SFW Wolf Sheds it's Sheep's Clothing in AZ

Zim

Zim

Very Active Member
Messages
2,319
LAST EDITED ON Jan-10-12 AT 06:01PM (MST)[p]They promised AZ sportsmen there would be no wealth tags. That sure didn't take long!!! SFW just tip toed around AZG&F and have a bill asking for 332 premium tags for auction/raffle. Why am I not surprised? Gee I wonder what SFW has in store for NM.
 
You better get ready to fight them now. When Peay came out supporting USO then flipped when the heat started we knew they were bad for hunting here. This was a bill designed to totally whore out our big game management and was written by SFW. They got a politician to support it and used emergency procedures to try to force it before the people here could find out. Our game commission and G&F were not told of this bill at all and both came out strongly against it. We are in need of donations of hot tar and feathers.
 
>I believe the commission voted unanimously
>against it! Dead for now.
>

That goes without saying. The scarey thing is these lunatics actually believed in their own minds they had enough of a chance to even attempt this stunt.

Beware New Mexico. I'd say there's a snowball's chance in hell NMSFW won't be after auction/raffle/wealth tags soon. They will look at their AZ failure, make adjustments, and try again.
 
i say its an awesome idea. lets take 20% of the landowner tags and hand them to sfw. then at least we would be assured that at least some of the money was going back to elk. make sure sfw tavs were 100% linked to landowner tags that way if we killed lo tags sfw would go as well.

im just curious. can someone please explain to me why we give a crap if sfw gets a few tags when more than half our elk tags go to unit wide ranches? shoot id love to see a system like utah where each unit lost only 5 to 15 tags for sfw and the landowners got next to nothing. as we stand arizona gives their landowners nothing and hence arizona has a reason to gripe. as for new mexico, well we need to shut up until we get our landowners out of the tag system. at least drop the small contributing ranch tags and give those to sfw cuz thats an even bigger f'ing joke.

just my two worthless cents
 
Everybody needs to flood Gov. Martinez's office with e-mails asking for the resignation of MR. Espinoza, before they screw us more here.
 
No question Don Peay has a bullseye on New Mexico's back. It's only how to do it...........like a theif in the night (Arizona) or in a more prolonged subtle route taking many years (Utah).

After the latest Arizona backlash I highly suspect the subtle route. Of course it will depend on how gullible or susceptible the New Mexico politicians are.

It's just a chess game at this point.
 
>Everybody needs to flood Gov. Martinez's
>office with e-mails asking for
>the resignation of MR. Espinoza,
>before they screw us more
>here.

AMEN Brother!

Problem is Govenor Martinez most likely will never see our emails. I just sent one and got a generic response saying that her "team" will professionaly respond. Yea right! That person could be a supporter of Mr. Espinosa and sfw and delete all of our communications. I sincerely hope not, but it is possible.
 
You are probably right, but I am going to send e-mails/letters to everyone I can think of letting them know what SFW really is.
 
Stanks, not a bad idea.

If SFW makes a play for NM it will be a bad thing for us all. I personally will pull every card I have to keep this rich man's pay-to-play tag scheming out of our state. It will take a concerted effort of contacting our individual senators and representatives, as well as your local chambers of commerce, mayors, local media, small business owners, neighbors, and governor's office.

I also suggest contacting the governor's legal counsel (certain individuals in this office also happened to be very involved in her election campaign) to advise them that you question the appointment of Mr. Espinoza and will not hesitate to make this a "hot button" campaign issue in any upcoming election cycles.

SFW makes 196 look like a tame little puppy...don't let them take your tags from the application pool.

-Cody
 
It will be very interesting to see how Don Peay/SFW decides to dissect New Mexico given the way the politicians there have clearly shown money talks. They want wealthy hunters and nobody else. The pie is already cut up so bad by outfitters (10%), residents, and landowners, his easy target (nonresident unguided) seems too small for him to hit for his auction/raffle tags. Should he still attack the small target (6%) that has no legislative voice? Landowner tags would be a much bigger source, but he'd have a big fight on his hands going that route. Decision, decisions.

I can see DP now, lurking over a big war table, strategizing, like Hitler looking over a map of Europe.

Between the recent NM tag restructuring and the AZ debacle, I'd expect him to let things settle down for a year before making his play.
 
