Guaranteed Outfitter Tags??? Poll

Should outfitters be guaranteed a certain percentage of the tags each year.

  • Yes

    Votes: 19 9.3%
  • No

    Votes: 186 90.7%

  • Total voters
    205
  • Poll closed .

BrianID

Very Active Member
Messages
2,148
There was another thread that I didn't want to highjack that this was being discussed and thought it would be better to start a new thread.

Should outfitters be guaranteed a certain percentage of the tags given by a state?
For example NM currently guarantees outfitters 10% of the tags.
 
I think a small percentage should be guaranteed, but not in premier low quota areas. Also I have never paid for an outfitter in my life and I don’t see it ever happening unless I go to Alaska.
Matt
 
I could understand a transition period of phasing out the outfitter guaranteed tags over a 5 year period but don't think they should be guaranteed tags.

 
Hell no, New Mexico taking 10% of the 15% of nonresident tags is asinine, if they are going to do it there should be some resident tags in that pool as well not just non residents.
 
Tristate,

You just like argue. We should also reserve 25% of the tags for those that have a contract with a taxidermist as well. It would help the economy.
 
When you say 'give out, what does that mean.? Like they given to them at no cost to then sell for profit.? Why would anyone except outfitters be FOR that.?
 
When you say 'give out, what does that mean.? Like they given to them at no cost to then sell for profit.? Why would anyone except outfitters be FOR that.?
When you enter the draw and put in under an outfitter’s license number you are in the 10% pool, meaning only people that are with an outfitter are trying to and can draw that 10% of tags out of each unit/Hunt.

It also means that if you are out of state and do not put in with an outfitter you pretty much screwed when it comes to your chances of pulling a tag.
 
Nope. No way. No how.

Let the free market decide who stays in business and who doesn't. The rest of us live in that world...
Awesome. Then put every tag up for auction.

Let's be honest. The free market doesn't distribute tags through a draw.

The closest example of a free market distribution of tags is the auction tags which most on here are against.
 
Awesome. Then put every tag up for auction.

Let's be honest. The free market doesn't distribute tags through a draw.

The closest example of a free market distribution of tags is the auction tags which most on here are against.
So missed the point as you don't understand the gravity the outfitter pool has placed on public draws.

A free market absolutely and unequivocally decides who stays in business. If you did shoddy work on taxidermy, you would not be in business very long.

A piss-poor outfitter wouldn't stay in business very long either, however, the outfitter pool allows them to...
 
So missed the point as you don't understand the gravity the outfitter pool has placed on public draws.

A free market absolutely and unequivocally decides who stays in business. If you did shoddy work on taxidermy, you would not be in business very long.

A piss-poor outfitter wouldn't stay in business very long either, however, the outfitter pool allows them to...
No. You missed the point. I DON'T CARE.

A free market economy allows for competition, investment, and maximizing profit margin. You don't get any of that now in a draw system so quit imagining any of this has anything to do with a free market.

This is just one more case of people fighting over who gets to kill the last deer. Meanwhile the herd gets worse and worse and worse. Enjoy your future. You will get the hunting you deserve.

Cookie. Cookie! COOKIE!
 
No. You missed the point. I DON'T CARE.

A free market economy allows for competition, investment, and maximizing profit margin. You don't get any of that now in a draw system so quit imagining any of this has anything to do with a free market.

This is just one more case of people fighting over who gets to kill the last deer. Meanwhile the herd gets worse and worse and worse. Enjoy your future. You will get the hunting you deserve.

Cookie. Cookie! COOKIE!
It’s true, your describing exactly what’s happening to some of the foundations here in Utah, they are thriving and doing well, I think most of us from western states are talking about is actually having a chance to our tags and less for the handouts to the outfitters and for profit foundations
 
I think most of us from western states are talking about is actually having a chance to our tags and less for the handouts to the outfitters and for profit foundations
In Utah yall have been screaming and crying for years over a total number of tags which is less than %2 of your big game tags. Yeah, this is about your "chance".?
 
