Let’s keep the E Plus program

[NM high country]

Replaced with what? Overcrowded public land, elk shot and left to waste on private, water turned off, and a loss of access to a million acres of private/landlocked public land? You don’t know how good you have it.

When both sides think they are getting screwed it is probably a good program.

+100%

 

[roadrunner]

EPlus isn't a bad program, it's what it has turned into.

I recently saw advertised bull and cow tags available that are EPlus UW for an exorbitant amount. Not even close to being worth that.

This is what ticks people off the most when it comes to EPlus. Not necessarily the program.

 

[Booner]

EPlus isn't a bad program, it's what it has turned into.

I recently saw advertised bull and cow tags available that are EPlus UW for an exorbitant amount. Not even close to being worth that.

This is what ticks people off the most when it comes to EPlus. Not necessarily the program.

If they aren’t worth that then the guy won’t get it. Even if they get twice that amount who cares? If he asks too much and waits too long and has to eat them then maybe a lesson will be learned. The house down the street from me wasn’t worth 600k but someone paid 3x more for it.
Who cares? Maybe if the ranchers see some value in having elk around they will be much more tolerant of them.

The only person who determines the real value of something is the purchaser. Welcome to America.

 

[roadrunner]

If they aren’t worth that then the guy won’t get it. Even if they get twice that amount who cares? If he asks too much and waits too long and has to eat them then maybe a lesson will be learned. The house down the street from me wasn’t worth 600k but someone paid 3x more for it.
Who cares? Maybe if the ranchers see some value in having elk around they will be much more tolerant of them.

The only person who determines the real value of something is the purchaser. Welcome to America.

Not the point. EPlus was developed as a way for landowners to recoup costs they say they incur. Not as a way to make bank on a public resource.

If a landowner wants to charge $10k to access their property to hunt resident elk that live on their property, then yay for them.

But to charge the same for the ability to hunt off their property on public land using a public land tag is another issue. If the tag holder needs to hunt off property to fill it, then the property doesn't necessarily have the elk problem they say it does.

It's a double edge sword. On one hand, you keep overcrowding down (somewhat) by unlocking thousands of acres of private to either hunt or access other public and on the other, you remove a public land tag out of the draw.

Has nothing to do with "welcome to America"...

 

[Booner]

Not the point. EPlus was developed as a way for landowners to recoup costs they say they incur. Not as a way to make bank on a public resource.

If a landowner wants to charge $10k to access their property to hunt resident elk that live on their property, then yay for them.

But to charge the same for the ability to hunt off their property on public land using a public land tag is another issue. If the tag holder needs to hunt off property to fill it, then the property doesn't necessarily have the elk problem they say it does.

It's a double edge sword. On one hand, you keep overcrowding down (somewhat) by unlocking thousands of acres of private to either hunt or access other public and on the other, you remove a public land tag out of the draw.

Has nothing to do with "welcome to America"...

Why does the price mean so much to you? What’s the cutoff? Who TF cares if they make nothing or 20k? Public resource blah blah blah…you wouldn’t have any if it wasn’t for their private resources…

I’d bet you jump at the chance to be president of your HOA, considering how much you love to virtue signal.

Oh, and it isn’t thousands of acres. It’s more than hundreds of thousands. If someone dug deep I’m sure it easily hits the 7 digit mark.

 

[JB1975]

Why does the price mean so much to you? What’s the cutoff? Who TF cares if they make nothing or 20k? Public resource blah blah blah…you wouldn’t have any if it wasn’t for their private resources…

I’d bet you jump at the chance to be president of your HOA, considering how much you love to virtue signal.

Oh, and it isn’t thousands of acres. It’s more than hundreds of thousands. If someone dug deep I’m sure it easily hits the 7 digit mark.

Price means so much to RR because he is envious of anyone that is successful and can spend what they want. In case you haven’t noticed, he’s never wrong either, just ask him.

 

[roadrunner]

Why does the price mean so much to you? What’s the cutoff? Who TF cares if they make nothing or 20k? Public resource blah blah blah…you wouldn’t have any if it wasn’t for their private resources…

I’d bet you jump at the chance to be president of your HOA, considering how much you love to virtue signal.