>i say its an awesome idea.
>lets take 20% of the
>landowner tags and hand them
>to sfw. then at least
>we would be assured that
>at least some of the
>money was going back to
>elk. make sure sfw tavs
>were 100% linked to landowner
>tags that way if we
>killed lo tags sfw would
>go as well.
>
>im just curious. can someone please
>explain to me why we
>give a crap if sfw
>gets a few tags when
>more than half our elk
>tags go to unit wide
>ranches? shoot id love to
>see a system like utah
>where each unit lost only
>5 to 15 tags for
>sfw and the landowners got
>next to nothing. as we
>stand arizona gives their landowners
>nothing and hence arizona has
>a reason to gripe. as
>for new mexico, well we
>need to shut up until
>we get our landowners out
>of the tag system. at
>least drop the small contributing
>ranch tags and give those
>to sfw cuz thats an
>even bigger f'ing joke.
>
>just my two worthless cents


I couldn't agree more.
 
>
> I personally will pull
>every card I have to
>keep this rich man's pay-to-play
>tag scheming out of our
>state.


What do you call the current land owner tag system? At least with this, the money goes to the wildlife, not the landowners pockets for state animals.
 
this topic really gets under my skin. zim, until you grow half a brain crawl back under whatever rock u came out from under. its ok to give half our tags to landowners so that they can line their pockets? however if sfw wants 5 tags from each unit to auction for elk habitat its a bad idea? heck your right. lets just keep giving hundreds of lo tags for every unit and not even flinch. but if peay wants to help our elk herds lets throw him under the bus! i honest to god want to know where you got your brain from? walmart? or is it still on lay away cuz that would explain a lot. its obvious you deeply hate don peay and any decision he makes is gonna be deeply contested by you but i must please ask you to stfu until you understand nm's real problem. our problem is that landowners get 1000's of wealth tags a year and are cratering our tag allotments for the general public. noone has any room to gripe about the 100 or so sfw tags until we eliminate unit wide landowner tags all together. if landowners get ranch only tags then we are fine but uw tags need to go. and this my friends is coming from the mouth of a guy who depends on those uw lo tags every stinking year. so take your peay vendetta and go else where.
 
For the most part I think that a lot of us agree that LO tags are an issue.... Just remember SFW stance on LO and how they stood with LO,Outfitters,Ranchers,Oil and Gas during the A-plus issue... They are all about LO tags..
J
 
>For the most part I think
>that a lot of us
>agree that LO tags are
>an issue.... Just remember SFW
>stance on LO and how
>they stood with LO,Outfitters,Ranchers,Oil and
>Gas during the A-plus issue...
>They are all about LO
>tags..
>J


Exactly, align yourself with the people that will help you get what you want. You cannot position yourself against LO tags and then push for tags to auction/raffle yourself.
 
I'm not aligning myself with sfw. I'm just tired of people who aren't exactly thinking straight getting on here crying wolf over non issues.

NM's #1 problem is the LO system. Its gotta go, PERIOD! When someone with 30 acres can get a bull elk tag in unit 34 for rifle once every five years on average something is messed up. I say do away with Unit Wide tags all together. Let the common man broker a deal with the LO's if we want to. At least then the ranches have to work for their dollar and actually sell reall live animals. This LO welfare system is just plain wrong any way you look at it.

Once this system is fixed then lets re visit sfw. As for now sfw isn't our main enemy, its the large group of land owners that scream the loudest at g&f. I say give them what they want. All the landowner tags they want but ranch only. Lets get their worthless acts off our public land. Either that or have a lottery for cattle. I say we have cattle hunts for cattle grazing on public lands. twice the hunting opportunity, twice the meat in the freezer. Hey, thats fair right. Make em earn thier keep. Why can they hunt OUR elk but we can't hunt THEIR cattle?

Heck if you wanna make it fair we should have a draw hunt to hunt cattle on deeded grounds. If you recieve a UW elk authorization they must be willing to match it with a private ranch cattle hunt. That sounds dumb but its exactly what land owners are doing to us.
 
Stink, I agree with you 100% on the lO tags, but we can not let SFW get their heels dug in while that fight is going on. Until Jennings law is repealed, LO tags will not change.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-14-12 AT 07:37PM (MST)[p]>Stinky - "Once this system is fixed then lets re visit sfw."

WRONG WRONG WRONG

****************************************************************

SLM >Stink, I agree with you 100%
>on the lO tags, but
>we can not let SFW
>get their heels dug in
>while that fight is going
>on. Until Jennings law is
>repealed, LO tags will not
>change.

RIGHT RIGHT RIGHT

****************************************************************

I've been an outspoken critic of SFW for 10 years. Watching. Listening to Utah locals. Writing legislators. We all know the New Mexico Landowner system is BS. I welcome you to search the MM archives and locate one statement I ever made in support of that LO scam. However, Stinky, you are a fool if you think Don Peay isn't going to pay a midnight visit to a legislator near you to try this same BS he tried in Arizona. Only maybe this time he'll have a few more cronnies in place to make his plot a reality.
 
".......noone has any room to gripe about the 100 or so sfw tags until we eliminate unit wide landowner."

