New Mexico Bill Would Dramatically Reduce Non-Resident License Allocation

Send by email Printer-friendly version Share this

Senate Bill 196 currently in the New Mexico Senate Finance Committee would significantly reduce the number of licenses available to non-resident hunters. Currently New Mexico allocates 22% of the total licenses available to non-residents. If the law is passed, the new allocation would go to no more than 10% of total licenses. As currently written, 8% would go to non-residents requiring a guide and 2% to non-residents not requiring a guide.

While the bill could change, as written currently the 90% or more allocated to residents would apply regardless of whether the tag was for public or private land.


AlpineClimber's picture

100% Disagree With This!!!

The out state revenue created is self explanatory.  This is really being done with tunnel vision beyond disbursing hunting tags.  New Mexico has a huge portion of real estate bought by out of state investors and sportsman like myself.  I would not own my properties in Magdalena and Datil if I had not hunted there and fallin in love with the area.

NO TAG GUARANTEES A HARVESTED ANIMAL.  What is guaranteed is Travel Expenses, Meals, Accessories and huge dollars for Out of State Tag Pricing compared to Resident.

numbnutz's picture

If this bill passes the state

If this bill passes the state income will drop dramaticly and they will reverse it or tweek it. This was one state i was looking at applying for due to the no point system. it's a state where everyone has the same chance at drawing a tag. 2% of the tags for DIY. That hurts. what a dumb idea.

Ca_Vermonster's picture

Wow!  That would drastically

Wow!  That would drastically impact the hunter's $$$$$ that comes into the state. They actually have a fiscal impact report, but when I click on it, it comes up in jibberish.   And, only 2% for DIY hunts??

Man, don't like the looks of that.  New Mexico was one of the places I thought about going too. 

Glad I am looking more towards Colorado.  I guess some states just cater more to everyone.