Non-Res DIY Hunters

[1FastGambler]

Facts:

Your odds of drawing a tag in NM are terrible with 6% of the tags.

NMG&F had nothing to do with this.

I personally opposed the bill that created these new laws - SB196.

If you care to know what I felt was the best possible solution back when this was all taking place click here...
http://www.monstermuleys.info/cgi-b..._thread&om=3028&forum=DCForumID34&archive=yes

If you like to revel in the past do a search for *SB196* and you'll have all the reading you can handle for an evening.

The bottom line is this...

As a NR DIY you have been dealt a crappy hand of cards and if you have a desire to hunt in NM during the 2012-2013 season you will need to step outside the box and find a way to get a tag.

The best possible solution I know of for all of you in the upcoming year would be to contact a NM outfitter such as JFWRC or other outfitters who sponsor this site & advertise here. They will have better solutions for you than you might be aware of at reasonable prices.

All the cards were dealt face up and we're all aware of your situation. Further complaints will not get you more tags. If they make you feel better then by all means type away.

You really only have two options... play your hand or walk away from the table. I hope you all choose to play your hand and I wish you the best of luck... you'll need it.

Cheers

 

[fishfurlife]

I am sorry Fast, but I compare this to saying that "The government didn't wreck our economy, the banks did because the government let them"

The NDGF is just as much at fault however you will not see me complain excessively about it. It is what it is and now I have to deal with it. I am completely aware of how this all came about and do not need schooling to understand it. There are people in NMDGF (to include the commissioners) that could have cut this down.

 

[birdog]

Yes I agree and because of the mistreatment of us poor non-residents instead of playing me and my 5 buddies have decided we will hunt in states with better odds and those who want us in their states. My only hope is that enough of us don't hunt new mexico and it hurts their economy in such a way that they think twice about what they did. Kind of like idaho now I get a full color brochure begging me to hunt up there every year. Lets see better bucks in colorado, better elk in arizona? Over priced new mexico with poor odds. Its a no brainer.

 

[DoeNob]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-12-11 AT 12:59PM (MST)[p]Just have to find some outfitters crooked enough to let me apply with their number for a fee - shouldn't be hard!

That or pony up for a unit wide landowner tag - seem to be no shortage of those!


Its puzzling how it worked out, but it makes sense, stick it to the party with the least amount of voice. Wait another 5 years and I bet they cut it to 2% or eliminate it NR DIY all together. "If you don't live here and you wanna hunt here, you gotta PAY TO PLAY! "

 

[Bullbreath]

the facts are SB196 did not make the 10% OF welfare and 6% NRs in its original state. That was a very cold thing the LO/OF cartel pushed to have modified on the SB196. You will have the majority of resident sportsmen behind you and any org that will get it to 16% for ALL NRs.

 

[Josey_Wales]

Here's my question that I can't find in the new regs...what happens to the 10% for guided tags in units that are under proscribed (where not all of the 10% are used up)? Do those extra tags go to Non-Guided NR, or do they now go to the resident pool?

 

[TOPGUN]

I think the word you were looking for is "undersubscribed" and I believe they do go to the resident pool like you mentioned.

 

[Josey_Wales]

Yep...undersubscribed...my brain was hurting from work all day. And if you are right about the resident pool, it hurts that much more.

 

[WapitiBob]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-13-11 AT 07:35PM (MST)[p]The split was originally proposed at 90/10. The parties involved chose to continue to provide economic stimulus to the guides and outfitters of NM by way of tag set asides and new regulations requiring resident status. It was that or no change. The split will never be 84/16. SB 196 was about resident opportunity and sticking it to Outfitters, never mind it was the outfitters that got a res/nr split implemented in the first place. There used to be no split.

 

[Bullbreath]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-13-11 AT 08:31PM (MST)[p]>LAST EDITED ON Dec-13-11
>AT 07:35?PM (MST)
>
>The split was originally proposed at
>90/10. The parties involved chose
>to continue to provide economic
>stimulus to the guides and
>outfitters of NM by way
>of tag set asides and
>new regulations requiring resident status.
> It was that or
>no change. The split will
>never be 84/16. SB 196
>was about resident opportunity and
>sticking it to Outfitters, never
>mind it was the outfitters
>that got a res/nr split
>implemented in the first place.
>There used to be no
>split.