Oh, and it isn’t thousands of acres. It’s more than hundreds of thousands. If someone dug deep I’m sure it easily hits the 7 digit mark.

Score. You win.

?

 

[Booner]

Price means so much to RR because he is envious of anyone that is successful and can spend what they want. In case you haven’t noticed, he’s never wrong either, just ask him.

I’m sure he’s a Democrat.

 

[roadrunner]

Price means so much to RR because he is envious of anyone that is successful and can spend what they want. In case you haven’t noticed, he’s never wrong either, just ask him.

Sorry homeslice, you missed the mark on that one. I'm wrong all time.

Cutting a check for $8500 for a bull tag is what fools do. But then again, a fool is easily departed with their money. Sounds like you have a lot of experience with that, Mr Successful...

I’m sure he’s a Democrat.

I'm quite certain he's not.

Anything else you and your little bum-chum care to discuss?

 

[JB1975]

Sorry homeslice, you missed the mark on that one. I'm wrong all time.

Cutting a check for $8500 for a bull tag is what fools do. But then again, a fool is easily departed with their money. Sounds like you have a lot of experience with that, Mr Successful...



I'm quite certain he's not.

Anything else you and your little bum-chum care to discuss?

$8500 is small dollars for a good bull elk hunt. Life is too short Karen.

 

[roadrunner]

$8500 is small dollars for a good bull elk hunt. Life is too short Karen.

Who said anything about it being a "good bull elk hunt"?

You even know what a 'Karen' is? Pot, meet Kettle ?

 

[NM high country]

Not the point. EPlus was developed as a way for landowners to recoup costs they say they incur. Not as a way to make bank on a public resource.

If a landowner wants to charge $10k to access their property to hunt resident elk that live on their property, then yay for them.

But to charge the same for the ability to hunt off their property on public land using a public land tag is another issue. If the tag holder needs to hunt off property to fill it, then the property doesn't necessarily have the elk problem they say it does.

It's a double edge sword. On one hand, you keep overcrowding down (somewhat) by unlocking thousands of acres of private to either hunt or access other public and on the other, you remove a public land tag out of the draw.

Has nothing to do with "welcome to America"...

Eplus doesn’t have a thing to do with damage elk cause. It is all about the meaningful benefit a landowners property has for elk. Meaningful Benefit !!!

 

[countryboy300]

So here is a thought! Don’t bast me I see both sides and see pros and cons of it.

What if game and fish was to put a cap on tags going to out of state elk tags similar to the regular draw. Then some ranches that received a non resident tag can sell as high as they want! But then the other % of tags would be only sold to residents.

This allows more tags stay local and cheaper as don’t have to compete with out of state money. Then the ranch would alternate years through game and fish draw. To have the non resident vs resident quota met.

Still getting good hunts, still getting tags, all receives tags still . Don’t really have a dog in the fight. Just a thought!

 

[SLM]

E-Plus, like many .gov programs started out with good intentions, but morphed into something it never should have.

The conversation needs to be broke out into producing “ranches/property” and hobby property. A good portion of property enrolled are nothing more than recreational properties.

IMO, there should be a minimum acreage 640+ (?). No one with 2/5/10 acres should be receiving authorizations. All authorizations should be RO, let the market decide which properties have value.

I don’t buy into the “loss” of private ground if all authorizations go RO, we don‘t have access to said properties for any other species and we find a way to make it work. I’m definitely not for the elimination of E-Plus, but it needs a major over haul.

 

[MQ1_4_LIFE]

I have to admit that i got a little sucked into this thread/topic, but after some thought i realize that this thread serves no purpose.

The only place to have this discussion is at SGC meetings, or during legislative sessions.

What is taking place in this thread only amounts to screaming into the wind. For both sides. So, either take the initiative to be a voice during the rule making or legislative processes, or accept what is given.

 

[roadrunner]

Eplus doesn’t have a thing to do with damage elk cause. It is all about the meaningful benefit a landowners property has for elk. Meaningful Benefit !!!

