Link to the press release


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, MARCH 24, 2014:


COURT RULING GIVES NEW MEXICO RESIDENT HUNTERS BETTER ODDS
IN DRAWINGS FOR BIGHORN SHEEP, ORYX AND IBEX

ALBUQUERQUE – New Mexico resident hunters scored a big victory Monday with a U.S. District Court ruling that allows the Department of Game and Fish to reinstate quotas that give state residents a big advantage over nonresidents when applying for bighorn sheep, oryx and ibex hunting licenses.

“This is an important decision and a huge win for New Mexico hunters,” said Paul Kienzle, newly elected chairman of the State Game Commission. “It’s been a long fight, but New Mexicans now have a good shot at those quality hunts, as intended by the governor and the state legislature.”

Monday’s ruling by Chief U.S. District Judge Christina Armijo vacated a 1977 injunction that prohibited the Department from applying preferential quotas that benefited state residents in the drawings for bighorn sheep, oryx and ibex licenses. Because of that injunction, nonresident hunters enjoyed equal odds with residents in the annual drawings.

Beginning with this year’s draw, resident hunters who apply for bighorn sheep, oryx and ibex licenses will enjoy the same odds as those who applied for any other big-game species. Currently, state residents receive 84 percent of all public licenses issued through drawings. Nonresidents receive 6 percent and hunters using outfitters – residents and nonresidents – qualify for 10 percent of public licenses. The application deadline for 2014-15 big-game licenses was March 19.

“The injunction has prevented the Department from complying with state law to the detriment of New Mexico residents and in opposition to the will of the governor and the legislature,” Department Legal Counsel Allison Marks said. “Judge Armijo unequivocally found New Mexico’s statutory quota does not violate federal law. The judge’s quick decision affords the Department the opportunity to make immediate changes to the draw system in order to comply with state law.”

Several conservation organizations supported the Department’s motion to vacate the injunction. They included United Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife, the New Mexico Chapter of the Wild Sheep Foundation, the New Mexico Wildlife Federation and the Southern New Mexico Chapter of Safari Club International.

The injunction applied only to bighorn sheep, oryx and ibex because at the time of the legal challenge, they were the only species of big game in New Mexico for which the State Game Commission provided an in-state preference for license allocation. The injunction was issued in connection with a 1974 lawsuit by David B. Terk, a Texas resident and hunter. Terk challenged New Mexico’s license allocation system that gave him a lower chance of drawing a license than state residents would enjoy.

I obviously understand that NM residents are probably extremely happy about this decision.

I can't help but think that the NM Game & Fish Department are trying to determine how to make up the additional $$$ non-resident hunters brought into their department by drawing these tags.

A simple look at the costs of the tags would realize the potential loss the NM G&F would incur with this ruling.

Resident Bighorn ram tag $161 versus Non-resident Bighorn ram tag $3180 - It would take almost 20 resident sheep hunters to generate the same revenue as a single non-resident hunter.

Resident Ibex tag $111 versus Non-resident Ibex tag $1630 - It would take almost 15 resident ibex hunters to generate the same revenue as a single non-resident hunter.

Resident Oryx tag $161 versus Non-resident Oryx tag $1630 - It would take 10 resident oryx hunters to generate the same revenue as a single non-resident hunter.

Am I reading this correctly?
They changed the rule AFTER the application deadline date has passed? This change goes into effect this year?
What a crock of s&!%. I would have never given them that kind of money to sit on for a month for such a small chance of drawing.
I believe this will halve their non-resident applicants next year.

Are they going to give 10% of the bighorn and ibex tags to the outfitter pool then?

Finally a ruling by the courts that make sense.

quote:

Originally posted by COYOTE HUNTER:
Am I reading this correctly?
They changed the rule AFTER the application deadline date has passed? This change goes into effect this year?
What a crock of s&!%. I would have never given them that kind of money to sit on for a month for such a small chance of drawing.
I believe this will halve their non-resident applicants next year.

Are they going to give 10% of the bighorn and ibex tags to the outfitter pool then?

