Terk Overturned

Nice to see residents getting better opportunity, but why don't you guys go after the real problems?
The real problems are landowner tags and outfitter sponsored tags.

Imagine how many opportunity residents would get at reasonable prices if you grew a set and went after an allocation that just makes the rich get richer?
Wait, you would have to get off your a$%es and do something for that to happen and you don't have the money and influence that the landowners have so you just take it like you always do. Funny that your lobbying group won't fight to get you real results for more tags for all species.
 
DnkyPunch, this was a real problem and it was fixed. Residents have been taking it in the shorts with these exotic species for years. NR have been the recipient of that. I didn't see any NR crying about it being unfair when it worked in their advantage. I don't like the outfitter tags. It needs to be fought, although, as a resident, it doesn't affect me. But I sure would hate to see it spread to other states that I enjoy hunting. It's a bad precedence to set.
I will agree with you on the landowner tags. It's a ridiculous system that would take a lot of money to fight. Maybe now that sportsman have won some of the smaller battles, they will be willing to step in and fight the bigger fight.
 
Dnky anatomy:

LO tags is another issue that is currently being pursued by various sportsmen's groups here in NM, as it is also a huge issue with regards to resident allocation.
 
>Craig, you have the option to
>delete your app. just login
>to your account and delete
>your sheep app.

Tried that...said I still have to pay an application fee and my money will be refunded after the draw on the same schedule as everyone that stayed in the draw. In other words, deleting the application gets you nothing.
 
Glad I don't hunt sheep.
NMWF was really helpful in getting the NR screwed.
Are they still sitting on the fence on the wolf deal.

"I have found if you go the extra mile it's Never crowded".
>[Font][Font color = "green"]Life member of
>the MM green signature club.[font/]
 
I do think one rule i would like to see is it got to a once in a lifetime tag.The sheep mainly maybe the ibex to.I think those special animals that kind of rule would give more there chance at the dream of hunting one.
Just sucks seeing guys fight because one is a resident and other non res. Hunters just cant stay together or fight for a fair system for all just always thinking of if they can draw a tag.
 
Ibex rifle hunt, all bighorn ram hunts, oryx on-range hunts, and even elk valle vidal bull hunts are all once-in-a-lifetime hunts. One and done.
 
I have already drawn some OIL tags so no big deal to me. But I will assure you that some day there will be powerful groups trying to eliminate the opportunities for hunters (all of which will be residents to that particular state) on these federal lands. Since we are already eliminated for all practical purposes (more so each year)from the equation as non-residents what possible motivation could we have to even care? If they eliminate hunting on our federal lands that will leave more sheds to hunt for which they have not prevented non-residents from doing yet.

On average I host four to six non-resident hunters on my personal farms each year at no cost because I love to share what I have with others and it is fun to watch someone experience what I often take for granted, for the first time.

I really hate to see so much time being spent on fighting over who gets what piece of an ever shrinking pie when you should be focusing on improving habitat and game numbers to increase opportunity for all - yes I put both my money and time where my mouth is and I have a pile of non-resident hunters that can verify this. This is why I will continue to support groups like the RMEF, Ducks Unlimited and proven wildlife conservation organizations. Not ones that fight these types of fights.

Hey Jamaro - are you still selling landowner tags I might be in the market if I do not draw a non-resident tag? Good work Jamaro!
 
No ill will towards NM and its citizens. The state now uniformly offers lousy odds for the hunter that prefers to hunt without a guide. Is up to 6% of tags really when the dust settles so odds are poorer than what might thing. Add in the fees and is a no-go now.

I'll take the $200 or so I now save by avoiding NM and instead buy a super tag lottery entry in MT, AZ or somewhere offering a ram tag drawing. Presumably I will increase my odds so a win for me.

NM will still sell the few NR tags it offers. NM residents get more tags. Outfitters now will get more business as NR scramble to improve odds for sheep.

Residents will need to make up the shortfall from less application fees collected and lower revenues as tags fall in price when awarded to a resident. Or cut spending. No biggie, right?
 
Its a shame to see when we fight its only for the state we live in.Big picture it will cost us all in the end I am afriad.The states lose money with out people from outside there state and that will end up hurting everyone in time.Less funds more poaching less programs for the wildlife.Take landowner tags away less land to hunt less water for wildlife.There would not be any resident complaining about landowner tags if they sold for a few hundred bucks.I do think if they get tags the land should be opened to the public.No ranch only tags but giving the landowner something to open his land and share his water source with the wildlife nothing wrong with it.It could also be cut back some on the numbers they get.There is good and bad with the system but not so cut and dry like some like to make it.
 
Here is the response to the E-mail I sent.

The Department is accessing impacts and options to hunters that applied for bighorn sheep, ibex and oryx. Once the Department has determined the best course of action, we will notify the public regarding any changes to the application or draw process for these species. Notification of any changes will be sent to the media and published on our website.
 
Why don't some of you NR complainers just throw in the towel and MOVE to NM... You can then pay taxes and hunt all OUR game and have the same odds... And call me I will build you a beautiful Custom Home to hunt out of....This way your bringing your hard earned dollars to NM... Helping the bad economy and get to hunt also. WIN/ WIN Come on we welcome you
Jack
 
>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..

Really dude, why don't you step away from your computer and relax before you make yourself look like an idiot. You are saying residents are spineless and lack balls. Well dude, I am a resident. Tell me, what have I ever done to you? Well I have missed my share of season due to being overseas, I didn't even get a chance to put in for tags those years. And your gonna attack me. Well I'm sorry you are affected by this, and I hope you are appropriately compensated for it. If you want to say something about the NM government or Game and Fish, hey we are with you. But don't go attacking the residents like that.
 
I don't know about the rest of you NR's but my family is tired of eating all that old tough sheep, ibex, and oryx meat anyway.
 
+1 Iowan.

If i was the head of an anti hunting group, my strategy would focus on eliminating non-resident tags in all Western states. That would effectively wipe out a significant number of hunters. I, for one, wouldn't be so addicted to big game hunting if i was limited to hunting my crappy state.


But to be fair, i can see why residents are happy with this ruling, especially since most other states favor residents. Who wouldn't want better odds. But at some point, screwing over the non-residents (fewer tags, pay more) is going to hurt hunters in general.

I guess SFW's model is looking more attractive day by day. At least under a free market (auction every tag) i won't be locked out of hunting. It might screw the poor hunters over, but if i i've learned anything from this thread it is "as long as i get mine, screw you".
 
I hope none of you residents think I am crying about the tags coming back to you.I just think all coming back to only residents will not do hunting or the animals any good.It takes money to get things done and this will cost the g&f money.IT buts hunters vs hunters not good at all.If we would all just stop looking out for what ever group we are in and just be a group for hunter.We could come up with a fair system for all of us.I plan on hunting new mexico with my son as long as I can.Some of the best peole I know live in that state.Just remember not all of us liked the old rule or like the new rule as neither was fair to all hunters.
 
There was a bunch of talk early in this thread about how the Department is going to recoup the income they stand to lose by issuing a majority of the tags to residents. Here's some food for thought:
Last year 15 of the 37 tags went to nonresidents at $3,180 a piece ($47,700 total). Of the 22 tags that went to residents, 10 were ewe tags at $86 a piece ($860 total) and 12 were ram tags at $161 a piece ($1,932). That means a total revenue (tag fees only) of $50,492. If you apply the 84% to the total tag allocation (0.84 * 37) you get 31 tags going to residents at a maximum of $161 each ($4,991 total). Nonresidents would get 6 tags for a total of $19,080. That means a total tag revenue of $24,071 which is about half of what it was. However, when you consider that there were about 6,100 first choice apps last year, that $25,000 could be easily recouped simply by adding $4 to each application fee.

Granted, the number of nonresident apps is likely to decrease next year because of this and this analysis is probably over simplified, but the point is that it shouldn't be that difficult for the department to recoup the costs.

Again - just thinking out loud.
 
Sierra, if you like the auction tag option, you should love the landowner tag system in NM. You can NM every single year for elk, deer, antelope, Barbary sheep and oryx. I really have nothing against landowners who are really helping wildlife get landowner tags, but the system is badly abused.
 
