AuthorNew Mexico Council of Outfitters and Guides Archives
November 2019
Categories |
Back to Blog
November Commission Re-cap11/26/2019 The NM State Game Commission held their most recent meeting at the new Dept. of Game and Fish office in Roswell last Thursday. The meeting was heavily attended due to the discussion regarding stream access. Both sides of the argument were well represented. If you read nothing else in this re-cap, PLEASE read the portion on the Non-navigable waters rule. And if you think it doesn’t matter to you because you don’t fish or because you don’t own river front property; you are sorely mistaken. What ultimately happens with this rule, and the statute behind it, will have a long-standing impact on how private property rights are defined in state of New Mexico. Everyone will be impacted.
LANDOWNER CERTIFICATION OF NON-NAVIGABLE WATERS RULE Several months ago, due to continued pressure from Back Country Hunters and Anglers and the New Mexico Wildlife Federation, the Game Commission decided to place a 90 day moratorium on the Landowner Certification of Non-navigable Waters Rule (commonly referred to as the Non-navigable Waters Rule) in order to allow the Attorney General’s office to provide an official opinion regarding the constitutionality of the rule. During Thursday’s Commission meeting it was revealed to the public that the Dept. had received a memo from the attorney general’s office (not the same as an “opinion” – which is an important distinction). In the memo the AG’s office states that the Rule is “not in constitutional compliance and cannot be enforced”. To justify this stance the AG’s office uses Article XVI, section 2, of the NM Constitution which states “the unappropriated water of every natural stream, perennial or torrential, …is here by declared to belong to the public”. The memo goes on to state that the term “non-navigable” cannot be applied to “limit the public’s access” and that the “test of navigability used in other states to determine the public character of the water does not apply in New Mexico”. This is extremely important to understand because since the constitution includes “perennial or torrential” waters, without being able to use navigability to determine access the AG’s office is very possibly saying that the public has the right to walk up a ditch bank, dampened by a monsoonal flash flood, into any private property for any reason. I will note that the AG’s office has since somewhat back pedaled on their memo – and you can read the AG Press Release HERE But that doesn’t seem to matter much because the Game Commission, based on the AG memo, made the decision to stop enforcing the Non-navigable Waters Rule and to consider rescinding the Rule altogether. Shout out to Commissioner Gail Cramer for being the lone voice of reason and for going out on a limb to express her pro-private property stance during the meeting. This Commission decision was a gigantic blow to private property rights and to the NM guided fishing industry. First and foremost because the AG office has now labeled the Rule as unconstitutional and because of that, people will incorrectly believe that they have a legal right to fish in waters with private land on both sides. Even though there is still a law on the books that makes walking and wading in a privately-owned streambed illegal (without the landowner’s written permission). However, most folks (and the news media apparently) don’t seem understand the difference between Rule and Law. Many people will read the misinformation in the newspaper articles; with headlines such as “New Mexico moves to reopen public waterways on private property” (Santa Fe New Mexican) and they will believe they have the legal right to access private property. They don’t!! It is still considered trespass to walk or wade in a streambed that has private property on both sides of the bank. And while the Commission Chairwoman has stated that the NMDGF will continue to enforce criminal trespass as they have for the past 30 years many people don’t seem to understand that includes streambeds. So, what does all this chaos mean? Can an attorney general opinion or memo be wrong? Does an AG memo supersede State Law? Does the Commission have the legal right to simply not enforce a statute within the Game and Fish Chapter of Law? Your guess is as good as ours! If you are a supporter of private property rights please contact the Game Commissioners (email addresses below), the Governor, and the Attorney General and tell them we need clarification on this issue right away. And if you would like more information regarding NMCOG’s official stance on this issue (and/or the history behind it), please email NMCOG at info@nmoutfitters.com FINAL DISCUSSION ON THE BEAR AND COUGAR RULE The Commission voted to adopt the following changes for the next 4-year cycle of the Bear and Cougar Rules. You can find the Dept.’s full summary of their proposed changes HERE. BEAR
Wildlife Management Area in the areas open to hunting with that license. COUGAR
SUBSEQUENT DISCUSSION ON THE TRAPPING AND FURBEARER RULE The Dept. provided a subsequent presentation on their proposed changes to the Trapping and Furbearer Rule. To date the Dept. has received an astounding 2400 public comments regarding this Rule. That’s substantially higher than any other Rule has ever received and most of those comments came from the anti-trapping community. However, the Dept. thankfully continues to stand by trapping as a necessary conservation tool. The Dept. is going to propose making this rule a 4-year rule which would open for every 4-year cycle just like the other big game rules. Wildlife Chief Stewart Liley provided a lengthy presentation on the current trapping rule, why trapping is a completely necessary part of wildlife management, how the NM trapping regulation compare to other states, and how trapping is the only method of take that is actually recognized and regulated internationally through a 1997 agreement made between the US and the EU. The Dept. is proposing the following and you can read a full version of the Dept. summary of proposed changes HERE. Public comment is still open for this Rule and you can voice your opinion by sending an email to dgf-furbearer-rules@state.nm.us
Next Commission Meeting – January 17, 2020 (Las Cruces, NM) COMMISSIONER CONTACT INFORMATION (You are welcome and encouraged to contact the Commissioners any time to voice your opinion) Joanna Prukop - Chairwoman District 4: Santa Fe, Taos, Colfax, Union, Mora, Harding, Quay, San Miguel, Guadalupe and Torrance counties. Joanna.prukop@state.nm.us Roberta Salazar-Henry – Vice Chairwoman District 2: Catron, Socorro, Grant, Hidalgo, Luna, Sierra and Doña Ana counties. R.Salazar-Henry@state.nm.us Gail Cramer District 1: Curry, De Baca, Roosevelt, Chaves, Lincoln, Otero, Eddy and Lea counties. Gail.Cramer@state.nm.us Jeremy Vesbach District 3: San Juan, McKinley, Cibola, Valencia, Sandoval, Los Alamos and Rio Arriba counties Jeremy.Vesbach@state.nm.us Jimmy Bates District 5: Bernalillo county. Jimmy.Bates@state.nm.us David Soules Appointed At-large – Conservation Position David.Soules@state.nm.us Tirzio Lopez Appointed At-large Tirzio.Lopez@state.nm.us
2 Comments
Back to Blog
October Game Commission Re-Cap10/28/2019 Game Commission Re-cap
October 25, 2019 Farmington, NM The NM State Game Commission held their most recent meeting in Farmington on Friday Oct. 25th. Public attendance was sparse. DEPT. HABITAT ENHANCEMENT AND RESTORATION PRESENTATION Dept. Wildlife Chief Stewart Liley provided the Commission with a presentation on the status of the Dept’s habitat enhancement and restoration efforts. Essentially it was a discussion on how the funds generated by the habitat management stamps are allocated for on the ground projects. Chief Liley indicated that the funds are primarily focused on Dept. owned properties first and foremost. He also emphasized that while the habitat management fund is a highly monitored area of funding (through the Citizen Advisory Committee) it is actually the smallest pool of funding that the Dept. generates. Because of this the Dept. has been working on ways to utilize these funds in ways that will give the Dept. the best bang for their buck. This strategy includes working with government agencies such as the US Forest Service, BLM, and other non-governmental organizations to build additional funding structures to enhance the benefit provided by each habitat improvement project. SUBSEQUENT DISCUSSION ON THE FAIR CHASE RULE The Dept. provided a subsequent presentation on the development of a rule that deals with the idea of restricting public availability of wildlife tracking data. The rule is in response to Senate legislation that was signed into law during the past legislative session. The legislation provides for a prohibition on the distribution of wildlife location data collected by the Dept. Basically the Dept. now has the ability to delay releasing collar or other location gathering data so as to prevent hunters or other public individuals from knowing exactly where wildlife are located at any given time. The rule would also withhold (temporarily) some of the Dept. aerial and ground survey data. This agenda item was presented to the Commission for discussion purposes only and will voted on for final adoption at the November meeting. UPDATE ON THE MEXICAN WOLF RECOVERY PLAN The Dept. provided a presentation on their request to rejoin the MOU with the Fish and Wildlife Service as it relates to the Mexican Wolf Recovery Program. The Dept. feels that this step will do several things for the Dept. Signing onto the MOU will provide the Dept. with the status of “cooperating agency” and will allow the Dept. to have more hands-on involvement with the recovery efforts. With this partnership the Dept. would assign 2 employees to be involved with the recovery efforts full time. The Dept. feels that being more