LOCAL COLUMN
OPINION: How private interests have reshaped New Mexico's public draw
New Mexico鈥檚 elk allocation system needs formal scrutiny.
In a joint letter to the attorney general, lawmakers have raised constitutional concerns about how hunting licenses are distributed in the public lottery, questioning whether the current system aligns with the state鈥檚 obligation to manage wildlife 鈥渇or the benefit of the people.鈥� At the center of that concern is a growing perception that opportunity is shifting away from New Mexico residents and toward those with the financial means to access it.
New Mexico does not operate a single draw system. It operates two parallel systems: The public draw, where residents and nonresidents apply through a lottery, and the Elk Private Lands Use System, or EPLUS, where private landowners receive elk authorizations tied to acreage and habitat that can be transferred to hunters. Those authorizations carry significant market value. In some cases, elk tags tied to private land are transferred for many thousands of dollars, with high demand hunts reaching well into five figures.
Only the cost of the hunting license sales goes to the Department of Game and Fish.
Most hunters understand the draw, but far fewer understand how much opportunity is shaped before the draw.
Consider a simplified example: In a unit with 200 total elk tags, many hunters assume roughly 84%, or about 168 tags, are available to New Mexico residents.
In reality, some tags are first allocated through EPLUS to private landowners. If that accounts for even 20%, 40 tags are removed immediately, leaving 160 in the public draw.
From there, the draw is divided. Approximately 6% goes to nonresident applicants, and 10% has historically been set aside for outfitter-sponsored hunters. At that point, the number of tags broadly accessible through a standard resident application drops to roughly 130.
This is not a criticism of any one program. EPLUS was created to address legitimate concerns, including habitat stewardship and elk use on private land. Outfitters provide real services and will continue to be an important part of New Mexico鈥檚 hunting economy.
Legislators noted that the vast majority of licenses in the outfitter set aside are drawn by nonresident hunters.
But when these systems are layered together, they reduce the share of elk hunting opportunities accessible through a fair, open process. New Mexico鈥檚 system is unique in that it combines large, transferable private land allocations with an outfitter set aside within the public draw, a structure that differs from other Western states.
The economic argument also deserves a clear discussion.
Nonresident demand is not dependent on the outfitter pool. More expensive nonresident hunting licenses, which provide significant funding for department operations, will continue to be sold in high numbers. Highly sought-after nonresident tags will continue to be distributed through existing pathways, including the public draw and private land authorizations.
What New Mexico lacks is a transparent, independent analysis of how these systems affect revenue, access and rural communities. Without that analysis, policy debates are driven more by assumption than by data.
The removal of the outfitter set aside creates an opportunity to address that gap.
The state should commission a third party economic study evaluating the full allocation system, including EPLUS, nonresident demand and license distribution.
Future policy should be grounded in a simple standard: Public wildlife should be managed in a way that preserves meaningful access through a fair, open process.
New Mexico鈥檚 elk belong to the public. That principle is the foundation of wildlife management in this country. The question now is whether the system used to allocate those elk reflects that reality, or continues to drift away from it.
Kyle Klain is the New Mexico policy chair for Backcountry Hunters and Anglers.