Where I can I sign up to hunt BHS and IBEX in my home state of NM for $2,000 each? I'd jump at that deal--or anywhere else for that matter. Point is, I don't think it will be that hard for G&F to recoup the lost NR revenue.

This is not to say that I don't think the NRs got a bad deal year. I had quite a few NR friends that I was hoping for a chance to hunt oryx with this year that I had to deliver the bad news to...
 
It is not about if they can raise the money they lost on the non res. tags.They already needed more funds to help the deer and pronghorn let alone more to help with the sheep.Plus we all know maybe not all but some residents will ##### if there tag fees go up.I think us non resident pay our fair share with what tags cost us now already.Plus I know those that it does not effect dont buy this as a reason.But non resident bring in more then tag money to new mexico.How much do you think each one of those sheep tags brought in to that area were the hunts to place.Alot of food ,gas ,people hired and rooms which all helps someone in new mexico.Time people start looking at what hunting does all around for some states and what non residents do to help there state.Non resident hunting is needed in some states if you all want the hunting to get better and game protected for the youth to have the chance when they grow up.
 
I've heard it all before and fyi I do my own NR hunts in TX, CO, WY, and UT, so I understand. I don't deny that there is some economic impact to a small few, but it's not enough to make or break NM either way. I'm just telling you that your G&F funds argument is really pointless, as there are plenty of residents here in NM that would be willing to ante up giving the opportunity. If NM needs to replace the NR revenue, then create a similar pool where residents can apply paying NR equivalent fees in order to increase our odds. I'm in. Pretty easy to fix that one...
 
Billc, this argument has been beaten to death on the NM forum and many others.

Bottom line is that I do not think you can get the majority of Residents to give up opportunity in order for revenue. If Residents had to choose in any state, they would pay more to have more opportunity.

It is not getting better for NR in any state. NM was just one of the last to fix their system.

I personally think Deer tags for Residents should be a minimum of $95. We have a deer problem, and we need to cut tags.

Ibex and BHS sheep should be $250 for residents. There are only so many tags. Odds will still be 1% or less.
 
It just ashame when the reason for saying the non resident money coming in is it only effect a few so who cares.You ask the few butchers,guides small gas station and stores and outfitters if they care and the answer would be different.Unless there not new mexico resident who should have say because there a small group.Let alone all the tax money on gas and food that goes to pay for your rds and other programs.Times are tough and anyone who thinks turning money away is a good thing is crazy.We ever see the fees go up in the state we will see a post on now the state is wrong I wont pay 90 for a deer tag or 250 for a ibex tag.Those fees are crazy there trying to stop us poor resident for hunting and making it all about the rich residents Then it will be a poor resident againist the guys who will pay for it.Again just people worried about getting there tags and doing what ever then can to justify it in there head not what is best for the wildlife in the end.i am not only making this point about new mexico I think almost all the states laws are not fair and best for the wildlife.It all goes back to people doing what is right for them not what is right for all in this country and just one of the many reason we are in the shape we are in.
 
After reading the post by wyflyguy, I got to thinking about what is the true financial impact as a result of this change.
First of all, what many people don't realize is that it will take a MINIMUM of 6 tags in a single unit for a NR to EVER get a tag. Keep in mind that the statue says the residents are to receive a MINIMUM of 84% so until a unit has at least 6 tags the NR has zero chance. Many people are thinking 10% or 6% of the total number of tags, but that won't apply because the statue/quota is based on the individual unit.

Looking at last years numbers there is still a chance that a NR could draw a Latir ewe tag, so I will exclude those 30 NR applicants that applied for one of those tags as a first choice in my calculations.
There were 2998 NR applicants that will no longer apply for a sheep tag at a non-refundable $20 each which equates to $59,960. Also, 14 of last year?s tags drawn by NR?s at a cost of $3,160 (I already took out the $20 application fee) equates to $44,240. This brings the total NR income of $104,200 that will need to be replaced. To be fair, I will deduct the income that would have been generated had those 14 tags been drawn by a resident which equates to $2,179. Therefore the net income to be replaced would be $102,021.

Some residents have said that they would gladly pay a higher tag price for a sheep to compensate for the lost revenue. Let's look at the final cost then if the NR ?sheep income? is replaced in resident sheep tag fees. Dividing the total 37 tags into the $102,021 would result in an average tag increase of $2,757 each. This would need to be added to the current cost of $161 for a ram tag and $86 for a ewe tag resulting in tag costs of $2,918 and $2,843 for the residents.

To put this into perspective, their chance at a sheep tag will increase from 0.61% to a whopping 1.22% (a total increase of 100%) but the cost of a ram tag would have to increase 1,712% and the cost of a ewe tag would need to increase 3,206%.

As we all know this extensive tag increase won't happen. What is more likely to happen is that the cost of a resident tag might go up around $100 or so, and the costs for NR?s in other species will go up to compensate for the lost $100,000 revenue.

The financial impact for oryx and ibex is more difficult to calculate. Only time will tell how the 1,827 NR ibex applicants and the 1,670 NR Oryx applicants will react in following years when their chances become reduced to only a few tags.

Let's start by looking at just the lost tag revenue.
Again based on last year?s numbers, there would only be a maximum of 40 ibex tags available in the NR and outfitter pools. Last year there were 77 tags issued to NR?s. Those 37 tags at a cost difference of $1,519 would result in $56,203 of lost revenue.
Now for oryx. Based on last year?s numbers, there were 62 tags drawn in specific units by NR?s that would have exceeded the maximum quota available for both NR and outfitter. Those 62 tags at a cost difference of $1,519 would result in $94,178 of lost revenue.

The decrease in applicants and application fees as a result of fewer tags available is hard to calculate but assuming a conservative estimate of 10% fewer applicants for both ibex and oryx would result in only approx. $7,000 less revenue.

Based on these calculations the total lost revenue as a result of this change is approx. $260,000. This is not going to break the bank for NMGF. Like I said earlier, the department likely won't increase the cost of the resident sheep, ibex, and oryx tags significantly to make up for the lost revenue but rather increase the NR license cost, tag fees, and/or application fees by a few dollars for other species to compensate and claim ?inflation? as the reason. And we as NR?s will gladly pay another few dollars per tag to hunt elk or antelope, or deer in the great state of NM!!!
 
Just looking at the NMG&F Director position description...it identifies the department "an annual budget in excess of $39 million dollars". So don't worry about our revenues...
 
Bill, there is no where I can hunt around Albuquerque. When I draw a tag, I travel across the state, fill my truck with gas, eat at restaurants and pay butchers just like you do. My money is just as good as yours.
I really don't know what you want us to say. That NR should get half the tags in the state? That residents should have no preference at all?
I really do believe that the current quota is not fair. 6% is absolutely ridiculous. But I do believe there should be a quota. It is residents in this state (just like any other state) that influence the politicians, vote for those politicians, attend the game commission meeting, and does what they can to better opportunities for all hunters. Residents buy rifles, ammunition, rods and reels in state that also help fund the nmdg&f. It was resident hunters that put those ibex on the mountain, and oryx in the desert. Imagine if you took more opportunity away from the residents to the point they no longer care. Where does that leave anyone?
When there was no quota and the residents were getting screwed, I didn't hear NR coming out to help fight the fight. They were just taking advantage of the opportunities it provided. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, you expect us to not take advantage.
New Mexico is a wonderful state to hunt, but it does not have the number of game animals that a lot of states have. Wyoming has hunting units that have more antelope than an entire quadrant of the state of NM. The desert cannot support the elk and deer number of Colorado, Wyoming, Utah or Montana. There is limited opportunity. I haven't drawn an antelope tag in 14 years. I've drawn 2 elk tags in the last 15 years. It's not like residents are fat with opportunity and shutting out the NR. There just isn't enough to go around to everyone that wants a tag.
 