Yeah, that's what is posted on the website about the program....

NM Statute 17-3-14.2: "The director of the department of game and fish may issue landowner permits for the lawful taking of elk, antelope, oryx, and deer. The permits may be issued when, in the determination of the director, they are necessary to effectively reduce conflicts between humans and wildlife and provide sport-hunting opportunities in accordance with regulations of the state game commission"

Show me where in the language of the statute they're issued for the benefit that landowners contribute to elk. All I can find is that they reduce conflicts (aka damage or restitution from wildlife use of private property) between humans and wildlife.

I'm likely wrong again though, so help me understand.

 

[NMHUNTER]

E-Plus, like many .gov programs started out with good intentions, but morphed into something it never should have.

The conversation needs to be broke out into producing “ranches/property” and hobby property. A good portion of property enrolled are nothing more than recreational properties.

IMO, there should be a minimum acreage 640+ (?). No one with 2/5/10 acres should be receiving authorizations. All authorizations should be RO, let the market decide which properties have value.

I don’t buy into the “loss” of private ground if all authorizations go RO, we don‘t have access to said properties for any other species and we find a way to make it work. I’m definitely not for the elimination of E-Plus, but it needs a major over haul.

You’re exactly right. The loss of land, access and more pressure on public is all B.S. most of the UW ranches aren’t even hunted by public draw hunters and hell most still dont even know which land is open. Eliminating UW tags and ranches will just reduce pressure on public lands since you won’t have all the extra UW tag holders hunting the public lands.

 

[Booner]

You’re exactly right. The loss of land, access and more pressure on public is all B.S. most of the UW ranches aren’t even hunted by public draw hunters and hell most still dont even know which land is open. Eliminating UW tags and ranches will just reduce pressure on public lands since you won’t have all the extra UW tag holders hunting the public lands.

If someone doesn’t know what a UW ranch is or where to get the map info they can’t be helped, they are dumber than a rock and deserve what they have…an IQ in the single digits.

Most of the UW ranches aren’t even hunted by public hunters??? How TF do you know. This is what I love, guys talking out their ass. Hell, there is no data tracking that metric, it doesn’t exist. That’s your opinion, and it is backed up by zero data.

 

[Booner]

Yeah, that's what is posted on the website about the program....

NM Statute 17-3-14.2: "The director of the department of game and fish may issue landowner permits for the lawful taking of elk, antelope, oryx, and deer. The permits may be issued when, in the determination of the director, they are necessary to effectively reduce conflicts between humans and wildlife and provide sport-hunting opportunities in accordance with regulations of the state game commission"

Show me where in the language of the statute they're issued for the benefit that landowners contribute to elk. All I can find is that they reduce conflicts (aka damage or restitution from wildlife use of private property) between humans and wildlife.

I'm likely wrong again though, so help me understand.

Page 6, #16.

https://www.wildlife.state.nm.us/download/hunting/maps/e-plus/EPLUS-2024-25-Initial-Application-and-Agreement-Primary-Zone.pdf

 

[roadrunner]

Page 6, #16.

https://www.wildlife.state.nm.us/download/hunting/maps/e-plus/EPLUS-2024-25-Initial-Application-and-Agreement-Primary-Zone.pdf

How about you let that other fella respond? Unless you're his designated spokesman...

And, just to help you out, the original comment made was what the original intent was, not what it is now. The statute posted supports that.

Somebody else besides me wrote the same thing. Go argue with him, or did you just decide to skip ahead to the most recent posts?

 

[NMHUNTER]

If someone doesn’t know what a UW ranch is or where to get the map info they can’t be helped, they are dumber than a rock and deserve what they have…an IQ in the single digits.

Most of the UW ranches aren’t even hunted by public hunters??? How TF do you know. This is what I love, guys talking out their ass. Hell, there is no data tracking that metric, it doesn’t exist. That’s your opinion, and it is backed up by zero data.

