Out-of-Staters Over Residents

R

Ropinfool

Very Active Member
Messages
1,446
Looking at data from 2021, the report found that in comparison to other Western states, New Mexico allocates significantly more elk tags to nonresident hunters
By: Dac Collins

Posted On October 6, 2022

3 Minute Read
NM_elk_report_2.jpg

The new report takes a closer look at New Mexico's elk license allocation program. NPS

When it comes to drawing an elk tag in New Mexico, resident hunters there seem to be getting the short end of the stick. That’s according to a new report issued on Oct. 5, which found that New Mexico Game and Fish’s current license allocation system turns over a significant share of the state’s elk licenses to nonresidents and landowners, making it harder for working class New Mexicans to get a tag.

“New Mexico elk hunters who rely on drawing a license in the public draw to hunt on public lands have sensed for years that the system’s rigged against them,” the report reads. “They were right.”

The report, titled Take Back Your Elk, was prepared by the New Mexico Wildlife Federation and the New Mexico Chapter of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers. Both groups have long argued that the state’s license allocation system needs to be reformed, but they haven’t had the numbers to back it up. So, last year, the NMWF and NMCBHA filed a request with the state fish and game agency to provide detailed records showing how the state’s elk tags are allocated.

Records from 2021 show that of the 36,162 elk licenses issued in New Mexico, 12,757—or roughly 35 percent of them—went to nonresident hunters. As the report points out, this percentage looks even more skewed when compared to other Western states. In neighboring Arizona, for example, nonresident hunters are restricted to drawing no more than 10 percent of the licenses set aside for elk and other big game species. Noting that NMGF is required by statute to offer at least 84 percent of all available licenses to New Mexicans through the public draw, the report said that due to the current system, residents only purchased 74 percent of the elk licenses issued from 2017 to 2019.

According to the report, 1,388 (or roughly 89 percent) of the 1,553 elk tags that NMGF allocated through its “outfitter set-aside” program went to nonresidents in 2021. Plus, the department issued 13,803 elk licenses through the Elk Private Land Use System, and 75 percent of those tags ended up in the hands of nonresidents. EPLUS allows the state game commission to give elk permit authorizations to private landowners, who can then resell their authorizations to the highest bidder. More often than not, the data show, those bidders are from another state.

Read Next: “Bulls for Billionaires.” Are Montana’s 454 Permits a Step Toward Privatizing the State’s Elk Herd?

Interestingly, while most EPLUS authorizations only allow hunting on private ranches, about 20 percent of those were for “unit-wide” licenses that were valid on all public lands in 2021. The report’s authors contend that this system disenfranchises working class New Mexicans who are limited to hunting public land, while allowing many out-of-staters to circumvent the public draw system.

“Other states in the West fight to preserve hunting opportunities for their own residents,” NMWF executive director Jesse Deubel said in a press release promoting the report. “But our report shows New Mexico does everything it can to help the wealthiest hunters cut to the front of the line. They get to hunt elk that belong to New Mexico citizens every year while many resident hunters can’t draw elk licenses.”

As the report points out, the state legislature’s Legislative Finance Committee came to a similar conclusion back in 2020. After evaluating NMGF’s operations, the committee concluded that the agency should consider amending the Elk Private Land Use System “to be more in line with neighboring states.”

The LFC’s conclusion prompted Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) to call on the state game commission to reform the current system later that year. According to the report, however, the commission has not done anything to address these concerns thus far.

“We’re seeing our state’s family hunting traditions die while elk hunting in New Mexico increasingly becomes a pay-to-play exercise,” Deubel said on Wednesday. “I encourage all New Mexico hunters to speak up and demand real change.”
 
I agree with the underlying premise of the article that we should be looking for ways to to give those that desire it more elk-hunting opportunities.

However, I don't agree with its overall tone where it appears to be pitting hunters against each other (residents vs non-residents, private vs public, wealthy vs everyone else). I wish we could stop with the labeling and just respectfully treat each other as fellow human beings.

In my humble opinion, this type of labeling causes us bigger problems as a community than the initial problem of not enough of us get to hunt elk.
 
mozey said:
I agree with the underlying premise of the article that we should be looking for ways to to give those that desire it more elk-hunting opportunities.

However, I don't agree with its overall tone where it appears to be pitting hunters against each other (residents vs non-residents, private vs public, wealthy vs everyone else). I wish we could stop with the labeling and just respectfully treat each other as fellow human beings.

In my humble opinion, this type of labeling causes us bigger problems as a community than the initial problem of not enough of us get to hunt elk.
Click to expand...
I sort of skimmed through it. I agree that it’s a backhanded attempt to piss hunters off at other hunters.
I do agree that NM landowners are given a lot of reign with the amount of tags they get.
I am a 4th generation landowner so believe me when I say I know the landowners point of view.
I see this thread having the potential to get pretty big given the same argument made over the years here on this very topic.
Everyone is entitled to an opinion and mine has alway la been that eplus has spiraled out of control and is indeed landowner welfare for most.
 
I believe the perception they want to portray is that all of the tags that went to the outfitter pool and to landowners will be available to resident hunters, which is totally false. Lets assume that they get the 90/10 split they want. Residents gain 6% of the tags, and NR gain 4%. In a lot of cases that's an additional 6-10 tags, when you have thousands of people applying for them, its not moving the odds that much, if at all. I wish they would add that information. Show me that it moves my odds .06% in 2C LOL!
Also, what happens to all the elk that were part of the quota on the landowner side? How are those calculated in the overall harvest? So lets say that all the unit wide ranches must move to RO. Is it then up to the rancher to decide how many elk they want to kill and they get to roll their own dates? If that's the case, come December when my ranch is full of elk, its literally going to be open season. Has anyone noticed the change in quality and quantity of the antelope in the NE? I sure have. Expect that to happen to the elk. In some of the areas it won't matter too much, as the amount of private won't dictate the quality and quantity of the elk, and in some areas its already happening like unit 4. But in some areas, it will definitely change things. Think of a ranch in 6A, a ranch that only gets one unit wide tag now, that has to follow the regular season dates. All of a sudden that 200 acre ranch that didn't have many elk on it in September or October now gets unlimited tags that they can use in December when its home to 200 elk. Now instead of killing one elk, we are killing hundreds. Trust me, it will happen. That is how the current rules are written. No limit on the number of landowner authorizations that can be issued for deer, antelope, oryx, elk. Granted, many of the larger ranches that are already currently RO are proactively managing their herds and not exceeding the harvest because they know the value of the quality of the animals. Not all the landowners will share this same view. The tags will lose the current value that they hold, but now landowners can kill exponentially more animals, so trust me, the landowners will make way more money. Those tags will most likely be purchased by NR's, so how does that help their argument?
 
This is/or just like NM Wildlife Federation. They are mad because someone else gets something they don't, not only that, but they want it for free too. Typical democrat/woke views.

Anyone can buy a NM LO elk authorization; it doesn't favor nonresidents; it only favors those that are willing to pay to play.
 
Setting aside the Resident/Non-Resident argument for a moment, the wealthy vs blue collar argument is fundamentally flawed. The article implies all non-residents are on the wealthy side of the equation and all residents are on the blue collar side. Not the case at all. Many of hunting friends as well as myself hunt public lands in several states WHEN we can draw a tag. None of us are what could be classified as wealthy. We are mostly blue collar types. The landowners and outfitters don’t care what state you are from as long as you pony up the cash! Glad I am an old fart and my mountain hunting days are about over, feel sorry for my small business owner son and his kids as they are about to lose all real hope of being able to hunt our public lands for big game.
 
Every single landowner tag goes to someone who owns land in NM!!! Though they may have their primary residence out of state, they have a stake in NM. They likely pay more in NM taxes than the average resident hunter.

