New Mexico Privatization. Nuthin like it

[SAJ-99]

i think an issue in this thread is an inability by some to acknowledge that both sides have a point.

Same with almost every thread, when you think about it.

What is this based on? What says that the historic carrying capacity of elk in New Mexico isn't quite high? Perhaps even higher than it is now? I have seen nothing that makes this clear either way.

Just a guess based on the fact that elk need water and most of the watering holes in NM are man-made stock tanks. No one counted elk in the 1700 and 1800's so it is only a guess, but I would stand behind it as a generic comment. My point was that landowner tolerance of elk is important to growing the herd.

I think everyone is open to other ideas, but no one can say the impact on the resource of eplus going away. I'm not going to ask anyone to "prove" the idea. Look at other states. MT sells an elk tag for $25 to every resident that wants one and it allows them to hunt in 80ish% of the state for 11wks. The pressure pushes elk to private land and those landowners sell access to hunters. It is a very similar system to eplus on the money side. The state doesn't get any of the extra money, just the money for the tag. That system has flaws too which can be seen in the threads in that state forum. I assure you landowners want more, outfitters want their own tags, and Rs hate NRs. All the while people complain hunting is getting worse.

What works for you? get rid of eplus and go 90/10? 80/20? 100/0? What will let your hypothetical teacher hunt every weekend? Any downsides to it?

 

[seeth07]

You aren’t accounting for special and secondary management zones

You are correct because I want to compare apples to apples.

Should we tally up the Wyoming Type 8 licenses and compare them to the draw tag allocation?

How about the CO private land only vouchers and compare them to the draw tag allocation?

Does Montana have anything for private land only?

 

[brocksw]

there are many ways to ask the same question that would lead to many different answers from the same individual if asked for the first time.

HAHA the question is so loaded and disingenuous it's mind boggling to even remotely think it serious. I should walk down the street and ask residents if they support 40% of their elk getting sold to the highest bidder for tens of millions of dollars with a tiny fraction of that money coming back to the beneficiaries and a vast majority of those getting sold to NR. See what I did there?

 

[seeth07]

All the while people complain hunting is getting worse.

Except in NM where hunting is getting better?

 

[Nm252525]

When

You are correct because I want to compare apples to apples.

Should we tally up the Wyoming Type 8 licenses and compare them to the draw tag allocation?

How about the CO private land only vouchers and compare them to the draw tag allocation?

Does Montana have anything for private land only?

You used 48 and 36 as examples with are mostly secondary management zones so probably should

 

[TOGIE]

Except in NM where hunting is getting better?

i think we need to be careful with any broad statement about hunting being better or worse anywhere.

mule deer are struggling everywhere. elk are not struggling so much... everywhere and, importantly, under varying types of management. the myriad factors that go into these species successes and failures are very difficult to isolate with confidence.

i don't think the most beautiful, immaculate and perfectly executed (if such a thing exists) e plus system is gonna save mule deer.

 

[brocksw]

Same with almost every thread, when you think about it.

I have acknowledged almost all of that, mostly in my very first post.

What works for you? get rid of eplus and go 90/10? 80/20? 100/0? What will let your hypothetical teacher hunt every weekend? Any downsides to it?

I think "eplus" can stay. But let New Mexican residents sit down and decide what split they want for the total number of elk tags. Not the split after the landowners take what they want, but the split on whats available over all.

90/10 means NM residents get another 12k-14k tags ontop of what they got in 2023
80/15 means another 10k-12k tags
80/20 means another 8k-10k tags

Then maybe they'll take the 10, 15, or 20% left over after resident allocation and say, okay split it right down the middle for NR draw and landowner eplus tags.

Maybe they'll hybridize the system and make it so the secondary management zones can still keep there unlimited tags in return for an open gates contract. Or some percentage of these smz tags have to be available to the resident New Mexican or youth at resident prices. Lots of different ways to negotiate that. But right now, the landowners don't need to negotiate because they've had the Governor and the commission under their thumb and the average NM resident wasn't any wiser.

 

[MTGomer]

You are only looking at this from the NM public beneficiary that actually hunts. What percentage of the state do you think that is?

If you walked down the street and interviewed some of the public and asked them if they would support a government incentive program with the goal of putting more elk on the NM landscape that didn't cost the taxpayers a dime, what do you think their response would be?

If you asked them if they supported hunting, or supported rich people ‘trophy hunting’, being prioritized over locals hunting for food, many would say no.
All in the wording

But also…. It’s New Mexico. Many of the people you’d interview are addicted to drugs and might try to steal your car.

