Terk Overturned

J

jamaro

Guest
GOOD DAY FOR RESIDENT HUNTERS..

Huge news this morning -- a federal judge has overturned the Terk v. Gordon injunction, which has prevented NMDGF from applying the NM resident quota law to oryx, ibex and bighorn sheep. NMWF was instrumental in getting Game and Fish to take the issue to court, and today it paid off.

AWESOME....
J-
 
That's awesome!! Now we hopefully won't have 16 out or 17 BHS tags going to non-residents. Might make it possible for a resident to maybe draw a tag once in their life.
 
>That's awesome!! Now we hopefully won't
>have 16 out or 17
>BHS tags going to non-residents.
>Might make it possible for
>a resident to maybe draw
>a tag once in their
>life.


Not likely, 3,000 resident apps and 37 tags.
 
Per the quota statute that was the result of SB196. It's pretty straightforward that the quota applies per hunt code and that if the quota percentage yields a fraction of .5 or greater the number of licenses rounds up to the next whole number, less than .5 the number of licenses rounds down to the next whole number. By that, there would need to be a minimum of 5 tags in a hunt code for there to be an outfitter tag. There would need to be 9 tags in a hunt code for there to be a nonresident tag. The only hunt code that has enough tags for a nonres or outfitter tag is Latirs ewe hunt.

The only way around it would to be to put all the sheep tags in one hunt code (or groups of hunt codes to get above the 5 or 9 tags required to "generate" a nonres and/or outfitter tag) and then assign specific hunts to applicants that draw. It might take legislation to create special rules for sheep quotas for the resident/nonresident/outfitter tags.

This is going to be weird.
 
The system may have not been totally fair to residents but I hope you guys are ready to pull your weight.The game department is already short cash and now when they get 161 instead of 3180 for the tag who does that help.Plus ibex 103 compared to 1610.I bet when there was outside funding to help grow the herds no one was turning down money from out of state groups or people.Just another group that fights for what they want for there state not what is best for the wildlife we all want to hunt.Just another example of hunters hurting all hunters rights.For the record it does not affect me I dont put in for those hunts.Just believe a fair system need to be put in place for all states that supports all hunters like a 75/25 split.Not a million raffle tags that have no way of showing how they are helping the cause.Landowner tags should be given only to those that give back to earn them.Give tags to get land opened or give access to water on private land.With some thinking and planning we would all win if we worked together more.Just my two cents
 
This is great!!!!
I see Resident tag fees jumping significantly to offset the loss of revenue. Be careful what you wish for.
I wont be sweatin it, too many options.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-24-14 AT 04:15PM (MST)[p]This needed to be overturned. Thanks to those that fought to get this done.

I am sure there will be revenue issues, but, they will have to be dealt with like any other revenue issues.

Deer tag prices should be doubled, mostly because the number of tags issued should be cut in half for starts.
 
This news is like fire! I just got the Department email and it's all ready posted and commented on.

I wonder what this will do to Dptmt. funds, time will tell.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-24-14 AT 04:27PM (MST)[p]Goes into effect for 2014

Court ruling gives New Mexico resident hunters better odds in drawings for bighorn sheep, oryx and ibex
ALBUQUERQUE ? New Mexico resident hunters scored a big victory Monday with a U.S. District Court ruling that allows the Department of Game and Fish to reinstate quotas that give state residents a big advantage over nonresidents when applying for bighorn sheep, oryx and ibex hunting licenses.
?This is an important decision and a huge win for New Mexico hunters,? said Paul Kienzle, newly elected chairman of the State Game Commission. ?It's been a long fight, but New Mexicans now have a good shot at those quality hunts, as intended by the governor and the state legislature.?
Monday?s ruling by Chief U.S. District Judge Christina Armijo vacated a 1977 injunction that prohibited the Department from applying preferential quotas that benefited state residents in the drawings for bighorn sheep, oryx and ibex licenses. Because of that injunction, nonresident hunters enjoyed equal odds with residents in the annual drawings.
Beginning with this year?s draw, resident hunters who apply for bighorn sheep, oryx and ibex licenses will enjoy the same odds as those who applied for any other big-game species. Currently, state residents receive 84 percent of all public licenses issued through drawings. Nonresidents receive 6 percent and hunters using outfitters ? residents and nonresidents ? qualify for 10 percent of public licenses. The application deadline for 2014-15 big-game licenses was March 19.
?The injunction has prevented the Department from complying with state law to the detriment of New Mexico residents and in opposition to the will of the governor and the legislature,? Department Legal Counsel Allison Marks said. ?Judge Armijo unequivocally found New Mexico?s statutory quota does not violate federal law. The judge?s quick decision affords the Department the opportunity to make immediate changes to the draw system in order to comply with state law.?
Several conservation organizations supported the Department's motion to vacate the injunction. They included United Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife, the New Mexico Chapter of the Wild Sheep Foundation, the New Mexico Wildlife Federation and the Southern New Mexico Chapter of Safari Club International.
The injunction applied only to bighorn sheep, oryx and ibex because at the time of the legal challenge, they were the only species of big game in New Mexico for which the State Game Commission provided an in-state preference for license allocation. The injunction was issued in connection with a 1974 lawsuit by David B. Terk, a Texas resident and hunter. Terk challenged New Mexico?s license allocation system that gave him a lower chance of drawing a license than state residents would enjoy.
 
Nice they decided to do this AFTER the NRs sent in all their money this year and now have ZERO chance at these tags that they just sent in thousands of dollars for.
I agree the previous lack of controlled allocation was not fair to residents but to change it right after the application deadline is not fair either.
 
