here are the stats for 16 D how can you guys whine at that?

T

tooele

Active Member
Messages
727
So I went to the new mexico fish and game stats and looked up the tag allocations for the archery hunts.
1st season 60 tags, residents get 47, 13 divided between guided and non-guided non-residents
2nd season 50 tags, residents get 39, divdied 11 between guided and non-guided
3rds season 40 tags 31 go to residents 9 divided between guided and non guided.
Land owners get total of 5 unit wide tags bull, 3 cow tags.

So residents get the vast majority of tags. Land owner tags don't have to be sold, but can be, no guarantee a resident doesn't buy it or landowner even sales it. No excessive landowner tags, like in Utah. There are a reasonable number of non-rs tags, half to do it yourselfers, half to guided, healthy mix, keeps guides in business. So what are you whining about again? Statistically a non-resident will probably not draw for 20 + years with no bonus points. Residents have a much better chance. If 10% more tags were added to non-resident pool, draw odds would go up 2%. Really and your whining. New mexico may have the fairest system out there. Good luck if you get it changed. If it ain't broke do you really want to fix it?
 
LAST EDITED ON Aug-11-10 AT 11:41AM (MST)[p]Fact of the matter is it is broke and needs fixing!!!You forgot to add in all land owner tags to your %. By the way what other job has the gov forcing work on them?
 
i thought it was about the money. 16 D is a perfect example aminly public so most of the tags go to the public just a s you would expect an all private unit (12) to go to the private. it is plain and simpleeither we pay the land owners to help build fences to keep our Elk out or we compensate them for allowing our Elk to live on there land. How about i bring my horses ove to your place and you let them graze for free and dont worrie about an damage they cause it just cosmetic.
 
I did add in all the landowner tags. Didn't you read the whole post or are you so fired up, you cant think straight. I will do another unit. I will do 15 when I get a spare moment. A lot more private on that one. Give me a bit here. Just want the facts, don't want hot headed crazy comments about it is broken. If you really look at all the states,I believe it was a toss up at who had a better system in my opinion, between new mexico and nevada. Now people (with absolutely no facts as far as I have seen) are saying the system is broke? So I want to get the facts, so unit 15 is next. I will do archery as it will be a good measure to compare with.
 
15's gonna take you awhile! But you might as well do all the muzzy tags too there! That's one of the worst units in nm for over hunting and lo tags.


I just call em as I see em!
 
>I did add in all the
>landowner tags. Didn't you
>read the whole post or
>are you so fired up,
>you cant think straight.
>I will do another unit.
> I will do 15
>when I get a spare
>moment. A lot more
>private on that one.
>Give me a bit here.
> Just want the facts,
>don't want hot headed crazy
>comments about it is broken.
> If you really look
>at all the states,I believe
>it was a toss up
>at who had a better
>system in my opinion, between
>new mexico and nevada.
>Now people (with absolutely no
>facts as far as I
>have seen) are saying the
>system is broke? So
>I want to get the
>facts, so unit 15 is
>next. I will do
>archery as it will be
>a good measure to compare
>with.

Easy there big shifter. I don't think I was out of line with my post in any way. Just stating that every unit is setup a little different (as it should be) and I don't think 16D is one of the units that really shows anything in regard to what all the fuss is about. Unit 15 is definitely a much better unit to look at for either side of the debate.
 
here are the numbers for 15
unit 15
LO MB 237
LO A 162
LO ES 179
public draw
ES 600
youth ES 25
A 500
A youth 120
MB 699


Jacob2006 the elk in NM where not here until the early 1900 when they where reintroduced and not hunted until late 60 early 70 so I am just going to reintroduce my horses to your yard
 
LAST EDITED ON Aug-11-10 AT 02:07PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Aug-11-10 AT 02:06?PM (MST)

Here we go again....

If the landowners only hunted their ranch with a controlled number of permits, that would be one thing but that isn't always the case. Joe Schmoe Rancher with his UW tag could be hunting elk up to 40 miles away in unit 16D. Please tell me you don't think that is as it should be.

The LOs with RO tags in 16D have viable habitat for the elk unlike a unit like 50 where LOs have a bunch of sage brush flats that might have elk on it in January but you mine as well watch paint dry August through November because you'd probably see more action. A 16D RO tag is actually worth something because their land actually has elk on it and which is why you see more RO tags than UW in this unit.

