Are you including landowner tags and outfitter draw into this 40%? Where are you getting that number?
New Mexico website says its way less than that:
Last edited:
Take Back Your Elk
- Thread starter Oak
- Start date
Are you including landowner tags and outfitter draw into this 40%? Where are you getting that number?
New Mexico website says its way less than that:
You point out the bad joke of the draw quotas and what NMDGFs website says. There are a little over 36,000 elk tags in NM. Almost 14,000 are private landowner tags that are not subject to the draw quotas. About 1,400 are outfitter draw set aside. About 90% of these are nonresident.
What you posted from NMDGFs website says 84% of tags are resident. We wish. Only 55% of all elk tags in NM are drawn by NM resident via that 84% draw quota.
Try to find anything on NMDGFs website that tells you how many elk licenses are in EPLUS and how many of those are resident vs nonresident or the resident and nonresident split of the outfitter draw set aside. You won’t.
Sorry man… I think I actually pointed out that you’re lying.
Do tell. I’m not. Study up on the NM tag allocations and come back if you want to have an intelligent conversation. You are free to debate my opinion about the numbers. But you can’t make up that the numbers are incorrect with no evidence. That you posted the draw quotas as your evidence indicates how little you know about NM tag allocations.
Your definitions of what makes a tag R vs NR are very… let’s just say they are a bit creative.
You are being silly.
It’s not complicated. When a resident buys a tag it’s a resident tag. When a nonresident buys a tag it is a nonresident tag. I assume NMDGF is not lying when its says how many licenses are purchased by residents or nonresidents.
Apparently you are conflating tags that are set aside in the draw for residents or nonresidents with tags that are not residency quota restricted for application or purchase. Like outfitter draw set aside and private landowner. But an applicant or buyer of these license are always either resident or nonresident.
Without intent, you are getting to the heart of the important impact of privatization on resident vs nonresident tag acquisition. When tags are sold without residency quotas the 330 million Non New Mexicans are going to buy a hell of a lot more tags than the 2 million New Mexicans. Especially when the price is a private price set by the highest bidder. This is why most western states set quotas and don’t have massive leakage outside those quotas through privatization. NM by any objective measure is an outlier in the western states in the scale of private nonresident dominated tags.
What is the percentage of deer tags in your state that are bought by nonresidents?
You are being untruthful. Residents of NM have every opportunity to obtain many of the “NR” tags your complaining about if they so choose.
But apparently they aren’t and the resource seems to be largely controlled by outfitters through the outfitter draw and private landowners through the landowner tag system.
It’s pretty slimy to me to see outfitters offering the bare minimum(basically nothing) and charging people for it to put people them into the outfitter draw at better odds
David658
Well-known member
Gonna jump in here, and raise the BS flag. What abqbw says is correct.
You will find that outfitters will often not outfit "regular" NM residents because of the fear their hidey holes will be exposed. Right there you limit how many of those pay to play tags can even be accessed by residents.
And NM residents should not have to pay thousands of dollars for tags, which NRs are wont to do in order to hunt NM. You would not pay thousands just to get to hunt in WI, I wager, because you can get a resident tag or at least have decent odds of drawing.
The 55% number is correct if all tags are counted - if you only look at the tags in the draw, well, yes you can come up with something near the NM "goal" for residents. But the numbers of landowner tags that go out of state are almost 100%, and that totally blows up the annual Game Commission gaslighting of NM resident hunters.
If I were an NR I'd sure want to argue as you are, so I could get access to some fantastic elk hunting. Regardless of how you want it to be, it just ain't like you say. Our system is broken here.
David
NM
I’m sorry to be blunt David, but you are 100% lying.
I am getting the impression that you guys want to have your cake (paid for by NR's, of course) and eat it too. Take a quick look at NMDGF funding sources (and the financial condition of the state of New Mexico overall) and you will start to understand better why things are how they are.
I hope this helps
I am getting the impression that you guys want to have your cake (paid for by NR's, of course) and eat it too. Take a quick look at NMDGF funding sources (and the financial condition of the state of New Mexico overall) and you will start to understand better why things are how they are.
I hope this helps
I have a feeling I know where this thread is winding up… not interested in another one.
If my posts have caused anyone to question some of the fibs told on this thread and actually look up some of the data themselves for 30 seconds, then my work here is done.
If my posts have caused anyone to question some of the fibs told on this thread and actually look up some of the data themselves for 30 seconds, then my work here is done.
David658
Well-known member
Lying?
That is a very big word.
My guess is your willingness to toss a word like that on this forum is inversely proportional to your willingness to do it in person. Internet warrior.
Lying. I know whether or not I am doing so. But idiot, that problem is one that you will never realize you have. And honestly, I'm laughing at how sure you are that you are right (or else, you are the liar) - as an involved resident, friend of several active guides, and a somewhat astute observer, you really don't have a clue. Not a single clue, not one.
Done rasslin' here, this un appears to enjoy the mud.....
David
NM
I don’t mean this with any disrespect, but if you knew who you were talking to and how much time and effort has gone into the facts and statistics presented by bw, you’d probably realize that you’re embarrassing yourself.
The percentages of tags available to NM residents without paying a landowner or guide is exactly what he says it is.
In addition to that, very few NM residents (the people that should be considered the owners of the elk) have the financial ability to compete with residents of 49 other states, and why should they have to? NM is a poor state.
Don’t confuse that with thinking that the people in NM that are behind the “Take Back Your Elk” movement are just doing so because they personally can’t afford elk tags, because that’s not the case.
I have no doubt it took a while to twist himself into a pretzel trying to validate this cause. The problem is that it takes less than 30 seconds to see that it is not fact-based.
Like I said… these always wind up in the same spot. Hopefully I have at least compelled people to look into some of these data claims for themselves, because they are simply not true.
Last edited:
New mexicos eplus system is a joke anyone can see its a system set up to benefit nr hunters
what resident is going to pay the cost of those tags to hunt their home state every tag in that system should be only valid on private land. Nr hunters get a much larger share of the allocated number if you are trying to deny that you are a fool just because those tags are available to resident or nr doesn't change the fact that nr are the main beneficiaries of that system And purchase the majority of the tags it needs to be changed to benefit the residents of the state
what resident is going to pay the cost of those tags to hunt their home state every tag in that system should be only valid on private land. Nr hunters get a much larger share of the allocated number if you are trying to deny that you are a fool just because those tags are available to resident or nr doesn't change the fact that nr are the main beneficiaries of that system And purchase the majority of the tags it needs to be changed to benefit the residents of the state
Just the same as everyone has every opportunity to buy a jet, vacation home in Hawaii, and a 200 ft yacht.
I’m sorry to be blunt David, but you are 100% lying.
I am getting the impression that you guys want to have your cake (paid for by NR's, of course) and eat it too. Take a quick look at NMDGF funding sources (and the financial condition of the state of New Mexico overall) and you will start to understand better why things are how they are.
I hope this helps
What is wrong with you saying everyone is lying? 100% lying even. That’s not how people interact on the hunt talk forums.
Correct. I will add that the reason privatized tags are majority nonresident is demographic. If the barrier to tag acquisition is ability to pay a private fee their will be orders of magnitude more hunters in the necessary income bracket out of the 330 million nonresidents than out of the 2 million New Mexicans. But the most basic tenets of the public trust and the North American Model indicate that the allocation of hunting opportunity not be based on wealth.
Valley1320
Well-known member
Exactly my thoughts
Right. The “New Mexicans can buy $20,000 landowner elk tags” argument is such a red herring. It belies willful ignorance to the reason western states have R/NR tag quotas. Pretty basic stuff.
