Let’s keep the E Plus program

[NM high country]

The e -plus program has been a I great way to hunt elk in New Mexico every year you don’t draw a tag. Should the program ever be shut down 100’s of thousands of great elk hunting land will be PRIVATE hunting only.

I don’t know if the people who want to see it end are financially unable to buy a tag or think without the program they could draw. In NM the draw gives everyone the same chance at a tag every year unlike Arizona where I have been putting in for 20 years straight for elk and never have I drawn a tag but in NM I hunt elk every year. Draw some tags and buy a tag through e plus if I don’t draw.

I would hate to see the program go and then private landowners receive unlimited tags for their property like they did with Antelope. E-plus is a great hunting, managing program let’s keep it around.

The New Mexico Council of Outfitters and Guides has decided to contract with Southwick Associates to conduct a comprehensive economic study of the outfitting industry with a specific focus on the contribution of the Elk Private Land Use System (EPLUS) to New Mexico’s rural economies.



The NM Wildlife Federation and the NM Chapter of Backcountry Hunters & Anglers continue in their attempts to destroy the EPLUS program. These organizations try to bias the public perception of EPLUS through emotionally charged misinformation campaigns. Then they capitalize on the public’s confusion in order to manipulate state lawmakers.

 

[bobby]

I, in no way support the E plus program for many reasons . One being the fact that they can send them to unit wide. Perfect example in a unit I will be hunting later this year. There is a road closure area on forrest land locked and gated.. Guess who has a key the FS ranger and the adjacnet landowner to check his cattle . How the hell does he have unrestriced access to our forrest land but hunters cant . And yet he still gets tags on his land and we have zero access. Every tag game and fish gives should be ranch only PERIOD . I have many other reason to hate this system but the catering to ranchers has to end.

 

[NM high country]

If the rancher has unit wide tags you’re legal to be on it. If the Forrest is land locked the surrounding landowners have a right to lock up their land just like you have a right to lock up yours. If you can’t get through legally move on, the rancher probably has a cattle allotment.

You aren’t using eplus to your advantage. Because of eplus I have hunted elk for about 12 years straight, I have a coveted tag this year because of it. Elk season starts here Sept 1 the day I start saving for next years eplus tag incase I don’t draw a tag.

 

[WapitiBob]

His cattle are on a grazing allotment, really not that hard to comprehend.

 

[fmarrs3]

"I don’t know if the people who want to see it end are financially unable to buy a tag or think without the program they could draw"

Well, if there are 30-40% more tags available in the draw, draw odds should increase by this much. I don't know how much argument against that fact there can be.

I see both sides. Based on principle, the elk, and the right to hunt them, are held in the public trust. The EPLUS program is inconsistent with the (highly successful) American model of conservation, where hunting rights are not pay-for-play but allotted democratically. The tags are not NMDGFs, or the game commissions, property to give away: they belong to the public. Further, there are many EPLUS lands -- that I have hunted -- that are clearly not adding the 10's of thousands of dollars value for the elk that their tags can now fetch on the open market.

Yet, if the alternative to EPLUS is the antelope-style compensation of landowners, with unlimited private land tags, I think that is worse. My understanding is that antelope herds are hurting because of this management plan.

EPLUS is the wrong way to compensate landowners, and I think some landowners are overcompensated. Those landowners that support elk habitat definitely deserve to be compensated, but not with tags. EPLUS appears to be a lot better than what happens with antelope though.

 

[fmarrs3]

"The NM Wildlife Federation and the NM Chapter of Backcountry Hunters & Anglers continue in their attempts to destroy the EPLUS program. These organizations try to bias the public perception of EPLUS through emotionally charged misinformation campaigns."

What specifically is misinformation?

 

[windtalker]

New Mexico Cattle Growers is to strong financially and the New Mexico Hunters are not willing to bad together to change this (just a lot of complaining) so I do not ever see E-Plus going away. I would love to see it changed so all land owners tags could only be used on Private land otherwise no unit wide tags. I am amazed at the number of unit wide tags issued in where their hunters never hunt the private land due to the fact the elk are not there that time of year.

 

[NM high country]

Well, if there are 30-40% more tags available in the draw, draw odds should increase by this much. I don't know how much argument against that fact there can be.
……………………

I don’t know if there would be 30-40% more tags because so much elk hunting land would now be private. There is now so much great private eplus land to hunt now that would probably go private hunts only. I truly think the biggest complainers of the system are out of state hunters who don’t really get to see and scout all the eplus private because if they did live here and got to see some of the land they would never want to see it eliminated from public hunting!

 

[lovehunting]

Hunting has become blood money and a rich man‘s sport because of e plus in NM, if you fail to draw.

 

[BrianID]

NM high country,

With this change, you will still be able to buy a landowner tag, you just won't get to hunt public land every year just because you spend $$ that many in NM cannot afford.