The argument that the landowner tags primarily benefit non residents is crazy when viewed in light of all facets (including tax money, tag fees, out of state money coming in to hunt, etc). Also, many LO tags are financially attainable for just about all NM residents if they budgeted correctly (less bud light and fast food throughout the year). Only the best hunts are really expensive. I’ve taken advantage of landowner cow tags (and doe pronghorn) for years and they are priced reasonably. I only hunt in 16 if I draw and hunt lesser units if I have to buy. Simple….

Lastly, though I dislike the outfitter 10%, these also are geared towards NM residents. These are NM outfitters only and the entire state benefits from the money coming in. This should be eliminated though and go to a 90/10 like other western states.

Most LO and outfitter tags are used by non residents simply because there are more elk hunters in that group than there are NM elk hunters. I have a hunch that NM elk hunters use more LO tags per hunter than NR hunters use per hunter.

Remember, the elk are owned by the residents of NM, not the hunting residents of NM only!!!!! Given that more than 9 out of 10 New Mexicans don’t hunt, looking at this strictly through benefiting NM hunters is false. There is no doubt the other 90%+ of New Mexicans would be better off if all tags went to NRs. Be careful what you wish for….
 
Myself I think New Mexico has one of the best elk hunting programs in the west. Best draw. Best chance to go elk hunting if you don’t draw you can buy a LO tag. You always have a chance to draw with no competing with high point holders like in other states. Someone’s always going to complain. I don’t think elk and elk hunting could get any better than in New Mexico!!
 
It’s not just hunting, everything is sky high today. Shop quoted me $500 to change the oil and filters on my diesel pickup. Used to cost around $50. $60 dollar tires are now $275 a piece. Diesel pickup is $80,000 to $100,000. My brother bought a 30 acre pasture in 2003 for $50,000 never touched it and sold it for $225,000 last year. You get the picture.
 
NM high country said:
It’s not just hunting, everything is sky high today. Shop quoted me $500 to change the oil and filters on my diesel pickup. Used to cost around $50. $60 dollar tires are now $275 a piece. Diesel pickup is $80,000 to $100,000. My brother bought a 30 acre pasture in 2003 for $50,000 never touched it and sold it for $225,000 last year. You get the picture.
Click to expand...
BRANDON’S AMERICA !!!
 
Ropinfool said:
Looking at data from 2021, the report found that in comparison to other Western states, New Mexico allocates significantly more elk tags to nonresident hunters
By: Dac Collins

Posted On October 6, 2022

3 Minute Read
View attachment 128719
The new report takes a closer look at New Mexico's elk license allocation program. NPS

When it comes to drawing an elk tag in New Mexico, resident hunters there seem to be getting the short end of the stick. That’s according to a new report issued on Oct. 5, which found that New Mexico Game and Fish’s current license allocation system turns over a significant share of the state’s elk licenses to nonresidents and landowners, making it harder for working class New Mexicans to get a tag.

“New Mexico elk hunters who rely on drawing a license in the public draw to hunt on public lands have sensed for years that the system’s rigged against them,” the report reads. “They were right.”

The report, titled Take Back Your Elk, was prepared by the New Mexico Wildlife Federation and the New Mexico Chapter of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers. Both groups have long argued that the state’s license allocation system needs to be reformed, but they haven’t had the numbers to back it up. So, last year, the NMWF and NMCBHA filed a request with the state fish and game agency to provide detailed records showing how the state’s elk tags are allocated.

Records from 2021 show that of the 36,162 elk licenses issued in New Mexico, 12,757—or roughly 35 percent of them—went to nonresident hunters. As the report points out, this percentage looks even more skewed when compared to other Western states. In neighboring Arizona, for example, nonresident hunters are restricted to drawing no more than 10 percent of the licenses set aside for elk and other big game species. Noting that NMGF is required by statute to offer at least 84 percent of all available licenses to New Mexicans through the public draw, the report said that due to the current system, residents only purchased 74 percent of the elk licenses issued from 2017 to 2019.

According to the report, 1,388 (or roughly 89 percent) of the 1,553 elk tags that NMGF allocated through its “outfitter set-aside” program went to nonresidents in 2021. Plus, the department issued 13,803 elk licenses through the Elk Private Land Use System, and 75 percent of those tags ended up in the hands of nonresidents. EPLUS allows the state game commission to give elk permit authorizations to private landowners, who can then resell their authorizations to the highest bidder. More often than not, the data show, those bidders are from another state.

Read Next: “Bulls for Billionaires.” Are Montana’s 454 Permits a Step Toward Privatizing the State’s Elk Herd?

Interestingly, while most EPLUS authorizations only allow hunting on private ranches, about 20 percent of those were for “unit-wide” licenses that were valid on all public lands in 2021. The report’s authors contend that this system disenfranchises working class New Mexicans who are limited to hunting public land, while allowing many out-of-staters to circumvent the public draw system.

“Other states in the West fight to preserve hunting opportunities for their own residents,” NMWF executive director Jesse Deubel said in a press release promoting the report. “But our report shows New Mexico does everything it can to help the wealthiest hunters cut to the front of the line. They get to hunt elk that belong to New Mexico citizens every year while many resident hunters can’t draw elk licenses.”

As the report points out, the state legislature’s Legislative Finance Committee came to a similar conclusion back in 2020. After evaluating NMGF’s operations, the committee concluded that the agency should consider amending the Elk Private Land Use System “to be more in line with neighboring states.”

The LFC’s conclusion prompted Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) to call on the state game commission to reform the current system later that year. According to the report, however, the commission has not done anything to address these concerns thus far.

“We’re seeing our state’s family hunting traditions die while elk hunting in New Mexico increasingly becomes a pay-to-play exercise,” Deubel said on Wednesday. “I encourage all New Mexico hunters to speak up and demand real change.”
Click to expand...
I apply all over the country and New Mexico has one of the best draw systems in the west. I have buddies that draw elk tags often. As a lifelong resident I think the NR tags, Eplus and Ranch only tags are beneficial and bring in tons of money to this state. They are such small portions of tags that it wouldn’t even increase draw odds by 1%. I know lots of residents who guide to supplement their income. Lots of positives to our system and I personally just don’t think it’s worth changing just for the 5 tags extra per unit that would be allocated to residents.
 
CJhunter26 said:
I apply all over the country and New Mexico has one of the best draw systems in the west. I have buddies that draw elk tags often. As a lifelong resident I think the NR tags, Eplus and Ranch only tags are beneficial and bring in tons of money to this state. They are such small portions of tags that it wouldn’t even increase draw odds by 1%. I know lots of residents who guide to supplement their income. Lots of positives to our system and I personally just don’t think it’s worth changing just for the 5 tags extra per unit that would be allocated to residents.
Click to expand...
what you described is right and part of the problem. it's all about making money for the state, landowners, and outfitters. very little focus on managing the wildlife. it started out good but is now a welfare program.
 
So 12,857 tags went to NRs. Approximately 1100 via outfitter allocated, and approximately 10,000 via the LO allocation. That leaves less than 1800 NR tags in the draw for regular DIYers.

What’s the total cost/influx of money to NM from an outfitter tag? $10K?
From an LO tag? $5K,10K? So probably 100 million dollars floating into NM from NR tag sales. Follow the money!

Not disputing that a higher percentage of NM tags go to NRs. Or trying to pit R against NR, just digging into the numbers to understand a little better.
 
Joe2Kool said:
So 12,857 tags went to NRs. Approximately 1100 via outfitter allocated, and approximately 10,000 via the LO allocation. That leaves less than 1800 NR tags in the draw for regular DIYers.

