Outfitter nonres tag quota??

N

northwesthunter

Guest
I got an email recently stating that N Mexico was trying to do away with the nonres outfitter allocation(12%) and that nonresidents would only be able to draw 10% of the tags if this were passed. I don't see it anywhere on the N Mexico hunting website and was told via an email from fish and wildlife that this is not on the table at all. Soooo, whats the scoop??? nwhunter
 
Did not happen. Do not see it happening any time soon. I do see it getting talked about every year though.
 
Don't think it'll happen either. Unless they jack the price up for resident hunters,and that will NOT Happen.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-18-11 AT 10:16PM (MST)[p]There is talk but it's not going thru the game dept, it would be a legislative action.
Despite which side you may be on, legislating hunting laws rather than going thru the game dept. Is a bad way to go.
 
As of yesterday and from a reliable source, 3 separate bills are being introduced into the 2011 legislature to go to 10%.

The Non res money to NM is huge. NMSU's 2003 study indicated $129 million per year was being brought in by the industry.

The Outfitting industry has offered up 2 interesting alternatives. 1) Right now when a hunt code is undersubscribed within the 12% Guided pool, the leftover tags go the Non Guided NR pool. The Council of Guides is suggesting that they go to the Resident pool.This would allow for more tags to go to residents.
2) Go to an every other year hunt scenario for all applicants, Guided NR, Non Guided NR, and resident. In other words you draw, you sit a year, all hunt codes, not just Q/HD as previously ok'd by the commission.

Will be a tough battle......lots of money will be lost to the state coffers. Rural communities will be hurt big time, guides extra dollars will go away, private land leases will go through the roof as well as LO permits. Overall, it will be more expensive for both non res and res hunters.

From what I understand third hand, the NMWF has been approached with these ideas and indicated they don't care about the ramifications. They want the 12% gone, no discussion. Odds for draw will not increase for jack. Take ALL 22% of the NR Public Antelope tags and throw them back into the Res pool and you get a whopping 2% increase in draw odds from 11 to 13%.

No matter what, the bills won't affect 2011. Will keep you posted.
 
As somebody who hunted NM last year for the first time, I really hope these bills don't pass.

We personally pumped thousands of dollars into NM while we stayed in a rural community in a local motel for 7 days. We ate at the local diners, shopped at local gas stations, and paid an outfitter a ton of money. We had a great time and can't wait to go back.

We will be applying again in the outfitter draw this year. I also have friends that have never considered traveling to NM to hunt that will be putting in as well, some as Guided and some as UnGuided.

Plus, did you all know that outfitters pay a levy to the state on all Gross Sales of their outfitting proceeds? Outfitters benefit NMGF, and the whole economy, more than most people know.

Grizzly
 
Well, I think NM has had the highest NR tag allocation in the US for some time. Was wondering how long it would be before they pinched that. Only wish every state set aside a full 10% unguided allocations.

If it happens I will miss hunting there.
 
Here we go again the sky is falling. Why is it every state gives nons 10% why should NM give outfitters 12% then non guided folks 10%? Let the guided and non's compete for the tags plain and simple sorry folks. Jim you say it doesnt raise the odds much well guess what 12% go back into the res pool good enough for me hell what do I care I put in for non hd/q hunts anyways but an extra 12% to residents sounds good to me.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-19-11 AT 07:29PM (MST)[p]the bills ain't going anywhere

the structure as it stands now is actually pretty sound...

yes, right now there are plenty of undersubscribed 'outfitter NR' hunts...be patient, and watch them odds decrease exponentially by the year

and I thank all the out of towners for showing inerest in, and directly supporting our state's world class hunting opportunities

Zim, i believe Colorado has a more generous NR quota for some species/units
 
I sent money to NMCOG the other day to help fight this battle. They solicited a donation from me i presume because I too have put in w/ outfitters in the past. If you care you may consider donating as well.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-20-11 AT 03:02PM (MST)[p]The system seems pretty fair to me.I am from out of state but see a few things wrong with the system.Brings alot of money to new mexico that they will not see if all goes to residents.Alot of people jobs seem at risk to me.The state would lose alot of money in lic. sales that will only hurt the wildlife in the end.People should look at the good and bad before there so eager to just say take them away from the outfitters and nonres.I would like to see adult hunters need to wait for a year after drawing or hunt another game animal then they drew the year before.From what i remember being told the state was sued over this once before.Then what we got now is what came from that.Maybe wrong about that but thought I was told that when we hunted there last year.I think some land owner tags are what should go back into the lic. pool.All those tags that go to landowners who keep them ranch only who make alot of money for free roaming animals that belong to everyone.Unless they open up to some public hunting or big enough to be ranch only.If they have thousands of acres feed them to keep them on there place.If they get 6 ranch only tags half should go to the public to hunt that ranch.Having a thousand acres that elk or deer walk across from public grond to public ground does not equal a tag to me that someone should make a ton of money on. Just my thoughts.
 
I say eliminate all non-resident tags on state and private land and let's put all the federal land tags into a pool that residents and non residents compete for equally. I will pay the state gas tax that maintains the roads to the federal lands and I will even pay the non-redident fee for the tag to support conservation measures and law enforcement.

I do support having to sit out a year if you drew the previous year. I drew last year and have no problem sitting out to give others a little better chance - I am not going to do it voluntarily though.

Why don't we all just agree that we want more even at others expense and leave it at that?
 
IOWAN your last name isn't Taulman is it? Just kidding I think you are 100% right most of the land in NM is national land not state. Maybe we can all quit paying taxes to take care of that land when they take the non-res tags away. Some people don't think about nothing but themselves in the present moment or the consequences that come with some decisions.
 
To the NR's out there, its real-You can go to the link below and read the bill: SB 196 introduced by Sen George Munoz-D Gallup, NM

http://www.nmlegis.gov/Sessions/11 Regular/bills/senate/SB0196.pdf

The NMWF is going full bore with spin. From their sportsman alert today:

Nonresidents? odds often better than yours

Sen. Munoz crafted the bill to give resident hunters more opportunity in their own state. Under the current quota law, he said, nonresident hunters have better odds of drawing a license than residents in more than two-thirds of draw hunts.

?I got tired of sitting on the curb every fall and watching my friends go hunting without me because I didn't draw a license and so many nonresidents did,? said Munoz. ?If a New Mexico resident can't draw a license, many of them just won't hunt. That's bad for our local businesses and bad for our local families.?

Raising the resident quota to 90 percent would not only give thousands of New Mexico families a chance to fill their freezer, Munoz said, but also would boost the state economy by ensuring that more residents get the opportunity to hunt.

According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, resident hunters account for over 95 percent of hunting equipment sales in New Mexico, and when residents are unfairly pushed out of hunting, sporting goods stores and other businesses suffer.

SB 196 also maintains current license revenue for the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish. It would require all hunters to purchase a general hunting license in order to apply for any big game hunt or purchase an over-the-counter big game license ? a common procedure in many other states.

?We have a lot of nonresidents who apply for hunts here but don't pay anything in,? Munoz explained. ?By requiring purchase of the general hunting license first, we'll not only bring in more revenue from nonresidents, but also induce some of them to come here and hunt for quail or waterfowl if they don't draw an elk license ? so it will be a little extra boost to the economy, too.?

THE TRUTH IS THAT RURAL NM IS GOING TO GET HURT LIKE YOU CAN'T BELIEVE, ALL FOR A MEASLY 1-2% BETTER ODD FOR THE PRIMO UNITS.

Go to this link:
http://www.wildlife.state.nm.us/recreation/hunting/documents/draw_odds/DrawingOdds2010-2011.pdf

Run your finger down the right hand column of the stats right now and you will see several hunt codes in excess of 80,85, and even 90% right now.

I love the quote from above;?We have a lot of nonresidents who apply for hunts here but don't pay anything in,? Munoz explained. ?By requiring purchase of the general hunting license first, we'll not only bring in more revenue from nonresidents.

