should outfitters split profits with DWR

dogwood · Sep 12, 2007

I pose a question to you all, The animials we all hunt on Public ground belong to us as residents of Utah right, we pay taxes that fund the Division to manage them, we pay taxes to maintain and manage public lands, they belong to each of us. Many of us spend alot of dollars that a sportsman tax is charged and we gladly pay. We have ownership in these animals regardless of what the DWR will tell you. They are just a management organization. My question is, as popularity increases and demand gets so high to harvest these tremendous animals that belong to you and I! Should we not see a return on those investments. I appreciate what "honest Guides" do They work hard for there money, and if anyone thinks it easy their up in the night, But it just seems to me the prices of these animals are being so over inflated and glamorized by a few "Elite" guides that is doing nothing for the average hunter who has just as much of an investment in the animals. YOu can argue that the Hunter is putting up big bucks for it. but so do we. Long term we put up plenty of money to keep these animals going. Who profits the most from that money, is it us as the long term investor, NO, maybe its time the dwr places a "tax" on these excesive dollars being spent on harvesting our animals! Put it back into the system to give more opportunity for the average hunter to get a chance. (if you think the draw is a chance then you are up in the night) Face it, many of us many never get a chance at a premium bull. And if we do only maybe once or twice in a lifetime. Yet our dollars keep paying for it to be maintained. Very few of us have the money to pay the huge dollars being spent right now on trophy hunts. A few who are fortunate hunt year after year and harvest "our" animals. Its time to evaluate it and see what can be done.

alpinebowman · Sep 12, 2007

I have a problem inposing taxes on anyone. there are already to many out there and some want more. Don't penalize a man for making a living. people get what they pay for and some people want a lot. Then you also get into wether or not an animal is a trophy or not. Does the guy paying a guide 4,000 and shoots a 320 bull pay the same as a guy that pays 10,000 and shoots a 380 or 400 bull what if that guy shoots a 300 inch bull for 10K. It is a slippery slope my friend.

alpinebowman

>>>---shots that are true pass right through--->

yak4fish · Sep 12, 2007

I'm guessing that outfitters already pay taxes on their fees in the form of income tax. If you wanted to put outfitters income tax into the sportsmen tax fund I could go along with that. If you want to raise income tax you would have to raise everyones not just outfitters.

Allen

Wes · Sep 12, 2007

How about this. Why don't we tax every hunter and fisherman or anyone else who even thinks about looking at a wild animal. And while we're at it we can raise license and tag fees so high NO ONE can afford them then we can put outfitters out of business. Then we can work on doing away with the DWR because they won't be needed when every animal is the King's deer. Or how about this idea. Why don't you morons who want to charge higher fees to every one else just be happy you can still hunt.
Wes

YukonDall · Sep 12, 2007

DOGWOOD....THATS REALLY OUT THERE MY FRIEND....WES, IS KEEPIN IT REAL.....YD.

257Tony · Sep 12, 2007

As a General Contractor should I split my profits with DOPL? Theya re the governing body over my licensing and such, so why not? Because its a stupid idea, thats why.
______________________________________________________

dogwood · Sep 12, 2007

Obviously I didn't get across what I mean, I have nothing against the guide or outfitter, I have guided myself. I guess what I am saying is how far is Trophy hunting going to go! 10 years ago would you ever imagined the price someone would pay for these animals. The DWR can see the value in Trophy animals and more and more Tags Go to those who can lay down those dollars. It just further separates the haves and the havenots. That is all I am saying. Those animals belong to each of us. As a General Contractor that is something totally different. These animals belong to the public! Your lot, or your wood or whatever does not belong to the public. They are harvesting public property and collecting huge fees in return. I know they work there butt off for what the earn, I don't want them to take that away from them at all. I would just like to see some of it come back to enchance the opportunity to hunt. YOu and I who cannot afford to buy a tag, we put alot of time and investment into that one chance to harvest an animal. As the prices go up fewer and fewer will have that opportunity. I don't want to TAX any one any more, I am just wondering if we are all on the same playing feild.

257Tony · Sep 12, 2007

Thats the great part about America. Anybody can go get their guide license and take advantage of the opportunity. I can assure you that if it was as easy as people make it out to be, their would be a whole lot more of them...
______________________________________________________

lchcguide · Sep 12, 2007

The hunters are the ones harvesting the public property as you call it. The hunters are paying for a service to assist in the locating, maybe calling depending on species, field dressing and trophy care. They are also buying the hospitality that an outfitter offers. If the outfitter is the one doing the harvesting of the animal for the hunter then we would have a problem.

Unfortunately we do not all make enough money to have the opportunity to hunt as much as we might like. But that is just life and life is just not fair. As far as the question about outfitters sharing profit is an absolute NO. They worked for their money providing a service and pay their taxes, so the DWR or and Game and Fish office does not need anymore money from the outfitter.

CAelknuts · Sep 12, 2007

Bad idea, really, Really, REALLY BAD IDEA.

