Commission meeting about e-plus link

[NMBOWHNTR27]

You can comment in the link I believe.

https://www.wildlife.state.nm.us/download/commission/agenda/hearing-notices/SGC-Agenda-04_11_2022-Meeting.pdf

 

[5yearcoueshunter]

https://www.wildlife.state.nm.us/commission/meeting-agendas/ nothing in the proposals about e plus specifically. Unit 34 proposal is interesting though, making to a secondary zone. That would mean unlimited private land tags, but all UW would be gone.

 

[roadrunner]

Commission Meeting Briefing Statement

This link will take you directly to the meeting's agenda about the elk rule change proposal.

 

[Phantom Hunter]

Someone explain the reasoning behind the proposed changes to unit 34. Pros and cons?

 

[Bigfoot 1]

Nothing earth shattering I read in any of those proposals. I am interested in seeing how they adjust the antelope tag numbers.

 

[5yearcoueshunter]

Someone explain the reasoning behind the proposed changes to unit 34. Pros and cons?

They haven't provided reasoning yet, I'm sure we'll hear more on the 11th meeting and then the formal public comment document. My speculation is that
1. They want to reduce the elk in 34, so making unlimited private would help
2. There are probably quite a few properties in 34 that don't qualify for E Plus so they don't get tags but want them, this would accomplish that
3. Certainly much easier for game and fish to manage, might be a trial run to basically eliminate e plus and move to manage private elk hunting the same as deer, pronghorn and Barbary.

As a strictly public land hunter, the only upside I see is would eliminate UW tags. Other than that, I fear too many elk being killed by unlimited tags, especially when that includes cow tags. Elk in 34 definitely like to hang out in the private valley corridors, so I could see over harvest potential, but I could be wrong.

 

[Bigfoot 1]

They haven't provided reasoning yet, I'm sure we'll hear more on the 11th meeting and then the formal public comment document. My speculation is that
1. They want to reduce the elk in 34, so making unlimited private would help
2. There are probably quite a few properties in 34 that don't qualify for E Plus so they don't get tags but want them, this would accomplish that
3. Certainly much easier for game and fish to manage, might be a trial run to basically eliminate e plus and move to manage private elk hunting the same as deer, pronghorn and Barbary.

As a strictly public land hunter, the only upside I see is would eliminate UW tags. Other than that, I fear too many elk being killed by unlimited tags, especially when that includes cow tags. Elk in 34 definitely like to hang out in the private valley corridors, so I could see over harvest potential, but I could be wrong.

There’s a few private ranches up there with big money. 34 is loaded with elk, you’ve got a very good chance of getting a really nice bull if you draw 34, those high dollar Mescalero Apache bulls can’t read and they transit back and forth from the reservation to National Forest regularly. You make some good points.

 

[roadrunner]

The problem with ALL game agencies is they tend to do a "one size fits all" approach rather than a fit for purpose on game management.

In regard to moving unit 34 in its entirety to a secondary zone is foolish. Certain pieces of private ground or portions of the unit, sure. But not the entire unit.

After "well intended" moves are made by the game commission, the 4 year waiting period is far too long to correct foolish results...

 

[5yearcoueshunter]

There’s a few private ranches up there with big money. 34 is loaded with elk, you’ve got a very good chance of getting a really nice bull if you draw 34, those high dollar Mescalero Apache bulls can’t read and they transit back and forth from the reservation to National Forest regularly. You make some good points.

Yeah, I'm thinking this would have little effect on the big ranches, they probably self manage right now and might not even use the tags allotted to them via e plus. They get big money for quality hunting. This would most likely affect small private holdings more.

 

[BigChiefJ]

I guess if unit wide tags are gone, you will see less elk hunters on public land if you're lucky enough to draw a tag.

 

[RoughCountry]

I’d rather see the UW tag where you can buy one and hunt the whole unit. Private land only will probably cost the same but now you can’t hunt the forest. The liberals of NM will probably mess up a pretty good unit.

 

[roadrunner]

I’d rather see the UW tag where you can buy one and hunt the whole unit. Private land only will probably cost the same but now you can’t hunt the forest. The liberals of NM will probably mess up a pretty good unit.

I have all the confidence in them that they will.

 

[Booner]

Anyone have a proposed map of the possible change to the 13 Primary Management zone boundary? It was expanded not too long ago.