involved will help them to have a better understanding of wolf population numbers as well as to deal with livestock depredation issues (which have increased exponentially over the past year). The Commission voted in favor of rejoining the MOU. The Dept. also updated the Commission on the details of the recovery efforts planned for 2020. The USFWS plans to cross foster as many puppies as are logistically possible during 2020. The Commission authorized the Director to allow the 2020 plan for cross fostering and to allow for the importation of wolves into captive facilities in NM for management purposes. SPECIAL DRAW ALLOCATION PROCESS Chief Liley provided the Commission with a brief summary of how the big game draw functions. First and foremost, the Commission sets the level of take by Rule every 4 years. Every year when the application period ends for the draw, each individual application is assigned a random sequence number. A computer program then examines each application in numerical order starting with the application randomly assigned #1. When an application is examined, the computer attempts to fulfill the first, second, then third hunt choices subject to the quotas (84% resident, 10% outfitter pool, 6% non-resident DIY). The Dept. always runs into an issue in making this draw allocation work exactly according to the quota statute because there is an inherent flaw in the mathematics written into the law. According to the statute the Dept. must allocate a minimum of 84% to resident hunters (the 10% and 6% pool do not have that caveat). The statute also states that if the allocation results in a fraction of a tag than the Dept. shall round-up for anything over 0.5 and otherwise round down. However, mathematically it is impossible to follow both requirements in the statute. In the past the Dept. has handled this fractional remainder by adding tags to the draw. However, Department Director Mike Sloane does not wish to continue this practice. The Commission voted to approve the issuance of permits strictly based on the minimum 84% (no longer adding tags to the draw). ODDS AND ENDS The Dept. provided the Commission with a presentation regarding legislation (Recovering America’s Wildlife Act) moving through Congress that would provide for federal funding for non-game species. The Commission voted to approve writing a support letter in favor of the legislation. The Dept. also provided a presentation on the 2019 Nuisance Abatement report. In 2019 racoons dominated the complaints by individuals of nuisance wildlife. Over 30% of all reports were racoon related followed by bear, elk, beaver, and cougar. PUBLIC COMMENT During the general public comment segment of the meeting opposition was expressed by several entities to the Certification of Non-navigable Waters Rule. In response, the chairwoman requested that the Non-navigable Water Rule be put on the agenda for the November meeting. Next Commission Meeting – November 21, 2019 (Roswell, NM) COMMISSIONER CONTACT INFORMATION (You are welcome and encouraged to contact the Commissioners any time to voice your opinion) Joanna Prukop - Chairwoman District 4: Santa Fe, Taos, Colfax, Union, Mora, Harding, Quay, San Miguel, Guadalupe and Torrance counties. Joanna.prukop@state.nm.us Roberta Salazar-Henry – Vice Chairwoman District 2: Catron, Socorro, Grant, Hidalgo, Luna, Sierra and Doña Ana counties. R.Salazar-Henry@state.nm.us Gail Cramer District 1: Curry, De Baca, Roosevelt, Chaves, Lincoln, Otero, Eddy and Lea counties. Gail.Cramer@state.nm.us Jeremy Vesbach District 3: San Juan, McKinley, Cibola, Valencia, Sandoval, Los Alamos and Rio Arriba counties Jeremy.Vesbach@state.nm.us Jimmy Bates District 5: Bernalillo county. Jimmy.Bates@state.nm.us David Soules Appointed At-large – Conservation Position David.Soules@state.nm.us Tirzio Lopez Appointed At-large Tirzio.Lopez@state.nm.us
Back to Blog
September Game Commission Re-Cap9/20/2019 The NM State Game Commission held their most recent meeting in Cloudcroft at The Lodge Pavilion this past Wednesday. The meeting was sparsely attended compared to the previous commission meetings held in more urban venues. Even though Bear, Cougar, and Trapping were all on the agenda; only several more hunters and trappers than usual showed up to defend their positions (which is the opposite of what you might expect to see at a meeting held in a rural setting). Yet, as usual, the anti-hunting/trapping crowd was solidly represented and provided public comment.
The moral of the story: The Commission continues to hear from many, many individuals in the anti-hunting community who wish to prevent all predator hunting and trapping. However, the Commission is not hearing from the pro-hunting/trapping community in nearly the same volume. If our industry continues to sit on the side-lines, hoping and praying that the Commission makes the right decision, we may be sorely disappointed in the end. PLEASE take the time to provide public comment to the Dept. in general support of predator hunting and trapping (click HERE). Also, please send the Commissioners an email reiterating your position (Commissioner email addresses provided below). FISHERIES MANAGEMENT DIVISION PRESENTATION The Chief of Fisheries, Kirk Patten provided a comprehensive presentation on the condition of the fish hatcheries across the state. The presentation included an update on the condition of both game and non-game species as well as the condition of the Gila Trout population which is listed as “threatened” under the ESA. Chief Patten also gave an update on the condition of the “world class” fishery along the San Juan River and referred to the fact that much of the revenue generated through that fishery is derived primarily by non-resident anglers. Kudos to Chief Patten for this underlying plug for outfitters along the San Juan. The presentation additionally included a description of the most pressing needs of the fisheries division regarding needed infrastructure improvements at hatcheries across the state. Improvement needs are as follows:
SECOND SUBSEQUENT DISCUSSION ON THE BEAR AND COUGAR RULE The Dept. provided a final updated presentation to the Commission on their proposed changes to the next 4-year cycle of the Bear and Cougar Rules. The Dept. has made a couple of changes to their proposal in response to their research as well as the public opinions that were voiced at the recent public meetings. The Dept. is proposing the following changes to the Bear and Cougar Rule. The proposals were presented for discussion purposes only and will be approved at the Commission’s November meeting. This rule is currently open for public comment but the final version of the proposal with be posted to the registrar in October so if you would still like to provide public comment please voice your opinion ASAP by sending an email to DGF-Bear-Cougar-Rules@state.nm.us. You can find the Dept.’s full summary of their proposed changes HERE. BEAR
Wildlife Management Area in the areas open to hunting with that license. COUGAR
SUBSEQUENT DISCUSSION ON THE TRAPPING AND FURBEARER RULE The Dept. provided a subsequent presentation on their proposed changes to the Trapping and Furbearer Rule. The Dept. is going to propose making this rule a 4-year rule which would open for every 4-year cycle just like the other big game rules. Wildlife Chief Stewart Liley provided a lengthy presentation on the current trapping rule, why trapping is a completely necessary part of wildlife management, how the NM trapping regulation compare to other states, and how trapping is the only method of take that is actually recognized and regulated internationally through a 1997 agreement made between the US and the EU. The Dept. is proposing the following:
ODDS AND ENDS The Dept. also provided a presentation on their efforts to establish an E-tagging system and they initiated rule openings in both the Hunting and Fishing License Application Rule and the Game and Fish Licenses/Permits Rule in order to make minor clarification changes to licenses issued to returning Iraq/Afghanistan veterans as well as penalties for vendors who do not return unissued carcass tags. PUBLIC COMMENT The general public comment segment of the meeting was dominated by the usual complaints by the anti-hunting community. The Wildlife federation opposed the adjusted season dates being proposed in the Bear rule and spoke out in general opposition to the Certification of Non-navigable Waters Rule. There were also several ranchers who voiced opposition to the Dept.’s recommendation to do away with Cougar trapping as well as a number of Trappers who spoke out in opposition to the Dept.’s recommendation to increase trap setback distance. Next Commission Meeting – October 25, 2019 (Farmington, NM) COMMISSIONER CONTACT INFORMATION (You are welcome and encouraged to contact the Commissioners any time to voice your opinion) Joanna Prukop - Chairwoman District 4: Santa Fe, Taos, Colfax, Union, Mora, Harding, Quay, San Miguel, Guadalupe and Torrance counties. Joanna.prukop@state.nm.us Roberta Salazar-Henry – Vice Chairwoman District 2: Catron, Socorro, Grant, Hidalgo, Luna, Sierra and Doña Ana counties. R.Salazar-Henry@state.nm.us Gail Cramer District 1: Curry, De Baca, Roosevelt, Chaves, Lincoln, Otero, Eddy and Lea counties. Gail.Cramer@state.nm.us Jeremy Vesbach District 3: San Juan, McKinley, Cibola, Valencia, Sandoval, Los Alamos and Rio Arriba counties Jeremy.Vesbach@state.nm.us Jimmy Bates District 5: Bernalillo county. Jimmy.Bates@state.nm.us David Soules Appointed At-large – Conservation Position David.Soules@state.nm.us Tirzio Lopez Appointed At-large Tirzio.Lopez@state.nm.us
Back to Blog
Game Commission Re-cap 8/22/198/29/2019 The NM State Game Commission held their most recent meeting last Thursday in Santa Fe at the State Capital building. The meeting was well attended, as is typical anytime an issue regarding a predator species is on the agenda.