In Utah yall have been screaming and crying for years over a total number of tags which is less than %2 of your big game tags. Yeah, this is about your "chance".?
So are an authority on every western state? I couldn’t imagine living a thousand miles from somewhere and imagining that I know what’s best for them
 
A free market economy allows for competition, investment, and maximizing profit margin. You don't get any of that now in a draw system so quit imagining any of this has anything to do with a free market.
Thanks for proving my point. An outfitter pool gives a special privilege that takes out the competition for that portion of tags. Some hunters use that advantage to draw a tag against those who cannot use that advantage which goes directly against the allocation of scarce resources of a commonly owned commodity.

I wouldn't expect you to understand...
 
So are an authority on every western state? I couldn’t imagine living a thousand miles from somewhere and imagining that I know what’s best for them
Well I have been watching this whining on an internet forum for a decade.?

By the way Cooper, what state do you live in?
 
Last edited:
Thanks for proving my point. An outfitter pool gives a special privilege that takes out the competition for that portion of tags. Some hunters use that advantage to draw a tag against those who cannot use that advantage which goes directly against the allocation of scarce resources of a commonly owned commodity.

I wouldn't expect you to understand...
And you still don't understand that you aren't using logic. You seem to be thinking there is some moral superiority of a free market economy that you don't partake in now with a draw system run like socialized welfare for everyone.
 
SO you, COOPER, don't live in New Mexico either??????

Well then practice what you preach and only comment on Utah topics. Hypocrite.
 
I think guides play a role in hunting. I think the original intent was to help insure local guides can stay in business. There is considerable investment in time and gear to be a professional guide and they need clients with tags. Slip them a bone.

I'm not real fond of out of state guides who swoop in, make a profit, and then go back home after the season. I think it defeats the purpose.
 
I think guides play a role in hunting. I think the original intent was to help insure local guides can stay in business. There is considerable investment in time and gear to be a professional guide and they need clients with tags. Slip them a bone.

I'm not real fond of out of state guides who swoop in, make a profit, and then go back home after the season. I think it defeats the purpose.
I think there's enough tags that outfitters shouldn't be given any outfitter allocations. Allocating a public asset solely to any particular business is welfare.

No other segment of the businesses that gain financially from wildlife are given tags to prop up their businesses, and the outfitting industry should be no different.
 
Allocating a public asset solely to any particular business is welfare.
Allocating a public asset solely to individuals is also welfare.

So since we have determined that the wildlife agencies are engaged in welfare whether they give it to you or a non resident who wants to spend more money than you in the state, THIS IS JUST AN ARGUMENT OVER YOU THINK YOU DESERVE WELFARE MORE THAN THEM.?
 
Allocating a public asset solely to individuals is also welfare.

So since we have determined that the wildlife agencies are engaged in welfare whether they give it to you or a non resident who wants to spend more money than you in the state, THIS IS JUST AN ARGUMENT OVER YOU THINK YOU DESERVE WELFARE MORE THAN THEM.?
Not true...argue with yourself, you're an expert at that.
 
And you still don't understand that you aren't using logic. You seem to be thinking there is some moral superiority of a free market economy that you don't partake in now with a draw system run like socialized welfare for everyone.
Taxpayer dollars = wildlife management funds = public resource = not for sale to the highest bidder.

Outfitter 'A' is average. Outfitter 'B' is really good. Outfitter 'A' charges 25% less than Outfitter 'B' but both are able to equally profit from the allocation of tags available only to them through an outfitters pool and hunters use this because it gives them the advantage of a more successful draw outcome. Outfitter 'A' stays in business despite being average. In a free market, Outfitter 'A' will either have to find a job as a taxidermist for Outfitter 'B' or step up his game...

What part about that do you not understand?
 
Taxpayer dollars = wildlife management funds = public resource = not for sale to the highest bidder.



What part about that do you not understand?
Actually that's incorrect. Federal state and municipal governments sell public resources to the highest bidder all the time. Somewhere you got lied to and told they don't, or it's dirty business. In reality it's the government trying to maximize the value of the resource.

Hopefully you understand now .
 
Greed? Greed is advocating for the ones with the deepest pockets being able to hunt on a regular basis.

Try and keep up Keebler boy...
Who are the guys with the deepest pockets?????? These are people still trying to draw tags.

Do you really know what's going on here or are you trying to lie so people will support your greed?


Cookie. Cookie! COOKIE!


