A. The participating states find that:
(1) wildlife resources are managed in trust by the respective states for the benefit of all of their residents and visitors;
(2) the protection of the wildlife resources of a state is materially affected by the degree of compliance with its statutes, laws, ordinances and administrative rules relating to the management of those resources;
(3) the preservation, protection, management and restoration of wildlife contributes immeasurably to the aesthetic, recreational and economic aspects of the natural resources of a state;
(4) wildlife resources are valuable without regard to political boundaries; therefore, a person should be required to comply with wildlife preservation, protection, management and restoration laws, ordinances and administrative rules of a participating state as a condition precedent to the continuance or issuance of a license to hunt, fish, trap or possess wildlife;
(5) violation of wildlife laws interferes with the management of wildlife resources and may endanger the safety of persons and property;
(6) the mobility of many wildlife violators necessitates the maintenance of channels of communication among the various states;
(7) usually, a person who is cited for a wildlife violation in a state other than his home state:
(a) is required to post collateral or bond to secure appearance for a trial at a later date;
(b) is taken directly into custody until collateral or bond is posted; or
(c) is taken directly to court for an immediate appearance;
(8) the purpose of the enforcement practices set forth in Paragraph (7) of this subsection is to ensure compliance with the terms of a wildlife citation by the cited person who, if permitted to continue on his way after receiving the citation, could return to his home state and disregard his duty under the terms of the citation;
(9) in most instances, a person receiving a wildlife citation in his home state is permitted to accept the citation from the wildlife officer at the scene of the violation and immediately continue on his way after agreeing or being instructed to comply with the terms of the citation;
(10) the practices described in Paragraph (7) of this subsection cause unnecessary inconvenience and, at times, hardship for a person who is unable to post collateral, furnish a bond, stand trial or pay a fine at that time and is therefore compelled to remain in custody until some alternative arrangement is made; and
(11) the enforcement practices described in Paragraph (7) of this subsection consume an undue amount of enforcement time.
B. It is the policy of the participating states to:
(1) promote compliance with the statutes, laws, ordinances and administrative rules relating to the management of wildlife resources in the respective states;
(2) recognize the suspension of wildlife license privileges of a person whose license privileges have been suspended by another participating state and treat the suspension as if it had occurred in the home state;
(3) allow a person, except as provided in Subsection B of Section 4 [11-16-4 NMSA 1978] of the Wildlife Violator Compact, to accept a citation and, without delay, proceed on his way, whether or not the person is a resident of the state in which the citation was issued; provided that the person's home state is a participating state in the Wildlife Violator Compact;
(4) report to the appropriate participating state, as provided in the compact manual, a conviction recorded against a person whose home state was not the issuing state;
(5) allow a home state to recognize and treat convictions recorded against its residents, which convictions occurred in another participating state, as though they had occurred in the home state;
(6) cooperate to the fullest extent with other participating states in enforcing compliance with the terms of citations issued by one participating state to residents of another participating state;
(7) maximize effective use of law enforcement personnel and information; and
(8) assist court systems in the efficient disposition of wildlife violations.
History: Laws 2001, ch. 101, § 2.
ANNOTATIONS"Revocation" and "suspension" construed. — Where the New Mexico department of game and fish (department) denied respondent's application for a New Mexico outfitter's license pursuant to 17-2A-3(C)(2) NMSA 1978, which precludes an individual from working as a registered outfitter if the person has had a guide or outfitter license revoked in another state, and where the district court reversed the decision of the department, finding that the department applied an inapplicable section of 17-2A-3 NMSA 1978 and violated the Interstate Wildlife Violator Compact, 11-16-1 to -12 NMSA 1978, the district court did not err in reversing the department's decision, because the evidence in this case established that the actions of the Arizona commission on which the department relied to deny respondent a license are akin to a suspension, rather than a revocation, and therefore the department erroneously applied 17-2A-3(C)(2) NMSA 1978. An applicant whose license has been taken away for a specified period of time or until the applicant comes into compliance with the requirements established by game and fish is subject to the provision of 17-2A-3(C)(3) NMSA 1978. N.M. Dep't of Game & Fish v. Rawlings, 2019-NMCA-018.
Effective dates. — Laws 2001, ch. 101, § 13 made the Wildlife Violator Compact effective July 1, 2001.