So a question to the comment above "The point is that the herd is managed by the State, not the outfitters, and almost totally not the landowners.".Had not thought of the landowner tags in exchange for access. I like the idea that if you get a landowner tag, then you'd have to enroll in the "open gate" program. Otherwise, enter the draw like the rest of us.
The point is that the herd is managed by the State, not the outfitters, and almost totally not the landowners. In the context of a Trust agreement, there is no way EPLUS meets the standard.
David
NM
Does Vidal benefit from the management practices of the rio costilla cooperative and vermejo or do vermejo and rio costilla benefit from vidal? One of the criticisms of the report was unused eplus tags by private ranches. Neither of those ranches convert all of their codes every year and support some of the best elk herds in the state. I disagree wholeheartedly with that statement. They manage the resources for use year after year, to a great extent outfitters as well in most cases. I know there are bad outfitters just like there are bad DIY'ers. That point is agreed to.
Also, I hate to see a great conversation like this drug into the mud with name calling, vulgarity, and trolling. A lot of peoples views are limited to their experience and some just don't have much experience with systems other than leaser/lessee(75% of the country).
I agree the trustees are the primary beneficiaries of the trust but someone has to manage the resource in the trust first and foremost to ensure it keeps providing returns. Several of the models suggested scare me and make me think of unit 9 a few years back, if you convert or move those tags into the public's hands without designating them as "private only will require a trespass fee", you will over hunt the public and push all the elk to the private, thus diminishing the quality of experience.