Subsequent Discussion on the Bear and Cougar Rule PLEASE NOTE: The Dept. has specifically requested outfitter industry input regarding their proposal to change the start date of the bear season in Zones 10, 12, & 13. If you hunt bear, please provide either public comment to the Dept. email address below or simply reply to this email. The Dept. provided an updated presentation to the Commission on their proposed changes to the next 4-year cycle of the Bear and Cougar Rules. The Dept. has made a couple of changes to their proposal in response to their research as well as the public opinions that were voice at the recent public meetings. The Dept. is proposing the following changes to the Bear and Cougar Rule. This rule was being presented for discussion purposes only and will be approved at the Commissions September meeting. This rule is currently open for public comment. Please voice your opinion by sending an email to DGF-Bear-Cougar-Rules@state.nm.us. The Dept. plans to have the updated proposal including season dates and maps on their website to be reviewed in the next week. You can find the Dept.’s summary of their proposed changes HERE. BEAR
COUGAR
Initial Discussion on the Fair Chase Rule The Dept. provided a presentation on the development of a rule that deals with the idea of “Fair Chase”. The rule is in response to Senate legislation that was signed into law during the past legislative session. The legislation provides for a prohibition on the distribution of wildlife location data collected by the Dept. Basically the Dept. now has the ability to delay releasing collar or other location gathering data so as to prevent hunters or other public individuals from knowing exactly where wildlife are located at any given time. The rule would also withhold (temporarily) some of the Dept. aerial and ground survey data. This agenda item was presented to the Commission for discussion purposes only and will be addressed again at the next meeting. Initial Discussion on the Trapping and Furbearer Rule The Dept. provided a presentation on their proposed changes to the Trapping and Furbearer Rule. First and foremost, the Dept. is going to propose making this rule a 4-year rule which would open for every 4-year cycle just like the other big game rules. Wildlife Chief Stewart Liley provided a lengthy presentation on the current trapping rule, why trapping is a completely necessary part of wildlife management, how the NM trapping regulation compare to other states, and how trapping is the only method of take that is actually recognized and regulated internationally through a 1997 agreement made between the US and the EU. The Dept. is proposing the following:
Final Discussion on the Migratory Bird Rule The Department presented their final proposed changes to the Migratory Game Bird Rule. The changes being proposed were determined in conjunction with information from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as is a requirement of the Pacific Flyway Council. The proposed amendments are as follows:
The Commission voted unanimously to approve the Migratory Bird Rule. Odds, Ends, and Public Comment The Dept. also provided an update regarding the Laguna del Campo (Burns Lake) transfer to the Tierra Amarilla Land Grant Association as well as presented an application to establish the La Joya Farm Game Shooting Preserve. The Commission voted to approve the Dept.’s fiscal year 2021 budget requests and also approved a request by the Holy Pursuits Dream Foundation to become a “qualified non-profit wish granting organization” eligible to receive donated licenses or permits. During the general public comment segment of the meeting a large group of landowners from the Pecos Canyon area spoke in opposition of the Commission’s moratorium (which was passed at the last meeting) of the Landowner Certification of Non-navigable Waters Rule. Additionally, the assistant attorney general, who is required to be in attendance during Commission meetings, indicated to the Commission that it would likely be in the best interest of the Commission to not "enforce" the moratorium until the AG’s office has time to review the issue. Chairman Prukop alluded that a rescinding of the moratorium would require a formal Commission vote in accordance with the Open Meetings Act which will likely take place at a future meeting. Next Commission Meeting – September 18, 2019 (Cloudcroft, NM) COMMISSIONER CONTACT INFORMATION (You are encouraged to contact the Commissioners any time to voice your opinion) Joanna Prukop - Chairwoman District 4: Santa Fe, Taos, Colfax, Union, Mora, Harding, Quay, San Miguel, Guadalupe and Torrance counties. Joanna.prukop@state.nm.us Roberta Salazar-Henry – Vice Chairwoman District 2: Catron, Socorro, Grant, Hidalgo, Luna, Sierra and Doña Ana counties. R.Salazar-Henry@state.nm.us Gail Cramer District 1: Curry, De Baca, Roosevelt, Chaves, Lincoln, Otero, Eddy and Lea counties. Gail.Cramer@state.nm.us Jeremy Vesbach District 3: San Juan, McKinley, Cibola, Valencia, Sandoval, Los Alamos, Rio Arriba. counties Jeremy.Vesbach@state.nm.us Jimmy Bates District 5: Bernalillo county. Jimmy.Bates@state.nm.us David Soules Appointed At-large – Conservation Position David.Soules@state.nm.us Tirzio Lopez Appointed At-large Tirzio.Lopez@state.nm.us
Back to Blog
Game Commission Re-Cap (July 24, 2019)7/29/2019 The NM State Game Commission held its second meeting of 2019 at New Mexico Tech in Socorro, NM on July 24th. There was greater than average attendance at the meeting most likely because wolves, bears, cougars, the big game draw allocation, and stream access were all on the agenda. All agenda items were listed to be heard by the Commission for discussion purposes only.
Update on the Mexican Wolf Program The Dept. provided the Commission with an update on the Mexican Wolf program in NM/AZ as well as Mexico. The update began with a historical perspective of the biology of the species (which is a subspecies of the Gray Wolf), the listing of the species under the endangered species act, and the subsequent reintroduction efforts that began in the late 1970s up to the condition of the recovery efforts today. According to Wildlife Chief Stewart Liley, Mexican wolf populations are currently in an exponential growth period. Minimum populations estimates are currently 131 wild wolves between the recovery zones in NM and AZ. However, according to Chief Liley that number is just a minimum estimate and true population numbers are likely higher. Most of the animals on the landscapes today are wild born or cross fostered (captive born puppies placed in a wild den within 14 days of birth). Today’s recovery efforts are boasting a 45% survival rate of puppies which basically mirrors the success of fully wild populations. With this exponential growth there have also been 114 confirmed livestock depredations so far this year. Problem wolves must be either removed and re-released elsewhere, placed into captivity, or lethally removed (in the event of a habitually troublesome wolf); all of which requires NMDGF and/or USFWS intervention and complicates recovery efforts. Chief Liley also provided a summary of the current recovery plan which was approved by the USFWS in 2017 and accepted by the previous Game Commission. The ultimate goal of the recovery plan consists of the following criteria: the US population of Mexican wolves can be considered for “de-listing” when the wolf population reaches an abundance 320 wolves maintained over 8 consecutive years with at least 22 genetically diverse, captive bred wolves have been released into the wild and survive to “breeding age” (>2 years) AND Mexico’s Mexican wolf population achieves an abundance of 200 wolves maintained for 8 consecutive years with at least 37 genetically diverse wolves survive to breeding age. This item was on the agenda for discussion purposes only and no action was taken by the Commission however, the Commission did ask several questions about what the recovery might look like if the NMDGF established a MOU with the USFWS to take on a more active role in the recovery efforts. Draw Allocation Process Chief Liley provided the Commission with a summary of how the big game draw functions. First and foremost, the Commission sets the level of take by Rule every 4 years. Every year when the application period ends for the draw, each individual application is assigned a random sequence number. A computer program then examines each application in numerical order starting with the application randomly assigned #1. When an application is examined, the computer attempts to fulfill the first, second, then third hunt choices subject to the quotas (84% resident, 10% outfitter pool, 6% non-resident DIY). The Dept. always runs into an issue in making this draw allocation work exactly according to the quota statute because there is an inherent flaw in the mathematics written into the law. According to the statute the Dept. must allocate a minimum of 84% to resident hunters (the 10% and 6% pool do not have that caveat). The statute also states that if the allocation results in a fraction of a tag than the Dept. shall round-up for anything over 0.5 and otherwise round down. However, mathematically it is impossible to follow both requirements in the statute. In the past the Dept. has handled this fractional remainder by adding tags to the draw. However, Department Director Mike Sloane and the new Commissioners seemingly do not wish to follow this practice in the future. According to Chief Liley this issue can be fixed legislatively OR through rule by issuing the draw strictly based on the minimum 84% (no longer adding tags to the draw). For example, if the fraction of a tag in either the 10% pool or the 6% pool is 0.8 the Dept. would no longer “round-up” and any time the draw resulted in a fraction no tag would be issued. There was much discussion from the Commission regarding this issue and the sentiment seemed to be that the Commission would like to see the issue corrected legislatively. What this means for the outfitting industry is that it is highly likely that the quota statute will be opened in the very near future (perhaps as soon as January 2020). Initiation of Bear and Cougar Rule The Dept. provided a preliminary presentation to the Commission on their proposed changes to the next 4-year cycle of the Bear and Cougar Rules. The changes will not be voted on by the Commission until November and the Commission will hear several more updates on the rule development over the next several months. The following are the current recommendations being proposed. BEAR
COUGAR
The Dept. has also scheduled the following public meetings to discuss the proposed changes. Please attend one of these meetings if you have an interest in hunting Bear and/or Cougar.
