schmalts

I am working on setting up a fund and contacting some attorneys to file a lawsuit. It Seems since the outfitters (USO mostly) have files some suits themselves and to surprise have won in a case that stated AZ was infinging on the intercommerce act by limiting the nonres hunters. Allthough this seems like a fair thing to some but its all about greed with them. They are the same outfitters who lobbied for NM' s outfitter preference system and are shutting out hunters who dont want to hunt with high priced guides. Well i feel that guides are good but you can get your guide after you draw your tag, not get preference to get a tag because you will use one! Stand up for your right to keep hunting by yourself, and keep hunting from becomming a rich mans sport.
Heres what i propose. We can file a suit very similar to USO' s but with a twist. The outfitter preference is denying me my right to draw tags in NM and other states and affects the intercommerce act also.
Outfitters got this preference by lobbying alone, imagine what we could get with a lawsuit?
There are lots of lawyers out there who hunt and would be willing to fight for such a case but we need money, are you willing to chip in a little for the cause. Dont let big greedy outfitters price you out of hunting. Dont let them use OUR FEDERAL LAND YOU OWN AND PAY TAXES ON for thier private hunting preserve.
Let hunters draw a tag fair, then get a outfitter if they like afterwards.
Rumor has it that NM is talking about dropping the quota to this; NR with a outfitter 10% without outfitter 5%.
The curent is 12% and 10% and thats a crock already.
If you believe its not fair for outfitters to get thier hunters preference to draw on public land lets here it. Anyone know an attorney that may be interested? A fund can be setup and far a nominal donation we can get some things given back to us. Time to stand up as a group and not let outfitters lobby us out of hunting rights.
Outfitters, please this is not a debate about why you think the preference is fair. you can start you own thread. This is for who is with this idea only please thats all i ask.

gleninAZ

Schmaltz-Where you been? I agree with what you' re sayin but I rank lawyer just below dogshoot when it comes to protecting my rights. If you can find a lawyer that is a real hunter and lives in NM then I will follow the thread and donate. The Taulman thing will get thrown out on appeal by Arizona after his indictment for using his plane but the NM allocation is real crap. Think about how many more elk tags go to outfitters on top of the draw allocation due to the private landowner tags that sell to highest bidder. Arizona has no private landowner tags now but the politics are on to get that changed. I have no dislike for good outfitters and think maybe just no allocation or if they have an allocation then have no preference for outfitters. Let us hire the outfitter after we draw. Good luck with the fight.

schmalts

Glenn, what sucks is i found out that outfitters apply in some units for the nonguided portion too. Thats a double standard. I cant apply with the outfitter preference and then not hire a guide so why should an outfitter be able to have his client apply for the nonguided potrion and then use a guide. Also the attorny would not have to be from NM. I have been around but spend most time on other boards.

schmalts

Hey glenn (and others) heres a reply from an outfitter on this subject on a different website..... qoute,
Some comments have been made about the advantage that non-resident hunters have when hiring an outfitter. Here is the deal on that. There is a 2% difference in the number of licenses between non-residents who hire an outfitter and non-residents that have the choice of hiring an outfitter or going on their own!! A 2% difference!! end quote

now, Heres my response to his dribble.. qoute
2%??? do your math better buddy so, show me the numbers, i want to see it in print as to what units these are in, or if its true at all. You dont do math so well, no offence but there is not a 2% difference in the tags guided to non guided its 20%ish!!! there is a difference of 2% between the two compared to the residents but thats not the issue! last time i checked the difference between 12% and 10% was 20%!Also you seem to think its fair to have the higher percentage go to outfitted hunters and they are the smaller pool of applicants making their chances even higher, what dont you get?. so that 2% turns into lets see, 20% more tags for the outfit guys, do a little figuring for the difference in the amount of applicant of both draws and i bet the 2% turns into more like 50% better drawing odds all said and done in most units. I challenge you to put a post where we can see these numbers to look at ALL units Mostly the GILA units.end qoute.
Even outfitters dont see themselves how unfair it is! they really believe they are doing us a favor i guess.

DARTanian

you lost me there schmalts, you want to try to vote or bring up charges because az limits the amout of tags offered to out-o-staters? really what are you trying to say?

schmalts

I am trying to say that we should sue NM for the outfitter freference that USO loves so much. Nothing to do with AZ at all. But use a similare reason USO did with AZ as a reason to sue NM(interstate commerce sort of) The outfitter preference is really unfair!!