midwest's Link
It's more of a possibility with the current congress, but doubtful under the current administration and Park Service hierarchy.
If bison are going to die in the National Park, it's more likely that park officials (or hired guns) will mow them down, 2 or 3 people killing dozens, which is unfortunate.
The tag price though, is, IMO, ridiculous. I just don't understand any state charging north of $1500 for any NR tag, and that includes NM, OR, CO, ID, and WY to AZ who have at least one over-priced NR tag.
A fourth fact is that the tag is ridiculously overpriced.
5 points, I think MT recently had an auctioned sheep tag that went for $300,000. An AZ elk tag auctioned for that as well.
Those aren't tags for regular hunters. Those are fund raisers for wealthy hunters. When all we have left is fund raisers for wealthy hunters, we all lose cause it's back to the king's forest.
The state government departments of fish and game are in place to manage the wildlife that belongs to the people, not exploit limited resources for financial gain and price people out due to market value. This is not a for-profit company, it's the government.
I'm all for free-market enterprise. That's not what this is. The government is in place to provide things that are inherently good for society, but not money-makers, ie: roads, police, fire control, defense, managing wildlife...
I could poach 365 days a year and get away with it. Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should.
The government can also tax us into oblivion. Just because people will pay it, doesn't make it right.
what is expensive is hunting special game in special places. you want to play in that arena then you pay special prices. yes so what.
fishing is the same.........bass in the pond out back or marlin on the other side of the world. both are fishing, but if you desire special fish in special places......guess what............you pay special prices.
what is not like that in life. mcdonalds vs. a 5 star restaurant........the list is endless. if you can't afford or don't want to afford the extraordinary then accepted the ordinary and don't complain or begrudge others theirs.
Think critically for a moment, and consider the utility of all that private money being used to grow the numbers and habitat for a highly sought after species. The end result will be MORE hunting opportunities, not less. The end result will be MORE species availability, not less. The end result will be MORE of EVERYTHING available to EVERYONE. That is not just good....it's wonderful!
I wish these tags would all sell for 10 million dollars a piece and all that cash would be used to buy and manage more habitat and increase the range and number of the species that brought the money in. That would just be incredible.
Also, as a caveat, one might consider how the money is NOT from taxes....and yet it benefits the collective. Bully for this sort of program! I'm all about more programs like this one, which by my assessment seems to privatize a very small portion of a collective resource and pay for the entire public to enjoy the rest of it!
To the OP, sorry for the minor hijack.
in '55 dad and granddad would load up the '49 Ford, drive 4 hours (one way) to Mouth of Wilson in Grayson County (there were deer there) over US Highway 221, US 58, and some gravel-tracks to a camp where they had a paid membership.
Gas was around 30 cents a gallon, the old Ford burned probably close to 50 gallons on the 300-plus mile round trip on those mountain roads (and two quarts of oil) .....add in a couple boxes of saltines, a case of viennas and pork n beans (the game-changing beanee-weenee was not invented yet) a pint of liquor per man, and a $6.00 box of .30-30 "shells" and a $5 quart of white liquor and it took a real chunk out of a man's $55 a week paycheck.....
if you stayed in camp the whole two weeks, (unpaid vacation) hunted hard, you might get a shot at an antlered buck, and if you didn't, or missed, and were REALLY lucky, in years where the last day was "doe day" you still might get some venison....
Now, what the heck does that have to do with buffalo hunting in the park? Nothing.
I wish they would auction "park tags" in all the national parks. I can only imagine what that would generate for wildlife. Millions of dollars. On top of that, it would be one more opportunity to hunt. I'm in favor of that.
Can you imagine what a sheep tag in Denali might fetch? My bet is north of 100K. That would go a long way towards helping sheep with studies and boots on the ground without a single dollar in tax money.
While that's definitely true in Texas, 95+% of the state is privately owned and it would take a significant amount of time, effort, and resources to fill all the tags (or any for that matter) on a TX license on public land. I know, I'm from TX and I tried through college when I had less access to private than where I grew up.
I see all sides, but comparing TX to most states out west is like comparing apples to icecream. So too is comparing bass to marlin. Damnit I love icecream though.
Regardless, there's a need for revenue generation from limited tags on trophy species, units, etc. Just like anything else, it takes ethical sportsman to manage such revenue and such auctions to moderation. However, 100% of that tag does not go to conservation, in many cases. Ask NvaGiveUp. He's one of the most knowledgeable people I've read or spoken with on this topic. When there's big money, there's always going to be someone trying to get their hand in the cookie jar. Hopefully Kyle will chime in.
