Tag whoring proposal

swbuckmaster

Long Time Member
Messages
5,004
Range tenants: Cattle and wildlife could benefit from program
Tribune Editorial
Article Last Updated: 08/04/2008 11:51:04 AM MDT


State Sen. Dennis Stowell, R-Parowan, wants to take a number of trophy game tags away from the public and give them to groups of ranchers who have had grazing permits partially suspended, reducing the number of cattle they can run on public lands.
The grazing associations would then auction the hunting permits to wealthy hunters and use the proceeds to grow forage and develop water sources with a goal of improving the carrying capacity so their grazing permits can be restored in full.
At first glance, Stowell's proposed legislation sounds like a terrible idea. It seems like the little guy, the wildlife and Utah's arid, fragile public lands would be the losers. It sounds like the ranchers and the rich hunters would win again.
But what if Stowell's plan would benefit wildlife as well as cattle; Joe Hunter as well as Joe Rancher? What if it resulted in better habitat, more game animals and more permits to hunt them?
A similar program conducted by the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources in cooperation with public land management agencies already exists. Permits are given to sportsmen and conservation organizations for auction, and the groups use the money for habitat improvement projects under the watchful eye of DWR.
But could projects be developed that would benefit both livestock and wildlife? State wildlife officials and federal land managers say yes.
And would the public accept more cattle on public lands? That's the great unknown.
Grazing on Utah's public lands is a touchy topic. They're marginal cattle range at best, easily damaged by plodding, four-footed plant processors. If wildlife and the environment were the sole considerations, you'd remove all livestock from the scene. But that's not going to happen.
Ranching is a Utah tradition, and in some locales an economic engine. And federal Bureau of Land Management property, by law, is managed for multiple uses, which puts cattlemen and conservationists at odds.
Stowell's proposal could bridge that gap. If he clones the existing state permit auction program, and requires habitat restoration projects that benefit livestock and wildlife equally, it could work.
For hunters, it would mean fewer permits now, with the potential for a lot more later. For grazing groups, it would mean the restoration of suspended grazing rights. And for the rest of us, a healthier economy, and healthier public lands to enjoy.
The senator should proceed, with caution. His proposal could be a winner . . . as long as there are no losers.



Any one want to chime in on this one?




Archery is a year round commitment!!
 
any idea just how many permits we are talking about here? what do cattle eat compared to deer and elk? what would the ranchers be planting to improve habitat? just a couple of quick questions after a quick read through of the proposal.
 
I don't know any more than what is posted. I was given this e-mail just a few minutes ago.

Just thought I would throw it up so people can see where the governor is leaning. I personally think if the government gets a hold of our tags as a revenue build plan for anything us hunters are going to loose big time.



Archery is a year round commitment!!
 
"For hunters, it would mean fewer permits now, with the potential for a lot more later. For grazing groups, it would mean the restoration of suspended grazing rights. And for the rest of us, a healthier economy, and healthier public lands to enjoy."

Total BS...this is nothing more than another special interest group trying to horn in on a piece of the pie. They have nothing to offer in addition to what is already available.
 
Why not take a couple of tags away from some of the other groups? The other groups take tags from Utah make money but dont guarantee the money is spent here. Yes some of it might get spent here but not all of it. I assume that the cattlemen are a state group not a national group, so they would at least spend the money here so we could acually benefit from it.

I know this idea is just a pipe dream, because god forbid something be taken away from a special intrest group in Utah.
 
Addicted, you may want to do a little research on where the money from these tags MUST be spent by LAW.

The cattlemen have refused to allow for increases in deer/elk populations even with the THOUSANDS of acres improved for deer/elk AND cattle. Now they have the audacity to say they should get some of the tags for the very animals many despise. I don't think so!

PRO

Define, develop, and sustain BOTH trophy and opportunity hunts throughout the state of Utah.
 
LAST EDITED ON Aug-07-08 AT 03:26PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Aug-07-08 AT 03:24?PM (MST)

I am not a conservation group hater and I recognize that these groups have done some good things for habitat, but I fear that we have opened Pandora's Box and conservation tag numbers will continue to increase over time. Both the groups and the DWR are addicted to the money. I am not opposed having a very few limited conservation tags but I would like to see a significant decrease.

