Re: Governor Tag Discussion

[addicted1]

I don’t really understand how they can allow people to put a price on game animals and yet it is illegal to sell game meat. No need to go into why we have the laws, I just have a hard time with governors tags. Knowing I will probably never get to hunt an OIL in Washington makes it even tougher to stomach.

[teanawayslayer]

I don’t really understand how they can allow people to put a price on game animals and yet it is illegal to sell game meat. No need to go into why we have the laws, I just have a hard time with governors tags. Knowing I will probably never get to hunt an OIL in Washington makes it even tougher to stomach.

for one it isn’t a governor tag. It’s an aution tag. Goes to the highest bidder and what does the meat selling thing have anything to do with it? Pay to play. I don’t have the money to buy auction tags but if I did you bet your arse I would buy them!

[addicted1]

You are literally selling a game animal to be harvested. And don’t try telling me that it is selling an opportunity.

[Alan K]

The state sells me meat every year with my general tag too by that logic... 

[link]

You are literally selling a game animal to be harvested. And don’t try telling me that it is selling an opportunity.

Well, I am going to tell you it's selling an opportunity.

[teanawayslayer]

You are literally selling a game animal to be harvested. And don’t try telling me that it is selling an opportunity.

Well, I am going to tell you it's selling an opportunity.

right!

[MtnMuley]

There's been several auction tags went unfilled. Hence definitely an opportunity.

[addicted1]

Okay sure, we’ll cal it an opportunity. An opportunity for a tag that would otherwise be allocated to the OIL draw, sold to the highest bidder. I don’t really care one way or the other, cause no matter what most of us are going to be on the outside looking in. I’d just question how ethic it is to have an auction for tag that extremely rare, as it seems to contradict the very principle of the basic NA mode of conservation. But, that’s just the way I see it. Not trying to propose we get rid of it, just find it interesting. If I had the money I would certainly buy one or two or three.

[MtnMuley]

The funds from auction tags goes towards conservation, so how is that contradicting the basic principle?

[stw]

That  money the governor sheep tag generates goes back to the sheep and putting sheep back on the mountain its not tied in with the normal tag money its good for the sheep it put sheep on the mountain
.
Now the raffle tags thats just a money grab for the state  they pull those tags from are oil tags to make the raffle tags to make money .

[NOCK NOCK]

This always cracks me up that folks believe this.  You don't trust or believe the WDFW/commission on most things.....but you do on this???

READ   "RCW 77.32.530"  Monies from auction tags goes to "wildlife" conservation....... FYI, wolves, griz, spotted owl, cormorants, etc are all wildlife.

[ramslam]

By no means can I verify how it is actually spent but here are the two relevant lines from the RCW you quoted.  In section (4), the "wildlife conservation" references the non-profit that conducts the auction or raffle and what they do with their portion of what's retained. 

(4) After deducting the expenses of conducting an auction or raffle, any revenues retained by a nonprofit organization, as specified under contract with the department, shall be devoted solely for wildlife conservation, consistent with its qualification as a bona fide nonprofit organization for wildlife conservation.
(5) The department's share of revenues from auctions and raffles shall be deposited in the limited fish and wildlife account created in RCW 77.12.170(1). The revenues shall be used to improve game management and shall supplement, rather than replace, other funds budgeted for management of game species. The commission may solicit input from groups or individuals with special interest in and expertise on a species in determining how to use these revenues.

This got me wondering if the WAC that defines how the money can be spent has changed so I looked it up.  It appears to be the same as I recall since the addition of all the multi-species raffles, ie money raised from the single-species auction/raffle permit must be spent on "that species" whereas the multi-species goes to "game management."  (WAC 220-412-060 #6)  Gotta think my south central raffle tickets are funding black bear and cougar management?!?!  But my moose raffle ticket should just be going towards moose.

And no, Nock Nock this doesn't mean I trust them, just that they would be violating the WAC 

[addicted1]

The funds from auction tags goes towards conservation, so how is that contradicting the basic principle?

The animals are the peoples animals, not to wealthiest member of the hunting community. When you start to assign a high value to the animal, that only a small percent of the population can afford you start encroaching on English royalty. That’s how I see it, and I also don’t know how the money is spent. Sure it supposed to go to sheep. But, what does that even look like and what are the results? Certainly has given us more opportunities to my knowledge.

[nwwanderer]

Might look at administrative costs. In the WDFW world it might exceed the 600 grand

[NOCK NOCK]

By no means can I verify how it is actually spent but here are the two relevant lines from the RCW you quoted.  In section (4), the "wildlife conservation" references the non-profit that conducts the auction or raffle and what they do with their portion of what's retained. 

(4) After deducting the expenses of conducting an auction or raffle, any revenues retained by a nonprofit organization, as specified under contract with the department, shall be devoted solely for wildlife conservation, consistent with its qualification as a bona fide nonprofit organization for wildlife conservation.
(5) The department's share of revenues from auctions and raffles shall be deposited in the limited fish and wildlife account created in RCW 77.12.170(1). The revenues shall be used to improve game management and shall supplement, rather than replace, other funds budgeted for management of game species. The commission may solicit input from groups or individuals with special interest in and expertise on a species in determining how to use these revenues.

This got me wondering if the WAC that defines how the money can be spent has changed so I looked it up.  It appears to be the same as I recall since the addition of all the multi-species raffles, ie money raised from the single-species auction/raffle permit must be spent on "that species" whereas the multi-species goes to "game management."  (WAC 220-412-060 #6)  Gotta think my south central raffle tickets are funding black bear and cougar management?!?!  But my moose raffle ticket should just be going towards moose.

And no, Nock Nock this doesn't mean I trust them, just that they would be violating the WAC 

Bold is important!  REMEMBER what our commissions goal is........To have Wolves and Griz "manage" our wildlife....(sheep included)
#6 could mean managing that specie with wolves/griz.

To think auction tags are anything other than a money grab for the state/conducting auctioneer, is very narrow minded IMHO.

PS, as far as any gov. agency violating RCW's/WAC's........that would never happen. 

There is other ways to raise money to support individual species.

When the commission gets their way, the only people hunting will be the millionaires.


WAC 220-412-060
Washington auction hunts.
1. The commission, in consultation with the director, may authorize hunts for big game animals and wild turkeys through auction.
2. When an auction hunt is adopted by the commission, the director shall solicit nonprofit wildlife conservation organizations (hereafter referred to as "organizations") to bid to market and conduct a public auction for the special auction hunt. The department of fish and wildlife shall solicit bids consistent with established state competitive bid rules.
3. The organization interested in conducting an auction for an authorized hunt shall submit a proposal outlining its experience and plan to conduct a public auction. The proposal shall include:
a. Name of the organization, articles of incorporation, and contact person.
b. The date, time, and place of the proposed public auction.
c. The approximate number of people expected to attend the auction.
d. Past experience in conducting auctions.
e. Marketing strategies to be used.
f. Portion of revenue proposed to be retained by the organization.
4. The director will select an organization to conduct an auction.
a. Revenue potential to the department will be a primary criterion in applicant selection.
b. The department shall enter into a contract with the organization identifying specific terms of the contract.
5. The organization shall notify the public about the auction hunt opportunities.
a. The public must be informed of the date, time, and place of the auction and, the organization must hold the auction as specified.
b. The auction must be accessible to the public.
c. Anyone may bid on an auction permit.
d. The organization shall award the hunt to the highest qualified bidder who will then become the auction hunt hunter.
e. The organization shall notify the department of the name and address of the successful bidder within two days of the auction.
f. The department's share of the auction revenue shall be delivered to the department within 30 days of the auction.
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.

I agree with nwwanderer