Plus open for public comment
New Mexico
Just got off the G&F website and under the commission there are proposed changes for elk eplus. I am formulating what I want to say and wrapping my mind around what they are trying to do. It seems like they are defining land use of elk and some scr's may be kicked off. Also it looks like scar's out of the coer area might go otc tags. Some large ranches that don't utilize all their tags may get tag reductions, those I would suggest get put in the draw.
They are also changing the rules and hunt dates for elk. Now is the time to have our voices heard.
Okay! When's the meeting? Is this another email and phone call situation?
Suggested improvements:
? Develop Commission approved Guidelines for program administration
? Define “meaningful benefit” based on biological criteria
? Use habitat based evaluation to screen all properties currently in EPLUS
? Re-evaluate any properties with acreage changes
? Remove properties that don’t provide meaningful benefit
? Route Bonus and Unconverted authorizations through the SCRs first
? Eliminate SCR draw history system
? Develop a weighted draw for SCR properties
? Make outside COER private land tags available over-the-counter
? Draft new rule language
Suggested improvements are the MAPS for sure. Unreal the how poor of maps they accept in exchange for so many tags.
splitlimb13-- From what I can tell this meeting was in Raton. I don't know if they are going to have other meetings or not.
They also opened the elk rule to change hunt dates. Some of the APRE hunts are looking at going into the general draw, more tags except for unit 9. They are looking at getting rid of all the antler less tags and reducing bull tags there. Taking away some youth encouragement hunts and opening them to seniors 65+.
There were a total of 4 meetings around the state to gather input directly from landowners who are currently signed up in the system. There are four public meetings this next week to gather input on elk, deer, and E-PLUS rules.
Thank you Red!! I think they should take those tags from uw LO and not the youth. Kevin ,do you know the location of the meetings?
Roswell: 6 to 7:30 p.m. July 25 at the Department of Game and Fish office, 1912 W. Second Street Las Cruces: 6 to 7:30 p.m. July 26 at the Department of Game and Fish office, 2715 Northrise Drive Santa Fe: 6 to 7:30 p.m. August 1 at the Santa Fe Community College (Jemez Room 1), 6401 Richards Ave Albuquerque: 6 to 7:30 p.m. August 2 at the Department of Game and Fish office, 3841 Midway Place, NE
"I think they should take those tags from uw LO and not the youth"
Couldn't agree more. Most 65+ year olds still have more of an advantage than a 12 yr old does and has had way more opportunity in the past 55 yrs than any youth today will ever have...
But the 65 year old deserves the tag more; I've read it on the Internet multiple times.
65 hmmm... Would that put me closer to drawing Valle Vidal ?
I'll most likely be at the Roswell meeting, anything you guys want me to address/ suggest? I think e-plus should be depredation therefore nothing is gained by harvesting bulls, hence no bull tags should be allocated to Eplus. If they want to hunt bulls on their ranches they or their clients can draw a tag.
Ohio , I think your thoughts are similar to most of ours. We can suggest drastic changes but will most likey be ignored. IMO we should take small bites . I will be addressing the uw portion .I believe there should be gps coordinate to every uw ranch in the system online where the landowner list is. I also believe if a lo fails to call you back they should be taken off the list for the following year. They love to pocket the money from the tags they sell and never wanna hold up their end of the bargain. Along with some other issues .
Ohio, I think depredation will prob have zero penetration as eplus is more about compensating for damages rather than reducing damages caused by elk. I do agree with you that depredation is the correct answer to reduce the issue. Also think eplus should allow adjustement of hunt dates to control the elk on private when they're actually on the private. Just like the UW ranch I showed you pics of. Does no good to kill trophy bulls on the other side of the unit in the fall when the elk are eating your hay field in summer. That rancher prob accumulates $50k-60k in tags and still asking for gnf to help supply a high fence around the hay field. That rancher really doesn't want to fence out all game cause it's evidence of needing more tags.
Think Split is precisely correct in we need to try and make small achievable gains within the system that will help all draw hunters benefit from the eplus asap. Gnf needs to cold call some ranches and get a feel what we public landowners are deaLing with and even attempt to put these maps together. But the mapping access sytem is a must that needs addressed. I would like landowners do choose a type of access upon thier contract with gnf. Like foot access only, vehicle access etc. I could go on all day but got get some work done.