Well I Da#n sure would HAVE NOT applied if I had known this. Havent applied since 2010. Oh well, looks like my last hoorah in NM. If i do draw I"ll be a plundering and pillaging!!!
 
SDB
We had that discussion internally and I think the general concenus was that the Dept has issued refunds which at the time was against the law and they have made changes on the fly in the past that they have the authority to do this.. That being said consider there is no point system in NM you still have better odds than someone trying to get a tag in a state with a point system.
 
That being
>said consider there is no
>point system in NM you
>still have better odds than
>someone trying to get a
>tag in a state with
>a point system.


Which state with a point system would that be? I don't think you thought that statement through.
 
NM should make a deal with CO and Wy to allow their residents the opportunity to apply in the other states as residents. That would be a win for everyone!!
 
AZ....
you can get a tag in NM every year.. In AZ, you don't even have a chance or they less than NM's...
 
>AZ....
>you can get a tag in
>NM every year.. In AZ,
>you don't even have a
>chance or they less than
>NM's...


We are talking sheep, ibex and oryx tags here. Since there are no ibex and oryx in other states, I can only assume your comment was in reference to drawing a sheep tag in states with point systems. You will be hard pressed to find a harder state to draw a sheep tag as a non-resident based on current application numbers and the new quotas.
 
jamaro

"That being said consider there is no point system in NM you still have better odds than someone trying to get a tag in a state with a point system."

Please explain to me how I have a better chance than other states now that I have ZERO chance!

As already stated there needs to be a unit with "at least" 9 tags in order for a DIY NR to have an opportunity at a tag. It takes a "at least" 5 tags in a unit for a tag to be issued in the guided draw. Last time I checked, none of the sheep units have 5 or more tags.

Since there was no "outfitter draw" this year, we can only hope that they "might" give the NR's 1 of the 4 tags in the Wheeler or Latir units (16% of 4 equals 0.64 which would round up to 1 tag). But they didn't address how they will handle the outfitter draw issue.

However, I won't hold my breath on hope that NR's get one of the ram tags in Wheeler or Latir as the state law says that residents get "at least" 84% which means that if they only gave 3 tags to residents then that would be less than 84%.
 
Would have been really nice to have known this before I dumped almost $13,000 into sheep applicaitons for my 3 sons and myself with no chance at a tag!
Also wouldn't have done the ibex either with the slim odds that will now occur.

Like I said before i don't dissagree with them going to a quota (long overdue) but just PO'd with the the way they handled it right after the aplicaitons were due. The "right" thing to do would have been to wait and implement it in 2015.
 
>Would have been really nice to
>have known this before I
>dumped almost $13,000 into sheep
>applicaitons for my 3 sons
>and myself with no chance
>at a tag!
>Also wouldn't have done the ibex
>either with the slim odds
>that will now occur.
>
>Like I said before i don't
>dissagree with them going to
>a quota (long overdue) but
>just PO'd with the the
>way they handled it right
>after the aplicaitons were due.
> The "right" thing to
>do would have been to
>wait and implement it in
>2015.
+1
 
Absolute BS.
They are going to get a lawsuit against them if they do not offer a chance for those who already applied to get an immediate refund. You NM guys need to understand that this is a lot of money for us NR to front and then be held until after the draw. To change the rules after they locked up our money is BS.
I advise the gentleman that fronted the money for his kids to call his credit card company and file to get the charge reversed. They took your money for something that was advertised as something else.
 
I agree it screwed NRs not to have the law changed until after the deadline. I'd be upset as well.

nmhntr,
Throw MT into that list and your idea sounds great. Would probably open a huge can of worms though.
 
It's borderline FRAUD waiting until after the deadline. I just sent them a nasty-gram voicing my concerns of the legalities of this matter. I urge EVERY other EVILNR to do the same!!!
Raise hell and throw rocks!!!! BE HEARD.
 
This is GREAT news for Residents of NM.

36+ years of this law affecting residents from not being able to hunt their sheep is long overdue.

Yes, we may have to front more money but as Residents it will be worth it to finally be able to hunt sheep.

Non-Res. I know you guys are pissed but just think how we as resident's have felt getting screwed by this law that got shoved down our throat 36+ years ago up until now, what really still sucks is that we as residents did not get a chance to hunt and take the 185+ Desert's and Rocky's that have been killed by non-res. Maybe just maybe there might be one or two monster rams left for a resident to get his/her name in the books.

NMBIGHORN
 
Everyone had the same shot at drawing at least with the old system.There were just more non resident applying so the odds were what they were.I just hope since a non resident will not be able to draw a tag all the outside funding stops.With out a doubt the lose of funds on that amount of tags could cost the state a few officers to.But you can now hunt what the poacher dont get.Last thing the state needs is less funding.Anyone who thinks the new rule with zero tags going to non res is good is crazy and forgets the sheep were helped back to the size herds there now with outside funds also.I am not so sure if sued now the draw would changed this year.The quote of tag issued to everyone maybe able to change but once the money was taken with rules in place that may not be total legal to do.I really hope this does not back fire on the great state of new mexico long term.It is my favorite state to hunt.If I knew I could get work there I would move there in a second.
 
nmbighorn,

Its about implementing the law after a bunch of NR's already fronted the money.

Most dont have a problem with New Mexico Residents sticking it to the NR's, just let us know prior to fronting a pile of cash for no chance at a tag.
 
