Post by: Monsterbull11 on April 19, 2013, 08:50:00 AM
If you aren't aware, the 2013 Washington game regulations are on-line as of last night. Among the changes that I noticed, there was one that glared out at me. Like most of you, I've been putting in applications to hunt sheep since I could afford too (30 years). In the last few years, the odds haven't increased much to get drawn but the sheep numbers and quality are getting better and that's great. But apparently the state has noticed this also. So on the recent heals of a whole unit of sheep being killed because of a pneumonia outbreak , our beautiful game department has seen fit to take away our Asotin sheep tags and hand them to the Wild Sheep Foundation for raffle. This, to me, is completely wrong. I will be writing both the WDFW and the sheep foundation letters in the next day or so to convey my disgust of the way "OUR" sheep tags are being sold off to the highest bidder. I suggest that we all say something to someone about this. Most guys I know just don't have $50,000 to dump on a tag like this and our draw tags give all of us a shot at hunting a sheep without selling our house to do it.
I'll be the first to admit that I don't have all the facts on this but my gut says "money grab" and that's not right.
Post by: lokidog on April 19, 2013, 09:01:16 AM
Post by: HUNT on April 19, 2013, 09:03:41 AM
Post by: huntnphool on April 19, 2013, 09:04:03 AM
Post by: WAcoueshunter on April 19, 2013, 09:24:01 AM
Post by: huntnphool on April 19, 2013, 09:25:14 AM
Yes, it's a raffle not an auction. But I think the point is still valid - you can effectively buy a raffle by purchasing $50K worth of tickets.Which is why they need to limit each license holder to 5 or 10 tickets each, IMO.
Post by: arrowflinger on April 19, 2013, 09:27:55 AM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: HUNT on April 19, 2013, 09:28:44 AM
Yes, it's a raffle not an auction. But I think the point is still valid - you can effectively buy a raffle by purchasing $50K worth of tickets.Which is why they need to limit each license holder to 5 or 10 tickets each, IMO.
:yeah:
Post by: elkoholic1 on April 19, 2013, 09:37:10 AM
Yes, it's a raffle not an auction. But I think the point is still valid - you can effectively buy a raffle by purchasing $50K worth of tickets.Which is why they need to limit each license holder to 5 or 10 tickets each, IMO.
:yeah:
:yeah: x2
Post by: Monsterbull11 on April 19, 2013, 09:41:22 AM
Post by: NoBark on April 19, 2013, 09:48:26 AM
Post by: 3nails on April 19, 2013, 10:08:56 AM
:yeah: x3Yes, it's a raffle not an auction. But I think the point is still valid - you can effectively buy a raffle by purchasing $50K worth of tickets.Which is why they need to limit each license holder to 5 or 10 tickets each, IMO.
:yeah:
:yeah: x2
Post by: link on April 19, 2013, 10:32:09 AM
Post by: jackelope on April 19, 2013, 10:42:25 AM
Booo..... put a limit on the raffle tickets that can be sold, otherwise you're taking our wild sheep hunting opportunities away from the regular guys like me.
Post by: WAcoueshunter on April 19, 2013, 10:51:10 AM
Thank you coueshunter, that's exactly what I meant. Not so good at speach make'n.
No problem, thanks for bringing it to our attention. I agree, doesn't seem right that the only tag for an entire species can be bought. If there's two tags, okay split them. But if there's only one, I think it needs to be in the regular draw.
Post by: huntnphool on April 19, 2013, 10:58:57 AM
If that's the case I am glad I'm not a member of that organization. As was made clear the last couple years, raffle tags have become more of an auction anymore with people dropping $20-30k on raffle chances.+1
Booo..... put a limit on the raffle tickets that can be sold, otherwise you're taking our wild sheep hunting opportunities away from the regular guys like me.
Post by: deadwoodbuck on April 19, 2013, 11:06:36 AM
Quote
If that's the case I am glad I'm not a member of that organization. As was made clear the last couple years, raffle tags have become more of an auction anymore with people dropping $20-30k on raffle chances.