Frequency and support will be key factors for getting things on the ballot so to speak. I will push for location clarification also. I'll also back my position down to putting a minimum ranch size for bull tags. There is no reason a 40acre ranch should get a UW bull tag, my premise will be simply what does that do for that ranches problem? I'll also bring up the financial assistance given to some ranches for wildlife damage. I know it happens and the more details/ familiarity I go in the better so can some please give me some info regarding this 2nd avenue of welfare?
**edit.. maybe not exactly financial assist... but I've heard of LO getting help with fences.
Who all is attending the meetings in your area?
I would be interested to see the cost of damage associated with elk on PL as an itemized list. Afterall, the allocation of public resources is a matter of public record, I want to see what and where my state shared resources are going for...
I do not know, and I don't know half the stuff you lifers do... I'm just a transplant. So thats why I want to get things straightened out so I can be as clear and concise about our objectives.
I will ask about those records.... Like I said, the more info and the more concise I can be the better... even better when my sentiments coincide w/ others at other meetings... split. We all know this is near impossible but we gotta try, I finally have the opp to attend so I plan on it.
HDE, that's not a bad idea. Then they can be reimbursed commensurate to the damage and measiley fee they pay to public lands for over grazing and livestock crapping everywhere.
Edited: and the miles and miles of barbed wire they leave behind.
I will be attending. We do have to try. So does anyone know what type of input they want on the hunt date topic?
I suppose if some EPlus LO tags are unit wide and will allow any and all tag holders for that unit and hunt dates to hunt said land, then there are not that many elk to start with on said land. UW EPlus are not necessary and should be discontinued.
It ain't rocket science...
HDE, Spot on. Other issue is there's LO that are RO just to landlock the public behind thier property then thier RO hunters can hunt into public lands with minimal risk of getting caught. Gnf doesn't care to enforce that trespassing issue.
They can’t catch them all but they did catch 2 bbs hunters that had 2 sheep down. My buddies bought the sheep 26” and 29”. I don’t know if they were reported or spotted from the sky hunting a similar situation you describe.
Bingo HDE. Can't count how many times I've been to a UW ranch who got tags, only to find dry dirt, no vegetation or water sources. Exactly how are some of these property owners "contributing"? Because their property lies within the vague area known as the COER.
Splitlimb and HDE, I think we are on the same level. Get rid of E-Plus and hunt only on deeded land during season.
Those who have deeded land with habitat will prosper, and that's fine. Those who have deeded land with dry dirt...let the market decide.
Splitlimb, maybe you could just ask what G&F is doing to ensure that LO's are providing equal value to the public in return for the value of tags received? Otherwise that's Anti-Donation violation.
All presentation information should be available online.
Deer proposal: split archery, 9day youth hunt Thanksgiving week, couple units will increase/ decrease tags
Elk proposal: late season flash sale moved to draw, split gmu 15, increase cow tags in 34, increase some COER, implement 37 COER, unlimited otc outside COER.
Eplus criteria was explained, they also said they will be reevaluating properties when there is a change, I suggested no partial. Presenter said under new reevaluation they will weed out the very small ranches, but I do not recall a clear explanation for this other than their criteria which does not account for ranch size. He also explained criteria for public/LO tag distributions, which is pure land mass. SO if the COER increases in size to encompass more private, more tags will go to private LO, but if the COER does not include said properties they will then fall under unlimited OTC. Kind of screwy, but currently outside COER properties can purchase unlimited tags, its just not exactly otc.
Access access access. The fact is hunters must get organized, LO's are organized and they win (so to speak) regularly. There were about 15 people at this meeting, with several LO's. We need organization w/ a representative who can clearly convey our needs and wishes. Furthermore all comments must be made in writing, email addresses are available but to be heard it has to be in writing ASAP, the next commission hearing is Aug 23.
Eplus email: [email protected]
The more concise and repetitive the public is with their voice the more we will accomplish.
So, we need someone with the political savvy to go toe to toe with bureaucracies in an organized and methodical fashion. Anyone know any good sportsmen friendly lobbyists...?
I propose an all or nothing, if a ranch participates in Eplus they must, at a minimum, allow pass through access if a viable road is present. Perhaps Open Gate can negotiate foot access, either way I want to get to the public land that is land locked. Land locked public land is not public. I also commented on the quality of the eplus UW maps.
