Yeah, make sure that the guy that actually was awarded the unit tag gets the sloppy seconds, after all he didn’t pay real money like the auction winner did. Merica
Competition grows to auction off coveted hunting tags
- Thread starter Oak
- Start date
Bambistew
Well-known member
Amazing how groups that focus on habitat have had the most success. RMEF, DU, and WTF. None have to rely on flashy tags to be successful.
Would we have even fewer animals of it wasn't for auction tags? Good question, it obviously hasn't increased them.
Would we have even fewer animals of it wasn't for auction tags? Good question, it obviously hasn't increased them.
But they do. Commissioner tags in WY, expo, etc.
RobG
Well-known member
In the bigger picture, it seems the legislature makes sure the dept is funded at a certain level of disfunction. That is, if an auction tag brings in money, the legislature just subtracts that amount from what they want the department to run at.
SAJ-99
Well-known member
What doesn't alienate the average sportsman? Seriously? People love to complain and not much is going to stop them. Per some of the comments, it would be nice to get a clear accounting of where the money is going, but putting one tag back in the pool is only going to make one average sportsman (or sportswoman) happy. Regarding the RMEF and DU comparisons, those groups are also dealing with far more adaptable species than WSF or even MDF.
I think Wyoming and MDF have done some great stuff on migrations. If any of that money came from selling a mule deer tag then it was worth it IMO.
I’d argue the money raised from auction and raffle tags is an unnecessary rounding error amount in the total funds for fish and game departments budgets but I’m not here to chat about it.
Why do conservation organizations get 10%? The privilege to auction these tags is high demand. States should allow the percentage amount paid to the conservation organization be determined at the time the tag is allocated. The organization bidding would make its percentage bid as part of its presentation. High demand tags might be bought (negative percentage paid) for the right to auction at the banquet while low demand tags might max out at 10%.
If we’re going to be capitalist and auction tags, let’s be good capitalists and get maximum value for the states.
A good conservation organization shouldn’t care what it makes if it is helping the species. Right?
Why do conservation organizations get 10%? The privilege to auction these tags is high demand. States should allow the percentage amount paid to the conservation organization be determined at the time the tag is allocated. The organization bidding would make its percentage bid as part of its presentation. High demand tags might be bought (negative percentage paid) for the right to auction at the banquet while low demand tags might max out at 10%.
If we’re going to be capitalist and auction tags, let’s be good capitalists and get maximum value for the states.
A good conservation organization shouldn’t care what it makes if it is helping the species. Right?
Last edited:
We’re not talking about one tag. Just at the WSF annual convention there is about 30 premium tags any given year. GSCO and SCI will be close to that put together for theirs as well. Then take the smattering of tags that get auctioned off at lesser event through out the year. Then add up the cronyism tags that given out via political channels. If you don’t have 200 plus I would be surprised adding in all the states and provinces. Some of those will go to raffles… however even if half end up on the auction block your looking at spread sheet of above 500 names that are in the running during most years, and some floaters that come in and out of the game.
It’s all smoke and mirrors to keep the skids greased and make sure those with the means have access and opportunities afforded to them. Way way too much credence is given to altruism, which quite frankly takes a back seat to entitlement.
SAJ-99
Well-known member
You may be right. I really have no clue (I'm an outsider obviously, lol). Unfortunately, money is required in anything these days. You want to know how to put or keep sheep on the mountain, it takes money. Like I said, I just want some transparency. I can see that WSF raised $6.8m but expenses are $6.2m. Seems like a pretty crappy margin for a non-profit, but I'm sure they can defend it. Taking MT as example, people (avg sportsman) seem to be upset that they are losing a single .2% chance at a $125 tag (MT R cost), but if the tag gets sold for 200x that it seems hard to argue the finances for FWP. Get rid of the auction and a lot of sheep stuff gets cut. We can argue cost/result and counterfactuals all day, but both sides of the argument have a worthy case.
I don't dislike people for being rich enough to participate and get a tag, but I have met a lot of people with a LOT of money, and none of them really "earned" it. I think that is the source of the bitterness with a lot of stuff these days.