Booo..... put a limit on the raffle tickets that can be sold, otherwise you're taking our wild sheep hunting opportunities away from the regular guys like me.
+1
x10 what booship
Post by: HUNTINCOUPLE on April 19, 2013, 11:16:17 AM
Post by: Ridgerunner on April 19, 2013, 11:33:54 AM
Post by: Ridgerunner on April 19, 2013, 11:36:44 AM
Post by: jackelope on April 19, 2013, 11:39:42 AM
This was planned for a few years.
Wsf is taking back that raffle this year I believe last year the Wdfw did it. Wsf is a good organization that does a lot for sheep in this state. I think ram numbers are down in the asotin herd as well.
Your Asotin sheep tag just got sold to the highest bidder.
(well, not yours, because you already got one).
Post by: MtnMuley on April 19, 2013, 11:44:54 AM
If that's the case I am glad I'm not a member of that organization. As was made clear the last couple years, raffle tags have become more of an auction anymore with people dropping $20-30k on raffle chances.+1
Booo..... put a limit on the raffle tickets that can be sold, otherwise you're taking our wild sheep hunting opportunities away from the regular guys like me.
+2
Wsf is taking back that raffle this year I believe last year the Wdfw did it. Wsf is a good organization that does a lot for sheep in this state. I think ram numbers are down in the asotin herd as well.
I am a member of the WSF and think it's a great organization as well, but this is total *censored* to take the OIL tag and put it up for raffle through WSF. Even if they are dropping the tag to one with the pneumonia, it should be for the OIL drawing. :twocents: :tdown: to WDFW once again.
Post by: provider on April 19, 2013, 02:35:02 PM
Post by: link on April 19, 2013, 02:42:34 PM
Post by: coachcw on April 19, 2013, 06:45:30 PM
Post by: huntnphool on April 19, 2013, 07:44:38 PM
limit it to $100.00 per catigory . From what I've heard the sinilikan herd is doing well ??? . and one ram tag isn't gonna hurt the over all number of the herd.thats too much for most people. If it were limited to 5-10 tickets then more would likely participate, thinking they have as good a chance as anybody. If you go as high as $100 then the mindset still remains its too expensive to try. :twocents:
Post by: trophyhunt on April 19, 2013, 07:55:48 PM
Post by: chukarchaser on April 21, 2013, 07:36:08 PM
Post by: huntnnw on April 21, 2013, 11:03:56 PM
Post by: jackelope on April 22, 2013, 11:04:58 AM
Post by: chukarchaser on April 22, 2013, 11:58:46 AM
Post by: jackelope on April 22, 2013, 01:13:57 PM
I still want a cap on raffle tickets.
Post by: huntnphool on April 22, 2013, 01:55:02 PM
As I understood it and if I recall correctly, for the foreseeable future. WSF donates the raffle money directly to WSU for research. That doesn't happen with the wdfw run raffles. If there was no research money, there'd be no sheep. As it sits right now there may be no sheep. Again, look at what happened In the Tieton unit this year or the umtanum last year. Not sure Bigtex has much info on this as he is in law enforcement. I could be wrong though.:yeah: How can we push for a cap?
I still want a cap on raffle tickets.
Post by: RaffleMule on April 22, 2013, 02:33:23 PM
Do you feel it's unfair someone with the means to buy 2500 tix should win a raffle even if it has no effect on the person buying one ticket?
Just asking......
Post by: jackelope on April 22, 2013, 02:40:49 PM
:chuckle:
I don't want to say that it's unfair for a guy to drop $40k on raffle tickets but come on...look at last year. At least 2 raffle tickets for elk and the 3 deer were basically bought at $20k+ spent on the tickets. Tell me someone isn't going to "buy" the chance to hunt these sheep?? It's a double edged sword. You're damned if you do and damned if you don't. At least everyone would have the same chance. It may be a bad chance but its equally bad across the board.