Landowner Certification of Non-navigable Waters Rule The Dept. provided the Commission with a summary of the Landowner Certification of Non-navigable Waters Rule which was established by the previous Commission as a result of the “Stream Access” Law which passed in 2015. Unfortunately, the presentation made it painfully obvious that the Dept. staff does not fully understand the history behind why the legislation was necessary nor the reason why the previous Commission was required to draft a Rule to determine the navigability of waters. The Dept. misrepresented the case law that was the catalyst for the legislation back in 2015 and additionally misstated the findings of subsequent case law that deals with the Public Trust Doctrine as it relates to an existing state statute. The Dept.’s presentation created more confusion than clarity and caused a tremendous amount of frustration among those of us who have been involved in this issue since the beginning. The Commission ultimately voted to put a 90-day moratorium on the Rule to give time for yet another attorney general opinion to be acquired. NMCOG continues to support the Landowner Certification of Non-Navigable Water Rule as it was approved in January 2018. And we also support the 30 year old NMDGF regulation (codified into law in 2015) which states that in order for an angler to walk or wade up a stream-bed (where there is private property on both sides of the waterway) they must obtain the written permission of the landowner. Below is a detailed summary regarding the basis of our support for the Law and subsequent Rule. This issue has always been about the ownership of the stream-bed not the ownership of the water. We agree with the opponents of this law that the water of the state of NM belongs to the public. We have never wavered from this stance. If a waterway can be floated or fished from a boat without stepping onto the stream-bed than the individual has the right to recreate on the water. The opponents of this law continue to confuse the issue by stating the Red River Valley case as their basis for disputing the statute. The Red River case attempted to ban members of the public from fishing in a lake from boats. And while former AG Gary King's 2014 opinion, which referred to the Red River case, was the catalyst that prompted the need to codify in law the NMDGF "stream access" regulation, the case does not deal with stream-bed access or the ownership of the stream-bed. And while the opponents also point to an opinion released in 2016 by current AG Hector Balderas as further basis for their dispute of the statute; in-fact the opinion clearly states that it upholds the constitutionality of the 2015 Stream Access Law. The 2015 Stream Access Law gave the NM State Game Commission the ability to adopt rules to establish a process for determining stream-bed ownership. The New Mexico Council of Outfitters and Guides continues to support NMAC 19.31.22 the Landowner Certification of Non-Navigable Water Rule which provides a clear process for landowners to determine whether the waters within their private property are considered navigable. If the opponents of the Stream Access Law wish to continue their dispute as to the constitutionality of the statute, they should do so in a court of law or in the Legislature. There are several reasons that the NM guided fishing industry supports the Stream Access Law, water being the number one factor. Approximately 70% of NM's waterways are already located on public land. And of the 30% located on private land only about 10% of these are fish-able (most waterways are dependent on torrential events and are essentially dry ditch banks for ninety percent of the year). The only reason that there is such a heavy push for the public to obtain access to this 10% is because in NM the fish-able waterways on private land are world class fisheries. The reason for this is that landowners have spent thousands upon thousands of dollars, over many decades, restoring, developing, and establishing the riparian areas located within their private lands. These efforts should not be disregarded. And because there has historically been a NMDGF regulation that stated that anglers need the permission of the landowner in order to fish in waterways on private lands, the outfitting industry has spent nearly 30 years fostering relationships with landowners to establish a multi-million dollar per year guided fishing industry. Outfitters are small business owners who contribute substantially to NM's rural economies, pay NM gross receipts taxes, and employ individuals in very rural NM communities where unemployment rates are the highest. They also provide integrity to the angling industry by protecting the pressure to the fisheries resource on private waterways. The importance of guided fishing industry to the conservation and profitability of angling in NM cannot be understated. Odds, Ends, and Public Comment In addition to the above agenda items the Commission also heard an update on the current and future financial condition of the Dept. including the process of making budget recommendations to the state legislature. During the general public comment segment of the meeting Brandon Wynn of Albuquerque, the NMWF, and a representative of the Back-Country Hunters and Anglers provided comments regarding the quota statute and the draw allocation. Each group implied that they feel the resident hunter is somehow being slighted in the number of tags distributed through the draw and encouraged the Dept. to attempt to change the statute. Next Commission Meeting – August 22, 2019 (Santa Fe, NM) COMMISSIONER CONTACT INFORMATION (You are welcome and encouraged to contact the Commissioners any time to voice your opinion) Joanna Prukop - Chairwoman District 4: Santa Fe, Taos, Colfax, Union, Mora, Harding, Quay, San Miguel, Guadalupe and Torrance counties. Joanna.prukop@state.nm.us Roberta Salazar-Henry – Vice Chairwoman District 2: Catron, Socorro, Grant, Hidalgo, Luna, Sierra and Doña Ana counties. R.Salazar-Henry@state.nm.us Gail Cramer District 1: Curry, De Baca, Roosevelt, Chaves, Lincoln, Otero, Eddy and Lea counties. Gail.Cramer@state.nm.us Jeremy Vesbach District 3: San Juan, McKinley, Cibola, Valencia, Sandoval, Los Alamos and Rio Arriba counties Jeremy.Vesbach@state.nm.us Jimmy Bates District 5: Bernalillo county. Jimmy.Bates@state.nm.us David Soules Appointed At-large – Conservation Position David.Soules@state.nm.us Tirzio Lopez Appointed At-large Tirzio.Lopez@state.nm.us
Back to Blog
Game Commission Re-cap 6/14/196/19/2019 The first Game Commission Meeting consisting of the newly appointed Commissioners took place this past Friday at the Albuquerque office of the NMDGF. This meeting was also the first to be held in over 6 months. The meeting was a packed house. A representative of nearly every sportsman, landowner, and conservation non-profit in the state showed up to meet, greet, and try to get their foot in the door with the new commissioners. The first order of business was to appoint a commission chair and vice chair. The new commission made history in their first 5 minutes on the job by electing the first ever woman chair and vice chair. Commission positions are as follows:
Joanna Prukop - Chairwoman District 4: Santa Fe, Taos, Colfax, Union, Mora, Harding, Quay, San Miguel, Guadalupe and Torrance counties. Joanna.prukop@state.nm.us Roberta Salazar-Henry – Vice Chairwoman District 2: Catron, Socorro, Grant, Hidalgo, Luna, Sierra and Doña Ana counties. R.Salazar-Henry@state.nm.us Gail Cramer District 1: Curry, De Baca, Roosevelt, Chaves, Lincoln, Otero, Eddy and Lea counties. Gail.Cramer@state.nm.us Jeremy Vesbach District 3: San Juan, McKinley, Cibola, Valencia, Sandoval, Los Alamos and Rio Arriba counties Jeremy.Vesbach@state.nm.us Jimmy Bates District 5: Bernalillo county. Jimmy.Bates@state.nm.us David Soules Appointed At-large – Conservation Position David.Soules@state.nm.us Tirzio Lopez Appointed At-large Tirzio.Lopez@state.nm.us The first hour of the meeting encompassed introductions of the new commissioners, public meeting attendees, and NMDGF staff. There was also a considerable amount of time spent discussing the governmental roll of the Commission and the creation of a new policy and procedures manual. The agenda was routine and did not consist of any controversial issues however, each agenda item was reviewed slowly and thoroughly to give the new commissioners the opportunity to fully understand the Commissions roll in each issue. Approval of Land Transfers The Commission approved the transfer of the Mesilla Valley Bosque State Park back to the Energy, Minerals, and Natural Resources Dept. as was statutorily mandated during the last legislative session through Senate Bill 533. However, the Commission voted to issue a conditional approval of the transfer of the Laguna del Campo property in Rio Arriba county to the Tierra Amarilla Land Grant as suggested by the legislature in the 2019 Senate Joint Resolution 2. Chairwoman Prukop indicated that the Commission was concerned with the precedence that this transfer may set considering the TA Land Grant association is expecting the NMDGF to continue to maintain the property. A conditional approval will give the NMDGF the ability to draft a more flexible land transfer agreement which can be reviewed and negotiated with the TA Land Grant. Discussion on Changes to the Migratory Bird Rule The Dept. presented their recommended changes to the Migratory Bird Rule. The migratory game bird rule is amended annually, ensuring compliance with Flyway recommendations and Federal guidelines. In New Mexico, season selections and bag limits are determined in conjunction with the Central and Pacific Flyways and the USFWS. The Departments recommended changes are as follows:
Commission Meeting Schedule The new Commissioners reviewed the 2019 meeting schedule created by the previous Commission and decided to change the scheduled meetings as follows. They also decided to increase the number of meeting between now and the end of the year in order to get caught up on Commission business that has been building up since January. No consensus was reached between the new commissioners, so the 2019 schedule is still a bit in limbo.
