Changes to New Mexico Outfitter Pool

[Labman]

Doesn't Idaho have outfitter tags too?

Not that you can apply for in a separate pool. I think they have a few deer and elk tags you can get through an outfitter.

 

[bigsky2]

Does anyone know if this new rule went through?

 

[NoWiser]

It did not.

 

[bigsky2]

That's good to know, I was afraid the odds for the unguided pool would get even worse. Do you have a link where I can read about it? I am still having people tell me this changed.

 

[NoWiser]

I do not have a link, but I'm on the email list for a well known outfitter down there and they sent me an email that it was defeated.

 

[Aussie_hunter_JD]

I think every state should allow diy hunting (I'd have done a caribou hunt by now at least in ak). They'd never get anything like that through down here. In my state of aus the tricky part is finding a guide as it's all diy pretty much!

Someone always has to make money somewhere though.

 

[hank4elk]

I know many NM outfitters. Some are good folks. But they remind me of the whole entitlement culture here.Ranchers included.
That said the whole outfitter pool deal is BS & the LO system needs serious work. NMG&F for that matter.
I tried my hand at speaking up @ Commission meetings,getting to know the wardens & turning in violations I see.
That all stopped a few years ago. Made me suspect on too many lists.

I was very lucky as a NR DIY hunter here for years,both in the draw & the hunts. It changed the year I moved here.10% of the pool was OK with me.I got no better odds/% in other western states & the cost was way less.Still costs less than most I can see tho I no longer apply in any other states.

NM is corrupt and always has been.
It's as timeless as it's long history. Hell,we sent it everywhere with chiles,beans,squash & maize it seems.
Good luck in the draw folks. Some day I'll draw a true trophy type unit. Till then I'll hunt how & where I can.

 

[Labman]

Hank, 100% agree with you. I have gone to the EPLUS manager with numerous ideas that would be a breeze to implement and would make the program so much more friendly to the ones it should benefit-the hunters. He said, ya those are great ideas...they never went further than his office. The culture down there reeks of laziness and corruption. I love the hunting and people there but the people in power are as close to worthless as they come in govt.

 

[F250]

I too have written off New Mexico for a place to hunt. My wife and I enjoyed DIY December muzzle loader cow hunts. Several years ago NM took that opportunity away from nonresidents.

 

[mdhunter]

I have drawn good tags in New Mexico and even purchased one in a year I didn’t draw anywhere in the West. I assumed the landowner tags in New Mexico were issued in return for property access. I must have been wrong on that thought.

 

[hank4elk]

NM is bad ,stay away...LOL.
LO tags are for damages (use)elk do to private lands & habitat provided for said elk/wildlife...
UW tags are suppossed to provide access to public in return for tags,but I rarely see that. This program is the one that really needs to be cleaned up. Vague in wording,implementation and enforcement. IMHO
RO tags provide access for tag holders & an opportunity to hunt , to deeded lands,but not the general public...unless you want to allow access.
There are some other access incentive programs,but I know little of them.
Everyone loves to hate the landowners.
I see LO tags & similar vague tag allotments & access issues in other states too. They just name the programs different. IMHO

 

[Deleted member 22670]

If I remember correctly, you'll have a hell of a time trying to even find out where the property is that the voucher is tied to. Yeah they're supposed to provide access, but they have for requirement to advertise or make known where you can hunt. That's why the UW were worth more than the RO. Is it still that way? NM is definitely one of the more backwards state's I have lived in and their policies suck for the avg DIY guy, but I still love it there and the elk hunting is awesome. I could see myself moving back there some day.

 

[Labman]

That was just one of my suggestions. They should have the maps for all UW tags within the COER (which are a requirement of EPLUS enrollment) available to anyone on the internet, just like they are with similar programs in WY, ND, MT, SD... As it stands in order to have a fighting chance of guessing where these UW properties are each hunter has to submit a public information request asking for specific maps. When you get them (for a price) about half the maps are usable, the others are hand drawn on napkins and are clearly not in compliance with the EPLUS rules. Their response to me when I said half these maps are garbage...call the landowner! Really? Why on earth are the maps not available to the OnX folks so they can be on your GPS is beyond me. I asked the OnX folks and they said they requested it, but were denied because the open lands change every year...piss poor excuse IMO (SCR properties are the ones that change year to year but the regular list is pretty solid every year). Sounds like laziness. Another idea I threw out was why not require the landowners who enroll in the program to have their lands open every year regardless of whether or not they are issued a permit (really only a player for SCR properties, but they add up to a ton of ground).

