Conservation Tags

U

UGAhunter

Moderator
Messages
958
This topic needs a post of its own! Daren T. posted this on another thread but I love the idea. Something (IMO) needs to be done to reighn in these permits.

The proposal: All Utah conservation tags should be bid out on a common website so all can see and participate. The DWR can control the money for habitat projects (they can doll out the money to proposed projects conceived by the various conservation groups).

I just love this. Transparent, fair, raise more money, no down sides that I can see.
 
Oh no here we go again! first off uga it will change nothing! what is the difference between on the net and in an auction???? Nothing, the richest dude will get the permit, the division gets the money, and all is the same cept they have to spend more money to put up a web site and manage it so the average dude can wish even more!!!! nope leave it the way it is and just live with what it does cause its workin! least on the elk it is and the goats and the moose. the deer just suck because of completely different reasons!

Wildlife population control specialist
 
I probably should stay quite on this but I won't.

You say giving full control to the DWR would "be transparent, fair, raise more money, no down sides". I disagree wholeheartedly. When has ANY government agency been "transparent/'fair'/efficient/more effective than the private sector/had 'no down sides'? The DWR already has COMPLETE control over where the money is spent, they already have COMPLETE say over what tags will be sold. All that would change is passionate sportsmen being able to promote the tags, rally support for the projects. Brilliant!

PRO

Define, develop, and sustain BOTH trophy and opportunity hunts throughout the state of Utah.
 
Pro you believe it would change how things went down?? i dont think it will change anything the guy who can spend the 10,000+ will get the tag still. Im all for these tags but im not sold on the idea of changin the way they allot them especially this way


Wildlife population control specialist
 
That would be good to see.

Even if it didn't change anything from the folks who buy them or the amount spent, it would certainly help put more of a 'respect factor' towards the sale process and the income process would not be debateable.......even if it ended up being even money on the 10% factor to run the on-line bid process via the DWR.

I would like to see the Con tags cut way back in the next round of Con tag commitments by us the public to them--the Con orgs..

Robb
 
Berry, I do believe turning this program over to the DWR would hurt the program big time!

Robb, no surprise, but I think the conservation tag numbers are right where they should stay. It is enough to bring in a significant amount of money for conservation, but not so much that it hurts ones odds of drawing a LE/OIL tag.

PRO

Define, develop, and sustain BOTH trophy and opportunity hunts throughout the state of Utah.
 
How does it not hurt ones odds of drawing a tag? Anytime you take that many tags out of the drawing it's going to have a negative affect on draw odds. I bet if you took every conservation tag for the last five years and added them together It would be a pretty big number. Those are all people that did not draw a permit.

With or without conservation tags the draw odds are bad but every little bit would help.
 
Craig, if you look at the whole picture instead of just one SMALL part of it you will see that what I said is indeed FACT. Let's run some numbers, since I am a numbers junky. For elk they take around 200 tags out of 3000, give or take a few. If you were to add the 200 tags back into the pool where 50,000+ are applying the odds would improve by .03%, which is NOTHING in reality. Now, if you consider the amount of habitat that is improved/restored from the money generated from these tags, we now have MORE tags for the general LE folks.

PRO

Define, develop, and sustain BOTH trophy and opportunity hunts throughout the state of Utah.
 
Well if it's only a .03% difference go ahead and take a couple hundred more it won't make much more of a difference.

the big picture is if they average about 200 elk permits a year for the last five years that is 1000 less tags in the general draw. If the just look a draw % odds it's not much but it is still 1000 less people out of the general draw pool that don't get a tag.

I'm sure Utah would make plenty of money with 50 conservation tags. Less tags means higher prices people will pay to get one.
 
How many LE tags have they INCREASED during that five years? Are you saying that 50 tags would generate the same amount of money has 200 tags? On what grounds do you come to that conclusion? I suppose just saying it makes it so, right? How many other animals like general season deer benefit from these tag sales as well? The outcome is a positive not a negative gain.