What’s the total cost/influx of money to NM from an outfitter tag? $10K?
From an LO tag? $5K,10K? So probably 100 million dollars floating into NM from NR tag sales. Follow the money!

Not disputing that a higher percentage of NM tags go to NRs. Or trying to pit R against NR, just digging into the numbers to understand a little better.
Click to expand...
Your numbers are skewed. First, tons of residents use the outfitter draw. Even know lots of guides who use their outfitter’s application number in the outfitter draw . Second, all 10,000 LO tags go to NR… that’s false. Yet again I know tons of residents who buy LO tags. I’m a resident and I’ve even bought a few over the years. Third, of the 10,000 tags you mentioned; how many are Ranch Only and how many are Eplus? There are a ton of Ranch Only tags given out across the state that residents would never be able to hunt without private land permission. Those tags will never be in a draw system. Third, what is wrong with a 100 million dollars coming into our poor state? That’s a huge positive to why our liberal state even lets us have a hunting season.
 
If Joe2kools numbers are skewed then so is the 100 million dollars. 100,000,000.00 from NR elk tags seems like a stretch. Imho
 
CJhunter26 said:
Your numbers are skewed. First, tons of residents use the outfitter draw. Even know lots of guides who use their outfitter’s application number in the outfitter draw . Second, all 10,000 LO tags go to NR… that’s false. Yet again I know tons of residents who buy LO tags. I’m a resident and I’ve even bought a few over the years. Third, of the 10,000 tags you mentioned; how many are Ranch Only and how many are Eplus? There are a ton of Ranch Only tags given out across the state that residents would never be able to hunt without private land permission. Those tags will never be in a draw system. Third, what is wrong with a 100 million dollars coming into our poor state? That’s a huge positive to why our liberal state even lets us have a hunting season.
Click to expand...
how many is tons and lots?
 
CJhunter26 said:
Your numbers are skewed. First, tons of residents use the outfitter draw. Even know lots of guides who use their outfitter’s application number in the outfitter draw . Second, all 10,000 LO tags go to NR… that’s false. Yet again I know tons of residents who buy LO tags. I’m a resident and I’ve even bought a few over the years. Third, of the 10,000 tags you mentioned; how many are Ranch Only and how many are Eplus? There are a ton of Ranch Only tags given out across the state that residents would never be able to hunt without private land permission. Those tags will never be in a draw system. Third, what is wrong with a 100 million dollars coming into our poor state? That’s a huge positive to why our liberal state even lets us have a hunting season.
Click to expand...
The liberals in NM want the oil and gas industry, the only real money in the state to go away now hunters want eplus that makes the landowner a little money and increases thousands of huntable acres to go away. Liberals suck !
 
Ropinfool said:
Looking at data from 2021, the report found that in comparison to other Western states, New Mexico allocates significantly more elk tags to nonresident hunters
By: Dac Collins

Posted On October 6, 2022

3 Minute Read
View attachment 128719
The new report takes a closer look at New Mexico's elk license allocation program. NPS

When it comes to drawing an elk tag in New Mexico, resident hunters there seem to be getting the short end of the stick. That’s according to a new report issued on Oct. 5, which found that New Mexico Game and Fish’s current license allocation system turns over a significant share of the state’s elk licenses to nonresidents and landowners, making it harder for working class New Mexicans to get a tag.

“New Mexico elk hunters who rely on drawing a license in the public draw to hunt on public lands have sensed for years that the system’s rigged against them,” the report reads. “They were right.”

The report, titled Take Back Your Elk, was prepared by the New Mexico Wildlife Federation and the New Mexico Chapter of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers. Both groups have long argued that the state’s license allocation system needs to be reformed, but they haven’t had the numbers to back it up. So, last year, the NMWF and NMCBHA filed a request with the state fish and game agency to provide detailed records showing how the state’s elk tags are allocated.

Records from 2021 show that of the 36,162 elk licenses issued in New Mexico, 12,757—or roughly 35 percent of them—went to nonresident hunters..,,,

According to the report, 1,388 (or roughly 89 percent) of the 1,553 elk tags that NMGF allocated through its “outfitter set-aside” program went to nonresidents in 2021. Plus, the department issued 13,803 elk licenses through the Elk Private Land Use System, and 75 percent of those tags ended up in the hands of nonresidents. EPLUS allows the state game commission to give elk permit authorizations to private landowners, who can then resell their authorizations to the highest bidder.
Click to expand...
Just quoting the numbers from the report. 89% of the 1533 outfitter set aside tags, plus75% of the 13,803 LO tags. The $10,000 per tag is a guess in my part. Even if it is only half that, still a lot of money.

Nothing wrong with the money coming into the state. The rules allow LOs to sell the tag, so that’s what they do.
 
RoughCountry said:
The liberals in NM want the oil and gas industry, the only real money in the state to go away now hunters want eplus that makes the landowner a little money and increases thousands of huntable acres to go away. Liberals suck !
Click to expand...
questioning a government handout certainly isn't liberal. quite the opposite actually.
 
How is it again the NR are screwing the R out of thousands of tags? The LO tags is where the tags are all going correct? Now when I first started hunting in NM the NR was sitting pretty but now I think it favors the R which it should but to complain again its now just crying Wolf Right?! Now that’s if I read the complaint correctly but I sometimes read things but don’t compute right in my melon so please correct me if I’m missing something I won’t be offended He’ll Mrs Sikora tells me I’m wrong all the time! LOL
 
joesikora said:
How is it again the NR are screwing the R out of thousands of tags? The LO tags is where the tags are all going correct? Now when I first started hunting in NM the NR was sitting pretty but now I think it favors the R which it should but to complain again its now just crying Wolf Right?! Now that’s if I read the complaint correctly but I sometimes read things but don’t compute right in my melon so please correct me if I’m missing something I won’t be offended He’ll Mrs Sikora tells me I’m wrong all the time! LOL
Click to expand...
That's how I read it Joe. A total of 12,757 total elk tags went to NRs. Of that, 10,352 (75% of the 13,803) LO tags ended up going to NRs.
 
Ropinfool said:
Looking at data from 2021, the report found that in comparison to other Western states, New Mexico allocates significantly more elk tags to nonresident hunters
By: Dac Collins

Posted On October 6, 2022

3 Minute Read
View attachment 128719
The new report takes a closer look at New Mexico's elk license allocation program. NPS

When it comes to drawing an elk tag in New Mexico, resident hunters there seem to be getting the short end of the stick. That’s according to a new report issued on Oct. 5, which found that New Mexico Game and Fish’s current license allocation system turns over a significant share of the state’s elk licenses to nonresidents and landowners, making it harder for working class New Mexicans to get a tag.

“New Mexico elk hunters who rely on drawing a license in the public draw to hunt on public lands have sensed for years that the system’s rigged against them,” the report reads. “They were right.”

The report, titled Take Back Your Elk, was prepared by the New Mexico Wildlife Federation and the New Mexico Chapter of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers. Both groups have long argued that the state’s license allocation system needs to be reformed, but they haven’t had the numbers to back it up. So, last year, the NMWF and NMCBHA filed a request with the state fish and game agency to provide detailed records showing how the state’s elk tags are allocated.

Records from 2021 show that of the 36,162 elk licenses issued in New Mexico, 12,757—or roughly 35 percent of them—went to nonresident hunters. As the report points out, this percentage looks even more skewed when compared to other Western states. In neighboring Arizona, for example, nonresident hunters are restricted to drawing no more than 10 percent of the licenses set aside for elk and other big game species. Noting that NMGF is required by statute to offer at least 84 percent of all available licenses to New Mexicans through the public draw, the report said that due to the current system, residents only purchased 74 percent of the elk licenses issued from 2017 to 2019.