Try 500+ in Utah and an attempted 332 in Arizona. None of which have any transparency as to how the funds are spent. Zero goes to the fish & game departments. These tags are being abused for political gain. They have for 10 years! And DP is always looking for more.

By the way, I've never bought a LO tag anywhere, much less NM.
 
No one is contesting the fact that the LO tag system hurts the average NM hunter buddy.

However, If SFW wants tags for THEIR auctions they need to be taking those tags from the private sector ie., LO tags and NOT lay a finger on tags available to the public in the public draw. If 100% of the money derived from their auctions would go back to the State of New Mexico or its wildlife I could begin to support such auctions. But, if you think it's all right for SFW to strip any of the remaining tags from those that are available to the general public you've got a screw loose.

New Mexico already subsidizes enough private interests with its current tag allocation programs. And yes, thanks to friends, family and hard work I am one of those guys who always has a LO deer, goat, and/or elk tag in my pocket for the years I don't pull a tag. It's kind of worrisome when a guy has to be born into money, save for an entire year, or put himself through 19 years of education and maintain a high-stress career just to be able to hunt in his home state every year.

-Cody
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-15-12 AT 09:56AM (MST)[p]You guys might do a little fact checking. SFW auction tag money does not go to wildlife until they have fully paid all their "associated" expenses ie; banquet, advertising, travel, entertainment, etc, etc.

Your Game Dept could easily donate auction tags to various Organizations for auction and simply give the hosting org a percentage of the auction proceeds, then keep the majority and use it for habitat. They do it up here every year. The Host gets 10% and can do whatever they want with the money, the dept's 90% is earmarked for habitat and access. And the auction tags don't come from the draw pool.

Clean and simple without all the associated BS.
Donate tags and then be happy with what is "left over"? are you serious?
 
Donate tags and then be happy with what is "left over"? are you serious?

That makes alot of sense? Duh!!! Lets elect him as president! OMG!
 
Seen your post before ya deleted it SLM...there's a feller on here called Tiger who is one of Espinoza's sons whom has stated on this forum in the past something to the effect of 'SFW will NOT tolerate criticisms of their entity on public discussion boards without their voice being represented' or some such drivel...maybe the ol' striped cat will arrive to uphold his claim yet

G&F records show commissioner Robbie Sr's term expiring New Year's Eve '11...haven't bothered to check if such is in fact accurate, and what his current standing is. Maybe I'll make a call or two manana

Ol' DP sure ain't gonna play his shady cards in this great state and pull a money hand...but I do appreciate your concern Zimmerman ;)
 
BTW, Bob is right, there ain't nothin wrong with very moderately numbered auction/raffle Consevation Incentive tags when purveyed by credentialled non-profit organisations who put the $$$ back on the ground after thier overhead is accounted for (NOT their pocketbooks fattened)...our state has agreements with such provenly reputable entities concerning our current Conservation permits

More money put to its proper use is a very good thing as far as Wildlife Management/Enhancement is concerned
 
I have sent numerous e-mails to MR. Espinoza and SFW asking if they were in favor of this bill or felt auction/raffle tags would be a good idea for NM, as of now, no one has responded. Has anyone received or heard anything from them?
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-18-12 AT 08:03AM (MST)[p]I understand the frustration with NM LO welfare, but the idea of transferring LO tags to SFW would only turn one problem into two problems. There's no need to feed the beast that is SFW any more than already exists. Lack of money will make them go away. That's the only reason they exist now. They serve no purpose at all other than channeling tags and money to legislators, wealthy hunters, and a select few in their upper management.
 
As I have stated many times in the past. NM-SFW is its own entity. Only link it has with Utah is the magazine, name and a combined effort to fight the federal wolf battle.

So I can see the ignorance on how people think that anyone from Utah has any say in how NM is run or even that AZ, WY, ID or AK. Each state keeps it own money. Each state is run by its states elected board members (you must be a member to vote).

There are 2 deer tags, 2 elk tags, 2 sheep tags that go out to MDF, RMEF, FNAWS currently one is auctioned, one is raffled. 10% goes to the orginization running the auction/raffles. Rest is returned to NMG&F.

I like the idea stinky put out about LO tags. I will bring up at the next state board meeting. One thing I will never support is asking for tags from the current public tags. We support more opportunity for all hunters. Which can be done. However we as hunters fight more among ourselves and if we ever became united to fight the anti's we could accomplish great things. I never see it happening but it is something I wish for. You have to many people that see one thing and draw conclusion that are totally wrong. Yet a little fact finding will paint a complete different picture.

We are the orginization that has been on the front lines fighting the wolves.

