Is IT Time To Eliminate OIL Tag Auctions?

[JimmyHoffa]

A normal person has to wait something like 20 years (20 points) to draw a tag that will likely be OIL in the more coveted regions and about 10 years (points) for other quality bull tags.  Given the poor odds, it does seem like those tags would be better off tossed in the draw.  But realistically, it would only account for another 10 or so elk, with 50% success, maybe 20 additional tags.

[Bob33]

@Bob33

Where does the money go?

That information is not readily available; it would require a PDR request: http://wdfw.wa.gov/about/public_disclosure/

The best you can do without a PDR is this WAC: https://app.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=220-412-060

6. Revenue from the sale of single-species auction permits shall be used for the management of that species and revenue from the sale of multiple-species auction permits shall be used for game management. Except, that the hunting license fees for the appropriate species shall be considered part of the auction price and be deducted from the auction revenue. A hunting license and transport tag will be mailed to the successful bidder.

[pianoman9701]

Your arguments are the same I use for instructor, master hunter etc.. draws. One pool of tags that all compete in is my preference. If you want to buy a hunt, go hunt the farms.

It's different because you don't have to be rich to become a MH or Hunter Ed instructor. Anyone can. You just have to have the commitment to do so and do the work required. We don't have enough instructors for students now. If you eliminate the incentive permits for Hunter Education, we'll lose some of them and that means a drop in new hunter participation overall - bad thing. The same goes for the MH program and volunteerism. Right now, MHs contribute a minimum of 16,000 hours per year of volunteer conservation work, and the actual figure is much higher than the minimum. If you eliminate those incentives, we would lose some - bad thing. How would you replace those volunteer hours? I personally don't care about the tags and haven't been chosen for either of the two damage hunts that I've drawn - there are no guarantees. I would do the program without them. But the hours are contributing to our abundant wildlife and it costs the state little or nothing to get those hours. This should be a different topic. It has nothing to do with how rich you are.

[Bob33]

A normal person has to wait something like 20 years (20 points) to draw a tag that will likely be OIL in the more coveted regions and about 10 years (points) for other quality bull tags.  Given the poor odds, it does seem like those tags would be better off tossed in the draw.  But realistically, it would only account for another 10 or so elk, with 50% success, maybe 20 additional tags.

It could be that the funds generated from auction and raffle sales, if used appropriately could increase the number of animals available and thus the number of permits available in the general draws.

[Redbeard]

Tags should go.

I believe we should all be on a level playing field when obtaining tags.

Anything after that if your money or success in life helps you tag that animal well good for you.

[JDHasty]

I have given a bit of thought to this and one thing I would advocate for is that the Raffle & Auction Tags would still be good from September 1 - December 31*, but they would not be valid the first five days that any GMU is open for each season.  This still gives those who win all the opportunity they need to take advantage of their tag and to bag an outstanding trophy, but it would not allow them to go in and snipe a trophy out from under someone who has scouted that animal for years and has gotten lucky enough to draw a tag.

I know of at least one instance where a winner of an Auction & Raffle tag tried to go into one GMU and take two outstanding trophies (using modern firearm) from that one unit before anyone else, particularly those who finally drew a Quality tag, has an opportunity in that unit.

*I would also open it up to the Auction/Raffle Tag winners for archery five days after Archery first opens in each unit and let it run through Dec 31.  Open it for the  Auction/Raffle Tag winners for ML five days after ML first opens in each unit and let it run through Dec 31. and open it for  Auction/Raffle Tag winners for modern firearm five days after modern firearm first opens in each unit and let it run through Dec 31.

However if there were a limit to 10, or 50, or even a hundred Raffle purchases then I would not impose the * clause I have above and would allow it to be open from Sept - Dec.   

[Dhoey07]

Any time you whore out animals to the highest bidder, it doesn't end well.

[JDHasty]

Any time you *censored* out animals to the highest bidder, it doesn't end well.

That is not really fair.  There are a few, the usual suspects, who abuse these opportunities over and over again.  But most of the participants you never hear about.  Here is the story of a friend of mine, he used to participate in these opportunities quite a bit:  https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1310&dat=19910922&id=gENWAAAAIBAJ&sjid=mOoDAAAAIBAJ&pg=6525,5192645&hl=en
I know others who have participated too and most of them I have met through these guys have taken the opportunity to challenge themselves.     

[pianoman9701]

I am squarely in the "FOR" category with these auctions and raffles.  I just don't see the down side to a few high dollar opportunities for folks who are willing to pay the price.  I know it ruffles some people's feather to think a rich guy is going to get over on them, but let's be honest.  That guy brings some things to the conservation discussion that you and I don't.  The crowd that the CEO type associates with is not typically a pro hunting crowd, but they are without question a politically active group.  You and I will never be able to express an opinion to them simply because we don't have the access.  The wealthy hunter who buys that ticket can, and often does profess his support for hunting in those high money crowds.  That goes a long way.   The second tangible that comes from these hunts is the ability to keep access where it is easily taken from working hunters.  The same money that buys a rich guy access to trophy game also keeps that access available to everyone else.