According to the report, 1,388 (or roughly 89 percent) of the 1,553 elk tags that NMGF allocated through its “outfitter set-aside” program went to nonresidents in 2021. Plus, the department issued 13,803 elk licenses through the Elk Private Land Use System, and 75 percent of those tags ended up in the hands of nonresidents. EPLUS allows the state game commission to give elk permit authorizations to private landowners, who can then resell their authorizations to the highest bidder. More often than not, the data show, those bidders are from another state.

Read Next: “Bulls for Billionaires.” Are Montana’s 454 Permits a Step Toward Privatizing the State’s Elk Herd?

Interestingly, while most EPLUS authorizations only allow hunting on private ranches, about 20 percent of those were for “unit-wide” licenses that were valid on all public lands in 2021. The report’s authors contend that this system disenfranchises working class New Mexicans who are limited to hunting public land, while allowing many out-of-staters to circumvent the public draw system.

“Other states in the West fight to preserve hunting opportunities for their own residents,” NMWF executive director Jesse Deubel said in a press release promoting the report. “But our report shows New Mexico does everything it can to help the wealthiest hunters cut to the front of the line. They get to hunt elk that belong to New Mexico citizens every year while many resident hunters can’t draw elk licenses.”

As the report points out, the state legislature’s Legislative Finance Committee came to a similar conclusion back in 2020. After evaluating NMGF’s operations, the committee concluded that the agency should consider amending the Elk Private Land Use System “to be more in line with neighboring states.”

The LFC’s conclusion prompted Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) to call on the state game commission to reform the current system later that year. According to the report, however, the commission has not done anything to address these concerns thus far.

“We’re seeing our state’s family hunting traditions die while elk hunting in New Mexico increasingly becomes a pay-to-play exercise,” Deubel said on Wednesday. “I encourage all New Mexico hunters to speak up and demand real change.”
Click to expand...
Thanks Ropinfool. Ok I see some holes in their story so If I have time I want to talk to NMG&F for their side and get a copy of this study and see whats up after the 1st of the year of course. I’ve seen in the past that some groups like to Guild The Lilly a little if they think most people won’t check and will just believe what someone says right or not. As I’ve said probably 100 times on here and the guys that know me have heard this already NM is my first love my first ever big game hunt etc, etc! I Love NM and Im wanting to buy some property with at least one LO tag every year so I know I’ll be hunting every year. Just kidding about the LO tag but not about buying some land.
 
Why do Game and Fish departments always walk away from easy revenue? They aren't going to get rid of landowner tags, so simply charge $5,000 for each landowner tag. It would easily double their 46 million budget.
 
ArizonaBuild said:
Why do Game and Fish departments always walk away from easy revenue? They aren't going to get rid of landowner tags, so simply charge $5,000 for each landowner tag. It would easily double their 46 million budget.
Click to expand...
One thing you need to know is NM is the second most corrupt state next to my home in IL. LOL! The LO‘s get tags to compensate for damages to fences etc etc. so that‘s a good thing of course but I’ve seen big ranches receive a hundred tags. Now they don’t use them of course they may only use a half dozen or so but they were still allotted the tags. Now I dont if that’s gospel but I seen ads stating that
 
joesikora said:
One thing you need to know is NM is the second most corrupt state next to my home in IL. LOL! The LO‘s get tags to compensate for damages to fences etc etc. so that‘s a good thing of course but I’ve seen big ranches receive a hundred tags. Now they don’t use them of course they may only use a half dozen or so but they were still allotted the tags. Now I dont if that’s gospel but I seen ads stating that
Click to expand...
Certainly nothing wrong with playing by the rules your given. It just boils down to money as usual. As long as the game & fish is funded by selling tags, the goal will be to sell tags. It's impossible to make residents, NR's, landowners, and outfitters happy. I'm old enough to remember when the hunting in my neck of the woods was pretty good. Back then, a lot less tags were given out and there were no LO tags. Now the g&f is still selling tags to units with little to no animals and they know it. kinda like fraud isn't it. Landowners have a lot of political pull and so do some outfitters. We all know that once you're stuck on the tit, you'll fight tooth and nail to keep it and the g&f is just another government agency who milks the public.
 
Ropinfool said:
Certainly nothing wrong with playing by the rules your given. It just boils down to money as usual. As long as the game & fish is funded by selling tags, the goal will be to sell tags. It's impossible to make residents, NR's, landowners, and outfitters happy. I'm old enough to remember when the hunting in my neck of the woods was pretty good. Back then, a lot less tags were given out and there were no LO tags. Now the g&f is still selling tags to units with little to no animals and they know it. kinda like fraud isn't it. Landowners have a lot of political pull and so do some outfitters. We all know that once you're stuck on the tit, you'll fight tooth and nail to keep it and the g&f is just another government agency who milks the public.
Click to expand...
 
BeDawg said:
As a NR, I seem unable to ever draw a tag. I guess I just need to be a WEALTHY NR to be successful.
Click to expand...
Nope I'm about as broke ass as can be. Yet I've drawn NR NM tags In the last two application periods. Before that it was year 2000 when I collected a NR draw tag in New Mexico. All those years in between I was a faithful contributor to the NMDF&G with no tags drawn contributing to wildlife conservation at its finest.
 
Ropinfool said:
Looking at data from 2021, the report found that in comparison to other Western states, New Mexico allocates significantly more elk tags to nonresident hunters
By: Dac Collins

Posted On October 6, 2022

3 Minute Read
View attachment 128719
The new report takes a closer look at New Mexico's elk license allocation program. NPS

When it comes to drawing an elk tag in New Mexico, resident hunters there seem to be getting the short end of the stick. That’s according to a new report issued on Oct. 5, which found that New Mexico Game and Fish’s current license allocation system turns over a significant share of the state’s elk licenses to nonresidents and landowners, making it harder for working class New Mexicans to get a tag.

“New Mexico elk hunters who rely on drawing a license in the public draw to hunt on public lands have sensed for years that the system’s rigged against them,” the report reads. “They were right.”

The report, titled Take Back Your Elk, was prepared by the New Mexico Wildlife Federation and the New Mexico Chapter of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers. Both groups have long argued that the state’s license allocation system needs to be reformed, but they haven’t had the numbers to back it up. So, last year, the NMWF and NMCBHA filed a request with the state fish and game agency to provide detailed records showing how the state’s elk tags are allocated.

Records from 2021 show that of the 36,162 elk licenses issued in New Mexico, 12,757—or roughly 35 percent of them—went to nonresident hunters. As the report points out, this percentage looks even more skewed when compared to other Western states. In neighboring Arizona, for example, nonresident hunters are restricted to drawing no more than 10 percent of the licenses set aside for elk and other big game species. Noting that NMGF is required by statute to offer at least 84 percent of all available licenses to New Mexicans through the public draw, the report said that due to the current system, residents only purchased 74 percent of the elk licenses issued from 2017 to 2019.

According to the report, 1,388 (or roughly 89 percent) of the 1,553 elk tags that NMGF allocated through its “outfitter set-aside” program went to nonresidents in 2021. Plus, the department issued 13,803 elk licenses through the Elk Private Land Use System, and 75 percent of those tags ended up in the hands of nonresidents. EPLUS allows the state game commission to give elk permit authorizations to private landowners, who can then resell their authorizations to the highest bidder. More often than not, the data show, those bidders are from another state.

Read Next: “Bulls for Billionaires.” Are Montana’s 454 Permits a Step Toward Privatizing the State’s Elk Herd?