You mean like you talking out your ass about how great the eplus system is lol. You guys will literally say anything to make it sound good. How do I know most these ranches don’t get hunted? Idk maybe just ask the hunters who draw tags **** ask some of the guys who buy unit wide tags. it’s not that hard to figure out

 

[Booner]

You mean like you talking out your ass about how great the eplus system is lol. You guys will literally say anything to make it sound good. How do I know most these ranches don’t get hunted? Idk maybe just ask the hunters who draw tags **** ask some of the guys who buy unit wide tags. it’s not that hard to figure out

Ask “some of the guys”…well, in the case of an area like unit 15 for example, that has 2k tag holders, “some of the guys” amounts to literally a drop in the bucket. I know quite a few guys who hunt almost nothing but UW ranches. You have a preconceived notion based on an opinion. It is baseless, yet you peddle it as some sort of factual argument. Hell, you might be right, but there is no way to back up your argument, so it is worth less than nothing.

 

[SLM]

This property is not a one off by any stretch of the imagination. What meaningful benefit does this property have? How does the property benefit the average draw hunter? Who is the only one benefitting? Who is going to hunt this “ranch”? Before someone brings it up, yes, it is an SCR property and does not receive an authorization every year, but the subdivision has authorizations within it every year. What meaningful benefit do any of these properties offer?

Why are they getting points towards water when the water runs for miles on public either side of the subdivision?

it is a broken system and needs a major over haul.

 

[NMHUNTER]

Ask “some of the guys”…well, in the case of an area like unit 15 for example, that has 2k tag holders, “some of the guys” amounts to literally a drop in the bucket. I know quite a few guys who hunt almost nothing but UW ranches. You have a preconceived notion based on an opinion. It is baseless, yet you peddle it as some sort of factual argument. Hell, you might be right, but there is no way to back up your argument, so it is worth less than nothing.

well then I guess that makes your argument about more pressure and lost access and blah blah blah worth less than nothing also, since we can’t prove how many if any hunt these properties.

 

[NM high country]

Yeah, that's what is posted on the website about the program....

NM Statute 17-3-14.2: "The director of the department of game and fish may issue landowner permits for the lawful taking of elk, antelope, oryx, and deer. The permits may be issued when, in the determination of the director, they are necessary to effectively reduce conflicts between humans and wildlife and provide sport-hunting opportunities in accordance with regulations of the state game commission"

Show me where in the language of the statute they're issued for the benefit that landowners contribute to elk. All I can find is that they reduce conflicts (aka damage or restitution from wildlife use of private property) between humans and wildlife.

I'm likely wrong again though, so help me understand.

Go to the eplus site on the G&F web site read it including the application process and you’ll find everything you need to know about it. A lot of what you and a bunch of other guys say about eplus shows you’re not up to date on it. The eplus program is one of the best programs NMG&F has ever implemented. Because of it, myself, brother and many of our friends have had the opportunity to hunt elk many times.

 

[roadrunner]

Go to the eplus site on the G&F web site read it including the application process and you’ll find everything you need to know about it. A lot of what you and a bunch of other guys say about eplus shows you’re not up to date on it. The eplus program is one of the best programs NMG&F has ever implemented. Because of it, myself, brother and many of our friends have had the opportunity to hunt elk many times.

You do realize the current EPlus isn't what it used to be, right? They revamped it a few years ago to what it is today.

FYI - I have used EPlus to our advantage many times in the past and will again this year. Quite certain I know how it works, and if you go back in the comment history of this thread, you'll see what I said about it.

It's when some of you half read what someone posts is when you go off half-cocked in a death spiral...

 

[SLM]

Go to the eplus site on the G&F web site read it including the application process and you’ll find everything you need to know about it. A lot of what you and a bunch of other guys say about eplus shows you’re not up to date on it. The eplus program is one of the best programs NMG&F has ever implemented. Because of it, myself, brother and many of our friends have had the opportunity to hunt elk many times.

I have a good understanding of the program and would say NMDGF had a good frame work for a good program, but allowed politics and Jennings Law to taint it.

 

[NM high country]

You do realize the current EPlus isn't what it used to be, right? They revamped it a few years ago to what it is today.