Point 1: Surely you're not implying that because a politically active rich guy doesn't get to buy a tag, he's going to turn his back on hunting and conservation? Regardless of his money, even if he did turn his back on hunting and conservation, he's not going to be able to hurt hunting because he's mad at losing his personal tag. I don't care how politically connected he is, he's not going to get anti-hunting laws passed because he doesn't get his way. His representative might support him but no one else's would.
Point 2: That same money could be raised with a lottery for those choice Governor's tags. But instead, everyone gets a chance. The access you speak of isn't currently available to everyone.

Look, I base my opinion on the North American Model. If someone gets to buy better hunting opportunities than I because he's rich and I'm not, that's in direct opposition to the model and that the wildlife belongs to everyone.

[idahohuntr]

One thing that drives my opinion on ending these auction tags - they are so valuable because of the very tight restrictions placed on all the average sportsmen.  So few branch bull tags are given out in many areas that it creates a very good trophy opportunity.  Imagine if we decided to open up many of these eastside units to any bull, and long seasons...what would that eastside elk tag go for then? Because the wildlife is owned by the people of the state, if the people decide to limit/restrict their harvest - they should have an equal shot at getting ANY of the limited opportunities which might exist.  This would, in my view, preclude selling tags to the highest bidder. 

As far as how the money is used from these raffles/auctions...no doubt they at least try to put it to good use.  And if you asked someone at WDFW they would probably mention various habitat improvements, access increase...all things that benefit the average sportsmen.  This at minimum implies if the auctions/raffles go away, we would lose habitat/access etc.  The reality is, if the agency (which has an annual budget in the hundreds of millions per year) suggests we are 400 or 500k per year from losing really important actions/programs that benefit sportsmen...they are out of their minds. Cut a few travel days per year from the staff and other things that amount to budget dust and there is your 400 or 500k.   

[Dhoey07]

Any time you *censored* out animals to the highest bidder, it doesn't end well.

That is not really fair.  There are a few, the usual suspects, who abuse these opportunities over and over again.  But most of the participants you never hear about.  Here is the story of a friend of mine, he used to participate in these opportunities quite a bit:  https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1310&dat=19910922&id=gENWAAAAIBAJ&sjid=mOoDAAAAIBAJ&pg=6525,5192645&hl=en
I know others who have participated too and most of them I have met through these guys have taken the opportunity to challenge themselves.   

I am not talking about individuals, I'm talking about the overall concept.

[JKEEN33]

Your arguments are the same I use for instructor, master hunter etc.. draws. One pool of tags that all compete in is my preference. If you want to buy a hunt, go hunt the farms.

It's different because you don't have to be rich to become a MH or Hunter Ed instructor. Anyone can. You just have to have the commitment to do so and do the work required. We don't have enough instructors for students now. If you eliminate the incentive permits for Hunter Education, we'll lose some of them and that means a drop in new hunter participation overall - bad thing. The same goes for the MH program and volunteerism. Right now, MHs contribute a minimum of 16,000 hours per year of volunteer conservation work, and the actual figure is much higher than the minimum. If you eliminate those incentives, we would lose some - bad thing. How would you replace those volunteer hours? I personally don't care about the tags and haven't been chosen for either of the two damage hunts that I've drawn - there are no guarantees. I would do the program without them. But the hours are contributing to our abundant wildlife and it costs the state little or nothing to get those hours. This should be a different topic. It has nothing to do with how rich you are.

Using this argument we could say all tags should be sold to the highest bidder and then we can pay volunteers with cash. payment is exactly what these additional opportunities are. You want to penalize certain individuals that contribute cash -vs- time?

[trophyhunt]

I'm with Jackelope, keep auction tags, limit number of raffle tags one can purchase in each category.  But I have to admit, I love it when someone floods the raffle with thousands and some guy gets it who put in only a few!   

[rosscrazyelk]

I know people who will not buy the special raffle anymore.
Besides a very small % most of the raffles are won by the person who "buys the raffle" so to speak.
I would bet that the state would make more money if they had a reasonable cap . Maybe limit it to 30 for example. I bet more people would participate that way. Rather than the guy with the most money waiting to the last day to see how many he has to buy to put the odds in his favor because there is no cap.

[pianoman9701]

Your arguments are the same I use for instructor, master hunter etc.. draws. One pool of tags that all compete in is my preference. If you want to buy a hunt, go hunt the farms.

It's different because you don't have to be rich to become a MH or Hunter Ed instructor. Anyone can. You just have to have the commitment to do so and do the work required. We don't have enough instructors for students now. If you eliminate the incentive permits for Hunter Education, we'll lose some of them and that means a drop in new hunter participation overall - bad thing. The same goes for the MH program and volunteerism. Right now, MHs contribute a minimum of 16,000 hours per year of volunteer conservation work, and the actual figure is much higher than the minimum. If you eliminate those incentives, we would lose some - bad thing. How would you replace those volunteer hours? I personally don't care about the tags and haven't been chosen for either of the two damage hunts that I've drawn - there are no guarantees. I would do the program without them. But the hours are contributing to our abundant wildlife and it costs the state little or nothing to get those hours. This should be a different topic. It has nothing to do with how rich you are.

Using this argument we could say all tags should be sold to the highest bidder and then we can pay volunteers with cash. payment is exactly what these additional opportunities are. You want to penalize certain individuals that contribute cash -vs- time?

It's a different topic. Go ahead and start one. This topic is about auction/Governor's tags.