We have done a few habitat improvements around the state. We have sponsored the youth hunts for the kids that draw the hunts for getting 100% on hunters saftey. Thanks to Vermejo Park for providing the LO tags, guides, and the facilities.






Outside of a horse is good for the inside of a man.
 
Let me say that I am all for money going back into habitat.. BUT we don't have to look to far to see how this can be abused.. Just look at the Sheep LO tags that were just approved by the Game and Fish... At first we were told that it was a 50/50 split of draw tags public to LO tags... That is what we were told... and the NMWF and I supported that ratio. AT THE LAST MOMENT it was switched to 1/3 on one of the ranches in favor of the LO and there is no reason why the other ranch can't come back and ask for a 1/3 split... SFW-NM went on record saying that they were ok and supported this last minute change... NMWF and I refused to support the 1/3 split because there are no guidelines or rules on the Sheep LO tags. Residents already get the shaft on sheep tags because of they don't follow the quota and this will make it worse.

How does this relate? I think that once we start carving out tags at the public's expense that we are setting a dangerous precedent...

Instead of handing the tags over to one organization or individual I think we should have a state run auction and the money that is generated from the sales go into the same pile of cash that the habitat stamp money goes into. I just think that once you privatize these tags it leads to favoritism and politics... It might cost a little more than the 10% but it will be well worth it in terms of credibility. The habitat stamp program has some very specific rules and it requires transparency and it approved by a state-wide committee...

I wish I could say that tags should come from the LO pool but..... I just dont' see that happening, until we change the system LO are going to get their tags.. BUT... we should at least ask and go on record for this..

J
 
SFW is bad news. One of many concerns about SFW is there seems to be a play on "more hunting opportunities for all". This scares me ALOT. This state is SO overhunted. We are a joke compared to almost all other states in the rockies for mule deer with the exception of 2a in Jan. Obviously it is about money. Elk quality in 15,16s,9,6 and a few others is not what it once was. Once LO tags being issued peaked in around 2000, it was all downhill. They will bring up "habitat" expansion but these elk do fine from one end of the state to the other. They recently found elk on white sands.Sure we can put tanks in but watch what they say when you want to do it on public land. Anyway, its about limiting hunting opportunities so we all at some point can enjoy a quality hunt. I wont even go into who SFW is in bed with. I hope most do know.
 
SFW claims that each state is a separate entity when it helps them but Don Peay claims to be the founder of all of the chapters to bolster his credibility. Simple question?Which is it? Is each state separate and independent or are they all under the same umbrella?

Take a look at the BGF webpage and look at the Endorsements and Sponsors page. On that Page there is a little endorsement from Don Peay who is listed as:
"Don Peay
Founder Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife
Utah, Wyoming, Idaho, New Mexico, Montana, Nevada and Alaska"

It looks to me like Don will claim each state is separate when things are not going great?
?SfFW believes in local control
Each state sfw organization is:
1.a complete separate legal entity
2. Has a totally independent board of directors electEd by sportsmen in their specific state
3. Each state keeps 100 percent of the money they raise in their state
So to try and link any state is not true in any sense of the word.
When their are issues of common agreement such as wolf delisting. There is cooperation?
(http://www.monstermuleys.info/dcforum/DCForumID5/18877.html#20 Post # 20)
but will also turn around and claim to be the founder of all of them when it suits him.
 
Wow, if SFW truly sided with the LO again on the sheep tags, they just fell another rung on the respect laddder with me.
 
I know alot of you guys are Business Owners.

But to the guys that are not. If you think politics are bad at the state level? Let the power get in the wrong hands in the private sector! This could happen now or 10 yrs from now.

Atleast with the nmg&f you(residents)have a voice.

The UW landowner tags I agree are a joke, but as a NR I have no voice. If I were a resident though, I would want some of them to be in the draw, atleast 50%. No way would I vote to give them to a private organization.
 
Be a Founder is just that - starting the orginization. He and UT assisted in getting NM up and going and assisting in getting started, nothing more nothing less.

As far as the sportsman vs wolves the BGF is the orginization for the federal fight. SFW-NM just askes all to join that fight. Feds what to increase the wolf numbers in the Gila, they want to introduce Mexican wolves in Northern NM, and Northern AZ Southern UT. BGF is trying to politically stop them.

"1.a complete separate legal entity
2. Has a totally independent board of directors elected by sportsmen in their specific state
3. Each state keeps 100 percent of the money they raise in their state"

These are all true statements for NM. Just replace sportsman with SFW members.

Expanding opportunity is not saying to put out more tags, it means sound management, increase the capacity of the land, increasing herd sizes, thus providing more opportunity.