FYI - I have used EPlus to our advantage many times in the past and will again this year. Quite certain I know how it works, and if you go back in the comment history of this thread, you'll see what I said about it.

It's when some of you half read what someone posts is when you go off half-cocked in a death spiral...

You ask a question and then when you hear the answer you spin it….wtf. Reminds me of my 87 year old neighbor, I can’t make sense out of the things he says.

 

[roadrunner]

You ask a question and then when you hear the answer you spin it….wtf. Reminds me of my 87 year old neighbor, I can’t make sense out of the things he says.

Post #102. Please read in its entirety.
Post #104. Please read in its entirety.

EPlus has been around for a while. They changed the criteria a few years back. It was initially a way to compensate landowners per the statute above. The new form you and that other guy Boner so proudly shared reference to indicates that.

There have always been depredation tags. There have been what we always referred to as "landowner tags" for quite some time.

The verbiage used on the website is a nice way of saying that the Game Comsission recognizes that a state owned resource uses, and can cause loss/damage to private property without admitting "guilt". The voucher is their thank-you. If it were merely a simple thank-you, then the voucher wouldn't be transferable in consideration of _____ (that means you can sell it for money).

Now, why in the world would the Game Commission allow the landowner to sell the voucher for profit if they were only concerned with recognizing the importance that LO's are contributing to elk ?...

It's really not that difficult to understand.

Cheers.

 

[Trad Bow 1979]

Well if you can’t beat ‘em, join em. I think I am gonna go find me a 1/4 acre of property with a couple of 5 gallon buckets filled with water for the animals. Maybe then I can skip worrying about the draw.

 

[live4muleys]

I guess the part that blows me away more than anything reading all these posts is how very few seem to care about the elk and elk population. It is more about the price of tags and who can get them. Eplus has some issues, I agree but it is great program for the elk population. When you have ranches that are doing things to increase elk numbers I don't see how that is a bad thing. I think UW is abused in some rare cases, but I also see times when it is needed. Take a ranch for example that gives access to big parts of forest that otherwise wouldn't be able to be accessed. Or a ranch that has hundreds of cows and calves during the summer months and not many or no elk on there during hunting season. They just did great things for the elk population during the calving months. I feel it is a great program for the elk, maybe not for each person or each rancher or each hunter, but for the elk. Are things abused here and there, of course but that is everywhere.

 

[outdoorsdude]

One point that is never discussed: it is not in the interest of the State to do away with e-plus.

I hope I can explain it well enough.... small business owners will understand immediately --CRS!
If a UW tag in 34 is sold to an out of state hunter for $12,000, how much money does the State make?
G&F= $773
Gross Receipts Tax (CRS) $[email protected]%= $924
Personal Income Tax (est5%)= $600
that's +/- $2297 to the State... off one tag.

It is not in the interest of the New Mexico Government to change.

 

[windtalker]

Ok, Just some food for thought. Arizona does not have a land owner system. Tag allocation is 90% resident, 10% non-resident. their Elk populations and quality are much better than ours. Residents are still able to draw a quality tag every three to five years. not much different here.
Their land owners are not complaining!!! ours are. Why? they know if they scream the game and fish gives them more tags. it should be obvious what is happening.
the only people who love this system are the landowners, outfitters and wealthy non-residents. again Obvious right!!

 

[Looserowel505]

I have to admit that i got a little sucked into this thread/topic, but after some thought i realize that this thread serves no purpose.

The only place to have this discussion is at SGC meetings, or during legislative sessions.

What is taking place in this thread only amounts to screaming into the wind. For both sides. So, either take the initiative to be a voice during the rule making or legislative processes, or accept what is given.

Hunters always argue ,gripe ,complain , but come Game Commission meetings almost never is there public land hunters showing up to voice their concerns ,opinions etc. BCH & NMWLF is ALWAYS there ....and then the excuses , game commish meetings are alwasy on week days , always in far away towns , always another excuse as to why people dont show up!

 

[WestTxHunter]

NR aren't all wealthy. We just like to hunt. Texas hunting land is almost all private. Whether it's a 3 day hunt or a season lease it's going to cost $2500 to $5000 a year to hunt. These aren't high fence properties. Just ranch land.