You're living in the wrong country if you think this way.

bigbuckchaser · Sep 12, 2007

I leave tommorrow to guide an elk hunter on a limited entry unit. He paid 14,000 for a conservation tag and paid my outfitter almost 5 grand. All of his conservation money goes for habitat improvement ect... We have spent over 50 days and countless tanks of fuel scouting bulls. We pay the U.S Forest service for each ranger district we guide in another $350.00 and the BLM $350.00 in each of its districts. Throw in $400.00 in groceries, another $500.00 for fuel, transportin' horses, gear, meat and cape prep, camp set up and tear down and time away from my day job and I should just stay home and work! I do it for the same reason you do it! I love being in the woods each fall and unless I draw out of state tags I aint going unless its guiding. Even your "elite" guides and outfitters put out dvds and decals to help pay the bills. You could go get licensed and guide if you had enough want to! The average hunter has a great chance if you will work as hard as we do. And you own these animals about like you own that new truck that you're making payments to some bank on. The state owns them and we get lucky sometimes to hunt them. I drew my elk tag last year and hunted all 15 days and never had a chance at a good bull. But i have zero regrets cause atleast I was giving them hell. Stop whining, start working harder and leave our government out of it. They screw up enough stuff!

ICHABOD · Sep 12, 2007

Dogwood,
I think what your post misses is the fact that there are very few "purchased tags" compared to draw tags given out every year.
Furthermore, a large portion of the funds collected on these "purchased" tags are used by the DWR and other agencies to benefit the herds in the state. The hunters purchasing these tags are paying a very high price; money that should satisfy your complaint.
If a person who draws a tag decides to mortgage his home to pay one of the "elite outfitters" as you call them, so be it. It doesnt affect you and me, except of course, that these elite outfitters are very successful, and may take a larger percentage of the Quality bulls. Thats America. An outfitter that is more successfull is going to be in higher demand, and therefore can charge higher fees.
If I go into business and make a better widget than the next guy, I am going to be more successful. If I consistently make superior widgets than everyone else, I will raise my prices commensurate with the quality of my product.
I currently have 14 bonus points foe elk in Utah. Will I ever be able to afford to hire one of these "elite outfitters" when I draw my elk tag? No! Is it fair? Sure! Why not?
Why should they should re-imburse me or anyone else because they are the best at what they do?

dogwood · Sep 13, 2007

Point Taken, I stand corrected, I just wanted to hear others feelings about it all. Good luck big buck chaser, Kill a big one. Its just good to stir some emotions around here and see what poeple think.

T264 · Sep 13, 2007

I totally agree. It always seems to come down to the "haves" and the "have nots". What the hell are we all working for, to get ahead or to better our lives, right? This guy is basically wanting a Robin Hood deal. And sure he has been paying for the public's deer over the years via tags & taxes, however these "rich" guys killing his big elk probably paid more in income taxes last year than the guy complaining has in ten.

T264

OutdoorWriter · Sep 13, 2007

LAST EDITED ON Sep-13-07 AT 09:04AM (MST)[p]The money EACH hunter pays for his license/tag is what comprises the equality for those who hunt DIY or those who pay an outfitter for the services he provides. Using an outfitter doesn't change the value of an elk to the state, i.e. the 'people' who own the resource. How or where that elk is killed is irrelevent. IOW, one elk -- one license/tag per person. -TONY

dogwood · Sep 13, 2007

Man Dudes, I just posed a question, Aren't any of you concerned about the escalation of prices to hunt, 5 years ago I could buy a landowner tag on Diamond Mountain Deer for less that $500.00 Today the price has gone out of control, the same landowner called and offered me a "great deal" for $6000.00. There are less deer on his unit today than 5 years ago. I am just saying thing are getting way out of control. The "trophy" animal has be glamorized to the point of discussed. These are just freaking animals, does it make us supermen to harvest the biggest and the best. Are our ego's such that we are ashamed to harvest and "average animal. That is what I am concerned about how fast it is all blowing way out of proportion. Aren't any of you concerned about it!!!!!!!!!!!!!

overton · Sep 13, 2007

>Man Dudes, I just posed
>a question, Aren't any
>of you concerned about the
>escalation of prices to hunt,
> 5 years ago I
>could buy a landowner tag
>on Diamond Mountain Deer for
>less that $500.00 Today
>the price has gone out
>of control, the same
>landowner called and offered me
>a "great deal" for $6000.00.
> There are less deer
>on his unit today than
>5 years ago. I
>am just saying thing are
>getting way out of control.
> The "trophy" animal has
>be glamorized to the point
>of discussed. These are
>just freaking animals, does
>it make us supermen to
>harvest the biggest and the
>best. Are our ego's
>such that we are ashamed
>to harvest and "average animal.
> That is what I
>am concerned about how fast
>it is all blowing way
>out of proportion. Aren't
>any of you concerned about
>it!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yep I'm concerned. Tax the guide, no. How about we tax every liberal who uses the same public land that hunters use. Hiking $100 a day, photo shoots $500 a day, gripping about hunters $1,000 a day. Hunter harrassment $10,000 a day. We could go higher if needed. Anyone agree?

Ransom