Arizona does away with auction tags

[CorbLand]

MattB's link on the AZ Habitat Partnership committee has some useful information on their yearly projects and costs. Can I show earmarked dollars going to earmarked projects? No.

It seems pretty logical to me that a department that gets $400k more will have money to spend on such projects. And a department that gets $400k less will have...less money to spend on these projects.

I have conceded the point that the rich might not care as much as you or I. Maybe they care more. But their money is there. And I see we agree on that.

Once again, I do agree that the money is vital. But saying the money goes to fish and game therefore it’s good and helping while watching tags and hunting opportunities decrease doesnt add up to me.

That’s like a state doubling fuel taxes to improve roads and saying the roads are getting better while your dodging more potholes.

I am extremely pro fish and game agencies, it’s the about the only government entity I smile when I give money to.

There is a simple test of my theory. Make a state give them to a non profit that isn’t considered a charitable contribution and let them auction it off. If someone pays in the same ball park, I am wrong and I will eat my crow. Done it plenty of times.

 

[MattB]

But you can go back through this entire thread and nobody has been able to definitively show that the funding has improved hunting for everyone. The only thing that anyone has really posted is that all the funding goes back to AZFG.

Have you read the HPC project funding reports that were linked in this thread to understand how these dollars are used? Based on your comment, I am guessing not. While it is difficult to establish a direct, causal link between any one dollar or any one project increasing hunter opportunity, it can easily be demonstrated that 1) the dollars raised through the auction tags are being used to support activities which are necessary to maintain/increase game populations and public draw hunter opportunity, and 2) AZ sheep hunting opportunities have increased 40%+ since 1995 (the oldest paper regs I have).

If you had looked at how HPC funds have been used, you would see projects that reference survey work (necessary to open new hunt units and to justify keeping or expanding existing hunts), disease studies, translocations (precursor to new populations/augmenting existing, struggling populations which can help support new hunt opportunities in the future), and drinker installation/maintenance/hauling (important for supporting existing populations and potentially increasing sheep habitat and inter-connectivity between sheep sub-populations).

These are all activities that support higher game populations, and the demonstrated growth in sheep tag numbers over time makes a pretty strong argument that a history of the department and volunteer organizations using these dollars for the betterment of the sheep and their habitat has directly contributed to hunter opportunity.

 

[HuntHarder]

Forget about what the money is used for and ask yourself is it in YOUR values to sell wildlife to the highest bidder?

Azgfd's stance is the practice of selling wildlife to the highest bidder does not follow the North American conservation model. I agree according to the 7 interdependent principles

North American Model of Wildlife Conservation :: Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies

www.fishwildlife.org

 

[Steve O]

If you pay attention, you will see a lot of rich dudes win the state raffles too; especially the ones that don’t have limits on the number of ticket you can buy. Can’t write off raffle tickets, can you…

Those monies pay for countless domestic sheep retirements, all kinds of flight time to survey the herds. That has opened up sheep hunts and added tags to AZ, ID, CA, CO off the top of my head. It costs something like $30,000 to haul water in AZ during drought to keep the guzzlers and waterholes functioning which is CRUCIAL to all wildlife there. There is quite a bit of documentation on the ADBSS website about where money is spent. RMBSS in Colorado also has a ton of information where money raised goes if not on the website type that along with “oak” or “sandbrew”, those guys have posted on multiple message boards how much good they have done with the auction proceeds; the are/were board members.

Be better to accuse all the wrongdoing after one researches how and where the money is spent.

I’m not a black and white guy. I know there is some negative with these things but what I’ve seen is the good WAY outnumbers some tools hunting as a posse. I do not see ONE auction tag as destroying the NA model but enhancing it.