I would be first to agree some areas are currently over hunted. At same time some areas are under hunted for certain species. Some areas are not opened to public because of the land locked status. There are many improvements that could be made, however we need everyone on the same page. When I say everyone I am talking LO's, Industry and Sportsman. There is a middle ground that if all would come to a common term, we could accomplish great things. When it continues to be a battle of sportsman vs the others. We will lose. There is too much money the "others" have and money is political power.


When you constantly attack and stir the pot saying sportsman of NM vs LO's or vs OF's or vs Industry. All you so is play into the hands of the anti's. Anti's know as long as there are fighting amonst themselves then they cannot make a joined effort in fighting them. Which is what we should be doing.


Outside of a horse is good for the inside of a man.
 
"stirring the pot" "playing into the anti's hands". This is rhetoric we hear coming from the SFW,LOs and OF cartel. Just do what is right. First of all, make ALL NR tags available to ALL NRs. Let the market dictate demand for services. Second, illiminate UW tags to LOs. Just start making things right and then lets work together on habitat. I really do not see the anti's doing as much damage to sportsmen/women/families without ranches or OF businesses as SFW, LOs/w tags and(some)OFs. I read somewhere "you shall know them by there fruits". I am sure we will all come together if the anti's become as much a threat to the sportsmen.
 
30?, I agree 110% that everyone should be able to come to a middle of the road agreement, although, if the other side is not willing to give up anything, you have to take it from them. My problem with SFW is on both the SB and the A-plus it seems like they swung wherever the political wind blew them. Instead of waiting till things are almost done and releasing your position so it appears to some like you won and were instrumental in the negotiation, let everybody know up-front what you want and fight till the end for what is right, not for individual political gains.
 
SFWNM be stand up guys? Nah, ain't gonna happen. You're observations are consistent with what MANY of us have seen to be the case with them.

30", if the NM 'chapter' is as disassociated from your parent organization as you describe, why wouldn't you cut the 'minor' binding ties, change the name, and start actually DOING something positive for wildlife and the Public Sportsman?

I am incredulous that you all would choose to stay with the enormously and validly ill perceived SFW entity, and subject yourselves to the massive amount of justifiable negativity concerning such, if your affiliation wasn't in fact much deeper than you claim.

What that Indian saying? Talks out both sides of his mouth?
 
I also remember Tiger suggesting MORE tags...that seems to be in direct contradiction to what you are saying now, 30"

So who's word is it? Or do y'all even have that figured out yet?

In contrast, I'd also have a lot more respect for the NMWF if they'd disassociate themselves from THEIR national parent, take some responsibility for ever gettin into cahoots with that two-bit political HACK Munoz, and clarify once and for all their stance on the idiotic lobo reintroduction and propagation endeavor

They as well speak with a forked tongue, albeit a bit more diplomatically and articulately than the fellers at SFW

Both these entities try to pit the common public against eachother through their transparent emnity, and play upon the generally indoctrined notion of bi-partisanism to attempt to achieve some advantage over the other

We the PEOPLE are not fools, and it is disgusting to us to regard y'alls blatant efforts at trying to quite obviously achieve POLITICAL gain

Despicably self serving, and incredibly short sighted

Slithery snakes in the grass, I tell ya
 
GW..
Just wondering why you don't like Munoz? In my dealings with him on SB196 he seemed pretty stand up and really took some heat for us.. Can you please be specific?

Thanks
Jason
 
Have hesitated before jumping into this.

Good news is we have some hunting organizations vying for hunters to join them here in NM.
Bad news is that I see their priorities misguided.

Here in Southern NM I see different priorities than maybe N. NM or other states.

Habitat is always thrown around. Someone on this forum made a great point a while back. Unless they can make it rain here in S. NM you have very little control of habitat. During this last drought lots of land with cattle on it was eaten down to the dirt. I do not fault the ranchers if they followed the rules of their lease or it was their own private land. They are trying to make a living and unless you have been in the same position you cannot judge them.
I do not think many deer starved to death because there were very few deer to begin with. They can browse on what cows cannot.

So an organization that wants to talk about habitat here in NM indicates to me that they are just making "feel good" and uninformed sales pitches to anyone willing to bite.


What I see as the #1 PRIORITY in S. NM is the decimation of the mule deer herds. It is criminal the amount of tags they are dumping into units like 34, 30 and 29. Fawn recruitment is discouraging. On our 2B hunt we saw multiple does with twins, here in the south it is an exception to even see a fawn with a group of does.
Why is nobody in these groups talking about this?
Opportunity does not mean dumping 3600 deer tags (before unlimited private vouchers) into unit 34.
Shut the deer hunt down a few years in 34. Cut the tags by 2/3s or more indefinitely. It does not take a biologist to see the decimation of the deer herd here in the South. I want to hear the person or persons making the decision on the number of tags in 34, 29, and 30 to publicly say the deer herd is not decimated and to explain why they feel they can justify 3600 deer tags in unit 34.
Yea, we have other problems, but, this is so shockingly obvious that I have no confidence in those that are allowing this to happen and I do not want to hear a hunting organization babbling about things that are not critical when irreparable damage is being done to our herds.
 
