Nope. Won't help elk either. Guys like Treeshark are great examples of why other states shouldn't do as New Mexico does. mtmuley
Yes, and there are abuses of that as well.
Which speaks nothing about WHY EPLUS is an abomination. It is the wholesale privatization of what is to be a public resource that is the problem there.
There is no beating around the bush for me. Reality is there is a substantial amount of private land in this country and although wildlife is a public resource, it requires willing private landowners to ensure the future survival of these species. Unfortunately our society doesn't contain many people anymore it seems that value the existence of wildlife over cash. It doesn't matter if we are talking about NM, Montana, WI, Florida or New York. The trends of ranchers, farmers and developers destroying wildlife habitat in trade to make a larger profit is what I'm against. That's it. Any government program or incentive from organizations that encourage private land owners to give conservation value to the habitat and wildlife I'm in favor of because it beats the alternative of seeing a marsh ruined by drain tile or a sage flat tilled and irrigated to produce a crop.
Those are pricey! Quality vouchers in CO can be found for way less than that. PM me if interested, I can point you in the right direction
Regarding WY- varies significantly depending on the tag and area. Accounting for the time value of money, it can very easily more than that more than that (from a NR point of view). It’s hard to favorably compare the quality of Access Yes hunting to NM E-Plus (elk) in my opinion. Massive issues of private/public elk distribution in WY have been very well documented here on HT. (Of course all of this is completely disregarding the significant habitat differences in the two states),
Montana… no brainer, really doesn’t pay to even discuss. Proof enough that not having transferable landowner tags doesn’t magically open up private lands (BML is a mess, well documented by various HT members. I believe @The Hedgehog has a thread discussing it somewhere- thought it was him but can’t say for sure). The issues are so obvious that a working group of local experts has emerged from HT in no small part to address these specific problems.
Its sad but I believe this to be correct. And its only correct because there are people with money willing to pay for hunting wildlife. The American wildlife model is great for the general American citizen. It is also good for wildlife compared to what it was in early America. But there are other places in the world where wildlife is doing fantastic where it's all on private land and managed by those owners. Argentina - so many ducks and doves its absolutely stupid to hunt them. Axis deer, red deer, blackbuck extremely abundant on the ranches that manage and allow them to stay (neighboring ranches will just shoot everyone because they don't want them). Look at South Africa. Based on stories shared here is wildlife doing bad there on private? Central/east/south Texas - might as be its own class but wildlife is doing great there all ran by private citizens under generally their own management.
Correct and that is why there needs to be a balance. Specifically talking about E plus, it does seem the balance based on the current program setup is out of balance towards private landowners compared to the other stakeholders
International level. That is supposed to be some good thing? HAHAHAHA. The wildlife are a STATE property and benefit held in trust for primarily New Mexicans benefit in this case, except the state is screwing their own residents with EPlus and well heeled nonresidents are the main beneficiary. Selling a massive fraction of wildlife hunt opportunity to highest bidder does not benefit average New Mexicans who should be able to apply in a lottery for the oportunity.
G&F agencies can and do turn hunting license dollars into a multitude of uses benefitting non-hunting residents: clean air, clean water, clean soil, reclamation, fishing, thriving ecosystems, parks, trails, problem animal removal/relocation, roadkill cleanup, salvage tags, nature programs, boat launches, wildlife viewing, erosion control, invasive species management, operational costs, communication, signage, web-hosting. And on and on and on.