$780 elk licenses, double app fees.....this guys is in la la land bad.

Places like the High Country Lodge in Magdelena and the Eagle Guest Ranch in Datil, and the little places in Reserve will surely hate this bill if it gets passed. Munoz does not care, its all about votes to him.

For all you NM guides out, say goodbye to your extra dollars and watch the cost to access private land go thru the roof. Its all about supply and demand. You still won't draw and you'll be out of extra income to go spend money at the Sports shops.

The residents best think hard before they throw their support behind this one.
 
QUOTE by Sen Munoz:

?We have a lot of nonresidents who apply for hunts here but don't pay anything in,? Munoz explained. ?By requiring purchase of the general hunting license first, we'll not only bring in more revenue from nonresidents, but also induce some of them to come here and hunt for quail or waterfowl if they don't draw an elk license ? so it will be a little extra boost to the economy, too.?

You have got to be kidding me! Let me post the approximate amounts I have paid to NMGFD in license and app fees over the past few years. This includes small game, fishing, deer and elk.

2008: $900

2009: $700

2010: $700

2011 (projected): $1100

Then there's this notion of NR's coming to hunt quail and waterfowl. Noone comes a long way to hunt birds in NM. Maybe the Dakotas and Kansas, but not NM.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-21-11 AT 10:14PM (MST)[p]It is a money maker and many other states are doing it.

What?? Do you expect a politician to talk straight??

I buy a worthless (to me) hunting lic every year in AZ to earn points.

Think I am gonna drive 8 hours to shoot doves in AZ??

Local politicians are not for one second going to hesitate to screw Non Residents. They are not looking for their votes for one, and a good politician can smell money.

There is no doubt in my mind that a NR hunter is going to spend more to hunt in NM than a Res.
That being said I would not mind better odds to draw a tag as a res even if it meant they doubled the price of tags. Maybe not a popular opinion.
 
NMPAUL,

I agree with you on paying more for a tag, if we had more chances.

Jim, your math and mine are not the same. Having an increased chance of 12%, seems like I have a better chance of drawing?

I have looked at odds for some cow hunts etc. I used to put them as third choice. They would be great odds, and now some are down to 25% etc. The NM residents are sick of this crap.

I am by no means against non-rez hunters, but giving 12% to outfitters and 10% to non-rez not using a guide. What a freaking JOKE!

I do not understand the econ. argument. If the non-rez % is cut, there will be no one renting cabins buying gas etc? Is there seperate gas stations and cabins/motels for non-rez?

I am sure there is so much crap that goes on with the 12% stuff. Isn't the guide and outfitter supposed to be with the hunter? "YOU PAY ME $500 YOU CAN USE ME AS YOUR GUIDE FOR BETTER ODDS ETC"!
 
JFWRC, here ya go again. You are worried about your pocket book, not rural NM. I am tired of the outfitter welfare system and so are many others. On top of taking away the 12 % non resident tags, they need to make all landowner tags private land only. You know as well as anyone what that would do to the value of many LO tags, it would make them worthless because they don't have the elk that they claim.

This bill will eventually pass, if not this year then some year in the future. Then the outfitters will have to get off the public dole.
 
Marc-Which Cow Hunt Code are you talking about? Looks like to me they are undersubscribed in the outfitter pool.If those could spill to the res hunters as proposed would that help?
 
I lurk here often and can't let this one go without my 2 cents worth. Cutting the NR tags to 10% is a good move. Because when you add LO tags and RN tags together you have 40% NR in the feild. THIS IS ABSURD! and we resident hunters are not going to to take it anymore. The outfiters are telling you it will hurt the local economy BULL! all it will hurt is there bottom line. We resident hunters buy gas, food etc. just like everyone else.One thing that has to happen also is the LO tags be ranch only. Then no one will buy them unless they actualy have elk on the ranch. I have gone 10 years without drawing a deer tag and I'm going on 18 years without an Antelope tag. I go to some old honey holes from years ago and its all NR hunters there now, this makes me sick. Our youth the future of our sport are moveing on to other things because they can't draw a tag this is wrong. I'm willing to pay more for my tag to offset lost money to the state and so are most other residents. NR's get 10% thats it. And this is going to happen maybe not this year but it will happen.
 
Having hunted NM a few times as a NR I can say this for certain. NM offers better odds than most states for the opportunity to hunt big game. With that being said, I can tell you one other thing. This Munoz (D) guy is an intellectual idiot. Who in the hell is going to buy a NR license to hunt quail and waterfowl. This politician is getting into grandpas cough syrup way too often. Resident hunters might consider contacting him and setting him straight. I wonder if the (D) after his name stands for Dummy?
 
I too think NM is way too generous to the NR crowd. I'd like to see more of the tags go to residents. I don't care if it only changes the odds a point or two, it still means a resident or two gets to hunt in their own state. Give NR hunters 10% and that is split between DIYers and outfitter/guided hunts.

With the landowner tags the way they are, I do not feel sorry for guides and/or outfitters loosing the 12% of tag allotment. They exploit the sport we all love and whine when somthing does not go their way.
 
You guys crack me up.Anyone thinking a res. is going to spend as much money hunting as a non-res is kidding themselves.Most res stay at there house non get a hotel.Food res eat at home non out to eat or buy food there to make.gas almost the same but would say a non res is going to do more driving.Who pays for the lost not just the outfitters.The corner store,gas station and local hotels.This is all money that would not be in new mexico unless non res come there.Then you have lose of money made on lic. which goes to help the wildlife we all want to hunt.Because when the lic. go up to make up the differents then all will cry about that increase.Then there is the money the outfitter loses also plus his guides, camp cook.All the res are fine with us non res buying landowner tags.Well if you want to hunt so bad join the party and buy one of those to hunt the unit you want.Whats that a res spend as much for a tag as us non res thats funny.Remember people the country is not called new mexico that is a state.The usa is were we live and the animals belong to us all.
 
Hmmm...makes sense to me! Yup, I can kill an elk or a deer right here in my back yard in the middle of Albuquerque. I pretty much have to drive 3+ hours to hunt elk or deer...or at least where I can draw a tag as a resident. We eat out, buy groceries and gas just like everyone else wherever we end up. I'm sure the butcher in Velarde appreciated the chunk of change I gave him for processing our elk. I don't need a license plate from another state to do that. STATES own the wildlife and NM is no different. Just because there's federal land doesn't entitle a NR to a tag to hunt "their" animals no more than I'm entitled to a tag in another state.

It's time to clamp down on outfitter and landowner welfare. While we're at it, lets put a NR cap on sheep, oryx and ibex. The idea that all tags could theoretically go to NRs is just flat wrong! Like getting hit by lightning, but it is possible. It seems NRs whine about the lack of tags in every state. The best solution is to move to the state in question if you want better chances and cheaper tags. I'd love to have a better chance of hunting in AZ again, but there's no way I'd want to live there again. That's just me.
 
As more residents get tags they can do more scouting, which boosts rural economy, including gas stations, restaurants, stores, etc. This is increasing the revenue as the guides are scouting anyhow for other clients.

How many hotels get filled by non-res using outfitters and guides? I did stay in a hotel for my last elk tag, and I am a resident. I did see other elk hunters with NM tags in the hotel at the same time. During my deer and oryx hunt this year, I ate, filled my gas tank 7 more times than normal commute, and stopped in some stores I would not have, so I have to raise the flag to your comment.

bs.gif
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-22-11 AT 07:23PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Jan-22-11 AT 07:22?PM (MST)

If they cut non-res tags back the feds will put out national forest tags. So much for good elk, antelpoe, and deer hunting in NM. The residents don't know what their wishing for.
 