Now, the cattle ranchers are licking their chops with the thought of receiving some tags to sale. My father grew up in the ranching business so, once again, I have no real beef with ranchers. However, they need to understand that they are already allowed to graze their cattle on public lands in exchange for nominal fees. Grazing permits are a subsidy in and of themselves. Now, ranchers are asking for hunting tags so that they can sell them and raise additional revenue. This is ridiculous.

First, it was the conservation tags, then it was convention tags, now we are talking about "cattlemen tags." Who are we going to give special tags to next? The environmental groups? Since we apparently cannot control our appetite for big money tags, I vote that we get rid of them all.

Hawkeye
 
wasnt it the cattle men that shot down a UBA proposal for the archry elk season changes? SFW I believe passed it or agreed with it.



Archery is a year round commitment!!
 
I will admit I dont know all about where the money is supposed to be spent by law. BUT you cant possibly say that the millions of dollars that is raised by giving away a couple of hundred tags every year for the Sportsmans Expo gets spent here.

A couple of months back at the central RAC meeting involving the big game propsals the Cattleman rep wasnt opposed to raising tags numbers one bit, and Im going to assume that it was the same at the other meetings as well.

Im not saying that I support giving them tags. Im against giving out tags for the most part, there are already way to many people making too much money off our tags. I just think if something like this does happen take some of the tags from others.
 
If the cattlemen want more area to graze to be profitable they should make those improvements as part of their long-term grazing permits. It's kind of backwards to me. "I would like subsidies from the public to help make my already discounted pasture even more profitable". Maybe we should supply the diesel to haul them back and forth.
 
I agree, there has been WAY to much welfare ranching in this state. I think we should just get rid of all the cattle, then they would not have to worry about grazing on public lands. Why should we as sportsman pay the price for the damage that their cows have made? It seems that if they follow through with this plan they concede that their cattle DOES do damage to the range. If that is so, then why should it continue? This will go nowhere. It would be privitation of a public resource and they wont go there.
 
"A couple of months back at the central RAC meeting involving the big game propsals the Cattleman rep wasnt opposed to raising tags numbers one bit, and Im going to assume that it was the same at the other meetings as well."

An increase in tags is NOT the issue. We are saying the cattlemen, including those representing on the Central RAC ARE opposed to HERD numbers.

As for the money being spent out of state, if YOU can show where ONE penny from these conservation tags is spent out of Utah, post it up! That would be illegal and I will gladly help end such policy. I am willing to bet NO such evidence can/will be produced as it is nothing more than nonsense.

PRO

Define, develop, and sustain BOTH trophy and opportunity hunts throughout the state of Utah.
 
I side with Pro here.

All the money....every dime, raised from an auction tag, issued by the State Wildlife Dept, regardless of what organization auctioned it, goes back to the the State wildlife agency.

With the possible exception of some obscure landowner tags, those funds belong to the State. Period.

The auctioning organization makes their money from attendance, donated raffle prizes and membership drives.....no percentage at all, from any auction tag given by the State.

Your State may or may not put that money into it's general fund, but it ALL stays in that particular State.

In California, it is a mandate that the funds go directly to programs that enhance projects for the game animal that the tag applies to.

All that being said.....the cattlemen can go kick turds on this one. They don't need or want these game animals on their leases and only tolerate them now because they have to.
 
Heck, while we're at it why don't we give the wolf lovers a few conservation tags. They could use the money to improve the habitat for the big game animals and cattle, then we could grow more wolves without such a big impact on the big game herds and livestock. Win Win for everyone!
 
Pro-- I agree with you on this point. I do think it is important to work with cattleman who's land is utilized by elk, especially winter range. Unfortunately, there are some that will not allow hunting on their land, even though they are having depredation problems. However, I know of many rancher/landowners that love to see and have elk on their lands and are very open to having legit hunting. We need to make sure and continue to work with those kind of folks who really do enjoy wildlife. As for another kind of group being given permits to help raise funds, I am more inclined to allow that to happen but from within a specified number of "conservation" permits that the DWR would give out each year and allocated among the various groups.. I am very much against taking away any more tags that should go to individual hunters in the draw and would vote against any such proposal.
 
I am at this time making a new proposal. Please give me some tags! I promise that if you give me some tags I will go out and kill as many coyotes and other varmints as I can. This will not only improve my outlook on hunting but will singlehandedly change the deer and elk numbers in Utah. Just remember if you give me tags I will get er done. Excuse me, now I must call my congressman.
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom