Not surprised that some who are asking for proof that the deployment of auction tags proceeds improves hunter opportunity in defense of their position on auction tags haven’t taken the time to click on a link to understand how those funds have been used in the past.
Does anyone have the “so you’re telling me there’s a chance?” meme from “Dumb and Dumber” they can insert here?
I am pretty sure they did the exact same thing last year. I will check my email tomorrow when I am at a computer.
Correct. This is not the first time the dept has done this sort of draw. The emails says it is discretionary and employed when they have a funding gap that needs to be addressed.
If they did it last year and the year before. I think it would be a stretch to think it is in anyway connected to the auction tag thing going on now.
Like I said, let a C4 org auction one off and if it fetches the same amount, I will eat my crow. I hope I have to.
They’ve done it a few times before, more than once a year I think. I think the frequency has been increasing and will continue too.
It looks like they have done it the past 3 years, and it suggests a funding gap which is unfortunate.
Some SCI auctions go for astronomical amounts and you can very rarely write those off (and the ones you can aren’t big ticket items). I haven’t been able to write any off because the money, despite going to a non-profit, is usually less than the sticker price associated with the trip itself if you were to just pay for it.
Um, nope. You're wrong on this one. Anyone who supports Ferrari in F1 or WEC and buys Ferrari gear is helping fund the machine. They make hundreds of millions of dollars off of those supporters, 99.9% of whom will never own a Ferrari. They absolutely play a part, no different than the average Joe buying points and gear that benefits P-R funds. How many of those regular license sales does it take to add up to ONE of these auction tags? Is it these guys buying the tags that's the issue? Or the douchebag outfitters that is the issue? I would venture it's the latter far more than the first. Adding ONE tag back into the general pool isn't going to change draw odds in the least, people are still going to complain about it. If there's one thing that sportsmen are good at, it's complaining that someone does something different than them so they must suck.
Sure, go right ahead. In Idaho, the last time they tried raising tag prices by $5 everyone raised immortal hell about how the state was screwing them. You overestimate the average sportsman's willingness to pay more for a license or tag.
But there are alternatives to the people who make the decisions. Most politicians/political appointees are more concerned about re-election/re-appointment than doing the unpopular thing even when it is the right thing.
What am I missing here? I've read every post in this thread twice at this point and outside of desert bighorns, there's not a convincing argument that auction tags have done anything to grow the pie for general tags.
There are more desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep tags, there are more elk tags (although my sense is there is not much more habitat that AZGFD wants them to expand into so this has an upper bound), and deer and antelope tags have been declining. It isn’t really possible to tie increased tags directly to dollars raised, so you are not likely to find a convincing argument. My sense is if people will take the time to see what the dollars are being used for and then ask themselves if they believe those activities are likely to help grow herds or help protect the resource on the downside (ie. partially mitigate the impact of drought), they can make an informed decision as to the merits of auction tags.
By "informed decision" you mean agree with you. LOL Give it a rest bud, you aren't gonna convince anyone. Time will tell. If in 5 years, AZGFD has a funding shortfall of 2 million dollars, you can say I told you so. If they do not, you are gonna have to eat Raven.