Interestingly, while most EPLUS authorizations only allow hunting on private ranches, about 20 percent of those were for “unit-wide” licenses that were valid on all public lands in 2021. The report’s authors contend that this system disenfranchises working class New Mexicans who are limited to hunting public land, while allowing many out-of-staters to circumvent the public draw system.

“Other states in the West fight to preserve hunting opportunities for their own residents,” NMWF executive director Jesse Deubel said in a press release promoting the report. “But our report shows New Mexico does everything it can to help the wealthiest hunters cut to the front of the line. They get to hunt elk that belong to New Mexico citizens every year while many resident hunters can’t draw elk licenses.”

As the report points out, the state legislature’s Legislative Finance Committee came to a similar conclusion back in 2020. After evaluating NMGF’s operations, the committee concluded that the agency should consider amending the Elk Private Land Use System “to be more in line with neighboring states.”

The LFC’s conclusion prompted Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) to call on the state game commission to reform the current system later that year. According to the report, however, the commission has not done anything to address these concerns thus far.

“We’re seeing our state’s family hunting traditions die while elk hunting in New Mexico increasingly becomes a pay-to-play exercise,” Deubel said on Wednesday. “I encourage all New Mexico hunters to speak up and demand real change.”
Click to expand...
Is anyone else not surprised by results / conclusions of a report funded and prepared by New Mexico Wildlife Federation?
#fake news #landowner haters #wolf lovers
 
Holy Pete said:
Is anyone else not surprised by results / conclusions of a report funded and prepared by New Mexico Wildlife Federation?
#fake news #landowner haters #wolf lovers
Click to expand...
Nope.
12,757 tags went to NRs
10,352 ended up there via LO tags.
1388 went to NRs via Outfitter Designated.
Hard to say the NM G&F draw favors NRs when 92% of the NR hunters got their tag from a NM LO or outfitter.
 
1704662981590.png
1704662981590.png
Mom, I didn’t draw a New Mexico elk tag. Donald Trump and Elon Musk are he only guys that can afford a LO tag. Mom can I borrow some money or can we move to New Mexico ?
 
ArizonaBuild said:
NMWF was so proud when they got NR's cut to 6%. In fact all they did was drive NR's to landowner tags and reinforce the landowner strangle hold on the state. Well done!
Click to expand...
Amen! I have said before NM is the 2nd most corrupt state behind my state of IL of course. Now think of this that’s more corrupt than the east coast states like New Jersey etc where the mob are
 
Last edited:
Joe2Kool said:
Nope.
12,757 tags went to NRs
10,352 ended up there via LO tags.
1388 went to NRs via Outfitter Designated.
Hard to say the NM G&F draw favors NRs when 92% of the NR hunters got their tag from a NM LO or outfitter.
Click to expand...
That means 1,017 non residents drew tags in the (DIY) part of the draw? If I interpret that information correctly?

Technically the Landowner tags and outfitter draws are for anyone, residents and non residents.

I think the % of non residents in the outfitter draw pools would be high, as lots of residents don't need guides.

As far as the landowner tags, a lot of them are purchased by outfitters and tag brokers that book guided hunts and a high % of those hunters are are non residents. People that don't have elk hunting opportunities in their home states are going to pay more money to hunt elk than people with elk in their back yard.

If anything, the Outfitter Draw helps them and the landowner tags helps NM land owners, brokers and outfitters.

New Mexico handed out 1,017 elk tags to non residents straight up DIY. The LO tags and Outfitter draw tags essentially went to the people willing to pay for them, no matter the residence.
 
Buxndiverdux said:
That means 1,017 non residents drew tags in the (DIY) part of the draw? If I interpret that information correctly?

New Mexico handed out 1,017 elk tags to non residents straight up DIY. The LO tags and Outfitter draw tags essentially went to the people willing to pay for them, no matter the residence.
Click to expand...

The numbers I used came straight out of the report. Not sure how the 1017 went to NRs, likely draw. But just don't know.

And I agree on the Outfitter and LO tags. Anyone can buy them. Just most are bought by NRs.
 
ksp71 said:
You can also check the NMDGF draw odds report if you want to know the number of tags issued through the draw. According to the report NMDGF published (https://www.wildlife.state.nm.us/do...21-Big-Game-Drawing-Odds-Complete-Report.xlsx):

2021:
Total elk tags issued through the draw: 22,371
Resident tags issued: 19,866
NR tags issued: 947
Outfitter: 1,558
Click to expand...
That is around 88.5% of the elk tags going to residents, before you figure out how many of the LO tags and outfitter draw tags go to residents.

That might as well be a 90-10 split, because you know residents bought land owner tags and a small percentage of residents got in the outfitter draw as well.

Seems like a whole lot of bitching and complaining about nothing IMO.
 
I do not mind private landowners getting their fair share of tags for their private land. Fair numbers and percentages can be debated, negotiated, compromised. I know if I owned 500 acres of land and maintained habitat to support animals I would want the right to hunt them from time to time.
What is the BIGGEST CROCK OF S*#% is being able to use PRIVATE LAND tags on adjacent PUBLIC LAND through the UNIT-WIDE designation that the EPLUS system allows. This needs to STOP NOW.
The supposed tradeoff is that public land hunters can hunt on those private parcels and therefore it increases access to public land hunters as a tradeoff. However, I was on a recent youth hunt in 16C and the Adobe Ranch which is supposed to be open due to its Unit-Wide designation had all gates into the ranch locked except if you accessed the ranch from an entirely different unit (16E).
I have ran into several outfitter's and guides in the field and they laugh saying that they harvest most all the decent elk on their private land in the first 24 hrs of a hunt (after all it is their land 365 days a year and should know it well) and then use their remaining tags on adjacent public land the remaining hunt days. I've seen Units that were once quality, become almost impossible to harvest a legal bull in.
Furthermore, many of these tags can be used in any 5 day span, including outside the hunt dates that restrict public land hunter. This is BULLCRAP! Let's let common sense prevail and allow private landowners their tags to use on THIER PRIVATE LAND ONLY! If we do not stop this I can guarantee hunting quality will go down for everyone, but PUBLIC LAND hunters most of all.
 
I feel like I could just copy/paste my post from last year. The problems with the EPLUS program are its size, and the out-of-control tag prices. I wouldn't mind forking over $1-2K for an elk tag if I didn't draw, but in my understanding the prices are 2-3X that, even for marginal units.

1. What makes me most mad is the direct pay-for-play aspect. No where else in the US, to my knowledge, can you walk up with $10-20K and pay to hunt public elk on public land in whatever unit you choose. The American model of conservation, which has been very successful, allocates tags democratically by lottery (or OTC/generally to all takers), not to the highest bidder. Some pay-for-play fine, and the line blurs with Governor's tags and similar programs, but the number of tags in EPLUS and quantity of $$ is the problem in NM in my opinion.

2. It is secondarily frustrating that, with all this money flying around, NMDGF is getting a small fraction of it. One can debate how much benefit the elk and the people of NM get from EPLUS, but it seems like it should be more to me, and more of the money directly.

3. EPLUS is probably not bad for elk, since our herds appear to be doing well. There is no counterfactual though (we don't know how they'd be doing without EPLUS).

So, as a public land NM elk hunter, I wish we had a few more tags floating around. But the herds are good and I've had good experience hunting elk most years I've lived here since 2020. The EPLUS program has a lot of flaws, but if we could shrink the program by reducing LO tags some, reduce some corruption (the minimal size is a little silly, like 3-5 acres I think?), limit the UW tags a little more, and somehow cap prices / send more money to NMDGF, I'd be a happy camper.

Just like anything nowadays, NMWF needs to sensationalize the issue to get coverage. I wish they would focus on our mule deer, since those herds seem like they are in a lot worse shape than the elk.
 