No one is trying to "stick it to the OFs". Based on the facts, it was the OFs that DID stick it to the NRs. As far as welfare subsidies at the expense of NRs, well that is not built on the free market that in years past made us a great nation. Just because we have some of that in our country does not make it right. As far as the outfitters getting the split, because NM elk hunting was growing in demand they set up a locked in subsidy. You really believe that was done for the DIY benefit? I got some ocean front property in NM. I am not against OFs. I know some very reputable ones who I would recommend. Let the free market dictate the outfitting needs. I personally think 16 is better than 10%, however it was totally undermined. The subsidy will also hurt G&F revenue.

 

[WapitiBob]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-13-11 AT 10:03PM (MST)[p]Your "facts" are a long way from reality. The outfitters of NM gave up 2% of their allotment. The NMWF took that 2% and another 4% from the NR quota, sticking it to the NR. NMWF is the group that took the tags and most people are smart enough to see thru the rhetoric of NMWF.
I'm waiting for the day when they tell me how much better off I'll be with Wolves roaming the hills of NM.

 

[Bullbreath]

Lets just say UBNM, NMWF and most NM sportsmen compromised over SB186 alot more then OFs. 90/10 with no welfare subsidies for OFs was the original. Then 6% more was compromised. THEN the abuse got its ugly head in there again. By the way,can you give me a list of all the states that had 12% OF subsidies? I am sorry but any one with half a conscience should know at a minimum it should be 10% NR and 6%GNR. By the way, I agree with you on the wolves.

 

[jamaro]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-14-11 AT 08:12AM (MST)[p]NMWF didn't want any OF subsidies.. NONE... We wanted a straight draw... 90/10 SFW, The LO, The Cattle Growers and the oil groups wanted the OF Subsidies..

 

[WapitiBob]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-14-11 AT 12:51PM (MST)[p]Everybody knows who wanted the Outfitter tags to continue, no argument there. The point of my contention is the continued use of the phrase "the outfitters screwed the NR". It's not correct, not even close. But, unfortunately, that's how NMWF operates. I don't blame the outfitters for wanting to keep their tags but to say they screwed the NR because they didn't just give up their tags is ridiculous.
You guys like NMWF and that's fine. I have friends that are members but they'll never see a dime of my money. I don't like their media spin. After reading the SFW-WY take on corner jumping in WY, SFW will never see my money either.
The final Bill provided more opportunity for residents, be they hunters, outfitters, or guides. It was all about resident opportunity and resident economics. I do believe that's what your Legislators are there for, to look out for their constituents. Didn't one of the Legislators mention in the hearings that NM currently had over 120 different subsidies? It sounds like a fairly common practice.
I would rather have close to 20% NR tags like WY but I'll take what NM gives me. I'll keep applying and keep hunting there when I can.

 

[nripepi]

It will be very interesting to see how many residents draw in the outfitter pool next year. I might be going out on a limb, but I think it will be much higher than anticipated. Outfitters have a lot of family and friends. If you are a resident and apply in the outfitters pool, are you then not eligible for the resident pool? I sure hope that is the case.

 

[firemedic56]

I dearly love to hunt in NM....but apparently they don't want me to. I will never hire an outfitter, I'm a do it yourself hunter,...so I'll not be sending NM any of my money until they want me to hunt there.

 

[appaloosa]

I am intersted to see what happens to the draw odds. I am definetly out this year and probably for good, but I've been a sucker before.

 

[junior]

I have not decided if I want to be in the 10% pool or th 6% pool. You would think the 10% would have better odds, but I wonder just how many resident hunters may try there luck the first year.

 

[gleninaz]

I am never hunting NM again but it has nothing to do with the residents vs NR. I am good with a straight 90/10 split like every other place. I am against subsidizing landowners and outfitters by letting them sell publicly owned animals for profit. You locals have had 12% of your tags stolen from you for years.

 

[YukonDall]

WOW.........SOUNDS LIKE A TON OF NON RESIDENT HUNTERS WILL HUNT IN OTHER STATES FOR YEARS TO COME. IDAHO HAS MADE SOME BASICS MISTAKES ALSO THAT ARE LEADING TO THE POOR FARM, NEW MEXICO WILL FOLLOW SUIT IT LOOKS LIKE..................YD.