Odds and Ends In addition to the above agenda items, the Commission voted to approve the Dept.’s capital outlay plan for FY21-FY25. The Commission also voted to revoke the hunting, fishing, and trapping privileges of the individuals who had accumulated an excess of 20 violation points as well as individuals who are out of compliance with the Parental Responsibilities Act. The commission also heard public comment from nearly every interested non-profit organization under the sun, including NMCOG. Every organization from Defenders of Wildlife to Sierra Club to the NM Wildlife Federation to the NM Farm and Livestock Bureau took the opportunity to introduce themselves and highlight the mission of their organization. Next Commission Meeting – TBD
Back to Blog
Game Commission Re-cap 11/30/201812/3/2018 The NM State Game Commission hosted what might have been their most actively participated in meeting of the year this past Friday in Roswell. The meeting resulted in a much higher than normal attendance by the general public. Much of the public comment centered around opposition to the proposals regarding trapping, extending the restrictions to aircrafts, and doing away with the 2-hook limit on the San Juan. The decisions made during this meeting will impact the outfitting industry. If you are an outfitter/guide please take the time to read through this re-cap!
2019 DRAW DEADLINE The Commission approved the 2019 Draw deadlines. The Dept. will begin accepting applications on January 16th, 2019. Deadlines for applications are as follows.
TRAPPING The Dept. updated the Commission regarding their proposal to amend the rule that governs trapping. The Dept. opened the trapping rule to appease a NM state senator who requested in 2017 that the Dept. facilitate meetings where both sides of the issue could come together to discuss potential middle ground. After over a year of stakeholder meetings the only middle ground to be found between the two sides was the implementation of mandatory trapper education. In addition to trapper education the Dept. has additionally proposed to create signage at trailheads, expand setback requirements from 25 to 50 yards off any road or “trail” (a definition which they propose to further refine). They are proposing to increase setbacks near recreations areas (campgrounds, picnic areas, etc…) from ¼ mile to ½ mile and are also proposing to give the Dept. Director and Commission Chairman the power to make trapping closures on public and Dept. lands across the state if necessary. To this point Chairman Kienzle requested that if any rule change is finalized that it only be for a one-year period so that any closure would have to be re-assessed by the Commission each year. Public comment consisted of representatives from groups on both sides of the trapping issue. It was clear that the anti-trapping side will not be content until trapping is banned completely on public lands. It was also clear that the trappers see most of the Dept.’s proposals (aside from mandatory trappers Ed. – which both sides support) as unnecessarily restrictive. The anti-trapping side attempted to capitalize on their claims that domestic dogs are continually caught in traps while hiking in public land. However, the trappers were quick to point out that there are leash laws on public lands which are rarely followed. The NMWF tried to take an unbiased approach to their comments stating that they agree with the Dept. proposed increase on setbacks and potential closures (like the west side of the Sandia Mtns.) but that they are not opposed to trapping in general. This agenda item was for discussion purposes only and will be further discussed at another meeting. MEXICAN WOLF 2019 TRANSLOCATION PLAN Dept. Wildlife Chief Stewart Liley provided the Commission with an update on the first full year of progress of the USFWS updated Mexican Wolf recovery plan. Of the 8 wolf puppies who were cross-fostered (bred in captivity placed with in wild wolf den at 14 days old) in spring of 2018, 1 puppy was confirmed dead, 1 was confirmed still living, and the status of 6 was unknown. In 2019 the USFWS plans to cross-foster 12 puppies. They will continue to translocate or remove problem wolves, they will also separate sibling brother/sister pairs that they discover to be denning together, and they will continue to consider importing wolves for captive breeding purposes to the Ladder Ranch. Currently the USFWS does not release adult wolves into the wild. During public comment a rancher from the Apache Creek area spoke very eloquently about the devastating problems that ranchers are seeing on the ground, their struggles with the USFWS to confirm wolf kills, and their issues receiving compensation for confirmed kills. In a response to this gentleman, Chairman Kienzle instructed the Dept. to do all that they can to work more closely with the USFWS to provide as much support to NM ranchers as possible – even to the extent of possibly hiring personnel to focus entirely on wolves. The 2019 plan was approved unanimously by the Commission. FINAL DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL CHANGES TO THE DEER RULE Wildlife Chief Stewart Liley presented to the Commission the Dept.’s final recommended changes to the Deer rule. These recommendations were approved by the commission unanimously and will take effect for the next 4-year rule cycle beginning in 2019. Please read the rule in it’s entirety HERE (includes season dates and tag numbers). - Adjust some seasons for calendar dates - Adjust draw license numbers based on biological data and management goals (see details below) - Separate archery season into September and January (2 different seasons and draws) when a split September and/or January season currently exists (see Table 1 at end of document) - Create some new opportunities (see details below) - Standardize most youth hunts to a 9-day hunt surrounding Thanksgiving week Region Specific Proposed Changes Northeast - Allow Either Sex (ES) white-tailed deer hunting for all white-tailed deer hunts in the northeast - GMU 55: create new September archery hunt of 10 licenses in Valle Vidal - Create new archery hunt of 10 licenses in Colin Neblett - Create January archery hunt of 10 licenses in GMU 41 - License increases based on biological data (5% overall) o GMUs: 41, 42, 43, 45, 47, 48, 57, 58, 59 Southeast - GMU 30: split 2 rifle hunts evenly (800/hunt; previously 1st rifle hunt was 640 and 2nd rifle hunt was 960 licenses) - GMU 31/33: Decrease youth licenses on Huey WMA from 2 hunts of 20 to 2 hunts of 10 licenses each (the Department no longer has management authority over Brantley and Seven Rivers) - Do not split GMUs 31 & 32 - License increases based on biological data (3% overall) o GMUs: 28, 30, 31, 32, 36 Southwest - GMU 19: create any-legal-weapon hunt of 5 licenses on White Sands Missile Range; move off range muzzleloader hunt from October to first weekend in December - GMU 23: Reduce licenses by 13% - GMU 24: Reduce licenses by 10% - GMU 23 (Burros): Reduce licenses by 13%, decreasing from 2 regular any-legal-weapon hunts to 1, but lengthening the season to 9 days (35 licenses for mule deer and 40 licenses for white-tailed deer [mule deer and white-tailed deer hunters will hunt at separate times]). Also, create a new white-tailed deer hunt of 20 archery licenses in September. - Allow Burros Archery hunters to hunt Silver City Management Area - Move January FAWTD archery hunt from Jan. 1-15 to Jan. 16-31 o GMUs 23 (Burros & excluding Burros area), 24, 27 - Other license decreases based on biological data (6-8%) o GMUs: 26, 27 Northwest - GMU 4: Create limited public and private hunt in late November (10 licenses each); Include Sargent in draw for WMAs; Create September archery hunt for WMAs - GMU 5A: Create late September muzzleloader hunt (public licenses = 10; private licenses = 50) - GMU 5B: Create September archery hunt (10 licenses) and late September muzzleloader hunt (10 licenses) - GMU 14: Create January archery hunt (25 licenses) - License increases based on biological data (5% overall) o GMUs: 2B, 2C, 5A, 5B, 6A/C, 7, 8, 14 - License decreases based on biological data (4-7%) o GMUs 10, 12 FINAL DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL CHANGES TO THE ELK RULE Wildlife Chief Stewart Liley presented to the Commission the Dept.’s final recommended changes to the Elk rule. These recommendations were approved by the commission unanimously and will take effect for the next 4-year rule cycle beginning in 2019. Please read the rule in its entirety HERE (includes season dates and tag numbers). - Adjust seasons for calendar date shifts. - Youth Encouragement hunts limited to resident youth who put in for the draw but were unsuccessful. If hunts are undersubscribed after 14 days, allow license to be sold to resident seniors (65 years and older) who put in for the draw and were unsuccessful. - Move Antler Point Restriction (APR) hunts into the big game draw (GMUs 12, 34, 37) - Adjustment to Core Occupied Elk Range (COER) boundaries in the primary elk management zone (see details below and see EPLUS proposal for additional details). o COER/primary elk management zone: the portion of land designated by the Department as containing the majority of routine elk use, this is the area on which elk management goals and harvest objectives