Jimmy John kills potential new state record sheep in NM

[BBob]

Does UT have a rule that you can only have 1 guide and one spotter? I am not up on guide rules but I think I was told that they limit the people. That does nothing to stop the family from going and families tend to be big here.

I'm in AZ and have never actually hunted UT so no idea. Mby @CorbLand knows about UT????

 

[CorbLand]

I'm in AZ and have never actually hunted UT so no idea. Mby @CorbLand knows about UT????

Multi quote doesnt want to work. @MuleyFever

I am not sure of the exact wording or what exactly the law pertains but yes, UT does have a law about the number of paid people you can have supporting you as a hunter. I think its 1 guide, 1 spotter but it might be 2 spotters.

 

[idelkslayer]

It's a great ram and the guy played by the rules that exist at this time so I have nothing against him or his success.

I disagree that we need these types of tags and this style of funding in order to continue efforts for sheep conservation. The money that is generated by these auction tags can be replaced by a combination of raffle tags and simple license fee increases.

Take Idaho as an example, it may be the simplest example because Idaho offers only 1 auction tag and 1 raffle tag. Last year the raffle tag set a record and brought in $315,870, but it averaged $197,000 over the last 6 years. The auction tag record is $320,000, and averaged $206,700 over the same time period. Some years the raffle tag makes more but most years the auction tag makes the most. In fact the raffle tag made more than the auction tag 7 times in the last 20 years.

If you combine the average revenue of each tag you get $ $403,700. In 2023 Idaho had 302,000 hunting license holders. Maybe I'm different than most but I would be more than happy to pay an additional $1.35 for my license each year that could be earmarked for wild sheep conservation. Hell, throw in another $1.00 for mountain goats and round it up to an even $2.50. We already got slapped with a $5.00 depredation fee each year and we don't see any benefit from that.

Other states may be more complicated but I think that a combination of raffle/lottery tags and moderate fee increase could easily replace all the revenue from auction tags. The problem is that organizations like WSF seem to have become de facto lobbyists to perpetuate auction tags for those who can buy their way to the front of the line. If it weren't true they would explore other means to raise money for sheep but instead they stick to the auction tag approach. They are happy to push the narrative that all of us are indebted to a few individuals who are able to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on sheep tags. I think it is disingenuous when simple math shows the buying power of the masses can easily eclipse that of the wealthy few.

Here's a few quotes from WSF CEO Gary Thornton pushing the agenda.

“The fact that a handful of individuals stepped up at these levels to put and keep more wild sheep on the mountain for everyone, and one day put more sheep permits into the public draws, is the definition of paying it forward. That’s the backbone of conservation.”

Do we really believe that the backbone of conservation is a "handful of individuals" paying big bucks for tags? Idaho has fewer sheep today than in 1982 when the Idaho WSF was founded, where are the "more sheep" and "sheep permits into the public draws"? Maybe they have had more success in other states? Nevada probably, where else?

"Without auctioning a few special permits each year, some agencies would have no wild sheep programs, and others would be severely limited as to what they could do.”

This is only true for as long as we allow it to continue instead of creating alternative funding sources. And it is as easy as a couple dollars per hunting license sold.

In the long run, 1 or 2 tags per state makes very little difference in anyone's odds of drawing a tag. The low odds make people apathetic and willing to accept the status quo of auction tags. I just really don't like the disingenuous attitude being pushed that we have no other choice but to continue funding in this way.

 

[KurtR]

It's like deja vu all over again. 2024 version. Same conversation once a year.

2022:
View attachment 749746
View attachment 749747

2023.

View attachment 749743
View attachment 749744

So lets save some time. 2025 I still feel the same way. Use that sheep to milk some more cash for habitat.

 

[cuerro viejo]

Story I hear from a buddy of mine on the $300K trespass paid. The fee was actually $150K and he also paid for the guy who drew the tag for the same hunt for a total of $300K. Story I heard it was just to pass through the public land to get to public behind it. Don't know if true but good on him if he did.

