NR’s chance to put $ where our mouths are

[TOGIE]

Incredibly surprised how off base you are. That 4-5% had nothing to do with stating a goal of a party platform that is federal lands being turned over to states( read corporate interests) . That may have more legs and money behind it then you know.
Some well placed landowner tags on newly privatized “ state lands” might be appealing to a new found 4%-5% non resident constituency…eh.
And let’s not forget a we have an insane Supreme Court values states right over individual rights right now…

Never say never.

meh. these are different topics now.

the fraction of hunters that live east of -102 degrees and of those that even hunt west of that line and of those that are worked up enough to want to privatize federal public lands out spite is not a huge concern of mine.

 

[TheJason]

@Rhcuam I see you think my comment was funny. You do realize game and fish departments don’t have complete budget autonomy, right? And that everything has to be approved by a legislature that may have a worse understanding of the budget process than some of the folks here?

They don’t necessarily understand earmarked accounts, matching fund appropriations, limitations on how money can be spent, etc. They may not realize shuffling one pot of money can have big downstream consequences.

A prime example was the MT legislature deciding to fund 40% of their enforcement funding with PR money, not realizing it couldn’t be spent on law enforcement and this the game wardens ended up doing a lot of non enforcement work.

It’s not all about balancing a checkbook. It’s about balancing a checkbook with final approval coming from an entity that may be antagonistic, under educated, and overly controlling.

 

[TheJason]

@Rhcuam I see this was funny too. Maybe 60 in a 55 is the depth of your understanding.

 

[Rhcuam]

@JLS
If a Game and Fish dept has funding issues after a natural disaster (winter kill in this case) it’s not my problem. Most agency’s and state governments have made it crystal clear they are going to maximize profits on the tags they allow NR’s to have access to. I don’t have a problem with that, it’s just business. Just don’t don’t expect me to give a shit if game and fish agency’s run into funding issues after they just got done cutting available tags and raising my cost. I don't care if the wardens don’t get new pickups or raises this year.
Really it’s a silly thread, if I wanted to maximize my donation dollar amount the last people I would give it to is a state or federal agency. That said WIHA/ access yes programs are donation worthy. They just haven’t figured a way to screw them up yet.
And we all know every western states are going to sell out every tag they have. I bet they will be just fine.

 

[Rhcuam]

Hey now @JLS! Don’t laugh at my post. I poured my heart and soul in to that.

 

[DFS]

I would think game agencies wouldn't or shouldn’t count on booming populations for funding. I agree with many to donate to NGO’s. They have done much better in my state than the people at the helm.

 

[bulldawg10]

New Mexico has a good organization that is pro Non-resident opportunity, pro landowner, and pro guide/outfitter, pro public lands.

New Mexico Council of Outfitters and Guides. (NMCOG)

Worth looking into if you want to donate to something more than just entering a draw, that as some interest in Non-resident value.

New Mexico Council of Outfitters and Guides

As the official organization for NM Outfitters and Guides, we are proud to represent the finest hunting and fishing professionals in the state of New Mexico.

www.nmoutfitters.com

 

[232401a]

New Mexico has a good organization that is pro Non-resident opportunity, pro landowner, and pro guide/outfitter, pro public lands.

New Mexico Council of Outfitters and Guides. (NMCOG)

Worth looking into if you want to donate to something more than just entering a draw, that as some interest in Non-resident value.

New Mexico Council of Outfitters and Guides

As the official organization for NM Outfitters and Guides, we are proud to represent the finest hunting and fishing professionals in the state of New Mexico.

www.nmoutfitters.com

If we give generously enough, do you think NMCOG could convert more of the 84% res & 6% NR allocation to the 10% outfitter draw? And maybe get even more landowner tags siphoned off before the allocations are applied?

I’m torn as to whether I should give to NMCOG or to the WY outfitter & guide’s association. Both seem honorable.

 

[Rhcuam]

If we give generously enough, do you think NMCOG could convert more of the 84% res & 6% NR allocation to the 10% outfitter draw? And maybe get even more landowner tags siphoned off before the allocations are applied?

I’m torn as to whether I should give to NMCOG or to the WY outfitter & guide’s association. Both seem honorable.