We can't hunt for $100 on public land like you guys. Y'all also get 80% to 90% of the tags. That's why we find it interesting you think you're getting cheesed somehow. We choose to pay the $1000 to $4000 for a LO voucher because we want to hunt. It pretty simple.

 

[Ropinfool]

Ok, Just some food for thought. Arizona does not have a land owner system. Tag allocation is 90% resident, 10% non-resident. their Elk populations and quality are much better than ours. Residents are still able to draw a quality tag every three to five years. not much different here.
Their land owners are not complaining!!! ours are. Why? they know if they scream the game and fish gives them more tags. it should be obvious what is happening.
the only people who love this system are the landowners, outfitters and wealthy non-residents. again Obvious right!!

exactly!!!
it's not hard to come up with a better system BUT it's hard to peal the landowners and outfitters off of the tit.

 

[roadrunner]

NR aren't all wealthy. We just like to hunt. Texas hunting land is almost all private. Whether it's a 3 day hunt or a season lease it's going to cost $2500 to $5000 a year to hunt. These aren't high fence properties. Just ranch land.

We can't hunt for $100 on public land like you guys. Y'all also get 80% to 90% of the tags. That's why we find it interesting you think you're getting cheesed somehow. We choose to pay the $1000 to $4000 for a LO voucher because we want to hunt. It pretty simple.

Correction: that's 84% of available public draw tags, not total tags available in the system. There is a difference.

If there are a total of 10,000 tags available in the system, and 30% go to LO's (either RO or UW), only 84% of the remaining 10,000 go to residents, or in this example, 5,880. Just over 1/2.

Of the 30%, some residents my buy the voucher, most are picked up by outfitters and sold to high rolling residents and mostly non-residents.

 

[WestTxHunter]

Correction: that's 84% of available public draw tags, not total tags available in the system. There is a difference.

If there are a total of 10,000 tags available in the system, and 30% go to LO's (either RO or UW), only 84% of the remaining 10,000 go to residents, or in this example, 5,880. Just over 1/2.

Of the 30%, some residents my buy the voucher, most are picked up by outfitters and sold to high rolling residents and mostly non-residents.

You're guaranteed 59% of the tags and an equal shot at 30% of the tags. That's 89% right. Even at 50/50 on the LO vouchers that's still 74% of the tags. They sell tons of LO vouchers UW and RO for $1000 to $2500. That's still cheap compared to the alternative. A very small percentage of those tags go to high rollers which can be bought by anyone. I'm not one of the anyone but go them for being successful.

 

[roadrunner]

You're guaranteed 59% of the tags and an equal shot at 30% of the tags. That's 89% right. Even at 50/50 on the LO vouchers that's still 74% of the tags. They sell tons of LO vouchers UW and RO for $1000 to $2500. That's still cheap compared to the alternative. A very small percentage of those tags go to high rollers which can be bought by anyone. I'm not one of the anyone but go them for being successful.

Theoretically, yes. Practicality, no.

I don't know about them selling "tons" of vouchers for that low of a price other than cow tags.

Many LO's won't sell you a voucher unless you buy all of them, which most outfitters do.

People need to understand the majority of hunters out there aren't about to drop up to 3 months take home pay on a LO voucher. NM is a low wage earnings state.

Just because the 30% are on the open market doesn't mean they're attainable...

You also mentioned being able to hunt public for $100. That's only doable through the public draw and not LO vouchers. So, you still only have 59% available for that.

 

[WestTxHunter]

Theoretically, yes. Practicality, no.

I don't know about them selling "tons" of vouchers for that low of a price other than cow tags.

Many LO's won't sell you a voucher unless you buy all of them, which most outfitters do.

People need to understand the majority of hunters out there aren't about to drop up to 3 months take home pay on a LO voucher. NM is a low wage earnings state.

Just because the 30% are on the open market doesn't mean they're attainable...

You also mentioned being able to hunt public for $100. That's only doable through the public draw and not LO vouchers. So, you still only have 59% available for that.