I would suspect that private landowners and hunters are behind the push to replace e plus. I would guess many of the richest landowners with the most influence/land would prefer no e plus because they don't want to allow public hunters on their land.

The benefit of e plus really depends on the private land vs public land in a particular unit for both the landowner and hunters.

I would rather see "landowner tags" only be good for private property than the current unit wide.

 

[BUGLEnmIN]

E PLUS

 

[OCHO]

What's crazy I have been hunting my whole life and up until about 15 years ago never even knew about things like E-tag and land owner vouchers. I started learning about them via antelope and now its the CREAM!!

Everything is all about status and look at me at this point. You remove social media and the world would be upside down on its head. Hunting/tags are no different! Honestly, most people don't even hunt anymore....

 

[Booner]

"The NM Wildlife Federation and the NM Chapter of Backcountry Hunters & Anglers continue in their attempts to destroy the EPLUS program. These organizations try to bias the public perception of EPLUS through emotionally charged misinformation campaigns."

What specifically is misinformation?

Well, they NEVER mention how much private it opens up to public hunting, or how much landlocked public it opens up.
They love to cherry pick numbers that makes their position look more relevant. For example they typically use total permit numbers across the entire state in their data. How can you compare, and lump together data, from a unit like 32 with all private land and no public tags, with a unit like 16A? If it helps to further your agenda then you make sure the numbers reflect your position. The NMWF and BHA are a fugging joke.

 

[Booner]

Well, if there are 30-40% more tags available in the draw, draw odds should increase by this much. I don't know how much argument against that fact there can be.

Well, this could be the dumbest thing I read on the internet today. Sorry to be so blunt, but you have no idea how draw odds work do you?

Crunch the numbers a little bit harder and get back to us.

Use 16A total archery tags for an example. 400 public tags, 10 private…which opens up around 4k private acres to hunting. Looking forward to the analysis.

 

[muleyczy]

For those of us who don’t know what the E-plus system is, what is it?

 

[NMPaul]

For those of us who don’t know what the E-plus system is, what is it?

As you can see, it depends on who you ask.

What it is, is an imperfect system (as most are) that is meant to be and incentive to landowners/ranchers to live with the elk and the damage they do to pasture, fences etc. In most cases the landowner has the option to be a unit wide ranch where hunters are allowed to hunt their property or a ranch only. If they allow hunters to hunt their property they receive tags based on a formula that takes into consideration habitat, water, bedding area, acreage etc. In some cases they get a tag or tags every year to sell or keep. In some cases it may take years between receiving tags.
They are then able to sell unit wide tags on the open market. E plus refers to the unit wide tags program.

 

[fmarrs3]

Quick clarification: I believe E-PLUS is the entire system of landowner tags, not just unit-wide tags. From NMDGF page: "Landowners who selected the unit-wide hunting option on their EPLUS agreement...."

I also believe landowners can sell their ranch only tags, not just unit wide tags.

 

[fmarrs3]

@ Booner: Talk about cherry picking, you're doing a good job of it. Of course some units will not see a substantial increase in draw odds. 16A is almost all public. 6B would see no increase as it is 100% public, of course. This just means other units would see a larger increase, for a rough average across units of ~30%. Take unit 15, another high demand, quality unit. It is 78% public. There were about 170 EPLUS archery tags there this year, compared to 600 archery draw tags, that's 28% more tags without EPLUS.

You make a very compelling point, however, that some of the EPLUS tags -- in a world without EPLUS -- might be funneled into private-only tags, but BHA and NMWF make the implicit assumption that all of these tags would be available in the draw. Also, you point out that the value / demand of some tags might change without the private access from EPLUS. In my experience, this benefit is limited, and the objection of many is the unit wide tag for the landowner whose land is not a valuable addition during hunting seasons.

Overall, I still think the principle is wrong, but I want to add that the glaring issue for me is the magnitude: too many tags for private landowners to sell. If they could back it down to ~5-10% of the total tag allocation, I don't think there would be as much outrage from the public land, draw hunter, or NMWF/BHA.

 

[Booner]

@ Booner: Talk about cherry picking, you're doing a good job of it. Of course some units will not see a substantial increase in draw odds. 16A is almost all public. 6B would see no increase as it is 100% public, of course. This just means other units would see a larger increase, for a rough average across units of ~30%. Take unit 15, another high demand, quality unit. It is 78% public. There were about 170 EPLUS archery tags there this year, compared to 600 archery draw tags, that's 28% more tags without EPLUS.

You make a very compelling point, however, that some of the EPLUS tags -- in a world without EPLUS -- might be funneled into private-only tags, but BHA and NMWF make the implicit assumption that all of these tags would be available in the draw. Also, you point out that the value / demand of some tags might change without the private access from EPLUS. In my experience, this benefit is limited, and the objection of many is the unit wide tag for the landowner whose land is not a valuable addition during hunting seasons.

