Taos Commission meeting - My thoughts...

[jamaro]

From my blog..

Let me first say if you are a trapper or have a strong opinion about wolves being in New Mexico YOU NEED TO ATTEND and give your opinion at the Game and Fish Commission Meetings. Anti-Trappers and Pro-Wolf people are VERY ORGANIZED and are INVOLVED. If we sit back we will BE RUN THE HELL OVER!

During the comment period for Bear and Lion Management it was said and I agree, ?If we took a vote right now to abolish trapping it would be a landslide?. From the looks of it there were 2 trappers(including myself) and 25 anti-trappers.

Other issues in no particular order:

Valles Caldera ? There will be hunting, fishing and trapping in 2015 and the Game and Fish has 3 years to come up with a long-term plan. One thing that was encouraging is that there was discussion about increasing the numbers of species that could be hunted. I suspect deer or grouse? One thing that I would like to get a feeling for is if sportsmen want Rio Grande Cutts in the creeks. This might mean removing the browns.
Bear and Lion ? Over all there will be an increase of about 20% for bears and the department is also trying to find ways of hitting the harvest goals for mountain lions. That includes trapping. The opposition to any increased bear quotas and the use of snares and lion trapping was VERY STRONG. There was also discussion of having a split season for bears. I commented on the rules and I had three points; the Department should be sending emails to sportsmen when a bear region closes and it should also send one when it reopens, The Department should have a split season, the graph that was presented basically shows that most bears are taken during the first 2 days of the season and when the archery hunts starts. I suggested that if they were going to have split season then need to push it into the rifle hunts so rifle hunters can hunt bears before the regions closed. Lastly, I suggested that if they wanted to hit to harvest goals they should decrease the cost of the lion tags(this would need to be changed by legislation)
Conservation Plan- I commented that Trout Unlimited is working on an aggressive Gila and Rio Grande Cutthroat plan and that we would like to be involved. I also thanked them for start the reintroduction of Rio Grande?s in the Lincoln.
Shooting Ranges ? The Department has a number of projects to get new shooting ranges all across the state.. Good Stuff..

The only other issue that I think was of major concern was the E-plus program. As you probably know the New Mexico Wildlife Federation recently asked for the % of LO vs. Public Draw tags. Well, 50% of the elk tags get skimmed right off the top and are given to LO. This isn't good. The Federation has also been asking for a Commission to take a look at the program but that have not been given a response. IMO, we at least deserve a response.

To make a long story short Garrett V. from the Federation was able to get the Commissioner Kienzle ON RECORD saying that they would ?discuss? E-plus with Director Sandoval. This is good first step and it is basically what we had to do with the quota issue. This is a small victory. I also had a sidebar discussion with Commissioner Ramos and he mentioned that ?it was on the agenda.?. I am not exactly sure what that means but they at least know that sportsmen are fed-up.

I think everyone agrees that the E-plus system is broken and it needs to be revised. We need to make sure that we support the Federation on this one.



J-

 

[505]

So, is NMWF pro trapping and anti wolf now?

We've already been run the hell over in regards to wolves, or is your head in the sand?

Get Garret V and Joel Gay to stand loud and proud against wolves and pro cougar trapping and I'll donate 10K to NMWF right f'n now.

 

[greatwestern]

Hi jason,

I agree that the LO system in general has been abused to a great extent...but pray tell, how do you come up with 50% gleaned off the top of "would be" draw hunts? How do ya figure that? Seems a bit exorbitant and a bit more sensationalized, but you're the expert spokesman, so let us uneducated dolts in on how your organization arrives at these numbers?

After all, you are begging our support no?

Also, what is NMWF's official position on wolves??? This is a question I've asked you before, also of both former and current nmwf leadership...never got any hard answer from any of ya. Heads buried firmly in sand or a lot of huffing and puffing is about the sum of it.

I think we ALL here would appreciate some real accountability, or do you guys care more about the immigrant yippies in my home towns vote after the smoke has cleared and the mirrors broken?