To NM residents- I am happy for your favorable court ruling.
To all of you NR hunters-You have just been defrauded by the NMDFG, and should put the pressure on for refunds and application fees. If they don't, it will be time for some good old legal action.
 
>nmbighorn,
>
>Its about implementing the law after
>a bunch of NR's already
>fronted the money.
>
>Most dont have a problem with
>New Mexico Residents sticking it
>to the NR's, just let
>us know prior to fronting
>a pile of cash for
>no chance at a tag.
>
+1 That's what the problem is !
 
Just so everyone knows.. I have been on the phone with Game and Fish a few times today and while they stand steadfast on the quota being applied this year they are trying to come up with a solution that will easy the drama over this...

I have a call setup with them in the am when they have a solution...

J-
 
btw the scenario that Brandon described above already happens and the dept has a way with dealing with it. There are several hunt codes that have less than 10 tags.. I ask the dept if they would follow the same procedure and they wouldn't give me an official answer... SO stay tuned.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-24-14 AT 07:18PM (MST)[p]I'll be needing a tag or a FULL REFUND!!!!
Typical NM BS!!!!!
I havent applied since 2010 and wish I hadnt this year.
 
Yep, full refund, of all fees.

I'll be asking for my pronghorn fees to be refunded as well...I'm in full boycott NM mode.

Spineless residents stuck it to NR's with SB196 when the real problem is landowner tags and outfitter sponsored tags.

Then this.

I wont be applying in NM again unless the Residents grow a set of balls..
 
Unfortunately, this law was overturned in the courts it was not a direct department decision. The department has to fulfill the decision of the court immediately, so yes this change will affect non-res by court order
 
>Just so everyone knows.. I have
>been on the phone with
>Game and Fish a few
>times today and while they
>stand steadfast on the quota
>being applied this year they
>are trying to come up
>with a solution that will
>easy the drama over this...
>
>
>I have a call setup with
>them in the am when
>they have a solution...
>
>J-

Let me know when they open the outfitter pool. The outfitter pool will likely have better odds than the pre-2014 mixed pool odds for Oryx. But BHS will probably be much worse. Ibex could go either way, but will likely be worse as well. Non-resident, non-guided hnters will of course be hosed.
 
Bottom line, call your credit card company and file a dispute. There is no possible way the CC company would deny your claim and NM can pound sand for misrepresenting a high dollar transaction.
 
So my question is, who are you guys going to sue? The court? It wasn't the game dept who just all of a sudden changed the rules. It was the court!.
 
Guys if you want your refund immediately just log in to your account and delete your app., that is if you applied with a CC
 
All I can say is, it's about time!!! I know all the NR's are upset, but as a resident I'm excited to finally have a decent chance at a great tag in my home state!
 
jamaro

"btw the scenario that Brandon described above already happens and the dept has a way with dealing with it. There are several hunt codes that have less than 10 tags.. I ask the dept if they would follow the same procedure and they wouldn't give me an official answer... SO stay tuned."

I assume you are referring to me?

If so, I wouldn't put a lot of faith in how the NMGF implements the law and, as you say "deals with it". For example, look at how they give the shaft to the NR DIY youth in the elk tag allocation. Units 16C, 16E, 23, 13, 15, and 17 all have 25 available tags. State law says 6% go to NR which is 1.5 tags. State law says fractions of 0.5 and up get rounded up. However they round down every time and only issue 1 tag!! On the Outfitter side in these same units 10% equates to 2.5 tags yet for the outfitter tags they round up to 3 every time!!!
Although these 6 "potential" tags don't sound like much, it is a huge deal when you consider that only 14 total tags are issued to NR DIY youth (43%).

I have emailed them and talked with them on the phone for two consecutive years. they claim that that outfitter pool get satisfied "First" and "Then" the NR pool. They certainly can't read thier own law correctly because it states "AND" and not "THEN" for the criteria.

Here is the actual state law that in my opinion is being implemented illegally in favor of the outfitters:

Beginning with the licenses issued from a special drawing for a hunt code that commences on or after April 1, 2012:
(1) licenses shall be issued as follows:
(a) ten percent of the licenses to be drawn by nonresidents and residents who will be contracted with a New Mexico outfitter prior to application; AND
(b) six percent of the licenses to be drawn by nonresidents who are not required to be contracted with an outfitter; and
(2) a minimum of eighty-four percent of the licenses shall be issued to residents of New Mexico.
 
As far as the timing goes, it was a lawsuit. There was no way to know when the Judge would rule. It was well publicized on the NM Game and Fish website before you applied that the Dept had filed suit to overturn the injunction that prevented the quotas on the 3 species. On the day you applied there was no quota. The law changed afterwards.

I have applied in MT for sheep for many years. Under their system you have to send a money order. No credit card. Real cash. They don't guarantee that there will be any nonresident tags in the certain hunt codes. They only say there "may" be nonresident tags. Several times I have applied in a unit only to find out after the fact that there ended up being zero nonres tags avail for the unit. Impossible to have drawn.
 
Did your odds jump from 1% to 3%? Good luck.

I don't care they changed the law. Just give me the option of a refund right now or change the law next year.
 
abqbw

"As far as the timing goes, it was a lawsuit. There was no way to know when the Judge would rule. It was well publicized on the NM Game and Fish website before you applied that the Dept had filed suit to overturn the injunction that prevented the quotas on the 3 species. On the day you applied there was no quota. The law changed afterwards. "

I didn't see anything about this when I applied on line. If it was well pblicized, I just went on their website and couldn't find it anywhere.