4955nmg&f_budget.jpg
 
>Bill, there is no where I
>can hunt around Albuquerque.
>When I draw a tag,
>I travel across the state,
>fill my truck with gas,
>eat at restaurants and pay
>butchers just like you do.
> My money is just
>as good as yours.
>I really don't know what you
>want us to say.
>That NR should get half
>the tags in the state?
> That residents should have
>no preference at all?
>I really do believe that the
>current quota is not fair.
> 6% is absolutely ridiculous.
> But I do believe
>there should be a quota.
> It is residents in
>this state (just like any
>other state) that influence the
>politicians, vote for those politicians,
>attend the game commission meeting,
>and does what they can
>to better opportunities for all
>hunters. Residents buy rifles,
>ammunition, rods and reels in
>state that also help fund
>the nmdg&f. It was
>resident hunters that put those
>ibex on the mountain, and
>oryx in the desert.
>Imagine if you took more
>opportunity away from the residents
>to the point they no
>longer care. Where does
>that leave anyone?
>When there was no quota and
>the residents were getting screwed,
>I didn't hear NR coming
>out to help fight the
>fight. They were just
>taking advantage of the opportunities
>it provided. Now that
>the shoe is on the
>other foot, you expect us
>to not take advantage.
>New Mexico is a wonderful state
>to hunt, but it does
>not have the number of
>game animals that a lot
>of states have. Wyoming
>has hunting units that have
>more antelope than an entire
>quadrant of the state of
>NM. The desert cannot
>support the elk and deer
>number of Colorado, Wyoming, Utah
>or Montana. There is
>limited opportunity. I haven't
>drawn an antelope tag in
>14 years. I've drawn
>2 elk tags in the
>last 15 years. It's
>not like residents are fat
>with opportunity and shutting out
>the NR. There just
>isn't enough to go around
>to everyone that wants a
>tag.

Well said.
 
it is not about if your money is as good as mine.Your money is already in new mexico mine is not.My money is extra the state gets when I hunt there.Why you guys need to be new mexico hunters and not americans who hunt is beyond me.You read more in to what is really said.I am glad you got the tags back the system sucked either way it was or is now.It is about hunters trying to make some rules for once that help all hunters.making it fair in all states to get tags for all hunters.It is finding that split in tags going to all people that will help hunting overall.The more hunters there are the better off we will all be and thats just fact.
 
More fighting among ourselves and hard work to divide us into 50 camps - less effort to improve habitat and increase game populations.

I am at a point in life where I have the money to hunt generally where and when I want so again my family, friends, and I are still going to go on great trips not to mention world class hunting around home. I simply hate to see us turning on each other when there are so many other legitimate threats out there. I have personally elected to fight the loss of habitat.

Jamaro would you see if you can get non-residents eliminated all together than I will not feel any need to even apply.

Keep up the good work Jamaro!

In all fairness I have always lived in areas where you can buy tags over the counter and hunt. I have also always lived in areas where nearly all the ground is privately owned. In the future I will probably only be able to hunt elk, etc. out west on private ground so the more public ground converted to private ground out west the better for the people in the other 49 states right? It might also lower my federal tax bill if we sold these federal lands and reduced an going operating expenses associated with owning this public ground. Sell it, drill it, build on it, just do not let non-residents hunt on it I guess.
 
I agree Bill. But hunters are grown at home. A lot of people can't afford to take there children out of state to hunt. You and I were fortunate to take our kids several places to get opportunities, and I commend you for that. If there are no opportunities to hunt at home, most won't bother. The lifeblood of the hunting community is and always will be people that hunt near home. Those of us that travel to several states to hunt are the exception.
It's also not true that my money would stay here. The hotel in Deming, or the gas station in Quemado could care less if I'm from Albuquerque or Phoenix. The NR resident money spends the same as the resident money to them. If I didn't draw the tag, I wouldn't be travelling within the state. Or, if I draw nothing, then I head to Wyoming to hunt, and my money will go there. Seems as though it all evens out. Especially when you are talking about a miniscule amount of tags that bighorn and ibex have.
 
This issue has nothing to do with habitat and increasing game populations. In fact, the ibex and oryx herds are as big today as they will ever be allowed to get. The sheep population is growing, which means more tags.
It just seems that most of the NR posting on here want us to care about their opportunity to hunt here, but they could care less about our opportunity. When we want tags, we're selfish, greedy and destroying hunting as we know it. When you want tags, you're great Americans that are fighting for the cause of all hunters everywhere.
I do see your side of the argument, and do agree with much of it, but it's obvious that you will never see mine.
 
OR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, MARCH 26 2014:
APPLICANTS FOR BIGHORN SHEEP, ORYX AND IBEX HUNTING LICENSES ELIGIBLE FOR FULL REFUNDS

SANTA FE ? Hunters who applied for bighorn sheep, oryx or ibex licenses for the 2014-15 seasons and are unsuccessful in the drawings will be eligible for full refunds of application fees and license fees, the Department of Game and Fish announced Wednesday.

Application fees normally are nonrefundable whether a license applicant is successful or not. This year?s departure from that practice is in response to Monday?s ruling in U.S. District Court that vacated a 1977 injunction that prohibited the Department from applying preferential quotas that benefitted state residents in drawings for bighorn sheep, oryx and ibex licenses. The injunction allowed nonresidents to enjoy the same odds as residents when applying for those species.

Because of Monday?s ruling, the Department will begin applying the same quotas this year to bighorn sheep, oryx and ibex applications as it applies to deer, elk, pronghorn antelope and Barbary sheep. According to those quotas, 84 percent of licenses are allocated to New Mexico residents, 6 percent are allocated to nonresidents, and 10 percent are allocated to applicants ? residents and nonresidents ? who use New Mexico outfitters.

Applicants for bighorn sheep, oryx and ibex who choose not to participate in the new quota system must delete their applications by April 18. Applications can be deleted through online accounts or by telephone toll-free, (888) 268-6866.

?The Department determined that it will be most equitable to refund the normally nonrefundable application fees to applicants who are unsuccessful or who choose to withdraw their application due to changes resulting from the recent court decision, and to comply immediately with state law,? Department General Counsel Allison Marks said.

Because the option to apply with outfitters was not offered on this year?s application forms, hunters who would like to designate a valid outfitter will be able to do so and join the 10 percent license allocation pool. To add a New Mexico outfitter to an application, the applicant will be required to call the Department and provide the application number, customer identification number and the outfitter number no later than April 18.

The court ruling prompted the Department to delay this year?s drawing by approximately one week. Drawing results will be available no later than April 30.

For more information about the drawing, refunds and the application process, please call the Department toll-free, (888) 268-6866.
 
Great news... NR cry fest is over... Just released by NMDGF can now delete your application for a full refund on Oryx,sheep,and Ibex including app fees.. Finally an end !!!!!!!!!!
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-26-14 AT 04:22PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Mar-26-14 AT 04:19?PM (MST)

>This issue has nothing to do
>with habitat and increasing game
>populations. In fact, the
>ibex and oryx herds are
>as big today as they
>will ever be allowed to
>get. The sheep population
>is growing, which means more
>tags.
>It just seems that most of
>the NR posting on here
>want us to care about
>their opportunity to hunt here,
>but they could care less
>about our opportunity.
Wrong, I think most NR posting here just want our money back, At least in the beginning of this thread, but the thread has taken a bit a a turn on what it is about.
Me, I want it back to apply in other states in the very near future and do not want to tie up money that has no chance of drawing anything or would have been put there if the new odds were in place when I applied. I am not a rich man, and really do need this money to apply for other up front payment apps. I am happy for residents with the new better odds, really. I just hope you guys return some happiness to us NR by voicing to kill the outfitter quota.
 
I'm more upset about the bait and switch than I am anything. Pure Deception. Give me a full refund on ALL species and I'll walk away from NM without a 2nd thought. As I've said before, I havent applied in 4 years, and wish I hadn t this year. So if I never apply again, no big whoop!! I already have a 40"+ Oryx,a 34" barbary and I would love to have an Ibex. I'm blessed enough that I could go to Kyrgyzstan for that if I need to. I just hate being lied to, deceived, and tired of having the screws put to me in ALL western states. I have waaay too many options to get upset about not hunting NM. Residents can have ALL the tags as far as I'm concerned. But their reward is coming, I promise.

Furthermore, I see all this as a method to implement a Points System to keep NonResidents coming back. Maybe they'll make it happen this year. Ha, wouldnt that be interesting? Cant wait to see how they "resolve" this one.
 