I've about had it with the two faced bullshit myself...there is never a bad time for accountability in my view

Put up or shut up

Sincerely

Adam Simms

 

[jamaro]

These are my thoughts... I don't speak for the NMWF.. Yes, I do trap, how many lines did you run this year? Wolves have always been a no-win. and the raw numbers came from a IPRA that the NMWF had to submit to the State... They made the numbers public when they got them but I am sure you guys knew that.

Here are some elk license statistics from the 2014-15 license year:

Total number of elk licenses ? 41,697
E-PLUS authorizations ? 20,698
Share of all licenses in E-PLUS ? 49.6%
Big Game Draw licenses ? 20,999
Share of all licenses in Draw ? 50.4%
NM resident draw licenses ?17,639
NM resident share of all NM elk tags ? 42%

And the trend is clear: E-PLUS has steadily taken a bigger share of licenses, leaving fewer for the Big Game Draw. In 2002, E-PLUS received 35.8 percent of all available licenses in the state. By 2014 it was 49.6 percent.

It is time to put up or shut up, did you attend? Did you comment on the wolves when all the wolf lovers got up there? I did and I told them how big of a mess all this was.

btw- I am not begging for anything. People talk a big game but they never show up at the meetings or do any work to find out what is really happening with E-plus. Have you submitted an IPRA? What numbers did they give you?

Good luck, all this attacking me and the NMWF does nothing but divide and make the other side stronger.

J-

 

[505]

How bout YOU put up or shut up Jason? I see two valid questions for you, yet you won't answer them. Typical, "don't attack me, I don't speak for NMwF" same old same old.

 

[505]

One last thought.

I have a great big I TOLD YOU SO waiting for you and your old friends at NMWF when the Caldera gets thoroughly pooched. It's already started, if you hadn't heard. You wanted big government, you got it buddy.

You can't come on here, hit and run a thread and then cry about being attacked.

You, Jason, push the NMWF agenda and then can't take the heat.

Believe it or not, there are a lot of "sportsman" that don't agree with you or the NMWF.

Adam-Next time you're in Bernalillo/ABQ, I want to buy you a beer

 

[hank4elk]

LAST EDITED ON Jun-18-15 AT 06:18AM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Jun-18-15 AT 06:06?AM (MST)

Agree Adam,
Been to several meetings the last couple years,didn't see Jam...

They, WF, keep coming up with fake E-plus numbers/%.
The LO tags are in Addition Too- draw tags,not skimmed off top.

WF seems to be on a hate the LO roll for sure!
Even tho 95% of the landowners are Sportsmen who have have invested in land in NM and receive LO tags for depredation/compensation for damages elk do.
My unit is 1/2 private,not FS. RO.
Elk have tripled in numbers here last few years,due to the fact we provide water,feed and cover.
G&F cut our LO tags this year and increased draw in unit. Good,IMHO.
I personally NOT ALLOW the general public on my land unless I meet or talk to them first and they sign a damage/liability waiver first. I have allowed draw tag hunters on my land when I felt OK with them.

How many hunters do you allow on your property Jam?

Yeah the UW LO tags deffinatly needs to be reviewed,IMHO


WF,no firm stance on wolves, ever. Not even a mention of control.

WF sure seems to be cozying up with NC and Sierra club type Hate Hunting groups that have put no $ into NM land for wildlife,just control discussion and their agenda.

WF backed the NPS take-over of Caldera.
Just watch how that will/is turning out.....

 

[smarba]

This is the problem with sportsmen - we bicker among ourselves.

NMWF (not Jamaro) has repeatedly stated that they believe wolves and all predators should be part of a balanced wildlife management. The are not Pro Wolf, per se, as in pushing the agenda to get wolves released, but want wolf number goals clearly stated and wolf numbers to be managed.

I honestly am becoming "anti-wolf" simply because time and time again when goals are achieved, the huggers file lawsuits to keep their numbers going up (look at every western state - this is the trend).

I was born and raised in Alaska; we had wolves, griz, etc. to deal with. But their numbers were MANAGED, unlike what goes on with wolves in the lower 48.

The point is that NMWF makes a regular SPORTSMEN'S presence at the Game Commission Meetings. Jamaro is not speaking on behalf of NMWF; he can elaborate.