"I have applied in MT for sheep for many years. Under their system you have to send a money order. No credit card. Real cash. They don't guarantee that there will be any nonresident tags in the certain hunt codes. They only say there "may" be nonresident tags. Several times I have applied in a unit only to find out after the fact that there ended up being zero nonres tags avail for the unit. Impossible to have drawn."

This is a completely different situation than MT. They have quotas published, and they even state that there is no Res vs NR allocation. We knew at the time we applied how many tags were potentially available. Now after we have applied NONE of them will be available. If you had done appropriate research in MT you could easily figure out which units would likely have tags available. I have applied there for a dozen years and never "missed". It was your choice to gamble on a iffy unit choice.
 
>If we delete our application, do
>we get the $20 app
>fee too?


You will if you dispute the transaction with your credit card company. Trust me I know that in all cases the merchant is always in the wrong until proven otherwise by the CC companies.
File a dispute with your CC company and tell them that you paid for something that was advertised far far different.
 
Legal action.... blah blah blah.

Gonna sue..... blah blah blah.


To sue you have to have damages worth suing for.

Having a few grand tied up on a credit card for 2 months is not damages.

Interest??? $50 ????

Quit being drama queens.

Was the timing bad? Yes.

Is NMGF famous for bad timing and some bad decisions? Yup

Get over it.

It was a stupid law for a long time, that had no equal in any western states.

Move on...
 
Maybe they should limit NR to outfitters only so that all the NR have the same chances and they will stop whining about being "defrauded". And they wouldn't have to cry over the app fees.. That would shut em up!! All the NR that are complaining will be the same folk complaining about something else next yea and I'd bet 99% of them will apply for tags next year.. I agree with you NMPAUL let's move on.
 
I re read my post, and I came across like an ahole, but, come on.

If you are putting in for a hunt that you have 0.05% chance of drawing and now you have 0.01% chance are you really counting on drawing?

You are buying a lottery ticket with almost impossible odds, and now they are a little more impossible.

Timing was horrible. What if they had announced 2 weeks before the deadline, then all the folks that had already applied would be mad.
 
bighorn
June 2013 wow thanks!! I guess I don't read every detail on the website. Been festering over this for that long but don't post anything in the brochure or in the on-line applicaition?

Paul
It's about timing and what is right and wrong. Last year there were 3,085 NR sheep applicants. At $20 each in non-refundable fees that is $61,700 for absolutely "ZERO" chance at a tag. I'm sorry if I'm whining but I think that is just wrong.
 
As far as I'm concerned New Mexico has made a very poor decision. If you're a resident- great you finally "won" this one. But if you ever find yourself in the place that us Nonresidents are right now, I can assure you, you would not be happy.

I wouldn't have spent 7k on apps with this in effect. This is not right and I'm sure we have not heard the last of it. As far as I'm concerned New Mexico is doing a really poor job of taking care of their customers. For those of you (residents) who say raise our prices and we will cover the deficit, I don't think you really comprehend that other residents want to hunt and it needs to be affordable for them.

I would like to see more states with the 75/25 ratio, but I doubt you'll ever see any states moving toward that model.
 
Paul
I was just thinking about your comment on the odds of drawing. The odds last year were on "average" about 0.6% for drawing a sheep tag. A couple years ago I drew a 16D rifle elk tag with odds of only 0.3% so heck yea I believe the saying that you won't draw if you don't apply!! We all can dream anyway.

Am I dissapointed in the recent events - yes. Am I gonna threaten a lawsuit - no. Am I gonna boycott NM in the future - no.
I think we are all just wound up in the season of drawing tags and expressing our feelings.

I still love the great state of NM. I still beleive that NM has some of the best elk and antelope hunting in the US. I still feel that NM has some of the friendliest people I have ever met in the field. and I still believe the NMGF does a great job of managing their herds.

Good luck to everyone in the upcoming draws.
 
As a NR I was aware that NM was working on getting the Terk ruling overturned but was shocked that they are implementing it this year AFTER the draw deadline.

I sent an e-mail to NMG&F this afternoon requesting clarification on the handling of this year's draw and whether they will be offering a refund of the $20 application fee paid for my Ibex, Sheep, and Oryx applications.

I think it would be the honorable thing for NM to do if they intend to impose the SB196 quotas this year...

Horniac
 
Thanks for reposting Paul. I already said that I was happy for NM residents. Now I don't know what will happen. But with the rules they have set for the other species, this is what I see. I am going to use Oryx (Hunt 104) 49 permits (funny number for sure) Residents-42 Outfitter pool-5 (which will go to residents if undersubscribed) NONResidents-2.
Last years odds for NR=3.6%
This years odds with same pool. NR= .66%
My odds just went down 82%.
All Bighorn Sheep go to 0%.
Ibex last year-1 in 148.
Ibex this year-1 in 1594.
My opinion is an option for a total refund.
 
It's super lame they waited to collect everyone's money, refund or not, and then change everything around. I guess it's a huge victory to some, but the timing of it all stinks really bad. There may have been a victory here but it's out shined by the timing of it. Those that ask for refunds should also get interest on their money, even if it's a dollar. Lame time to do this and the organization that pushed this thru could have been more thorough with the implementation of it.
 
SDBugler,


My point of bringing up MT is that it is an example of a drawing where a nonresident can send all their money in and pick a published hunt code for which they are eligible to apply as a nonresident and not end up in a drawing for any tag.