If the LOs argument is that the public animals are destroying their private property, I'm sure G & F could round up some resident or non-resident hunters to reduce the problem but as has been said before, I don't think a solution to the problem is what is desired now that they've had a taste of the income potential...it is more about the $$$ (although I will say this may not the the case with every LO).
 
Tooele, you need to remember that on some and most units in the state the g&f from a biology standpoint will issue most of the quota tags for res and non-res but when there needs to be a reduction on tags in any given unit they will always pull the tags from the res pool not the non-res or landowner so the res gets the short end that way also,
example: 16d 3rd archery hunt quota 40 tags
res-26
non-res-4
guided-5
landowner-5
if there was a 20% reduction in the quota that would equate to 5 tags but they would be taken from the 26 available resident tags not the non-res. or landowner, so residents now would only be able to draw 21 tags and if this were the case you can see that the system is broke and needs to be fixed in different areas of the quota system, residents are getting the short end of the stick in most of the units in the state for most of the species of New Mexico,
Whew on that note I cant complain about not drawing because I drew back to back unit 16d 3rd archery hunts so arrows will be flying in a month or so and the bulls are big! Have fun on your hunts boys.
nmbighorn
 
the reduction is done across the board in every unit. just like thewy can not increase LOT with out increasing draw tags.
 
Ok 15 is a different beast altogether. In unit 16 D there were 9 ranches receiving tags. In unit 15 there are 74 ranches receiving tags so this is a different beast altogether. I am only going to look at the ES archery tags, because I am not sure how the Mature bull can be used (archery and Muzzleloader?)
1. Landowners receive 131 either sex archery tags, they receive 156 cow tags (archery or muzzleloader?) Of the 131 tags 69 are ranch only. That leaves 92 unit wide tags. New mexico resident gets 195 tags on 1st hunt, nonresident gets 25 non guided and 30 guided
2nd hunt New mex resident gets 156, nonrese 20 and 24 guided
3rd hunt 117 to resident, 15 and 18 guided to nonres

Assessment:
1. So it looks like there are double the Landowner bull tags if you add in the muzzleloader as compared to the cow tags. Makes sense, do not want to kill too many cows, will affect the herd. Lower success kill rates on the bulls, equals a substantially less bulls harvested vs cows. Fair allocation of bull vs. cow tags.
2. 92 unit wide archery landowner tags averages to 1 to 2 tags per ranch, the payoff is that 60 + ranches are open to public hunting, that may not be otherwise. How many of the 92 archery tags are sold to residents vs. non-resident or held by the landowner or given to family/friends (unknown).

3. In 3 archery seasons, Public draw New mexico residents get 408 tags. 60 tags go nonguided nonresident, 72 guided nonresident. Hard to argue residents are getting vast majority of tags.

If all 92 landowner tags had to go to non-residents, which they don't, many even go to residents. Then there would be a problem.

Seems like a system that allows a reasonable number of non-residents to hunt the state, helping the economy, half are guided permiting a predictable system for guides and bringing additional income to the state. Many ranches are open that otherwise would not be. Residents have a reasonable chance of being drawn and get the most tags.

So what do you guys want. No landowner tags, shut down the ranches and access, kill this aspect of the economy. Ranching becomes less stable and less wildlife friendly, over grazing encouraged, etc. A few good guides, but no real economic impact. Cut the nonresidents by half, so 30 more tags go into the pool, so now there are 438 tags. The residents already get all the landowner tags. Make them non-transferable, so now the ranchers are the only residents who benefit? Is the state really paying attention to these crazy ideas, sounds alot like the wolf arguments to me.
 
NM bighorn,
I didn't realize that the reduction went to the residents only, when a tag reduction was needed. I certainly couldn't agree with that. From looking at 16 D and 15, I would think that the logical place to reduce the tag numbers in 15 would be landowner tags only. In 16 D, I would think that straight accross the board, 1 from landowner, one from nonres guided, one from nonres unguided, and an equal percentage from res.