That’s cool, wish I was the other guy that drew the tag. Double lottery win

 

[mtmiller]

So lets save some time. 2025 I still feel the same way. Use that sheep to milk some more cash for habitat.

Dude, we get it. You have stated it three years in a row. Your post was that 100% of auction dollars go to bighorn sheep in SD.

You were wrong ‘22 when you stated it and again in ‘23 and ‘24. Enough of the red herring.

As usual he saying goes, “you are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts”.

 

[TenRing]

It's a great ram and the guy played by the rules that exist at this time so I have nothing against him or his success.

I disagree that we need these types of tags and this style of funding in order to continue efforts for sheep conservation. The money that is generated by these auction tags can be replaced by a combination of raffle tags and simple license fee increases.

Take Idaho as an example, it may be the simplest example because Idaho offers only 1 auction tag and 1 raffle tag. Last year the raffle tag set a record and brought in $315,870, but it averaged $197,000 over the last 6 years. The auction tag record is $320,000, and averaged $206,700 over the same time period. Some years the raffle tag makes more but most years the auction tag makes the most. In fact the raffle tag made more than the auction tag 7 times in the last 20 years.

If you combine the average revenue of each tag you get $ $403,700. In 2023 Idaho had 302,000 hunting license holders. Maybe I'm different than most but I would be more than happy to pay an additional $1.35 for my license each year that could be earmarked for wild sheep conservation. Hell, throw in another $1.00 for mountain goats and round it up to an even $2.50. We already got slapped with a $5.00 depredation fee each year and we don't see any benefit from that.

Other states may be more complicated but I think that a combination of raffle/lottery tags and moderate fee increase could easily replace all the revenue from auction tags. The problem is that organizations like WSF seem to have become de facto lobbyists to perpetuate auction tags for those who can buy their way to the front of the line. If it weren't true they would explore other means to raise money for sheep but instead they stick to the auction tag approach. They are happy to push the narrative that all of us are indebted to a few individuals who are able to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on sheep tags. I think it is disingenuous when simple math shows the buying power of the masses can easily eclipse that of the wealthy few.

Here's a few quotes from WSF CEO Gary Thornton pushing the agenda.

“The fact that a handful of individuals stepped up at these levels to put and keep more wild sheep on the mountain for everyone, and one day put more sheep permits into the public draws, is the definition of paying it forward. That’s the backbone of conservation.”

Do we really believe that the backbone of conservation is a "handful of individuals" paying big bucks for tags? Idaho has fewer sheep today than in 1982 when the Idaho WSF was founded, where are the "more sheep" and "sheep permits into the public draws"? Maybe they have had more success in other states? Nevada probably, where else?

"Without auctioning a few special permits each year, some agencies would have no wild sheep programs, and others would be severely limited as to what they could do.”

This is only true for as long as we allow it to continue instead of creating alternative funding sources. And it is as easy as a couple dollars per hunting license sold.

In the long run, 1 or 2 tags per state makes very little difference in anyone's odds of drawing a tag. The low odds make people apathetic and willing to accept the status quo of auction tags. I just really don't like the disingenuous attitude being pushed that we have no other choice but to continue funding in this way.

Majority, if not all, western states that offer auction tags have a raffle/draw version of the same tag. In Nevada the draw funds do not exceed the auction funds.

I am all for both! Let’s auction & raffle off a couple animals to raise a ton of money. I’d be wary of adding any more tag fees for conservation unless the mechanism and wording is flawless. The additional fee cannot be used for anything outside of the same heritage/habitat/conservation grant fund that the auction/raffle funds are allocated.

 

[KurtR]

Dude, we get it. You have stated it three years in a row. Your post was that 100% of auction dollars go to bighorn sheep in SD.

You were wrong ‘22 when you stated it and again in ‘23 and ‘24. Enough of the red herring.

As usual he saying goes, “you are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts”.

I was wrong.