They’re doing that because they love you.
Shitting in your hands and clapping would be a better idea than giving money to either of those organizations.

 

[Rhcuam]

New Mexico has a good organization that is pro Non-resident opportunity, pro landowner, and pro guide/outfitter, pro public lands.

New Mexico Council of Outfitters and Guides. (NMCOG)

Worth looking into if you want to donate to something more than just entering a draw, that as some interest in Non-resident value.

New Mexico Council of Outfitters and Guides

As the official organization for NM Outfitters and Guides, we are proud to represent the finest hunting and fishing professionals in the state of New Mexico.

www.nmoutfitters.com

GTFO here, they are pro non resident if you’re using an outfitter. 90/10 in New Mexico, with the removal of the outfitter pool would actually be an increase of 4% for tags I would be applying for.
From their site:

New Mexico's Outfitting Industry is Under Attack!​

NMCOG is fighting current legislation that would have major impacts on outfitters and guides in New Mexico and would substantially reduce nonresident hunter opportunity.

SB 312 would implement a 90/10 quota on public land. It would completely eliminate the NM outfitter draw pool. And it would repeal the "Jennings's Law" which is step one in dismantling the EPLUS system (NM's program that allocates elk permits to landowners).

In order to be able to successfully fight this legislation NMCOG must raise funds to hire an analyst, and other specialists, to expand our legislative influence and illustrate to legislators the vast economic contribution generated by the outfitting industry for the benefit of the state of New Mexico. The guided hunting segment of NM's outdoor recreation economy brings in over $1 billion annually in tourism dollars which directly benefits NM's rural communities.

We need the financial support of our outfitting industry and their clientele. This bill would have an immediate impact on your livelihood as well as nonresident hunter opportunity. Please help protect nonresident hunting and support NM's outfitter small businesses and the rural economies they support!”

Reference Bold/underlined- yeah, I’m pretty sure that’s called where welfare. So according to these jokers, we not only need to prop up Outfitters we need to help prop up their clientele. Unbelievable.

 

[ccc23454]

GTFO here, they are pro non resident if you’re using an outfitter. 90/10 in New Mexico, with the removal of the outfitter pool would actually be an increase of 4% for tags I would be applying for.
From their site:

New Mexico's Outfitting Industry is Under Attack!​

NMCOG is fighting current legislation that would have major impacts on outfitters and guides in New Mexico and would substantially reduce nonresident hunter opportunity.

SB 312 would implement a 90/10 quota on public land. It would completely eliminate the NM outfitter draw pool. And it would repeal the "Jennings's Law" which is step one in dismantling the EPLUS system (NM's program that allocates elk permits to landowners).

In order to be able to successfully fight this legislation NMCOG must raise funds to hire an analyst, and other specialists, to expand our legislative influence and illustrate to legislators the vast economic contribution generated by the outfitting industry for the benefit of the state of New Mexico. The guided hunting segment of NM's outdoor recreation economy brings in over $1 billion annually in tourism dollars which directly benefits NM's rural communities.

We need the financial support of our outfitting industry and their clientele. This bill would have an immediate impact on your livelihood as well as nonresident hunter opportunity. Please help protect nonresident hunting and support NM's outfitter small businesses and the rural economies they support!”

And this is why i posted we need a nonprofit to combat these people. Why is it outfitters get a seat at the table and diy hunters and even public land general users dont? Its because they are organized! If we had a true best for public hunter advocate funded to lobby and gain political favor many of these issues could be repaired/prevented.

 

[LopeHunter]

Technically, your odds will never be 100% if the draw is random and results independent. In your scenario, your chance of drawing 1 tag in 120 years (given the 1 in 120 odds) is equal to 1-((119/120)^120) = 63.4%. Your reasoning makes me question how much studying you actually did....

You are familiar with the level of critical thinking that exists if you walk into a room of random people from where you live? Payday Loan operations thrive. Enough said.

I could run Monte Carlo simulations for the sheep states offering NR tag(s) which have multiple choices which are considered (NV) or have specie caps (Idaho) or hunt region caps (MT) caps but even the simplified approach I did to normalize costs in relation to odds may be a bridge to far for some that read this thread.