On another note, the fact that a landowner has property in the sage brush that is used for winter range for the elk, i think would be incentive enought to give a unit wide tag for use or for sale. I guess it all depends on what your goal is with the lanowner tags. From an outsider looking in it would appear that New mexico commision is trying to:
1. Open ranches for hunting
2. Give landowners an incentive to continue to receive tags, ie better management of land. Don't just raise cattle, but raise elk as well.
3. increase economic stability by sale of landowner permits. Stabilizes ranches and potentially brings in out of state money.

If the states goal should be just to give new mexico residents the best chance to get a tag every year, screw the ranchers, and screw the economy, then for sure they are doing it wrong and it should be fixed. They do appear to be meeting what appear to be their actual goals. and doing it pretty well.. You'd probably be surprised how much of an economic impact this has on new mexico.
 
>I'd like to see ranchers ranch
>cattle, not wildlife.
______________________________________

Are you serious? If so, then you have made a very uneducated statement.

Several large NM ranches have had more positive influence on the wellbeing of wildlife than the NM G&F ever thought about. Without their contributions, Elk, Deer, and all other forms of wildlife would suffer greatly.

Why is everyone forgetting that a huge number of our deer and elk migrate onto private land in the winter because it's the only place where they can survive in numbers!!!

I'd rather they all quit letting those stinking bovine critters eat all the damn grass and focused their efforts on improving the habitat for deer, elk, antelope, etc. AND they would deserve to be paid for their good deeds.

The small ranches that rarely if ever see elk that get tags are the only problem in the current system that I see.





"Windage & Elevation Pilgrim, Windage & Elevation"
 
That was said tongue in cheek. I agree there are a number of ranches that do great deeds towards habitat development and typically not the core of the issue or problem but more of the ranches you mention in your last statement.

It is a delicate balance through when a private landowner is developing habitat for animals or "stock" in this case that he doesn't own. Because he contributes to their well-being he has an economic interest that he wants to see returned but the public sees those animals public property. Herein lies the problem.

My comment was really that we are now looking at wildlife ranchers not cattle ranchers because it has become a more profitable business.
 
LAST EDITED ON Aug-12-10 AT 08:54AM (MST)[p]A bunch of whiners and entitlement fools...you guys don't know what"Hard to Draw" is. NM has the best system there is compaired to other states.Try drawing ANY elk tag in CA,or a Manti or Beaver tag every year in UT. In some states you have to hire a guide,if you are nonres. LO tags don't come out of res. pool. UW LO tags,are for the unit ranch is in,not across the state. And alot are ranch only.They are a tool to benefit all,in long run. If your grandpa had left you a NM ranch instead of east coast place ,would you complain? If you had invested in NM land with critters in the area,would you complain? Yeah there needs to be some tweeking of the system ,but overall its pretty good,IMHO Sorry for the rant and hijack,but.....
 
If an SCR ranch does not draw in their unit they are assigned a different unit for the tag. Unit 48 and unit 9 have been the choices the last couple years.

I have never have seen an SCR tag go to a quality area when the ranch was in a scrub unit but it does make for a good story. You can read the internet stories of 5 acre ranches in BFE getting UW 15 tags but that just isn't the case. I save the SCR Lucky lists and haven't seen it yet.

For 2010/2011 there are a cpl unit 15 SCR ranches that got unit 16B/22 tags. Anybody believe those are a step up?
A year or two ago a fellow I know with a unit 34 SCR ranch got a 48 tag. Again, not much to write home about.

There does appear to be an inordinate amount of small, 10 and under acre parcels getting unit wide SCR tags in good units. That needs to get nipped in the bud but until then, I'm looking for property.
 
Agree, WapitiBob.I don't think someone with 10 ac should get tags,maybe help with a fence if they have a problem.I'm not familiar with SCR here,yet,but the trade for the 15 place is not a step up in my book.
 
I think that the SCR should become a co-op combined the land allocate the tags according size of the entire co-op and then distribute the money from the sale of the tags.
 
Sounds like after all is said and done in my opinion, the new mexico game and fish is doing a pretty good job with:
1. Elk management, tag allocation and hunt opportunity in general, albeit, they could tweak the landowner system a bit, but it would really be a bad decision to do away with it as there are many more benefits keeping it, than the benefits of doing away with it. Hard for some to take, but all things considered definitely a plus for new mexico and it citizens. They are not doing very well for trophy opportunity, but that is at the expense of opportunity. Sportsmen have to decide if they want trophy or opportunity, you can't have both. The vocal minority here wants both and thinks it is possible, but if you look at nevada, utah, and colorado, anytime trophy's are managed for, you are looking at a 20 year wait for a hunt.
2. Deer management, tag allocation and opportunity is great. Not a lot of quality deer in the state, for what they have they do a reasonable job and they appear to manage for opportunity again, which is obvioulsy what the vocal crowd wants.
3. Antelope management doing great for larger class animals, not doing so well for hunter opportunity. Could do much better with antelope to provide opportunity, but the quality would slip and then would our vocal minority be happy?

They are meeting several important goals
1. Opening ranches to the public
2. Providing economic incentives to stabilize the finances of ranchers (what new mexico was founded on)
3.Providing a lot of hunting opportunity (one of the top 2 states in the west for opportunity to hunt), One of the top 3 states for overall opportunity at a quality animal (elk, deer, antelope)
4. Providing economic incentives to guides (guide only draw) obligates non-residents to use a guide, directly impacting the states revenues. Increases business, allows the guiding business to be predictable and a good economic choice of employ, attracting better guides.
5. The increased opportunity overall attracts non-residents to hunt new mexico regularly, impacting the economy.
6. Increasing the habitat of the elk, deer and antelope, by including landowners at all levels.

Important goals they are not meeting.
1. Not providing highest possible trophy opportunity
2. Not allowing some residents to draw specific species every year or two in a high quality unit.
3. Providing too many landowner tags increasing hunter opportunity and negatively impacting trophy quality
4. Not providing non landowner resident hunters with 90 percent of new mexico tags period. (If they do this, then they will be exactly like arizona, (Hello 10 plus year waiting period to hunt period) Good quality terrible opportunity. I live in Arizona, it sucks compared to New Mexico for opportunity.
 
LAST EDITED ON Aug-12-10 AT 10:30PM (MST) by NMPaul (moderator)[p]hey tooele u need to hunt the 50's units and the 6's, and unit 15, and unit 34 and others with checkerboarded private. sad thing is that u dont even know about landowners getting tags in 52 when their land is in 34. u havent hunted in those units and enjoyed the overcrowded hunts that are pushed way out of the rut.




ego participate in Monasteriense muleys proinde ego sum bardus (I participate on monstermuleys therefore I am stupid)
 
YOU ARE GONNA LOSE IN LIFE, GET USE TO IT. WHO AM I TALKING TO? WHOEVER STARTED ALL THIS BULL!

ALL THIS IS NO MORE THAN A GUY WHO DIDN'T DRAW A TAG, SO NOW ALL OF A SUDDEN HE WANTS TO CHANGE THE RULES.....NOTHING IS GOING TO CHANGE BECAUSE HE KNOWS HE CAN'T COMPETE WITH LAND OWNERS. OR THE MONEY THE NOR-RESIDENTS GIVE THE STATE.....ALL OF YOU GIVE IT UP!

YOU ALL LOOK LIKE A CIRCUS.

KEEP IT UP AND THE FEDS WILL TAKE IT OVER, AND GUESS WHAT THEN?

HOW ABOUT 100% DRAW...NO MORE NON- RESIDENTS VS RES...IT WILL BE A FREE FOR ALL TAX PAYERS,ALL FED MANAGE...THEN TAGS GO TO 80% HUNTERS/20% LANDOWNERS...KEEP BITCHN AND SEE WHERE IT GETS YOU!
 
"ALL THIS IS NO MORE THAN A GUY WHO DIDN'T DRAW A TAG"

I drew the Caldera last year and unit 13 bullelk and unit 14 mulies. Its not just about "not drawing". I know there others like me who drew but care about other citizens of NM getting ignored because of out of balance OF and LO %. Its about making fair decisions for all new mexico wildlife and all NM citizens. As it stands we have have 22% of tags going to NR and Outfitters. On top of that we have a huge percentage of LO tags going to more NRs. Its a "in state" issue.
 