Didn't mean to group you there Schmaltsie. This thread has taken many turns, and I had too much time on my hands today.

I'd be interested to see if anybody is leading that fight. The fact that the quota was taken to the legislature to begin with sure complicates things.
 
> The court ruling
>prompted the Department to delay
>this year?s drawing by approximately
>one week. Drawing results will
>be available no later than
>April 30.
>
> For more information
>about the drawing, refunds and
>the application process, please call
>the Department toll-free, (888) 268-6866.
>


What is wrong with your state??? Call the number listed and see what I am talkng about. Good grief.
 
> The court ruling
>prompted the Department to delay
>this year?s drawing by approximately
>one week. Drawing results will
>be available no later than
>April 30.
>
> For more information
>about the drawing, refunds and
>the application process, please call
>the Department toll-free, (888) 268-6866.
>

Did anyone call this number yet?? LOL what a joke
 
It's one screwed up Game/Fish Dept, thats for sure.
And as poor as NM seems to be you would think they would be offering incentives for NR's. I mean that drive from ABQ to Alamogordo aint nothin but desert and slums.
Oh well.
 
New Mexico Department of Game and Fish
Media contact: Rachel Shockley, (505) 476-8071
Public contact: (888) 248-6866
[email protected]

REVISED: CORRECTED PHONE NUMBER
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, MARCH 26 2014:
APPLICANTS FOR BIGHORN SHEEP, ORYX AND IBEX HUNTING LICENSES ELIGIBLE FOR FULL REFUNDS

SANTA FE ? Hunters who applied for bighorn sheep, oryx or ibex licenses for the 2014-15 seasons and are unsuccessful in the drawings will be eligible for full refunds of application fees and license fees, the Department of Game and Fish announced Wednesday.

Application fees normally are nonrefundable whether a license applicant is successful or not. This year?s departure from that practice is in response to Monday?s ruling in U.S. District Court that vacated a 1977 injunction that prohibited the Department from applying preferential quotas that benefitted state residents in drawings for bighorn sheep, oryx and ibex licenses. The injunction allowed nonresidents to enjoy the same odds as residents when applying for those species.

Because of Monday?s ruling, the Department will begin applying the same quotas this year to bighorn sheep, oryx and ibex applications as it applies to deer, elk, pronghorn antelope and Barbary sheep. According to those quotas, 84 percent of licenses are allocated to New Mexico residents, 6 percent are allocated to nonresidents, and 10 percent are allocated to applicants ? residents and nonresidents ? who use New Mexico outfitters.

Applicants for bighorn sheep, oryx and ibex who choose not to participate in the new quota system must delete their applications by April 18. Applications can be deleted through online accounts or by telephone toll-free, (888) 248-6866.

?The Department determined that it will be most equitable to refund the normally nonrefundable application fees to applicants who are unsuccessful or who choose to withdraw their application due to changes resulting from the recent court decision, and to comply immediately with state law,? Department General Counsel Allison Marks said.

Because the option to apply with outfitters was not offered on this year?s application forms, hunters who would like to designate a valid outfitter will be able to do so and join the 10 percent license allocation pool. To add a New Mexico outfitter to an application, the applicant will be required to call the Department and provide the application number, customer identification number and the outfitter number no later than April 18.

The court ruling prompted the Department to delay this year?s drawing by approximately one week. Drawing results will be available no later than April 30.

For more information about the drawing, refunds and the application process, please call the Department toll-free, (888) 248-6866.
 
>It's one screwed up Game/Fish Dept,
>thats for sure.
>And as poor as NM seems
>to be you would think
>they would be offering incentives
>for NR's. I mean that
>drive from ABQ to Alamogordo
>aint nothin but desert and
>slums.
>Oh well.

I for one am glad you think that and others as well. I moved about an hour out of Alamogordo about 9 years ago, and I could have moved anywhere in this country since I primarily work out of my home.

People ask me all the time why of all places I chose the Sacramento mountains. I tell them the same thing. To me it is paradise on earth.
No place I would rather be, and one of the reasons is most pretentious azzholes do not move here. Just remember when you come to NM you are visiting, and some of us love it here.
 
>It's one screwed up Game/Fish Dept,
>thats for sure.
>And as poor as NM seems
>to be you would think
>they would be offering incentives
>for NR's. I mean that
>drive from ABQ to Alamogordo
>aint nothin but desert and
>slums.
>Oh well.

If its such a slum why even bother coming here to hunt?
 
I think all of us non residents are pissed off about the bait and switch and that's it. Some people have to strategically plan when applying for multiple states, and thus may have applied in new mexico instead of another because of funds, and now this. I have already plundered plenty of animals from new mexico so i'm not whining in the least. What new mexico did though was knowingly take every ones funds even though they new this was coming. What about interest on any fees charged, or interest on credit card fees. I don't care if it's been a week, if they make a cent off this interest wise i hope they pay that back to, or i see a little fraud going down here with regards to the ones that withdraw their apps. It's a little word called disclosure. Again i'm happy for you new mexico residents, as your game is yours to regulate, but the way this was handled was to say the least, very shady indeed.
 
>>It's one screwed up Game/Fish Dept,
>>thats for sure.
>>And as poor as NM seems
>>to be you would think
>>they would be offering incentives
>>for NR's. I mean that
>>drive from ABQ to Alamogordo
>>aint nothin but desert and
>>slums.
>>Oh well.
>
>I for one am glad you
>think that and others as
>well. I moved about
>an hour out of Alamogordo
>about 9 years ago, and
>I could have moved anywhere
>in this country since I

Just calling it like I see it. The truth does seem to hit a nerve from time to time.
>primarily work out of my
>home.
>
>People ask me all the time
>why of all places I
>chose the Sacramento mountains.
>I tell them the same
>thing. To me it
>is paradise on earth.
>No place I would rather be,
>and one of the reasons
>is most pretentious azzholes do
>not move here. Just
>remember when you come to
>NM you are visiting, and
>some of us love it
>here.
 
>
>Just calling it like I see
>it. The truth does seem
>to hit a nerve from
>time to time.


Evilnr,like I said, I could have chosen anywhere in the country to move to, including where ever you live and I chose NM.

I have never regretted moving to NM, I have not seen the demographics, but, I am betting it has a lower percentage of pretentious azzholes compared to where you live.
I think a lot of guys would feel the same way, their wives just wont let them do it. That is a whole other story.
 
>It's one screwed up Game/Fish Dept,
>thats for sure.
>And as poor as NM seems
>to be you would think
>they would be offering incentives
>for NR's. I mean that
>drive from ABQ to Alamogordo
>aint nothin but desert and
>slums.
>Oh well.

You're a piece......of work! Were you not one of the biggest whiners when we went to 84/10/6? Did you not post on mulitple threads about boycotting NM at that time? Why even apply in NM if all you have to say is negative things about our state? I say good ridence to you and any other EVILNR's with the same attitude. For all the rest of you civil folks good luck in the draw and welcome to our great state!

Aim small... miss small!
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-26-14 AT 06:09PM (MST)[p]just so everyone knows I am just wanting what is fair for all of us in all states.For the record i will keep applying in new mexico for myself and son as long as I can.I made to many good friends out there and like hunting out there to much.So i am not taking my ball and going home either.LOL
 
I can only hope this happens to you someday. You don't change the rules in the middle of the game, and expect everyone to be happy about it. It's ok to change the rules after the game is over though. You only say what you said cause it favors you, which is cool, but beware of the big flip. I have a feeling your snot rag would be full if it was reversed. Congrats to the new mexico residents for their victory, you deserve it!!! Long live the gila!!!!
 
>>It's one screwed up Game/Fish Dept,
>>thats for sure.
>>And as poor as NM seems
>>to be you would think
>>they would be offering incentives
>>for NR's. I mean that
>>drive from ABQ to Alamogordo
>>aint nothin but desert and
>>slums.
>>Oh well.
>
>You're a piece......of work! Were you
>not one of the biggest
>whiners when we went to
>84/10/6? Did you not
>post on mulitple threads about
>boycotting NM at that time?
> Why even apply in
>NM if all you have
>to say is negative things
>about our state? I say
>good ridence to you and
>any other EVILNR's with the
>same attitude. For all
>the rest of you civil
>folks good luck in the
>draw and welcome to our
>great state!
>
>Aim small... miss small!