 

[CorbLand]

Have you read the HPC project funding reports that were linked in this thread to understand how these dollars are used? Based on your comment, I am guessing not. While it is difficult to establish a direct, causal link between any one dollar or any one project increasing hunter opportunity, it can easily be demonstrated that 1) the dollars raised through the auction tags are being used to support activities which are necessary to maintain/increase game populations and public draw hunter opportunity, and 2) AZ sheep hunting opportunities have increased 40%+ since 1995 (the oldest paper regs I have).

If you had looked at how HPC funds have been used, you would see projects that reference survey work (necessary to open new hunt units and to justify keeping or expanding existing hunts), disease studies, translocations (precursor to new populations/augmenting existing, struggling populations which can help support new hunt opportunities in the future), and drinker installation/maintenance/hauling (important for supporting existing populations and potentially increasing sheep habitat and inter-connectivity between sheep sub-populations).

These are all activities that support higher game populations, and the demonstrated growth in sheep tag numbers over time makes a pretty strong argument that a history of the department and volunteer organizations using these dollars for the betterment of the sheep and their habitat has directly contributed to hunter opportunity.

I read it on my phone while boarding a plane so I can’t say that I read it closely.

They auction off more than sheep tags…so to point at one species as say “see it works” is kind of disingenuous. They also auction off a deer tag, and I don’t think anyone would say that deer hunting and deer opportunities are getting better or have gotten better since they started.

I am not saying anything about the money and it’s use. I am saying don’t bullshit people by telling them that “if your against this it’s because you can’t afford it.” There are plenty of reasons people can be against these and it doesn’t have to be about money.

I didn’t even mention money in my response, yet there are a select few that always seem to bring it back to that.

Like I said, let a C4 organization raffle one off and see if they fetch the same amount. I would actually love to be proven wrong on my theory. Won’t even ask for BBQ sauce to choke my crow down.

 

[CorbLand]

If you pay attention, you will see a lot of rich dudes win the state raffles too; especially the ones that don’t have limits on the number of ticket you can buy. Can’t write off raffle tickets, can you…

Those monies pay for countless domestic sheep retirements, all kinds of flight time to survey the herds. That has opened up sheep hunts and added tags to AZ, ID, CA, CO off the top of my head. It costs something like $30,000 to haul water in AZ during drought to keep the guzzlers and waterholes functioning which is CRUCIAL to all wildlife there. There is quite a bit of documentation on the ADBSS website about where money is spent. RMBSS in Colorado also has a ton of information where money raised goes if not on the website type that along with “oak” or “sandbrew”, those guys have posted on multiple message boards how much good they have done with the auction proceeds; the are/were board members.

Be better to accuse all the wrongdoing after one researches how and where the money is spent.

I’m not a black and white guy. I know there is some negative with these things but what I’ve seen is the good WAY outnumbers some tools hunting as a posse. I do not see ONE auction tag as destroying the NA model but enhancing it.

I have far more respect for the ones that put funds into raffles. At least they are putting up the money with a chance of getting something but don’t get the funds back if they don’t.

 

[BBob]

I don’t think anyone would say that deer hunting and deer opportunities are getting better or have gotten better since they started.

That's because the outfitters and social media have blown that up so bad, not because the projects aren't effective. Countless drinkers have been funded on the strip, it'd likely be a worse situation without. It was very easy to hunt the Strip and Kiabab before the blow up.

 

[CorbLand]

That's because the outfitters and social media have blown that up so bad, not because the projects aren't effective. Countless drinkers have been funded on the strip, it'd likely be a worse situation without. It was very easy to hunt the Strip and Kiabab before the blow up.

I know this and it’s why you can go back to one of my original comments in this thread where I say something about how the funding all seems to go to big name units, that create big animals and it becomes a self perpetuating cycle. “We need this money, so we can keep growing big deer to auction the tag to get the money.”

I don’t disagree that the outfitters are largely to blame. I haven’t blamed the state once in this thread. Regardless of who is causing it, things have to change and if it’s a problem then it needs to change. I don’t think we want to go down the road of a state being able to regulate what is posted on social media.

I really think Arizona is stupid for doing this. It’s going to hurt funding.