stinky stomper,

No I haven't and I don't plan to hunt those areas, however again rememeber they are providing opportunity. I never said I was an opportunity hunter, but most of these guys whining are. Whether they give the landowner permits in the unit or not they are still accomplishing their goals. Lots and lots of opportunity. Some of these clowns are whining about not drawing every 3-5 years for elk, just imagine if they didn't give out all of these tags there would be an uprising in new mexico as some of these guys would have to wait 10 years for a tag. It does sound like the landowner system should be tweeked a bit, but in this imperfect world there will always be landowners that abuse the system. Even if they change it, someone will figure out how to abuse it. So maybe at your meetings you could recommend reducing the number of landowner tags or even holding landowners more accountable for habitat improvements etc, but my best guess is that if you go in there guns a blazing, saying down with all landowner tags, 90%/10% no landowners tags, no compromise, it will fall on deaf ears, as the game and fish has been very successful as compared to other states, and I am sure that they are very aware of this, and just because there is a vocal minority pissed off that they don't get shots at 400 inch bulls in unit 15 everyother year, doesn't mean they are going to scrap a tried and proven system that has been in place for years. JUst my opinion

Good luck with it all
 
What about the LO who lets say have land in 6A, but receives a unit wide tag in 9? That makes no sense to me. This scenario happes a lot and know this to be true. This is a good reason why the system is broken
 
hey tooele. some of those 15 tags went for 5 grand this year. did u know for 3 grand morei coulda had a dutton tag? did u know for that price i coulda had a wasatch bull rifle tag? the difference is that u guys have ur money g to conservation at some percent whereas ours go into a ranchers pocket.

btw..... i've applied for NM elk since i was 9. i am now 32 and just drew my first tag. ohhh, and i've never put in for those hard to draw tags. ive only put in for areas i "think" i can draw and it still took me 23 years to draw. utahs system is looking better and better every year to me.



ego participate in Monasteriense muleys proinde ego sum bardus (I participate on monstermuleys therefore I am stupid)
 
Stinky... I'll bet if you moved to Utah you'd change your mind...have a great time putting in for one species and waiting 15+ years just to have a chance at a decent unit...that's the last state I'd pick to be a resident for hunting purposes...non residents have the advantage there...except back in the eighties when I drew a moose tag and an antelope tag as a high school junior...remember high school is over.
 
I can probably get you a bull tag in 15 for less than that stinky...it sounds like if you've been applying that long and not drawn a tag that you don't know how to apply.And as for UT,get in line and pay big $ to just apply for points,or pay bigger $ than here for a LO tag,your choice.
 
If you guys don't like the bonus points check the box on the application that says you DON'T want a hunting license and you won't be given a bonus point! Then you'll have the same chance at a decent tag as you do here in nm every year! At least your getting increased odds each year your unsuccessful! Here you MAY NEVER draw a great tag!



I just call em as I see em!
 
>If you guys don't like the
>bonus points check the box
>on the application that says
>you DON'T want a hunting
>license and you won't be
>given a bonus point! Then
>you'll have the same chance
>at a decent tag as
>you do here in nm
>every year! At least your
>getting increased odds each year
>your unsuccessful! Here you MAY
>NEVER draw a great tag!
>
>
>
>
>I just call em as I
>see em!


Only if everyone else checks the "don't want the license box " too.
 
A couple guys seem to be digressing the post again. Please be objective and add positive or negative feedback about what we are discussing. Really we aren't talking about bonus points here guys. That isn't even in the works in New Mexico. As already stated, and as most people would agree Utah is managed much differently, for better or for worse. Maybe we could go into detail on that one in the Utah forum, oh wait they already whine about that everyday over there that's why most of us don't frequent it.
Thanks.
T
 
Ok here's how I see this. 15 used to be a great unit for top end bulls. There are 2000 public land tags, which is way too many, and there are 578 private. That means that in a unit that is 90% public land and about 10% private the land owners are getting 25% of the tags! BS! The system is broke! And with nm over generosity with tags nm is starting to be more and more like colorado, over hunted with piss poor genetics! Wake up guys, its coming and none of you realize it!


I just call em as I see em!
 