Didnt mean to offend any of you guys on here. Just making an observation as how NM seems to be a poor state and would welcome nonresident money. Like I said, guess people just dont want to hear the truth.
And as far as "dude"s comment about being indignant it seems the residents are the ones with a bad attitude, not me. And what do the Residents have to be mad about? I havent used any names like "pretentious azzholes" either.
And when i draw my elk tag this year, I'll post it up so y'all can razz me about it. That WOULD be sweet. Just eat you up wouldnt it?!!!!! HA!!!!
You kids get to bed, its gettin late.
 
>
>>
>>Just calling it like I see
>>it. The truth does seem
>>to hit a nerve from
>>time to time.
>
>
>Evilnr,like I said, I could have
>chosen anywhere in the country
>to move to, including where
>ever you live and I
>chose NM.
>
>I have never regretted moving to
>NM, I have not seen
>the demographics, but, I am
>betting it has a lower
>percentage of pretentious azzholes compared
>to where you live.
>I think a lot of guys
>would feel the same way,
>their wives just wont let
>them do it. That
>is a whole other story.

You 'da man Paul, you 'da man.
>
 
I havent used any
>names like "pretentious azzholes" either.
>
>And when i draw my elk
>tag this year, I'll post
>it up so y'all can
>razz me about it. That
>WOULD be sweet. Just eat
>you up wouldnt it?!!!!! HA!!!!
>
>You kids get to bed, its
>gettin late.


No you havent singled any one person out you just called the entire state a slum. Thats so much better than "pretentious azzholes".
 
> I havent used any
>>names like "pretentious azzholes" either.
>>
>>And when i draw my elk
>>tag this year, I'll post
>>it up so y'all can
>>razz me about it. That
>>WOULD be sweet. Just eat
>>you up wouldnt it?!!!!! HA!!!!
>>
>>You kids get to bed, its
>>gettin late.
>
>
>No you havent singled any one
>person out you just called
>the entire state a slum.
> Thats so much better
>than "pretentious azzholes".

Thats not true. You forgot about the desert part.
 
Glad to see the NMGF doing the right thing and offering 100% refunds. Since we have zero chance at a sheep tag, I will pull our 4 sheep applicaitons to help fund our next round of applications in CO, NV, and MT. Will probably keep our ibex applications in though even with the extremely low odds (somebody has to draw!!!) One of my sons drew that tag a couple years ago and it was a unique experience.

I realize that it wasn't the NMGF that dictated this, it was the courts and the NMGF is just implementing the laws set forth by the courts. It was all a matter of bad timing. I do think the NMGF could have done a little more to inform applicants in the regulations and in the on-line applicaiton if this was truely a pending issue that they were aware of.

Congrats to the residents for finally getting their justified preferential treatment. I think the 6% quota is a little low though compared to most other states but that's another issue. The biggiest issue in general terms is the outfitter sponsored tags and the LO tags.

I do hope that the NMGF finds a way to offer at least one or two ram tags to NR's in the future. They "may" suffer some potential funding support from wildlife organizations such as RMEF, FNAWS, etc. and suplemental transplants from other states if they have zero opportunity for NR's even with nearly 40 tags. They would have to find a creative way to sidestep the wording of the statue in order to do that though so it likely won't happen.

Now back to researching for my upcoming late season bull elk hunt in WY that I waited 15 years to finally draw!!
 
>Glad to see the NMGF doing
>the right thing and offering
>100% refunds. Since we
>have zero chance at a
>sheep tag, I will pull
>our 4 sheep applicaitons to
>help fund our next round
>of applications in CO, NV,
>and MT. Will probably
>keep our ibex applications in
>though even with the extremely
>low odds (somebody has to
>draw!!!) One of my
>sons drew that tag a
>couple years ago and it
>was a unique experience.
>
>I realize that it wasn't the
>NMGF that dictated this, it
>was the courts and the
>NMGF is just implementing the
>laws set forth by the
>courts. It was all
>a matter of bad timing.
> I do think the
>NMGF could have done a
>little more to inform applicants
>in the regulations and in
>the on-line applicaiton if this
>was truely a pending issue
>that they were aware of.
>
>
>Congrats to the residents for finally
>getting their justified preferential treatment.
>I think the 6% quota
>is a little low though
>compared to most other states
>but that's another issue.
>The biggiest issue in general
>terms is the outfitter sponsored
>tags and the LO tags.
>
>
>I do hope that the NMGF
>finds a way to offer
>at least one or two
>ram tags to NR's in
>the future. They "may"
>suffer some potential funding support
>from wildlife organizations such as
>RMEF, FNAWS, etc. and suplemental
>transplants from other states if
>they have zero opportunity for
>NR's even with nearly 40
>tags. They would have
>to find a creative way
>to sidestep the wording of
>the statue in order to
>do that though so it
>likely won't happen.
>
>Now back to researching for my
>upcoming late season bull elk
>hunt in WY that I
>waited 15 years to finally
>draw!!

I agree with your post. Several states rotate units that they will offer a NR tag when the quota does not allow it per unit.
I agree that it should be adjusted and reflect in the proclamation every year which unit will have a NR tag.
 
Interesting thread.

Usually the NM forum was a place to go and read post without all the BS. Use to be a bunch residents always offering help to everyone Res. & NR. The tone sure has changed recently. Most NR are not complaining about the res. getting most of the tags (all), but rather the timing of the hole thing.

As far as funding for NMDGF they should have no problem. ANY person serious about hunting a ram would be more than willing (and happy)to pay $2000 to $3000 for tag, resident or NR. The funding problems I see is the organizations that have helped put sheep on many mountains through this country loosing their support if they invest their funds in states that do not offer at least a tag or to NR.

The only grip I have with NM and always will, is the guide allocation of tags. I feel those tags should be allocated into the NR allocation and then those who want to get a guide can.

NR have always taken it in the shorts from other states. High tag and license fees, not being able to hunt in wilderness areas without a guide (WY), ever changing point systems and costs, etc. I do not think most NR have a complaint about getting 10 to 25% of tags, just the attitude of all the DFG's that treat NR like a cash cow.

Bill
 
Thanks for posting the update news release Paul.. I am on the road..
Overall, I think what the dept did was fair.
Good Luck to All

J-
 
I got the email from NMGFD. Withdrew my application. See it's going to be a full refund. Does anyone know the timing of the refund? I'm less concerned about the $20 application fee and more concerned about having my $6,000 back!
 
>I got the email from NMGFD.
> Withdrew my application.
>See it's going to be
>a full refund. Does
>anyone know the timing of
>the refund? I'm less
>concerned about the $20 application
>fee and more concerned

That is the answer I am trying to get. That will determine if I do the credit card dispute instead if cancel the application.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-27-14 AT 08:32AM (MST)[p]>I got the email from NMGFD.
> Withdrew my application.
>See it's going to be
>a full refund. Does
>anyone know the timing of
>the refund? I'm less
>concerned about the $20 application
>fee and more concerned about
>having my $6,000 back!


I just got off the phone with them. She said money will not be refunded until after the drawing. I just got off the phone with my credit card company to dispute charges and as the usual protocol the money will be instantly be taken from The merchant and I am not responsible nor will pay interest on it. When they ask the reason state that the merchant sent you an email stating that the description and availability of the product has changed
 
Food for thought - in 2013 the NR contribution to the draw funds for all species contributed $3.8 million or 41% of the total $9.3 million (remember this is just for the draw funds). So while the NR segment might not be significant at the single species level, it definitely makes a difference when considered as a whole. In addition, each NR dollar represents a "tourism" dollar which is spent, an average of, 7 times over within each community and the state. So while the residents are making a large contribution to conservation so are the NRs. And while some NRs and Rs like to demonize the LOs and O&Gs, behind the scenes they are making huge contributions to habitat restoration, water, and herd quality on both private and public lands. So as a number of others have stated, lets try to remain united for the sake of the Hunting Industry as a whole. There are many anti-hunting organizations who would love to quietly get what they want while we are busy fighting amongst ourselves.
 