There is no other sportsman group at GC Meetings. If we want NMWF to represent our views, we need to become part of the solution and support them as well as tell them what we want. Best I can tell, there is no hidden agenda from NMWF - they simply present the views of their members. They are a very pro hunting organization; the only one with a real voice in NM at this point.

As far as VC and NMWF recommendations, I see it as a no win situation and simply the best of 2 evils. There was no good solution for the VC. The fact that it couldn't make $ was pathetic; at least there is a chance to continue hunting there. The other options would certainly not have allowed hunting.

No organization is perfect, but all we do is argue. The huggers relentlessly push a single agenda day and night. We are losing.

Carl

 

[bjn7f0]

Well said Carl.

 

[JH]

Ok so i rarely post on these online forums, as i do not feel that this is the channel to get my concerns and opinions heard, but that is just personal preference. However, due to the nature of this conversation i felt the need to make a few comments and observations. I do feel that one of the largest issues amongst all of us (sportsman) in NM is we do enjoy picking out single issues, and attacking each other on them, based upon our own perspectives. Healthy conflict and debate is critical to understanding others views, and the reasons behind those perspectives. However, as stated above, when it festers into a situation, where we are divided, it makes it hard to go forward, even with things we can all agree on. An example would be issues relating to habitat improvement, the decline of the deer population, a dis-regard for wildlife, and protecting our hunting rights. These are just examples, that i feel all of us could agree on, and how we influence decisions relating to these topics, could hopefully breed open dialogue where we could discuss and have more beneficial conversations about the topics that we may have differing views on, in a respectful and constructive manner. Also to comment about the wildlife federation being the only sportsman group that attends these meetings, that is not true. The New Mexico Council of Outfitters and guides also attends these meetings as well (full disclosure i am involved with this organization). While i know that they may not represent the views of all, it is another sportsman group that is involved, and active when it comes to having a voice other then the anti?s. I encourage everyone, myself included, instead of making remarks based upon your own personal perspective, to at least grasp as to why those with another perspective also feel equally passionate about their views. The best thing we can do as sportsman is recognize each others differences and be respectful and maintain a unified front on so many of these issues within our sub-culture of outdoorsman that should be very agreeable to all.

-Hunting for an experience

 

[greatwestern]

Nah, come on J, you know it aint personal...if you were present on your own account, then good for you. But I have always had a hard time distinguishing between your personal view and that of the ORG you represent? I hope you can understand how that might be probable for many folks no? Look back a your track record here if you need a reminder

To the others that speak of "divisiveness"...NMWF causes such more than any other entity out there. Wolves in sheeps clothing to be sure. Should we start a list??

I agree that we SHOULD strive to remain united, but when a fox is amongst the chickens, what do ya do then?

I call bullshit

NMWF has ZERO accountability, a two faced rat fink organization if there ever was one

I like ya Jason, just think you've fallen in with the wrong crowd of wanna be politicians.

505, thanks for the offer and likewise, if your ever up this way hit me up and we'll go have ourselves a cold one!

 

[NMPaul]

Hope some hunters can make this meeting. It always seems the antis are way more organized than hunters.

I agree with most of Jasons post. I do not know about the elk tag numbers mentions. I do not know if those include tags given to RO that are not used.
I know several RO situations where they do not hunt all the tags given.

That I consider to be a good thing. In most situations I think tag numbers could be cut, especially when it comes to Mule deer.

 

[flyfishmadison]

Hank4elk,

I have a question about the eplus tags not being skimmed off the top. If they didn't give the ranchers unit wide tags wouldn't those be available to be added to the draw? That seems like in a way it is taking tags away from the public draw. Good or bad that seems like skimmed off the top to me.

Serious question, not trying to take a jab at you or anyone else.

Andy

 

[WapitiBob]

There is currently no mechanism in place to provide for LO tags not given to ranchers, to automatically be placed in the public draw. There is no "skimming off the top".

