Rob I stand corrected the program differs from the elk program. Tag allocation to LO's looks to be a lot higher then the Draw tag numbers though.


F. All authorizations and licenses issued pursuant to this section shall be ranch-only and valid only within the boundaries of the enrolled ranch. With the exception of GMUs 50, 52 and 29 where all authorizations and licenses issued within the boundaries of these GMUs will be issued as “unit wide” and all landowners who participate will agree to, in writing annually, to allow for free, equal and unrestricted access to their privately deeded lands to any legally licensed pronghorn antelope hunter during the designated seasons pursuant to 19.31.15 NMAC.

Where did you get these numbers? The only publicly allocated permits I've seen are for hunting on Sierra Diablo/Black Gap/Elephant Mountain and those are usually just 1-2 permits a year. I'm worried I'm missing out!

I was factoring in all tags then putting the draw tags as a percentage of total tags.

You taking about what percentage of LO tags should be giving to the public. My bad.

If I paid for a 100% of all sheep restoration on my ranch id lock my gate and do with out the income before I'd allow public access. That's just me.

Whew, you had me worried.

I guess Coloradans are more shrewd negotiators than Texans.
I don't think any of the Texas ranches with Desert Bighorns paid for 100% of the restorations and I'd bet they didn't even pay 50% yet the public gets 0 permits. How many private landowners would be able to keep their land without government subsidies, Ag/wildlife exemptions, and trade protections? Talk about selfish!

I guess Coloradans are more shrewd negotiators than Texans.
I don't think any of the Texas ranches with Desert Bighorns paid for 100% of the restorations and I'd bet they didn't even pay 50% yet the public gets 0 permits. How many private landowners would be able to keep their land without government subsidies, Ag/wildlife exemptions, and trade protections? Talk about selfish! [/quote]

Realistically the ranchers may have put in a guzzler or burned off some scrub to promote new growth. Not like they went out there and bought some sheep from UT,AZ or NV to let loose, or put up 50 feeders stocked with corn to help facilitate the reintroduction of these sheep. Still they made a contribution, i guess that counts for something. Maybe not hundreds of thousands in free money at the tax payers expense.

My buddy pays 60k for the landowner tags and charges 75k for the hunt.( total including tag) 4 rams taken last year averaged 168. smallest was 165 and biggest 173. Contact me if interested

Interesting ..

Realistically the ranchers may have put in a guzzler or burned off some scrub to promote new growth. Not like they went out there and bought some sheep from UT,AZ or NV to let loose, or put up 50 feeders stocked with corn to help facilitate the reintroduction of these sheep. Still they made a contribution, i guess that counts for something. Maybe not hundreds of thousands in free money at the tax payers expense. [/quote]

I think the plain truth is the Texas ranchers are simply more attached/in tune with their places being private and not really all that excited about other folks being on it. So they were just harder to convince and drove a harder bargain. The state and others had to either dance to their tune or have very limited land available for BH restoration efforts.

There just a whole different vibe out west when it comes to public access on private property. Basically, it ain't gonna happen here in TX. Just the way it is.

No you don't! read below.



coerce? I never said that, so stop putting words in my mouth. instead of understanding what I'm saying you are trying to "perfectly" change what I'm saying just for the purpose you can be an [censored] and argue.

Kansas doesn't have to coerce anyone like they force landowners in New Mexico, establish a program and landowners can take it or leave it.. try it and dump it like you did. for someone so set in stone and vocal about this, why in the heck did you let the state and public come on your private land?



I didn't know Bobo and Goldstein had hunted at your place before.



OK, thanks for confirming my suspicion about intellect.

Big Bend, other Federal land? I know of Hagerman.

anyway, first step is just allowing public access for hunting, the next step is communicating and structuring so it is properly utilized.

I was just contacted by someone offline that is next next to tens of thousands of public land available for public hunting, yet no one knows about it! the state doesn't advertise it, doesn't provide maps or any other information. this person is aware of it and in 20 years has only seen a couple of other hunters on it.

thanks, now I'm curious what benefits the land owner gets by "enrolling". I suspect it just allows additional tags that they can sell to outfitter.

[/quote]




Lol, you aren't serious about the last part. All of them if you exclude the crop insurance program. If you don't exclude the insurance program the smaller guys would of been close to growing under the last 5 years in this drought. But that's an premium share insurance program, not a true sub. When did you find Ag crops in the dessert mountains?

I farm a few acres and have no issues keeping the doors open.

Like I said its comical when a ranch pays for ALL costs associated with establishing a big horn herd, and now people whom didn't spend a dime on it are whining they want more ram tags and access to the Private property.

Now that's selfish. What's next wanting free beef and corn? You want to drive my truck?

Thought processes like yours are why LO have started pushing for more crop depredation permits instead of allowing outside hunters. Nothing is ever enough.

They get ranch only landowner tags based off population numbers, and agree not to request crop depermation permits.