are based. - Adjust licenses to the current public-private split where COER boundary adjustments occur and in situations where land ownership has changed. Region Specific Proposed Changes Northeast - GMU 42/47/59: Combine units to create new ES hunts; 1 any-legal-weapon hunt Oct.1-5 of 5 licenses and 2 new archery hunts in September of 10 licenses each. - GMU 48: Move Dec. MB hunt to Oct. - Separate youth only (YO) and adult hunts on Valle Vidal. - Combine Colin Neblett north and south hunt zones. - GMU 56: Create new any-legal-weapon MB (Oct 1-5) and antlerless hunts of 5 licenses each. - GMU 57/58: Create new any-legal-weapon MB Oct. 1-5 hunt of 5 licenses. - GMUs 46, 54, 55A: Establish Special Management Zones (see EPLUS rule change presentation). Southeast - GMU 30: Create Oct.1-5 hunt of 10 ES licenses (any-legal-weapon). - GMU 34: Increase female harvest. o Increase draw A licenses to 3 hunts of 350 licenses and maintain youth A licenses at 120. o Change MB hunts to ES hunts. o Expand COER boundaries east and west. o Change late season archery APR hunts in 34 to APR/A hunt and put in public draw. - GMU 36: Increase MB and ES licenses by 15%. - GMU 37: Move 10 MB licenses to new Oct. 1-5 hunt (any-legal-weapon). Do not create COER boundary. - GMU 38: Create Oct. 1-5 hunt of 10 ES licenses (any-legal-weapon). Southwest - GMU 13: Adjust COER boundary to the northwest (include the Narrows area). - GMU 19: Create a new any-legal-weapon draw elk hunt of 3 ES licenses. - GMU 21A & B: Create late season MB archery hunt of 15 licenses in each sub-unit. o Extend 21B COER boundary south. - GMU 23: Create late season MB archery hunt of 15 licenses. Northwest - GMU 2: Remove quality management designation and - GMU 4: Change bag limit on Wildlife Management Areas and private land from MB à MB/A, create new antlerless hunt of 15 licenses (any-legal-weapon) on Rio Chama WMA, include Rio Chama as part of the Humphrees archery hunt. - GMU 9: Eliminate all cow hunts and reduce MB & ES hunts by 25%. o Adjust COER boundary to the east to include elk winter range. - GMU 12: Create COER boundary to establish the “Fence Lake herd unit” with a “quality hunt management” designation. o This moves GMU 12 into the Departments primary elk management zone resulting in the GMU being subject to the public/private split and private licenses being allocated through EPLUS. - GMU 14: Create Oct. 1-5 hunt of 10 ES licenses (any-legal-weapon). - GMU 6B: Eliminate mobility impaired hunts, increase youth hunts from 35 to 60, and change MB bag limit to ES and increase ES bow hunts by 5 licenses each. FINAL DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL CHANGES TO THE E-PLUS RULE The Dept. presented their final changes to E-plus. The Dept. is proposing to determine a definition for “meaningful benefit” and create a scoring criterion for properties to determine their level of “meaningful benefit”. Properties will be required to meet a minimum level of “meaningful benefit” to qualify for E-plus. This will help weed out a lot of properties that are currently enrolled in the Small Contributing Ranch program that are not truly providing benefit to the species or habitat. Under the new system SCR ranches will be issued tags based on their benefit to the species under the following categories:
Ranches that are contributing more to the habitat will have a better opportunity to receive tags. Also, any change or re-deeding of properties would result in an immediate re-evaluation of the property. This will hopefully dissuade landowners from attempting to play the system. Additionally, unconverted bonus allocations within the large landowners will be passed along to the ranches in the SCR program. The Dept. has also determined that the COER terminology is confusing to most people. They are proposing to do away with the term inside and outside the COER and rather use elk management zones. They are also proposing going over the counter in several areas that are currently designated as “outside the COER”. These over the counter private land tags will be transferable with written permission. All tags in this segment will be ES. There will be consistent season dates and weapon types across this segment. Exceptions will exist on a case by case basis. Proposed 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 · Added Antlerless as a tag option for outside COER (Secondary Mgt. Zone) · Added proposed hunt dates for outside COER (Secondary Mgt. Zone) · Allowed for a specific ranch code to be required before a hunter could buy an elk license Over-The-Counter. The Commission voted unanimously to approve the changes to the E-plus program. You can read the rule in its entirety HERE. FINAL DISCUSSION ON POTENTIAL CHANGES TO MANNER AND METHOD RULE The Dept. presented their final recommended changes to the Manner and Method rule. There was a substantial amount of public comment regarding the Dept. recommendation to extend the aircraft restrictions from 48 hours prior to a hunt to no flying for hunting purposes at all from August-January. The Commission received approximately 800 emails from general aviation pilots who were extremely opposed to the rule change stating that it would potentially make criminals out of any recreational pilots (hunter or non-hunter) who choose to fly during hunting season. The Commission ultimately agreed with the pilots and voted to remove this item from their approved changes. There was also a number of angling outfitters and guides in attendance at the meeting who provided public comment in opposition to the Dept.’s recommendation to do away with the 2-hook limit on the San Juan river stating that the fishery has a great deal of angling pressure and allowing a person to fish with as many flies as one chooses will not be good for this river. Although NMCOG did not provide oral comment during the meeting we did provide written comment in opposition to this rule change. But it was really Trout Unlimited and their members that convinced the Commission to vote to remove this item from their approved changes. The way the Commission ultimately chose to vote on the Manner and Method Rule (while favorable to the outfitting industry) went completely against our understanding of the NM law that governs a state agency’s ability to promulgate rule. And thus, will change how NMCOG instructs the industry to provide public comment regarding any proposed rule change from here on out. It was our understanding that any substantive change made to a rule must be posted to the public register for 30 days without being changed, which is true, but apparently a change is only considered “substantive” if it is new. Therefore, proposed rule changes can revert back to existing language by a Commission vote and without being posted to the public register. The below recommendations were approved by the commission and will take effect April 1st 2019. Potential Rule Changes
FINAL CHANGES TO THE REVOCATIONS RULE The Dept. provided their final proposed changes to the revocations rule. Most of the changes will help clean up the language and simplify the rule. The Dept. has not received any public comments regarding the proposal. The changes were approved unanimously by the Commission and the rule will take effect January 1st, 2019. Proposed Rule Changes
THE FINAL WORD The Commission ended the day by basically saying good-bye to all NMDGF staff and the handful of organization representatives that regularly attend Commission meetings. Each Commissioner expressed their gratitude for the opportunity to serve NM sportsmen. It is highly probably that when Governor Lujan-Grisham takes office on January 1st most, if not all, of the current members of the NM State Game Commission will be replaced. Next Commission Meeting January 10, 2019 – Santa Fe, NM
Back to Blog
Special Game Commission Re-Cap11/9/2018 November 8th 2018
Albuquerque, NM The NM State Game Commission hosted a special meeting to approve 5 landowner applications to certify non-navigable waters. In January 2018 the Commission adopted a new rule in response to a law signed by the Governor in 2015 which prevents individuals from walking or wading up a streambed into or through private property (NMCOG lobbied in support of this law). Because the citizens of NM own the actual water of NM, the new law required the NMDGF Commission to adopt rules regarding how waters in NM would be classified as navigable (meaning one may float into or through waters surrounded by private property without stepping onto the streambed) or non-navigable (meaning that water surrounded by private land cannot be accessed without stepping into the streambed and thus trespassing onto private property.) For a landowner to be fully protected from trespass under this new law they must fill out an application with the NMDGF to certify that the streams located within their private property where considered non-navigable at statehood. They must provide the property deed, evidence that the water is non-navigable, and post the application to a local newspaper for 3 weeks. For a complete copy of the application click HERE. There were a number of people in attendance at the Commission meeting assumedly there to oppose the applications however, the new regulation does not allow for verbal public comment and is written more in line with federal regulation. Meaning