Look, just admit you want more tags to draw from the pool you draw from.
 
Actually that's incorrect. Federal state and municipal governments sell public resources to the highest bidder all the time. Somewhere you got lied to and told they don't, or it's dirty business. In reality it's the government trying to maximize the value of the resource.

Hopefully you understand now .
Oh BS, you're flat wrong as always...tell me why under Federal Regulations then that a wildlife organization can't legally outbid the current lease holder of a federal grazing lease? Why can't a current federal grazing lease holder be outbid by his neighbor?

If what you think is even close to having a shred of reality to it, the Federal Government would be allowing the free markets to flourish and truly would be maximizing grazing revenue. There are winners and losers chosen, on nothing to do with anything but crony capitalism and "free market" and "maximizing" profits isn't even a proper punch-line.

That is the exact same model that the outfitting lobby is wanting for themselves, crony capitalism via the States assets. The various GF Departments would gain exactly nothing via an outfitter allocation. They can't, under statute and/or regulation, sell the outfitter allocation of tags at a higher R or NR price. They aren't legally allowed to maximize profits.

Like I said, you just like to argue and have zero clue...sell crazy somewhere else...nobody here is buying it.
 
You need to learn how to read slick. I never said they have to or they do sell to the highest bidderin every case. I was just saying they can and do, when they decide to. They are perfectly well within their rights to distribute those assets by any legal means they desire.

We have already shown this isn't a free market no matter how they distribute tags, so I don't understand why you keep coming back to that.

Slow down and reeeeeeead.
 
You need to learn how to read slick. I never said they have to or they do sell to the highest bidderin every case. I was just saying they can and do, when they decide to. They are perfectly well within their rights to distribute those assets by any legal means they desire.

We have already shown this isn't a free market no matter how they distribute tags, so I don't understand why you keep coming back to that.

Slow down and reeeeeeead.
You haven’t even gotten Tri baby worked up until he calls you boy, that’s his I’m mad word?
 
You need to learn how to read slick. I never said they have to or they do sell to the highest bidderin every case. I was just saying they can and do, when they decide to. They are perfectly well within their rights to distribute those assets by any legal means they desire.

We have already shown this isn't a free market no matter how they distribute tags, so I don't understand why you keep coming back to that.

Slow down and reeeeeeead.
Slow down and think for a change...the only place a free market exists is in your mind and fantasyland, if only obviously.
 
SO you, COOPER, don't live in New Mexico either??????

Well then practice what you preach and only comment on Utah topics. Hypocrite.
Slow down and reeeeeead
I referenced Utah, one of the many states you know all about, cmon Gump keep up
 
Negative, NM was just an example of one state getting a percentage of tags. The OP was talking about outfitters in general. Your reading comprehension sucks, slick....
Oh! So the thread topic does include Texas. That makes Cooper a lying crawfishing hypocrite.

Thanks for the correction Grosventre.
 
Actually that's incorrect. Federal state and municipal governments sell public resources to the highest bidder all the time. Somewhere you got lied to and told they don't, or it's dirty business. In reality it's the government trying to maximize the value of the resource.

Hopefully you understand now .

Not when it comes to publicly owned wildlife they don't. We aren't talking about mineral leases...

Who are the guys with the deepest pockets?????? These are people still trying to draw tags.

Do you really know what's going on here or are you trying to lie so people will support your greed?


Cookie. Cookie! COOKIE!


Look, just admit you want more tags to draw from the pool you draw from.

YOU support the 2% tag thing a lot of people are against. We're talking about an outfitter's pool and how it doesn't align with the principles of a free market. Monopolistic competition, maybe, or even an oligopoly. Try and keep up, hoss...

Cake. Cake. CAKE!

And posts from Roadrunner.

About the most idiotic thing I've read in a long time...
 
Not when it comes to publicly owned wildlife they don't. We aren't talking about mineral leases...
You are kidding right????? We literally just went through the annual crybabython about the state governments selling wildlife.

If you missed it just tune in again around January 25th.?
 
You are kidding right????? We literally just went through the annual crybabython about the state governments selling wildlife.

If you missed it just tune in again around January 25th.?
So much stored up knowledge, must be hard carrying all of that info around, can’t wait for your autobiography
 
You are kidding right????? We literally just went through the annual crybabython about the state governments selling wildlife.