Not necessarily political, but someone who can articulate our position and proposition, there are already organizations in place so its less of an initial start up and more of a membership participation. Now if you do not feel an existing organization shares the same sentiment then start a new one. The problem is the avg joe hunter doesn't always convey their message, nor do they do it objectively. Furthermore the LO turn out at the LO meetings is near triple digit while the public meetings are barely double digit, see the lopsidedness? But I further explained, of course, the LO's have a lot of money to be gained whereas avg joe hunter MIGHT hunt 5days every 2-10yrs.... again this is where the organizations continue to fight on your behalf, my biggest problem is; Have any of these organizations made a difference? example of one.. NMWF
The lopsidedness is because the avg Joe public land hunter works 2080 hrs a year for a living and might get paid 80 of it to do leisure activity (aka hunt).
The LO is a 3rd or 4th generation inhabitant, makes enough from hobby ranching/farming and the balance from selling tresspass rights for public resource assets (aka LO tags) to live on and has all the time in the world to represent their interests...
While I don't disagree, they are still making us look bad. How many hunters do you think there are in Chavez county, or just the immediate roswell area? How many LO's whom hold wildlife? There is every bit 10x more, and this meeting was made available during most people's off hours... only about 10 public hunters showed up??? really?
I hope there are better numbers at the other 3 meetings
The question is, how many concerned hunters were available during off hours? Major industry in the Roswell area within an hour drive is oil and gas, and their days don't necessarily end at 5 o'clock.
Tit for tat.. you can be a part of the problem or you can try to be a part of the solution
Again, all the information presented will be (or is) available on the website.
No, I get it. If it's important enough you figure out a way. If not, then you figure out excuses.
There is a difference between excuses and reasons. Excuses are a lack of desire or ambition, reasons involve pressing responsibilities that take precedence.
The most popular excuse is "I'm too busy" as you sit there on the couch watching AMC's 'Yellowstone' or anything else for that matter.
I think the overall pomp and circumstance of a political atmosphere like a city council meeting steers people away as well...
From: ohiohunter 26-Jul-18 Private Reply Tit for tat.. you can be a part of the problem or you can try to be a part of the solution
I had to double check who posted when I read this... For a second I thought artichill was posting...
arctichill
Sorry about that Jesse
Ohio, Doesn't surprise me LO show up in near triple digits. Imagine how many public hunters would show if we were getting free elk tags ??$$,$$$. Thousands my friend. I honestly think the public hunter in general doesn't have faith that thier time and voice will have any impact with gnf. Truly appreciate you going and, now I'm trying to move some Thurs plans around to make it. I truly don't think even 10% of the public hunters are educated on the eplus sytem. I talk to a lot hunters and most are entirely clueless.
After the 2nd or 3rd time I was told about the LO turn out I said of course. The avg NM hunter leisurely hunts big game 5days/yr every couple of yrs vs the LO’s who profit 10’s of 1000’s of dollars every year. To me this clearly explains the turn outs, but I guess these govt officials can not comprehend the different parties interests.
Who appoints the Game Commissioner? The Governor. Who appoints the commissioners who are in charge of overseeing the the head commissioner...the Governor. Checks and balances don't work here.
raceguy you are flinging arrows just to fling them? here is the skinny....The commission hires the game and fish director, not the governor.
“Commission members are appointed to up to four-year terms by the governor and CONFIRMED BY THE STATE SENATE. Not more than four members can be from the same political party. Five of the members represent different geographical areas of the state. The other two members are appointed “at large.” At least one member of the commission shall represent agricultural interests and one member represent conservation interests”
No arrow flinging going on. The statement was made about the commissioner and commission. Not the director of game and fish.
And it is indeed a political arena as raceguy pointed out...
A very ugly arena at that! I don't like any choice for any position, rough times ahead gentleman.
Not flinging arrows at all and not trying to start an argument. Its just how things work here. KS you are technically correct. The commission hires the Director, but who appoints the commission? The Governor chooses the commission, and you don't get selected unless you "go with the the flow"
And yes, it has to be confirmed by the Senate, which is basically rubber stamped as they also have to approve over 200 positions in the State Government, and its also not worthwhile to go against the governors choice of such a minor position as the Governor can veto any bill a legislator puts on the table.