But is it a fact with out that auction tag would we even have sheep here? They are a niche thing here if they were gone no one would really care. Ask 1000 residents would you rather have sheep or have more habitat and more land to hunt deer, waterfowl and pheasants/grouse. 9 license were available this year. So that $2520.00 generated in tag fees isnt funding much for sheep. The auction tag this year alone brought in $197,500.00. It would take 78 years of license sales to match that one tag. Since 2018 the ONE tag has brought in $1,247,700. Thats alot of money to be used for not just sheep. Is the juice worth the squeeze most Sodak residents would think so. Residents are the only ones loosing the chance at that one tag so it really has no effect on any one other than the people who live here.

23-$161,200
22-$150,000
21-$249,000
20-$312,000
19&18- $89,000

 

[HuntHarder]

I was wrong.

But is it a fact with out that auction tag would we even have sheep here? They are a niche thing here if they were gone no one would really care. Ask 1000 residents would you rather have sheep or have more habitat and more land to hunt deer, waterfowl and pheasants/grouse. 9 license were available this year. So that $2520.00 generated in tag fees isnt funding much for sheep. The auction tag this year alone brought in $197,500.00. It would take 78 years of license sales to match that one tag. Since 2018 the ONE tag has brought in $1,247,700. Thats alot of money to be used for not just sheep. Is the juice worth the squeeze most Sodak residents would think so. Residents are the only ones loosing the chance at that one tag so it really has no effect on any one other than the people who live here.

23-$161,200
22-$150,000
21-$249,000
20-$312,000
19&18- $89,000

Have they voted on this? Curious how you know this?

 

[KurtR]

Have they voted on this? Curious how you know this?

Living here for 45 years multiple forum discussions. You get a pretty good feel for it. An animal that is once in a lifetime to hunt that is not self sustaining has a huge budget just to keep around. Or animals you can hunt every year which one do you think the majority of people would want time and money put into.

 

[WCB]

Guys are really getting their panties in a bunch over the odd tag here and there making large amounts of money for the species? Not sure how it even registers in your daily life to cry about such dumb sh!t.

Will I ever get to sheep hunt?....probably not unless I draw a tag or win a raffle. Will adding a handful of tags over all the the mix where I still have to by another raffle ticket move the needle at all on my overall odds. Not a chance.

 

[idelkslayer]

Majority, if not all, western states that offer auction tags have a raffle/draw version of the same tag. In Nevada the draw funds do not exceed the auction funds.

I am all for both! Let’s auction & raffle off a couple animals to raise a ton of money. I’d be wary of adding any more tag fees for conservation unless the mechanism and wording is flawless. The additional fee cannot be used for anything outside of the same heritage/habitat/conservation grant fund that the auction/raffle funds are allocated.

Why have raffle/lottery tags at all? If the auction consistently brings in more money, then just have 2 auction tags rather than 1 auction and 1 raffle. My perception is that the raffle tags exists to make the serfs feel as though they also have a chance at the opportunity normally afforded only by the wealthy auction tag. It quells the masses so the big wigs can continue to have their cake and eat it too.

And make no mistake that many of the auction winners are not satisfied with only having one or two tags for bighorns available in each state. Doug Sayer, of "we knew it would be a gunfight" fame, has purchased the Idaho auction tag 4 or 5 times and he has been actively campaigning for increasing the number of auction tags for well over a decade now, and used his political connections to push two Idaho Fish and Game commissioners from their positions because they opposed him.

As far as wording in any new fee structure, I think that is easy enough to do. As I mentioned, Idaho added a $5 fee that everyone who purchases a hunting license has to pay. That money is earmarked for the sole use of depredation payments to landowners. Other states have "conservation stamps" that every hunter is required to buy no matter what they are hunting. I propose a Sheep and Mtn. Goat conservation stamp that would be a required purchase with a hunting license.

 

[TenRing]

Why have raffle/lottery tags at all? If the auction consistently brings in more money, then just have 2 auction tags rather than 1 auction and 1 raffle. My perception is that the raffle tags exists to make the serfs feel as though they also have a chance at the opportunity normally afforded only by the wealthy auction tag. It quells the masses so the big wigs can continue to have their cake and eat it too.