Why is it way too many? Is what you say that the unit is 90% public and 10% private true, where can this be found. From the map, it looks like it may be more like 20/80. Anyway, my question, and this would have to be answered by a biologist, is is the land that is private much better land? water feed etc. than a lot of the public land? Is it a fair trade off, opening so many ranches up to the public for hunting. It would be great to see a biologist perspective. Now "the systems broke group" has made the argument that if someone has some sagebrush land, that rarely supports elk, then no tags should be given, I would think that your same logic, would say that if the private land has exceptional habitat, then more should be given. So maybe the quality of private land merits the tags? In my opinion, 2000 tags is too many in the unit, but I am a trophy hunter, for "the systems broke group" it would appear that you guys are opportunity. So again let me make the statement that you can't have trophy and opportunity, it is impossible. If the "systems broke guys" want bigger bulls, then stop whining about not hunting in your spot every other year. If you want opportunity, then stop whining about the bulls aren't big enough. I am interested in the quality of private and the real percentages, would love to know more on that subject, hopefully someone can provide some real facts here, may help us come to some good conclusions.
 
Tooele I don't truly know the exact percentage. I'm not far off though. And most of the big pieces of private are on the very fringe of elk country in that unit. With just the occasional passing of elk and loaded with antelope. One rancher I know very well receives 9+ tags a year, some years many more. And most of his land, 400 acres total are in the wide open prairie country!
Now as far as too many tags, yes way too many with the LO tags included. NM needs a better system here period. The first time I set foot in 15 12-13 yrs ago you could literally call in bulls daily, and great bulls! Last few years it is like trying to call elk in december! It happens on occasion. But they have been hunted so hard and over hunted that the elk shut down as soon as the tiniest amount of pressure gets brought in to the unit! And good luck trying to find a 350+ bull with cows there now! Used to pass on bulls like that there now were hunting hard and praying for a glimpse of one!
Every one wants to blame the wolves? Guys its the LO's and the g&6 ruining that place!



I just call em as I see em!
 
So hornhunter it sounds like you are pro cut the tags back and lets get more trophy bulls in there. I am with you, but remember in doing this you won't be able to get in there and hunt, but maybe every ten years or more. Let's say you keep some of the land owner tags, but reduce them and the general tags, then maybe you will be in there hunting every ten to 15 years. The game and fish will take a big hit in income, reducing their management options. If you keep some of the landowner tags and you find a huge bull out there, you could buddy up with a landowner or spend your savings and maybe hunt in between the 15 year period. If you get rid of all the landowner tags, you will only hunt when drawn, which will be rarely. Now if you reduce the landowner tags, the price of the remaining tags will skyrocket. Landowners will probably make a similar amount, just sale them for more, however, the smaller ranches may not receive tags, there will be less private to hunt. Tradeoffs, tradeoffs. Be careful, you don't get an arizona, nevada, Utah system. Sure you will have big bulls, but no opportunity.
Imagine hunting the area, one or two more times in your life period!
 
I am pro quality. And as it sits I can afford a LO tag every year and wouldn't phase me one bit. I believe that the LO system if broke here. And I will not support something that I do not believe in period! And I am all for less tags, better quality, and as I am from az, lived there most my life, I am all for a bonus point system here.
9 yrs of applying here in nm with no elk tag what so ever! In az I draw about every 3 yrs! And I'm no closer now at getting a tag than 10 yrs ago when I started applying! I didn't put in this year btw.
As for the LO tags, I'm not for doing away with them, just limiting them! The g&f could issue these tags in per potion to the % of public/private lands per unit. And they would have to take in to
account animal distribution also. But in a unit that's greatly made up of forest service, state, and blm. 25% is agreat injustice to all nm sportsmen!


I just call em as I see em!
 
Why not provide cow tags to landowners after all most bull to cow %'s are 10 to 15 per 100.Ranch tags I thought were to provide population control not max profit.
 