Race are you suggesting the governor is vindictive? lol
Self serving is more like it
Clueless maybe but not necessarily vindictive. And I voted for her!! lol Its just how things work in politics. Happens all the time, When Trump got elected he cleared out Obama's staff for his own, and Obama cleared out Bush's staff and so on.
It's very rare for the Senate to not confirm a presidential (or gubernatorial) nomination. Unless they can dig up some dirt to justify it and by that time the person withdraws their name. I had to do some googling but's been nearly 30 years that a presidential nomination wasn't confirmed by the Senate. Not sure about here in NM but its pretty rear.
Heck, there's even an open position right now on the commission. I'm not sure why but If I had to take a guess a possible reason is that it might be a very short term gig as there's going to be a new governor in 4 months and that person might want to bring in new faces, especially ones that give campaign support.
Just to keep everyone updated, this is the time to submit ideas and comments for the elk and deer rules which will determine the next four years hunting seasons, bag limits, and weapons types. E-PLUS was passed in 2005 and opened for the first time since then. Please read how the primary zone and secondary zone will affect specific GMU's. Examples would include 13, 17, 21B, 22, 23, and 24 in the Southwest part of NM). Public hunt dates (for first MB hunt) start mid-October. Secondary zone private (current Outside COER) starts Oct. 1 with rifle during elk rut. What do y'all think of that?
I think that's bullshit !!!! That needs to be changed but it's like pounding your fist on a rock!
Splitlimb13, yup. All sportsmen, please submit written comments to game and fish website.
Splitlimb13, are you the only sportsman that has an opinion? LO's are represented with multiple speakers while public sportsmen are rarely spoken for.
I have already sent in my written opinion to the commission. So I have an opinion too. I plan to be in ALbq. on Thursday.
I feel you splitlimb. NM is just basackwards. I believe we are now the only State where our legislators are not compensated. They get a per-diem only while in session to pay for the commute and a hotel, but it's still a year-round job. Every entity from G&F, to tribes, to oil and gas, youth services, dental clinics for the poor wants to meet and make their pitch, and its year around.
You might me a great community leader and can help change G&F policies right? But you probably have a mortgage and kiddos that need to be fed. It really is a rigged system.
NM is 15 to 20 years behind everyone else in most things, no wonder it ranks towards the bottom of the list compared to the rest of the country. Also, way too much of the "good 'ol boy" thing happening with gov't and the old land grant guys.
Not sure I'd like our legislators to be paid more than travel expenses because then you may never get some of them out of office...
I really hope we get a turn out. Sportsman are always outnumbered 10-1 it seems like. We may be very disappointed in the end results ,but we really need to try and make the time. I have a full time job,a wife,and 4 children, and call me crazy but we're all going to attend the meeting on the 2nd.
Definitely a double edged sword HDE regarding compensation, However their daily stipend during session is $161 per day. They get a small gov't discount at motels but good luck finding a decent hotel plus meals in Santa Fe for $161 a night. It's more than just travel expenses also, it's time. Its literally is a year round thing, not just the 30 or 60 day session. Constituent phone calls, the local Mayor wants to meet, the local jail wants show that improvements need to be made, the hospital needs new ambulances but the local tax base can't support it, local schools need books, Cattlegrowers want to set up a meeting, NMWF want to discuss water diversion, League of women voters, rotary clubs etc etc.
Sorry for my rant, but you absolutely correct HDE that NM is 15 years behind. I just feel it's because there's a lot officials have been serving since before the internet was invented and/or they have the income from one source or another to spend the the time to serve. Whereas someone like you, me, Jessie JP could inject new fresh ideas and could be great, but we've got families, mortgages, car payments etc.
I actually just got an email back from the g&f stating most of my suggestions are being considered already and the others will be addressed through the public commentary. WOW! Didn't expect that!
That's good! At least you got a response. I've sent in suggestions only to probably have them buried somewhere.
I sent in a second set of recommendation and again got a response!!!!! Anyone else have any luck!
Judgement day is the 23rd right?
So tomorrow is when we find out? Or the meeting is tomorrow ? Ohio do you know if we can listen in on it?
I think tomorrow is when g&f presents to the commission. Not sure about a live feed, would be interesting, or at least access to their proposal.
Tomorrow is when NMDGF will present to the Game Commission the final proposal after all of the meetings and comments. The actual final vote to approve proposal is in November, so there is still time to submit comments, etc. There are a couple of new things on the website under commission proposals.