And make no mistake that many of the auction winners are not satisfied with only having one or two tags for bighorns available in each state. Doug Sayer, of "we knew it would be a gunfight" fame, has purchased the Idaho auction tag 4 or 5 times and he has been actively campaigning for increasing the number of auction tags for well over a decade now, and used his political connections to push two Idaho Fish and Game commissioners from their positions because they opposed him.

As far as wording in any new fee structure, I think that is easy enough to do. As I mentioned, Idaho added a $5 fee that everyone who purchases a hunting license has to pay. That money is earmarked for the sole use of depredation payments to landowners. Other states have "conservation stamps" that every hunter is required to buy no matter what they are hunting. I propose a Sheep and Mtn. Goat conservation stamp that would be a required purchase with a hunting license.

Yes, I’m sure the raffle tags were created to appease the masses. Do I partake, absolutely. Do I get upset I can’t afford a gov tag, not at all.

Here in NV we have 2 auction tags and 1 raffle tag for 4 different species, muley, Elk, Antelope and Desert sheep. Last year the the Sheep raffle tag raised $229,875 (2024 numbers haven’t been released) and this year the two auction tags raised $305,000 combined. I don’t think getting rid of the raffle tag would be wise as it would be hard to match that 229k in an auction. But on the flip side matching that 305k with more raffle tags won’t happen either.

I would be down for adding an increase fee on the application/license/stamp if the funds go to the same place, not the dept budget. But IMO throwing out auction tags because they aren’t fair is a bit hypocritical in this country.

 

[TheTone]

Take Idaho as an example, it may be the simplest example because Idaho offers only 1 auction tag and 1 raffle tag. Last year the raffle tag set a record and brought in $315,870, but it averaged $197,000 over the last 6 years. The auction tag record is $320,000, and averaged $206,700 over the same time period. Some years the raffle tag makes more but most years the auction tag makes the most. In fact the raffle tag made more than the auction tag 7 times in the last 20 years.

this is 100% related to the fact the Idaho auction tag isn’t valid in one particular unit every other year. The years you can hunt there it sells for big money. Then the rich guy hires the outfitter who posse hunts the heck out of some poor old ram. Most times it has been bought by one family, they’ve killed a pile of rams there. He also tried to push through Idaho selling auction tags for other species as well but that got him too much bad publicity



The fact that the tag sells for such variation in prices should show right away it’s about killing a big ram and not just about helping pay for sheep conservation

 

[idelkslayer]

Yes, I’m sure the raffle tags were created to appease the masses. Do I partake, absolutely. Do I get upset I can’t afford a gov tag, not at all.

Here in NV we have 2 auction tags and 1 raffle tag. Last year the raffle tag raised $229,875 (2024 numbers haven’t been released) and this year the two auction tags raised $305,000 combined. I don’t think getting rid of the raffle tag would be wise as it would be hard to match that 229k in an auction. But on the flip side matching that 305k with more raffle tags won’t happen either.

I would be down for adding an increase fee on the application/license/stamp if the funds go to the same place, not the dept budget. But throwing out auction tags because they aren’t fair is hypocritical in this country.

I also don't get upset about it, I'm not even concerned about the "fairness" of it. I don't even think that it is an undemocratic method of allocating tags because, after all, it was a democratic process that decided to allocate tags in this way. I do think it was a mistake and it is possible to raise the money in ways that don't create a separate class.

I think there are two questions to answer in terms of auction tags and wildlife as a public trust.

1. Are auction tags the best way to help the resource?
2. Do auction tags provide the most benefit to the largest number of beneficiaries?

I think the answer to question 1 is yes if general hunting public is unwilling to fork over a few extra dollars every year for a species they may never hunt. The answer is no, if sportsmen accept a small fee increase or increase participation in raffle tags.