IdlyWildArcher and AZBUGLER, 100% agree that 5K immediately cuts a large portion of the blue collar population out of the application process, myself included.
Healthy debate and good topic!
Halibutman, I never said I opposed auction tags. You said that. In fact, I'm very much in favor of those tags. I was pointing out to a prior poster who pointed out that people pay 14K for the same tag in an auction and I was pointing out the disparity between the actual tag price and the auction price when compared with sheep and elk.
Bou'Bound, your argument lists two non-sequiturs.
First off, marlin on the other side of the world is apples and oranges. The costs of that is due to travel. We're talking about American game here. I can fish marlin cheaply literally 100 miles from my house. It's absolutely understandable that if you leave the U.S., as you're no longer in your/our country, that any fee could be levied. I'm talking about Arizona - the U.S.A., not Canada, not Africa, etc.
Secondly, your whole McDonalds vs 5 star restaurant argument doesn't apply here either as we're talking about private companies vs the government.
Yes, all kinds of things are more expensive in life. I don't live in a slum. I have a nice house. I have stuff equivalent to my pay grade and that's fine. But I drive on the same roads, I enjoy the same police and military protection, etc. No one should get priced out of the functions of government. It's not supposed to be there to cater only to the wealthy. It's whole existence is to provide the minimum services needed to a society necessary to promote stability of the society at the lowest cost to that society as possible (even if it does a poor job of it).
Yes, there's people who will pay it. There are people who will pay 300 grand for a sheep or elk tag too. Does that mean that every tag should go to the highest bidder? When you crash your car, should the paramedic hold an auction to see who can pay the most to go to the hospital first?
These animals belong to the people, not the government. The fee for hunting them should cover the cost of administering the function of government and not price working class folks out of the ability to hunt.
As to Texas vs the west... The 1.5 million acres of public ground in Texas is mostly in the eastern part of the state. The deer density in this region is incredible. I would suggest that the opportunity to kill a deer here is excellent. I would also offer that in terms of deer numbers accessible, it's likely comparable to any western state where the density is much, much lower. More land doesn't necessarily equal more opportunity.
But like most good things it can be perverting into something else not good very quickly.
If they auction 15 tags and 13 of them have to come from the public draw.... not a good thing. As well as "others" start to circle when they smell money in the air.
Money to the government is like drugs to an addict. Once they get that income source they will never give it back. There is no amount a person could arbitrarily assign they could not find a way to spend. Yes they need money. How much they need and why.... what is the investment, the return/results....at what costs to something else.... that is the trillion dollar question...
I don't believe that tags should be a matter of what the market will bear. Draws mitigate the imbalance of supply falling short of demand.
I don't have a problem with some tags being put out for auction. I believe that it draws attention to the fact that these are valued resources.
But I don't believe that game and fish departments should price to maximize profit or run reverse auctions for all of the tags. Profit is not their purpose or mission.
In the end, I think that kind of approach will preclude many individuals from any participation and be detrimental to the future of hunting as a whole.
in reality what they have is a credit card....and apparently can raise the limit themselves with a wave of the hand.....
The way it sits, it looks like you're defending the current tax code.
I'm glad we agree on this.
I completely disagree. I think they exacerbate the discrepancy. I think there are a boat load of applicants that don't even hunt the tags, especially in states like Alaska where you're not required to pay full freight to apply. I also think there are a ton of applicants for "points only" pretty much everywhere as a "just in case" strategy for the future.
Premium places will always bring premium prices. I am not suggesting all tags be offered at auction. I am supporting the fact that some are, and that the funds could be used to help the species and habitat. Of course they are often mismanaged.... That's a whole other issue.
I would support auction hunts in national parks. Maybe then they could reduce the budget shortfalls they have and stay open during the "shut downs", or even eliminate the entry fees? Imagine that!
And I'm only speaking in reference to the tag prices. I'm only saying that I don't think that tags should be profit centers.
Premium places may demand a greater likelihood of premium prices for travel and logistics. To go with Bou's marlin comment...how much did the fishing license cost to pursue that marlin? Your odds of success may indeed be far greater with the water that you can cover aboard a 60' Hatteras, but I think that the guy who wants to take a shot in a panga shouldn't be shut out by licensing costs.
I agree wholeheartedly that there should be hunting in national parks. I find that prohibition to be ridiculous.
Off subject, but on a tangent. I live in the Chicago Metropolitan area. The forest preserves are being turned into a near monoculture of garlic mustard for ground cover and buckthorn. The deer have eaten everything. Bowhunting is forbidden supposedly because of safety concerns. Instead, sharpshooters are paid to thin the herd at night with rifles.