Overall, I still think the principle is wrong, but I want to add that the glaring issue for me is the magnitude: too many tags for private landowners to sell. If they could back it down to ~5-10% of the total tag allocation, I don't think there would be as much outrage from the public land, draw hunter, or NMWF/BHA.

Ok, let’s go with 15 as an example. I don’t have the time to add up how much land it opens up to hunting but it is substantial.
Of those 170 private tags 84% would go to Resident hunters. That’s 143. They would add more to the early season so to make the math easy let’s add 100 tags to the early hunt and see how that pans out with 1948 applicants. Currently 294 R 1st season archery tags. In this scenario bumping up to 437. So the odds would go from 15% to 22%. That isn’t a precise way to calculate the odds but I’m not GoHunt and can’t simulate a draw.

“Other units would see a larger increase…rough average across units of 30%“…again you can’t paint a picture of the program by viewing it statewide. It is not even close to an accurate representation or assessment. You have to break it down to individual units.

NMWF and BHA are Libtard groups. Nothing will appease them and stop the selective outrage.

I say selective outrage because they sure don’t whisper anything about deer, antelope or Bighorn sheep. Crickets.

Oh…one other little tidbit that they don’t like to talk about. Jennings Law.

 

[fmarrs3]

22% is ~45% higher than 15%, so a substantial increase in draw odds. What am I missing? Now, are people going to notice an increase in chances of drawing from about once every 6.7years to once every 4.5 years? Probably not.

They might say that there are no programs for species other than elk than allow private landowners to sell hunting access to public animals on public land....

Also good point. If EPLUS goes away then I predict some private landowners see an uptick in crop damage.

 

[Booner]

22% is ~45% higher than 15%, so a substantial increase in draw odds. What am I missing? Now, are people going to notice an increase in chances of drawing from about once every 6.7years to once every 4.5 years? Probably not.

They might say that there are no programs for species other than elk than allow private landowners to sell hunting access to public animals on public land....

Also good point. If EPLUS goes away then I predict some private landowners see an uptick in crop damage.

45% higher sounds so much more outrageous than 7% better odds…you should apply for a job with BHA since you have their way of discussing numbers figured out. Lol.

The other species mentioned all have private tags that can be transferred in NM yet the groups in question never discuss them…

 

[fmarrs3]

Ha it does sound better.

I don't know that much about transfer of private land tags, but elk must be the most visible / highest revenue species in NM, no? And you still have to draw them... Well, except antelope.

Based on this conversation, I do feel like the conservation-minded hunter might should focus on antelope (total mess) or the depredation system. EPLUS probably doesn't hurt the public land / draw hunter all that much and elk herds are generally healthy (I think). I do know antelope and mule deer are hurting.

I would guess those organizations only have bandwidth to really pursue one major issue at a time. Just like all states, NM has a bunch of problems. They probably picked the one they thought they could make headway on.

 

[BigChiefJ]

If EPLUS was eliminated, I wonder if it would increase the number of tags available in the draw.

I also don't believe NRs are the ones complaining about EPLUS. It seems like NRs benefit from EPLUS way more than NM residents.

 

[nmhntr]

EPlus is awesome! It opens up some of the best elk hunting in the state. Super easy now that the maps are online.

 

[NMFROM81]

If EPLUS was eliminated, I wonder if it would increase the number of tags available in the draw.

I also don't believe NRs are the ones complaining about EPLUS. It seems like NRs benefit from EPLUS way more than NM residents.

If you eliminated e-plus, then you would also eliminate access to thousands of acres of private land that elk use. If you kept the total number of elk tags issued/unit the same, it would dramatically increase the number of hunters on public land in the units that have significant amounts of private land.

I don’t mind bumping into people when I’m hunting, but I’d rather not feel like I’m hunting CO otc when I’m on a draw hunt in NM.

Oh, and without incentive for landowners to tolerate elk in their property, some may decide to not tolerate them, and that’s really not good.

Totally agree NRs probably aren’t the ones complaining about e-plus. Most likely they use it more than residents, but the tags are there for whoever wants them…..bet they weren’t cheep this year.

Also completely agree it’s an imperfect system, don’t think perfection is possible with anything, especially tag allocation.

 

[BigChiefJ]

From what I've read, it seems like the organizations against EPLUS are claiming all those landowner tags will go back into the public draw if EPLUS is eliminated. I don't believe that is true.

I don't have much of an opinion on the issue because I don't purchase landowner tags and only hunt elk in NM if I get lucky in the draw.

 

[NM high country]

One thing I hear a lot of is landowners receive eplus tags because of the damage elk do to the landowner’s property. That is not the way it works. A landowner must apply for a voucher and it is based on the benefit their land is to elk. The land must meet the NMG&F qualifications of cover, water, feed, the surrounding lands and any agricultural. When applying for the LO voucher there is absolutely nothing in the application about land or fence damage and there is nothing about elk competing for grass that cattle graze. It’s all about the meaningful benefit to the elk.

 

[NMFROM81]

From what I've read, it seems like the organizations against EPLUS are claiming all those landowner tags will go back into the public draw if EPLUS is eliminated. I don't believe that is true.

I don't have much of an opinion on the issue because I don't purchase landowner tags and only hunt elk in NM if I get lucky in the draw.

Good point. Don’t think anyone knows exactly what would happen to the number of public draw tags that would be issued if e-plus went away. I’m guessing that for most units it wouldn’t significantly increase draw odds, but if it did, may not turn out to be such a good hunt…..more public tags on a smaller chunk on land.

Simply think that because of the large amount of elk habitat on private land in NM, private land ownership should factor into the management equation for each unit.

And of course I want better draw odds like everyone else. As is often the case, there’s no perfect solution here that would make everyone happy.

 

[windtalker]

Lets just say that E-Plus caters to the Rich non-residents 90 percent of the time. the average Joe can not afford the land owners tags in NM. Residents rarely purchase one of these tags unless they have lots of money. lived here all my live. I have family and friends that take advantage of the system, Family with game and fish and have been involved in the hunting industry all my life in one form or another.
The land owners need to be compensated for the damage or use of their land by wildlife but the E-plus system should have never been used for this.
They have been given the golden goose and the land owners will not give it up. there was a day when these vouchers were reasonable but sloppy hunters and outfitters looking for another option to make make more money went in and created a monster. the ranchers did not want to deal with the sloppy hunters any more and the outfitters gave them promises in return the ranchers sold all tags to the outfitter. Thus the prices started in jump. having been in a ranching family, worked as a guide for some outfitters and been in the taxidermy business I have seen the progression. The increase in demand for tags and many more hunters with tons more money than I make will make it hard to remove the system from the books. I do hope that the system can be revamped someday soon to eliminate unit wide tags.

They should have left all the tags in the draw and told the land owners to charge trespass fees. I think average hunter would receive many more tags and the land owner who takes care of the herd could still sell high and make enough to be compensated for any damage done. the rapid upward progression in fees might have been slowed since you would have to draw a tag before you hire the outfitter or get ranch access. Just my opinion!

oh yes it would definitely affect the outfitters bottom line. the NM E-Plus system is a candy bowl for the outfitters.

 

[BUGLEnmIN]

oh yes it would definitely affect the outfitters bottom line. the NM E-Plus system is a candy bowl for the outfitters.

As well as landowners

 

[NM high country]

Hell, I can remember paying $10,000 for a new pickup truck and last week the dealer quoted me $102,000 for a new diesel dually. Times keep changing.

 

[NM high country]

Hell, I can remember paying $10,000 for a new pickup truck and last week the dealer quoted me $102,000 for a new diesel dually. Times keep changing.

 

[windtalker]

I remember the day that I was able to draw a tag and get permission to hunt some great property with only a guarantee that I would respect the landowners property and leave it as I found it. Now those tags are so expensive that even my family members will not let me hunt their land knowing I will respect it because they might piss off the outfitter.
The ranchers used to say hell yea hunt my property and kill every elk you see. they eat my grass, drink my water and tear up my fences. Now they don't want them gone they just use that excuse to try for additional tags because they are making more on the elk than on their cattle!!!!!
whom ever came up with E-Plus did not have a vision for the future of elk hunting or the people of New Mexico.

 

[NM high country]

Those days are long gone and aren’t coming back.

I never thought I would pay $1300 for a phone but I just did. 3 people waiting in line for the same phone.

 

[Booner]

Those days are long gone and aren’t coming back.

I never thought I would pay $1300 for a phone but I just did. 3 people waiting in line for the same phone.

iPhone 15? You like it?

 

[BUGLEnmIN]

iPhone 15? You like it?

Touché

 

[Booner]

Touché

I was being serious…

 

[roadrunner]

What really needs to happen is to throw the E Plus tags into the draw as a choice and change the price of the tag to match what the LO wants. Game and Fish then cuts a check to the LO minus the normal tag fee public land tags go for.

 

[BUGLEnmIN]

What really needs to happen is to throw the E Plus tags into the draw as a choice and change the price of the tag to match what the LO wants. Game and Fish then cuts a check to the LO minus the normal tag fee public land tags go for.

Wouldn’t that be somethin!

 

[NM high country]

15 Pro iPhone

 

[Muleman]

Everyone complains about E plus but when you look at the shape of our elk herds seems like the program works. Plenty of elk to hunt, access through lands that you wouldn’t normally have and locals get to make some money from the habitat they provide for elk. It’s a win win. It’s not perfect as has flaws but if you look at the big picture it’s not really a bad program.