That's the way I read it. I didn't put in this year simply because I've got other trips planned for 2014. So, I'm pretty confident my choice was a wise one with this change being made immediately for the 2014 season, and the fact no preference points are given. The same reason I don't apply for Idaho any longer. When I have to buy the hunting license and put in for a slim chance at drawing, at least I feel like I'm getting something for my money when I'm provided a preference point with a better chance of drawing next year.

I sent an email to NMFG and this is the response I got back almost immediately:
The Department is accessing impacts and options to hunters that applied for bighorn sheep, ibex and oryx. Once the Department has determined the best course of action, we will notify the public regarding any changes to the application or draw process for these species. Notification of any changes will be sent to the media and published on our website.



Information Specialist

Information and Education Division

New Mexico Game & Fish

Not mad at the decision, its great for the residents. But seriously sucks to think we had a chance in the sheep drawings, pony up the fees, and now get told "sorry your slim chance just went down to %0"

In 2012 there were 16 bighorn (desert and rocky mountain) sheep permits in New Mexico. 15 of those permits went to non-residents. I could not find the draw results for bighorn sheep for 2013.

Let's see now, the residents of NM paid most of the cost for rehabiliting the bighorn sheep in our state. Just does not seem fair that the majority of the permits go out of state.

How does your state handle out of state hunters? Is there a draw? What percentage of the permits go to non-residents?

Most of the western states have had this type of draw in place for some time as I understand it. NM is one of the last ones to implement these percentages in the draw hunts.

I don't see anyone complaining about the rule change.
The BS part of it is the TIMING of the implementation. Changing it after the application deadline is ridiculous.

And for what it's worth, I don't believe an any state limiting "non-residents" to public resources. Mine included. We have some of the best elk hunting in the US and I do not agree that we as residents have better access to those tags. You should have the same opportunity as I do.

This fits in with the topic in the ARPF, the politics of hunting.

This is just another example, Non-Residents are being weeded out in favor of residents, but resident license fees do not bring in any where near as much $$$$$ as Non-Resident fees.

In most states, the Game & Fish departments depend on the revenue of license/tag sales to Non-Residents for a large % of their annual budgets. This is being lost and will eventually create problems that the departments can not over come, simply because of the lack of those Non-Resident dollars.

I guess that was along my way of thinking, too, Crazyhorse.

Using the numbers impala provided, NMG&F would have brought in $47,700 in 2012 alone with 15 tags going to the NR hunters. It would take NMG&F over 18 years to generate that same revenue if every sheep tag went to resident hunters.

Put another way, with roughly 16 tags available and only 6% guaranteed to NR hunters that means only 1 tag is available to the NR crowd. So, a total revenue of $5595 will be generated each year, dependent upon the number of NR hunters who draw with an outfitter. It would still take 8.5 years to generate an equivalent $47,700.

I'm sure the bean counters within the NMG&F would like to see a bit more revenue from those tags considering what they have been receiving in the past.

And, this doesn't even consider the other two species, however ibex probably isn't much because of the number of tags given, but I would expect the oryx tags will put a dent into revenue generated, as well.

Coyote Hunter- I don't know what state you live in, but I bet "some of the best elk hunting in the US" has quotas on resident and non-resident tags. You and I have a basic difference of opinion on this issue. I believe residents should have the advantage here because we live here, pay property taxes, fuel taxes, taxes on everything else we consume to support our state. Non-residents pay taxes too when they visit, and I am glad for that revenue also, but not as much as the resident.

CHC and graybird- I am sure you are correct in your assumption about revenues concerning resident and non-resident fees. I know the game department will be scrambling to make up the shortfall. I for one would not mind raising the license fees for residents if I could draw a tag a little more often. I haven't drawn a tag in the last 4 years. I hunted in Texas last year and throughly enjoyed the hunting. It's just to bad I have to hunt out of my state because I can't draw a tag.