that all public comments need to be submitted in writing during a specified “comment period” in order for the individual or organization to have “standing”. The official comment period closes 14 days prior to the Commission vote. For more information on the proper way to provide public comment regarding non-navigable water certifications please read the entire rule HERE. Landowner Certification of Non-navigable Waters Application #1 (Chama Troutstalkers, LLC) – Private land where the Chama River and the Rio Chamita meet and traverse through private property in Rio Arriba Country. The application provided the required proof that the waters were considered non-navigable at statehood by means of a report of the Governor of NM to the Secretary of the Interior in 1905. The Commission voted unanimously to certify these waters as non-navigable. Application #2 (Hersh Residence Trust) – Private land where the Pecos River traverse through private property in San Miguel Country. The application provided the required proof that the waters were considered non-navigable at statehood by means of a report of the Governor of NM to the Secretary of the Interior in 1905. The Commission voted unanimously to certify these waters as non-navigable. Application #3-5 (Z&T Cattle Company) – Separate sections of private land where the Alamosa River traverses through private property in Socorro Country, where the Mimbres River traverses through private property in Grant County, and where the Penasco River traverses through private property in Chaves County. The applications provided the required proof that the waters were considered non-navigable at statehood by means of a report of the Governor of NM to the Secretary of the Interior in 1905. The Commission voted unanimously to certify these waters as non-navigable. These applications have been approved by the Commission and are designated as a non-navigable public water. Subsequent to the meeting the NMDGF will issue a written final agency action and decision indicating the segment identified in the application or any portion thereof as being “certified non-navigable public water”. A certificate will be issued by the NMDGF Director immediately following the final agency action. The certificate will include sufficient information for recording purposes with the various county clerks of the state of New Mexico and will run with the segment, the land, and the real property. Next Regular Commission Meeting November 30th, 2018 – Roswell, NM
Back to Blog
October Game Commission Re-Cap10/5/2018 The NM State Game Commission hosted their most recent meeting at their new Albuquerque office. The meeting began with the grand opening of the new office complex which is located just south of Paseo Del Norte and west of the river in a very nice location along the Rio Grande valley. The meeting was very short and focused mostly on the changes to the Manner and Method Rule. There was also an update on the Dept.’s legislatively directed stakeholder meetings regarding the Trapping Rule.
SUBSEQUENT DISCUSSION ON POTENTIAL CHANGES TO MANNER AND METHOD RULE The Dept. provided an update on their proposed changes to the Manner and Method Rule. The Rule has been open for public comment for the past month and according to the Dept. the public is supportive of most of the items being proposed. The Dept. received some public comments opposing the caliber restrictions as well as their proposal to allow shooting from the road. The Dept. received the most opposition to their proposal to extend the restrictions as it relates to “use of aircraft”. It should be noted that the opposition to the rule change did not come from the hunting industry but from the aviation industry. A high number of pilots attended the Commission meeting to voice their opposition to the wording in the rule indicating that the language was so vague it would create unintended consequences for recreational aviation. The Dept.’s final proposed changes to the rule will be posted to the public register next week and will likely be approved by the Commission at their November Commission meeting in Roswell. If you wish to voice your opinion on any of the following proposed changes, please email DGF-fieldopscomments@state.nm.us before Oct. 18th. Proposed Rule Changes
SUBSEQUENT CHANGES TO THE REVOCATIONS RULE The Dept. gave an update on their proposed changes to the revocations rule. Most of the changes will help clean up the language and simplify the rule. The Dept. has not received any public comments regarding the proposal. The Dept.’s final proposed changes to the rule will be posted to the public register next week and will likely be approved by the Commission at their November Commission meeting in Roswell. If you wish to voice your opinion on any of the following proposed changes, please email DGF-fieldopscomments@state.nm.us before Oct. 18th. Proposed Rule Changes
DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL RULE CHANGES TO TRAPPING The Dept. provided a very short presentation regarding the results of an ongoing initiative to bring together “stakeholder groups” to discuss areas of agreement regarding trapping in NM. The stakeholder meetings were a result of a legislative request made back in 2017 by Senator Pete Campos to bring organizations from both sides of the issue together to discuss areas of middle ground. Apparently, the only area of middle ground that was discovered during the stakeholder meetings was to establish mandatory trapper education. Unsurprisingly this agenda item turned out several activists who used the public comment segment of the meeting to express their anti-trapping sentiment. NMCOG was not one of the organizations originally included in the stake holder meetings and thus is unaware of the discussions that have taken place between the groups over the past year. The Commission provided assurance that anything that was discussed in the stakeholder meetings has not yet led to any official request for rule changes. ODDS AND ENDS During the meeting the Commission also approved the Dept.’s depredation and nuisance abatement report, the revocation of licenses for individuals who had an excess of 20 violation points, and the Biennial Review of the State Listed and Endangered Species. The Dept. did not recommend any changes to their existing list of threatened and endangered species nor did they receive any public comments regarding the document. Special Commission Meeting November 8th, 2018 – Albuquerque, NM Regular Commission Meeting November 30th, 2018 – Roswell, NM
Back to Blog
Game Commission Re-cap 8/23/20188/27/2018 Game Commission Re-cap
August 23, 2018 Gallup, NM The NM State Game Commission hosted their most recent meeting in Gallup. This was the first meeting for fisheries biologist Mike Sloan in his new position as the Director of NMDGF. The agenda was long and covered many highly important topics. There was also a high turnout of landowners, outfitters, and sportsman in attendance to provide public comment on the elk rule and E-plus changes. REVOCATIONS The Dept. presented the Commission with information on individuals who have accrued 20 or more game violation points within a 3-year period. There was one guide on the list who was denied the renewal of his license based on a history of violation. The guide, Hayden Pierce, is not and has never been a member of NMCOG. A number of individuals were revoked due to accruing 20 or more violation points in a 3yr period. All license privileges were revoked for the standard 3-year period. SUBSEQUENT DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL CHANGES TO THE DEER RULE Wildlife Chief Stewart Liley presented to the Commission the Dept.’s updated recommended changes to the Deer rule. These recommendations have NOT been approved and were presented for discussion purposes only however, based on the statutory rule posting requirements these proposals will very likely be what is approved by the Commission in November. If you still need to send public comment to the Dept. please do so ASAP by sending an email to DGF-Deer-Rules@state.nm.us. The changes to the rule are as follows: - Adjust some seasons for calendar dates - Adjust draw license numbers based on biological data and management goals (see details below) - Separate archery season into September and January (2 different seasons and draws) when a split September and/or January season currently exists (see Table 1 at end of document) - Create some new opportunities (see details below) - Standardize most youth hunts to a 9-day hunt surrounding Thanksgiving week Region Specific Proposed Changes Northeast - Allow Either Sex (ES) white-tailed deer hunting for all white-tailed deer hunts in the northeast - GMU 55: create new September archery hunt of 10 licenses in Valle Vidal - Create new archery hunt of 10 licenses in Colin Neblett - Create January archery hunt of 10 licenses in GMU 41 - License increases based on biological data (5% overall) o GMUs: 41, 42, 43, 45, 47, 48, 57, 58, 59 Southeast - GMU 30: split 2 rifle hunts evenly (800/hunt; previously 1st rifle hunt was 640 and 2nd rifle hunt was 960 licenses) - GMU 31/33: Decrease youth licenses on Huey WMA from 2 hunts of 20 to 2 hunts of 10 licenses each (the Department no longer has management authority over Brantley and Seven Rivers) - Do not split GMUs 31 & 32 - License increases based on biological data (3% overall) o GMUs: 28, 30, 31, 32, 36 Southwest - GMU 19: create any-legal-weapon hunt of 5 licenses on White Sands Missile Range; move off range muzzleloader hunt from October to first weekend in December - GMU 23: Reduce licenses by 13% - GMU 24: Reduce licenses by 10% - GMU 23 (Burros): Reduce licenses by 13%, decreasing from 2 regular any-legal-weapon hunts to 1, but lengthening the season to 9 days (35 licenses for mule deer and 40 licenses for white-tailed deer [mule deer and white-tailed deer hunters will hunt at separate times]). Also, create a new white-tailed deer hunt of 20 archery licenses in September. - Allow Burros Archery hunters to hunt Silver City Management Area - Move January FAWTD archery hunt from Jan. 1-15 to Jan. 16-31 o GMUs 23 (Burros & excluding Burros area), 24, 27 - Other license decreases based on biological data (6-8%) o GMUs: 26, 27 Northwest - GMU 4: Create limited public and private hunt in late November (10 licenses each); Include Sargent in draw for WMAs; Create September archery hunt for WMAs - GMU 5A: Create late September muzzleloader hunt (public licenses = 10; private licenses = 50) - GMU 5B: Create September archery hunt (10 licenses) and late September muzzleloader hunt (10 licenses) - GMU 14: Create January archery hunt (25 licenses) - License increases based on biological data (5% overall) o GMUs: 2B, 2C, 5A, 5B, 6A/C, 7, 8, 14 - License decreases based on biological data (4-7%) o GMUs 10, 12 SUBSEQUENT DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL CHANGES TO THE ELK RULE Wildlife Chief Stewart Liley presented to the Commission the Dept.’s updated recommended changes to the Elk rule. These recommendations have NOT been approved and were presented for discussion purposes only however, based on the statutory rule posting requirements these proposals will very likely be what is approved by the Commission in November. If you still need to send public comment to the Dept. please do so ASAP by sending an email to DGF-Elk-Rules@state.nm.us The changes to the rule are as followed: - Adjust seasons for calendar date shifts. - Youth Encouragement hunts limited to resident youth who put in for the draw but were unsuccessful. If hunts are undersubscribed after 14 days, allow license to be sold to resident seniors (65 years and older) who put in for the draw and were unsuccessful. - Move Antler Point Restriction (APR) hunts into the big game draw (GMUs 12, 34, 37) - Adjustment to Core Occupied Elk Range (COER) boundaries in the primary elk management zone (see details below and see EPLUS proposal for additional details). o COER/primary elk management zone: the portion of land designated by the Department as containing the majority of routine elk use, this is the area on which elk management goals and harvest objectives are based. - Adjust licenses to the current public-private split where COER boundary adjustments occur and in situations where land ownership has changed. Region Specific Proposed Changes Northeast - GMU 42/47/59: Combine units to create new ES hunts; 1 any-legal-weapon hunt Oct.1-5 of 5 licenses and 2 new archery hunts in September of 10 licenses each. - GMU 48: Move Dec. MB hunt to Oct. - Separate youth only (YO) and adult hunts on Valle Vidal. - Combine Colin Neblett north and south hunt zones. - GMU 56: Create new any-legal-weapon MB (Oct 1-5) and antlerless hunts of 5 licenses each. - GMU 57/58: Create new any-legal-weapon MB Oct. 1-5 hunt of 5 licenses. - GMUs 46, 54, 55A: Establish Special Management Zones (see EPLUS rule change presentation). Southeast - GMU 30: Create Oct.1-5 hunt of 10 ES licenses (any-legal-weapon). - GMU 34: Increase female harvest. o Increase draw A licenses to 3 hunts of 350 licenses and maintain youth A licenses at 120. o Change MB hunts to ES hunts. o Expand COER boundaries east and west. o Change late season archery APR hunts in 34 to APR/A hunt and put in public draw. - GMU 36: Increase MB and ES licenses by 15%. - GMU 37: Move 10 MB licenses to new Oct. 1-5 hunt (any-legal-weapon). Do not create COER boundary. - GMU 38: Create Oct. 1-5 hunt of 10 ES licenses (any-legal-weapon). Southwest - GMU 13: Adjust COER boundary to the northwest (include the Narrows area). - GMU 19: Create a new any-legal-weapon draw elk hunt of 3 ES licenses. - GMU 21A & B: Create late season MB archery hunt of 15 licenses in each sub-unit. o Extend 21B COER boundary south. - GMU 23: Create late season MB archery hunt of 15 licenses. Northwest - GMU 2: Remove quality management designation and - GMU 4: Change bag limit on Wildlife Management Areas and private land from MB à MB/A, create new antlerless hunt of 15 licenses (any-legal-weapon) on Rio Chama WMA, include Rio Chama as part of the Humphrees archery hunt. - GMU 9: Eliminate all cow hunts and reduce MB & ES hunts by 25%. o Adjust COER boundary to the east to include elk winter range. - GMU 12: Create COER boundary to establish the “Fence Lake herd unit” with a “quality hunt management” designation. o This would move GMU 12 into the Departments primary elk management zone resulting in the GMU being subject to the public/private split and private licenses being allocated through EPLUS. - GMU 14: Create Oct. 1-5 hunt of 10 ES licenses (any-legal-weapon). - GMU 6B: Eliminate mobility impaired hunts, increase youth hunts from 35 to 60, and change MB bag limit to ES and increase ES bow hunts by 5 licenses each. SUBSEQUENT DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL CHANGES TO THE E-PLUS RULE The Dept. presented their subsequent changes to the E-plus. The Dept. is proposing to determine a definition for “meaningful benefit” and create a scoring criterion for properties to determine their level of “meaningful benefit”. Properties will be required to meet a minimum level of “meaningful benefit” to qualify for E-plus. This will help weed out a lot of properties that are currently enrolled in the Small Contributing Ranch program that are not truly providing benefit to the species or habitat. Under the new system SCR ranches will be issued tags based on their benefit to the species under the following categories:
Ranches that are contributing more to the habitat will have a better opportunity to receive tags. Also, any change or re-deeding of properties would result in an immediate re-evaluation of the property. This will hopefully dissuade landowners from attempting to play the system. Additionally, unconverted bonus allocations within the large landowners will be passed along to the ranches in the SCR program. The Dept. has also determined that the COER terminology is confusing to most people. They are proposing to do away with the term inside and outside the COER and rather use elk management zones. They are also proposing going over the counter in several areas that are currently designated as “outside the COER”. These over the counter private land tags will be transferable with written permission. All tags in this segment will be ES. There will be consistent season dates and weapon types across this segment. Exceptions will exist on a case by case basis. Proposed 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 · Added Antlerless as a tag option for outside COER (Secondary Mgt. Zone) · Added proposed hunt dates for outside COER (Secondary Mgt. Zone) · Allowed for a specific ranch code to be required before a hunter could buy an elk license OverThe-Counter. FINAL PROPOSAL FOR CHANGES TO THE EXOTICS RULE The Dept. presented their final proposals on the exotics rule. The Commission voted to approve the new 4-year rule unanimously.
SUBSEQUENT DISCUSSION ON POTENTIAL CHANGES TO MANNER AND METHOD RULE Colonel Griego provided the Commission an update on their proposed changes to the rule that is basically the guts of NM hunting regulation. While this presentation was officially considered the “subsequent” discussion, it was actually the first time we’ve been able to see what the Dept. is considering changing in the rule. Which means you have less time than usual to voice your public comment to the Dept. It seems that the Dept. realizes this and as such they will be hosting several public meetings across the state where you can hear the rule changes, ask questions, and provide feedback. The public meeting schedule is as below followed by the Dept. recommended changes to the rule. If you wish to email public comment to the Dept. please send your emails to DGF-FieldOpsComments@state.nm.us Public Meeting Schedule
Potential Rule Changes
Odds and Ends The Commission approved the Dept.’s opening of the 14-day comment period on the Biennial Review of the Wildlife Conservation Act (WCA) which is the document that the Dept. puts together to describe the condition of the states species of conservation concern. The Commission also heard updates on the new Albuquerque and Roswell offices and were provided a presentation on the Dept.’s 2020 budget. Next Commission Meeting October 4th, 2018 – Albuquerque, NM |
51 Bogan Rd. Stanley, NM 87056
RSS Feed
QUICK LINKSHome
Join Now Make a Donation Industry News NMCOG Events New Mexico Outdoors Magazine National Affiliation-POGA |
Contact Us51 Bogan Rd. Stanley, NM 87056
(505)440-5258 info@nmoutfitters.com Kerrie Cox Romero Executive Director SOCIAL NETWORK |
© Copyright 2020 by New Mexico Council of Outfitters and Guides, Inc