I'd prefer all EPLUS tags be Ranch-Only. This Unit Wide crap is exactly that. Crap. That is speaking from experience as someone who has tried to utilize this supposed "increased access" to my own advantage on hunts. It doesn't work. Access is limited and gates are locked that should be opened.
No Unit-Wide Tags should exist unless public has full access to properties the same as landowners do. We can't have one set of access rules (drive-in for landowners) and another (walk-in for public) especially on huge 30,000 acre ranches. All existing access points need to be opened equally to landowner and public alike. Furthermore, I think access should be available a full two weeks preceding any hunt not just 2 days.
 
filinmar2 said:
I'd prefer all EPLUS tags be Ranch-Only. This Unit Wide crap is exactly that. Crap. That is speaking from experience as someone who has tried to utilize this supposed "increased access" to my own advantage on hunts. It doesn't work. Access is limited and gates are locked that should be opened.
No Unit-Wide Tags should exist unless public has full access to properties the same as landowners do. We can't have one set of access rules (drive-in for landowners) and another (walk-in for public) especially on huge 30,000 acre ranches. All existing access points need to be opened equally to landowner and public alike. Furthermore, I think access should be available a full two weeks preceding any hunt not just 2 days.
Click to expand...
I mean, the access is supposed to be the same. Did you call NMDGF / a warden? No doubt some landowners violate this rule due to lax enforcement, but I haven't observed it myself.
 
NM High Country In my experience growing up in NM people are pretty darn good at leaving gates the way they found them. I do. I bet you do too.
I believe you yourself said it best in another post you commented on when it came to not allowing legal access, “I’m probably getting my battery operated grinder with a cut off wheel out and keep driving.”
If landowners are being shady with allowing the agreed upon access to their property I’m sure it won’t be long until people make it right on their own as you stated with the closed county roads.
 
filinmar2 said:
I'd prefer all EPLUS tags be Ranch-Only. This Unit Wide crap is exactly that. Crap. That is speaking from experience as someone who has tried to utilize this supposed "increased access" to my own advantage on hunts. It doesn't work. Access is limited and gates are locked that should be opened.
No Unit-Wide Tags should exist unless public has full access to properties the same as landowners do. We can't have one set of access rules (drive-in for landowners) and another (walk-in for public) especially on huge 30,000 acre ranches. All existing access points need to be opened equally to landowner and public alike. Furthermore, I think access should be available a full two weeks preceding any hunt not just 2 days.
Click to expand...
First off, you have equal access...the rules are equal access for everyone. The one caveat is landowners can travel their roads to their homes, camps, etc. It is still private property...they have equipment, families, animals, etc behind those gates. Lock them if they like, it is still private land.

You are concerned if maybe the landowner breaks the rules (1% of users), but not excited for the fact that every tag hold in 16C can hunt the Adobe Ranch by climbing over a gate...all 34,000 acres of prime Gila habitat. The other 99% of tag holds still benefit, at no cost to them. They can hunt it! Jump a fence.

You would rather give away massive private access / resouces for every public tag holder, because maybe an outfitter breaks the rules, or a landowner.

You don't want unit wide tags...but at the same time you also want two weeks of scouting time on someones private land instead of 2 days?? The old saying "give and inch and they'll take a mile" applies here.

Very hypocritically thought process.

You really should re-evaluate your logic on this..EVERY public land elk hunter overall benefits in the current model via private land access. Your model eliminates private land access for everyone (which was costing them nothing to start)...among many other loses like waters, elk carrying capacity, public land access via Unitwide lands, ect
 
Last edited:
Have you looked at an EPLUS map? A vast majority of properties are small little parcels that give you access to a few acres and half the time have houses on them. If Adobe is that damn premium they would keep it Ranch-Only as most premium ranches do.
Concerned with their families and equipment? Are most hunters you know thieves? Every hunter I know or associate with are legit people. If they are that concerned why would they sign up to allow access onto their property and not just declare themselves Ranch-Only. Some land owners don’t want to have hunters on their land (even if they opted for unit-wide) so don’t comply with the rules but want the benefit of hunting adjacent public lands. It’s human nature to have your cake and eat it too, I get it. And that’s what they are doing.
I have personally experienced and seen 16C go from an amazing and coveted Gila unit to marginal at best in the last 25 years. I’m speaking from boots on the ground hunting it back then and now experience. Quality (harvest %, game densities, avg class of bull) has declined SIGNIFICANTLY over the last 20 years. Ask anyone (including guides and outfitters which I have spoken to personally in 16C) who has longstanding experience in that unit. This isn’t to say success can’t be had because it can, it’s just a a lot harder to come by than it was several years back given the same amount of work put in.
I’m not sure if this is the case in other units as well, I can’t speak to that as my personal experience is in 16. I’d be interested to hear more stories and examples of how the unit-wide status has helped public draw hunters in other units.
As far as the two week scouting period goes, that was a suggestion if we have to be stuck with this bullshit unit-wide tag crap. Not hypocritical logic.
I would prefer to never have access to any private lands with my public draw tag. Keep private tags on private land and keep public draw tags on public land. This separation worked pretty damn well for decades as the Gila became a world renowned destination for elk hunting.
But if I have to be stuck with this BS then damn right I’m gonna take full advantage of it and have done so in the last few years to my personal benefit. That doesn’t mean I wouldn’t trade those successes and my access in a heartbeat to keep public and private separate as it was for many years growing up.
 
Last edited:
coryb said:
The Gila elk decline is a result of wolves, not eplus!!!
Click to expand...
Agreed and even with wolves, him saying 16C is marginal is laughable.

Landowners are incentivated with EPLUS to do more...not less. 16C is, and almost everywhere else, is better for EPLUS.

Wolves are def trouble. I ran into a pack on my 21A hunt two years ago. Right on the eastern edge of 16C...as I was working a buglung bull.

I also hunted a great little unitwide property that was some of the only water around and saw elk. I just climbed over a gate and walk to a pond I saw on the map.
 
filinmar2 said:
From a desktop in Florida. SMH....
Click to expand...
Wait a minute…. What happened to all of your “equal” talk? As a member of the public I’m just as entitled to my perspective on the Gila NATIONAL forest as you are. Is this about YOU or the “public land hunter”.

Additionally, I happen to have spent about 200 days with my boots on the ground in the Gila in the last 20 years, mostly in 16c….
 
Last edited:
The article would only be valid if it only looked at public land elk tags. Throwing in private landowner tags def skews the data. In what world would a majority of those tags going to residents?

Now if you want to argue that landowners get too many tags, that is a different discussion. But if i understand public land hunts, the numbers are locked in to the 84,6,10%.

But I also would agree that landowner tags should be PLO!
 
txhunter58 said:
But if i understand public land hunts, the numbers are locked in to the 84,6,10%.
Click to expand...
No, those splits are for draw tags (which may be used on public or private). UW landowner tags have no restrictions on res vs non-res, and it so happens that mostly nonresidents buy the UW tags. I believe one roundabout point of the article is that the 84/6/10 split is (most likely) not maintained on public lands due to the UW landowner tags.

"In what world would a majority of those [PLO] tags going to residents?"
A little bit of devil's advocate: (some) other states allocate (some) private land only tags through the draw, and control res/nonres ratios that way (see WY and CO for instance, although CO does give landowners tag to sell too). Landowners still can sell access but can't sell the tags.

In a BHA/NMWF world, I believe, all NM elk tags would be allocated through the draw and res/nonres ratios controlled.
 
fmarrs3 said:
No, those splits are for draw tags (which may be used on public or private). UW landowner tags have no restrictions on res vs non-res, and it so happens that mostly nonresidents buy the UW tags. I believe one roundabout point of the article is that the 84/6/10 split is (most likely) not maintained on public lands due to the UW landowner tags.