Post by: B.G.hunter on April 22, 2013, 02:48:30 PM
It's a double edged sword.:yeah:
Post by: whacker1 on April 22, 2013, 02:50:10 PM
Phool/Jackelope, I'm not disagreeing with you but why do you want a cap? I have heard multiple people ;) make an argument that more tickets would be sold if there were a cap therefore decreasing a persons odds of drawing.
Do you feel it's unfair someone with the means to buy 2500 tix should win a raffle even if it has no effect on the person buying one ticket?
Just asking......
I have quit buying tickets in certain raffles, because there have been several people that have come in and bought 1000 tickets and total 2500 sold for that raffle. I agree that they should have a 1 in 3 chance in winning with buying that many tickets, but I can only afford to maybe buy 10 - 20 tickets if I isolate to one raffle. But typically I buy 1 NE raffle, 1 sheep raffle, 1 SE raffle, 1 mule deer, 1 moose, 1 eastern elk, and maybe a handful of others or double up to 2. It deters people from buying 1 or 2 tickets when the person that buys 1000 tickets and wins year after year in different categories.
If there were someone that were willing to admit that they bought 1000 tickets and lost, well that would be a win for the little man, but we don't hear about that. We just here about the other scenario.
But it is hard to say no to a raffle ticket when the cause is research as it is in this case. I wish WDFW would change them all so that 100% of proceeds went to research for all raffles.
Western Elk could go to hoof rot.
NE raffle could go to wolf research as that is the population deal breaker right now.
etc. etc. etc.
Post by: RaffleMule on April 22, 2013, 02:57:20 PM
But, the sentiment on here is the odds wouldn't change by putting a cap on it. Therefore, maybe we are making too big a stink about it when our odds are the same either way.
I know, easy for me to say but would people have been pissed if they didn't know John Doe bought 40K worth of tickets?
Post by: huntnphool on April 22, 2013, 02:58:04 PM
Phool/Jackelope, I'm not disagreeing with you but why do you want a cap? I have heard multiple people ;) make an argument that more tickets would be sold if there were a cap therefore decreasing a persons odds of drawing.Regardless of odds, I would much rather see the tags go to someone that otherwise would never have the funds available to purchase one of these hunts on their own. Lets face it, if someone has the means to drop 2500 chances into the pot then they also have the means to simply bid in the auctions. :twocents:
Do you feel it's unfair someone with the means to buy 2500 tix should win a raffle even if it has no effect on the person buying one ticket?
Just asking......
Post by: whacker1 on April 22, 2013, 02:59:33 PM
Phool/Jackelope, I'm not disagreeing with you but why do you want a cap? I have heard multiple people ;) make an argument that more tickets would be sold if there were a cap therefore decreasing a persons odds of drawing.Regardless of odds, I would much rather see the tags go to someone that otherwise would never have the funds available to purchase one of these hunts on their own. Lets face it, if someone has the means to drop 2500 chances into the pot then they also have the means to simply bid in the auctions. :twocents:
Do you feel it's unfair someone with the means to buy 2500 tix should win a raffle even if it has no effect on the person buying one ticket?
Just asking......
spot on.......which is why I don't buy a ticket in the ones that are obviously getting bought by big spenders.
Post by: huntnphool on April 22, 2013, 03:03:31 PM
Which is what I suggested a while ago in a different thread.which is why I don't buy a ticket in the ones that are obviously getting bought by big spenders.Phool/Jackelope, I'm not disagreeing with you but why do you want a cap? I have heard multiple people ;) make an argument that more tickets would be sold if there were a cap therefore decreasing a persons odds of drawing.Regardless of odds, I would much rather see the tags go to someone that otherwise would never have the funds available to purchase one of these hunts on their own. Lets face it, if someone has the means to drop 2500 chances into the pot then they also have the means to simply bid in the auctions. :twocents:
Do you feel it's unfair someone with the means to buy 2500 tix should win a raffle even if it has no effect on the person buying one ticket?