 

[raidergrad]

"I don’t know if the people who want to see it end are financially unable to buy a tag or think without the program they could draw"

Well, if there are 30-40% more tags available in the draw, draw odds should increase by this much. I don't know how much argument against that fact there can be.

I see both sides. Based on principle, the elk, and the right to hunt them, are held in the public trust. The EPLUS program is inconsistent with the (highly successful) American model of conservation, where hunting rights are not pay-for-play but allotted democratically. The tags are not NMDGFs, or the game commissions, property to give away: they belong to the public. Further, there are many EPLUS lands -- that I have hunted -- that are clearly not adding the 10's of thousands of dollars value for the elk that their tags can now fetch on the open market.

Yet, if the alternative to EPLUS is the antelope-style compensation of landowners, with unlimited private land tags, I think that is worse. My understanding is that antelope herds are hurting because of this management plan.

EPLUS is the wrong way to compensate landowners, and I think some landowners are overcompensated. Those landowners that support elk habitat definitely deserve to be compensated, but not with tags. EPLUS appears to be a lot better than what happens with antelope though.

Can you explain how there will be more tags if e-plus is gone? Tag Allocations are based on the biological studies and Mgmt plans for each unit. If you take acres out of the pool, you take tags out of the pool the way I see it.

 

[Booner]

Can you explain how there will be more tags if e-plus is gone? Tag Allocations are based on the biological studies and Mgmt plans for each unit. If you take acres out of the pool, you take tags out of the pool the way I see it.

You’re trying to converse with someone who doesn’t even possess the most basic/simple math skills.

What’s funny is these guys always love to bring up the NAMWC, as if it is law or an unbreakable commandment. It’s a model, and a noble one that has a ton of value, but it isn’t a concrete tablet with the words carved in it. If you took an absolute strict interpretation of it there could be zero youth/military/LO/old person preferential treatment in tag distribution. Hell, you could interpret it to mean no bonus/preference system. There could be no shooting coyotes and leaving them lay, and no lion/bear meat left to waste. I can’t think of a state in our nation that has an absolute adherence to the model, and they don’t need to, it isn’t a law, it’s a framework.

 

[roadrunner]

Can you explain how there will be more tags if e-plus is gone? Tag Allocations are based on the biological studies and Mgmt plans for each unit. If you take acres out of the pool, you take tags out of the pool the way I see it.

There wouldn't be. The tag count would remain the same, they would just make more RO by the same amount of increase for public land only. If you take 100% UW landowner tags and allocated them as an additional 50% increase in RO, the public only would increase by 50%, or 25/75 or whatever it would be.

You would see a crowding of people pushing more elk into private that is now limited to deeded acreage only.

Not all private would be setup to handle the influx, casuing PL owners to take matters into their own hands by shooting and let lay.

The best by far is to put them into the public draw keeping them designated as UW or RO. Each ranch code is a hunt choice as either a 1sst, 2nd, or 3rd choice. Tou pay the max upfront of the license fee (R/NR) plus the "tresspass" or voucher fee you'd normally pay the LO. Game and fish, once received at time of successful draw, cuts a check to the LO for the voucher or "tresspass" amount.

All hunting laws apply up to and including any stipulations placed by the LO, whclich couls not restrict further beyond state law.

 

[windtalker]

Read this morning that some of the ranchers around the Gila have filed a law suit against NM Game and fish for the damage the elk are doing to their property. I see this happen when they are trying to get more of them high dollar tags.
The department sold their soul to the Devil when they created E-Plus and the hole will continue to grow. lets see how many tags they pull from the public draw to add to the E-Plus system just to pacify the Ranchers. Oh yea I am betting they will want Unit wide tags. just saying!!!

 

[BUGLEnmIN]

Read this morning that some of the ranchers around the Gila have filed a law suit against NM Game and fish for the damage the elk are doing to their property. I see this happen when they are trying to get more of them high dollar tags.
The department sold their soul to the Devil when they created E-Plus and the hole will continue to grow. lets see how many tags they pull from the public draw to add to the E-Plus system just to pacify the Ranchers. Oh yea I am betting they will want Unit wide tags. just saying!!!

Political corruption!

 

[NM high country]

E plus and depredation elk are two different things. When my neighbor was applying for the eplus tag he brought up elk damage and NMF&G told him if he is complaining about elk damage then the eplus tags aren’t for him and they would have to try and keep the elk off his property. There is always the Jennings law for a landowner who just wants to get rid of elk.

 

[roadrunner]

E plus and depredation elk are two different things. When my neighbor was applying for the eplus tag he brought up elk damage and NMF&G told him if he is complaining about elk damage then the eplus tags aren’t for him and they would have to try and keep the elk off his property. There is always the Jennings law for a landowner who just wants to get rid of elk.

NM is a fence out state.