Actually, from what we have previously posted, if you look back, it would appear that the landowner tags are indeed for profit and for economical stabilization, not just for population control. The state of New Mexico is obviously not providing landowner tags for population control. Someone keeps posting that the landowner tags are for population control, to suggest this seems to me that someone isn't really thinking this one through very well or they are being obstinate (which won't get very many people to listen if you want a change in the system). The landowner tags are to 1. compensate landowners for damage done by wildlife 2. provide economic incentive to encourage landowners to ranch for wildlife and to aid economically in preserving New Mexico's ranching heritage 3. To improve wildlife habitat from the funds and as incentives to receive future landowner tags. Nowhere can I find where New Mexico is using landowner tags for population control. Someone may have made this remark, but there is really no validity to it, if you look at New Mexico fish and game management. So again lets try to post facts that can help us figure out what we want to change with the current system, what the problems are and what are the solutions. Or in the end do we really want to change the system. Oh and by the way if you really lived in Arizona all of your life, then you are full of BS, if you say you drew a tag every 3 years, unless it was a late season or cow tag. You didn't draw an early season bull tag in a premium unit every three years, unless you are the luckiest sob in the world. 99 % of the population in arizona will only draw those tags every 10 plus years. Unit 15 would be a premium unit and if the tags were reduced to 100-200, which is what it would take to have quality. Drawing odds would be well over a 10 year wait. Bonus points wouldn't change a thing, you would be more sure to have the tags after 10 years with bonus points, but too bad for the poor little kid or the guy who decides to hunt, that is 5 years behind in the bonus system. Though, I like bonus points as well for predictability, they are much less fair for everyone that doesn't get in the game the first year provided, than a straight draw.
 
LAST EDITED ON Aug-18-10 AT 09:56AM (MST)[p]>Why not provide cow tags to
>landowners after all most bull
>to cow %'s are 10
>to 15 per 100.Ranch tags
>I thought were to provide
>population control not max profit.
>

Because it is not about population control. You may remember a few "slaughters that happened by a few ranchers years back. The biggest was N Baca down in 15 I believe. He shot about 30 plus cows and then got more tags. That is the lie the LO's and OF's worked on Game and fish to get more of our states resources into there pockets. Now that citizens are bringing it to light, some of them are coming out finally and saying: yes, its about the money and we will be making minimum wage if you take away the big profits. It is as bad as cutting welfare entitlement from healthy people who have been on it for years. They will scream bloody murder. Well, just like enron, the party will have an end. I suggest NM state sportsman get on board with what is going on. There is a new group starting on bowsite.com. There is a few others that are confronting this long time injustice. Petitions will be starting soon also. Lets take back our state by eliminating the 12% OF welfare entitlement act, illiminate the UW rancher tags and cut back LO tags by 10%. This will start balancing this abused system and bring true quality back. God bless
 
Tooele no I don't even waste my time on early tags in az! Lmao How mant 350+ bulls from Arizona do you have on your walls? I have 3, the best bull being 373 P&y. Why do you guys think the only way to kill big bulls is if their rutting? And the only 15 choice I've put on an app in years is the november hunt! So don't start crying wolf because of what YOU think is a quality tag! PM me and I'll be more than happy to talk AZ hunt strategies!


I just call em as I see em!
 
LAST EDITED ON Aug-18-10 AT 11:17AM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Aug-18-10 AT 11:16?AM (MST)

The story you have about Baca is not true at all.Thats my brother in law so I know the real story,so here it is.
First he called game and fish to help him out he planted several fields of hay and the elk were eating it faster than he could plant it.They first brought in a propane cannon,it worked till they got used to it.Then they offered to put him up a high fence but it never happened.Then he asked them to call the hunters on the dep list as he did not want to waste the animals,but nmdgf refused they told him shoot them and call us right away so he did.Guess when they showed up to get the animals two days later!He ended up towing them into an arroyo because they were rotten.Just so you know he's not getting a single tag now.Makes you wonder why there's a dep list hu.They now offer him one cow tag he had to give up his crops.He does not take the cow tag because if he does he will have to allow nmdgf on the ranch and after they smeared lies to the media they are not welcome.But if the tags were all all done thru the draw he would probably allow a few hunters on the ranch but as it stands now he won't even allow us to hunt it.The media is a bunch of greenies and use it to their benifit just remember that.

SO YES HE WANTED IT FOR POPULATION CONTROL NOT PROFIT!!!HE WOULD HAVE BEEN HAPPY TO HAVE US GO IN AND FIX THE PROBLEM AND SOME PEOPLE WOULD HAVE ENDED UP WITH A FREEZER FULL FOR THE WINTER.HE WOULD HAVE BEEN HAPPY WITH JUST COW TAGS!!!!
 