 

[sjl2012]

Sure. But everything I can find says thats not where most of the elk are. And regardless of what land they're on, they belong to all the residents of New Mexico.

I don't think anyone is arguing that. You seem hell bent that that's what we're arguing about when it's not. The issue is how the landowner is compensated for access, if they would allow access, and what type of access allows the state to best manage the elk populations.

 

[TOGIE]

But also…. It’s New Mexico. Many of the people you’d interview are addicted to drugs and might try to steal your car.

"excuse me ma'am do you have a moment to discuss New Mexico wildlife management? I have a few questions from a survey I'm hoping you could answer for me."

 

[noharleyyet]

Who gets to explain the serf's rights to the refugee elk lounging on private?

 

[brocksw]

I don't think anyone is arguing that. You seem hell bent that that's what we're arguing about when it's not. The issue is how the landowner is compensated for access, if they would allow access, and what type of access allows the state to best manage the elk populations.

The public trust, that's what this argument is about at its core. Make no mistake about it. Arguments about what a landowner wants for access is a distraction from the heart of the issue. Letting them have first swing at the elk tags is a backwards way of going about it. They are a stakeholder, not a beneficiary, when they put on their landowner hat. The residents of NM own 100% of the wildlife and about half the land in New Mexico. They should have the leverage in this discussion. But back to that distraction. If the NM public wants they could take away all landowner tags. I don't think they will, and I don't think that's a good idea. But it's not for the landowner to decide, and currently that's the deal. The landowners only own their land, and yet they get to draw up the contract for the public's wildlife and the public has no say. Take this out a bit further and you're basically living in Europe. Does anyone here think Europe has it better when it comes to wildlife and hunting? I'll save the mental masturbation and half-cocked arguments, the answer is no.

 

[Letthemgrow]

One thing this post has taught me is that my definition of "rich" is very different from some folks.

To me, being able to afford a $5-10K landowner tag does not elevate someone to the status of rich.

Many people on this forum could do that if they chose to.

I have 2 friends who I consider to be "rich".

They don't buy landowner tags . . . they buy the ranches that get the landowner tags.

 

[TOGIE]

One thing this post has taught me is that my definition of "rich" is very different from some folks.

To me, being able to afford a $5-10K landowner tag does not elevate someone to the status of rich.

Many people on this forum could do that if they chose to.

I have 2 friends who I consider to be "rich".

They don't buy landowner tags . . . they buy the ranches that get the landowner tags.

people have wildly differing definitions of "afford" too.

i know a few people who think they can afford things that IMO they absolutely cannot afford and yet they buy

 

[Letthemgrow]

people have wildly differing definitions of "afford" too.

i know a few people who think they can afford things that IMO they absolutely cannot afford and yet they buy

Definitely a good point.
I know some of those folks too.
One guy drives a pickup that is worth more than the trailer he lives in.
I don't get it.

 

[Archer86]

You are only looking at this from the NM public beneficiary that actually hunts. What percentage of the state do you think that is?

If you walked down the street and interviewed some of the public and asked them if they would support a government incentive program with the goal of putting more elk on the NM landscape that didn't cost the taxpayers a dime, what do you think their response would be?

Probabaly opposite of what you think it would be. go tell them we are going to give rich landowners tags to sell to other rich nr so they can come here to kill a elk.

I am willing to bet with the current political climate in new mexico that looks much worse to them then you want to believe

 

[WildWill]

people have wildly differing definitions of "afford" too.

i know a few people who think they can afford things that IMO they absolutely cannot afford and yet they buy

See those people more and more. Conversely the wealthiest man I ever knew lived in a two room house he built in the 40s, wore old dirty overalls, ate Vienna sausage everyday, and drove a old beater pickup. People are truly the strangest creature on earth.

 

[TheTone]

If I spent 5-10k on a landowner tag right now my wife would kick my behind! That’s multiple house payments for us or it would go a big ways towards something for the family instead of something for just me

 

[TOGIE]

Conversely the wealthiest man I ever knew lived in a two room house he built in the 40s, wore old dirty overalls, ate Vienna sausage everyday, and drove a old beater pickup. People are truly the strangest creature on earth.

See and I would suspect that lifestyle of his coupled with that wealth isn’t exactly a coincidence or just an ironic lifestyle by design.

As a general rule when I look around I always assume the newer the car the worse one’s finances actually are.

 

[mtmuley]

If I spent 5-10k on a landowner tag right now my wife would kick my behind! That’s multiple house payments for us or it would go a big ways towards something for the family instead of something for just me

There isn't an elk on the planet that I would pay that kind if money to hunt. Whether I could or could not afford it. mtmuley