If you missed it just tune in again around January 25th.?
Who said anything about this only being about UT?

Again, try and keep up home-slice...

:rolleyes:
 
I have no problem with a sportsman drawing a tag through the normal process and then hiring a guide if he so chooses. I do not supporting allocating a set portion of public tags for those sportsmen who hire guides. We should not be subsidizing the guiding business or unfairly pressuring sportsmen to hire a guide just so that they can increase their chances of drawing a public tag.

Hawkeye
 
You do like welfare.
No.... a small percentage say 1% in areas that are relatively easy to draw, like wilderness units in some states. This gives the “good” outfitters clients.... in this day and age it’s more diy guys out there than ever before. But I also agree with several of the points that Buzz brought up.
Matt
 
You know, for a guy who doesn't care you sure are running your mouth a lot.

Didn't hurt, just amazes me how clueless you really are.

Respond away motor-mouth, it's only for your own ego...
That's what I find funny with you. I actually don't care. I don't care if they get tags. I don't care if they don't get tags. I really don't. However I really do find it amusing to watch people get greedy and then try and justify it. ;)
 
I am going to hate myself in the morning...Anybody that claims a premium LE tag is the same as any other tag (general season tag) is up in the night and a liar. The 2% number is a farce. How about we give the outfitters 2% of the tags...the general season tags and not allow them to guide any LE hunters. After all...it’s still 2%.

This is welfare and anybody that doesn’t want to admit that is not being truthful.
 
Last edited:
No.... a small percentage say 1% in areas that are relatively easy to draw, like wilderness units in some states. This gives the “good” outfitters clients.... in this day and age it’s more diy guys out there than ever before. But I also agree with several of the points that Buzz brought up.
Matt
You can't have it both ways. You like welfare, its ok, I've seen you brag about it before.
 
Tristate already arguing with himself...funny stuff and yes, its entertaining.
In a few more responses Tri will catch himself in favor of not having tags go to outfitters, he just likes people to think he’s important
 
That's what I find funny with you. I actually don't care. I don't care if they get tags. I don't care if they don't get tags. I really don't. However I really do find it amusing to watch people get greedy and then try and justify it. ;)
your motor-mouth responses show otherwise. What you do care about is someone being coddled and receive special treatment because they don't have what it takes to do it in a competitive market and then get bent out of shape when someone makes a comment the coddled should put up or shut up.

Greed has nothing to do with it home-slice...

:cool:
 
I'm a guide for an outfitter here in AZ. Absolutely NOT... outfitters shouldn't get guaranteed tags. If an outfitter can't figure out how to market his business, book hunts and kill mature animals then he shouldn't be in business. Thank God we don't have that garbage here in AZ!!!! We have no issue booking as many hunts as we can possibly handle. As a matter of fact, we have a 2 year waiting list on some hunts. The guys saying it's welfare are 100% correct.
 
Last edited:
All that talk and then denial. Greed is everything to do with it.

The interesting parts of this thread is the logic behind the greed. Some of yall say its welfare. OK. Here's the problem. THE ENTIRE DRAW SYSTEM IS WELFARE. So you look down your nose at one type of welfare all the while praying you can get some welfare. Please forgive me if I am lumping you into this group and you actually don't enter the draws.

Roadrunner, do you enter state hunting draws?

Slightlysober, do you enter hunting draws?

Utah400elk, do you enter hunting draws?

If you answer yes then isn't the natural conclusion is either you aren't being honest, AND THIS IS ABOUT GREED, or you are a hypocrite that thinks you on welfare is morally superior to others on welfare.

:unsure:
 
Sounds to me like these outfitters know how to do that.

Desert Muley Guide,

Do you have any desire to ever hunt or have you hunted sheep, goats or brown bear in Alaska?
No I don't. I would never have the time. I don't even have time to hunt in my own state because we are so busy. If I have to follow laws in other states to hunt, then so be it. I still don't think its right though.
 
Well if you want to hunt those animals in that state you are required to have a licensed guide to do so. Not a percentage of them, but every single one of them. How's that for welfare?