PRO

Define, develop, and sustain BOTH trophy and opportunity hunts throughout the state of Utah.
 
The way i calculate it is the wildlife that is way ahead based upon the auction process the way it is as the dollars spent for these tags way exceeds what revenue would be generated if the tags were in the draw process.

Lets see 300 ELK tags at an average of $10,000 per tag is 3 Million dollars.from the auction.

300 tags at $500.00 if that were the average cost of drawing the tag is $150,000.

This is a huge difference in revenue to WILDLIFE conservation.

The system seems to be working financially for wildlife
why change it and put it back in the hands of the government ??


Bullmania
 
Woah Pro i think we got confused and each are saying the same thing in different words. Amen i dont want to give the division control period i think its workin great as it is haha. Most of these guys have no idea what the benefits of these tags are its like tryin to teach a toddler geometry impossible!!

Wildlife population control specialist
 
I have no problem with having an online auction that is handled by a seperate organization than DWR. I just believe that if the tags are placed on line, where everyone (not just the people at a certain banquet) can have an equal chance at them. I believe that if they are handled in this manner, these tags can bring more money (more competition) and thus benefit more wildlife. It also puts it back into the general publics hands and not a certain group or person's control.

I also believe that the money raised on a deer tag, should go towards deer habitat. Money raised on elk tags should go towards elk and so forth.

Have a committee set up, with representation from all areas of the state and with a diverse background to handle the Conservation Tags.

Right now, 10% of the money raised on these tags, goes back to the Conservation organizations for administrative costs. While I know that the 90% is going to good work, I would like to see more of it go towards "on the ground" projects. I have checked with a couple of groups that handle on-line auctions of this nature and their costs for this would be more in the range of 2-5%. More money going to wildlife and less going into other areas.

These are just thoughts and opinions. Everyone is free to have them still, I believe.

Daren T.
 
PRO you know my opinion on these tags. Your numbers show that only .03 or whatever percentage increase in draw odds.
I say that since 5% of these tags are being used 5% more hunters would be hunting.

I would argue that if the 350 tags were cut in half you would see the value of these tags increase. Think gold diamonds anything that doesn't grow on tree's like these tags do right now and it holds a higher value.

This plan needs some serious cleaning up. I can think of several violations in the written rule that went down last spring alone, not to mention the previous years.

At minimum I would suggest an independent audit of the program. I would suggest that the DA look at the plan and
give a ruling.
 
"I would argue that if the 350 tags were cut in half you would see the value of these tags increase. Think gold diamonds anything that doesn't grow on tree's like these tags do right now and it holds a higher value."

Gold/diamonds are NOT a renewable resource for one.

Secondly, the unharvested diamonds don't make more diamonds, nor does the sale of diamonds make more diamonds. Unharvested deer/elk DO make more deer/elk and the sale of these tags DOES make more deer/elk. Comparing apples to bananas my friend. I maintain 5% is a good/fair balance based on the loss/gain ratios.

I have no real objections to an audit, but is going to fund it? And, if everything checks out 'clean', then what? Please explain/share what 'violations' "went down" last spring, I missed them.

PRO

Define, develop, and sustain BOTH trophy and opportunity hunts throughout the state of Utah.
 
LAST EDITED ON Aug-05-08 AT 09:38PM (MST)[p]Anyone remember when the Mule Deer Foundation Rep, Tony Abbott, lobbied against the recommended bull elk tag increases a couple years back? MDF lobbying for the animal which competes against the animal they are chartered to protect. That is a classic example of what is wrong with the program, the lobbying to keep tag numbers low and quality higher than the management plans. (Also, the current MDF leadership in Utah has been very impressive to me)

I do think the program has been beneficial, as I have seen some of the results. It isn't perfect though and could use a tweak here or there.

If the state goes to Micro-Management for deer, won't there will be more deer tags for auction, from every unit?
 
Pro, I think your point about odds is accurate for residents, but certainly not for non-residents.

