President Obama... end this discrimination now

HornedToad

HornedToad

Active Member
Messages
410
Okay. This does it. I have asked President Obama and every Senator I can locate to move immediately to end any USE on Federal public land that discriminates against any American citizen. If certain USES, such as camping and bird-watching, do not involve discrimination, then those USES should continue to be allowed. But if the USE includes discrimination, such as the expected extreme discrimination in New Mexico based on residency requirements for the USE of hunting, then that USE should be disallowed.

Let the New Mexico resident hunters hunt "their" wildlife on New Mexico state lands. But no more USE of Federal public lands based on discrimination. New Mexico resident hunters will be welcome to camp and bird-watch on Federal public land with the rest of us American citizens.

And don't tell me that New Mexico is justified in this change because it only mirrors the discrimination that occurs in Arizona and some other states. I own property in both Arizona and New Mexico (including paying property taxes) and have family connections in both states extending back over a hundred years. But because I currently choose to reside in another state, I am discriminated against in favor of some guy who only a few months ago drove in from LA, or better yet, Juarez.

But... great job of driving another huge wedge into the already diminishing hunting community. When the Anti-Hunters come to take away hunting as an approved USE on New Mexico's Federal public land... well, you'll be on your own.

Go ahead... bring on the hate.
 
WTF?? Why should NM be different than any of the other Western States? All the other states I hunt or have hunted have quotas so why should NM be different. By this same logic I take it you are going after Colorado, Utah, Arizona, and all the other states that have NR quotas including your own home state I am guessing?

I am fine with them (and us) having quotas and actually support it. Am I ever going to draw the Henry Mountain hunt in UT as a NR? No probably not, but given that I am not from UT I am ok with it.

All of you NR guys throwing your fits need to suck it up and move on. That said you should be able to pull out your money entered into the draw immediately including app fee.
 
The feds don't manage, nor do they own the wildlife on federal land. The state does per state law. This applies to private lands as well.

What state do you know of in the country that doesn't apply this same model?
 
I wish I was you. You can establish residency in AZ and buy a lifetime hunting license and then establish residency in NM, thus placing yourself in the resident pool for the draw in both states!...cry me a river.




-I have fought tougher men, but I really can't remember when-
 
Im at work so I cant do it , but somebody look up Interstate Commerce Clause. Something about impeding commerce between states.

Also, IMO; Animals on Federal Lands should be regulated by the Landowner. I mean, they would be Landowner Tags right??

Y'all git after it!!!!
 
You guys act like this just didn't go through the court systems. The state is charged with the management of wildlife. Period. The courts have ruled that multiple times. They have the right to manage as they see fit, with quotas and such. That's what the court JUST RULED ON. The precedence that was set with prior cases was why the G&F thought the appeal was justified. It wasn't some back door legislative deal that hasn't been vetted. It wasn't the Game and Fish deciding to make this happen. It was the courts. If you guys want to get into Interstate Commerce, why stop at quotas? Who is the G&F to limit tags. We should all get all the tags we want, at all the same price, and hunt animals year round. Then you guys want the federal government to manage the wildlife? Do you really think the feds are going to come up with a draw system, and manage game properly in each state. Give me a fricken break.
The NR quota in this state is a joke. I agree with that. But you saying there should be no quota is as big of a joke. You better go cry on the UT, AZ, MT, ID, OR, KS, CO forums about that also to tell them how unfair it is.
 
Don't worry hornedtubby, BLM all ready is pursuing restricting use of firearms - at the national level. And the FS, is more restrictive in use every year. Be care full what you wish for: plenty of people want the elimination of hunting on all public lands in our United States.

" I am discriminated against in favor of some guy who only a few months ago drove in from LA, or better yet, Juarez."
You ignorant, racist, narrow minded, pile of shite! Some of us were here when that Cortez fellow showed up. Get stuffed!
 
>Appealing to Obama to fix ANYTHING
>seems ludicrous at best...

I don't think I can add anything or could have said it any better! Maybe you could get an Obama phone, free tags as well to go with your great new free healthcare. You must be a special kind of idiot to try and get your point heard starting any argument with Democrats and Obama help me.
 
Toad... I think your post must be a joke... If not you have a serious problem. I wont get into name calling but... seek out some professional HELP!
Jack
 
Listen, fool. This has nothing to do with race. But it does have a lot to do with nationality. The Federal lands belong to all citizens of the United States of America. Not to the citizens of some subset, such as the residents of any one state, nor to members of other nationalities, nor to the Children of Cortez, or any other group you can claim membership in.

I'm against discrimination, in any form, in the USE of our Federal lands. It appears as though you are okay with discrimination, as long as the gate swings your way, and serves to shut others out. Justify that.

And why should I be "careful what I wish for" in terms of getting President Obama involved in this matter. I don't know what his position would be, but your position is crystal clear. And that is that you are okay with discrimination in terms of who gets to USE Federal land. Given that case, I will take my chances with President Obama.

No joke.
 
Man talk about beating a dead horse...Toad you are welcome to and entitled to use federal land all you want...BUT YOU CAN'T KILL ANIMALS THAT BELONG TO THE STATE!!!!DUH wake up from your bad dream.
 
I said the same thing the Toad is saying 10 years ago. If a landowner is entitled tags for damages from wildlife to do what ever they please. Then the owner of federal lands should be given the same rights, and distributed evenly.

Although there is a case here!I decided to leave well enough alone. I am sure we don't want the government stepping inn, then doing population management via wolf/military/edible contraceptives etc..
 
Hey, Cosmic. I'm okay with not killing animals on Federal land, just so long as all of us are treated equally, without discrimination, and you can't kill animals on Federal land. You already can't kill animals on some Federal land, such as the National Parks, regardless of whether your state "owns" the animals or not. That precedent can be applied to all Federal land.

Given your interest in discriminating against others in the USE of hunting on Federal lands, I'm in favor of treating all Federal land just like we already do the National Parks, in which NO discrimination for any USE is allowed against any American citizen. If that means no hunting, then no hunting. Given that you're already determined to shut the gate and keep others out, why should I care if you get shut out too.

Just say NO to discrimination on Federal land.
 
Well I give up... Toad I think Obama is your best bet... He will fix everything for ya...and believe everything he tells ya... LOL
Jack
 
Well, you enjoy hoarding all the wealth of nature for yourself, while shutting others out, and see how long that lasts.

A huge wedge has been driven into the hunting community, and it is getting worse every year, as the few erect walls to keep out others. The change may not arrive soon, but when the Antis come to take away your children's USE rights for hunting on Federal land, your children will ask in dismay, "Why won't America's hunters stand up for our rights". And the answer will be, that their fathers long ago pushed everyone else away.

But, oh yeah, thanks for leaving a few crumbs on the table.

HT
 
First of all. Hunting is not a right in New Mexico or any other state. It is a PRIVILEGE. I am not aware of any constitution that states I have the right to hunt. I am glad that I have the privilege to do so. Our sport is in jeopardy because it is not a right. It is a privilege and the anti's are fighting hard to have this privilege revoked for those of us that do enjoy it.

That being said, There is no discrimination going on. You have the right by law to access Federal lands that can be legally accessed without violating trespass laws. You have the ability to hunt those same lands everyday you want. You just cant hunt species protected by the state. You must have a permit from the state to take any protected species. The state does not manage what can and cannot be done on Federal Lands. The Feds manage that and currently allow those lands for that use. The state manages its resources within the confines of its state borders. This includes Federal Lands.

I have never felt due to states quota systems that I have been driven away. Individual states set their own quotas and it is what works best for them. I know that my odds are not great and it may be 20+ years before I might have a decent shot at drawing, but its not my decision. I don't have the ability to vote in states that I do not have residency in. I have to abide by their laws and rules and in no way is that discrimination. If you don't like how a state manages it resources I encourage you to take your resources to a state that you agree with. If you have a problem with resident hunters getting to hunt protected species on Federal Lands and you can only hunt unprotected species on those same lands because you were not successful in the draw process, then you need to contact your elected officials in your district. Griping and complaining on this forum will get nothing accomplished for you or all the other users of Federal Lands that are getting screwed.

In no way, shape, or form does any DIY hunter want access to federal lands be denied. That would be the dagger in the heart of our sport.

Regards,
Michael
 
Don't worry. I have contacted my elected officials. But I am under no illusion that equitable change will happen soon. Your quibbling distinction between the right to hunt unprotected species versus protected (permitted) species on Federal land, however, is unpersuasive. It is still discrimination. No other USE of Federal land anywhere in this country is allocated on the basis of discrimination in favor of one class of American citizens over another.

And I am not sure what you consider to be a "dagger in the heart of our sport" to be. But when I'm told that I, and my kids, and thousands of other hunters across this nation, are being discriminated against in favor of others in a USE of Federal lands, such as the USE of hunting bighorn sheep, and will henceforth have 0% chance of drawing a BHS tag on Federal land in New Mexico, well then it seems that the dagger is already in the heart. There's no quibbling about that.
 
