RE: BUUUUUUU-YA H!!!
class envy....rich vs. poor guy.......yeah there is some of that on this site; but you know what??? That issue crops up in every segment of our society, doesn't matter if you are talking about mule deer hunting or picking daisy's. I'm not here defending the guys who want to beat this guy up just because he is rich....great for the rich guy! I could care less what his income is. There is a bigger issue here. The question should not be if this is rich guy or a poor guy, it should be what effect does this policy have on our mule deer herds? The simple way to look at it is from the perspective of saying; "This guy paid 50,000 dollars for a deer tag, he is only shooting one deer, and all that money goes to fund better mule deer management, so this is acceptable."
We are basically sacrificing one animal, so that we can add money to the DWR budget. On the surface, it does sound like a good tradeoff, until you dig a little deeper. I am not totally against this concept, but ask yourself, if this is about raising money for the DWR, than a simple question is, are we getting the most money we can out of this sacrificial (and that is what it is, period) buck? I think the answer is NO! Ethically, the very least we should do in this situation is demand that the DWR maximize the revenue from this buck. That can be done much simpler by having a lottery open to all hunters, residents and non-residents, and charge a nominal fee for entry. This would achieve far greater revenue. Secondly, we must also ask ourselves, if the DWR is going to sacrifice (because that is what it is) a majestic buck on the winter range, are they using that money the most wisely that they can? Once again I say NO! Does anybody really believe that the DWR is doing the best job that they can? Guys, the only way state govt agencies respond to the taxpayers is WHEN YOU TAKE THEIR REVENUE AWAY. You don't reward poor management with more money in the name of saving the mule deer.
A couple of more points. How long until the DWR says that they are really hurting for funding, so they need to do two governer tags? And then so and so on. If one is ok, certainly sacrificing 5 bucks certainly is going to hurt anything. So, you have to ask yourself, if they can raise more money, and make this tag available to everybody, through a lottery type system, why are they doing it this way??? They do it this way because the guides want them to do it this way. If they give the tag to a regular guy through a lottery, that guy isn't going to spend 10 grand on hiring a guide, it really is that simple. When big money gets involved in mule deer, there is going to be great pressure for ethics to slip in the harvesting of that deer, but hey, it is no big deal right, because it is only one deer! And all that money is going for a good cause! These types of tags, unless done right, are just one more example of ethics slippage.
And, a couple of disclaimers, I don't know this guy who has this tag, he is probably a very honest ethical guy, I have no idea, so this is not an attack on him personally, it is an attack on the system. Second, please don't try and tell me that the shooting of one big buck is not that big of a deal. Lets switch it around a little bit, lets say that every year, somebody found one huge, dead, poached deer in southern Utah, this site would flip out. I have seen how this site responds when an issue of poaching comes up, so don't tell me it is no big deal.
And, the final point is this, you do not reward poor management at the DWR with MORE money, more money is not going to make them "figure it out" one day! This might be a hard concept to understand, but to improve mule deer herds in the long run, you need to take away the money in the short run. When all those biologists, secrataries, and agency administrators figure it out that you are going to take their funding away ( their jobs) if they do not perform, I can garantuee you that things will change, and they will change rapidly. This whole governer tag thing is ethically slippery, period!
muleguy