When the tags were set aside for the convention, 50% came out of the non-resident pool, even though they were only getting 10% of the total tags. If those tags were to go back into the draw, non-resident odds wuuld be improved, certainly by much more than .03%.

As far as I can tell, the convention tags have resulted in tags that came out of the non-resident pool going to residents, for the most part. That is not surprising, given the requirement to attend the convention to apply.

As to money, it appears to me it is all guess work, since I can find no reporting by either the UDFW or the conservation organizations of exactly what tags sold for. This makes it impossible to compare with what tags are going for in other states, where numbers are much more limited.

As an example, I talked to the Wyoming Wildlife Federation last week. They were running a raffle for three commissioner's tags. The winners could select any unit for deer, elk or antelope, then hunt during the season for that species on that unit. Pretty similar to the convention tags. They had sold 6,000 tickets with a couple of days left to go. Don't know what the average donation per ticket came out to, since you got discounts for volume, but at $ 25.00/ticket, that works out to 150,000.00 for 3 tags. I happily donated $ 80.00 to the cause, even though my draw history is atrocious. Would gladly make a similar donation to Utah, if you guys would fix the obvious problems with the current system.

Scoutdog
 
I feel that when one goes to a SMALL picture and wants to use isolated numbers then it is EASY to MISLEAD and to come up with a somewhat PRESUMED-accurate number (.03) but not a look at The BIG PICTURE is penalizing all Utah hunters.

Since the Con tags came into play....right at 6,250-collective species wide- public hunters HAVE NOT DRAWN those tag.

Take those tag numbers and subtract from the current top point pool folks still in the top pool (s) and guess what....the top point pool drops to 11/12 not 16 as will be in 2009 draw.

EVERY single western state has INCREASED tag numbers in the last 10 years--every single state---

EVERY single western state has LEFTOVER Antlered tags available.....with very minimal Con tags sold....

We are VICTIMS of marketing-habitat- and INCHES could have your name on this animal.

I say 1 PREMIUM Con tag per unit/species PERIOD for Con orgs good bye Expo 200 tags and have an EQUAL PREMIUM tag available to the public via a conservation tag public draw....tie them all into the Sportsman Tag application period...

Thanks for your input fella's....... others points of view are great food for thought......Bart you are always on top of your game-thanks.

Robb
 
Scoutdog, you are mixing convention tags with conservation tags, which are two different animals. My comments have been directed to conservation tags ONLY.

Robb, I wonder how you get through the day seeing everything so dang negative. Hope your hunts go well this year, I am excited for mine. I was scouting this last weekend and came across acres and acres of PJ removal funded by conservation tag sales. There were deer/elk everywhere in the area. Knowing I guided MOST of the conservation tag holders for this unit over the last few years made it even more rewarding. Have a good one!

PRO

Define, develop, and sustain BOTH trophy and opportunity hunts throughout the state of Utah.
 
Bart:

The main problem I have with the conservation tags is the accounting/audit of the money. The only report I have ever seen (PleaseDear had the link on Bowsite and he may be able to provide it again) was published by the DWR. It showed FNWS put about 80% of the required 90% of the money into projects. The other conservation organizations were way behind them. Anybody who has hunted in Utah has benefited from the conservation efforts by these groups. My problem is they appear to not be doing what is required by law (giving back 90%). If they are not giving back the 90% then they should not get any tags the next year or the law should be changed. To say the least they should not get additional tags the next year. The groups (not just SFW) will tell you about all of the conservation efforts but there is never an accounting of the money. Open the books and show the public what they have done. I have always lived by the trust but verify ideal. Until the conservation organizations can account for the money they are required to give back then they should not get any additional tags. These are public resources being sold. All I have ever wanted is see that the conservation organizations are held accountable for their required 90%. I will stop harping on this issue the day somebody will show me a report that shows the 90% being given back.

On a side note.....
Robb is right on the statistics. The 5% of the tags would definitely help reduce the max point poll on some hunts.
 