Difference is that Bighorn sheep doesn't belong to you, it belongs to the state of New Mexico and it's residents. The state can decide to "sell" that Ram to you or not, regardless of what land it's on. However, the state of NM can not discriminate against you about access to Federal lands in the state because that is YOUR land as much as it's the residents of NM's land.

So, your argument shouldn't be about discrimination, it should be about how it's in the best interest of NM residents and the hunting community to give you a better chance to buy that sheep tag.

Travis
 
>First of all. Hunting is not
>a right in New Mexico
>or any other state. It
>is a PRIVILEGE. I am
>not aware of any constitution
>that states I have the
>right to hunt. I am
>glad that I have the
>privilege to do so. Our
>sport is in jeopardy
>because it is not a
>right. It is a privilege
>and the anti's are fighting
>hard to have this privilege
>revoked for those of us
>that do enjoy it.
>
>That being said, There is no
>discrimination going on. You have
>the right by law to
>access Federal lands that can
>be legally accessed without violating
>trespass laws. You have the
>ability to hunt those same
>lands everyday you want. You
>just cant hunt species protected
>by the state. You must
>have a permit from the
>state to take any protected
>species. The state does not
>manage what can and cannot
>be done on Federal Lands.
>The Feds manage that and
>currently allow those lands for
>that use. The state manages
>its resources within the confines
>of its state borders. This
>includes Federal Lands.
>
>I have never felt due to
>states quota systems that I
>have been driven away. Individual
>states set their own quotas
>and it is what works
>best for them. I know
>that my odds are not
>great and it may be
>20+ years before I might
>have a decent shot at
>drawing, but its not my
>decision. I don't have the
>ability to vote in states
>that I do not have
>residency in. I have to
>abide by their laws and
>rules and in no way
>is that discrimination. If you
>don't like how a state
>manages it resources I encourage
>you to take your resources
>to a state that you
>agree with. If you have
>a problem with resident hunters
>getting to hunt protected species
>on Federal Lands and you
>can only hunt unprotected species
>on those same lands because
>you were not successful in
>the draw process, then you
>need to contact your elected
>officials in your district. Griping
>and complaining on this forum
>will get nothing accomplished for
>you or all the other
>users of Federal Lands that
>are getting screwed.
>
>In no way, shape, or form
>does any DIY hunter want
>access to federal lands be
>denied. That would be the
>dagger in the heart of
>our sport.
>
>Regards,
>Michael

You are mostly correct in regards to most hunting being a privilege and not a right. However, it is a right in Idaho, they actually protected there hunters and passed it into their state constitution, 2013 I believe, could have been 2012.


~Jason Peterson


"No man should go through life without once experiencing healthy, even bored solitude in the wilderness, finding himself depending solely on himself and thereby learning his true and hidden strength."~Jack Kerouac
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-28-14 AT 05:21AM (MST)[p]5yearcoues - Being selective in who you choose to trade with is the very definition of discrimination. Kind of like... I'll choose to serve coffee at my lunch counter to whites, but not to blacks. To say that one class of American citizens is okay to USE Federal land to hunt big game in a state , but other citizens are only okay to hunt crickets, is discrimination. Kind of like saying it is okay for some to ride the bus, but only if they are in the back of the bus. And to say that this practice has gone on for years in other states is no justification. Kind of like how the old segregationists justified Separate But Equal, since it had been practiced for years, until the Supreme Court found that Separate means Unequal.

If the state of New Mexico wants to discriminate in the USE on its public State lands, well go ahead, but to discriminate in the use of Federal lands is wrong. If they will selectively choose to sell you a big game permit to hunt on Federal land, but will choose not to sell me a permit for that same purpose.... well, that is discrimination, plain and simple.

It is no surprise that those who benefit from discrimination are its loudest and most vitriolic supporters.

Stop this discrimination now!
 
I am quite surprised as to the pure volume of outcries from nonresidents on the Terk issue.

Why don't you lobby G&F for eliminating the outfitter allowance for tags (10%)? Wouldn?t you get more tags?

Why don't you lobby for more access to federal lands across the west? Wouldn?t you get more access to lands to hunt as well as possibly increase the # of tags available to draw?

Why don't you lobby for more restrictions on the leasing of federal lands across the west (i.e., mandatory that established water tanks have water in it year around, mandated habitat improvements, etc.)? Wouldn?t you ultimately have more quantity and quality of wildlife populations thus increasing the possibility of additional tags to draw?

Why don't you lobby G&F on the issue of LO tags? Wouldn?t you get an increase in the # of tags available to draw?

