Flash Report post Posted February 5, 2011 I agree residents should get a majority of the tags, but 2% to nonresidents is tough. Not sure about that as fair either. Just for the record, I have applied for rifle deer, archery elk and rifle antelope every year for 13 years and have drawn 1 tag, an antelope tag last year as my third choice. I was surprised to read the post above about non-residents drawing so many tags. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ihuntblues Report post Posted February 5, 2011 The bill that went through committe will give non residents 10 % of the tags with the outfitter allocated tags if i read it right their choice wether or they choose to up their odds more by appling with an outfitter. No other state gave 50 % of their sheep tags to nonresidents last year it was time for a change. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jamaro Report post Posted February 8, 2011 There are quite a few long term negatives with only some short term positives for a few with this bill. This issue will go deeper than expected as most wanting the change only are visualizing the crust. The larger deeper issues are not being dealt with and will create problems for Nm in the future. Why do residents of any western state believe they have a "right" to a tag every year? There used to be OTC elk tags in Nm - right? there are reasons why they are no longer there - right? I've never been drawn for antelope in Az in my life - putting in every year for 17 of 18 years as a resident. I've been drawn for Az elk once in the past 16 years as a resident. Can very many Nm residents say the same? IMHO fight for what you believe is right and enjoy the outcome or suffer the consequences. Good luck to you guys in Nm this upcoming year To answer your question... Yes, on average it takes 22 years to draw a rifle tag... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jamaro Report post Posted February 8, 2011 I agree residents should get a majority of the tags, but 2% to nonresidents is tough. Not sure about that as fair either. Just for the record, I have applied for rifle deer, archery elk and rifle antelope every year for 13 years and have drawn 1 tag, an antelope tag last year as my third choice. I was surprised to read the post above about non-residents drawing so many tags. That is more tags than I have drawn in AZ... and you don't have to buy a license every year.. Maybe we should make AZ more like NM? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
coueswt Report post Posted February 10, 2011 Look at the resident draw odds for archery elk hunts!!! Then compare to AZ, UT, NV, etc.... Residents are getting a majority of the tags with much better odds then most would for draw units in the west... My friend drew a once in a life time archery elk hunt and had 6% draw odds as a resident. Do think something should be done regarding the sheep hunts to make sure a majority do go to residents. Wonder how many resident apps vs. Non resident apps there are for sheep considering non-residents are drawing around 20 to 35% on average. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fatfootdoc Report post Posted February 10, 2011 I am entirely in support of the 90% resident tags, however I do not support giving the outfitters 8% and the other non residents 2%. that is just ridiculous, it should be 10% to non residents and if they choose to hire an outfitter then so be it. It is entirely unfair to limit the non res. tags to just 2%. I am emailing my state reps tonite about it. Guides in other states do well without a guaranteed percentage of tags. I really dont want teh surrounding states to reciprocate and limit us to 2% of tags.ag Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
c-ne-elk Report post Posted March 4, 2011 Do people really think this is going to make the residents happy? How many more tags are residents really going to get? Take a bull tag in Unit 34 - There were 3,536 residents that put in last year for 141 tags alloted for the residents. There were 33 tags last year for ALL non-residents, with or without guides. Under the new proposed bill, there will be 18 more tags for the 3,395 residents that did not draw. Take unit 16 hunt 1-264 in the Gila last year, 903 residents put in for 39 tags last year. There were 11 total non-resident tags last year, under the new bill there will only be 5, an increase of SIX tags for the 864 residents that did not draw. Are the residents odds going to be that much better? All this is doing is pitting hunter against hunter! And it will get worse before it get's better. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fatfootdoc Report post Posted March 5, 2011 You have to compare apples to apples though, you are quoting the entire amount of hunters that put in for that, 1st, 2nd and 3rd choices, not just first choice(which if you really want the tag is where it should be)there were roughly 1800 applicants, same for the 16 hunt only 346 of those were first choice applicants. If I was one of those who was a first choice applicant for either unit I would be happy with having 10% more tags!! Right now the residents get 78% of tags, non res 10% and non res guided 12%, now NM has landowner tags and who do you think locks up most of those?? I wonder what the true number of non res Outfitter tags really is, guaranteed and through the draw? As far as I(and the majority of my friends)are concerned we want the res. tag increase. I dont moan about AZ limiting the non res tags to 10%, I am fine with that. As far as pitting hunter against hunter, I dont know about that, maybe resident hunter against non resident hunter, but fair is fair. ag Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coach Report post Posted March 5, 2011 If NM says the only way I can hunt there is via landowner tags or hiring a guide, I guess that just means I won't ever get to hunt there again. Thanks. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fatfootdoc Report post Posted March 6, 2011 If NM says the only way I can hunt there is via landowner tags or hiring a guide, I guess that just means I won't ever get to hunt there again. Thanks. Coach, I am totally opposed to giving the outfitted non residents 8% of the tags and non residents only 2%. I think non outfitted non residents should get 10% and outfitted non residents should not get any. The outfitters still are able to use landowner tags so they dont need any of the draw tags. NM has let the outfitters have to much sway over this number. In AZ they dont have guaranteed tags or landowner tags and they do fine. I think it is the big outfitters here in NM (like USO) that are the driving force behind this. ag Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coach Report post Posted March 6, 2011 FFD, I agree, but that's not how it's playing out. Pure and simple, a handful of tags will go to residents that may have previously been allocated to out of state hunters, but not many. The out-of-state, non-guided hunters will be totally cut out of the mix. I have no problem with any state trying to allocate more tags to residents. For many of us, hunting is a big factor on where and how we choose to live. I really get how NM hunters see this as a good thing. As a guy living right across the border, who loves NM, was born in NM, and appreciates the opportunity to hunt in NM, the way this is worderd means, either I hire a guide or buy a land-owner permit, or "kiss off" and stay out of NM. It's really that simple. I'm not about to hire a guide to hunt NM, and would rather eat a week old dead rat than buy a land-owner tag. So, now I'm in the 2% who might just be lucky enough to draw a tag? Not to mention that the Catron Boys have just about wiped out anything worth crossing the border for by poaching everthing they see for the last 20 years. Sad to say it, but, you guys can have it. If your G&F dept was more interested in preserving what you have than catoring to the guides and ranchers that literally own your resources, NM would be a world-class hunting destination, as it should be. Unfortunately, too many are too short-sighted to see that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jamaro Report post Posted March 6, 2011 Hey guys... Just so you know 196 was passed and it looks pretty good. I have been involved in alot of the back channel discussions on alot of this... Most groups other than SFW wanted a equal split between guided and DIY hunters... It was the outfitters that pushed for the inequities. NOT NMWF or UNMB... It is pretty messed up but these outfitter subsidies are doing to continue for awhile... But for residents this is a good thing... Believe me I would love to have what AZ has but it isn't going to happen for a few years... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
c-ne-elk Report post Posted March 8, 2011 You have to compare apples to apples though, you are quoting the entire amount of hunters that put in for that, 1st, 2nd and 3rd choices, not just first choice(which if you really want the tag is where it should be)there were roughly 1800 applicants, same for the 16 hunt only 346 of those were first choice applicants. If I was one of those who was a first choice applicant for either unit I would be happy with having 10% more tags!! Right now the residents get 78% of tags, non res 10% and non res guided 12%, now NM has landowner tags and who do you think locks up most of those?? I wonder what the true number of non res Outfitter tags really is, guaranteed and through the draw? As far as I(and the majority of my friends)are concerned we want the res. tag increase. I dont moan about AZ limiting the non res tags to 10%, I am fine with that. As far as pitting hunter against hunter, I dont know about that, maybe resident hunter against non resident hunter, but fair is fair. ag Not that it matters but you do have to look at all 3 choices. When an applicaton is drawn, they first try to fill that applicants 1st choice, if it is full they then move to his 2nd choice, if it is full they then move to his 3rd choice. Only then do they go to the next applicant. So you may have unit "X" as your first choice and someone else may have unit "X" as their 3rd choice and if their application is drawn before yours, they my get drawn in lieu of you. On the elk hunt in the Gila that I referenced, of the 50 tags issued, 42 were issued on 1st choice applicants, 5 were issued to 2nd choice applicants and 3 were issued to applicants that listed this hunt at their 3rd choice. Pitting hunter against hunter...there is already talk about a lawsuit against the State of New Mexico if this bill gets signed by the Governor similar to the suit that was filed several years back when the quota was changed to the 10% NR w/o Guide and 12% NR w/ guide, do you remember what happended that year? There was almost no hunting draw, i.e. no draw, no hunt. Why should any non-resident want any of his money to go to funding any programs in New Mexico if he does not have a reasonable chance of hunting there? Just a couple of reasons this can and I will predict will pit hunters against hunters. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
naturebob Report post Posted March 8, 2011 Coach, a good amount of them catron boys are Methheads and don't know what they are doing. The hillbilly senators are just getting paid off by the outfitters. Why can't anyone over there figure that out. They are just buying votes and are gonna hurt that state financially in the long run. I use to own land there and glad I don't any more. Gave enough $ to that state and they aint gettin no more. They don't realize what nr's brought. learn the hard way. Hope the residents all enjoy all the cow tags.....BOB! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