My approach is reasonable if the outcome is a relative ranking of NR sheep states where we can identify odds and costs. Greater precision will be possible in an alternative approach which may shift a few of the states around compared to my approach.

So, the difference in the deficiency in my approach may not be related to my effort at studying or grades achieved (Magna Cum Laude from Top 2 program in America then Masters at a Top 10 graduate school so at a minimum I fooled some folks) but my ability to provide a quick and dirty approach to address what may be bewildering process if a few of the people with a limited hunting budget only look at application costs or only look at odds for a single state at a time as march through application season. I want to have hunters have better tools that have no less than limited applicability.

Elon Musk can disregard and shoot for the moon. Or even Mars. Most of us will benefit from an approach where get our best bang for the mule deer buck. I will be doing two comedy sets down at the Holiday Inn this weekend, $10 cover charge.

 

[sclancy27]

You are familiar with the level of critical thinking that exists if you walk into a room of random people from where you live? Payday Loan operations thrive. Enough said.

I could run Monte Carlo simulations for the sheep states offering NR tag(s) which have multiple choices which are considered (NV) or have specie caps (Idaho) or hunt region caps (MT) caps but even the simplified approach I did to normalize costs in relation to odds may be a bridge to far for some that read this thread.

My approach is reasonable if the outcome is a relative ranking of NR sheep states where we can identify odds and costs. Greater precision will be possible in an alternative approach which may shift a few of the states around compared to my approach.

So, the difference in the deficiency in my approach may not be related to my effort at studying or grades achieved (Magna Cum Laude from Top 2 program in America then Masters at a Top 10 graduate school so at a minimum I fooled some folks) but my ability to provide a quick and dirty approach to address what may be bewildering process if a few of the people with a limited hunting budget only look at application costs or only look at odds for a single state at a time as march through application season. I want to have hunters have better tools that have no less than limited applicability.

Elon Musk can disregard and shoot for the moon. Or even Mars. Most of us will benefit from an approach where get our best bang for the mule deer buck. I will be doing two comedy sets down at the Holiday Inn this weekend, $10 cover charge.

Man, I was just ribbing ya. Carry on...

 

[Trial153]

You are familiar with the level of critical thinking that exists if you walk into a room of random people from where you live? Payday Loan operations thrive. Enough said.

I could run Monte Carlo simulations for the sheep states offering NR tag(s) which have multiple choices which are considered (NV) or have specie caps (Idaho) or hunt region caps (MT) caps but even the simplified approach I did to normalize costs in relation to odds may be a bridge to far for some that read this thread.

My approach is reasonable if the outcome is a relative ranking of NR sheep states where we can identify odds and costs. Greater precision will be possible in an alternative approach which may shift a few of the states around compared to my approach.

So, the difference in the deficiency in my approach may not be related to my effort at studying or grades achieved (Magna Cum Laude from Top 2 program in America then Masters at a Top 10 graduate school so at a minimum I fooled some folks) but my ability to provide a quick and dirty approach to address what may be bewildering process if a few of the people with a limited hunting budget only look at application costs or only look at odds for a single state at a time as march through application season. I want to have hunters have better tools that have no less than limited applicability.

Elon Musk can disregard and shoot for the moon. Or even Mars. Most of us will benefit from an approach where get our best bang for the mule deer buck. I will be doing two comedy sets down at the Holiday Inn this weekend, $10 cover charge.

Are you saying I have a chance? Take my money

 

[Trap]

77% of WY GF budget is funded by NRs. Almost all western states are over 70%. An NR should give more to the state of Wyoming (and others)?

NRs should give less to other states and stay home. Let the resident hunters fund their own states.

Find somewhere to give, but make it in your own state. Don't be a fool.

Every single state has opportunity in your backyard, find it.

I think going back to basics and primarily hunting your backyard is the way to go. Every state has something good I would think. Maybe apply for 1 other state you know really well. I already donate to rmef, f4wm and sometimes du. I pretty much hunt my home state and apply in 1 other where I grew up. The point systems and draws in most states are broken.

 

[bulldawg10]

Sometimes you have to create your own luck too...especially as a western hunter.

Land owner opportunities can be key...and in some places, it doesn't require you to be the "wealthy landowner".

Maybe something like a new truck payment...