>LAST EDITED ON Jan-22-11
>AT 07:23?PM (MST)
>
>LAST EDITED ON Jan-22-11
>AT 07:22?PM (MST)
>
>If they cut non-res tags back
>the feds will put out
>national forest tags. So much
>for good elk, antelpoe, and
>deer hunting in NM. The
>residents don't know what their
>wishing for.

Excuse me? What part of the STATES owning the wildlife within it's borders got past you? Every state.
 
As I dont post often on here anymore I will keep this brief.

Here are my .02 on this issue
As a res in NM I am like the rest of you...who wouldn't like any better chance at getting a tag for the fall even if its only couple percent bigger.
THE PROBLEM is where the funding for this bill is coming from and why are they so worried about it. If any of you do not know the funding is coming from the NMWF (New Mexico Wildlife Federation) this group is an extension of the National Wildlife Federation. If you are not familiar with this group I encourage you all to look them up and see for your self. They are ANTI-HUNTERS they always have and always will be.
Are you sure that you would like to throw you support behind a bill that the anti-hunters are also backing. On the surface this looks great for resident hunters in the state but when you find out who is putting the money behind it. It definitily makes you wonder what their objective is.
(My opionion is to bankrupt a major industry in the state that revolves around hunting. The outfitters association is one of the last organized groups that is left in NM, to fight groups like this on their objectives. With them gone the masses will be like lambs to the slaughter and will be left to react to what the ANTI's want to do instead of being proactive against them.)
Again Think long and hard about why a group of anti-hunters would want this bill passed so badly...maybe my opionion is wrong on their intentions but believe me it is not to make things better for resident hunts that is for sure and this will most definitly be a stepping stone to a larger objective.

Last thing the money issue is being argured back and forth. No one is saying that res. hunters are not spending money in the small communities of the state. But it doesn't do the state as a whole any good when money is just traded hands from one res. to another. The only time it will be helping is if this is new money coming into the state that will then in fact be trickled down. I for one believe that NM could definitly use 100+ million new dollors a year.

Thanks for Listening
Jordan Christensen
 
I can't find anything on the Legislature
web site.

Is there anywhere we can keep up with
this ??

I understand both sides.

I'd just like to know how it's gonna end up.

Laro
 
Jim,

That is exactly my point. A person can draw a tag, if they want to pay $$$$$ to a person that owns a private biz. Jim, I saw you praising the draw odds section on this site. I think it is great also.

Let's take unit 13 for elk as an example. Not that long ago, the hunt was unlimited for elk. Now, the odds of drawing are well LOOK. That is why residents are upset. I am sorry the $$$$$ has skewed your view. The outfitters and guides have ridden this milk train long enough.

BILL, Are you kidding me. The camp cook might be out of a job. In this econ, there are tons of professionals being laid off. NM Residents should give up 12% of tags for a camp cook?

H, that was a great point on the scouting!
 
The State quota (78% to residents, 12% to non-residents with an outfitter and 10% to non-residents without an outfitter) ABSOLUTELY needs to be adjusted. What is the benefit of being a NM resident? I think it should be 88% residents and 12% non-residents/non-res with an outfitter. All non residents should spilt the 12%, If you're an non-resident move down to NM and then you can talk about supporting the local economy.

And bring on the higher fees if need be, us residents will always support NM.
 
well there is some bs for sure.You call me out for bs but funny you as a res. got 2 tags this year for big game.What you did not get your unit 34 or 15 elk tag because of us non res. I also seen res trucks at the hotel we stayed at.most were guides taking people hunting.Never said res dont spend money but it is crazy to think it is the same amount.Yes the serious res hunt will scout and spend some extra money.But just like local hunters around me most will grab there guns or bows look for the crowd and go hunting.I believe most of the guys here are the serious kind so they see what they would do but that is not the avg hunter.As far as just the camp cook losing his job more will lose out also.Could be only a guide per outfitter but it all adds up.Why add to the people losing there jobs on the idea of there are already alot of people being laid off.As i said before res can buy those landowner permits just like us if they really want to go.I still think sitting out a year or even 2 years after drawing a tag is a good way.then applying for other tags till you can start again.I do agree the ram, ibex and such tags should be capped to non res and must should go to res. I think most of us just want to hunt and if the above post about the anti hunting group behind this we will all lose for sure.
 
Oh Marc buddy.....you picked a winner there to argue. As you mentioned 13 and I may be wrong but this is your favorite now, HUNT CODE E-3-234, the 13 cow hunt......had a 1, I mean ONE!!!! whole applicant in the outfitter pool to take your tag away. Now its time for me to say WHAT A JOKE!!!!. Look at 17, no outfitter pool applicants at all,look at 15...both hunt codes undersubscribed, and to top it off, the game dept decided to put in another 100 permit cow hunt for you in 13 in 2011. To top that off which I firmly believe is great is that there are 60 RESIDENT Only youth tags that go out every year late season.

Guys and gals, please print the odds pdf off the web site. Take your finger and go down each page in the RESIDENT COLUMN and see the truth about how many tags are going where. Its the high demand units that are the problem JUST LIKE BACK IN EARLY 1990's. The compromise was made 1997 and now the residents want more, and IT WON'T MAKE THE ODDS A LICK BETTER.

Back to your example Marc.....those UNDERSUBSCRIBED tags went into the non guided, non res pool. How bout we compromise and make them just go to the resident pool? That's a BIG FIX and WON'T PUT FOLKS OUT OF BUSINESS, and I MEAN FOLKS other than outfitters, won't make private land access go through the roof, and WILL GET MORE OPPORTUNITY from that pool for the residents.

Please take heed to what Balz says above about the NMWF.If you don't think there is more coming folks beware.

Marc....one last think, Yes, I do point folks to the draw odds section as it is an excellent resource for quick facts for all of us, and yes, I do advertise there.....

Have a good day Marc. Jimbo
 
As a "average joe" hunter, I love to go hunting every year. With the current system of applying for hunts, I look at draw odds and use my first choice to apply for a hunt that is hard to draw. My second and third choices are for hunts that are easier to draw because I just want to hunt and don't mind the hunts that are harder (such as the first archery hunt for elk). Typically, hunters want to hunt the rut for elk. At least I get a better chance to draw every year. What is very disturbing is to hear the guides and outfitters are "proposing" to eliminate my chance to do that by having to sit out a year after drawing. Yet, they still get paid to go hunting with a paid hunter. Same thing with the landowner tags. I grew up with my family hunting and it is tradition, it's not about money or killing the biggest animal out there. Look up the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation and understand that many species were "recovered" because of sportsmen dollars. The system of the "old World" and the animals belonging to royalty was eliminated here and the "average joe" gets to feel he/she has ownership in the resource thus will spend money to utilize that resource. I have a three year old boy and I am teaching him the value in spending time with family on hunting/scouting/camping trips. I drew javelina again this year and can't wait to take my boy like I did last year. With the outfitting industry's proposal, I won't be able to put in the next year. To me, that's being greedy on their part.
 
Gila-with all due respect and understanding....it was an idea...the outfitting industry has not seen any ideas from the NMWF or residents on a remedy that won't shut down or a least cripple some of the businesses that have taken years to build up. It's purely tough *&^$, now go pound sand. I'm not sure what you do, but I guarantee you that if someone was coming at you for no particular reason other than they can't draw 16D without trying other parts of the state or God forbid a cow hunt,....you'd either fight like wholly hell or come up with something that will work. Last rumor I heard from folks with the COG was that they were scraping all willingness to work on something and going to fight like hell for their industry. If it crashes and burns well....we'll have to figure something else out.This has been and is pure attack by the residents and NMWF on an industry that hasn't cast any stones at them.

Gila, did you print the stats and look at the resident column??
 
See, this is one of my points. My family were ranchers and farmers on the eastern side of the state. One of the biggest issues is that ranching and farming are a way of life and that way of life is being attacked. They understandedbly fight "like wholly hell" to maintain that way of life. Same thing you said. That is my point. Hunting to me is a way of life and I'll fight like wholly hell to keep that privelege. I understand that it was just an idea, I just had to say something because it reduces my opportunity to go hunt every year. I'm willing to listen and compromise with just about anybody.

What about the draw stats and the resident column?
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-23-11 AT 10:26AM (MST)[p]Gila-go to the link below and look at the Res% draw column.

http://www.wildlife.state.nm.us/recreation/hunting/documents/draw_odds/DrawingOdds2010-2011.pdf



The article below was written by Bert Ancell

Not all Sportsmens? Groups Created Equal
While many advocacy groups and organizations claim to support protecting wildlife populations, improving habitat and preserving land access for the future in their publicity and fundraising campaigns ? which all sound good to anyone who enjoys the outdoors -- they are not always showing their true colors.
?Many so-called sportsmens? groups are actually working against the interests of hunters and fishermen as well as landowners and managers,? said Bert Ancell, New Mexico Cattle Growers Association (NMCGA) President, Las Vegas. ?While some are out there actually doing good work that makes a positive difference on the ground, others are working behind the scenes to put policies and regulations in place that restrict multiple use, which includes hunting and fishing; threaten the second amendment; and negatively impact both wildlife and New Mexico?s rural economies.?
All of these groups depend on public support, but sportsmen who want to contribute to causes they care about should look carefully at what these groups are actually doing with their time and money. ?Groups like the Center for Biological Diversity and WildEarthGuardians use the courts to push their radical agenda. They used the Mexican Spotted Owl to destroy the logging industry in New Mexico and Arizona, and are now using the reintroduction of the Mexican Grey Wolf to decimate the livestock grazing industry,? he continued. ?When you look at multiple use of our federal and state trust lands, how far behind is the elimination of hunting and fishing??
Introduced wolves have had a significant negative impact on deer and elk herds in southwestern New Mexico, which means fewer hunting opportunities and tough times for businesses that depend on those hunts, like hunters, outfitters, and local businesses. ?With the ?help? of these groups, the quality hunts that once were available in the Gila are becoming a thing of the past,? Ancell noted.
Another example is the New Mexico Wildlife Federation, who recently led an effort to significantly rework Pronghorn Antelope hunting in the state claiming to be working on behalf of hunters. ?Had they succeeded, far fewer hunting opportunities would have been available because of the harm and headaches the suggested changes would have meant for private landowners and ranchers, who provide most of the antelope habitat in the state, according to Ancell.?
?Additionally New Mexico has way too many bears and mountain lions, which not only impact human health and safety and livestock production, but they also seriously depleting wildlife populations including deer, antelope and elk,? he continued. ?But we didn't hear a word out of the Wildlife Federation about balancing predator populations to benefit hunters and hunter opportunities.
Other groups, like the Sportsmen for Fish & Wildlife, the Wild Sheep Foundation, The Safari Club, and the Trappers Association do good work for wildlife and sportsmen on the local and national level, and should not be confused with activist, environmental groups, Ancell said. ?Many of our members are also members of these organizations. We just want people to be conscious of exactly who and what they are supporting when they send in that check. Most times, the efforts of activist groups are just as bad for us as ranchers as they are for the sportsmen.?
In an effort to truly protect habitat, wildlife populations and hunting opportunities, NMCGA has joined forces with several other groups in a Sportsmen & Landowner Coalition to present the real picture of what is happening on the ground and what needs to happen, Ancell reported. Included in that Coalition are the New Mexico Sportsmen For Fish & Wildlife; New Mexico Wool Growers, Inc.; the New Mexico Trappers Association; the New Mexico Farm & Livestock Bureau; New Mexico Houndsman?s Association; Safari Club Southeast New Mexico Chapter; Safari Club Northern New Mexico Chapter; New Mexico Council of Outfitters and Guides; New Mexico Chapter of the Wild Sheep Foundation; Southwest Coursing Hounds and Farm Credit of New Mexico.
 
I already had the draw stats printed up here at the house. I've looked at the column. What is it that you want me to understand?
 
Run your finger down the % dawn column on all the hunt codes and species. You'll note a bunch that are already 90+% for the residents.Again, the problem is supply and demand for the HD/Q units. Its not going to fixed by this action. Its still going to a long time before folks get drawn....but lets shut down outfitters anyway.
 
I've used the current system to my advantage for a long time now. I didn't like the fact that the quota has been 78/22 (minus the landowner tags), but have not worried to much about it because I used the draw odds to my advantage. However, what got me irked is that now another idea was thrown out that reduced my chances even further. You said that was an idea, well then let's scrap that idea. I think we all need to get along and compromise. That includes guides/outfitters, hunters, ranchers, trappers, etc. Kinda like getting pushed into a corner, every little thing just keeps building up.

How about this (in the spirit of compromise), change the current 78/22 to 85/15, and add oryx, ibex, and bighorn to the quota? Landowner tags are still there and are used heavily by guides/outfitters to guarantee their business every year.
 
Not a bad compromise Gila.

I don't believe the 3 hunts can be added to the quota because of legal issues.

The 12% was added for a reason. Is that reason still valid? Also, NM has relied on that 12% money for a while now. How is it going to be replaced? A $90 license fee won't replace a 5K hunt.
 
Thanks Gila-I do think that is on the lines of what I was hoping for, a win-win. Let me run that thought process up the pole with COG and the Coalition. Jim
 
I think a big problem is people are not looking as outfitters making a living.why is the outfitter always the bad guy.Because he is doing what he loves and enjoying the outdoors. Some Locals in all states look at out of state people as taking from them and others have no problem helping people from out of state out.People who's jobs or income will not change have no problem saying just take them away.We all like hunting and should be welling to share for all to enjoy.I can not say it is unfair for non res to get 22% of the tags.Yes the ibex, sheep tags should be like that to.Unfair to just say let the outfitter use all the high dollar landowner tags as not all outfitters clients can afford that.As talked about above residents can buy them landowner tags to.The wait a year if you draw seems good to me.You draw a elk tag you still would have ant,deer,ibex to draw for.Just giving up elk for a year.I would say to only have the wait to draw on bul tags not cow tags.As for keeping the youth hunting I would say let them draw ever year till there 18.I believe some landowner tags could go back into the draw as some seem to take advantage of that system to me.
 
I am hearing from some folks that other states quotas are NOT 90/10. Can anyone shed any light in the facts. I just heard that Colorado for example is 65/35 for units that don't have the 6 pt minimum. I heard Utah is different. I did hear that Wyo was 90/10. Just would like to know the facts.
 
Oregon is 5% to NR
AZ is "up to" 10% and the 10% is filled in virtually all hunts.
WY fluctuates and was 17% to NR last year.
UT is 10% to NR
CO is "up to" 20% to NR for tags that take 6 points to draw.
CO is "up to" 35% to NR for tags that take <9 6 points to draw.
NV fluctuates between 10% and 15%
 
Thanks Bob-

So the statement that 90/10 is basically the norm is not necessarily true as the NMWF tends to report.
 
Wow you mean NMWF would print something unfactual (LIE) I can't believe it. When are these people going to listen and realise NMWF is the enemy they will do anything to get them on there side so they can dump on all of us. Go ahead support them while your at it send some money to PETA. UNBELIEVEABLE.
 
OK Jim,
Look at what was posted!! CO is pretty much the only state that gives more love to NR's! CO has dinks plain and simple and plenty of them, you are soooooo worried about the $$$$$ that you would rather whore out our resource! I can see your point but it is bad. Jim I know you and have called you on occasion and you are a decent guy but if you think I as a resident I would stand up for the outfitter welfare system like it is you are crazy! I like the 85 to 15 but a 90 to 10 would be better! Just makes you wonder how in the world the other outfitters that operate in a 90 10 or even an 85 15 state make it! We as hunters and outfitters can make it a fair system but everyone has to give alittle and quit thinking of the mighty $$$$$$$$!
 