The Game and Fish didn't change any laws. In fact, the injunction has prevented them from complying with state law that limits the percentage of big game licenses allocated to non-residents. With this ruling we finally get to apply the same quotas to these three species. It's absolutely no different than what every other western state does with virtually every big game species. I sure don't have equal footing in the bighorn sheep draw in CO or WY and residents do, and I support that. After, residents likely provide the bulk of the overall funding and boots on the ground for wildlife projects.

Yeah, the timing sucks if you're a non-resident in the draw this year, I'll grant you that. However, this is a court decision, not one the Game and Fish could schedule. Of course, they get to decide when to apply the ruling. I for one am glad they're applying it this year. It's very frustrating as a resident watching the lion's share of these extremely-hard-to-get and much coveted tags go out of state.

As to the money? I'm sure there will be a revenue loss, but that's part of it. I suspect the few thousand bucks lost from these tags are a relatively small portion of the overall hunting and fishing licenses sold in the state. Hell, as far as I'm concerned they could go ahead and raise the resident license fees for these three animals to the same price as the non-residents to keep the revenue from license sales the same.

The timing is poor for the current draw and the forcing of immediate compliance, as opposed to delaying it until the next draw period. Having said that, the decision is the right one. people who live in NM deserve to have the majority of permits for any game species set aside for residents. It is the norm in most other jurisdictions.

Don't like it, move to NM.

I think some have missed what the lifting of this injunction has done. If you are strictly a DIY hunter, the 6% cap effectively eliminates you from almost every tag available for those three animals because the cap is not on total tags. It is a 6% cap on each unit where there are tags, just like for all the other animals. I'm not sure on Ibex and Oryz, but there will probably not be a single tag for sheep now for the NR DIY pool. If the G&F doesn't immediately refund all monies to NRs who want it back after changing the rule in the middle of this I can see lawsuits or a class action lawsuit, especially because of the interstate commerce that money represents. They have effectively taken many NR hunter's money under false pretenses with nothing now available for the money those NRs have shelled out. I'd bet that any day you'll see a refund policy coming out of the G&F Office to eliminate lawsuits, while keeping the resident hunters happy. NM is now probably the worst western state in the way it deals with the NR DIY hunter. They need to revamp the outfitter tag set asides and landowner transferrable licenses such that both the residents and NRs are treated fairly.

Impala #03- I just don't believe in the arbitrary lines that were created so many years ago that divide us as a country today. We are Americans, period. A river here, a line there . . . that makes us different? Not in my eyes. I live in Utah and I believe that you or anyone else who wants to apply deserves the same shot at a Henry's deer tag or a Pahvant elk tag as I have.

By the way, it's nice to have a civil discussion with someone on this site when so often I see people make asses of themselves when they don't agree. Who knows, maybe someday we'll share a campfire and solve all the state's problems. Good luck in the draws this year.

I think the most interesting thing out of this ruling is how the NMG&F is going to handle this year's draws with the potential for a full refund for those who choose so, while drawing their name out of the hat. I think if they kept all the applications and money without giving people a chance to decide with the rules now changed mid-stream, would not look good on the NMG&F.

However, it were me, I would likely go ahead and leave my name in the hat for this year since the money was going to be sitting there anyway had the rules not changed. Next year, would be a totally different story though.

Topgun- It was the US District Court that handed down the ruling, not the NM Dept of Game and Fish. But I agree with you, some non-residents will be upset that the rules were changed in the middle of the draw, as they should be.

Coyote Hunter- I have to agree with you about arbitrary lines dividing us. However that is the world we live in, I guess we have to abide by the rules. Sharing a campfire and solving all the states problems would be a worthy endevor.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by impala#03:
Topgun- It was the US District Court that handed down the ruling, not the NM Dept of Game and Fish. But I agree with you, some non-residents will be upset that the rules were changed in the middle of the draw, as they should be.


***I know it was a female Federal District Judge that lifted the injunction itself. The thing that the G&F needed to do was have a plan in place in case this happened, which they full well knew it could, and immediately state that they would issue refunds to all the affected NRs who choose to get refunds. Leaving the draws alone until next year, IF they could even legally do so, would obviously piss off a lot of residents that they need on their side at all times, so I am not surprised they chose to immediately change the rules in midstream. With the 6% NR DIY cap now applying on tags that are so few for those three animals, they have effectively eliminated DIY NRs from applying because there are none available or possibly one in a couple units the way the percentages work out!

