SB 312 - eliminating outfitter set asides.

[hank4elk]

So...BHA now supports it. I could see that coming.

Non resident bull tags go up to $700. No change in resident prices. I could see that coming.

Name changes are most of bill. NM Dept. of Wildlife Conservation.
Dept. will get $1 mill of general funds.
Both of these I could see coming and can see problems coming from them.IMHO
Maybe the Conservation Officers will get a uniform color besides blistering dark gray to wear.....lol

One item mentioned by another here is hunt times of LO tags.
UW LO tags will only be good during draw hunt times. Oct.5th to ? depending on unit.
RO are Oct. 5th to Dec 31st for MB & A tags. ES are choose early or late bow in Sept.

 

[VikingsGuy]

The bill appears long and that is because the department is being renamed. This makes it so that everywhere the department is named in statute, it appears in this bill as stricken out and renamed.

Tax payer funds well spent I am sure on new signs, forms, websites, stationary, etc - I love govt.

 

[MTGomer]

Tax payer funds well spent I am sure on new signs, forms, websites, stationary, etc - I love govt.

That part seems wasteful. If that’s the stuff the leftists that run the state want, might as well get some good hunting stuff attached to it.

 

[Labman]

That part seems wasteful. If that’s the stuff the leftists that run the state want, might as well get some good hunting stuff attached to it.

All we want is a name change, says this guy:

 

[mariano742]

You seem very emotional about this issue which is mainly aimed to benefit Resident hunters of NM, not NR residents from Maine or Saskatchewan. I see things differently, you can argue all you want and embark on this crusade of yours, you can also be as flabbergasted as you'd like, I really don't care.

I'm not sure what part of me being against guide/outfitter pool you don't get. I really couldn't give a rats butt about the math if it removes these handouts to guides and outfitters. If NR want to apply in the NR pool of applicant and choose to get an outfitter, so be it. At the end of the day, I'm not a resident of NM so I really don't care what they elect to do, I will adjust my applications accordingly whichever way this goes.

Ok that comment highlights what you don’t get. Yes it does benefit resident hunters. But it harms nonresident hunters! And I’m an American. I have a right to hunt in any state. So it definitely interests and affects me. And you just admitted that you don’t care if it hurts your odds as long as it hurts outfitters. That is, pardon my french, but really dumb. It’s biting off your nose to spite your face. But at least you admit that you are employing emotion targeted against outfitters and don’t care that it will hurt NR odds. ok.

 

[grizzly_]

Have any of you guys looked at what's in this bill? The R/NR split is a tiny part of the overall legislation and much of it is very questionable, at best.

 

[Labman]

Have any of you guys looked at what's in this bill? The R/NR split is a tiny part of the overall legislation and much of it is very questionable, at best.

 

[Straight Arrow]

I have a right to hunt in any state.

Only if that state allows you the privilege of drawing/purchasing a tag/license. The hunting privileges to NRs varies from state to state. Likely there are no states which have established the hunting right to NRs.

 

[VikingsGuy]

And I’m an American. I have a right to hunt in any state.

That may be your wish. It may even be the right way for things to be. But it undoubtably is NOT true. Hunting is regulated state by state and has nothing to do with being an American. When I go to WY to hunt, I am in the same shoes as a NR from Canada or the UK. States choose to allow NR to hunt to generate revenue (tags, fees and local business). To what extent they choose to do so is entirely their option. Different states have made different choices.

That said, despite many comments to the contrary this is not cemented in some legal stone for all of times - it has been true for the past, and is true today, but laws and approaches change on all types of issues. The Federal govt and the Federal courts could choose to weigh in. But to date they have repeatedly chosen not to. And there are no signs on the horizon that they plan to. So for now and the forseeable future hunting is a state by state legal regime where out of staters have no particular rights other than the influence of their $$.

 

[mariano742]

That may be your wish. It may even be the right way for things to be. But it undoubtably is NOT true. Hunting is regulated state by state and has nothing to do with being an American. When I go to WY to hunt, I am in the same shoes as a NR from Canada or the UK. States choose to allow NR to hunt to generate revenue (tags, fees and local business). To what extent they choose to do so is entirely their option. Different states have made different choices.

That said, despite many comments to the contrary this is not cemented in some legal stone for all of times - it has been true for the past, and is true today, but laws and approaches change on all types of issues. The Federal govt and the Federal courts could choose to weigh in. But to date they have repeatedly chosen not to. And there are no signs on the horizon that they plan to. So for now and the forseeable future hunting is a state by state legal regime where out of staters have no particular rights other than the influence of their $$.

under the equal protection clause i do have a right to hunt in any state if states keep pushing NR further and further the courts are going to revisit this on the federal level

 

[Deleted member 20812]

under the equal protection clause i do have a right to hunt in any state if states keep pushing NR further and further the courts are going to revisit this on the federal level

They revisited it under the commerce clause about 10 years ago. It went no where.

Good luck.

 

[mariano742]

under the equal protection clause i do have a right to hunt in any state if states keep pushing NR further and further the courts are going to revisit this on the federal level

we’re talking about hunting hunting on FEDERAL lands. BLM. National Forests. etc

 

[Deleted member 20812]

we’re talking about hunting hunting on FEDERAL lands. BLM. National Forests. etc

Doesn't matter the land ownership. It's still a state's management issue.

 

[mariano742]

like i say. states abusing citizens rights vis a vis the equal protection law can only go so far. there’s case law on this

 

[VikingsGuy]

like i say. states abusing citizens rights vis a vis the equal protection law can only go so far. there’s case law on this

There is no case law that even begins to suggest an equal protection argument in favor of NR hunting.

That being said, certainly a SCOTUS or Congress that actually cared about this issue has plenty of tools at their disposal to address - but there is no evidence they have any interest in this. As such the law is currently clear, state restriction (or even outright banning) of NR hunters is lawful under the equal protections clause and the commerce clause. It is also equally clear, if Congress wanted to legislate a different outcome under the commerce clause it could. It is also equally clear that SCOTUS could reverse itself as to epc or cc - but there is no current indication they will.

 

[Straight Arrow]

we’re talking about hunting hunting on FEDERAL lands. BLM. National Forests. etc

'Old deflated argument, an issue with the dust long ago settled. Wildlife and hunting is a state prerogative ... regardless of land ownership / oversight.

states abusing citizens rights vis a vis the equal protection law can only go so far. there’s case law on this

When you're in a hole ... quit digging. Especially with JLS and VikingsGuy dropping fill from a bulldozer!

 

[bobbydean]

Those two members usually win the discussion. I think they stick with facts and forgo the emotion.

 

[ccc23454]

Remember a productive conversation about NM tag allocations....

 

[Pucky Freak]

under the equal protection clause i do have a right to hunt in any state if states keep pushing NR further and further the courts are going to revisit this on the federal level

Go get him, Viper!

 

[mariano742]

well some guy on here just told me i don’t have a right to hunt in any state. that’s bs. As currently I do there are still NM tags for NR. I got pissed bc some canadian was lecturing me about it not being my business these NM tags. i’m like excuse me buddy but you can stick that where it don’t shine. I’m already in a knot about this bc there appear to be some hunters, i assume they’re hunters if they’re here, who are ok with their draw odds going down so long as the outfitters lose their guided draw. what the bleep