Let me start by saying that I am a NM Resident and in 2010 I drew for the first time since 2004. I know what it is like to get on the game and fish website year after year and see all of my hunts saying UNSUCCESSFUL.

Nonetheless, I don't think our Resident/Non-resident split is out of control. Over and over I hear NM hunters claiming that the game belongs to the residents of New Mexico. That is true, but I feel that most of them think that the game belongs to the hunters of New Mexico, and that just isn't true. Last year residents put in around 96,000 applications for deer, elk, and antelope. Assuming that each application represents a different hunter (which of course isn't the case, many of us put in for all three of these species) these hunters represent only 5% of New Mexico's population (2,009,671 according to the US Census Bureau, July 2009). How does improving your chances of getting to hunt help the other 95% of NM Residents (other than the fact that they won't have to listen to you complain)? Non-residents bring money into NM and that helps all of the residents, not just those of us who hunt. Don't get me wrong, I wish that I could draw more often, but sometimes life just isn't fair. Hunting, like many things in life takes determination. If you really want to get a rifle bull hunt in 16A, put in every year, and eventually you should get one. In the mean time, hunt birds, hunt turkey, go fishing, go camping, whatever floats your boat. But don't get caught up in the "It's all about me" mentality. It's not all about you or me, it's about what's best for everybody.

Our hunt quota system isn't perfect but it isn't the monster most of us make it out to be. Like everything else, it could use some improvement, but the decisions shouldn't be made on what will bring you or me more fun in the fall.

Cory B
 
Munoz is highly mistaken if he thinks NM will rake in as much cash as AZ or NV by mandating a hunting license before applying. The only reason AZ and NV do so well is because they have a point system. I wonder why Idaho keeps talking about a point system (mandated license/no points).

I for one won't be applying under a mandated license/no point system draw--just not worth it to me with the long draw odds. You guys are successful is running this nonresident off. Your draw odds just increased by 0.00000000000000000001 %.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-24-11 AT 01:02AM (MST)[p]ha! lotta righteous 'proposals' gettin tossed around...most rational on i've seen was from Gila @ 85/15...

again, the bill ain't going anywhere! not in MY state

i especially like nmelk's 'outfitter welfare program' conjecture...'welfare' programs in general are disgustingly oversubscribed and suffering severe shortages to supply their overwhelming 'disadvantaged' demand...quite opposite the case here in the context of undersubscribed outfitted NR tag allocations

it is a rather absurd parallel to draw regarding this circumstance, anyway

also, LO allocations are based on the amount of 'usability' a particular property provides the species in question...MUCH of nm's elk and antelope primary habitat lies on private land...hell, the most concentrated elk herd in the state exists most the year in a unit that is exclusively private except for a few WMAs...these people are providing habitat for 'our' big game and should rightly be compensated for it

UW tags are a decent idea in principle, but a profound failure in practice...how many guys actually hunt the private property that provided that liscence? very few...even though it is their legal prerogative to do so...most of 'em get bullied out by landowner/outfitter abuse of the LO provision (locked gates, hostility from operating agents, false trespass accusation, etc)

very good point about legislated hunting statutes Bob...we are unfortunately rather archaic that way, and it makes it a real headache gettin anything changed in a timely fashion...still, done it before, will do it again

but all this blaming and squabbling will never amount to much

hell, nevermind! you guys all have a nice time with your bickering ;)
 
I enjoy this site and this is my first time making a comment. I am from North Dakota and we have our own Res vs. NR issues. In ND we have 100K hunters and 49% are NR. ND is also 90% private land. I understand the frustrations of residents losing "honey holes" to NRs as it has happened to me on numerous occasions. The majority of NR hunters in ND are hunting waterfowl and pheasants and this influx of NRs combined with guiding/outfitting/leasing has diminished quality hunting oppurtunities. However, I have come to the conclusion that if I want to hunt big game in the West, I have to pay a certain price. That price may involve hiring an outfitter, purchasing a general hunting license before being eligible for big game draws, or paying $787 for an elk tag. I personally will not hire a guide to bird hunt but have gone on several guided big game hunts. I love scouting and would prefer DIY but due to logistics and for safety reasons, hiring an outfitter makes sense. I have hunted elk in NM on two occasions through the draw. I really enjoyed my experiences and hope to return. Like in my state NR hunters have a huge economic impact in NM. There are many complex issues here but I feel the existing sysem is pretty fair(except for unit wid LO tags). Sure everyone would love to draw a 2B muley tag, a 16D or unit 15 elk tag every year. But game resources are limited and nobody owns the game. Hunting is about oppurtunity, but sometimes we should work harder to gain oppurtunity rather than gripe..(I agree with Cory B). NM has vast outdoor/hunting opurtunities but all can't be Q/HD. If a person wants to hunt they can do so somewhere for a very reasonable price( doe/cow tags, or management hunt). I envy the public land oppurtunties that New Mexicans and residents of many other western states have so readily available to them. Given the amout of federal-national forest and BLM lands that make up a significant part of New Mexico's prime elk range(16A-97% public, 16D 88% public,15...17..36..52 lots of public) 22% does not seem out of balance. Like I said..my state has 49% NR hunters so 22%(not taking into account LO tags that can be purchased by anyone) does not seem all that bad.
 
I am a resident that lives 30 miles from the best mule deer hunting in the state. In 45 minutes I can be scouting a big bucks hideout. In 15 years I have yet to draw on that tag and only once on the lesser unit west of it as my 3rd choice.
Every July through the end of the year I read on this forum about some non-resident that has drawn this hunt, knows nothing about the area or roads and wants help to even know if this is a good hunt..they just put in because of the reputation of the Unit and draw it.
This is what irks us residents- the 22%.. I would love to hunt AZ unit 9 elk or Utah's Henry Mountain mulies but I understand my odds are very slim unless I move there. Thats life. I put in on those hunts every year and one day I will draw and get on the Utah or AZ forum and ask for help too. I will gladly pay an outfitter. I will spend dollars there just as I spend my dollars here every year at the bow and gun shop.
These good hunts are becoming more of a once or twice in a lifetime deal even for the residents..a guy should be able to hunt in his own state.
 
Bullroarer-If there is one species that absolutely sticks out as undersubscibed it is deer. Try a different area. We see huge bucks killed in other areas of the state that rival the "2's" all day long. Take a look at the homepage buck n this site today. Western NM. Getting rid of the outfitters in your situation isn't going help one bit. Its supply and demand and boat loads of residents apply for 2.
 
Just the facts here.

First off, for anyone who says the existing system is fair: do you realize that current law gives non-residents better odds than NM residents in over two-thirds of hunt codes?
If so, please explain why you believe it is fair for a non-resident to get better odds than a resident and please provide an example from any other state where that is the case.

Senate Bill 196 would provide about 3,500 more big-game licenses for residents each year. It would not guarantee anyone a tag, but it would put more residents in the field, and help make and unfair system more fair.

The bill also more than offsets the revenue impact by setting up a system like Arizona and Utah have that requires purchase of a game license prior to applying. It is a sensible bill that is good for the future of hunting.

It is a good, solid bill that NM hunters should support.

Jim Welles, we all know you profit from the existing system.

But I'd like to ask you directly: Is it right for a non-resident to get better drawing odds than a New Mexico resident? Current law gives non-residents better odds than residents in over two-thirds of the hunt codes. Is that fair by your measure?

Jeremy Vesbach
NM Wildlife Federation
 
Jeremy, thanks for checking in with us again.

Couple points. Odds are completely subjective. It comes down to who applies from the NR or Res Pool to determine odds.

More telling is the actual tags going to Res and NR. That is a much more objective way to address this issue.

Little quote about statistics.

"Do not put your faith in what statistics say until you have carefully considered what they do not say." William W. Watt

That being said, I do agree that a fairer system is warranted. I do believe it is bad policy to get politicians involved, but, if nothing else works then maybe it is necessary.