"So an organization that wants to talk about habitat here in NM indicates to me that they are just making "feel good" and uninformed sales pitches to anyone willing to bite."

I am not sure what you are trying to say here(honestly).. Who is the organization... Who is they? What is feel good and what is the sales pitch... AND is this on public or private land?

BTW you can call game and fish they have been really good to me when I call... Just ask that is why we pay them.

I do know that there are a ton of discussions regarding the fawn recruitment and tag allocation of antelope tags in the SE because of the lack of a fawn crop...

J
 
Jason, do not read to much into what I am trying to say here.

I am not attacking either organization. My point is that there is a major crisis down here and that neither one is addressing what I perceive to be the most significant problem in Southern NM and the one that immediate action COULD be taken.

Yes, I do feel that the term "habitat" is thrown around as a "feel good" term that is acceptable in all circles from hunters to tree huggers.

My opinion is that "habitat" does not even make the short list of the problems hunting has in Southern NM. It is something that we have little control over, unless it includes year round drinkers for wildlife.

Jason, not to make light of it, but, I can see my phone call to G&F now.

Paul: Hello, this is Paul C down around unit 34. I think we need to shut down deer hunting in a few of these units until our herds come back.

G&F employee: (hand over the receiver calling over her shoulder to someone else) Hey, Paul C down in Southern NM thinks 3600 deer tags (not including unlimited private land tags) is to many and we need to reduce by at least 2/3 or close hunting for a few years.

Answer back: Absolutely, I will get right on it.

Jason, they must know the critical state of mule deer in SE NM. Why do they continue to dump tags into these units?

Why are not any of the 2 major organizations in NM (NMWF & SFW) not addressing it? In one conversation on the forum Tiger said SFW was gonna work on getting more tags available. In all fairness he did not specify the SE NM units and he personally may not be aware of your problems in 34 because he may not hunt this area. I am not taking a cheap shot at him.
I am only saying our localized priorities are not being addressed by either organization.
I want to know why the state of SE NM deer herds are not a major priority. Is there not enough contributors in this part of the state?

Jason, I have contributed to NMWF, SFW, RMEF, MDF etc.. I vacillate on this, but, currently I find myself more aligned with NMWF than the others. If they would just come out against wolves I would be all in with NMWF.

Finally, how in the hell do they justify dumping more tags in unit 34 than any other unit??????????
Are they trying to exterminate the deer herd here??
 
I agree NMPaul with your concerns. It is like they do not get it. It is much like our government situation. They need more money than is available which causes tag abuse. I suggest NM game and fish get a audit for cost cutting measures from anything to keeping vehicle fleets longer, assessing office admin employee counts, money spent on buildings and host of other areas. Sure we could use more officers "in the field" but I suggest cutting tags in an area like 34 by 25% for instance is more effective. We cannot destroy the resource in the name of money, albeit G&F budgets,LOs,OFs,Orgs or whoever just wants to be able to hunt regardless. That is what is happening. The big question is how many people value the reality of the issue you brought up. I know it is a huge issue. I personally would never apply for deer in 34, at least in its current condition.
 
Paul...
I will call when I get a chance and I will ask if there is a plan to review tag allocation because of the drought and fawn recruitment... AND see if the tags are going to be reduced how will they address the unlimited tags by LO on private lands.

BUT in regards to the habitat projects... One of the reason very few are done in all honesty is that requires a TON of resources... IE CASH...After the fire in 6A at one of the NMWF Board Meetings I proposed that we try to do something to help the habitat... SOOO... We looked at the numbers and the resources just weren't there... Also, our big issue is WATER... In NM if you want to do anything with water it is a major process... Everything to down river studies to archeology studies...

Anyway... I will call and see what I can find out...
Jason
 
With the new Gov that audit already happened... BUT the G & F budget has flatline over the last few years... The way it works is that the dept suggests a budget and then it gets approved or not... IMO and this IMO because things are so political in Santa Fe that no directors have asked for an increase for fear of getting fired. Sad but true... Also, the Habitat Stamp amount of $5 has been the same for the last 20 years... The use of the habitat stamp money is currently one of the issues the commission is working on..
 