"In what world would a majority of those [PLO] tags going to residents?"
A little bit of devil's advocate: (some) other states allocate (some) private land only tags through the draw, and control res/nonres ratios that way (see WY and CO for instance, although CO does give landowners tag to sell too). Landowners still can sell access but can't sell the tags.

In a BHA/NMWF world, I believe, all NM elk tags would be allocated through the draw and res/nonres ratios controlled.
Click to expand...

So you are saying that legally, the split is supposed to be 84/6/10 including landowners/ private land? I figured it was written so it would only include public land hunt draw tags, and exclude landowners. If you are correct, then I have no idea how that would be accomplished. Not with the current system.

Whatever else happens. Landowners should be PLO. Keep pounding that message. But as they say, money talks.
 
Last edited:
txhunter58 said:
So you are saying that legally, the split is supposed to be 84/6/10 including landowners/ private land? I figured it was written so it would only include public land hunt draw tags, and exclude landowners. If you are correct, then I have no idea how that would be accomplished. Not with the current system.

Whatever else happens. Landowners should be PLO. Keep pounding that message. But as they say, money talks.
Click to expand...
You don't understand the benefit of unitwide landowner tags.

I hope the majority of landowners will go unitwide in time (they won't). I hope they further incentivize landowners in time to choose the unitwide option. It benefits everyone...even if you never step foot on unitwide land. It greatly helps elk.

Within the current program, unitwide makes elk have enough value that landowners see the benefit of installing water wells that often are not needed on the property ($50k+). It encourages cattle reduction, it encourages fence alternations...and so far it has opened up ≈600k acres of private ground to public land elk hunters in NM.

Let's use EPLUS to get that publicly accessible private land up to 1 million, then 2 million acres, and so on. That is a way better option than eliminating or reducing public hunting opportunties.

Again, Unitwide Ranches are PRIVATE ranches you can hunt with a legal tag! That is a beautiful thing!...no other permission needed, no tresspass fees, for every legal tag holder in that unit.
 
Bulldawg87 said:
You don't understand the benefit of unitwide landowner tags.

I hope the majority of landowners will go unitwide in time (they won't). I hope they further incentivize landowners in time to choose the unitwide option. It benefits everyone...even if you never step foot on unitwide land. It greatly helps elk.

Within the current program, unitwide makes elk have enough value that landowners see the benefit of installing water wells that often are not needed on the property ($50k+). It encourages cattle reduction, it encourages fence alternations...and so far it has opened up ≈600k acres of private ground to public land elk hunters in NM.

Let's use EPLUS to get that publicly accessible private land up to 1 million, then 2 million acres, and so on. That is a way better option than eliminating or reducing public hunting opportunties.

Again, Unitwide Ranches are PRIVATE ranches you can hunt with a legal tag! That is a beautiful thing!...no other permission needed, no tresspass fees, for every legal tag holder in that unit.
Click to expand...
UW authorizations do not incentivize LO’s to do any of that. The authorization is worth the market value of the unit regardless if an elk ever steps on the deeded ground or not.

I know too many UW authorization recipients to believe that for a second. UW recipient’s have no reason to want to keep elk.

Are there UW properties that supply critical habitat? Absolutely, but their authorization is worth the same whether 100 elk or 0 elk use the property.
 
SLM said:
UW authorizations do not incentivize LO’s to do any of that. The authorization is worth the market value of the unit regardless if an elk ever steps on the deeded ground or not.

I know too many UW authorization recipients to believe that for a second. UW recipient’s have no reason to want to keep elk.

Are there UW properties that supply critical habitat? Absolutely, but their authorization is worth the same whether 100 elk or 0 elk use the property.
Click to expand...
What you are missing is many properties would not qualify without the improvements....and the weighted scoring system.

They would no get tags without doing the work to get the ranch qualified, in many cases, or constantly draw cows or rarely a bull with a miminum score.

The reason people buy the land and do the work, spend the money is because the tag authorizations have value to the landowner, especially in unitwide tags.

I know enough people doing this work, and spending this money to qualify for EPLUS tags to know the program works exactly like it is intented, on many land owners.

Without the value of the tag, much of this this habitat is never developed...and elk are worse off. Hunters are also worse off without it, as now they have more acerage to hunt, more water holes to hunt and sometimes new access points into public land...because landowners see value in going unitwide.

A ranch that scores lower, is more likely to not draw a tag or draw a cow tag. The system is setup in a way where the better you score, meaning the better the habitat (water, cover, forage, etc) the more likely these small contributing ranches should do in the landowner draw....that is where unitwide incentivizes you.

I want to draw a bull, I better score well on my land! To score high enough to have better draw odds and improve my chance at a bull, I better install a $50k well and drinkers.
 
Last edited:
Maybe I don’t know how it works in New Mexico. Never hunted there. This is my first time to apply. Are you saying that if I draw a tag in the public drawing, and there is a private ranch in that unit that gets unit wide landowner tags, I can hunt that ranch?
 
txhunter58 said:
Maybe I don’t know how it works in New Mexico. Never hunted there. This is my first time to apply. Are you saying that if I draw a tag in the public drawing, and there is a private ranch in that unit that gets unit wide landowner tags, I can hunt that ranch?
Click to expand...
Correct. Any landowner that gets unitwide tags is trading access to his land to the public, for his tags to also have public land access.

Now you have private lands you can hunt that are widely overlooked by the public. Generally for those to be in the program, they also have to score well from a habitat perspective....often times, meaning there are water sources. Being that it is privately owned, they usually are functional too.

Here are some examples. All the unitwide ranches are the orange outlines.

That is thousands of acres in most primary zone units that you, as a public land hunter, have immediate permission to hunt with a valid elk tag. No trespass fees, no having to know somebody. Jump a gate and go hunt that property.

Screenshot_20240312_204553_Chrome.jpg


Screenshot_20240312_204612_Chrome.jpg
 
Last edited:
txhunter58 said:
Maybe I don’t know how it works in New Mexico. Never hunted there. This is my first time to apply. Are you saying that if I draw a tag in the public drawing, and there is a private ranch in that unit that gets unit wide landowner tags, I can hunt that ranch?
Click to expand...
That 16C ranch for example is over 30,000 acres. But some are just 40 acres or 100 acres...these can be extremely productive too. Especially when the surrounding forest, BLM or State ground is lacking water.

I have a great spot in a Gila unit that is like 20-30 acres I hunted, not much other water around and it got hammered by elk.

Landowners choose each year whether they want to go Unitwide or Ranch Only.
 
Bulldawg87 said:
What you are missing is many properties would not qualify without the improvements....and the weighted scoring system.

They would no get tags without doing the work to get the ranch qualified, in many cases, or constantly draw cows or rarely a bull with a miminum score.

The reason people buy the land and do the work, spend the money is because the tag authorizations have value to the landowner, especially in unitwide tags.

I know enough people doing this work, and spending this money to qualify for EPLUS tags to know the program works exactly like it is intented, on many land owners.

Without the value of the tag, much of this this habitat is never developed...and elk are worse off. Hunters are also worse off without it, as now they have more acerage to hunt, more water holes to hunt and sometimes new access points into public land...because landowners see value in going unitwide.

A ranch that scores lower, is more likely to not draw a tag or draw a cow tag. The system is setup in a way where the better you score, meaning the better the habitat (water, cover, forage, etc) the more likely these small contributing ranches should do in the landowner draw....that is where unitwide incentivizes you.