Wow, change the rules in the middle of the game, and try to keep the money till after the draw. This is really bad, to say the least, and while screwing guys that have to pay interest on the money if they put in on cards for a couple months, and to boot they are going to have to hold it for an additional week cause of their own rule change. On top of the guys that put most of their money up on their cards , they won't have the money available to use for other states on their cards. This is really getting good now. What a deal indeed. This is certainly the way to treat people in a business deal. I'm sure the new mexico residents are super proud of this one. Get the word out fellas and make a run on the game and fish bank with 1000's of disputes coming in on a daily basis. What kind of business man would do this? It's about the timing, and that's it!!!
 
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, MARCH 26 2014:

APPLICANTS FOR BIGHORN SHEEP, ORYX AND IBEX HUNTING LICENSES ELIGIBLE FOR FULL REFUNDS

SANTA FE ? Hunters who applied for bighorn sheep, oryx or ibex licenses for the 2014-15 seasons and are unsuccessful in the drawings will be eligible for full refunds of application fees and license fees, the Department of Game and Fish announced Wednesday.

Application fees normally are nonrefundable whether a license applicant is successful or not. This year?s departure from that practice is in response to Monday?s ruling in U.S. District Court that vacated a 1977 injunction that prohibited the Department from applying preferential quotas that benefitted state residents in drawings for bighorn sheep, oryx and ibex licenses. The injunction allowed nonresidents to enjoy the same odds as residents when applying for those species.

Because of Monday?s ruling, the Department will begin applying the same quotas this year to bighorn sheep, oryx and ibex applications as it applies to deer, elk, pronghorn antelope and Barbary sheep. According to those quotas, 84 percent of licenses are allocated to New Mexico residents, 6 percent are allocated to nonresidents, and 10 percent are allocated to applicants ? residents and nonresidents ? who use New Mexico outfitters.

Applicants for bighorn sheep, oryx and ibex who choose not to participate in the new quota system must delete their applications by April 18. Applications can be deleted through online accounts or by telephone toll-free, (888) 248-6866.

?The Department determined that it will be most equitable to refund the normally nonrefundable application fees to applicants who are unsuccessful or who choose to withdraw their application due to changes resulting from the recent court decision, and to comply immediately with state law,? Department General Counsel Allison Marks said.

Because the option to apply with outfitters was not offered on this year?s application forms, hunters who would like to designate a valid outfitter will be able to do so and join the 10 percent license allocation pool. To add a New Mexico outfitter to an application, the applicant will be required to call the Department and provide the application number, customer identification number and the outfitter number no later than April 18.

The court ruling prompted the Department to delay this year?s drawing by approximately one week. Drawing results will be available no later than April 30.

For more information about the drawing, refunds and the application process, please call the Department toll-free, (888) 248-6866.




TONY MANDILE
48e63dfa482a34a9.jpg

How To Hunt Coues Deer
 
Wait a second, if you dispute the charges for this debacle then won't you also be disputing your elk and deer apps as well cause it's the same merchant? If you dispute the sheep charges it might take you completely out of the draw for all species?
 
>Wait a second, if you dispute
>the charges for this debacle
>then won't you also be
>disputing your elk and deer
>apps as well cause it's
>the same merchant? If you
>dispute the sheep charges it
>might take you completely out
>of the draw for all
>species?


Yup, you would if you put in for all species at the same time. It would be just one charge.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-27-14 AT 12:33PM (MST)[p]I will say this , this was a very well thought out sneaky trap they conjured up here. Good luck to all this year in the field, and i sure am glad i drew an arizona rut tag!!!!
 
It is silly to say this was a pre meditated plan by NMGF.

There is no upside for them to be going through this.

I think applicants should be able to get full and selective refunds immediately, but, it being a bureaucracy, sometimes stuff like that is easier said than done.
 
>"...........
>Overall, I think what the dept
>did was fair.....
>
>J-


Of course you do Jamaro. Only you could think that this is fair.
 
Come one Couesmagnet. I don't blame you for being upset over this, but I really don't think the G&F had much control.

If they had done this on purpose, that would mean that 2 or 3 years ago when they appealed in the injunction, they knew the judge would wait until March 2014 after applications had been submitted to over-turn the injunction, requiring them to then follow the state law that sets the quota. Diabolical.
 
Come on dude, how can you say there is no upside? let me explain the upside for you bud......... The upside is they trapped people under diff. rules, and then changed the rules. There would not have been nearly as many applicants if they would of told everyone this prior to the draw, which means less revenue for the state. So now if you want your money back in a timely manor, you have to wait for them to give your money back, and on top of that if you dispute the charges your taken out of the draw completely. In other words 'we' got ya, and there is no way out unless you want to penalize yourself. how can you honestly say there is no upside when 100's of thousands of dollars were collected in this manor? With all due respect nmpaul, get real for a second, it's ok to do so!!!
 
>Come on dude, how can you
>say there is no upside?
>let me explain the upside
>for you bud......... The upside
>is they trapped people under
>diff. rules, and then changed
>the rules. There would not
>have been nearly as many
>applicants if they would of
>told everyone this prior to
>the draw, which means less
>revenue for the state. So
>now if you want your
>money back in a timely
>manor, you have to wait
>for them to give your
>money back, and on top
>of that if you dispute
>the charges your taken out
>of the draw completely. In
>other words 'we' got ya,
>and there is no way
>out unless you want to
>penalize yourself. how can you
>honestly say there is no
>upside when 100's of thousands
>of dollars were collected in
>this manor? With all due
>respect nmpaul, get real for
>a second, it's ok to
>do so!!!

But they are refunding ALL the money including App fees, so they aren't getting anything out of it. This was not a scam.
 
Ya your right , but the diff is they should give back all the money immediately, not just hold it for 2 months. In many cases, they will be holding 3000 to 6000 dollars of people's money, tied up under false pretense. On top of that credit cards charge between 6 to 12 percent interest on that for 2 months, so that could cost hundreds of dollars. Listen guys, i love your state, i love your forests, and i have a ton of respect for you new mexico guys. I have met so many awesome hunters from new mexico over the years it unbelievable. I'm very happy for the residents on their win so to speak, but the state could have handled this in a way better manor. I wish you you guys the best of luck in new mexico in the future, but who ever thought out the fix, wasn't really thinking right in my opinion, and it's nothing personal. My last post , i have a charge to dispute because this wasn't handled properly in any way.
 
They should have reopened the draw when this came out, and allowed people to cancel their applications, and allowed these people to reapply instead for the other species. This would have postponed the draw by a couple of weeks, and everyone would have been happy. That was easy!!!
 
Couesmagnet, tell what is in this for NMFG besides bad PR, dealing with the resulting shytstorm?
They are not allowed to earn interest on deposits, and if so, what could they get short term .05%.

They are not that creative. Bad situation, but, false claims are just that, false claims.
 
So correct me if I am wrong, but the way I understand it is if I am unsuccessful then I can get my application fee back even though I am a resident. It stats Hunters who applied for bighorn sheep, oryx or ibex licenses for the 2014-15 seasons and are unsuccessful in the drawings will be eligible for full refunds of application fees and license fees. It does not specify weather you are a resident or not.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-27-14 AT 12:52PM (MST)[p]Nothing personal to you nmpaul, or anyone else in any specific way, and after looking back and realizing that it's just hunting and it's not the end of the world, i realize chit happens. I think there could have been a much better solution though and the g anf f had to have know this decision was coming down the pipeline for weeks before the draw. I find it very hard to believe that they didn't hear of this in advance. It is what it is, and that's all there is to it. I read thru several of the earlier posts and saw several people posting about how we as non residents where a bunch of complainers and got fired up, because i think if the deal was reversed on anyone from new mexico they would feel the same, with regards to the timing of collecting funds. On a positive note: new mexico has done an extremely good job in my opinion at managing their elk herds. Starting to get slightly shot out with all the land owner tags, but darn good job overall!! I have hunted in many units in new mexico over the years, and the forest there is something special, not necessarily in appearance over the rest, but feel so to speak. Good luck to all in the draw this year, and on your expeditions. Also i'm thankful for the fact new mexico hasn't buckled yet to the way of thinking that utah has with regards to wealth tags being taken out of the draw. The g and f should be commended for not going by this way of thought. If you new mexico residents want to keep winning good battles like you just did with the tag allocations keep fighting to keep the "give away" tags down to a minimum.
 