Bart,

Having been apart of one of the Conservation groups until earlier this year, and having been apart of the allocation of funds, I can give you a bit of insight into the money and numbers.

First off, the money spent by these groups is usually not updated on the DWR website in a timely manner. I know with the organization I was with, we would have put money towards multiple projects but it won't show up until months down the road.

Another issue is that we would put money towards a project and the DWR would cancel that project but, not let us know and there would be money hanging out there that could be reallocated to another project, but we wouldn't know.

Alot of these organizations will hold money over year to year for a "rainy day" fund. The organization I was with had hundred of thousands of dollars out there that was just sitting there. My issue is that from a Mule Deer standpoint, we are way past holding for a rainy day. We need every dollar we can get.

One budgeting tactic that a certain Conservation group does and I have a real problem with, is to say that they have funded a project, but in reality, they just put a bit of money towards it. Example: Let's say that a project in Central Utah for Deer habitat improvement needs $45,000 dollars to conduct it. A certain group comes along and gives $5000 towards it. Other groups come along and put $5000 towards it as well to make the $45000. This certain group then goes out and advertises and states that they are handling this project by themselves or gives the impression that they are the only ones doing it. While I love the fact that a project is getting done and that multiple groups are working together to do it, I do feel that it is a misrespresentation of the facts.

Most of the projects in the state of Utah come from the actual Conservation officers and biologists with DWR. They have to submit project proposals by a certain date to the DWR offices and then the individual Conservation groups sit down sperately with the DWR and decide where the money is to go. The Project Proposals must state the wildife to benefit from the project in a ranking order. The main animal benefitted first and then the next and so on to the end. If this projects are being funded by Conservation tags for Big Game, then why are many of the Project Proposals being submitted for this money for use on Fish, Upland game and Water fowl? If the money is coming from a deer tag, it should go towards deer projects. The problem is that the DWR is set up so that Big Game is funding everything and sometimes Big Game suffers.

If you have a project that you feel needs money to benefit it, you need to get with your local Conservation officer or biologist and get them to submit a Project Proposal. A big help would be if you got a group of people involved as well and show them that you are very serious about wanting a certain propject to happen.

The high point of the group I was with, was that the Regional Director would always share with anyone who asked, where their money was going and how to give input on a proposed project. We need to work more with these type of individuals and not so much with the individual conservation groups corporate leadership. They have their own political and personal agendas.

Daren T.
 
400, I am fine with the 'books' being more open. I sit on the Board of Directors for UBA, we can account for every dime from our conservation tag monies.

On a side note.....
I am sure if you pull a SMALL segment out you can show a loss/gain, but when you look at the overall picture it is a GAIN. The unit you drew a tag for this year never produced a 400 class bull until AFTER the burn in 2002 and the following planting of feed in the burn areas, right where you told me you plan on being in a few days! Just something to think about.

PRO

Define, develop, and sustain BOTH trophy and opportunity hunts throughout the state of Utah.
 
Daren, not sure why you directed your post on how the program works, as I have been DIRECTLY involved in it for a while now. I am a huge fan of how the program works, and I was there at the WB meeting last fall when only ONE group was chastised for not being up to date on the money from Conservation projects, and it was NOT SFW/UBA/MDF. I believe they have since got up to par and our complying with the guidelines.

I agree much of the posturing by members of different groups does little/no benefits for wildlife. But, it is not unique to one group, or one individual, there is plenty of blame to go around on that. SFW is great at calling attention to the projects they work on, that is what they should do to increase membership/involvement. If a group feels 'slighted' they should stand up for themselves.

PRO

Define, develop, and sustain BOTH trophy and opportunity hunts throughout the state of Utah.
 
Sorry,

I was answering UTAH400ELk's question and put in the wrong name.

I was not trying to single one group out from another, that is why I did not use any names.

Daren T.
 