Still doesn't change anything. The public draw for us is what 11%. If you didn't draw, what's wrong with a cow tag? I was offered buck tags for $2500.

It's not everyone else's fault you believe you can't afford it. I make sacrifices ever year to hunt somewhere. I would like to draw somewhere every year but that's not doable especially for someone not living in a Western State. I take what I can until I get drawn.

It seems you think you're entitled to a top end tag every year. I think I'm more realistic in what I think I can get. If I don't draw, I go see what I can get to make sure I get to spend time in the woods every Fall. I don't look down my nose at a cow tag. I love being in the woods and I love elk meat. It's a win win for me.

I'm taking one of my best friends and my youngest daughter on her first elk hunt in 2 weeks. They have cow tag. I'm driver and pack mule. We're going to have a ball.

I'm going hunting in New Mexico with my oldest brother (second elk hunt) and my BIL (first elk hunt). We have cow tags. We're going to have a ball.

 

[roadrunner]

Still doesn't change anything. The public draw for us is what 11%. If you didn't draw, what's wrong with a cow tag? I was offered buck tags for $2500.

It's not everyone else's fault you believe you can't afford it. I make sacrifices ever year to hunt somewhere. I would like to draw somewhere every year but that's not doable especially for someone not living in a Western State. I take what I can until I get drawn.

It seems you think you're entitled to a top end tag every year. I think I'm more realistic in what I think I can get. If I don't draw, I go see what I can get to make sure I get to spend time in the woods every Fall. I don't look down my nose at a cow tag. I love being in the woods and I love elk meat. It's a win win for me.

I'm taking one of my best friends and my youngest daughter on her first elk hunt in 2 weeks. They have cow tag. I'm driver and pack mule. We're going to have a ball.

I'm going hunting in New Mexico with my oldest brother (second elk hunt) and my BIL (first elk hunt). We have cow tags. We're going to have a ball.

You assume too much...

1) I've killed way more cows than bulls, even when having an ES (archery) tag.

2) the median household income in NM is $55k +/- a few thousand. It's absurd to think that "everyone" can afford to buy up a land owner voucher that equals a month's mortgage or rent, and then throw in the expense to kill the damn thing.

3) one of my choices on my app is always a cow tag, and only the first choice is a top end tag.

4) I don't have to sacrifice to buy a land owner voucher. I can cut a check today for any land voucher in the state.

Shall we compare household balance sheets? I can promise you that my debt to income ratio is likely way better than yours.

5) I burned bonus points this year in another state for a lower end tiered hunt and unit for antelope because I didn't draw NM, so yeah, I look and go elsewhere too.

6) I remind you that you stated a resident can go elk hunting for $100 on public. Yeah, only if they DRAW one of the 59% available public land tags (see example above for any readers that just jump to newest posts and skip everything in between).

7) my nephew will be taking advantage of the EPLUS UW offering for a Dec cow hunt, first ever, as did his cousins over the years because they couldn't draw a public land tag. This particular hunt isn't available to adults. And no, it's not a landowner voucher he obtained. It's a very limited public land tag through a fire sale.

Good luck on your hunts you listed above.

 

[WestTxHunter]

You assume too much...

1) I've killed way more cows than bulls, even when having an ES (archery) tag.

2) the median household income in NM is $55k +/- a few thousand. It's absurd to think that "everyone" can afford to buy up a land owner voucher that equals a month's mortgage or rent, and then throw in the expense to kill the damn thing.

3) one of my choices on my app is always a cow tag, and only the first choice is a top end tag.

4) I don't have to sacrifice to buy a land owner voucher. I can cut a check today for any land voucher in the state.

Shall we compare household balance sheets? I can promise you that my debt to income ratio is likely way better than yours.

5) I burned bonus points this year in another state for a lower end tiered hunt and unit for antelope because I didn't draw NM, so yeah, I look and go elsewhere too.

6) I remind you that you stated a resident can go elk hunting for $100 on public. Yeah, only if they DRAW one of the 59% available public land tags (see example above for any readers that just jump to newest posts and skip everything in between).

