Governor Tags - Deer, Elk, etc.

[TimberRunner]

Money drives everything. I get both sides, but it's big dollars and helps maintain.

 

[Trial153]

Sorry state of affairs when the best people can come up in the way of solutions to multifaceted problems is regurgitated nothing more than right vs left drivel.


question: if a handful of tags at auction is the answer to our funding problems, why are we limiting it to a handful?
Why not let the market decide and drive the price of all tags? Maybe we’re missing an opportunity here.

 

[PMcGee]

I would argue the general public is neutral on a 1/8th % tax. I would also argue the general public would be appalled to learn rich people can buy once in a lifetime tags. Either we police ourselves as hunters or lose to antis when they realize what angle to attack from.

Also if your against a 1/8 % tax for conservation, you're truly just a horrible person and I hope you're not my fellow American.

I would argue the general public would be all for the amount of money raised for conservation through these auctions. I highly doubt every american that doesn’t hunt is going to be for a tax that has no bearing on their everyday life. No I’m not for a conservation tax. I’ll choose when and where I’ll spend my money on conservation not the government. If that makes me a horrible person to you so be it.

 

[Chrisamx]

I think it’s fine if it’s for 1 tag. It’s a great amount of money that goes towards conservation. More money than if it was a raffle. Like in Colorado. We have an auction for a Rocky sheep tag and a raffle tag. So the normal guy can buy a ticket or a bunch if they want to be in the raffle. But for the auction tag it can sell for 450,000 dollars. That’s a lot of cash that goes into conservation

But Fish and Game sees this and they want more of it. The more people are willing to pay helps to push our American Heritage out of reach for more and more people.

 

[idelkslayer]

Conservation Permits: A History of Impacting Wild Sheep Conservation

In 1980, a new strategy to fund wild sheep conservation emerged in Wyoming. The state auctioned off a single bighorn sheep hunting permit, raising $23,000—a staggering sum at the time. Fast forward to today, and the concept has reached unprecedented heights. The sale of New Mexico's bighorn...

www.wildsheepfoundation.org

That article only talks about how much money is raised and gives only one example of how many more sheep or sheep tags have become available as a result.
""More dollars equals more sheep on the mountain. More sheep on the mountain equals more opportunity for all," Thornton said."
This is the lie that we are told so that we tolerate the auction scheme. WSF is a lobby whose goal is to perpetuate the auction tag system so their richest members continue to have access to tags on a regular basis that most hunters will never get to draw.

The Idaho example:
Idaho Wild Sheep Foundation founded in 1985
First year Idaho offered an auction tag for Bighorn Sheep - 1988
Idaho Wild Sheep Population 1990 ~5,000; 203 Tags available; Overall drawing odds 1:6
Idaho Wild Sheep Population 2015 ~2,800; 89 Tags available; Overall drawing odds 1:27
Idaho Wild Sheep Population 2023 ~3,400; 96 Tags available; Overall drawing odds 1:44

WSF is manipulating hunters by constantly beating the drum that we need the auction tags so they can put sheep on the mountain for the rest of us. I don't think their claim stands up to scrutiny, at least in Idaho. Instead, they perpetuate the auction system which guarantees their wealthiest members a tag while the opportunity continues to shrink for everyone else.

The most mystifying thing on this entire forum, is watching a tiny fraction of us pro-freedom, pro-liberty, pro-capitalist, gun owning, hard working people, turn into absolutely raving marxist lunatics when it comes to governor tags or landowner tags. Absolutely unhinged, cracker-culture hatred of "the rich", completely unable to see how we all get more tag opportunities through the conservation work that comes from those systems.

I don't think it is anti capitalist to question the effectiveness of auction tags given the example I provided above. In the current system I don't have a problem with the rich guy who participates in the auction and buys the tag. It's his money and he isn't breaking any rules. I don't begrudge him his success no matter how jealous I am. It also isn't anti-capitalist to suggest alternative means of funding sheep conservation. Idaho could replace the auction tag revenue by charging a mere $1 extra on every hunting license sold.

 

[nm.otter]

Closing prices were mostly what I expected, and not totally out of line with top dollar private land tags. The Pronghorn and Coues surprised me a bit.

 

[cuerro viejo]

That article only talks about how much money is raised and gives only one example of how many more sheep or sheep tags have become available as a result.
""More dollars equals more sheep on the mountain. More sheep on the mountain equals more opportunity for all," Thornton said."
This is the lie that we are told so that we tolerate the auction scheme. WSF is a lobby whose goal is to perpetuate the auction tag system so their richest members continue to have access to tags on a regular basis that most hunters will never get to draw.