Why don't you do something about the predators that impact our wildlife populations on a year around basis? Again, wouldn't this positively impact the very resources that you are concerned about?

As for the unique wildlife that NM has, especially oryx and ibex, these are state resources as dictated by the concept of the Public Trust Doctrine and backed by Geer v. Connecticut, 161 U.S. 519 (1896). There is nothing stopping any nonresident from moving to NM to live and pay state taxes (on a daily basis) as well as to contribute his/her time for the betterment of the habitat in NM in order to enjoy the state?s fine resources it has to offer. Nothing!!!

Instead of playing the system, why don't you proactively work for changing the system? You are either part of the problem or part of the solution. From my viewpoint, it would appear that the vast majority, not all, are part of the problem rather than part of the solution.



JBone
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-28-14 AT 07:22AM (MST)[p]Wow. It's getting deep over here, and Jbone, I am not talking about your post.
 
Any post that begins with Obama help me and then goes into race and discrimination with no mention to either, yeah it has gotten deep.

Anyone can come to NM and hunt OTC tags, camp, rock collect, whatever is legal, so this crying each time NM aligns with other western states is laughable at best.

Toad, good luck with whatever hunts you have this year.
 
JBone - why lobby for any of the things you propose, including opening new Federal land for hunting, when all evidence over the past decade is of Residents such as yourself working to receive all limited tag opportunities while pushing Non-Resident opportunities to zero?

It is interesting, and telling, that there is almost never a voice among Residents on this board that it might be more fair, and more constructive for the future of the national hunting community, to share equitably limited hunting opportunities, on Federal land, with Non-Residents. Never.

All we ever hear is: (a) we Residents "own" the animals (not true, the law grants to the States the right to MANAGE the welfare of wildlife for the benefit of The People, which means all the people of the United States... though it is true that in the past the government has allowed discrimination in the USE of Federal land for the purpose of hunting on the basis of residency distinctions... but this discrimination should end), and,(b) we Residents pay State taxes (which has nothing to do with maintaining Federal lands, and as far as Fish and Game Departments are concerned, those costs can be, and generally are, covered by license use fees, including disproportionately high fees from non-residents).

My family was in New Mexico in the 1880's. I have deep connections to the state. But if I don't live there now, I get shut-out, of practically any of the limited opportunity hunting permits, except the few crumbs on the table in the leftover OTC allocation. That's not great.

So New Mexico Residents... how many bighorn sheep permits should be shared every year with Non-Residents, mostly all for animals living on our collective Federal lands? One? None? Yeah, I thought so. Who cares?
 
Well said Jbone.

And Toad, for the record I believe that NRs should get a percentage of tags. Far too many states have made it all but impossible for NRs (AZ, UT, etc.).

I'd like to see consistently ~15-20%% of tags go to NRs in all states across the west, with no goofy stuff like outfitter set aside pools.

Will this happen? Unlikely.

Is it unfortunate that the current NM law results in no bighorn ram tags to be available to NRs this year? Yes.

Would I be irritated if I were a NR in the pool this year? Yes. But direct your attitude toward the judge who ruled at this particular time. NM had nothing to do with the timing.

In the grand scheme of things NRs have been treated VERY well with regards to NM bighorns. To the point where NRs could be given zero for the next decade and still be ahead of the average tags provided to NRs compared to any western state with regards to sheep.

I'm sure after the debacle of this untimely ruling passes, the law will be revised to somehow allocate a reasonable percentage of bighorn tags to NRs.

In the meantime take a chill pill, relax, and make the best of a bad situation.

Oh yeah...and while you're talking to him please ask Obama to fix the economy. I mean since George screwed it up 7-years ago maybe it's about time that big O could start to bring us some of that change he promised? LOL
 
Toad, I'm assuming you are posting on all other state sites on this website fighting for the same cause right? Why this sudden outcry on the NM forum just because of this one court decision?

I was always under the assumption that the people of the state "owns" the resident animals within. If you are right that they equally belong to everyone in the country and the state is only allowed to manage them, then I can see your point. However, this would need to be changed at the federal level and ALL states would need to comply. To me that is a scary road to go down for the hunting community as a whole and access to Federal Lands for hunting in your own resident state might be in jeopardy....


Travis
 
In all my years of putting in for sheep tags for my family and I
We have drawn zero.I know of 3 residents that have drawn sheep tags although I don't know them personally.If you are so in favor of NR opportunity maybe you should have donated one of your tags to a family that has never taken a sheep.

I think you just got bitter beer face that the only state that
didn't have a quota now put one.