7) my nephew will be taking advantage of the EPLUS UW offering for a Dec cow hunt, first ever, as did his cousins over the years because they couldn't draw a public land tag. This particular hunt isn't available to adults. And no, it's not a landowner voucher he obtained. It's a very limited public land tag through a fire sale.

Good luck on your hunts you listed above.

You keep assuming a large percentage of LO tags are expensive.
You're the one who said the numbers I listed would only get you a cow tag. I'm just responding to your commentary.

So, what are you whining about?

You keep skipping over NR only get 11% in the draw. That's 11% of the reduced tags you keep bring up.

I'm not sure you want that comparison. You brought it up.

I hope the hunts go well. I wish you luck on your hunts.

 

[slicktrick]

what i cant figure out is if all i got to do is buy a 30acre lot in the right spot i get a tag ? tell me how giving landowners with less then 150acres is doing anything for the public ? unless that 150 happens to be on the best spot in that unit ? some of the spots that get etag are no where anybody is looking for elk ? it don't get elky unless it snows 3 ft ?

 

[Booner]

what i cant figure out is if all i got to do is buy a 30acre lot in the right spot i get a tag ? tell me how giving landowners with less then 150acres is doing anything for the public ? unless that 150 happens to be on the best spot in that unit ? some of the spots that get etag are no where anybody is looking for elk ? it don't get elky unless it snows 3 ft ?

You can’t judge ‘em by looking at them on a map. I’ve hunted some killer properties that are between 10-60 acres. Wouldn’t trade them for 500 acre properties. Also, those are SCR properties so it’s not like those landowners are getting tags every year. It might be every few at best, and it might be just a cow tag.

 

[filinmar2]

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.

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.

 

[filinmar2]

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.

Amen Bobby

 

[filinmar2]

Ask “some of the guys”…well, in the case of an area like unit 15 for example, that has 2k tag holders, “some of the guys” amounts to literally a drop in the bucket. I know quite a few guys who hunt almost nothing but UW ranches. You have a preconceived notion based on an opinion. It is baseless, yet you peddle it as some sort of factual argument. Hell, you might be right, but there is no way to back up your argument, so it is worth less than nothing.

Here's a first hand experience for you Booner.

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). You can drive 100 miles to a designated access point and the gate is locked. What then? Call G&F and wait a day for them to show up if at all? BTW No cell phone service in 16C.
I have ran into several outfitter's and guides in the field (again 16C, Blackrange, Beaverhead, Adobe Ranch) 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.

 

[5yearcoueshunter]

Furthermore, many of these tags can be used in any 5 day span, including outside the hunt dates that restrict public land hunter.

This only applies to Ranch Only. Unit wide tags are only good for the same hunt dates as the public. Here it is out of the regulations page 70:

"Unit-wide Season Dates: Unit-wide authorizations within the primary management zone correspond with an elk hunt code for the same GMU and are restricted to the same bag limit, sporting arm and hunt dates."

 

[Booner]

You can drive 100 miles to a designated access point and the gate is locked. What then?

Park your truck and walk the hell in there! Or unload a bike and use the road if one exists. If you truly think that being "open to hunting" means the gates have to be open and you can drive in there it tells me you haven't read the rules. They can lock any and all gates (even better IMO because it keeps out people that are ignorant of the rules or are too lazy to get after it). If they are driving in there to hunt THEN they have to allow you the same access.

 

[BUGLEnmIN]

Park your truck and walk the hell in there! Or unload a bike and use the road if one exists. If you truly think that being "open to hunting" means the gates have to be open and you can drive in there it tells me you haven't read the rules. They can lock any and all gates (even better IMO because it keeps out people that are ignorant of the rules or are too lazy to get after it). If they are driving in there to hunt THEN they have to allow you the same access.

I agree ! If the gates are locked for EVERYONE! Hell I prefer it that way! Weeds out a ton of people! It’s when a guy busts his ass to get in there just for a guy with a key to open it and drive hunters straight in spooking all the elk and completely undermining the guy who walked in! That’s my gripe!