Topgun- It will be interesting to see how it all plays out. Maybe the dept of game and fish have a contingency plan. We'll see.

I agree - the G&F needs to offer to refund NR licenst AND application fees to anyone who wants them. That's the fair thing to do. In 2001, my wife drew a tag for a two-day oryx hunt on the White Sands Missile Range. Between drawing the tag and going on the hunt, crazies attacked the World Trade Center, putting military installations on high alert. WSMR opted to restrict every hunt to one day and require full escorts for all hunters. The G&F notified all oryx hunters and offered to let them give up their hunt and apply later; and not count it against your once-in-a-lifetime limit. I'm not sure how many folks gave theirs up though. We went and the wife killed a big ol' broken horn cow (she had a non-typical tag).

Based on that, I would expect them to offer refunds.

Oh, and I agree with Topgun's idea to reevaluate outfitter set-asides. All NRs ought to have an equal shot at the NR licenses without having to hire an outfitter.

I believe that residents should always have better odds than non-residents. A 10% quota would be the fair way to go IMO. They pay state taxes, live there, and they deserve more.

Outfitter, designated tags is just plain STUPID!

Non-Residents absolutely should get a refund. Its hard to believe how screwed up some of these
Western states are, in their F&G management ( know nothing about the other states).

I don't have an issue with this. The NM game dept works for the residents of NM and not the residents of the other states. Residents should have better odds. Nobody makes someone hunt NM. If they don't like it, they can hunt elsewhere.

Link to the Press Release


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, MARCH 26, 2014:


APPLICANTS FOR BIGHORN SHEEP, ORYX AND IBEX HUNTING LICENSES ELIGIBLE FOR FULL REFUNDS

SANTA FE – Hunters who applied for bighorn sheep, oryx or ibex licenses for the 2014-15 seasons and are unsuccessful in the drawings will be eligible for full refunds of application fees and license fees, the Department of Game and Fish announced Wednesday.

Application fees normally are nonrefundable whether a license applicant is successful or not. This year’s departure from that practice is in response to Monday’s ruling in U.S. District Court that vacated a 1977 injunction that prohibited the Department from applying preferential quotas that benefitted state residents in drawings for bighorn sheep, oryx and ibex licenses. The injunction allowed nonresidents to enjoy the same odds as residents when applying for those species.

Because of Monday’s ruling, the Department will begin applying the same quotas this year to bighorn sheep, oryx and ibex applications as it applies to deer, elk, pronghorn antelope and Barbary sheep. According to those quotas, 84 percent of licenses are allocated to New Mexico residents, 6 percent are allocated to nonresidents, and 10 percent are allocated to applicants – residents and nonresidents – who use New Mexico outfitters.

Applicants for bighorn sheep, oryx and ibex who choose not to participate in the new quota system must delete their applications by April 18. Applications can be deleted through online accounts or by telephone toll-free, (888) 268-6866.

“The Department determined that it will be most equitable to refund the normally nonrefundable application fees to applicants who are unsuccessful or who choose to withdraw their application due to changes resulting from the recent court decision, and to comply immediately with state law,” Department General Counsel Allison Marks said.

Because the option to apply with outfitters was not offered on this year’s application forms, hunters who would like to designate a valid outfitter will be able to do so and join the 10 percent license allocation pool. To add a New Mexico outfitter to an application, the applicant will be required to call the Department and provide the application number, customer identification number and the outfitter number no later than April 18.

The court ruling prompted the Department to delay this year’s drawing by approximately one week. Drawing results will be available no later than April 30.

For more information about the drawing, refunds and the application process, please call the Department toll-free, (888) 268-6866.

Yep, just as I suspected. Makes sense; now those that don't like the lower odds of drawing can bow out. But hell, someone has to get the tags, so why not stay in the draw?