In MT they tell Nonres what sheep districts to apply in based on what they term "tenative" quotas "could change". Sometimes a district they tell us we can apply in ends up not having a nonresident tag. To wit, in 2012,HD 121-00. On the nonres app form they listed 121-00 for nonres. When they set the actual quotas AFTER 502 NR applied for this HD 121-00 there was no nonres tag available for HD 121-00. They all sent in their refundable $755 tag money (money order or cashier's check, no credit card) paid the nonrefundable $10 conservation license fee and $5 app fee, may have paid another optional $20 bonus point fee, and didn't end up being in the drawing for a sheep tag (unless they had a ewe tag as their second choice and there was a quota for a ewe tag for which they applied.)

If in the 2012 drawing you were able to figure out in advance that they would drop the published tentative quota of 10 tags for hunt code 121-00 by 60% to an actual tag quota of 4, thereby reducing the quota for the region 1 from 42 tags to 36 tags and thereby reducing the max nonresident tag quota for region 1 from 4 to 3, AND that out of the four hunt codes available for nonresidents to apply in region 1 that they would pull the nonres tag out of hunt code 121-00 instead of 122-00, 122-30, or 123-00, then you know something or someone I don't know.
 
They (NM) didn't "wait".

When NM published the proclamation and when the application deadline passed, the Terk injunction was in effect. Subsequently, on March 24 a US District Court Memorandum Opinion and Order was signed by the Chief United States District Judge for the District of NM, M. Christina Armijo that says "Wherefore, It is Hereby Ordered that Defendants' Second Motion for Relief from Judgement (DOC 83) is granted and that the Court's October 28, 1977 Judgement and Order (Doc 73) is vacated. So ordered this 24th day of March, 2014". They order does not say that NM can start applying the quota when they get around to it or if they feel like it.

Once the Judge signed the order it would be illegal under State law (17-3-16) for NM NOT to apply the quota to Bighorn Sheep, Ibex and Oryx. The Dept of Game and Fish didn't just decide to slap on the quotas after everyone applied. There is no way NM could have known in advance of the drawing if the order would be issued before the drawing and what the outcome would be. If NM had posted a warning that there "might" be a quota applied before the applications were due and then the order wasn't issued before the drawing or NM lost, everyone would have gone ballistic if they didn't apply because they were worried that there "might" be a quota.

Sure, it sucks for nonresidents, but it isn't devious on the part of NM. NM Game and Fish published on their website that they had filed suit to have the Terk injunction removed and have the quota apply to Bighorn Sheep, Ibex, and Oryx. That was your notice that your applications for these species were in peril before you sent them in. This was not done in the dark.

The Statute concerning quotas for draw tags (17-3-16) is specific about how quotas are to be calculated. There is no wiggle room for NM Game and Fish. They must be calculated by hunt code (17-3-16 B) "Beginning with licenses issued from a special drawing for a hunt code that commences on or after April 1, 2012:"

17-3-16 is available for download on NM Game and Fish's website.

http://www.wildlife.state.nm.us/enforcement/guide_outfitter/NMStateStatute.pdf
 
I see what you mean. At 9 outfitters would get one tag (.9 rounded up to 1), and residents would get 8 (7.56 rounded up to 8) nonres at .54 should be rounded up to 1 but that would put the tags over the limit.

But I don't think its 13. I think its 10. At 10 Res is 8.40, rounded down to 8, nonres is .6 rounded up to 1, and outfitter is 1.00.
 
abqbw

"In MT they tell Nonres what sheep districts to apply in based on what they term "tenative" quotas "could change". Sometimes a district they tell us we can apply in ends up not having a nonresident tag. To wit, in 2012,HD 121-00. On the nonres app form they listed 121-00 for nonres. When they set the actual quotas AFTER 502 NR applied for this HD 121-00 there was no nonres tag available for HD 121-00. They all sent in their refundable $755 tag money (money order or cashier's check, no credit card) paid the nonrefundable $10 conservation license fee and $5 app fee, may have paid another optional $20 bonus point fee, and didn't end up being in the drawing for a sheep tag (unless they had a ewe tag as their second choice and there was a quota for a ewe tag for which they applied.)

If in the 2012 drawing you were able to figure out in advance that they would drop the published tentative quota of 10 tags for hunt code 121-00 by 60% to an actual tag quota of 4, thereby reducing the quota for the region 1 from 42 tags to 36 tags and thereby reducing the max nonresident tag quota for region 1 from 4 to 3, AND that out of the four hunt codes available for nonresidents to apply in region 1 that they would pull the nonres tag out of hunt code 121-00 instead of 122-00, 122-30, or 123-00, then you know something or someone I don't know."

MT has a 10% max quota "per region" for NR. They didn't pull the NR tag from code 121-00, but rather the NR quota was met for the entire region before a NR drew a tag in that sub-unit. Those NR's that applied for 121-00 still had a chance at a tag. Its just that the "regional" quaota for region 1 was met before any of them drew a tag in that sub-unit of region 1. They all technically were in the drawing and had a chance to draw a tag. In MT you need to look not only at the sub-unit demand and tentative quota, but also the regional demand and tentative quota. there are only two ways that you would NOT be eligible - one is if they eliminated the tags in the sub-unit that you were applying for and the second is if they had less than 10 tags in the region. In MT a NR is not only in competition with all other applicants in the sub-unit but also competing with all the NR applicants in the "regional NR quota drawing". Therefore my comment about research applies.
 
abqbw

"The Statute concerning quotas for draw tags (17-3-16) is specific about how quotas are to be calculated. There is no wiggle room for NM Game and Fish. They must be calculated by hunt code (17-3-16 B) "Beginning with licenses issued from a special drawing for a hunt code that commences on or after April 1, 2012:""

Actually the state does have "wiggle room" and if you read my post #53 above you will see an example of how they are "in my opinion" missallocating tags to the outfitter pool at the expense of the NR pool. The key point of my argument is that statue 17-3-16B phrase 1.a ends with the work "and" and not "then". NMGF has decided upon themselves to interpret this as 1.a (outfitters) gets drawn FIRST and THEN 1.b (NR).

