Caribou Gear

2022 New Mexico draw results!!!!

people tell me I’m wrong, crazy…etc, data doesn’t support my complaint. But I’ll tell you this, I’ve got 20 years of my own data to suggest NM has a very strong bias against solo applicants.

15 years consecutive no archery antelope
12 consecutive years no archery elk
18 consecutive years not being able to draw first or second choice archery deer.

I used to draw my 3 rd choice because the unit always went undersubscribed. But now, not even that. I don’t even get a archery javelina tag with any consistency.

Yes, I’m whining, but as a 45 year resident and a 33 year tax payer that can’t even count on one hunt in his home state, I am going to complain.
I have 5 years of applying solo and I will 100% argue the opposite. I’ve had great success drawing tags. I don’t draw “good” tags though, lol.
 
people tell me I’m wrong, crazy…etc, data doesn’t support my complaint. But I’ll tell you this, I’ve got 20 years of my own data to suggest NM has a very strong bias against solo applicants.

15 years consecutive no archery antelope
12 consecutive years no archery elk
18 consecutive years not being able to draw first or second choice archery deer.

I used to draw my 3 rd choice because the unit always went undersubscribed. But now, not even that. I don’t even get a archery javelina tag with any consistency.

Yes, I’m whining, but as a 45 year resident and a 33 year tax payer that can’t even count on one hunt in his home state, I am going to complain.
Serious question for the peanut gallery, has there ever been an audit of their process? I know, no single applicant has enough data to prove non-randomness… but the burden of proof of randomness should be on them. If I was them I’d advertise the quality of the draw process front and center.

If in fact there was said quality to advertise 😉
 
Friend of mine drew 16D, second archery elk. From the sounds of it, he had planned on a pretty quiet fall, just doing local hunts around his home in Montana. His plans have changed.
Prob best to get out of MT. That state is well on its way to a civil war with what they got going!
 
Last edited:
Serious question for the peanut gallery, has there ever been an audit of their process? I know, no single applicant has enough data to prove non-randomness… but the burden of proof of randomness should be on them. If I was them I’d advertise the quality of the draw process front and center.

If in fact there was said quality to advertise 😉
Last year a resident sued to get access of all the names that were drawn. When he got the info no issues were found (as far as I know)
 
Last year a resident sued to get access of all the names that were drawn. When he got the info no issues were found (as far as I know)
I'm thinking more along the lines of a game show auditor that reviews procedures and confirms things are handled correctly, things like anonymization of applications prior to assignment of random numbers, that the random number generator and associated algorithms don't have bugs, etc - a periodic software / process audit. Not just reviewing the drawn names to see if things look right. Based on just a list of drawn names (even over several years?) I'm not sure what conclusions could be drawn. Maybe more information than that was provided in response to the lawsuit you mentioned, however.

Such an audit would put to rest concerns about malfeasance (which I do not assert) as well as IT defects (which I think are plausible).
 
I'm thinking more along the lines of a game show auditor that reviews procedures and confirms things are handled correctly, things like anonymization of applications prior to assignment of random numbers, that the random number generator and associated algorithms don't have bugs, etc - a periodic software / process audit. Not just reviewing the drawn names to see if things look right. Based on just a list of drawn names (even over several years?) I'm not sure what conclusions could be drawn. Maybe more information than that was provided in response to the lawsuit you mentioned, however.

Such an audit would put to rest concerns about malfeasance (which I do not assert) as well as IT defects (which I think are plausible).
So far, in my life(67), NMG&F is the one agency in the state that operates it's agency with integrity.
The draw particularly has been vetted. The agency as a whole operates itself with integrity. IMHO as a retired 22 yr LEO's observations.
Now there may be some bad apples out there, but this smacks of pure sour grapes.
 
So far, in my life(67), NMG&F is the one agency in the state that operates it's agency with integrity.
The draw particularly has been vetted. The agency as a whole operates itself with integrity. IMHO as a retired 22 yr LEO's observations.
Now there may be some bad apples out there, but this smacks of pure sour grapes.
No sour grapes here, and I think I also made clear I don’t think there’s any wrongdoing. But software is hard, sometimes. If it’s been vetted they should advertise that.
 
No sour grapes here, and I think I also made clear I don’t think there’s any wrongdoing. But software is hard, sometimes. If it’s been vetted they should advertise that.
Most F&G departments are well aware of HT and such.
NMG&F dept. has lots of techies. I hear they get a kick out of these discussions online.
They loved the get your draw info early methods folks discused...they law the hackers.

I don't believe NM should advertise hunting,more.
It was nice when no one knew what that was.IMHO
 
I'm thinking more along the lines of a game show auditor that reviews procedures and confirms things are handled correctly, things like anonymization of applications prior to assignment of random numbers, that the random number generator and associated algorithms don't have bugs, etc - a periodic software / process audit. Not just reviewing the drawn names to see if things look right. Based on just a list of drawn names (even over several years?) I'm not sure what conclusions could be drawn. Maybe more information than that was provided in response to the lawsuit you mentioned, however.

Such an audit would put to rest concerns about malfeasance (which I do not assert) as well as IT defects (which I think are plausible).
I hear Cyber Ninjas are looking for a new project. 😎🤣
 
The thing that New Mexico does by handling things this quickly and doing the refunds is they save everyone the credit card processing fees.

States like Wyoming are making millions of $ annually for the credit card companies just in processing fees. If you aren't going to have the draw quickly enough to refund it on the next credit card cycle and get the fees back then you shouldn't require up front payment with a credit card, at least allow a cashiers check or some alternative. On the bison tag for Wyoming it is a $112 nonrefundable processing fee and the only one winning on that is the credit card companies.

I have $15K of pending credits showing right now, but not 100% this year!
 
Back
Top