Just sayin'...

 

[Booner]

NM is a fence out state.

Just sayin'...

Ya…for domestic livestock.

 

[roadrunner]

Ya…for domestic livestock.

And "ranchers" make money off of wild game no different than livestock. If the elk eat the graze their cattle do...

 

[NMHUNTER]

Here’s an idea. Why not create a program similar to the old aplus. All tags go into the draw, ranches who are enrolled would have hunters assigned to their ranch. This could be done for all big game tags. Yes it may be a bit of a process but it would work.
They do similar things in other states successfully.
Even without adding eplus tags to the draw, we could draw tags and ranches can charge trespass fees if they wish
Eplus is an extremely broken system, most that think otherwise are profiting from the program. The amount of huntable land and access it opens up in minimal and a lot of times the elk aren’t even on these properties. To say there will be way more pressure on public lands may be true to a point but there is already more pressure due to these UW tags.

 

[roadrunner]

Here’s an idea. Why not create a program similar to the old aplus. All tags go into the draw, ranches who are enrolled would have hunters assigned to their ranch. This could be done for all big game tags. Yes it may be a bit of a process but it would work.
They do similar things in other states successfully.
Even without adding eplus tags to the draw, we could draw tags and ranches can charge trespass fees if they wish
Eplus is an extremely broken system, most that think otherwise are profiting from the program. The amount of huntable land and access it opens up in minimal and a lot of times the elk aren’t even on these properties. To say there will be way more pressure on public lands may be true to a point but there is already more pressure due to these UW tags.

UT does CWMU's (Cooperative Wildlife Management Unit).

It works.

 

[NM high country]

There aren’t many states that have the quality elk hunting that NM does. NM big game draw is the best in the west !! Every year we are all on the same level. If you have some extra money and don’t draw buy a LO tag and go hunt elk. IMO it doesn’t get any better. So let’s not screw it all up.

 

[roadrunner]

There aren’t many states that have the quality elk hunting that NM does. NM big game draw is the best in the west !! Every year we are all on the same level. If you have some extra money and don’t draw buy a LO tag and go hunt elk. IMO it doesn’t get any better. So let’s not screw it all up.

It's not perfect...

 

[BUGLEnmIN]

There aren’t many states that have the quality elk hunting that NM does. NM big game draw is the best in the west !! Every year we are all on the same level. If you have some extra money and don’t draw buy a LO tag and go hunt elk. IMO it doesn’t get any better. So let’s not screw it all up.

The draw SYSTEM is the best no doubt!

Here’s an idea. Why not create a program similar to the old aplus. All tags go into the draw, ranches who are enrolled would have hunters assigned to their ranch. This could be done for all big game tags. Yes it may be a bit of a process but it would work.
They do similar things in other states successfully.
Even without adding eplus tags to the draw, we could draw tags and ranches can charge trespass fees if they wish

I personally think NMHUNTER is right about this one!

 

[NMHUNTER]

There aren’t many states that have the quality elk hunting that NM does. NM big game draw is the best in the west !! Every year we are all on the same level. If you have some extra money and don’t draw buy a LO tag and go hunt elk. IMO it doesn’t get any better. So let’s not screw it all up.

The draw system is the best but the tag allocation and privatization of our game animals is not. When something like 45% of all elk tags go to private land owners, of those more than 70% go to non residents and another 10% of draw tags go to outfitters. Residents really just get the shitty end of the stick like everything else in this state. NM has created a monster with eplus and now everyone and their grandmas are a tag broker of some kind lol.

 

[MQ1_4_LIFE]

I think there are lots of other options, not sure if its better or worse or if any kind of change is possible to make to the overall program without having the cattlegrowers association blowing it all up.

But, it would be nice to put it into rule that any landowner who recieves eplus, or other species authorizations is automatically barred from entering the public draw for licenses to hunt that species.

 

[Muleman]

No doubt E plus has turned into an economic monster, that’s why it’s here to stay. May get tweaked but don’t see it leaving. E plus is the best employer in Catron county and other small counties that don’t have any economic drives.

Residents have the same opportunity to buy LO tags as non residents. It does play into only the rich get to hunt but get a better job and make more money. We shouldn’t complain cuz someone in another state was smarter and made more money than ourselves. It’s called free enterprise. Also NM is about 50% private land so it makes since that 45% of tags go to private land.

I do agree that the outfitter pool is BS. 10% of tags should go to non residents regardless of outfitter and the rest to residents.

 

[NMHUNTER]

No doubt E plus has turned into an economic monster, that’s why it’s here to stay. May get tweaked but don’t see it leaving. E plus is the best employer in Catron county and other small counties that don’t have any economic drives.

Residents have the same opportunity to buy LO tags as non residents. It does play into only the rich get to hunt but get a better job and make more money. We shouldn’t complain cuz someone in another state was smarter and made more money than ourselves. It’s called free enterprise. Also NM is about 50% private land so it makes since that 45% of tags go to private land.