Some good ideas were floated out there.

15% for non res rather than 22%
address the inequities in the land owner elk tag system.
publish accurate maps for contributing ranches
Double the tag fees for residents to make up the revenue shortfall

As far as soaking the NR for license fees, several states are doing it. Right or wrong it is being done and NRs are paying up including myself in other states.

Jeremy, I still struggle with the relationship that NMWF has with the National Wildlife Federation. It seems more than a relationship, rather an affiliation.

http://www.nwf.org/Regional-Centers.aspx

I looked around in the NWF site today again, and they do not strike me as a pro-hunting organization. However, in all fairness I did not see anything against hunting either. Unfortunately, we all know that type of crowd is rarely pro-hunting and in most cases anti-hunting. This time I searched the site I did not see anything pro wolf (like I did last time), which in my opinion is a tool to eliminate hunting.

Jeremy, this is not a shot at you, I just want to understand NWF and NMWF. It does not make any sense to me, and when something like this does not make sense to me it seriously concerns me.

There have been some theories floated out there that by damaging the outfitter industry in NM you take away one more pro hunting voice. Also, there would be a net loss of Antelope hunting overall if landowners do not see the financial benefit in having antelope on their land.
 
The percentage of tag allocation is off and quotas aren't necessarily met because typical outfitted hunts involve HORNS. I don't want to pull a number out of the air, but I would guess the majority of outfitted hunts (elk mind you) are bulls...not cows.

And did anybody else notice HB84 which calls for the dissolution of the State Game Commission and merging the Dept of G&F under the Energy, Minerals and Natural Resource dept?
 
Kind of simple.The better odds are from more residents applying for there tags.Not as many non res appling for there tags.Any state is going to have more resident hunter then out of state hunters.I looked at what I would say are three good units 16a first season res 59 tags 3.1% draw non res 8tags .08% and 9 outfitter non res 2.0% unit 17 76tags 11.0% 10 non tags 1.8% 12 outfitter non tags 7.6% unit15 156 res tags 6.o% 20 nonres 2.5% 24 outfitter tags 2.5%.in 2 of the 3 even when you add the non res tags togther the odds are still better for the res. these are either rifle or muzzy tags. Not to hard to figure more residents are appling for tags then non res. this is not that simple as to just look at draw odds and say it is not fair.The few tags everyone thinks should go back would make the draws odds go up very little.As for the money of res spending to hunt vs non.Again not to hard to figure out why out of state money is important.IT is all money the state would not see unless we hunt there.All states try and get money from people that are from outstate to grow there economy.Everyone spends money to hunt but non res will spend more in that week then the avg res. will.I guess it comes down to someone will never be happy either res. or non res. As far as all the attacks towards jim on here never heard him say he does not make money doing this.But guess what that is the job he picked for himself.All because he likes his job and helps out of state people he is now a bad guy.If he helped you res guys draw tags he would be the best guy ever.I talked with jim once did not make a penny on me but sure did offer up help.I think we all make money at our jobs and alot of people would say more then what is fair alot of the time.Just human nature I guess
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-24-11 AT 08:01PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Jan-24-11 AT 06:52?PM (MST)

Hi Jeremy-

Answer to your questions and or statments:

Jim Welles, we all know you profit from the existing system.

Wow, you are smart.....been doing here in NM twice as long as you've lived here. You probably caught that I advertise here as well...shere genious.

I was around when the original legislation was made. Remember it well and how it centered around certain areas of the state that folks couldn't draw for, just like now. Were you around Jeremy?

Jermey did you know that there were 58 elk hunt codes in excess 85%+ going to residents in 2010, 45 codes were over 90%? Did you know there were 196 hunt codes in excess of 85% going to residents for deer and I got tired of counting over 90%? Did you know there were 12 out of 29 antelope hunt codes where no guided residents put in? Did you know that 2 out of the 4 barbary hunt codes were 0 for guided NR and the highest was 3%?

That leaves a bunch of NM opportunity to those that will get out and hunt. But some don't want to try new areas for some reason and that's fine, that their choice and the guys in 50,51,52,53 are all saying great, stay away!

Are there problems, sure. Are there other solutions to look at before a dismantling of an industry, sure. Is looking at the how allocations are made a solution, damn right.

Question from Jeremy.

But I'd like to ask you directly: Is it right for a non-resident to get better drawing odds than a New Mexico resident?

When out of staters are paying 5 times the resident rate for Elk Hunting on Federal Land they pay taxes on just like you and me in standard hunt areas, I say YES. When they are paying 8.5 times the resident rate for Elk Hunting on Federal Land, I say hell YES. They don't get the same amount of tags either..hummm. They used to...but you would remember that because according to your bio on the NMWF site, you moved here in 2002.

Statement and quesiton from Jeremy.

Current law gives non-residents better odds than residents in over two-thirds of the hunt codes. Is that fair by your measure?

Reduce the cost of a license to the resident fee and the answer is no. Keep it at $550 and $780 and they should get a break as they don't get there fair share of what they are paying for. If they are paying the NM Game and Fish to manage wildife and they only get 22% of the deal when there fees are as high as they are, yes they should get a break in my opinion. That to is about supply and demand. Many can't afford our outragous rates.

As far as your question about my operation you posted on another site, the answer is 83.27%. Now tell us what you make as the director of the NMWF.

Tell us if you and NMWF support the re-introduction of Wolves in NM, or will you dodge that one again?

Tell us why you are targeting outfitters and not the Non Guided Non Resident as well?

Not sure about your statement on the rumor mill. Sounds like you just confirmed what Jesse didn't know.

I will get to your questions on the other site.

xoxo Jim
 
I would also ask Vesbach what his personal hunting experience is?

What is the level of your current participation?

What is your favorite type of hunting, and what is your preferred big-game weapon?

What pro hunting conservation organisations do you actively support?

Have you ever hunted a state as a non-resident, and did you ever hunt NM before you moved here less than 10 years ago?

Have you ever hunted using the services of an outfitter?

If you have children, do they hunt?

Do you live in a community whose economy is NOT augmented by NR hunter dollars?

Also quite curious about your position regarding the wolf in NM???

and Jim, would you please direct me to this 'other site'...would like to see what this Mr. Vesbach has to say for himself there as well...thanks man
 
Again the NMWF stirring the pot to bring in donation $ to pay for ads and salaries. LOL

Getting to the bill, Jim has done a great job detailing out many of the negatives that the state would face. Money that is brought into the state/local economy increases the worth. Money that is hear already and spent does nothing.

The areas that most people are concerned with the additional NR tags does very very little on increasing your odds.

When you compare the NR odds from a lessor unit or cow hunts yes the NR odds are very good. Is that really worth killing an industry? Killing some NM jobs? Eliminate dollars going to habitat improvements?

If you really want to improve your odds the best way to do that is increase the habitat, so that the land can hold the increase in herd sizes. Thus an overall increase in tags. Which would directly effect your draw odds. Yet what does the NMWF support? Wolves and Cap & Trade.







Outside of a horse is good for the inside of a man.
 
Jim,

You seem a little ampted up! You need to chill out!

The residents of NM are sick of getting screwed!

You have made money off a corrupt system! Now, you are going ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhh no,,,! Let's talk about the cabin in 9 near Pine Grove, and the landswap deal.

RUT RO,,, nooooooooooooooo 12% of the tags going to outfitters!
 
