The way I heard it said best is "we are all non residents in every state but one." I think most eastman subscribers get their name in the hat in more than one state, I think its outrageous to have a restrictive quota then gouge us on the tags as well. In my thinking it
should be one or the other - either set a restrictive NR quota, then make the NR tags 4-5x res prices OR make them expensive and don't set a limit on it.
Quite a few of the NM outfitters that are harmed by this live just over the border in CO or AZ, so spend as much time in the units as residents and are good guides. AZ is hard as hell to get a tag in compared to NM, so many have had to do both. A lot of piggy backing going on this year, but I think its mostly established and well regarded guides running their business through a NM resident, seems like an awful easy hoop to jump thru, the law makes little sense to me.
Update: The judge ruled the 5 outfitters suing could get in the outfitter pool this year, but not if they were an LLC, only individuals, something about the commerce clause protecting individuals but not corporations. That makes a whole lot of no sense, so I think that further lawsuits will bring forth more changes in the outfitter pool.
My opinion is do away with the outfitter pool altogether, just make the NR pool 15%. I think everyone would be happy with that except the guides, but I don't think the government should be subsidizing their business anyway. Most guides worth their salt do a healthy trade in landowner tags already to make sure they can be booked enough to make a living. The reason that will never happen is NR have no place at the table and the Guides and Outfitters have more political clout than any of the other groups.
The whole things a cluster, I threw my name in the hat for a bunch of long shots (except elk), maybe I'll have better luck this year.