Pro:

I am fine with the idea of the conservation programs. As I said, all Utah hunters have benefited from these groups/projects. This year I plan on capitalizing on some of the benefits in the area we talked about. I don't doubt the validity of the successes that can be shown from some of these tags. I believe that with a public resource the public should be made aware where the money is going. I have always asked for a fair accounting of the money. It should be done. The rainy day funds are the issue with me. In the accounting I have seen, I have not been able to come up with any year the conservation organizations have given back 90%. I believe the study accounted for 10 plus years. I would think that in one of the ten plus years one of the groups would have spent their rainy day funds. I could not find one. The money should be put to the ground now. I was a committee member to one conservation group in Utah. I had issues with the way the money was being spent and the accountability. This group (not SFW), I believe, lost sight of the goal, which I should be conservation. I felt the conservation tags became a status symbol for the conservation organizations and in the competition to become the best, and at times; the public needs were cast to the wayside.

I feel that the negatives of pulling the tags from the public can be offset by the benefits to all. I simply want an accounting of the money. Any group that is not/can not account for the money should be denied any tags in the future.
 
Pro, I apologize. I guess I look at them as being the same thing, which they obviously are not.

Giving it some more thought, I would think you guys in Utah would be demanding a full accounting of the dollars being generated to the department for the convention tags. It appears likely, in my opinion, that the main benefit from these tags is the SLC economy, and NOT wildlife, but without the figures, it is impossible to know for sure.

At $ 5.00 a pop, and assuming every dime of that went to Utah Fish and Wildlife, it would take 200,000 tickets to generate $ 1,000,000.00. For 200 tags, that works out to $ 5,000.00 per tag. I understand that some of the tags are worth considerably less than that, but that still seems awfully low, and I would be surprised if they are selling 200,000 tickets, and would doubt 100% goes to the department.

Just something to think about.

Scoutdog
 
Yes-Yes-Yes---I got messages stating I hit the 6 instead of the 3.........3250 Con tags----point pool drop-max-figured off the 3,250 Con tags.

http://wildlife.utah.gov/hunting/biggame/pdf/conservation_permit_program.pdf

Yes-Yes-you need to add 2008 Con tags to the shown total.....and the projects are a couple years behind--up dated....as Darren T has stated.

Thanks Bart-I am rooting for ya on your LE hunt.....I am off to Wyo/Az on my bow bull tags.....

I see many-many benefits from the Con tag projects in my main area for Big Horn Rams and LE elk....never remember stating that they do not do some good....just way to many Con tags...


I think what we as Utah hunters-res or non-ressy- that are conservation mind set need to do is look at what the Con tags have done FOR our Utah hunts----and-----

I think we need to look at what the Con tags have done TO our Utah hunts...

Is there an equal balance......hhhhhmmmmmm

Robb
 
LAST EDITED ON Aug-07-08 AT 05:12PM (MST)[p]Daren,
I think that you give a great insider view. My only question is why you are withholding information by saying this group and that group. Why don't you share the names of the organizations? It is obvious that every one in the state of UT is looking at these issues. Why don't you give everyone the information that you have? This will help us be better educated on these issues in the future.
 

Similar threads

gr8fuldoug
For Sale Valentines Day Sale
Replies
2
Views
332
gr8fuldoug
gr8fuldoug
gr8fuldoug
SHOT Show Day 1
Replies
0
Views
311
gr8fuldoug
gr8fuldoug

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

Sweet Big Bull Score
big buck 2.jpg
IMG_1898.jpeg
2006 blacktail.jpg
art's deer.jpg
672CFE2C-3963-4F85-BF93-0A24FC0AD8E3.jpeg
A358FDA8-55F4-463D-9C06-25EC834A5D5C.jpeg
B927644A-FA28-45D9-9C7D-6C94E07EDCBA.jpeg
100C6CCE-556C-41A0-8FF6-C69B16E329AF.jpeg
Late Hunt Stud
98024023-075C-4B15-8F42-6BDB0F814153.jpeg
0B9E7C8C-4AE9-453C-867A-0E1A2FA5E304.jpeg
Back
Top Bottom