Just asking......
So would you participate in the raffle if there was a 5 or 10 ticket cap?
Post by: RaffleMule on April 22, 2013, 03:05:47 PM
[/quote]
+1
Although, you're starting to sound like Obama! :chuckle:
Post by: jackelope on April 22, 2013, 03:06:23 PM
It's totally unfair if someone spends 40K and it diminishes the odds of someone who buys one ticket.Maybe it's psychological to me. I don't buy raffle tickets anymore. What's the point. How much did the guy spend on the eastside elk raffle last year? $30k?? That's more than 1k tickets isn't it? I don't even remember how much they cost.
But, the sentiment on here is the odds wouldn't change by putting a cap on it. Therefore, maybe we are making too big a stink about it when our odds are the same either way.
I know, easy for me to say but would people have been pissed if they didn't know John Doe bought 40K worth of tickets?
Post by: huntnphool on April 22, 2013, 03:10:35 PM
Regardless of odds, I would much rather see the tags go to someone that otherwise would never have the funds available to purchase one of these hunts on their own. Lets face it, if someone has the means to drop 2500 chances into the pot then they also have the means to simply bid in the auctions. :twocents:
Quote
+1
Although, you're starting to sound like Obama! :chuckle:
You are confused, Obama would have those that have the means to purchase 2500 tickets taxed higher, then use that tax revenue to purchase tickets and hand them out to those that can't afford to purchase their own, big difference! ;)
Post by: whacker1 on April 22, 2013, 03:24:21 PM
Which is what I suggested a while ago in a different thread.which is why I don't buy a ticket in the ones that are obviously getting bought by big spenders.Phool/Jackelope, I'm not disagreeing with you but why do you want a cap? I have heard multiple people ;) make an argument that more tickets would be sold if there were a cap therefore decreasing a persons odds of drawing.Regardless of odds, I would much rather see the tags go to someone that otherwise would never have the funds available to purchase one of these hunts on their own. Lets face it, if someone has the means to drop 2500 chances into the pot then they also have the means to simply bid in the auctions. :twocents:
Do you feel it's unfair someone with the means to buy 2500 tix should win a raffle even if it has no effect on the person buying one ticket?
Just asking......
So would you participate in the raffle if there was a 5 or 10 ticket cap?
Yes, I would be more likely.
I watch the ticket sales about every time they update, and it usually becomes pretty obvious which of the raffles had a big ticket buyer come into the equation. A few years ago the NE raffle was running really light, so I bought a rafflet ticket, and then a few weeks later, the number of tickets sold went from 700 range to 1700 range. Not rocket science to figure out that someone bought 500-750 tickets. So I didn't buy any more raffle tickets in that category that year.
Next year I watched them all to the end and then selected a couple of them and bought 2 or 3 tickets in each of those 2 categories.
Post by: whacker1 on April 22, 2013, 03:26:30 PM
Regardless of odds, I would much rather see the tags go to someone that otherwise would never have the funds available to purchase one of these hunts on their own. Lets face it, if someone has the means to drop 2500 chances into the pot then they also have the means to simply bid in the auctions. :twocents:Quote+1
Although, you're starting to sound like Obama! :chuckle:
You are confused, Obama would have those that have the means to purchase 2500 tickets taxed higher, then use that tax
revenue to purchase tickets and hand them out to those that can't afford to purchase their own, big difference! ;)
No you are both wrong....Obama would have those that have the means to purchase 2500 tickets taxed at higher rate, then use the tax revenue to lobby against gun ownership.....for everyone except congress and the president.....And in the fall Obama would win the raffle and hunt sheep in Asotin.