WOW I really opened up a can of worms here!!! Jim I hope you don't think I was trying to come on here and get you bashed, I just wanted some clarification of this issue. I see and understand both sides. As a nonres elk fanatic I would love to hunt N Mexico every year in the Gila but know that isn't realistic and I feel bad for the locals who don't get to hunt their home state either. I have put in for the better units in N Mex for the last 6 years and have yet to draw a tag, my brother drew a tag this year finally. The times we were in Reserve the place was packed with hunters, many nonres all buying gas , food etc. The gas station and grocery store people said they change their hours during hunting season to accomodate the hunters because without them they wouldn't make it through the year. Sure there were plenty of res. guys spending money but I do think our out of state money goes a long ways. As far as draw odds at least with a no points draw system and you really want to hunt your 3rd and 4th choice could be a unit you have good draw odds for and go hunting! I'd love to hunt the gila every year too but that isn't realistic. Hopefully a solution can be agreed to that is fair, I hate to see a drop to 10%, But most importantly we as hunters both nonres and res. and even outfitters need to band togethor and be united or the antihunters will slip in and attack these weaknesses and eventually hunting the gila will only be a something of the past.nwhunter
 
OH, settle down!

Jim, does not care as long as it does not effect his bottom line!

He will talk % this and % that!

NM residents want that 12% back, and he is getting realllllllllllllllllie mad
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-25-11 AT 07:44AM (MST)[p]Jeremy, still waiting for a response.

If your going to come on here and make accusations and throw deceiving numbers around, then come back and answer the questions asked of you.

What is NWF's official stance on hunting?
Who is funding who? NMWF or NFW?


BTW to you new visitors to the site, the drunken mob tends to post after midnight. While I do not agree with Jim (JFWRC) on everything, he does not hide behind a fake handle, he responds to all posts, phone calls, pms and questions.
 
I don't want to open another can of worms but... Lets bring the LO tags into this discussion. I don't know if this info is available or not but I bet 90% of LO tags go to NR hunters and when they are unit wide tags that puts all those NR hunters into the prime habitat in that unit. Witch compete with lucky hunters that drew the unit. I know this is a slippery slope because all land owners need the money from this program but...
It dosen't seem fair. If the LO tags were all ranch only it would stop alot of unit wide presure. There are alot of LO tags isued to ranches with no elk. They shouldn't get unit wide tags just becaues they have elk habitat. Most ranches that get unit wide tags are either very small or don't have any elk to hunt. This is a loophole that needs to change. This is also an advantage to the outfiters because if ther hunters don't draw in the public draw they just buy a LO tag and go hunting anyway. Deep pockets and go hunting every year. Again not fair.
Iv'e enjoyed all this discusion I think all sides have a point so what we need is compromise everyone just wants to draw and go hunting. We are first and formost all hunters!

O ya my stance on wolves SSS... shoot, shovel and shutup.
 
What is the problem we are trying to fix by reducing the number of non-residence licenses?
Is it to increase the odds for residences?
If so has anyone calculated the percent increase in odds?
If so how much would residence odds increase of HD or Q hunt?

It is my gut feeling that the odds would not increase enough to make a big difference.

How about introducing a point system?

We could also increase our hunting opportunities by increasing game populations. Especially the mule deer, antelope, and big horn sheep populations. I think that we need to increased and improve habitat especially water sources.
 
>What is the problem we are
>trying to fix by reducing
>the number of non-residence licenses?
>
>Is it to increase the odds
>for residences?

yes

>If so has anyone calculated the
>percent increase in odds?

yes

>If so how much would residence
>odds increase of HD or
>Q hunt?

true odds can't be determined because all 3 choices are looked at.
16a archery, 3rd hunt, 12.97% to 14.52%
36 archery, 2nd hunt, 11.74% to 13.18%
52 archery, 3rd hunt, 33.62% to 37.71%

>
>It is my gut feeling that
>the odds would not increase
>enough to make a big
>difference.
>
>How about introducing a point system?
>

yikes


>
>We could also increase our hunting
>opportunities by increasing game populations.
> Especially the mule deer,
>antelope, and big horn sheep
>populations. I think that we
>need to increased and improve
>habitat especially water sources.

I would guess everybody can agree on that.
 
where did Mr. Vesbach disappear to? It seems he would be interested it what was being said here, and have the sense of self to respond to the decent questions posed to him?

it seems he's acted similarly on each of the other topics he has posted on as well

while we're waiting, you all might refresh yourselves by regarding his past 'comments'...and ask youselves if there might be a bit more to this deal then he would have you believe?
 
that's a little biased since ole bert is a rancher who works for the bell ranch, who profits big time from them antelope tags.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-25-11 AT 11:51PM (MST)[p]jimbo's responses of there's plenty of other units, states going to loose money, poor outfitters are going to starve, supply and demand,and spitting out statistics are just a smoke screen to hide a screwed up, biased system.

outfitters make most if not all of their money off of non-residents. no surprise that they don't want change. they are just leaching off of a poor system, or in politically correct terms, it's supply and demand.

resident hunters in this state would be better off if there were quite a bit less outfitters around, and deserve more tags then they are getting.
 
Rope,

You make some great points!

Here it is! An easy way to have your voice heard. Just copy and paste the following into an email to your state senator.
Larry

* Support a 10 percent cap on nonresident big game licenses in the 2011 legislative session. Currently New Mexico allocates 22 percent of licenses allocated through the big game draw to nonresidents. This 1997 law actually gives nonresident hunters better odds of drawing a tag in 71 percent of draw quota hunts. No other state that we are aware of provides preferential treatment to nonresident hunters over their own residents. Not only does the current law threaten the future of hunting for New Mexico families, it also places New Mexico at a competitive disadvantage with other western states in attracting independent businesses that consider quality of life factors like outdoor recreational opportunity.
 
I don't think jim is the one blowing smoke here.Since when is it that outfitting can not be a job.I bet maybe because they do a job they enjoy and most here would love to do.My bad no they wouldn't because most outfitters enjoy sharing the outdoors with people and most who have a problem with outfitters just think of there hunting not sharing hunting with others.All because they like there job this is no reason to hate on them.The % that jim talk about are fact.The odds do not go up 12% if those tags go back.Plus if you don't draw a tag do like us non residents buy a landowner tag and spend that money like you all say you do_Or if it is all about hunting put in for more then 16a or unit17 try another unit since you all spend so much money scouting you can find animals in other units.After all it is about hunting right not the trophy.
 
Good post. I think the % should be changed to 15 or 20%. LO tags should be ranch only and not for places less than 20 acres,or show game are present. Also maybe the every other year rule for units would increase odds of drawing when you are able. And put in for tags for lesser units and cow tags.Yeah I'd love to be able to hunt bulls every year here at home in Catron County,but not likely to happen. And I still want to hunt with a outfitter/guide some day just for the experience. Wish I could make a living as an outfittter/guide,and I respect most that can. IMHO
 
"true odds can't be determined because all 3 choices are looked at.
16a archery, 3rd hunt, 12.97% to 14.52%
36 archery, 2nd hunt, 11.74% to 13.18%
52 archery, 3rd hunt, 33.62% to 37.71%"

So,

16a 1 in 7.71 or basically 1 out of 8 years with current system
1 in 6.88 or basically 1 out of 7 years.

36 1 in 8.51 basically 1 in 9 years current
1 in 7.58 basically 1 in 8 years

52 1 in 2.97 - 1 in 3 years current
1 in 2.65 - 1 in 3 years


Does that still justify your wants? vs all the negatives to this? I do not think the very slight increase in odds would negate the total negative effects to the entire state of NM.


How about this. Instead of changing the percentages. Raise prices on everything. So that more Officers could be hired and put in the field to cut down on poaching. Raise stamps dollars so that more habitat improvements could be made.

As said before increase in total herd size will gain you more as far as odds go.
 
Another thing, I have been a guide. Made a little spending money doing so. Have a friend that is an outfitter.

I have no desire to work as hard as he does to make a living doing what a outfitter does. Guys that have never seen what a outfitter does sure do talk them down. I fully respect many outfitters in the state. That provide a means for fellow hunters from across this country that without the outfitters would have a very difficult time hunting this state.

In general, outfitters in this state do more for wildlife in this state than most resident hunters.

So before attacking them put yourself in their shoes for a little while. Better yet, if your so jealous of there lifestyle become a guide and work one or two seasons. Might just change your mind about it.
 
