NM's Game Meat Law: Are You Eating on Schedule?

By Justin McDaniel Published: 7/11/2008

Elk - Colo..jpg

Game laws, for the most part, exist for good reasons.  Safety regulations, bag limits and seasons are all good things that have made our days afield more secure and conserved our wildlife resources.  When a law makes sense, no one has a problem following it.

But sometimes a regulation is added to the books that, quite honestly, makes no sense.  It seems the only thing these laws protect are the guarantee that hunters will be burdened. 

One of the more peculiar laws in effect is a New Mexico rule requiring hunters to consume, trade, or legally sell game meat in their possession prior to the end of the license year—March 31.  If a hunter still has game meat in his or her freezer after that date, then a conservation officer must be summoned, who will inspect the freezer and issue a 30-day permit authorizing possession.  At the end of those 30 days, if the remainder of the meat has not been consumed, then the process must be repeated.

Without a doubt, hunters are supposed to know regulations.  But if a hunter overlooks this obscure rule, or forgets to obtain a permit, then he or she is guilty of unlawful possession of game.  For deer, the hunter is subject to a $400 fine; the penalty is even higher for possession of elk meat.

Essentially, this rule is an anti-poaching measure that is used by game wardens to verify whether or not meat is legally possessed if a search warrant is issued.  Other states have similar laws stating that game must be consumed before the next hunting season, but an early spring turnaround seems awfully fast for even the most dedicated carnivore.   

That’s not to say that game wardens are running around checking people’s freezers to ensure compliance.  In fact, New Mexico Game & Fish admits this law is rarely used.  But that doesn’t change the fact that a legal hunter could be made into a criminal simply because he or she didn’t eat like a pig.

And that’s exactly what a hunter would have to do in order to finish off a good-sized elk by the end of March.  New Mexico’s elk hunting season begins in September and runs through December in some management units.  Considering that the average bull elk weighs approximately 700 pounds on the hoof, and that the average meat yield is 40 percent of that weight, a hunter would take home roughly 280 pounds of meat.

Say a hunter was to get 280 pounds of meat from an elk legally harvested on Dec. 1.  To polish off that much protein by March 31 would require each member of a family of four to eat quarter-pound portions of elk two meals a day, everyday, for four months. 

I don’t know about you, but that’s a lot of elk.  And that’s only one bull.  What if several family members had a successful season?

To put this into perspective, a buddy of mine killed an elk in Colorado back in October.  He has literally eaten elk almost every night for nine months and still has meat in the freezer.  If he lived in New Mexico and followed the law, he’d be on his fourth meat possession permit.

Does it really benefit game management or law enforcement to force hunters to eat on the government’s schedule?  We think not.  Game laws should be tools to conserve our wildlife and manage it so that we can all enjoy hunting safely.  After all, nitpicking how long it takes us to eat what we harvest does little to advance any of those goals.

Related Articles
Comments
If everyone who has meat left in the freezer would comply you probably could put the state over budget pretty quick by making the conservation officers keep reinspecting freezers every thirty days. I am thinking they might get mighty tired of this law themselves and support a change. Food for thought.

From John Owens on Friday, April 02, 2010 1:05 PM
Brian had the right idea to get this off the books. Imagine if every hunter in New Mexico kept a small portion of their hunt, and then barraged the authorities to keep coming back and issuing permits. They would be so ragged from traveling to each and every hunter's freezer, they'd soon give up this stupid law! What's next, door to door freezer inspections?

From Steve on Friday, April 02, 2010 9:05 AM
Years ago, when my oldest child was just a baby, we found out she had some extreme allergies, one of this being to beef. She could eat deer with no adverse affect. So every year I would max out my bag limit on deer so she could have red meat all year long. We lived in Iowa at the time. So with that kind of limit, I could only feed my child red meat part of the year?? She was also allergic to soy, a main protein replacement. At least she outgrew her more extreme allergies because it seems common sense is becoming a rare commodity.

From David L Wood on Monday, March 29, 2010 3:12 PM
Bureaucrat + Common sense = Does not compute! Hey, if anybody worried about what to do with that leftover elk come the end of March, drop me a note here and maybe I can take it off your hands. Wouldn't want anybody to get fined for not eating their rations on time! Maybe we could swap for some whitetail. They're as plentiful as rats here in the Northeast!

From Brian on Sunday, March 28, 2010 11:31 PM
I think part of what they are pushing is the donation of meat. You keep 50-100 lbs, and donate the rest to shelters. That way there is no issue with you being able to eat your portion in the time alloted and you help the less fortunate. Granted, I don't agree with the concept of pushing you to do anything that you don't want to, especially with something you gain legally. But I am just trying to understand their logic, like everyone else.

From Brian Goralczyk on Sunday, March 28, 2010 10:56 PM
I think everyone that hunts should keep one pound of meat and run the enforcers of the stupid ass law crazy and have them come and check up on your meat. This way the conservation officer will have a little job security. and it may make them think before they implement laws that make no sense at all.

From ED on Sunday, March 28, 2010 9:35 AM
WOW!

From bru on Sunday, March 28, 2010 7:22 AM
I live in New Mexico, I have read the proclamation of Game and Fish laws and never read this one. It is good to have an organization that digs deeper to keep us up to speed on the different laws even on absurd laws such as this one. I will do my best to eat my next elk as fast as I can to remain legal if not overweight.

From Francisco Franco on Tuesday, November 10, 2009 10:02 PM
If I can manage to 'conserve' game meat by eating it only on special occasions, wouldn't that be to the advantage of the Wildlife Conservation people, or would they rather we simply be gluttons and/or sell meat that we harvest? Like the man said, 'common sense isn't very common anymore'.

From William Barber on Friday, November 06, 2009 6:28 PM
Name:*
Email:
Comments:*
Enter the above code here:
(Code is case insensitive. You can put lower or upper case.)
Can't read? Try different words.