I want to draw a bull, I better score well on my land! To score high enough to have better draw odds and improve my chance at a bull, I better install a $50k well and drinkers.
Click to expand...
I think you are confusing a few things. The weighted score applies to the base properties (a property that receives at least one authorization), they do not draw for authorizations. Any property not receiving one whole authorizations is put into SCR where they have to draw yearly for 1 authorization.

Some larger small properties get screwed in units with large parcels and get stuck into SCR with 1,000+ acres.

Do you know why the Adobe went UW?
 
SLM said:
I think you are confusing a few things. The weighted score applies to the base properties (a property that receives at least one authorization), they do not draw for authorizations. Any property not receiving one whole authorizations is put into SCR where they have to draw yearly for 1 authorization.

Some larger small properties get screwed in units with large parcels and get stuck into SCR with 1,000+ acres.

Do you know why the Adobe went UW?
Click to expand...
I am not confused..the complaints about Unitwide and EPLUS mostly have to do with SCR properties.

Weighted scoring of SCRs is every important to what they draw. A SCR with a 7 is less likely to draw period in some units, and less likely to draw a bull or archery tag in others...compared to an SCR scoring a 9 (better habitat).

The scoring system helps push SCR owners into doing things to score better. It improves their odds of drawing, and odds of drawing better tags. This still helps elk, and opens up ground.

The scoring system absolutely still applies to SCR ranches.

Both base ranches and SCRs can put in for habitat incentitives as well. For those of you that do not know, these are improvments the NMDGF considers sigificant to improve elk habitat. If someone was looking to make some money to cover the cost of these improvements, going unit wide would be a great way to do so. Again, the public gets the huntable improvement / acerage, the landowner gets a more valuable authorization to sell, use, trade, etc.

The landower is totally incentivized to do habitat improvements, especially in Unitwide, as the value of the tag authorization is generally much more....which can help pay for that new $50k well that will last much much longer than the 3 year window the landowner can apply for the bonus tag authorization for habitat improvements, by putting in said well.

Now his ranch also scores better as maybe it was a 7, then the habitat improvement water well was completed. The ranch, the next year starts to score a 9 for having year round water.

The hunting public gets huntable acerage, the landowner gets an improved chance at tags or better tags, elk and other wildlife get improved habitat and the cost to the state of NM is nothing but a code given to the landowner, if the landowner draws.
 
Last edited:
Bulldawg87 said:
…That is thousands of acres in most primary zone units that you, as a public land hunter, have immediate permission to hunt with a valid elk tag. No trespass fees, no having to know somebody. Jump a gate and go hunt that property.

View attachment 139701

View attachment 139702
Click to expand...
I also have never hunted NM, but am interested in hunting elk, so I’m trying to understand this system.

Just to make sure I’m reading correctly, I can draw a 16C tag, and hunt the private land in the program?

Referencing The report, it said ~10,000 tags went to NRs via LO allocation. How do those tags get to NRs?

If they are sold to NRs, does that mean I could pay $5000 for a tag and another NR 16C tag holder can jump the fence and hunt next to me for free?

Finally, what’s in it for the LO? $5000/tag?

Note, since my earlier post, I searched for “cost of NM elk LO tag.” The going rate was $4500-$7500.

Thanks.
 
This initial report is junk IMO. The tags are for sale and anybody can buy them. It’s the system NM set up and we play by their rules. However, complaining that more NR but the available tags is a big nothing burger to me. The tags are available to the residents, they choose not to exercise their options. I wish NM would go to a straight 90/10 split with no outfitter set aside but, their game…their rules.

Many nonresidents save up for years for a OIL elk hunt. NM offers a viable option for NRs to hunt elk.

Carry on and good luck in the draws.
 
Joe2Kool said:
I also have never hunted NM, but am interested in hunting elk, so I’m trying to understand this system.

Just to make sure I’m reading correctly, I can draw a 16C tag, and hunt the private land in the program?

Referencing The report, it said ~10,000 tags went to NRs via LO allocation. How do those tags get to NRs?

If they are sold to NRs, does that mean I could pay $5000 for a tag and another NR 16C tag holder can jump the fence and hunt next to me for free?

Finally, what’s in it for the LO? $5000/tag?

Note, since my earlier post, I searched for “cost of NM elk LO tag.” The going rate was $4500-$7500.

Thanks.
Click to expand...
As a non resident, your odds of drawing a tag in the 16's units in NM is about 1% or less.

This is an additional option as a way to hunt since you are highly unlikely to ever draw that tag...you can buy a landowner tag that is Ranch Only or Unitwide. Residents or NR can buy these. If you buy a unitwide wide tag, you can hunt the normal public land that a draw tag allows, or hunt any private land that is in the Unitwide program. As can someone drawing at tag.

Think of unitwide as being another public resource like NF, BLM, State and then Unitwide.

So yes, another hunter that drew a tag could hop that fence and hunt right next to you, just like you could do the same on a different unitwide property in the same unit or like you could do in the Forest too. It expands public access essentially.

Not sure where you looked but you probably are not gonna find a Gila unitwide tag for $5000. Maybe $7500 probably $9500+...depending on the unit.

You will also see a few units like 16A that are over $20k. However...there are only a few tags for sale that exist at all in those units, as the vast majority of the unit is all public already...with very few landowners.

You also will find units with much higher percentages of private land, meaning more private land tags...and those tags will be on the lower end of the market too.
 
Last edited:
I haven’t studied the draw odds, and didn’t specifically find 16C tags for $5000, just a quick Google search said typically $5-7K.

Bottom line seems highly unlikely I could draw the tag, but could buy one. Not currently headed down that path, just curious how it worked.

Thanks for the info BD87.
 
Do you know why the Adobe went UW?

There's not enough elk on the ranch to consistently hunt the # of tags they had been hunting. The tags were worth more to outfitter and ranch to go UW. Shows how low the elk #'s are in 16C compared to 10 years ago.
 
Agreed Muleman. If they had the elk numbers year-round you bet they’d be RO and restrict access to paying customers only. They’re definitely not UW out of some moral prerogative to improve hunter access.

As I understand from talking to several guides in the area it’s a game of betting on a good monsoon year vs drought year. If it’s a big drought year private land has the water and the advantage. If it’s a good moisture year the public land has enough water infrastructure to disperse the animals.

With the UW designation they are hedging their bets. If it’s a drought year they got the concentration of animals on their property and if it’s a good moisture year they can harvest the animals on their property first (after all they do own it 365 days a year and with hunting becoming the business it is likely have a few hundred game cameras everywhere keeping tabs) and then still have access to the entire unit.

The landowner is just being smart and using the existing system to their advantage. No blame there. It’s the system that needs changing.

I would like to see more conservation dollars being spent on more guzzlers and water catchment systems on public land to mitigate against drought years. Many very arid places in NM have these types of water harvesting infrastructure and help keep wildlife in many public areas they would otherwise not be. Would like to see
Many more of these put in and expanded with RAWA funds.
 
I think we asked this before, where is this record/study that you speak of? Please post it on here so we can all read it instead of the just take my word for it mentally.

That’s for your time
 

Similar threads

F
Change UNIT-WIDE elk designation in New Mexico to RANCH ONLY!
Replies
54
Views
2k
MrRogers
MrRogers
Simpleton
Mule Deer Proposal
2 3
Replies
202
Views
4k
Vanilla
Vanilla

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

Screenshot_20201006-090749_Gallery.jpg
Antelope Island Giant
A332F146-5945-4D2E-ACF6-9FE9C1789E4D.jpeg
2017-11-10 11.05.11.jpg
20201014_123628.jpg
book cliffs buck pack out.jpg
20191106_130658.jpg
IMG_5861.jpeg
743658C7-3127-4918-B705-511EC130A006.jpeg
1009141955c.jpeg
20210811_231319.jpg
[000138].jpg

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