It seems like this could go a lot of different directions. I wonder how many outfitters would provide NR hunters 2 or more tags to a group of individuals who liked to hunt together and were willing to pay for the tags. If this passes and it turns to all draw, would those NR hunters who can't hunt as a group together (unless they all draw) start considering other states where they can guarantee a group hunt where everyone has a tag? That could in turn boost NR DIY odds. Maybe....
SB 312 - eliminating outfitter set asides.
- Thread starter MTGomer
- Start date
Personally I would not count on any group hunts in a draw,in NM.
I did see a pair last year from KY tho. What do I know,I hunt alone.
That is where I see LO tags going mostly. Groups of out of state hunters. But I also see plenty of residents with LO tags.
Looking to see where this is now. The bill. The interweb seems silent on it.
I did see a pair last year from KY tho. What do I know,I hunt alone.
That is where I see LO tags going mostly. Groups of out of state hunters. But I also see plenty of residents with LO tags.
Looking to see where this is now. The bill. The interweb seems silent on it.
Khunter
Well-known member
Yes, you can draw out of the nonresident non outfitter pool and then go hire an outfitter. No idea ow many do that.
Khunter
Well-known member
I have drawn as part of a 2-person nonresident elk application a couple times. Once in 16D which was of course ridiculously long odds. Did same in unit 15 another tough draw.
Nick87
Well-known member
Exactly
Just got an notice from NMWF on the bill. Nothing in papers from what I have seen,nor on local news.
NMWF is posing it as a positive for NM folks. Funding increase from yadda yadda Fed acount,that will never be funded fully of course.
They are pretty anti-non resident hunter group from what I have seen,besides being very anti-landowner.
Does look like it would be 90R%-10NR%.
Repeal Jenning's law.
NMWF is posing it as a positive for NM folks. Funding increase from yadda yadda Fed acount,that will never be funded fully of course.
They are pretty anti-non resident hunter group from what I have seen,besides being very anti-landowner.
Does look like it would be 90R%-10NR%.
Repeal Jenning's law.
I am afraid its gonna lead to LO tags effectively being bought up for clients, and under a capitalistic system just drive up price of those LO and in effect outfitted hunts. That increase will cause a kings deer effect and push many both residents and nonres to compete for fewer total tags(nonres).
Hank would you give your tag to a buddy or sell it to a outfitter for $8k. I know your a solid dude and may still give it to your buddy but everyone has bills to pay... he doesnt have your tag one more in draw
as i have said this doesnt pass the smell test to me and i need to get smarter and read full proposal but sure seems like its only going to more problems for very little benefit to resident hunters. I said in previous post just change draw 85/15% no outfitter pools! LO tags should be price controlled by state with financial benefit: RO tags immediately family, UW(significant cost) as a term of accepting tag ALL tag holders should be able to hunt the property (i.e. walk in access).
I gave away all my tags last couple years & probably will again. I'm small potatoes. Dumb maybe,but not stupid. Yeah pretty broke & dumb..............lol.
And I do see your point,but that ship has sailed,many years ago with the economy as it is.
Outfitters & supply & demand set or finagled the price. Average folks from anywhere cannot afford those tags anymore. For the most part. Some are like me.
I also would like to see the resident prices go up,but that will not happen. NM,land of entitlement in many ways.
Valley1320
Well-known member
I think alot of guys would be surprised at how many LOs give friends their tags.. I know a decent amount of guys that do. I had a guy give me a LO tag last year and also I had gave my dad one a few years before that. And he never sells any of his tags. But I'm also sure the number of guys selling their tags for outnumbers it.
D_Walt
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2020
- Messages
- 668
I would bet that, much like ccc said, market forces will shift more and more landowner tags into the hands of non-residents. There is no way to escape the laws of supply and demand. This will be a “net zero” on the whole for residents; as I would bet there will be a corresponding 6% increase in LO Voucher sales to NR’s to offset the lack of tags in the outfitter pool. Sounds to me like a few politicians/activists wanting to do something to make them feel better even though it will not do a great deal to help anyone. Much like changing the NR rounding rules last year, did nothing for residents, took away some opportunity for NR’s - that whole deal seemed petty to me. Either way, in the end it’s up to New Mexico’s elected officials to decide and that’s how it works in a democratic Republic. As Winston Churchill said “democracy is the worst system, except for all the others”. If the folks in NM don’t like it they’ll vote for politicians who will change it, though I won’t hold my breath. If the odds drop so be it, I’ll still apply and if I don’t draw I’ll save some $ a year or two and buy a voucher and get on with life. Or hunt Colorado.