Post by: Bwana Bob on April 22, 2013, 03:29:36 PM
Post by: ramslam on April 22, 2013, 03:46:13 PM
First, let's look at the history of the Rocky raffle as I think it will help understand the situation. The idea of the Rocky raffle began way back in late 2003/early 2004, we were still suffering the lingering impact (and we still are) of the 95/96 pneumonia die-off the great Hells Canyon area. All Rocky units in WA had been closed since about 1996 and it didn’t appear we were getting closer to a huntable population yet we had a few scattered mature rams. Because the older rams were scattered and none of the units met the state requirements to hold a hunt (there is an equation that is used to determine permit levels that is a percentage of the class 3 and 4 rams), having a draw permit was not an option. Imagine waiting x-number of years to draw a sheep permit, the one older ram dies or moves out of the unit before your season opens and you're left with virtually nothing to hunt. There needed to be a way to offer a hunt that was flexible each year in what units were hunted as well as with multiple units open.
So, the idea was presented to the state in 2004 to have a Rocky raffle but under different stipulations than the current Cali raffle (minimum 2 draw permits before the raffle would be available). The local bio's could designate which units would be open each year with a few different areas to choose from and allow someone the chance to hunt these few scattered mature rams. Again, these would include units that are not eligible for a draw permit because of the low number of mature rams. At the same time, it would provide an important revenue source to help with the intensive monitoring and research at WSU. For $20, any person could buy a chance to win the coveted hunt.
It took a year but this idea was on its way to fruition in April 2005 when the unexpected happened. I got a call from WDFW that said our Rocky raffle was going to be voted on by the commission the next day and they anticipated it passing. The caveat was the commission wanted to make it an auction tag and not a raffle! Luckily I was on spring break and could drive to Spokane the next day to testify before the commission as did a fellow WA WSF board member. We guaranteed the commission that WA WSF would sell at least $50,000 in raffle tickets or we would donate the balance. In the end, the raffle idea prevailed and the commission accepted our proposal. We had a Rocky permit that would allow the consumable usage of some big ol rams while generating a revenue source to try to solve the disease issue with domestic sheep/goats.
In the eight years (2005-2012) of the Rocky raffle, rams have been harvested from the Tucannon, Wenaha, Mtn View, Black Butte, Hall Mtn and Asotin herds. In many of these situations, the Rocky raffle was the only Rocky permit in Washington; same as 2013. Our greatest revenue was $112,000+ and our lowest was about $56,000+. In 2010, WDFW marketed the raffle and generated about $48,000. WA WSF markets the permit and then has WDFW conduct the actual drawing. We are all sheep nuts too and buy tickets so it’s important to have WDFW conduct the actual ticket drawing.
WA WSF bids on the opportunity to market the permit every June. Every other conservation group bids on offering auction permits as well. As I mentioned, we did not market the tag in 2010 as our bid was rejected from the state. That was the year of the “multi-species” raffle and two of our Cali tags were pimped out to fund other species in the North Central raffle and the South Central raffle. At the same time, WDFW increased the administrative take from the raffle and auction to over 15%. Our bid was to retain 100% of the Rocky raffle revenue but that all 100% of the funds would be available for bighorn projects—WA WSF would not retain the standard 10-15%. Basically, we were guaranteeing more money would go back to sheep! I guess that wasn’t acceptable to WDFW?!?! WA WSF board members have written a truck load of letters to WDFW and the commission adamantly opposing the excessive Cali raffles—I sure hope all of you have as well. We should have one and only one! I promise you, there is not a conservation organization in this state that watches over the auction/raffle program like WA WSF. We lobbied to maintain the individual species funding requirement for species-specific raffles/auctions as well as filed a public disclosure request to get all raffle and auction expenditures out on the WDFW website.
The herds available to the Rocky raffle are set over a year in advance of the hunt (unless a biological emergency occurs) and are determined by WDFW. Again, considering the flexibility of offering multiple units that may or may not meet the state requirements for a hunt, WA WSF does not feel we are “taking” a permit away, but instead offering opportunity when one would not usually exist. For 2013, the Rocky raffle winner may or may not hunt Asotin so it will not guarantee a harvest from that herd. There seems to be a bigger group of up-and-comers so I sure hope we add a draw permit back in Asotin sometime soon.