>Paul...
>I will call when I get
>a chance and I will
>ask if there is a
>plan to review tag allocation
>because of the drought and
>fawn recruitment... AND see if
>the tags are going to
>be reduced how will they
>address the unlimited tags by
>LO on private lands.
>
>BUT in regards to the habitat
>projects... One of the reason
>very few are done in
>all honesty is that requires
>a TON of resources... IE
>CASH...After the fire in 6A
>at one of the NMWF
>Board Meetings I proposed that
>we try to do something
>to help the habitat...
>SOOO... We looked at the
>numbers and the resources just
>weren't there... Also, our
>big issue is WATER... In
>NM if you want to
>do anything with water it
>is a major process... Everything
>to down river studies to
>archeology studies...
>
>Anyway... I will call and see
>what I can find out...
>
>Jason


Jason, we will take any help we can get. If you can some how get the machine moving to address the problem out here I will have a statue erected of you. :)
When I opened the proclamation this year and counted the # of deer tags in 34 compared to the other units I was just disgusted.
It is absolutely tragic.
 
>With the new Gov that audit
>already happened... BUT the
>G & F budget has
>flatline over the last few
>years... The way it works
>is that the dept suggests
>a budget and then it
>gets approved or not...
>IMO and this IMO because
>things are so political in
>Santa Fe that no directors
>have asked for an increase
>for fear of getting fired.
> Sad but true... Also,
>the Habitat Stamp amount of
>$5 has been the same
>for the last 20 years...
>The use of the habitat
>stamp money is currently one
>of the issues the commission
>is working on..

There has to be a balance between budget and our natural resouces. I believe a some point a concession has to be made that whether we like it or not, our natural resouces(deer/elk populations/quality etc) dictate budget to a very large degree. Obviously when you see large amounts of tags going out to places like 34, it points to imbalance. Anyone deny or have a rebuttal in light of the context?
 
>I agree NMPaul with your concerns.
>It is like they do
>not get it. It is
>much like our government situation.
>They need more money than
>is available which causes tag
>abuse. I suggest NM game
>and fish get a audit
>for cost cutting measures from
>anything to keeping vehicle fleets
>longer, assessing office admin employee
>counts, money spent on buildings
>and host of other areas.
>Sure we could use more
>officers "in the field" but
>I suggest cutting tags in
>an area like 34 by
>25% for instance is more
>effective. We cannot destroy the
>resource in the name of
>money, albeit G&F budgets,LOs,OFs,Orgs or
>whoever just wants to be
>able to hunt regardless. That
>is what is happening. The
>big question is how many
>people value the reality of
>the issue you brought up.
>I know it is a
>huge issue. I personally would
>never apply for deer in
>34, at least in its
>current condition.


Bullbreath, I also try to look at it like a business as well. You have to allocate resources and maintain a budget.

My impression is that SE NM is the red headed step child of NM G&F.
Whenever a new hunt is dreamed up for elk (late archery, late cow, youth encouragement, etc...) they dump the tags in 34. Deer is just shocking the # of tags in units like 34 & 29.

There must be so many other squeaky wheels for the northern units that the extra $ needs to come from somewhere and they dump on these units.
There must be some formula used to determine # of tags issued.
Either that formula needs to be re thinked, or it is being seriously kinked when it comes time to rape unit 34.
 
Its not just 34 though. Look at how many tags are in 13,37,2a and a host of others. Sure we get an influx of colorado deer late nov/early dec in unit 2, but the rest of the state has a rare bruiser as the exception. Even Corona has went down hill drastically.I personally want to see cuts in most units for tags. I am sure spending more than our resources merit will be our reality. I am kind of used to it from my government.
 
Paul,

I do know that the G&F and the commision is looking at reducing the tags, because of just what you stated. The drought has really took its toll. N NM not so much but I have been hearing about southern end of state.

Not only deer but elk tags as well are getting looked at. I would only hope that they do something.

I was also informed even though number of tags avaliable shows X. G&F has the ability to decrease the number of tags up to either the draw date or the app due date.

email and call your concerns in. They do listen.

Yes all orgs say habitat. Because only way of increasing herd, thus increasing opportunities is in habitat. There are many places that have old growth. It is very expensive to do thining and clearing. Also noxious weeds are a factor as well. If there is no food there is no animals.

Back in the day of healthy deer herds there was plenty of logging, clear cutting, forest fires left to burn ect. We have gone opposite of that now. Which is I think is a major part of the problem.





Outside of a horse is good for the inside of a man.
 
You guys make this too hard...
SOOOO I called the SW offices and I talked to Kevin R.. the Game Manager for the region... He was awesome...

OK...
Regarding tag numbers and reductions..
Let's talk antelope... Well the fawn recruitment was about 5 fawns per doe... NOT GOOD The issue is that it takes a min of 10 bucks per 100 does to maintain the population... We are currently around 25+ in the area... So that is good. They don't want to reduce the tags until they can show a TREND of population decline.. In other words they can't make a knee jerk reaction due to one year.. AS you know the Antelope very often have twins and they have very recently seen some units where there are over 100 fawns per 100 does... That being said they said they are going to close some units because the TREND has been negative...