Hornhunter,
not trying to get in a pissing match about who has the bigger bull, or who is tougher in a pissing fight. I am just trying to compare apples to apples. Comparing the draw odds of a rut hunt and a late season hunt, isn't apples to apples, so that really is pointless to debate. i am very happy you have harvested some great bulls. Sounds like you know what you are doing, no one is questioning that. Just trying to get a true idea of how changing new mexico's system will affect all aspects of hunting the state, not just the best hunters, the richest hunters, or even the common guy. Right now it is an opportunity state. You seem to be a guy that wants trophy bulls in these units, but you also want opportunity, so it is really hard to take your opinion here as you just can't have both. Now if you are a good hunter like yourself, and can find big bulls in an opportunity hunt, then that is awesome, but you are being real selfish, in that you are trying to reduce the opportunity for all the regular guys who aren't as good of a hunter and need the rut to be able to go out and have a shot at a 350 inch bull. They don't have the time, money or optics to go hunt a late season bull. So in my opinion, you are taking advantage of the situation potentially. You are reducing the regular joes chances of hunting in the rut, maybe they are happy with a 300 inch bull as long as they can hunt the rut in unit 15 every 3 years. So that you will have bigger end bulls surviving and you can pick them up in a later hunt with better draw odds. Everyone seems to have a motive here to change the system.
 
Tooele
Ok for starters I'm not a selfish guy. I do want bigger bulls that's why I do not apply for any unit north of I40. Not that there are no truley huge bulls but the odds of finding one go up tremendously in the southern units. Let the guys that are happy with the 300 type bulls have those tags up there, yeah fun to hunt but I don't want a tag that would make someone truly happy with it go to waste in my hands! Lol I am fortunate enough to get to hunt elk every year with great friends on the gila and 34, even if I'm not the one with the tag!
So let's break it down for you on what I want to see happen in nm-
1 reduce the LO tags to an equal proportion of private/public lands IN elk country.
2 take the nr cap to no more than 10% like every other western state.
3 manage some of the better units for trophy quality.
4 in state a bonus point system so that someday in nm I will have better than 2% odds of drawing.
I am happy with waiting for an almost guaranteed hunt of my own. I never once said that I feel I deserve a tag every year. Nm needs to get with the program like every other state has. Every year the odds just go down.


I just call em as I see em!
 
So you obviously see the disadvantage to the game and fish to go to a 90/10 system as the reduction in out of state tag money would be significant. Would you be interested in going to a system more like colorado, where some of the harder to draw units are more 90/10 and the easier to draw units are a 70/30 perhaps preserving some of the departmental funding? or are you just straight up 90/10 in every unit?
 
I hunt out of state a lot. So as far as the state losing big money, there can be an argument in either direction. I know on my kiabab deer hunt last year I purchased all my supplies here in nm. I spent less than 300 bucks in the state of az. Just fuel. I spent more than 1500 here in nm. So how much is a guy from Kentucky really going to spend here? Now I do understand the outfitters losing out and our economy on a guaranteed 12%! So what's to keep all 10% of the nr's from hiring an outfitter? What's the percentage going to be period? The outfitters will still have clients and they will still bring money into this state! I am pro resident in every state. You live in az I feel you should have the chance to hunt a unit in your home state before me.
Now our g&f dept is making money hand over fist with all the LO tags. You still have to buy a nr tag from them at full price. And yes most of the tags do go to nr's. And I'd love to know what the g&f actually does with the money here. They obviously don't hire officers to help patrol anything! Just the money they get from unit 15 LO tags covers their yearly payroll! As far as the 70/30 in some units I'd really like to think about that. it still really screws the residents and even though I don't care to hunt there, I know there are hundreds here that do!

I just call em as I see em!
 
The state of NM is going to go to hell, if there is no "Landowner Welfare System"!

I mean GOD FOR BID, that some country music singer can not hunt on the DOUBLE H!
 

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

Dan's Arizona Beast
Score for the Wife!
3F464652-9896-4B2E-8A7F-2BA4ED4DB859.jpeg
IMG_9801.jpeg
IMG_4275.jpeg
Screenshot_20221031_235838.jpg
IMG_1435.jpeg
19375.jpeg
20230706_145024.jpg
Picture_cell_1396794097969871(1).jpg
2022 Paunsaugant Archery Buck
20230814_203909.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