They have even indicated to me that they run the outfitter draw "first" and then run the NR draw. They said that to round up the .5 tag for both pools would exceed the 84% quota for residents and therefore they round down the NR tag allocation. In my opinion the draws should be run simultaneously and whichever pool draws the "extra" rounded up tag first should get it. The way they run the draw, they have already decided that the outfitter will always get the advantage of the rounded up tag. I think that is "wiggle".
 
I am just glad everyone in new mexico does not act like some residents on this thread.If something even less serious then this happen to must of you the whining would be as bad or worse.Some guys are out thousands ,paying interest ,out fees and to bad for them I now may get a tag so all is good.How do you think some are feeling who did not put in this year because they thought why do it the odss stink anyway.If there trying to come up with a way to fix it for this year then they could have just lefted it like it is also.I see a lot of fakes pretending to be for hunting rights that are just about themselves.
 
I used to apply in 11 states, I am now down to 6. The one thing I have seen, is that no matter what crap some of these states come up with people keep applying.
There are more people interested in hunting out of state and less opportunities.
You will not please everyone.

The comment that someone is out thousands of dollars makes no sense to me.
How are you out thousands of dollars if you will get your refund in a couple months?

Most transaction fees on Credit card cash advances are a one time fee of 3% or 4% and 0% apr. Or if you just charged it, unless you are in really bad standings it would be 12-14% apr for the length of time you have the money out. Maybe a couple hundred bucks.
 
This is great news! Now my odds of drawing went from slim to none to slightly less slim to none. But I keep applying - someone's got to draw!
 
WOW this really got things moving...Terk was a bad law and I'm happy it was finally overturned. Now we need to overturn the Jennings law. The R vs NR is very entertaining keep em coming...
Jack
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-25-14 AT 07:32AM (MST)[p]>I re read my post, and
>I came across like an
>ahole, but, come on.
>
>If you are putting in for
>a hunt that you have
>0.05% chance of drawing and
>now you have 0.01% chance
>are you really counting on
>drawing?
>
>You are buying a lottery ticket
>with almost impossible odds, and
>now they are a little
>more impossible.
>
>Timing was horrible. What if
>they had announced 2 weeks
>before the deadline, then all
>the folks that had already
>applied would be mad.

You wait until it's a new application period to apply the changes -- that's what they should have done. There's a big difference between 1% or .5% or .05% and ZERO which is what the chances of drawing most of these units has now gone to for NRs. Just to say it another way, there's a huge difference between ALMOST impossible and DEFINITELY impossible I read on here where someone has fronted $13,000 for him and his kid's applications. Between BHS, ibex, and oryx I believe I'm at $6,400 in outstanding applications. Giving someone that kind of money for no chance at drawing or no bonus point is ridiculous.
 
Was the outfitter pool even an option on the draw? Draw odds show no outfitter applications the last few years for sheep. It wouldn't have made a difference until just now, after the deadline. Maybe an acceptable compromise would be to just one time allow that 10% to go to the nonresident pool? Maybe allow applicants to make that selection or withdraw for immediate refund of all fees or just stay in as is? Of course, that might delay things so they keep the cash longer, that might happen anyway. :)
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-25-14 AT 08:10AM (MST)[p]The best thing Game and Fish can do now is run the draw as the law requires, then refund the application fees of the NR applicants and eat credit card fees.

Does not even need to be in that order.
 
The money out or anything to do with the money is this.They went in thinking they had a chance to draw be it slim or not they had the chance.Now with the law they have no chance at all.Getting the refund gets there money back but fees will be there.Be it 1 dollar or a few hundred how is that right when the rules changed after the fact.Because someone has the money to put in the draw does not make it right for them to be out any money if they can't draw plan and simple.No other person has the right to say big deal there out alittle but they would not have drawn anyway.If this mistake would have happened and hurt any residents the crying would be the same.Stop looking at it as a non res vs res. as wrong is wrong.The we gain who cares about the other guy is why we are still fighting the anti and people againist hunting.Everyone just looks out for themselves when it comes to tags anymore.A bad law replaced by another unfair bad law does no one any good.
 
>The money out or anything to
>do with the money is
>this.They went in thinking they
>had a chance to draw
>be it slim or not
>they had the chance.Now with
>the law they have no
>chance at all.Getting the refund
>gets there money back but
>fees will be there.Be it
>1 dollar or a few
>hundred how is that right
>when the rules changed after
>the fact.Because someone has the
>money to put in the
>draw does not make it
>right for them to be
>out any money if they
>can't draw plan and simple.No
>other person has the right
>to say big deal there
>out alittle but they would
>not have drawn anyway.If this
>mistake would have happened and
>hurt any residents the crying
>would be the same.Stop looking
>at it as a non
>res vs res. as wrong
>is wrong.The we gain who
>cares about the other guy
>is why we are still
>fighting the anti and people
>againist hunting.Everyone just looks out
>for themselves when it comes
>to tags anymore.A bad law
>replaced by another unfair bad
>law does no one any
>good.