 

[MattB]

Forget about what the money is used for and ask yourself is it in YOUR values to sell wildlife to the highest bidder?

Azgfd's stance is the practice of selling wildlife to the highest bidder does not follow the North American conservation model. I agree according to the 7 interdependent principles

North American Model of Wildlife Conservation :: Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies

www.fishwildlife.org

From the linked article one of the North American conservation model’s greatest proponents, Shane Mahoney, does not find auction tags to be at odds with the model.

‘While celebrating the record-breaking contributions of auction winners in January, the Wild Sheep Foundation’s Thornton acknowledged the problematic nature of the auction-tag model.

“While some may find this type of conservation funding contrary to the North American Conservation Model, the Model’s renowned spokesman, Shane Mahoney, disagrees, noting that the Model encourages states, provinces, and tribal/First Nations to fund wildlife agencies in the most effective manner. Allowing a few individuals passionate about a wildlife species to fund the majority of an agency’s budget for that species with very limited auction and raffle permits is the most effective, keeping pace with the increasing management costs for that species.”’

https://www.outdoorlife.com/hunting/big-game-tag-auctions-vs-raffles/#:~:text=One%20of%20the%20pillars%20of,%2C%20isn't%20particularly%20democratic.

 

[idelkslayer]

Shane Mahoney is wrong about this one.

It is disingenuous to imply that these auction tags raise money that would otherwise be unavailable. The money that is gained through auction tags can be easily replaced by increasing the cost of the average hunting license.

I read that Arizona raised 3.2 million on all of their auction tags combined last year. There are ~350,000 hunting licenses sold in the state. It only takes $9 per hunter to replace all that auction revenue.

I know that putting the auction tags back into the general pool will not significantly increase odds for the average hunter. I don't have any problem with a person who has been successful in life and can afford to buy one of these auction tags. I still prefer that tags for a public resource are distributed through a process that puts everyone on equal ground.

I'll also admit that another reason why I do not like auction tags is because I think it fosters an arrogance among the various organizations that hold the auction and the hunters wealthy enough to buy them. They seem to enjoy lording their contribution over the average sportsman. They like to point out how much we "need" them and their money. I'm sorry but I'm not going to pat any of them on the back when for less than $10 per hunter they can be replaced.

 

[MattB]

I read it on my phone while boarding a plane so I can’t say that I read it closely.

They auction off more than sheep tags…so to point at one species as say “see it works” is kind of disingenuous. They also auction off a deer tag, and I don’t think anyone would say that deer hunting and deer opportunities are getting better or have gotten better since they started.

Can't say that I am surprised.

Focusing on sheep is not disingenuous at all. Anyone who follows mule deer population trends would be aware that numbers across the west have been declining since the 1960's due to changes in forestry practices, fire suppression, drought, predation, etc. Antelope in AZ have demonstrated a similar decline for slightly different reasons (e.g. juniper encroachment on grassland). Then it would come down to a discussion of whether the declines would have been the same or greater but for the habitat improvement and water work done through auction tag proceeds. Some posters continue to pooh-pooh and deflect around the evidence that exists with sheep, there is no point in trying to make a case with deer or antelope.

 

[CorbLand]

Can't say that I am surprised.

Focusing on sheep is not disingenuous at all. Anyone who follows mule deer population trends would be aware that numbers across the west have been declining since the 1960's due to changes in forestry practices, fire suppression, drought, predation, etc. Antelope in AZ have demonstrated a similar decline for slightly different reasons (e.g. juniper encroachment on grassland). Then it would come down to a discussion of whether the declines would have been the same or greater but for the habitat improvement and water work done through auction tag proceeds. Some posters continue to pooh-pooh and deflect around the evidence that exists with sheep, there is no point in trying to make a case with deer or antelope.

Surprised about what? That I read the article quickly? I didn’t say a thing about the money or tags in my post that you replied to but you took it back to money. Two peas in the same pod as far as reading goes?