Live4:

Like typical G&F, it's my understanding they will refund all unsuccessful ibex/BH/oryx who don't draw, regardless of R or NR.

Talk about boneheaded. There isn't a single resident in the draw already who is unhappy with the recent turn of events, so why give back a bunch o' $ that we're all happy to pay?!

2 steps forward, 1 step back...sometimes I wonder if it isn't the other way around.
 
>LAST EDITED ON Mar-27-14
>AT 12:52?PM (MST)
>
>Nothing personal to you nmpaul, or
>anyone else in any specific
>way, and after looking back
>and realizing that it's just
>hunting and it's not the
>end of the world, i
>realize chit happens. I think
>there could have been a
>much better solution though and
>the g anf f had
>to have know this decision
>was coming down the pipeline
>for weeks before the draw.
>I find it very hard
>to believe that they didn't
>hear of this in advance.
>It is what it is,
>and that's all there is
>to it. I read thru
>several of the earlier posts
>and saw several people posting
>about how we as non
>residents where a bunch of
>complainers and got fired up,
>because i think if the
>deal was reversed on anyone
>from new mexico they would
>feel the same, with regards
>to the timing of collecting
>funds. On a positive note:
>new mexico has done an
>extremely good job in my
>opinion at managing their elk
>herds. Starting to get slightly
>shot out with all the
>land owner tags, but darn
>good job overall!! I have
>hunted in many units in
>new mexico over the years,
>and the forest there is
>something special, not necessarily in
>appearance over the rest, but
>feel so to speak. Good
>luck to all in the
>draw this year, and on
>your expeditions. Also i'm thankful
>for the fact new mexico
>hasn't buckled yet to the
>way of thinking that utah
>has with regards to wealth
>tags being taken out of
>the draw. The g and
>f should be commended for
>not going by this way
>of thought. If you new
>mexico residents want to keep
>winning good battles like you
>just did with the tag
>allocations keep fighting to keep
>the "give away" tags down
>to a minimum.

I think we all agree the timing was terrible.

The judge may have made this decision and had no idea what it would create such problems.
 
So let me get this straight...

As a NR you can either;

A. Withdraw your sheep, ibex, and oryx applications and have a 0% chance to draw and still have to wait until after the draw to get your tag and $20 application refund or;

B. Leave your sheep, ibex, and oryx applications in the draw and have a 0% chance for a ram sheep tag, but still have a slim chance at an ibex and oryx tag. If unsuccessful, you still get a full refund of your tag and $20 application fee.

Since NM isn't going to refund cancelled apps any sooner than draw refunds, why would any NR go through the hassle to pull their applications prior to the draw unless strictly on principle since they still have a chance to draw an ibex and oryx tag and you still get the $20 application refunded in either case?


Horniac
 
>So let me get this straight...
>
>
>As a NR you can either;
>
>
>A. Withdraw your sheep, ibex, and
>oryx applications and have a
>0% chance to draw and
>still have to wait until
>after the draw to get
>your tag and $20 application
>refund or;
>
>B. Leave your sheep, ibex, and
>oryx applications in the draw
>and have a 0% chance
>for a ram sheep tag,
>but still have a slim
>chance at an ibex and
>oryx tag. If unsuccessful, you
>still get a full refund
>of your tag and $20
>application fee.
>
>Since NM isn't going to refund
>cancelled apps any sooner than
>draw refunds, why would any
>NR go through the hassle
>to pull their applications prior
>to the draw unless strictly
>on principle since they still
>have a chance to draw
>an ibex and oryx tag
>and you still get the
>$20 application refunded in either
>case?
>
>
>Horniac

From my understanding, you've got it right. If the refund is no quicker, I see no reason to delete the app.

I think the dept needs to work on refunding IMMEDIATELY to anybody that deletes their app for those 3 species.

Travis
 
Couesmagnet,

Just wait and see what happens over the next few years..........SFW to the rescue of NMGFD! NM becomes a suburb of Utah!
 
Eight years. That's when the changes in law and court rulings made vacation of the Twerk Injunction a slam dunk. The embarrassment of 15 out 16 desert sheep tags being drawn by nonresidents in 2012 made it so The Game Commission couldn't ignore the obvious anymore and they had to finally challenge the Twerk injunction.

The nonresidents have had an unprecedented 37 year pillage of NM sheep tags and all you do now is go nuts because it ended. You guys can say whatever you want but you aren't fooling anybody. The only thing you are mad about is that there is a quota in NM for Sheep now.

The ignorance of calling this a bait and switch is astounding. When you sent your applications in it would have been illegal for NM to apply a quote. On Monday the ruling came out and Twerk was vacated and now it would be illegal to not have a quota. It ain't rocket science.

NM had no control over when the judge would rule and what her ruling would be. Say they warned you that the quota may be implemented before the drawing and you decided not to apply and then the quota did not happen. The most childish of you would be screaming about a bait and switch and that they need to redo the drawing and let you in. Anyway, 90% of you would have applied anyway because clearly by virtue of the fact that you fork over the money for a drawing with such infinitesimal odds means you are willing to gamble. The odds of there being a quota implemented were a heck of a lot higher than your odds if drawing. The only screwees in this are NM residents that have not had nonresident quotas for sheep for the past 37 years.
 
>Couesmagnet,
>
>Just wait and see what happens
>over the next few years..........SFW
>to the rescue of NMGFD!
>NM becomes a suburb of
>Utah!


I hope so. Never considered supporting SFW until recently. Maybe ALL tags should go to the highest bidder (resident or non-resident).
 
A review of the sheep draw odds back to 2002 show the allocation follows the res/nr pools pretty well excepting 2012.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-27-14 AT 06:03PM (MST)[p]I can't believe I actually bothered to read thru all of these posts--but I did see a few more "how will NM make up the money?" posts.

There are two sides to that coin: the total $$ that the NRs add to the NM economy need to be reduced by the sum total $$ that Rs take elsewhere because they weren't able to draw a tag here in NM. In the end it's going to be close to a wash. This is especially true for BHS. It's a little less true for oryx and ibex because outside of NM those species are limited to game ranches, unless you want to go overseas, which some Rs do.

The NRs that put some big dollars on their bank cards in the end are only out the interest charged for less than two months. This will be more for some, less for others, depending on their credit histories, but which is not anything that NM has any control over, and all 100% were willing to forgo regardless of the draw results when they hit the enter button.

I get it that NRs were screwed out of a very slim lottery type chance to hunt BHS, ibex, and oryx, and I feel like I should be treating my NR buddies to a steak dinner or something.

But this is one of the rare cases where I think arguing about money impact is much ado about relatively small differences that doesn't merit the keystrokes to make it into an issue.
 
I have applied in NM for sheep for the last 15 years. I am from GA and I knew prior to the draw that there was a very good chance that the injunction would be done away with yet I applied anyway hoping for the best. I feel that the injunction was complete BS for the residents of NM because everyone should have a better chance to hunt their own state than a non resident. I am glad NM residents will be guaranteed tags but I am not at all happy about the fact that their will not be any tags for us unguided folks (or at least that is what it looks like).If there are no tags available for unguided hunters than the department should issue immediate refunds to anyone requesting them. on a side note, I think that the guide welfare in NM is just as disgusting as 15 out of 16 desert tags going to non residents, especially when the do it yourselfers are the ones getting rained on. Everyone should take a step back and evaluate things from an objective perspective. Being from GA and applying in every western state for 15 years I've witnessed a disturbing trend of prices escalating and opportunity depreciating. It really sucks. I think there should be a nation wide 85% 15% or 80% 20% split. Just my two cents from an open minded perspective.
 