Billc, I agree if a NR applied for a hunt (sheep) that they have no chance of drawing they should get a full and immediate refund. I do not think there is a fair way to refund credit card fees.
Oryx & Ibex, I assume they will qualify for hunts.

No question it is a bad business, but, if the court required them to instate it, there is not much they could have done.
 
Bad timing? Yeah,but I'm glad. I might even apply now someday.
I used to apply and hunt in several western states.
I never got refunds for all those app. fees and points that the rules changed after years of applying in other states. I had to start paying way higher fees and a Lic. that more than doubled and was now required before I drew. Point creep was getting worse every year.
So I gave up and don't apply anymore,just home state,NM.

Also, no one ever knows the real odds of drawing a tag for any given year. That tag I applied for with 3% odds the year before, could be way lower or higher. It depends on how many apply this year. So now instead of 1200 folks applying for 50 tags like last year,there is 2000. My odds just went way down. Only 600 folks applied for it and my odds went way up.

NM Lic. cost and app. fees are still less than most any state I can think of,even for non-res. hunters.
 
If the change is mandated to happen for the 2014 draw, then NMDGF may want to revise their press release. It says "allows", not "must". See below.

New Mexico resident hunters scored a big victory Monday with a U.S. District Court ruling that allows the Department of Game and Fish to reinstate quotas that give state residents a big advantage over nonresidents when applying for bighorn sheep, oryx and ibex hunting licenses.
 
I understand new mexico is still the best state I think for us non res. I like the fact I have a chance to draw each year and I decide by my picking of my units how good my chances are.For the other states we all know the games.The point creep and laws that change are always at the begining of the year though.So you decide when fees get to be to much and if you want to stop trying.No other state has just stopped non res from having a chance like this though. Draw odds can change but if you have a 1% or 100% chance you have a chance.This stops even the 1% chance anyone may have had going in.I think we all know the games we most all play drawing tags.Fees go up odds change but this is not the same as this problem.I am no laywer but would bet the g&f could have just waited till next year or ask the court to make the ruling take affect till next year.If you believe they are trying to work something out on the sheep issue to me that means they can still decide the % they must use to draw tags.
 
>I understand new mexico is
>still the best state I
>think for us non res.
>I like the fact I
>have a chance to draw
>each year and I decide
>by my picking of my
>units how good my chances
>are.For the other states we
>all know the games.The point
>creep and laws that change
>are always at the begining
>of the year though.So you
>decide when fees get to
>be to much and if
>you want to stop trying.No
>other state has just stopped
>non res from having a
>chance like this though. Draw
>odds can change but if
>you have a 1% or
>100% chance you have a
>chance.This stops even the 1%
>chance anyone may have had
>going in.I think we all
>know the games we most
>all play drawing tags.Fees go
>up odds change but this
>is not the same as
>this problem.I am no laywer
>but would bet the g&f
>could have just waited till
>next year or ask the
>court to make the ruling
>take affect till next year.If
>you believe they are trying
>to work something out on
>the sheep issue to me
>that means they can still
>decide the % they must
>use to draw tags.
I understand and agree they should have waited,and faced the repercussions (lawsuits,etc..) next year.
I also think there should be no outfitter pool, just R & NR.
...going to hear from some friends on that one.
 
*The banks are making an unjust profit on CC ballances.
**The state has screwed it up for R's for so long in the past.
***The state has screwed it up for NR's this year and the future.

The solution...privitize and go free market. Give ALL the tags to land owners and let them decide how to manage the herds.

"Hows that for a new alternative to all the whining?" says King Soloman. (What't the emoticon for sticking out ones tongue?)
 
As a Wyoming resident who applies each year in NM I am disappointed with yesterday's news but underneath that I do agree that residents should have better drawing odds than nonresidents WITHOUT discounting nonresidents completely.

What frustrates me is how generous WY is with nonresident tag quotas where as other states such as NM and ID are very selfish towards nonresidents. There should be much more "tag reciprocity" between western states, in my opinion.
 
SDBugler,
Look, I really, really don't want to sound rude, but I believe you are incorrect. They did pull the nonres quota of 1 tag from 121-00 before the drawing. Please let me explain. You are correct that only "up to 3" tags were actually available in the drawing in region 1. Since there were only 3 nones tags in the region and 4 hunt codes, at least one nonres hunt code won't have a chance for a tag. However, you are incorrect as far as the reason no nonres drew 121-00 instead of one of the other 3 hunt codes in the region. The reason no nonresident tag was drawn in 121-00 was NOT that nonresidents drew the other 3 region 1 hunt codes first and depleted the regional nonres quota before a 121-00 nonres applicant got lucky or residents drew all the 121-00 tags first. It was because there was not a nonres tag available in 121-00 when the drawing occurred. MT sets the actual "max" nonres quota per hunt code before the drawing is run. Sometimes a hunt code listed on the nonres application form ends up having zero tags available for nonres when the draw is run. Any nonres that applies for one of these hunt codes has exactly zero chance of drawing. The decision on which hunt code will not be drawn in a region by nonresidents due to the 10% regional nonresident cap is made by MT before the drawing occurs every year.