Its not about "right" or "wrong". This is business. Welfare is part of business. No matter how much you don't like it. You may think outfitter draws is welfare and shouldn't exist but if you are guiding anyone who draws a tag you are guiding someone on welfare.
 
Well if you want to hunt those animals in that state you are required to have a licensed guide to do so. Not a percentage of them, but every single one of them. How's that for welfare?

Its not about "right" or "wrong". This is business. Welfare is part of business. No matter how much you don't like it. You may think outfitter draws is welfare and shouldn't exist but if you are guiding anyone who draws a tag you are guiding someone on welfare.
How do you figure? If they paid for their tag... how can it possibly be welfare?
 
Well if you want to hunt those animals in that state you are required to have a licensed guide to do so. Not a percentage of them, but every single one of them. How's that for welfare?

Its not about "right" or "wrong". This is business. Welfare is part of business. No matter how much you don't like it. You may think outfitter draws is welfare and shouldn't exist but if you are guiding anyone who draws a tag you are guiding someone on welfare.
I would also imagine that requiring an outfitter in Alaska would have a lot to do with safety. If it's the law then it's the law, nothing can be done about that.
 
How do you figure? If they paid for their tag... how can it possibly be welfare?
Well these other hunters pay for their tag and they pay a guide.

But to answer your question, when a man pays $20000 for a tag at an auction and you draw the same tag and only have to give the state $400, you just got welfare. You aren't having to pay anywhere close to a fair market value.
 
Well these other hunters pay for their tag and they pay a guide.

But to answer your question, when a man pays $20000 for a tag at an auction and you draw the same tag and only have to give the state $400, you just got welfare. You aren't having to pay anywhere close to a fair market value.
Except the State Game Agency only receives $400 for both tags...
 
I would also imagine that requiring an outfitter in Alaska would have a lot to do with safety. If it's the law then it's the law, nothing can be done about that.
It does have some to do with safety. Still doesn't mean it isn't welfare. There are tons of programs that make sure little children get the nutrition they need so they are healthy. Still doesn't mean it isn't welfare.
 
Well these other hunters pay for their tag and they pay a guide.

But to answer your question, when a man pays $20000 for a tag at an auction and you draw the same tag and only have to give the state $400, you just got welfare. You aren't having to pay anywhere close to a fair market value.
Well I can't say what happens in other states but 100% of the money generated from auction tags in AZ go into what's called the Habitat Partnership Committee fund. That money is then distributed among different critter groups. The tag money is also considered a donation and can be used as a tax write off. So... the draw tag isn't welfare
 
You get your facts straight slick.

Plus it doesn't matter where the money lands. All the money could go to Willy Wonka. It still shows the tag is worth in some cases 100 times more than what a draw winner is paying for it. WELFARE. YOU BUY INTO WELFARE. I BUY INTO WELFARE. ITS WELFARE. We aren't morally superior to these other people so quit acting like it.
 
I would also imagine that requiring an outfitter in Alaska would have a lot to do with safety. If it's the law then it's the law, nothing can be done about that.
Doesn’t make any sense. You can fish, hike, fornicate, bike, atv, whatever you want in the mountains. But you have to hire an outfitter for some species? WELFARE. Nothing to do with safety.
 
Its obvious tristate is ignorant about the meaning of welfare. A hunter paying $400.00 and an outfitter getting tags for free. The two are not the same dumb, dumb.
And that actually isn't how it works dumb dumb. If you want to lie to yourself that's fine. But don't lie to the people.
 
You get your facts straight slick.

Plus it doesn't matter where the money lands. All the money could go to Willy Wonka. It still shows the tag is worth in some cases 100 times more than what a draw winner is paying for it. WELFARE. YOU BUY INTO WELFARE. I BUY INTO WELFARE. ITS WELFARE. We aren't morally superior to these other people so quit acting like it.
Back-peddling has always been your forte'...and ONLY move you have.
 
Well I can't say what happens in other states but 100% of the money generated from auction tags in AZ go into what's called the Habitat Partnership Committee fund. That money is then distributed among different critter groups. The tag money is also considered a donation and can be used as a tax write off. So... the draw tag isn't welfare
All the good will in the world doesn't make something not welfare. In fact almost all welfare is based on the premise that it is going to aid someone or some group.
 

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