So my question to you is How many rams have you and your family taken any species ?????
 
Look... discrimination used to be widespread, and tolerated by government in many forms. And this discrimination was widely accepted, rationalized, and applauded... by those who were the beneficiaries of discrimination.

But fortunately, for America, those tolerances changed. And discrimination, particularly in the rights of all Americans to have equal access to and USE of Federal public lands, is no longer tolerated... with this one peculiar exception.

That's why I'm turning to the big man, President Obama, to end this discrimination....

or at least, can't it just be a little more fair for all of us?

See ya.
 
So Toad, are you also adamantly pursuing this issue in all other states? Posting similar vents of anger on other state forums?

There is a lot of "unfairness" out there, but in this case it's up to the states to dictate how game animals are allocated. Stands up in court and is just the way it is.

Are you also opposed to contracts that include in-state preference clauses? Happens all the time in construction industry. Contractor from in-state typically receives some sort of preference to a contractor from out of state. Same concept.

Give big O a kiss for me. Right on his arse.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-28-14 AT 01:53PM (MST)[p]So I guess your avoiding my question.And me and my fellow NM hunters are the greedy ones.So how many rams do you alone have
is it 6 or 7 come on answer please..............
 
Toad what state do you live in? I assume that you already have a plan in motion there to accomplish your goals. Or are you wanting to test your plan on a state that you do not live in?
 
I'm all for the President and especially Congress ending the discrimination...Like this...

We should be reminded that the state of New Mexico not only has a responsibility to manage the wildlife, but has a right to the federal land (the real property) remaining in the state (e.g. as codified in the AZ-NM Enabling Act of 1910) and the Ferguson Act.

About 40% of the land in NM is still unlawfully controlled by the federal government. These lands were not intended to be retained by the federal government for the entertainment of the rest of the country. According to the AZ-NM Enabling Act these lands "shall be sold by the United States", a portion of the proceeds given to the state, and the state shall then regulate their use.

The proceeds are supposed to be used for schools and universities. Mining and petroleum exploration, sale of timber and other natural products, and "water power" are all specifically mentioned in the Act.

This is just same as what was done for the states east of us.

So, the assertion that there should be more access to any of the western states because of all the federal land there is based on the wrong-headed assumption that the lands are supposed to be federal lands in the first place.

http://americanlandscouncil.org/
 
So ranchers have to pay for cattle grazing rights to federal lands so maybe the STATE owned animals should be charged for grazing on Federal land too. Maybe the State could foot that bill, LOL.



"I have found if you go the extra mile it's Never crowded".
>[Font][Font color = "green"]Life member of
>the MM green signature club.[font/]
 
I just wish all the NR who complain on these forum's would spend the time sending aletter to there congress rep as they do on these forum's. If they did it would be much more productive. You would have never seen this last move I'm sure of that. 90% of the conservation $ for bighorn comes from federal gov.
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-02-14 AT 09:15PM (MST)[p]Does anyone out there know how most of the New Mexico Wildlife Management Areas (Marquez, Humphries, Sargent and others)were purchased? I have heard it was Pittman Robertson Act money paying for 75% of the purchase price. Does anyone know where Pittman Robertson Act money comes from?

Currently the only folks that can hunt these areas are residents.

If we are going to stir the #$%&, lets make it stink good:)
 
I agree LOL


"I have found if you go the extra mile it's Never crowded".
>[Font][Font color = "green"]Life member of
>the MM green signature club.[font/]
 

Similar threads

F
Change UNIT-WIDE elk designation in New Mexico to RANCH ONLY!
Replies
54
Views
2k
MrRogers
MrRogers
gr8fuldoug
For Sale Month End Review
Replies
0
Views
96
gr8fuldoug
gr8fuldoug
runamuk
Idaho wildlife federation
Replies
10
Views
869
devobrodie
devobrodie

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

48B7061C-B462-4882-AF6C-AAB036145AAE.jpeg
5525782E-128D-4416-BEE0-5096A68A6B54.jpeg
15E05645-E857-4F4E-A137-4511538CF4AD.jpeg
1591133932148.png
DSCN0979.JPG
5038592312.jpg
257C0AC1-60BF-47F6-BF49-EFDBBD52D3D8.jpeg
A186827E-1676-4FAD-A6E7-4EBF2FD84547.jpeg
20220917_073830.jpg
phonto.jpeg
B6D659F4-4CF2-4492-8855-642F7D81A0C5.jpeg
E1F3DB0E-AE2D-437A-BA11-83023EF75906.jpeg

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