NV auction tags conflict? NDOW chairman is in the pic? Raffle these tags, not auction!

[TX_Diver]

I’d be more suspicious if he was in a pic with a raffle tag winner.

 

[j_volt]

 

[cuerro viejo]

How is that a conflict of interest? It’s an auction tag, highest bidder win’s. Proceeds go directly back to conservative

Embarrassing that crap like this gets posted on Rokslide.

 

[NVUplandHunter]

Of the 4 guys in the disgusting picture, which one are you?

Too much to ask that a political appointee (commissioner) should not be too cozy with the auction tag he authorized?

not a one of them. never even applied for sheep. nice try though.

and yes it is too much to ask. someone with a bigger pocket book can come in and out bid him so who cares? he paid for it so why does it matter?

again, you are crying because you cant pay to play. get over it.

 

[CorbLand]

not a one of them. never even applied for sheep. nice try though.

and yes it is too much to ask. someone with a bigger pocket book can come in and out bid him so who cares? he paid for it so why does it matter?

again, you are crying because you cant pay to play. get over it.

I dont necessarily agree with OP but who cares? Well, animals are held in trust by the state for the people of that state. That means that everyone in that state has a vested interest in those animals. These tags take an animal from everyone in that state and give it to one person and that person only got that because of their ability to pay for it. In these cases, large sums of money.

To put this in context that more people deal with. This is the equivalent of the State using tax payer funds to build a road, then closing the road to anyone that has a tax bracket lower than X and saying these people pay more in taxes, therefore they are more deserving of using this road.

Pay to play works when its private entity/person to private entity/person. It does not work when its private entity/person to public entity/person.

 

[cuerro viejo]

I dont necessarily agree with OP but who cares? Well, animals are held in trust by the state for the people of that state. That means that everyone in that state has a vested interest in those animals. These tags take an animal from everyone in that state and give it to one person and that person only got that because of their ability to pay for it. In these cases, large sums of money.

To put this in context that more people deal with. This is the equivalent of the State using tax payer funds to build a road, then closing the road to anyone that has a tax bracket lower than X and saying these people pay more in taxes, therefore they are more deserving of using this road.

Pay to play works when its private entity/person to private entity/person. It does not work when its private entity/person to public entity/person.

While you make a simple point about animals in trust, the same thing can be said for states that sell preferential treatment via preference points. Not everyone can afford to buy preferential treatment in multiple states or even their own via purchasing points every year, but those points fund wildlife even though at a lessor dollar to dollar ratio then auction tags

End of the day, it’s a minute fraction of a percentage of tags that goes to action. We can argue different fundraising avenues but the overall theme is a minute percentage of tags out side a normal draw fund a large chunk of conservation.

 

[CorbLand]

While you make a simple point about animals in trust, the same thing can be said for states that sell preferential treatment via preference points. Not everyone can afford to buy preferential treatment in multiple states or even their own via purchasing points every year, but those points fund wildlife even though at a lessor dollar to dollar ratio then auction tags

End of the day, it’s a minute fraction of a percentage of tags that goes to action. We can argue different fundraising avenues but the overall theme is a minute percentage of tags out side a normal draw fund a large chunk of conservation.

Yes, that arguement could be made. Although, I think it is harder to say someone cannot find the ~100 dollars it takes to apply as a resident in their state versus ~100,000 plus that these tags go for. Then an argument could be made that all tags should be issued via auction.

I agree with you on that its a small number of tags and they raise a large amount of funds. I am very interested to see how the raffle tag goes in Arizona and the funds it raises. I am just saying, if you cant understand why people care and your only argument is people are jealous...well your not thinking very hard.

At this point, I think it should be pretty much general knowledge that I ******* despise point systems.

 

[cuerro viejo]

Yes, that arguement could be made. Although, I think it is harder to say someone cannot find the ~100 dollars it takes to apply as a resident in their state versus ~100,000 plus that these tags go for. Then an argument could be made that all tags should be issued via auction.

I agree with you on that its a small number of tags and they raise a large amount of funds. I am very interested to see how the raffle tag goes in Arizona and the funds it raises. I am just saying, if you cant understand why people care and your only argument is people are jealous...well your not thinking very hard.