Solutions to increase both odds and opportunity?

1) What would happen if the draw went to a 1st choice selection first, 2nd choice selection, then 3rd choice selection. Everyone right now goes for the gusto hopping they will get the old standby that works via one look at the app. A savvy resident suggested this to me this morning and he thinks odds will increase greatly as folks will go ahead a apply for there ol standby right off the bat....anyway something to chew on.
2) Make sure there are caps on the 12% and 10% where all undersubscribed go to the residents. Look at the stats and you'll see what I'm talking about. Right now there are 205 hunt codes out of 595 on elk, deer, and antelope that are 90% res allocations now. With a cap, that number will go way higher.


Yes Marc I am looking for ways to keep $ for me and the guides. Don't need to go waste your time telling everyone again...ok. If I save enough, will you go to a therapist with me. Love you ELKMAN.
 
30inch,

You mentioned that in general outfitters do more for wildlife than resident hunters. Please explain what outfitters are doing to increase populations, manipulate habitat, increase harvest limits for bear and cougar, etc?

Jim,

I appreciate your willingness to listen and compromise. Did you find out anything from the coalition about the 85/15 compromise and the idea that sitting out a year?

Gila
 
Gila-We have a meeting on the 14th. As mentioned above there are issues with having quotas on the species you mentioned. I've been talking to the folks about the suggestions above. Seems to me there are ways to get more opportunity with the current system by tweaking the way the draw is conducted and putting caps on both the pools. There is another bill out there folks are looking at that does conduct the draw differently. Its HB#149 was introduced by Bill Reehm. Whether folks will work toward a win-win is the tough part. Jim
 
jim,

Do you think any public hunter will be on your side, after all the BS you have done?

You do not give a rats A about public hunters or wildlife! It is all about the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$!

So, you go work it!

You have milked the system for years.

Too each their own, I would be ashamed. You are nothing more then a used Car Salesman!
 
3,500 more tags to the resident is a good start to a higher priced resident tag, I hope they are willing to fund all the programs the money from them tags would of brought in being sold to a NR. You guys will squeal like a stuck hog if they raise the resident price to half of a NR license. Hey here a good idea HAVE residents and Nonresidents pay the same amount of money for a license before the draw and see how many pony up the money.
Then see who would like to spend the money and buy a tag for deer and elk bet the odds would fall. But if you don't want to buy a tag for deer or elk you can still go hunt the millions of birds you have in NM on your high price license.

"I have found if you go the extra mile it's Never crowded".
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-27-11 AT 10:14PM (MST)[p]This is madness! I was born in NM and have lived here most of my life and I'm telling you... this is BAD... REALLY BAD! READ THE BILLS POSTED ON HERE. THERE ARE THREE OF THEM.

HB 149 is the only one with a chance to make a positive difference, we just need to add in the 1 year layoff for all successful hunters. Please read the post "Food for thought" for more details. The only thing I don't like about this bill is the big price reduction on nonresident standard elk hunts. I'm not sure how this is supposed to benefit anyone other than the landowners who get elk tags & the nonresident hunters. I did like that the youth nonresident prices are lowered for several species, this is a good thing. Although I don't like it, I am willing to pay the increased prices. Our G&F department is in dire straights financially and if we want them out in the field trying to stop all the poaching we've got to get them more cashflow.

Please do not support this.

Jim with JFWRC is a good honest man. He has proven his willingness to negotiate, communicate, and be fair. Yes he is an outfitter, yes he makes "part" of his living from nonresident hunters. How on earth ELKMAN is this a bad thing? Last time I checked, this is America. Home of the FREE and land of the brave. JFWRC, just like ALL small businesses have a right to conduct business according to the law. You have been attacking him for no aparent reason for too long and it's time to stop. The guy that lives down the street from me owns a convienence store and his wife has a lucrative business of her own, he makes "part" of his living off of "NONRESIDENTS" also. If this is what trips your trigger you can bash on my neighbor too.

Pull your head out of the sand! Outfitters are NOT the problem. Jim has been involved in the hunting industry for a long time. He knows how to get things done and I promise you, if this goes thru because YOU supported it I will BLAME you the next time I ask a landowner for permission to trespass and get told to pack sand and to go talk to the NMWF I will not be happy. That is what will happen, and this type of reprecussion will not be the only BAD thing to come to resident New Mexicans if this bill passes.

Dusty, you made some good comments on this topic. There are things that need to change, we all know & understand that, this is just not the answer, not by a long shot & I refuse to support this madness.

Anyone who supports this bill is dumb/lazy enough to have NOT READ IT. Same thing happend with the health care bill. Don't let it happen again. If you don't know how to read, call me & I'll read it to you. After that if you still support it, all I can offer to help you with is prayer.

"Windage & Elevation Pilgrim, Windage & Elevation"
 
JFWRC,

Does not give a rats A!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Do a bit a reaseach, on the unit 9 landswap!

He is in it for the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$, and he has done very well over the years.

The residents of this state are tired of it!

How can you own 4 acres of land, and be able to sell it to hunt public lands?
 
One observation about this debate.

One side has conducted itself with a lot more class than the other.

There is room for improvement in the current system with compromise and level headed discussion.

Some of the garbage being spewed would really turn me off if I was an outside observer.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-28-11 AT 08:52AM (MST)[p]i would again strongly recommend to EVERYone here to learn as much as you can about Senator Munoz and J. Vesbach/NMWF, and honestly question whether these folks are truly looking out for our public's collective interests, or working to advance their own political agendas?

We might ask Mr. Vesbach directly, should he ever show the good manners to come back and take the inquiries already asked of him here
 
Gila48,

1 - most outfitters that have a private lease with a LO assists in implementing some habitat projects.

2 - see the donors for groups like RMEF, NWTF, SFW, MDF ect. large donors are ususally outfitters no matter what org it is.

3 - G&F dollars, permit fees, providing advertising for the state.



That is what I am saying.



Outside of a horse is good for the inside of a man.
 
What is wrong with the way it is now?

I have lived and hunted in N.M. all my life. I have also hunted Colo. and Utah a good portion of my life.

I believe New Mexico's current system is better than most.
Back when they went to the true lottery system, I think was a positive step.

However, if they were to bring one thing back that they did away with, I wished they would bring back the weapon specific hunts.

I know we're supposed to have more "opportunity" the way it is now, but I don't buy it. Call me selfish if you want.

Someone above said something I think we all, as hunters need to look into, and that is Habitat. More habitat, more game..period.

Food specifically. Old growth just doesn't cut it.

Instead of buying some BS license why not up the price of the Habitat stamp to $25 or $30 and do some serious habitat restoration. Chaining and reseeding, etc.
 

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

919.jpeg
C2BB6A59-557C-4632-9701-673B580B8B25.jpeg
F246790C-6726-4756-A137-933DCCBCAD64.jpeg
buck.jpg
More High Country Muley Scouting
IMG_0747.JPG
First High Country Scouting Trip 2018
IMG-5666 (2).jpg
IMG_5420.jpeg
20211015_174327.jpg
CDF59666-C581-46BC-82E0-D1E2A1F731E6.jpeg
Hooked Cheater Big Buck Success

New Mexico Guides & Outfitters

H & A Outfitters

Private and public land hunts since 1992 for elk, mule deer, sheep, pronghorn, black Bear & lion hunts.

505 Outfitters

Public and private land big game hunts. Rifle, muzzleloader and archery hunts available. Free Draw Application Service!

Sierra Blanca Outfitters

Offering a wide array of hunt opportunities and putting clients in prime position to bag a trophy.

Urge 2 Hunt

Hunts in New Mexico on private ranches and remote public land in the top units. Elk vouchers available.

Mangas Outfitters

Landowner tags available! Hunt big bulls and bucks. Any season and multiple hunt units to choose from.

Back
Top Bottom