The Idaho example:
Idaho Wild Sheep Foundation founded in 1985
First year Idaho offered an auction tag for Bighorn Sheep - 1988
Idaho Wild Sheep Population 1990 ~5,000; 203 Tags available; Overall drawing odds 1:6
Idaho Wild Sheep Population 2015 ~2,800; 89 Tags available; Overall drawing odds 1:27
Idaho Wild Sheep Population 2023 ~3,400; 96 Tags available; Overall drawing odds 1:44

WSF is manipulating hunters by constantly beating the drum that we need the auction tags so they can put sheep on the mountain for the rest of us. I don't think their claim stands up to scrutiny, at least in Idaho. Instead, they perpetuate the auction system which guarantees their wealthiest members a tag while the opportunity continues to shrink for everyone else.


I don't think it is anti capitalist to question the effectiveness of auction tags given the example I provided above. In the current system I don't have a problem with the rich guy who participates in the auction and buys the tag. It's his money and he isn't breaking any rules. I don't begrudge him his success no matter how jealous I am. It also isn't anti-capitalist to suggest alternative means of funding sheep conservation. Idaho could replace the auction tag revenue by charging a mere $1 extra on every hunting license sold.

how and why did the most premier RMBH unit become established and where did the money from that relocation come from?

Also where has every Desert Sheep introduction originated from in NM and how is that breeding facility funded?

Even with massive disease break outs, sheep are still being established, re-established and supplemented through out the state.

So a better question is what would the NM DBHS and RMBHS look like with out the influx of Gov tag money?

There is also the other side that many people don’t talk about… those Gov holders are also the same ones writing million checks for fencing project, Kuiu direct, grazing lease buy outs etc. why do you think they are willing to spend no strings attached money to sheep conservation projects

The true con is the one trying to pursued public opinion against the Millions of dollars going to Sheep conservation projects that are holding a fragile line. Personally I’m glad there is a incentive program like the Gov tag that funnel way more money then license sales alone

 

[Hide Hunter]

how and why did the most premier RMBH unit become established and where did the money from that relocation come from?

Also where has every Desert Sheep introduction originated from in NM and how is that breeding facility funded?

Even with massive disease break outs, sheep are still being established, re-established and supplemented through out the state.

So a better question is what would the NM DBHS and RMBHS look like with out the influx of Gov tag money?

There is also the other side that many people don’t talk about… those Gov holders are also the same ones writing million checks for fencing project, Kuiu direct, grazing lease buy outs etc. why do you think they are willing to spend no strings attached money to sheep conservation projects

The true con is the one trying to pursued public opinion against the Millions of dollars going to Sheep conservation projects that are holding a fragile line. Personally I’m glad there is a incentive program like the Gov tag that funnel way more money then license sales alone

I would rather focus on getting a more consistent funding source established for these species than having to rely on a filthy rich guy to do it out of the kindness of his heart. I can won't beg the rich for a chance to lick up the crumbs left after he's competed his sheep slam.

 

[realunlucky]

When hunters banned together to save America's deer and elk from near extinction not a single tag was auctioned off to raise money "to put more critters on the mountain". To say without governor tags all is lost goes against proven history.

To much emphasis now days is put on chasing the banquet dollar rather than funding models that are long lasting. To many hands get a piece of the pie before those funds hit the ground. Entire organization's built solely around auctioning tags. When you can build a business with full time staff by auctioning off tags something has gone by the way side.

 

[supersonic_g&t]

If the people that are against hunting have their way, then these tags will be gone too. I think their plan is to funnel all pro hunting money to conservation, while all their money goes to banning hunting - then someone else can worry about conservation.

Since money from these auction tags are brought in through hunting, I think a large part of it should go to securing our future hunting rights. Part of that would be spreading the conservation cost out to the rest of the population that care so deeply about wolves...etc. Many hunters can get behind the idea of "more sheep on the mountain", but I think all would have some buy in to "part of this money is fighting to make sure your grandkids have the rights and opportunity to hunt"

 

[fulldraw1972]

However, I have personally seen landowner tags and farmers cornfields become commodities that go to the highest bidder, and push out anyone who doesn't have the money. Doctors and lawyers and such from Denver offering $40,000/year to waterfowl hunt in eastern CO, or billionaires from WY buying landowner tags in Nebraska for $90,000, and it prices everyone else out. Can't blame the farmers though, I'd probably do the same thing in their position. This is all becoming common and normalized.

Nebraska land owner tags are not transferable.

 

[cuerro viejo]

I would rather focus on getting a more consistent funding source established for these species than having to rely on a filthy rich guy to do it out of the kindness of his heart. I can won't beg the rich for a chance to lick up the crumbs left after he's competed his sheep slam.

We’ll get too it because it hasn’t happened yet, no conservation or state agency has found an acceptable way to provide the same supplemental funding.

NM raffles brought in 200k
NM auctions brought in 1.5 mil

Roughly 45 ram sheep tags issued last year… that’s roughy $37k per tag which was funded by 4 Gov tags.

Resident ram sheep tags licensing sales brought in roughly $6400, the outfitter/NR tags brought in rough total of 12k… so whopping total of 19k…. That’s a shortage of over 1.6 million when compared to gov tag funding.

 

[PMcGee]

When hunters banned together to save America's deer and elk from near extinction not a single tag was auctioned off to raise money "to put more critters on the mountain". To say without governor tags all is lost goes against proven history.

To much emphasis now days is put on chasing the banquet dollar rather than funding models that are long lasting. To many hands get a piece of the pie before those funds hit the ground. Entire organization's built solely around auctioning tags. When you can build a business with full time staff by auctioning off tags something has gone by the way side.

I don’t know if that’s a fair comparison to wild sheep. Deer and elk were obviously over hunted. Regulations change that and their numbers rebounded. Sheep were over hunted but they also have mass die offs do to diseases. I’m all for 15 tags being auctioned off to help combat that and help with relocating animals. 85 to 100 percent of those auction proceeds go back to conservation. I’m okay with those numbers.

 

[Hide Hunter]

We’ll get too it because it hasn’t happened yet, no conservation or state agency has found an acceptable way to provide the same supplemental funding.

NM raffles brought in 200k
NM auctions brought in 1.5 mil

Roughly 45 ram sheep tags issued last year… that’s roughy $37k per tag which was funded by 4 Gov tags.

Resident ram sheep tags licensing sales brought in roughly $6400, the outfitter/NR tags brought in rough total of 12k… so whopping total of 19k…. That’s a shortage of over 1.6 million when compared to gov tag funding.

Missouri's conservation sales tax brings in $100 million annually. Seems like the would easily bridge that gap.

 

[cuerro viejo]

Missouri's conservation sales tax brings in $100 million annually. Seems like the would easily bridge that gap.

And very broad in usage. Buy land, maintain forest, etc

But

Missouri already has a significantly lower over tax burden then NM.

So now you want to add more taxes to an already tax high state. Good luck with the voters. With that said you are once again still relying on the Rich to fund the majority, while also adding in more burden to lessor income levels

 

[realunlucky]

I don’t know if that’s a fair comparison to wild sheep. Deer and elk were obviously over hunted. Regulations change that and their numbers rebounded. Sheep were over hunted but they also have mass die offs do to diseases. I’m all for 15 tags being auctioned off to help combat that and help with relocating animals. 85 to 100 percent of those auction proceeds go back to conservation. I’m okay with those numbers.

Guess we'll see if Arizona implodes without auction tags, I'll bet they'll still find a way to keep sheep on the mountain.

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

 

[Weldor]

They always had both until last year, AZ could have twice the elk it has if the land owners were allowed to make a little revenue off them. Instead they’re murdered on an industrial scale in any unit that doesn’t have national forest.

What landowners, most of the state is public land.

 

[Hide Hunter]

Guess we'll see if Arizona implodes without auction tags, I'll bet they'll still find a way to keep sheep on the mountain.

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

No obviously all of the sheep will die since rich people can't buy tags.

 

[Weldor]

No dog in this fight. I would like to see full disclosure on where the money goes. Does it go to administration or conservation? Full accountability of every dollar, then we can have a good conversation.

 

[Hide Hunter]

And very broad in usage. Buy land, maintain forest, etc

But

Missouri already has a significantly lower over tax burden then NM.

So now you want to add more taxes to an already tax high state. Good luck with the voters. With that said you are once again still relying on the Rich to fund the majority, while also adding in more burden to lessor income levels

The missouri tax works out to $16 per person annually. Sales taxes are regressive. So I would very much support a progressive tax that would target the rich and still bring the same income. My guess is you will hate any tax that targets the rich based on your other stances.