 

[hank4elk]

Yep,when you enroll you are to provide maps & Legal discription of said property...lol Never seen one for UW elk or antelope RO or UW,yet for a ranch in the programs. They even post Leased Public Lands with private property signs all the time,lock gates.
I had to show Plot Map(Legal discription/Deed) of deeded lands, water features,property on a TOPO & on BLM map when I signed up for RO program. I gave 2 copies of each.
Last time I was in SF to discuss my ranch with head of COER program & elk,I noticed half my maps were gone fro my file. I said nothing because I had just had my tags cut in half. No reason or warning & no garunttees in NM boy.

I use onxmaps & know how to find properties & boundaries. NMG&F uses onxmaps or the wardens here do.
I know because I hunt here on public lands & want access, so I find out.
It is not rocket science or magic. Catron County(mine) is only county NOT to provide private property ownership for use on onxmaps. I can find out by going to courthouse & finding currant owner info myself. Real Old School. Randy asked me about some of the posted signs on land near me when he was here,as onxmaps shows it Public.

I have never gotten a straight answer from any G&F personel on where these UW ranch maps are.Why can they post Public Lands & lock gates? Even from the Head of NMG&F.
"It's available online", "I'll look into it & get back to you". Yeah right.

 

[Labman]

The maps are only available through a public information request. You literally can't get them anywhere else. It is insane. It is as if they are trying to keep the properties a secret. So they would rather have every tag holder ask for the maps than upload them to their web site. Montana was able to make exactly this happen. I requested all of the UW maps for a particular unit once, literally half were unreadable due to being hand drawn, copy of a copy of a copy, just garbage. Last year they implemented new rules for EPLUS, after the applications had come out, and they didn't mention anything about the new requirements anywhere online at any point in time. Just denied new applicants based on their new set of arbitrary rules. But properties previously enrolled were grandfathered in and do not have to comply. So a guy with a nice 80 acre chunk in the heart of the COER that borders state and BLM, and is accessible, gets denied into the program while 8 seperate 10 acre parcels that are inaccessible in the middle of a section of private all get UW tags...bull tags. True story. How does that not just reek of incompetence or corruption. And then they defend their position! Arrogance on top of it.

 

[Riplip]

So rumor has it that the proposed rule change has been adopted...

Now anyone who draws in the Outfitter pool has to be accompanied IN THE FIELD for a minimum of two days. Both the guide and client must have copies of their signed contract on them in the field . The hunter may continue to hunt if the season is still open,and upon meeting the requirements of the contract. Language is poorly written and extremely vauge in details. I wonder what outfitter are charging for this partial guide service?

 

[NoWiser]

That’s not a change, Riplip. It’s been that way for awhile.

Fees vary by outfitter.

 

[Keeptrying]

Based upon my experiences in New Mexico as a young man I would never spend my energy or money hunting there. The responses to this thread show me that isn't a bad plan.

 

[pointingdogsrule]

I hunted NM once. Used the guides number to get better odds on the tag. The catch was that I had to stay in the camp. I believe $1250.00.... I can not remember exactly. At that time it seemed reasonable as it was my first time and I was driving from Iowa. Drove into camp that was all set-up, three meals per day, electricity for part of the day, a guide that would pack out your elk for a "tip", and they told you where previous elk were being shot. For a first timer I thought that it was a good first time experience and would do it once more if I had the urge. I hunted the public lands for the 5 day period and had lots of fun. I screwed up on a legal elk at 150 yards (stupid greenhorn). Just so you understand they just provided the camp... no person guiding.

 

[Trial153]

Guide welfare, and monetizing the states wildlife befitting private individuals. Unfortunately NM doesn’t have a monopoly on this. It’s happening everplace. It will be death by a thousand cuts.