I agree with you DesertRam. If you've already got your money in there, you might as well keep your name in the hat. You definitely won't draw should you decide to abandon ship.

Media contact: Rachel Shockley, (505) 476-8071
Public contact: (888) 248-6866
rachel.shockley@state.nm.us

REVISED: CORRECTED PHONE NUMBER
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, MARCH 26 2014:

APPLICANTS FOR BIGHORN SHEEP, ORYX AND IBEX HUNTING LICENSES ELIGIBLE FOR FULL REFUNDS

SANTA FE – Hunters who applied for bighorn sheep, oryx or ibex licenses for the 2014-15 seasons and are unsuccessful in the drawings will be eligible for full refunds of application fees and license fees, the Department of Game and Fish announced Wednesday.

Application fees normally are nonrefundable whether a license applicant is successful or not. This year’s departure from that practice is in response to Monday’s ruling in U.S. District Court that vacated a 1977 injunction that prohibited the Department from applying preferential quotas that benefitted state residents in drawings for bighorn sheep, oryx and ibex licenses. The injunction allowed nonresidents to enjoy the same odds as residents when applying for those species.

Because of Monday’s ruling, the Department will begin applying the same quotas this year to bighorn sheep, oryx and ibex applications as it applies to deer, elk, pronghorn antelope and Barbary sheep. According to those quotas, 84 percent of licenses are allocated to New Mexico residents, 6 percent are allocated to nonresidents, and 10 percent are allocated to applicants – residents and nonresidents – who use New Mexico outfitters.

Applicants for bighorn sheep, oryx and ibex who choose not to participate in the new quota system must delete their applications by April 18. Applications can be deleted through online accounts or by telephone toll-free, (888) 248-6866.

“The Department determined that it will be most equitable to refund the normally nonrefundable application fees to applicants who are unsuccessful or who choose to withdraw their application due to changes resulting from the recent court decision, and to comply immediately with state law,” Department General Counsel Allison Marks said.

Because the option to apply with outfitters was not offered on this year’s application forms, hunters who would like to designate a valid outfitter will be able to do so and join the 10 percent license allocation pool. To add a New Mexico outfitter to an application, the applicant will be required to call the Department and provide the application number, customer identification number and the outfitter number no later than April 18.

The court ruling prompted the Department to delay this year’s drawing by approximately one week. Drawing results will be available no later than April 30.

For more information about the drawing, refunds and the application process, please call the Department toll-free, (888) 248-6866.





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Questions?
Contact Us
STAY CONNECTED:




SUBSCRIBER SERVICES:
Manage Preferences | Unsubscribe | Help


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This email was sent to slefforge@wyoming.com using GovDelivery, on behalf of: New Mexico Department of Game & Fish · PO Box 25112 · Santa Fe, NM 87504 · (505) 476-8000

quote:

Let's see now, the residents of NM paid most of the cost for rehabiliting the bighorn sheep in our state. Just does not seem fair that the majority of the permits go out of state.

I don't think so.....in addition, with the exception of the Armendaris Ranch, owned by Ted Turner, all restoration projects have been on public land.......ummm, how much public land do you think New Mexico owns compared to Federally owned lands which, theoretically should be shared equally among all US citizens IMO.

Does anyone have confirmation on what the odds are now for any of the Sheep (ram) permits? Everyone seems to think they will ALL be completely out of reach for non residents.

With a 6% cap on those three animals in each unit for a NR DIY there will be no tags for sheep and it will be lucky if there are more than one or two total in the other drawings. This ruling essentially ended a NR DIY hunter from drawing a tag for those three animals. In fact, even if you would go with an outfitter your chance will be next to impossible since the 10% outfitter set aside also includes residents. Anyway, I sure called that one and it was a matter of a few hours after my post and not days when they came out with their refund policy.

Topgun:

I think someone from the NM Fish and Game read your post- hence the immediate press release.

So there's a chance in the outfitter pool? All the sheep odds are next to impossible so it really comes down to either possible or not possible.

quote:

Originally posted by bobby7321:
So there's a chance in the outfitter pool? All the sheep odds are next to impossible so it really comes down to either possible or not possible.