Remember when there was a huge out cry by NM Res that they didn't get enough tags? So they lowered tag allocation to only 6%. This was their LO appeasement strategy most NM aren't hunting private land. I talked to a good friend last night that has 100k acres. He had so many issues he dropped out of the program and does crop depermation permits and only allows family and friends that draw a tag.

COE properties

You can tell who are the landowners on here and who want to hunt off of someone elses dime and hardwork.

Since you really can't grasp what it takes to own land or how the Bighorn Sheep was introduced, I suggest you become a volunteer and paying member in one of the groups to help you with your lack of knowledge about the sheep in Texas and what it took to get the number to where they are today.
http://www.texasbighornsociety.org/
Even if there are 1500 wild sheep in Texas they are not all rams and certainly not all mature shooting age rams. Very few rams make it a mature shooter age with those low of numbers. Many are moved to new habitat to new increase population and ranges. That expense is shared by many.

About half of the folks I've invited to hunt on my tiny place in the hill country start angling very soon to ask me if they can go out there without me, whenever they feel like it. When some of my customers in deep east Texas would find out (mainly through a loud-mouthed salesman of ours) that my mother had a small tract of timberland, they'd start asking me all kinds of questions about where it was located.

Hunting makes slightly unethical people do low-class things. I try to love my neighbor. 'Not a fan of human nature.

My intellect??

That's all you got? Calling me an ahole and demeaning my intellect?

You tell me what I should interpret when it's blatantly obvious you have no clue and and can't catch a clue even when I detailed it for you.

Read this slow and read it twice: I detailed for you that I participated in virtually identical programs here in Texas, that Kansas offers. Tpwd does in fact have those programs in place. I learned after one year that John Q. Public just wants a practically free place to hunt, and treats your land like a dump, trashes it, and then stands back like you and calls it a travesty that they can't just walk into any land they want and hunt.

Of course based on the fact that Texas already has Kansas type incentives, I was correct in assuming you want to adopt more coercive tactics. But you don't want to see yourself as that guy. TS. You are that guy.
It's real obvious you don't have a clue what sweat equity in a private ranch is.

And you and others here want $40 access to animals worth 10's of thousands of dollars. I personally am tickled pink that people like you (who consider private land ownership a travesty), won't ever see that happen on private land in Texas.

I repeat, go to those states that allow John Q. Public free access to private and public land and hunt there. Or, just cry about it here. Neither will change a thing about what happens here.

And who doesn't know what sweat equity is.

The culture of our nation is "it's not fair for you to have something I want" no matter how hard you worked to get it.

Lol, you aren't serious about the last part. All of them if you exclude the crop insurance program. If you don't exclude the insurance program the smaller guys would of been close to growing under the last 5 years in this drought. But that's an premium share insurance program, not a true sub. When did you find Ag crops in the dessert mountains?

I farm a few acres and have no issues keeping the doors open.

Like I said its comical when a ranch pays for ALL costs associated with establishing a big horn herd, and now people whom didn't spend a dime on it are whining they want more ram tags and access to the Private property.

Now that's selfish. What's next wanting free beef and corn? You want to drive my truck?

Thought processes like yours are why LO have started pushing for more crop depredation permits instead of allowing outside hunters. Nothing is ever enough.



[/quote]

I may be interested. What kind of truck is it?

Lol, becareful mine tend to burst into flames

The ranchers don't pay all the costs of the BH restoration program. Many share - the state, private donors, the Texas Desert Bighorn Society members (I am one).

The landowners' contributions in terms of providing the land, etc. are vital - but they don't have to pay all the costs of the program.

Here you go, just to break your post apart and break you. You are certainly arguing to argue by putting words in my mouth, which is the definition of trolling.



And I asked above (which you didn't read) why did you participate in the program in the first place if you were worried about government intrusion on your private land. I also said above (which you didn't read) that no one is forcing anyone in Texas or Kansas to do these programs (coercion), so your choice and it is the personal choice of many Kansas land owners it is a beneficial and good program for them.



Texas does not have the exact same program as Kansas! The main difference is that in Kansas it is a very open and transparent program widespread in adoption and application. The land owners like it and the public hunters like it. There is very clear documentation, mapping, signage, etc. There is no coercion, how in the hell can a state FORCE you into the program if you don't want to?



You don't know jack about me, I owned land in Kansas and now own land in Oklahoma. I do all the work myself.



Where did I ever say that private land ownership is a travesty? Where did I ever say private land owners should be coerced into a public program like this?

You have 12 hours to find exactly where I said that.

Confucius say (insert Chinese accent here):

Arguing with some guys is like mud-wrestling with pig-
Both get dirty, and pig enjoy it anyway.

Read about Arizonas parks depts. Grand plan to save the bighorns the mountain lions are killing them as quick as they release them, LO are there only hope as the control the predators and hunters on there property because they know whats best for there particular property