At this point, I think it should be pretty much general knowledge that I ******* despise point systems.

lol, I’m on that exact same page on points,

 

[Steve O]

Wyoming Super tag has raised over 12 million since 2013, 1.5 Million last this year alone. Don't have much time to look into the rest right now. There could be tweaks in every state to make up for the lost auction revenue, easily. And no offense taken, but right back at you with the comparison to the defund the police movement. Very confused by that comparison. Not even in the same realm. Bottom line is I dont support trophy OIL species going to the highest bidder. Neither did the very people who are responsible for the fact that we have these opportunities in the first place. The creation of the North American model of Wildlife conservation was to, in part, prohibit such things.

Just don’t do it like AZ did. It’s great for the residents but once again horrible for the species it is supposed to raise money for. In AZ you have to be present in the state to buy the tickets. I love AZ, I hope to retire in AZ, but I can’t afford 4 trips out there in 6 months to buy raffle tickets they way they have things spread out. Stupid. I e only been able to participate in one segment of the raffle since that ignorant change.

Wyoming does a fine job, I can buy all the SuperTag tockets I want from the comfort of my crummy Midwest home.

 

[def90]

Yeah.. what conflict of interest? Did the guy stop the auction as soon as his supposed buddy put in the highest bid or something?

I sense some butt hurt.

And a radfle wouldn't bring anywhere near as much money if the goal is to make as much money as possible.

 

[OMB]

While you make a simple point about animals in trust, the same thing can be said for states that sell preferential treatment via preference points. Not everyone can afford to buy preferential treatment in multiple states or even their own via purchasing points every year, but those points fund wildlife even though at a lessor dollar to dollar ratio then auction tags

End of the day, it’s a minute fraction of a percentage of tags that goes to action. We can argue different fundraising avenues but the overall theme is a minute percentage of tags out side a normal draw fund a large chunk of conservation.

I don't really care that much one way or the other on auction tags, but I'd like to see tangible results. We've seen some huge numbers in the last few years, like Jimmy John paying $600k to shoot a 208" RMBH in New Mexico, so I'm willing to let it play out over the next 10 years and see how how much conservation it pays for.

That being said, the data shows there's less overall opportunity across the board for the most part, despite the huge numbers on the auction tags. I'd view somebody like JJ in a more positive light if they dropped a more significant wad buying out domestic sheep leases/operations instead of paying a million bucks a year to have an infantry battalion walk him into a state record every year.

 

[wapitibob]

JJ bought a few miles of fencing in NM for a Sheep underpass, and bought a MT ranchers domestic sheep herd, replacing it with cattle to provide some protection for wild Sheep in the area. All out of his pocket with no tags attached.

 

[cuerro viejo]

I don't really care that much one way or the other on auction tags, but I'd like to see tangible results. We've seen some huge numbers in the last few years, like Jimmy John paying $600k to shoot a 208" RMBH in New Mexico, so I'm willing to let it play out over the next 10 years and see how how much conservation it pays for.

That being said, the data shows there's less overall opportunity across the board for the most part, despite the huge numbers on the auction tags. I'd view somebody like JJ in a more positive light if they dropped a more significant wad buying out domestic sheep leases/operations instead of paying a million bucks a year to have an infantry battalion walk him into a state record every year.

Push for a tag to go to grazing leases buy out then. Beauty of the auction tags is the revenue spend is better tracked, accounted for and exponentially more transparent then for PP or even license fees.

I have never personally consider or gauged someone on how they spent their hard earned money or time. I have the same opportunity to spend same amount at auction he did, just as you did.

I see no difference in buying a governor tag at auction and someone buying a NR sheep tag in Alaska or Canada, or more than one elk tag in different states.

But to your point JJ could of bought a LO or tribal tag for 80-100k and conservation would of seen zero return

 

[OMB]

JJ bought a few miles of fencing in NM for a Sheep underpass, and bought a MT ranchers domestic sheep herd, replacing it with cattle to provide some protection for wild Sheep in the area. All out of his pocket with no tags attached.

That's great and wonderful, and the first I'm hearing about it. Something like that should be on the cover of WSF magazine and getting talked about at the convention. Happy to be proven wrong, but I feel like I pay attention and the only thing I see is the 27 guys in the posse posting the professional pics from the kill site.

 

[OMB]

But to your point JJ could of bought a LO or tribal tag for 80-100k and conservation would of seen zero return

Totally agree, and not to single JJ out of the same 15-20 people dropping eye popping numbers on those tags, but what's the outcome? We have less huntable populations of sheep in the L48, with some very specific exceptions, than we did 20-30 years ago.

Again, the numbers from governor's tags recently are eye watering, and hopefully 10 years from now that pans out, but if you're somebody that's worth a billion dollars and can throw a couple million dollars towards hunts every year, why not go full Teddy Roosevelt and throw a stake down?

