Crazy idea

[brockel]

There’s a reason the shoulder seasons start in August well before those elk are being pressured by hunters to go to private because they are already on the private. Why are those elk on private before being pressured by hunters? Is there better feed on the private compared to the public land that part of the year?

 

[bigsky2]

With the upcoming commission meeting on Dec 14 and the controversy around Dir. Worsechs general season on private land proposal, one idea that has been floating around in my head for the limited entry areas is what would be wrong with splitting the quota into two draws- Limited entry public land tags and limited entry private land tags? I’m sure this has been cussed and discussed but honestly in my opinion the idea would get rid of crowding on public lands improving the quality of the hunt or at least make it manageable and distribute tags towards the private lands via draw. Outfitters clients would have to apply for these tags right along side the private hunting clubs and landowners. I get this is going down the rfw model somewhat but would be more like Colorados draw for private and public land tags. Aren’t we eventually going to end up there anyway essentially since the administration of the land is independent of each other anyway? Thoughts?

This is pretty similar to the idea I had. Currently, in units like 621 in the Breaks, they offer permits that are valid for the entire district, and permits that are only valid off the CMR. We could use this same model in units that are primarily private land like the former 900 districts. Offer some permits that are valid for the entire district (both public and private), and offer some that are only valid on private land (not transferrable or landowner tags). This would do several things. It would help to put more hunting pressure on private land, where most of the elk are. It would also lessen pressure on public land so public hunters would have a better hunting experience. People who have access to private would likely apply for the private land only permit because they would have better odds to draw. The percentages of each permit type could be adjusted based on amount of private and public and also by how far over objective the elk population is. In the current system when elk are over objective, we just throw more permits at the problem and it results in the public being more crowded and often less elk being killed. Our biologist pointed out when she increased 417 rifle permits the hunter success actually went down, and she attributed it to the additional crowding on public.

 

[406truth]

Also it really depends on the unit in New Mexico. The units that are mostly private are what you are referring to. The units that are predominantly public are hard to draw but if you do you will have a quality hunt at least. that is more a function of the demand for these western tags in my opinion. That is how Montana will eventually be as well. We can sit here and pound our bows off the ground saying the wildlife is PUBLIC but as long as it spends it’s time on private land we are going to have to come up with solutions that include the private land owner. I will even go further, the solution is really their call if the animal resides on their land. I don’t hunt for animals that live on private but understand that is just me and also not a viable solution

We do have a crowded public land issue for sure. If you get a chance the Elk Shape podcast has more info on what has went afoul since elk tags have been monotized in New Mexico. The biggest hurt has been to public land hunters both residents and non residents. They are offering unlimited archery tags in these units knowing that it will ultimately benefit the private land owners even more after all the elk are pressured off of the public. Biology should rule the plan in these units. Unlimited cow tags on private would be the answer here. Not unlimited either sex tags.