I do agree that the outfitter pool is BS. 10% of tags should go to non residents regardless of outfitter and the rest to residents.

NM as a whole is about 50% private yes but elk occuupied land is not 50% private. With except of a few units. Quick look at a land status map will tell you that. That economic drive argument is BS. No one stocks up on supplies in these small towns. They are buying **** at the closest Walmart guaranteed. These elk tags bring no more to a town like datil than anyone else does on their hunts in that area.

 

[NMHUNTER]

T

I think there are lots of other options, not sure if its better or worse or if any kind of change is possible to make to the overall program without having the cattlegrowers association blowing it all up.

But, it would be nice to put it into rule that any landowner who recieves eplus, or other species authorizations is automatically barred from entering the public draw for licenses to hunt that species.

The cattle growers and nm council of guides and outfitters pitch a bunch of BS because they make a ton of money off these tags. It’s a cash cow that they don’t want to lose. As NM residents those are our elk. We should be doing everything possible to make sure most of these tags go to NM residents. 90/10 split like most other state is where we should be reaching for. There’s just too much money involved so like mule said eplus probably isn’t going anywhere anytime soon

 

[MQ1_4_LIFE]

T

The cattle growers and nm council of guides and outfitters pitch a bunch of BS because they make a ton of money off these tags. It’s a cash cow that they don’t want to lose. As NM residents those are our elk. We should be doing everything possible to make sure most of these tags go to NM residents. 90/10 split like most other state is where we should be reaching for. There’s just too much money involved so like mule said eplus probably isn’t going anywhere anytime soon

Oh yes. I know what you are getting at.

But i still say private land owners and their immediate family members that get elk authorizations should be banned from the public draw for elk in ANY unit. If they like pay to play they can do exactly that with the proceeds of their sold authorizations by buying a private authorization in the gmu they want, OR, they could do as intended and use their own authorizations to fill the freezer.

 

[NMHUNTER]

I can agree with that.

 

[BUGLEnmIN]

No doubt E plus has turned into an economic monster, that’s why it’s here to stay. May get tweaked but don’t see it leaving. E plus is the best employer in Catron county and other small counties that don’t have any economic drives.

Residents have the same opportunity to buy LO tags as non residents. It does play into only the rich get to hunt but get a better job and make more money. We shouldn’t complain cuz someone in another state was smarter and made more money than ourselves. It’s called free enterprise. Also NM is about 50% private land so it makes since that 45% of tags go to private land.

I do agree that the outfitter pool is BS. 10% of tags should go to non residents regardless of outfitter and the rest to residents.

They should at the very least have a minimum acreage requirement for UW

 

[NM high country]

I’ve seen elk 60 -80 cows and several big bulls rut every year on a private piece of property that is only 80 acres with a lot of cover, a dirt tank, a drinker and about 20 acres of grass valley and never leave the general area for about 3 months and if they do go off the property everything close is private. Guys are running all over the forest looking for elk and these elk are not leaving this little Eplus UW honey hole that I have never seen another person on in the last 6 years. Without SCR Eplus those bulls will die of old age. I know of a few other little places where once a little pressure pushes the elk off the forest they go into these little private canyons and stay. Bugle all night and all day and just stay put.

 

[Booner]

I’ve seen elk 60 -80 cows and several big bulls rut every year on a private piece of property that is only 80 acres with a lot of cover, a dirt tank, a drinker and about 20 acres of grass valley and never leave the general area for about 3 months and if they do go off the property everything close is private. Guys are running all over the forest looking for elk and these elk are not leaving this little Eplus UW honey hole that I have never seen another person on in the last 6 years. Without SCR Eplus those bulls will die of old age. I know of a few other little places where once a little pressure pushes the elk off the forest they go into these little private canyons and stay. Bugle all night and all day and just stay put.

 

[BUGLEnmIN]

I’ve seen elk 60 -80 cows and several big bulls rut every year on a private piece of property that is only 80 acres with a lot of cover, a dirt tank, a drinker and about 20 acres of grass valley and never leave the general area for about 3 months and if they do go off the property everything close is private. Guys are running all over the forest looking for elk and these elk are not leaving this little Eplus UW honey hole that I have never seen another person on in the last 6 years. Without SCR Eplus those bulls will die of old age. I know of a few other little places where once a little pressure pushes the elk off the forest they go into these little private canyons and stay. Bugle all night and all day and just stay put.

No argument here. You’re absolutely right. How about the 1-2 acre parcels?

 

[NMFROM81]

No argument here. You’re absolutely right. How about the 1-2 acre parcels?

Yup, I think I'd qualify that as an imperfection in the system that could use some fixing.