 

[wapitibob]

That's great and wonderful, and the first I'm hearing about it. Something like that should be on the cover of WSF magazine and getting talked about at the convention. Happy to be proven wrong, but I feel like I pay attention and the only thing I see is the 27 guys in the posse posting the professional pics from the kill site.

Well, you're seeing the difference between an influencer and a contributor. He doesn't self promote so the only way you'd know about the two contributions mentioned is to watch his Waddell youtube discussion or be involved with the two game depts. As for the posse pic, that was promoted by the outfitter, and I'm not a fan of it either. After listening to him, I changed my opinion. I suspect he's one that'll keep donating whether there's a tag attached or not.

 

[MattB]

I dont necessarily agree with OP but who cares? Well, animals are held in trust by the state for the people of that state. That means that everyone in that state has a vested interest in those animals. These tags take an animal from everyone in that state and give it to one person and that person only got that because of their ability to pay for it. In these cases, large sums of money.

To put this in context that more people deal with. This is the equivalent of the State using tax payer funds to build a road, then closing the road to anyone that has a tax bracket lower than X and saying these people pay more in taxes, therefore they are more deserving of using this road.

Pay to play works when its private entity/person to private entity/person. It does not work when its private entity/person to public entity/person.

That is a really poor analogy, to the point it is hard to modify it to make it topical to this discussion. Perhaps if you posted that the closed road was a private-public partnership, the rich payed vast amounts of money to use the private road, and those funds were used to expand transit opportunities for the general public it would be more on point.

The notion with auction tags is that the funds generated *should* be a force multiplier to be used to add more tags for the general public over time by paying for water projects, translocations, etc. To suggest that they are a special carve-out to benefit high net worth individuals only is simply ignorant.

I get that you are from Utah and the way tags have been stripped from the public there is an absolute abomination, but that’s not the model used in other states.

 

[MuleyFever]

That is a really poor analogy, to the point it is hard to modify it to make it topical to this discussion. Perhaps if you posted that the closed road was a private-public partnership, the rich payed vast amounts of money to use the private road, and those funds were used to expand transit opportunities for the general public it would be more on point.

Except you cannot prove that the rich are expanding opportunities for the general public. In fact, opportunities are shrinking.

The notion with auction tags is that the funds generated *should* be a force multiplier to be used to add more tags for the general public over time by paying for water projects, translocations, etc. To suggest that they are a special carve-out to benefit high net worth individuals only is simply ignorant.

Sould does equal does. At this point, with shrinking opportunity, these auctions are a carve-out to benefit high net worth individuals.

To ignore the fact that raffle tags will still generate a substantial amount of money for these tags where 100% of the money goes to the department is simply ignorant. Add $1 to every license and you bridged the gap.

 

[CorbLand]

That is a really poor analogy, to the point it is hard to modify it to make it topical to this discussion. Perhaps if you posted that the closed road was a private-public partnership, the rich payed vast amounts of money to use the private road, and those funds were used to expand transit opportunities for the general public it would be more on point.

The notion with auction tags is that the funds generated *should* be a force multiplier to be used to add more tags for the general public over time by paying for water projects, translocations, etc. To suggest that they are a special carve-out to benefit high net worth individuals only is simply ignorant.

I get that you are from Utah and the way tags have been stripped from the public there is an absolute abomination, but that’s not the model used in other states.

Yet these auction tags sell for more and more each year and my opportunities decrease more than they increase. Should do and actually doing are two very different things.

Utah tags weren’t stripped for auction, they were stripped for raffles and that strip largely came at the expense of nonresidents. As someone that really stand nothing but a gain from that, I still think it’s stupid.

 

[MattB]

Except you cannot prove that the rich are expanding opportunities for the general public. In fact, opportunities are shrinking.


Sould does equal does. At this point, with shrinking opportunity, these auctions are a carve-out to benefit high net worth individuals.

To ignore the fact that raffle tags will still generate a substantial amount of money for these tags where 100% of the money goes to the department is simply ignorant. Add $1 to every license and you bridged the gap.

Whether opportunity increased depends on the state and the species. Here in CA we have opened a number of new sheep units over the past ~15 years which has in fact expanded opportunity.

Quick math question - if you 1) auction a tag for $300K and the entity that held and marketed the tag gets 5% of the proceeds to cover costs or 2) raffle a tag and it raises $100K, all of which goes to the state - which is the better economic option?

If you believe increased revenue is additive, you still can add $1 to every license. If you don’t, the point is moot.

- the ignorant guy