D_Walt
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2020
- Messages
- 668
No doubt there are lots of generous people, but what if your friend starts getting regular offers to sell his tags for a significant amount? As resources become scarce their value goes up; and would he be as willing to give you a tag that someone else was offering him $3 or 4K or more for? I realize some folks would still give away their tags, but I bet many more would sell.
You’re advocating for something that is already in place.
Not directed at you ccc, but I think that there are a pile of folks out there who don’t understand the rules behind UW tags and the private/public split. It is irrelevant if the LO chooses RO or UW, that is a tag that gets subtracted from the unit quota. Why on earth anyone would advocate for ONLY RO tags illustrates that the person holding that opinion doesn’t understand the system. UW tags are nothing but a benefit to the average DIY hunter.
I truley as i said dont know all the issues, thats why these conversations are productive to me. But 2 years ago i had a gila tag called game and fish and asked about walkin and other access in my zone and was told i have to get (think they said written) permission to hunt/access ANY private property. When i asked about landowner tags and hunting those properties they said that was between tag holder and land owner, I could ask.... i also asked what was total amount of tags issued in my hunt area for first rifle and was told we dont know, i understand it was mid summer and expect things not finalized yet but came away with impression it was a complete sh!@show. Maybe i had the new guy that was not familiar with everything.
So your saying if i draw that tag again i can hunt all enrolled private lands that recieved tags???
subtracted from whos quota; Res/nr who? I thought they are in addition too, dont they get issued months apart?
Thanks for all this info bro, apparently my experiances and info i was led to believe was wrong.
Ya, you talked to someone who didn’t know anything. You don’t have to ask, notify, or mention anything to a LO who took the UW option. Treat it like public, except no camping and off road retrieval.
Ok, let’s look at unit 15...I like real numbers. 78% public/22% private. The entire unit has a total tag quota of 923 MB muzz tags, 720 go to the draw (78%), 203 go to landowners (22%...RO or UW, their choice). If they pick UW they have to allow access and they have to adhere to established seasons. If they pick RO they don’t have to allow access (they still could but very unlikely) and they get to pick any 5 days all the way from Oct - Dec. Those 203 tags in this example are never going in the draw, so why not enjoy the 112,000 acres of private and ??? acres of landlocked public the program opens up with the UW choice. Good questions you asked. Knowledge is power they say.
Forgot to answer all the questions...all 203 of those tags in this example are up for grabs. R or NR. (G&F makes more $$$ if they are validated by NR). They won’t know breakdown on season choice or R/NR split until seasons are over because you can choose mid season. They can also choose to throw them away, and it might surprise many, but quite a few never get validated.
Last edited:
Wow your teaching me, Thanks!!!
Ok i see 695 mb(3muzzy seasons) but could just be difference in year permits (21-22 booklet)?
Last question where do you find that 923 MB number?
If i ever draw again or more likely buy a LO tag, i owe you a beer during trip...lol
you left out the youth hunt...those 25 add up to the 720 total
. The 923 number is in the 4 (I think it’s 4 yr) year season structure document that they revisit during the commission review process. I will see if I saved a copy.
The Hedgehog
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2000
- Messages
- 11,676
No more outfitter tags for you...
Perfect i seen the 25 youth but were labeled ES so didn't think they counted. Dont stress the season structure doc i am sure now that i know name i could find it if for some reason wanted it. You been great help and i learned much better how this process is working and sure few others been following.
Glad to help. I would hope that anyone who is reading this and didn’t fully understand the program now thinks, damn...that is actually a win-win for everyone. When folks have preconceived notions, inaccurate info, or a narrative they want to push you will only hear opinions based on emotion. When the facts get thrown out there the room gets quiet pretty quick.Perfect i seen the 25 youth but were labeled ES so didn't think they counted. Dont stress the season structure doc i am sure now that i know name i could find it if for some reason wanted it. You been great help and i learned much better how this process is working and sure few others been following.