Don't know where you draw the line, and the line would be drawn all over depending on who you ask, but it does seem kinda excessive to me that a 1 acre property should be eligible for a UW tag.

 

[NM high country]

Not all LO tags are like a Gila archery tag those tags are top quality elk hunts, some of the very best elk hunting in the country (price a Dall sheep hunt in Alaska $$$$) but not all tags are out of reach and very reasonably priced. Spend a couple grand and you can chase elk all over a unit DIY for 2 weeks of archery or 5 days with rifle or muz. Guys need to quit complaining, buy a tag and go hunt before y’all get what you’re wishing for and then just sit home wishing you could draw an elk tag. IMO New Mexico elk hunting opportunities are the best there is.

 

[NMHUNTER]

Not all LO tags are like a Gila archery tag those tags are top quality elk hunts, some of the very best elk hunting in the country (price a Dall sheep hunt in Alaska $$$$) but not all tags are out of reach and very reasonably priced. Spend a couple grand and you can chase elk all over a unit DIY for 2 weeks of archery or 5 days with rifle or muz. Guys need to quit complaining, buy a tag and go hunt before y’all get what you’re wishing for and then just sit home wishing you could draw an elk tag. IMO New Mexico elk hunting opportunities are the best there is.

Sounds like someone who makes a couple grand off these tags. The way y’all keep uping the price for elk tags it will be cheaper to hunt Dall sheep in Alaska than elk in New Mexico. People are complaining because the system is broken and something needs to happen.

 

[roadrunner]

Sounds like someone who makes a couple grand off these tags. The way y’all keep uping the price for elk tags it will be cheaper to hunt Dall sheep in Alaska than elk in New Mexico. People are complaining because the system is broken and something needs to happen.

It's not residents that keeps hiking up the price...

 

[Shedz]

Couple grand ...... oh yeah that's chump change. Not many folks I know in NM have that type of expendable cash. Most of these tags are ridiculously priced and a lot of it has become more about the money and not about the hunting opportunities IMO.

 

[tallpine13]

Ok, let’s go with 15 as an example. I don’t have the time to add up how much land it opens up to hunting but it is substantial.
Of those 170 private tags 84% would go to Resident hunters. That’s 143. They would add more to the early season so to make the math easy let’s add 100 tags to the early hunt and see how that pans out with 1948 applicants. Currently 294 R 1st season archery tags. In this scenario bumping up to 437. So the odds would go from 15% to 22%. That isn’t a precise way to calculate the odds but I’m not GoHunt and can’t simulate a draw.

“Other units would see a larger increase…rough average across units of 30%“…again you can’t paint a picture of the program by viewing it statewide. It is not even close to an accurate representation or assessment. You have to break it down to individual units.

NMWF and BHA are Libtard groups. Nothing will appease them and stop the selective outrage.

I say selective outrage because they sure don’t whisper anything about deer, antelope or Bighorn sheep. Crickets.

Oh…one other little tidbit that they don’t like to talk about. Jennings Law.

But you’re wrong here….. those tags from the Eplus wouldn’t be added to the draw….. Or at least the shouldn’t be because then you take the acreage out of being able to hunt….. this I believe is the biggest misconception about it all is people think the eplus UW tags would all the be funneled into the draw….. not the case and then you lose more hunting opportunities and then this in turn would drive tag costs even higher….

 

[Skykarp]

It almost feels like someone is personally invested in the situation…

 

[NMHUNTER]

But you’re wrong here….. those tags from the Eplus wouldn’t be added to the draw….. Or at least the shouldn’t be because then you take the acreage out of being able to hunt….. this I believe is the biggest misconception about it all is people think the eplus UW tags would all the be funneled into the draw….. not the case and then you lose more hunting opportunities and then this in turn would drive tag costs even higher….

I think the biggest misconception is people think we’ll lose a bunch of acreage and access. When in fact most people don’t even hunt these UW properties most don’t even know which properties are UW. A lot of times the elk aren’t even on these properties during hunting season, of course there are exceptions but not many. So in turn mostly all the extra UW tag holders are hunting public land anyway. So if they don’t put UW tags in the draw we will have the same chance of drawing a tag. Plus we won’t have the extra pressure in the woods from those who paid their way in.

 

[Muleman]

Yeah if we put all the private lands we’re put into the draw our public land elk hunting would be like Colorado. Quality would be gone and you would be fighting over rag horns cuz private isn’t going to open their gates to let you in without out $. Plus with our depredation laws in this state if you took away the incentive to have elk LO would slaughter a lot of elk which wouldn’t do anyone any good.

We will loose key access points. If folks
aren’t looking up UW property in their unit they are missing out.

I agree there are issues but in all it’s not as bad as NM wildlife fed try’s to make it out. I would like to see some minimums like you have to have enough land/ habitat to run an AMU of an elk meaning enough to support a cow/calf pair to qualify.