Deer
Coues Deer.. Populations seem to be stable or increasing because they are not like stupid mule deer... OK I just added that but they are stable or increasing because of their adaptability...

Mule Deer... While things have been tough the population AS A WHOLE is sustainable.. He mentioned that the limiting factor of the mule deer populations isn't water... It is a contributing factor BUT the biggest factor is the feed... Fire Suppression has really hurt us (read that - hunt burns).

Elk..
Did really talk too much about that but from what I gathered the management plan is being met.. I read that as things are going to stay the same until the management plan changes in favor of quality over opportunity..

The thing that I got from the call is that the Dept manages to a 4 year plan that has been approved by the commission. This has stuff like proposed buck to doe ratios.. but the number of tags can be modified year to year based on surveys... The modifications are meant to hit the targets of the management plan... ALSO, they manage to sustainability and the management plan NOT necessarily the overall experience of your hunt... Which makes sense... I have a feeling that as a general rule people don't hunt as hard as they use to... IMO...

SOOOO If we want to change the number of tags that are allocated then when they talk about the management plan we need to speak up....
 
AND I still can't believe that my url is banned on this website..

PS... Regarding money remember that Martinez didn't block the $500,000 that was yanked from the OHV funds and put into the general fund that could have been used for habitat and awareness...

Even Richardson blocked this...

J
www.#####.com
 
>Paul,
>
>I do know that the G&F
>and the commision is looking
>at reducing the tags, because
>of just what you stated.
>The drought has really took
>its toll. N NM not
>so much but I have
>been hearing about southern end
>of state.
>
>Not only deer but elk tags
>as well are getting looked
>at. I would only hope
>that they do something.
>
>I was also informed even though
>number of tags avaliable shows
>X. G&F has the ability
>to decrease the number of
>tags up to either the
>draw date or the app
>due date.
>
>email and call your concerns in.
>They do listen.
>
>Yes all orgs say habitat. Because
>only way of increasing herd,
>thus increasing opportunities is in
>habitat. There are many places
>that have old growth. It
>is very expensive to do
>thining and clearing. Also noxious
>weeds are a factor as
>well. If there is no
>food there is no animals.
>
>
>Back in the day of healthy
>deer herds there was plenty
>of logging, clear cutting, forest
>fires left to burn ect.
>We have gone opposite of
>that now. Which is I
>think is a major part
>of the problem.
>
>
>
>
>
>Outside of a horse is good
>for the inside of a
>man.


30", let me preface this by saying that my perception of you from your posts is that you are sincerely concerned about the future of hunting and that you are doing what you think is right to help it.
That being said, I disagree with your post in so much as how it pertains to units 29, 30 & 34.

Habitat does not even come close to being one of the major and immediate concerns in these units. Controllable habitat that is. We cannot control rain. These deer are not starving to death.

They are being over hunted by legal hunters, predators, and poachers.
We can make an immediate positive impact by significantly cutting the tags back.

I have spent literally days behind 15x binocs in unit 30/29/34 looking for barbary in Feb (the time of year that you see the most deer out and for the longest) and even though I am looking at dozens of square miles of wonderful deer habitat the numbers of deer I see normally is alarmingly low.

Maybe habitat is a problem in other parts of the states, but, we are way past that down here.

Jason, I have no idea why you cannot post your url. I would not have a clue how to have a url banned and if I ever wanted to, I would need to get help to do it.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-19-12 AT 02:34PM (MST)[p]I would agree with you Paul about the numbers in those units being way to many, but I would say the same about many units in the state as far as deer is concerned. There are way to many deer tags as a whole in this state IMO. And when there are so called left over tags then that is what they should stay is left over tags. At least that way give them a chance.

EDIT: I would also agree that it is not the change in habitat that has hurt the numbers(because in most areas that hasn't changed), it is what Paul has stated, hunters and poachers.
 

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

Strange buck.jpg
IMG_5111 copy.jpg
Bull_04c.jpg
6AC0DBEE-9C44-4A5E-A326-D2A3E8974EF3.jpeg
Screenshot_20230903-225245_Gallery.jpg
E4297F9E-E752-4AA4-8F5C-C23611DCB517.jpeg
Deer 1 trip.jpg
7FFB5E83-E8F9-451B-9307-56019A48F111.jpeg
2023 Bull 2.jpg
Deer 3 (2).jpg
6564C927-67DF-45C1-B6F7-D7AD6B4238DA.jpeg
2AEA8B2C-171B-4711-B7CA-CAF4AF3256FA.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