The answer to question 2 can be yes if the money from auction tags has in fact put more sheep on the mountain and therefore more tags in the general pool as Gary Thornton claims. In that case, provide the proof of a direct correlation between auction funds and increased tag numbers. Otherwise, it is just an unverifiable claim. However, if our goal is to provide the opportunity to hunt bighorn sheep to as many people as possible then I think auction tags fail unless you place limits on how many times a person can win the tag. As I noted above, Idaho's tag has gone to the same person 4-5 times in the last 20 years (and that's just the one guy I know of, there are probably more repeat buyers) . If allocated differently we could have provided opportunity for 4 or more other people to enjoy the resource. And again I would refer back to question 1, if we can provide the same amount of $ in other ways, then the value of auctions to answer question 2 is moot.

I'm not sure why it would be hypocritical in your opinion to eliminate auction tags. What principle is violated if those tags are eliminated?

 

[KurtR]

Why have raffle/lottery tags at all? If the auction consistently brings in more money, then just have 2 auction tags rather than 1 auction and 1 raffle. My perception is that the raffle tags exists to make the serfs feel as though they also have a chance at the opportunity normally afforded only by the wealthy auction tag. It quells the masses so the big wigs can continue to have their cake and eat it too.

And make no mistake that many of the auction winners are not satisfied with only having one or two tags for bighorns available in each state. Doug Sayer, of "we knew it would be a gunfight" fame, has purchased the Idaho auction tag 4 or 5 times and he has been actively campaigning for increasing the number of auction tags for well over a decade now, and used his political connections to push two Idaho Fish and Game commissioners from their positions because they opposed him.

As far as wording in any new fee structure, I think that is easy enough to do. As I mentioned, Idaho added a $5 fee that everyone who purchases a hunting license has to pay. That money is earmarked for the sole use of depredation payments to landowners. Other states have "conservation stamps" that every hunter is required to buy no matter what they are hunting. I propose a Sheep and Mtn. Goat conservation stamp that would be a required purchase with a hunting license.

If that’s the case everyone should have to purchase a federal waterfowl stamp. If we’re going to force people to pay for stuff why do just the sheep get it?

 

[Andrew12gauge]

Interesting insight into auction(governor) tags on the meateater podcast this week. 36 governor tags have gone to 3 individuals. I know, everybody can bid, but the reality is your average Joe doesn’t have the jingle to bid with the billionaires and yea I know he just needs to work harder and be a billionaire too. All these tags are is a set aside for the ultra rich to take the cream of the crop from our big game herds throughout the west, and I personally hope more states go the way of Arizona.

 

[PMcGee]

I honestly wonder if its more of a scare tactic and they really dont check. I dont see how pinging off a cell tower would work but I am far from an expert. Would probably have to go all the way into Flagstaff to be certain you get an AZ tower.

Eldora speedway does something similar with their 50/50 when they race. You can buy tickets from their website but you must be in Ohio. I’ve tried from home and it won’t let you buy them. Cross the Ohio boarder and you’re good.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Steve O]

Interesting insight into auction(governor) tags on the meateater podcast this week. 36 governor tags have gone to 3 individuals. I know, everybody can bid, but the reality is your average Joe doesn’t have the jingle to bid with the billionaires and yea I know he just needs to work harder and be a billionaire too. All these tags are is a set aside for the ultra rich to take the cream of the crop from our big game herds throughout the west, and I personally hope more states go the way of Arizona.

That’s BS. Or he is talking about a certain state or two. Just at the Sheep Show this year JJ only bought two of the many available. I was sitting 6’ from the guy who was in on the NM tag to $440,000. His wife made him stop I’ve talked to over a dozen guys personally who have bought Governors tags in the last few years. JJ is not one of them, I’ve not seen him at an auction, he’s got a few guides that bid for him.

Meateater is a much bigger problem than JJ…what has he given back?

 

[KurtR]

Eldora speedway does something similar with their 50/50 when they race. You can buy tickets from their website but you must be in Ohio. I’ve tried from home and it won’t let you buy them. Cross the Ohio boarder and you’re good.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I can honestly say i never thought eldora would ever be talked about here haha. That place rocks