>Eight years. That's when the changes
>in law and court rulings
>made vacation of the Twerk
>Injunction a slam dunk. The
>embarrassment of 15 out 16
>desert sheep tags being drawn
>by nonresidents in 2012 made
>it so The Game Commission
>couldn't ignore the obvious anymore
>and they had to finally
>challenge the Twerk injunction.
>
>The nonresidents have had an unprecedented
>37 year pillage of NM
>sheep tags and all you
>do now is go nuts
>because it ended. You guys
>can say whatever you want
>but you aren't fooling anybody.
>The only thing you are
>mad about is that there
>is a quota in NM
>for Sheep now.
>
>The ignorance of calling this a
>bait and switch is astounding.
>When you sent your applications
>in it would have been
>illegal for NM to apply
>a quote. On Monday the
>ruling came out and Twerk
>was vacated and now it
>would be illegal to not
>have a quota. It ain't
>rocket science.
>
>NM had no control over when
>the judge would rule and
>what her ruling would be.
>Say they warned you that
>the quota may be implemented
>before the drawing and you
>decided not to apply and
>then the quota did not
>happen. The most childish of
>you would be screaming about
>a bait and switch and
>that they need to redo
>the drawing and let you
>in. Anyway, 90% of
>you would have applied anyway
>because clearly by virtue of
>the fact that you fork
>over the money for a
>drawing with such infinitesimal odds
>means you are willing to
>gamble. The odds of there
>being a quota implemented were
>a heck of a lot
>higher than your odds if
>drawing. The only screwees in
>this are NM residents that
>have not had nonresident quotas
>for sheep for the past
>37 years.

The only thing that I'm pissed off about is that I've got $6,000 tied up for two months now for absolutely nothing. I could care less about the sheep tags. Ok, that's a lie, cause it does suck to go from a .1% chance to a 0% chance but I was never holding my breath that I'd draw a sheep tag. You make it sound like us non-residents are disappointed that we can't pillage all the sheep tags. You do realize that something like .25% of NR that apply draw a tag on average. Seriously, how disappointed do you think people could be? I don't think it was a bait and switch, and I think the NMDGF's hands were tied with regards to implementation. They can, however, do something about tying up millions of peoples dollars for a couple months though.
 
Seriously, how
>disappointed do you think people
>could be? I don't
>think it was a bait
>and switch, and I think
>the NMDGF's hands were tied
>with regards to implementation.
>They can, however, do something
>about tying up millions of
>peoples dollars for a couple
>months though.


You can do something too, and call you credut card company but be advised that you will have to pull out of all the drawings tied to that charge.
 
I love the references to Twerk. Somehow I feel that NM GF is twerking, and it is just as ridiculous as Miley Cyrus doing so.

I like to think of myself as pretty level-headed, see both sides of an argument, and then form an opinion based on fact, not emotion.

Like a lot of NRs, I have hunted NM and love it, and it's people, not to mention that my spouse is from NM. I think that NM residents have been taken to the cleaners on the BHS, ORYX, and IBEX tags because of the Terk injunction. However, the over-reaction of NM in the creation of the 84-10-6% split was simply a strike back at the injustice of the BHS, Oryx, and IBEX tags not having an allocation.

A more realistic allocation needs to be made, in my opinion, but maybe that is because I live in Wyoming and we give at least 25% of our tags to NR's, including NM residents. Maybe we need to go to reciprocity allocation, meaning California hunters would be limited to 1 NR tag for each species, NM could get cutout of the draw after 6% of tags were issued to NR's, etc., but I digress.

The real issue I have is that I will have spent approximately $200 in credit card fees and interest for my family's applications in NM with zero chance of drawing, because the rules changed in the middle of the game. That is fundamentally un-American in principal and practice. NM needs to reconsider their poorly thought out, poorly implemented plan to address this matter. I would think that bureaucrats would have had a contingency plan for this very thing, knowing it was before the court, rather than making it up on the fly.

Enough blackening the eyes of NM AG and G&F: Do I have a chance at drawing a sheep tag if I apply under the Outfitter sponsored 10% allocation? Even combining that with the 6% NR allocation, the way I read the law, the unit allocations will not support a tag to either the O&G or NR allocations.

Thanks for the info,
WyMo

PS. NMPAUL, you are just plain wrong on the principal of our money not being put to use for our benefit not meaning anything. Please, rethink your response to some of the other posters about their money being taken (and legally it is called a taking), without consideration.
 
>PS. NMPAUL, you are just
>plain wrong on the principal
>of our money not being
>put to use for our
>benefit not meaning anything.
>Please, rethink your response to
>some of the other posters
>about their money being taken
>(and legally it is called
>a taking), without consideration.


I think you misunderstood me. I did not say someone may put their own money to use.
I stated NMGF is not allowed to earn interest on money it is holding. That is what I understand.

That is what I was responding to. How people have their money working for them I never addressed. How much they would have to pay on a credit card advance I did, and will stick with what I said.
 
1Bigbull. Guys like you are why I am going to go to every Game Commission meeting, legislative committee meeting, whatever necessary as a NM resident and speak up and plead your case. The Nonresident DIY hunter really deserves to have their just tags. You would be surprised how many residents want you to have your tags. We dislike the 6% nonres quota as much as you do. It may take legislative action to get the nonres quota filled and your interests will be represented. We all have out of state friends and family that we would love to hunt with.
 
Paul,
It is nothing personal, I have helped you in the past and will do it again in the future, as I am sure you would. This is about the most fundamental principle of American law. I paid for something that was advertised as X, midway through, after incurring many costs, the rules change and I do not receive any benefit from the money spent. That is a taking. I don't care if it was only $1. It is still a taking.
___________________________________

You stated in two earlier posts:
"Having a few grand tied up on a credit card for 2 months is not damages.
Interest??? $50 ????

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."
_____________________________
A business person will file in court and/or put a very dark mark on your credit record for a very small (never insignificant) amount of money, all in an attempt to compel you to make a payment that is just and owed. The government is even worse about chasing down a very small amount of money it perceives to be owed, and will spend thousands to recoup pennies. That is how serious this taking is by NM G&F supported by an unreasoned legal opinion by the AG's office.

Will I sue to get my money back-no it would cost thousands to recoup $200-I am not the government. But the State of NM can and should rethink the draw.

Screw me once, shame on you. Screw me twice, shame on me. I ain;t gonna be shamed.
 
>It's one screwed up Game/Fish Dept,
>thats for sure.
>And as poor as NM seems
>to be you would think
>they would be offering incentives
>for NR's. I mean that
>drive from ABQ to Alamogordo
>aint nothin but desert and
>slums.
>Oh well.

Obviously you don't know much about NM if you call it desert and slums. Please allow me to shed some information that natives are very proud of.

Santa Fe New Mexico voted the best place to shop in the country. Wow you probably didn't expect that but your wife would love the plaza and the shopping and we love the revenue. Maybe we can make up some of the lost sheep revenue.

Los Alamos County most millionaires per capata in the country. (Slums HuH)

Enchanted circle 3 awesome ski valleys in a 60 mile radius. (Taos, Angel Fire, Red River)

Green chile Non Residents and Residents love it.

The Toltec Railroad from Chama NM to Antonito Colorado.

And the most proud is the citizens of New Mexico who will invite you into there homes and treat you like family. If you don't believe this have truck trouble, need help while hunting, some honest local will do there best to help you. ( Please don't start bashing the exceptions because there every where. )

EvilNR if your ever in the Santa Fe area let me know I will gladly spend a few days touring you on my dime.

I agree the Game and Fish owes you all immediate refunds. One pool for NR no more out fitter pool. I'm personally going to yank on my state Reps ear on this. I hope everyone does the same.
 

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

IMG_4386.jpeg
ABCA1A49-5E77-443D-BEC7-DD732F14F29A.jpeg
Euro Mounts
Screenshot_20220107-151831_Gallery.jpg
IMG_0676 (2)a.jpg
IMG_20131207_124723-1.jpg
Huge Bull Elk
342488736_263441792780040_1566272923379424723_n.jpg
IMG_3560.MOV
8C7863AE-FE13-40BD-A9AB-D3BD9D602F0C.jpeg
1657116823232.jpeg
1704251620039.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