Bullshit. mtmuley
SAJ-99
Well-known member
Tell me, oh great one, what do I think?
I work for company that deals with people of wealth. Not going to drop names, but these individuals busted their ass to get where they are. You can think whatever you want. mtmuley
SAJ-99
Well-known member
So you might deal with different people than me. Doesn’t mean what I said was Bullshit. I have met a dozens of people worth more than $1b and only one ever said “I got lucky, right place right time” while it applied to almost all. Things have to align right, regardless of industry. I also have never met one that work 1000x harder than the guy with $1m or 100,000x harder than the average employee worth 100k. It’s all relative.
Okey dokey. mtmuley
SAJ-99
Well-known member
Great contribution to the topic, as usual.
338win
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2015
- Messages
- 353
GFY. Sorry. Did I post that? mtmuley
Last edited:
Carnage2011
Well-known member
Why does someone have to tell you they “got lucky” or justify their money to you? Also, people that have done well financially don’t work 10000x harder than an average employee. That’s not how it works….ever. Usually the reason people make a lot of money is a combination of ingenuity, problem solving, leadership, timing, work ethic and other things. When you say they didn’t deserve it what does that mean? Who deserves a billion dollars? Who gets to choose who deserves it?
SAJ-99
Well-known member
They don’t have to justify anything to me. I have seen it all- entrepreneurs, CEOs, inheritance. None of it really matters to me. All I’m saying is that capitalism isn’t a meritocracy, which we like to sell it as. You know, work hard and you can be rich and happy. It doesn’t work that way, which might be your point. I have seen a lot of people work very hard. Not all ended up “rich”. Some ended up happy. Rich and happy aren’t the same either.
Back to the point of the thread. I don’t begrudge those that pay for the tag. I just want to see an accounting of what the $ was used for to determine if it was worth it for a public resource.
I believe this is the crux of the financial query.
I think @Bambistew and others have a solid gripe that's unquantifiable as we don't know unless we stop all supertags, auctions, and other non legislative funding for a few years and see what happens. IMO, we'd shit our pants.
Though maybe, as @RobG suggests, we'd also see our Legislatures email /phone storage filled... To raise/create State taxes in order to overcome FWP $ legislature withheld due to the Supertags, Auctions, and other funding offsets...
I know, we wouldn't demand a new tax code or raise current taxes... We'd demand an increase to non resident license or other b.s...
I'd be curious, without, say a $400,000 increase in funds from a single bighorn ram (90% 2013 Auction), as an example, that, according to FWP funds are for the use specific to the animal:
Would we have as many @theat helicopter collaring, blood testing (from capture to scientists), capture, transport, and transplant due to other MT herds decimated, former Thier (retired Region One biologist - single example) hours dedicated towards his scientific research and common social outreach placed with domestic sheep farms and international involvement with bordering Canada, etc?
I don't know... If there's transparency with the FWP financials for specific animals and the overall use of auction funds which goes to the point @SAJ-99 has made, maybe we'd have a better feel versus suppositions of our beliefs.
******
On an aside note: Many of us on Hunt Talk learn from the collective experienced here, shared in threads such as this. Prior 2009, buddies and I sat around a campfire and griped about FWP this and that. Maybe attend a meeting here or there, though that's it!
Since? Hell, an example, this thread alone had me googling the heck out of various aspects related to Auction tags. "Trust but verify" is oxymoronic though that's my means to find comfort believing people here.
Many of us don't mind being in the arena (reference to TR's speech) and may be wrong though willing to get involved.
Email and phone excess spam comes with involvement contacting State and our MT Federal Representatives, volunteering with RMEF (and others) clearing barbed wire, trail maintenance, etc, donating $ annually to organizations, the list is endless from pre 2009 campfire stump speeches.
This is one example of many where many reading and commenting learn a hell of a lot.
Elky Welky
Well-known member
Amen @Sytes. To continue with a cliche or two, showing up is half the battle. And some of us learn best by making mistakes and being wrong. I embrace those opportunities. This forum is a good place to do it, and there is much to learn from those here!