If the percentage is per unit, then it's highly unlikely there will be a NR tag for any hunt except the Latir Mountain ewe hunt, which has a total of 11 tags. 6% of those tags (so maybe one?) will go to NRs in the open draw, while 10% will go to NRs and Rs in the outfitter draw (so probably another tag). The remainder will be allocated to Rs. All other units have less than four tags per hunt, with many having only one or two. It's difficult to see how those will be divided - there's no such thing as .06 of a tag. Perhaps the G&F will set aside a specific unit or two for NRs to ensure that the 6% stipulated in state law is allocated. I haven't read anything about that, but surely they've got to be making plans.

Suffice it to say that all of our odds suck big-time, NR chances just suck worse.

They're currently accepting input for the 2015/2016 hunting regulations, so there's an opportunity for us to have a say is where they head with this.

Ibex will be a bit better. There are 25 tags in the "trophy hunt" - the once in a lifetime rifle hunt. There are also 25 tags available for muzzleloader hunters and two hunts with 100 bow tags.

For oryx, there are six primary trophy hunts with 49-50 tags per hunt, so 18 tags there. There's another ten off-range hunts with 60 tags per hunt, so a total of 36 more tags there. There's also private land hunts, which as far as I know are not restricted based on residency. There are also a few other hunts for oryx, but they'd probably only add a few more NR tags to the mix.

Don't forget that if you're a returning Irag/Afghanistan vet with NM residency, there are special oryx hunts set aside for you.

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:

quote:

Let's see now, the residents of NM paid most of the cost for rehabiliting the bighorn sheep in our state. Just does not seem fair that the majority of the permits go out of state.

I don't think so.....in addition, with the exception of the Armendaris Ranch, owned by Ted Turner, all restoration projects have been on public land.......ummm, how much public land do you think New Mexico owns compared to Federally owned lands which, theoretically should be shared equally among all US citizens IMO.

Gato, you make good points. Much of the restoration has occurred on BLM, National Wildlife Refuge, and US Army lands. There is some state land and various parcel of private also in the mix. And yes, NRs should (and do) have equal access to those lands. However, the states control access to wildlife within their borders, an idea that has been affirmed by the courts numerous times.

It was a little challenging to determine sources of funding for the restoration efforts, but it looks like about $2M of the estimate $6M effort has come from private advocacy groups like the Wild Sheep Foundation(mostly through the auction of tags that we New Mexicans, through our game laws, authorized the sale of), so many thanks to those folks with the means to bid on those very expensive tags. The remaining funds are a mix of state (through the G&F - our license fees) and federal (through the USF&W using excise taxes on hunting and fishing gear, P-R funds I suspect), with smaller amounts coming from the state of AZ, the army, and other private groups like the Turner Endangered Species Fund and New Mexico Ranch Properties, Inc.

The NMDGF funds much of the active management of sheep populations in the state, but a breakdown was not readily available (at least during my quick search).

I actually think that the 84% restriction is a bit harsh. The previous 74% (or was it 76%?) seemed a bit fairer, and for sheep, which have been restored with a lot of extra-NM funding, even a 50/50 split would not be unreasonable. As pointed out, the 10% set aside for outfitteres is not in the public's interest, and really irritates me. I'd be more inclined to just set aside the 16% to NRs period, and let folks, both R and NR, decide whether they want to hire an outfitter.

quote:

Originally posted by TommyII:
I don't have an issue with this. The NM game dept works for the residents of NM and not the residents of the other states. Residents should have better odds. Nobody makes someone hunt NM. If they don't like it, they can hunt elsewhere.

And I do. Me and my money drive right on through.

I put in every year and never draw so now the odds will be even crappier, plus I do DIY hunts so I am punished for not using an outfitter. I don't mind the high tag costs it is what it is. Maybe now they should go to a bonus point system for non residents !

quote:

Originally posted by DesertRam:

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:

quote:

Let's see now, the residents of NM paid most of the cost for rehabiliting the bighorn sheep in our state. Just does not seem fair that the majority of the permits go out of state.