Look at the 2012 draw statistics. The Region 1 tentative NR quota before the draw deadline was "up to 4 tags", 10% of the "tentative" total of 42 tags. That's why there were four region 1 hunt codes listed on your 2012 application form. Then after the application deadline they cut the actual Region 1 tag quota to 36 total (122-00 tag quota was reduced by 6 tags, from 10 to 4). There were now only up to 3 nonres tags in the Region 1 quota, and they were specifically only avail in 122-00, 122-30, and 123-00. In fact, all the region 1 tags that were available to nonres in the draw were drawn. There was not a tag in the 121-00 quota avail for nonres, even though 502 nonres applied for it. Their applications were completely worthless, except to get a bonus point if they paid for it. How do we know this? Look at the draw statistics. They show the nonres quota at the time the drawing was run. The table shows the actual "max" nonres quota per hunt code. You will see that the quota for 121-00 was 0, no tags would ever be awarded for a nonres in 121-00, even if a nonres that applied for 121-00 had the BEST random number of every nonres that applied in the entire region 1, or even the best random number in the entire state, res or nonres in 2012.

No Nonres drew in 304-00 and 622-00 for an entirely different reason. There was was an actual quota of "up to 1 tag" for nonres in each of these hunt codes, but a nonres didn't get lucky enough to draw before residents drew all the tags. Completely different reasons why a nonres didn't draw 121-00 (no quota) vs 304-00 and 622-00 (no luck). The 304-00 and 622-00 nonres applicants would have drawn if they had a better random number than at least one resident that drew.
 
Let's get this straight: Turk was not the law. Turk was an injunction that suspended our states law. The state law has always been in place.

Anyone who has been taking advantage of the Turk injunction to apply for a tag with 'better odds', is no different than an anti-hunter/ pro-wolf person using an injunction to supersede a states right to set hunting regulations on wolf packs.

All these whiners are showing how they simply are Anti-States Rights and anti-freedom.

The big picture: there is another precedent now that states and only states have the right to set law over their animals, just think about it.
 
Maybe NM decided after 37 years of Nonresidents drawing the majority of the sheep tags in NM that they would start as soon as possible to let us residents "catch up". Maybe they will run the draw under the current quota rules (zero ram tags for nonres) for 100 years or so so when they look back 137 years the total nonres tags drawn will be about 10% like most the other states with bighorns. Put that in perspective, it would take 100 years for residents to draw the same percentage of tags as residents of other states with 10%. Maybe you should be thankful for the 37 year run you had instead of the fact that it finally ended. I mean seriously, you are out $20 this year.

I do agree that NM should pass necessary laws to give nonresident and outfitter pools their quota percentage of tags. That's what we should all be focusing on now, how to do that.
 
>As a Wyoming resident who applies
>each year in NM I
>am disappointed with yesterday's news
>but underneath that I do
>agree that residents should have
>better drawing odds than nonresidents
>WITHOUT discounting nonresidents completely.
>
>What frustrates me is how generous
>WY is with nonresident tag
>quotas where as other states
>such as NM and ID
>are very selfish towards nonresidents.
>There should be much more
>"tag reciprocity" between western states,
>in my opinion.
Agree, there should be some equality in numbers, but that is up to the states as I understand it.
NM used to have the best numbers and prices for NR's. 78%-22%. But changed to currant #'s recently. Has to be middle ground.
I think 85-90% R & 10-15% NR would be good.
No outfitter pool,that just ate up a good chunk of NR's chances.

I have many friends that are outfitters, some good, most great at what they do. But I think if they are good at what they do they can get by on their reputations without the pool.
Smart NR and R hunters will hire one if they really want to fill a tag on that once in a lifetime hunt. Or do what most of us do,really put in a effort.

The folks that put in as NR in the draw as stated in Proclamation and had no chance after the decision
should be given FULL refunds. G&F should eat the costs.

NM has great diverse game,and exotics. Not many other states have near the options. Prices are less too.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-25-14 AT 10:55AM (MST)[p]Good for NM residents. But I am glad I did not put in for Oryx again this year. Not going to bother next year either or ever. I guess If hunt another Oryx I will have to spend money in Africa again to do so. Too bad Oryx is better than beef.
 
>Let's get this straight: Turk was
>not the law. Turk was
>an injunction that suspended our
>states law. The state law
>has always been in place.
>
>
>Anyone who has been taking advantage
>of the Turk injunction to
>apply for a tag with
>'better odds', is no different
>than an anti-hunter/ pro-wolf person
>using an injunction to supersede
>a states right to set
>hunting regulations on wolf packs.
>
>
>All these whiners are showing how
>they simply are Anti-States Rights
>and anti-freedom.
>
>The big picture: there is another
>precedent now that states and
>only states have the right
>to set law over their
>animals, just think about it.
>

Yes. Because I shelled out a significant amount of money under pretenses that I could draw a tag under what amounts to false pretenses it makes me anti-freedom. The depths of ignorance associated with that conclusion are astounding.

Most people on here are willing to accept the new NR vs. R split and the ruling (maybe not happy with it, but that's the law). What people find unacceptable is to publish regulations and open up a draw and then change the rules after NRs have forked over millions of dollars.
 

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

Deer 5 (3).jpg
2022 Paunsaugant Archery Buck
Picture_cell_1396794097969871(1).jpg
Screenshot_20221031_235838.jpg
IMG_2387.JPG
6C5C6BC8-F3FA-40A4-952C-64C6649CA424.jpeg
big buck 2.jpg
F39053A6-A54A-4BB1-A4DD-3B1E2BD4955A.jpeg
IMG_20221204_161247.jpg
20220811_093813.jpg
20230814_203909.jpg
7470704F-29E6-4353-8097-D2C392BA3800.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