I guess I don’t look at something as say, well we put 100% in and 33% worked so success. If deer populations have been on the decline for that long, and we are putting more and more money into it each year and not turning the corner, how can you say it’s a success? It could be worse without the funding, but it’s also hard to judge on intentions and not results when it comes to stuff like this.

Back to my original comment. To say that the only people that are against auction tags are only against them because they arent rich is flat wrong and that the vast majority of those that buy them are more interested in the tax write off than what the funding is doing. That was the point of my post, not that the auction tag is wrong or people buying them is wrong. Twist what I said anyway you want. We can agree to disagree and when my theory can be proven wrong, start a thread calling me out, I will video myself saying I was wrong. I actually hope I have to make that video.

 

[realunlucky]

These tags are still available-- just under a different funding mechanism.



Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

 

[Muley Tag]

in the long run, this will be a good decision by AZ.

 

[MuleyFever]

It is disingenuous to imply that these auction tags raise money that would otherwise be unavailable. The money that is gained through auction tags can be easily replaced by increasing the cost of the average hunting license.

I read that Arizona raised 3.2 million on all of their auction tags combined last year. There are ~350,000 hunting licenses sold in the state. It only takes $9 per hunter to replace all that auction revenue.

Say it again for the people in the back.

You wouldn't even have to add the whole $9. The tags can still bring in significant cash in a raffle. You only have to make up the difference.

 

[Steve O]

Say it again for those in the back…the average hunter does jack squat but complain about price hikes. You boys are not the average hunters.

General monies get gobbled up by scum politicians. SHEEP auction monies are earmarked for specific species projects that benefit all species in their general area. Wild sheep are fragile and take special care and there are groups out there that take extra effort to do just that. It’s not a big conspiracy theory it is people who care enough to work harder and get results. They just don’t say “let everyone else pay for it” and do nothing.

You paint with a broad brush and don’t have much information.

 

[MuleyFever]

Say it again for those in the back…the average hunter does jack squat but complain about price hikes.
.

So what. Let them complain. It didn't stop other states from raising prices over the last few years.

 

[realunlucky]

Say it again for those in the back…the average hunter does jack squat but complain about price hikes. You boys are not the average hunters.

General monies get gobbled up by scum politicians. SHEEP auction monies are earmarked for specific species projects that benefit all species in their general area. Wild sheep are fragile and take special care and there are groups out there that take extra effort to do just that. It’s not a big conspiracy theory it is people who care enough to work harder and get results. They just don’t say “let everyone else pay for it” and do nothing.

You paint with a broad brush and don’t have much information.

It'll still be "Sheep Money" in theory there is a real opportunity for the lottery to raise even more money as the price of participation is more reasonable to broader percentage of sportsmen.

No Im not optimistic they will, especially at first.

I will be super interested to see how the organizations that once hosted auction tag sales, shift gears to fully support the lottery ticket sales.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

 

[Steve O]

It'll still be "Sheep Money" in theory there is a real opportunity for the lottery to raise even more money as the price of participation is more reasonable to broader percentage of sportsmen.

No Im not optimistic they will, especially at first.

I will be super interested to see how the organizations that once hosted auction tag sales, shift gears to fully support the lottery ticket sales.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

Yep. AZ residents better step up, not much the rest of us will be able to do under the current system. I used to spend a pile of money in the old Super Raffle but can’t get out there three different times to buy raffle tickets. Won’t be able to do it once this year.

 

[Blackcow]

Better than raising the price of licenses, tags or app fees, would be to implement a state conservation/habitat stamp. Many other states have them. Wouldn’t have to be that much and easier to track.
We used to have a state trout stamp that had to be purchased with a fishing license but was included with a hunt/ fish combo. They could do the same thing with hunting and just roll it into the license, but I think it seems more transparent to have it listed as an individual line item. We sold X amount of stamps and brought in X amount of money, and it goes directly to HPC, along with X amount from raffle tags.