 

[NMPaul]

>Hank4elk,
>
>I have a question about the
>eplus tags not being skimmed
>off the top. If they
>didn't give the ranchers unit
>wide tags wouldn't those be
>available to be added to
>the draw? That seems
>like in a way it
>is taking tags away from
>the public draw. Good or
>bad that seems like skimmed
>off the top to me.
>
>
>Serious question, not trying to take
>a jab at you or
>anyone else.
>
>Andy

Andy, one thing to consider on this. Some of the large ranches where the elk are being managed. (this means that efforts have been made to keep water year round, the ranch is large enough that it does not feel pressure from the regular hunting seasons etc.) have become refuges for elk. I can think of at least 3 huge ranches (10,000 acres or more) in unit 34. Sure we would all like to go there and hunt, but, I think a few sanctuaries in a unit like that help the population of animals. These ranches often get assigned tags, and many are not used.
This of course is not the case for all ranches. And the ones I am thinking of are all Ranch only tags.

We have elk hunting opportunities that are IMO about as good as they are gonna get. The Residents get ALL of the cow tags, and most of the bull tags. It is a great state to live in if you are a hunter.
Certainly there are some disparities, but, considering all the different squeaky wheels, the fact that we are working through a bureaucracy, it is not as bad as some may have you believe.

 

[ELKMAN]

I think the opposite can happen with elk "refuges" in some situations.

For example, unit 9 has some big ranches that do not use all of their cow tags. Game and Fish will fly over and do a survey, and they count all the elk. A large percentage of those elk stay on those ranches especially during the seasons. Game and fish then sets the seasons numbers based on those numbers, hence slaughtering the public land with cow tags.

I have heard people suggest landowners should lose bull tags in some situations, if they do not manage the herd with cow tags on their side.

 

[NMPaul]

>I think the opposite can happen
>with elk "refuges" in some
>situations.
>
>For example, unit 9 has some
>big ranches that do not
>use all of their cow
>tags. Game and Fish
>will fly over and do
>a survey, and they count
>all the elk. A
>large percentage of those elk
>stay on those ranches especially
>during the seasons.
>Game and fish then sets
>the seasons numbers based on
>those numbers, hence slaughtering the
>public land with cow tags.
>
>
>I have heard people suggest landowners
>should lose bull tags in
>some situations, if they do
>not manage the herd with
>cow tags on their side.
>
I think that they should differentiate the elk on large ranches from rest of unit. Cows make more elk, and if the rest of the unit is mis managed, then at least there is some "seed" left on some of these ranches, and those elk do go out in the general unit. In most cases cows are killed to control the general population, and normally the comlaints about to many elk come from ranchers. Balancing act for sure.

 

[greatwestern]

What about units that are only RO and supply habitat to to New Mexico's largest elk herd?

Come on Jamaro, whats your take?

Or is this just another one of your insidious posts on behalf of the NMWF?

Quit clowning around man, its getting pretty old no

 

[hank4elk]

LAST EDITED ON Jun-27-15 AT 06:30AM (MST)[p]Carrying capacity on Public Lands is only so much.

Or you'll wind up with UT Gen. Hunt experience for elk or what we have now for deer in NM,not much left....overhunting on public lands.

So how does the G&F make up for lost income from decrease in LO tags (1/3-1/2 CUT in my unit/RO)and adding 100 or so new draw tags to already limited accessable Public Lands to hunt this year?
...my place will be even a bigger safe-haven.
Giving my cow tag to Make a Wish for kids this year....me the greedy tax paying LO.

Only smart thing they did here was cut the deer tags in half.

 

[Bolt Tripper]

I am not on here very often but from what I have seen the only thing Jamaro contributes to this site is to divide rich against poor, land owners vs non-land owners and also divide resident vs. non resident. At the end of the day we are all hunters and do not need this kind of BS.

 

[live4muleys]

Agree with Barbarados

 

[joesikora]

Barbarados, I totally agree!
jamaro will not be happy until only Residents get tags! That's why I stop applying in NM and it breaks my heart. What kills me is that most of the land is Federal not State but that's a different argument, and it's to late in the evening for getting my blood pressure up.

Thanks for your post
Joe

"Sometimes you do things wrong for so long you
think their right" - 2001
"I can't argue with honesty" - 2005
-Joe E Sikora