I don't think so.....in addition, with the exception of the Armendaris Ranch, owned by Ted Turner, all restoration projects have been on public land.......ummm, how much public land do you think New Mexico owns compared to Federally owned lands which, theoretically should be shared equally among all US citizens IMO.

Gato, you make good points. Much of the restoration has occurred on BLM, National Wildlife Refuge, and US Army lands. There is some state land and various parcel of private also in the mix. And yes, NRs should (and do) have equal access to those lands. However, the states control access to wildlife within their borders, an idea that has been affirmed by the courts numerous times.

It was a little challenging to determine sources of funding for the restoration efforts, but it looks like about $2M of the estimate $6M effort has come from private advocacy groups like the Wild Sheep Foundation(mostly through the auction of tags that we New Mexicans, through our game laws, authorized the sale of), so many thanks to those folks with the means to bid on those very expensive tags. The remaining funds are a mix of state (through the G&F - our license fees) and federal (through the USF&W using excise taxes on hunting and fishing gear, P-R funds I suspect), with smaller amounts coming from the state of AZ, the army, and other private groups like the Turner Endangered Species Fund and New Mexico Ranch Properties, Inc.

The NMDGF funds much of the active management of sheep populations in the state, but a breakdown was not readily available (at least during my quick search).

I actually think that the 84% restriction is a bit harsh. The previous 74% (or was it 76%?) seemed a bit fairer, and for sheep, which have been restored with a lot of extra-NM funding, even a 50/50 split would not be unreasonable. As pointed out, the 10% set aside for outfitteres is not in the public's interest, and really irritates me. I'd be more inclined to just set aside the 16% to NRs period, and let folks, both R and NR, decide whether they want to hire an outfitter.

Gato:

Using your logic, I should be able to buy a resident license and hunt on my land in Colorado; after all, I contribute $3500 a year in property taxes and support the animals on our land.

Fact is, each state owns its wildlife - the landowner is immaterial.

quote:

Originally posted by graybird:
I guess that was along my way of thinking, too, Crazyhorse.

Using the numbers impala provided, NMG&F would have brought in $47,700 in 2012 alone with 15 tags going to the NR hunters. It would take NMG&F over 18 years to generate that same revenue if every sheep tag went to resident hunters.

Put another way, with roughly 16 tags available and only 6% guaranteed to NR hunters that means only 1 tag is available to the NR crowd. So, a total revenue of $5595 will be generated each year, dependent upon the number of NR hunters who draw with an outfitter. It would still take 8.5 years to generate an equivalent $47,700.

I'm sure the bean counters within the NMG&F would like to see a bit more revenue from those tags considering what they have been receiving in the past.

And, this doesn't even consider the other two species, however ibex probably isn't much because of the number of tags given, but I would expect the oryx tags will put a dent into revenue generated, as well.

47 grand barely buys a new pickup for the department. I don't see that as a catastrophe.

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:

quote:

Originally posted by graybird:
I guess that was along my way of thinking, too, Crazyhorse.

Using the numbers impala provided, NMG&F would have brought in $47,700 in 2012 alone with 15 tags going to the NR hunters. It would take NMG&F over 18 years to generate that same revenue if every sheep tag went to resident hunters.

Put another way, with roughly 16 tags available and only 6% guaranteed to NR hunters that means only 1 tag is available to the NR crowd. So, a total revenue of $5595 will be generated each year, dependent upon the number of NR hunters who draw with an outfitter. It would still take 8.5 years to generate an equivalent $47,700.

I'm sure the bean counters within the NMG&F would like to see a bit more revenue from those tags considering what they have been receiving in the past.

And, this doesn't even consider the other two species, however ibex probably isn't much because of the number of tags given, but I would expect the oryx tags will put a dent into revenue generated, as well.

47 grand barely buys a new pickup for the department. I don't see that as a catastrophe.

True, but that's a new truck every 8.5 years versus a new truck every year.