This is getting far more long-winded than I anticipated but I hope that some background of what and why the Rocky raffle is conducted. Now, let’s look at the second issue of number of tickets to be purchased. I promise this is short!
There is no question some big money is being spent on raffles, the Rocky raffle not excluded. If you feel strongly enough about the issue, write the commission. If the directive is given to us by WDFW we will follow it without hesitation. I’m only guessing here but since the purpose of the raffle is also to raise funds, if WA WSF put a limit of x-number of tickets in our future bids I’m sure it would be rejected and WDFW would conduct the raffle. All of your concerns and frustrations are valid, but for 2013 anyway, WA WSF will not be limiting the tickets purchased because it would be a contradiction to the bid we submitted last June for the 2013 Rocky raffle. A couple interesting facts to consider about raffles: the person who has spent the most on the Rocky raffle each year has NEVER won it!!! Also, it only takes one. I know, I bought one $20 ticket for the New Mexico raffle in 2002 and have a desert sheep to show for it. I know “Starbailey” on here bought one or two tickets for the first ever Washington Cali raffle and won it; the following year he won Oregon with a $50 investment. Again, if you want this changed I encourage you to make it happen!
I had the unfortunate opportunity to spend a day in Tieton a few weeks ago for the first round of lethal removal. It absolutely broke my heart to watch. I don’t care if I ever do that again. I know that in the 15 or so years that I’ve been around this sheep stuff we’ve made great strides, researchers have learned more in the last five years than the previous 50. My greatest hope is that with continued financial support of LIMITED and TRANSPARANT auction/raffle programs as well as the financial support of conservation groups we will solve the devastating disease issue with wild and domestic sheep.
Yours in Conservation,
Glen A Landrus
President, WA WSF
Post by: 10heiau on April 22, 2013, 03:54:48 PM
It's totally unfair if someone spends 40K and it diminishes the odds of someone who buys one ticket.Maybe it's psychological to me. I don't buy raffle tickets anymore. What's the point. How much did the guy spend on the eastside elk raffle last year? $30k?? That's more than 1k tickets isn't it? I don't even remember how much they cost.
But, the sentiment on here is the odds wouldn't change by putting a cap on it. Therefore, maybe we are making too big a stink about it when our odds are the same either way.
I know, easy for me to say but would people have been pissed if they didn't know John Doe bought 40K worth of tickets?
2806 tickets at $6 per ticket. So he got it for a mere $16,836. That is a much better bargain than the auction tag that (from what I understand) the same guy bought. He had 2806/4788 = 58.6% of the total 2012 eastside elk raffle tickets.
Post by: whacker1 on April 22, 2013, 04:10:58 PM
It's totally unfair if someone spends 40K and it diminishes the odds of someone who buys one ticket.Maybe it's psychological to me. I don't buy raffle tickets anymore. What's the point. How much did the guy spend on the eastside elk raffle last year? $30k?? That's more than 1k tickets isn't it? I don't even remember how much they cost.
But, the sentiment on here is the odds wouldn't change by putting a cap on it. Therefore, maybe we are making too big a stink about it when our odds are the same either way.
I know, easy for me to say but would people have been pissed if they didn't know John Doe bought 40K worth of tickets?
2806 tickets at $6 per ticket. So he got it for a mere $16,836. That is a much better bargain than the auction tag that (from what I understand) the same guy bought. He had 2806/4788 = 58.6% of the total 2012 eastside elk raffle tickets.
Yes, i agree bargain in comparision to the auction. But $16,836 is more than the average joe that might spend as much as $60 or so. I just feel that there should be a distinction drawn between the raffles and the auctions as overall landscape of participants. I do like the Sheep tag more than any other for the reasons ramslam gave. I do hold the sheep raffle at a greater deal of respect than any of the raffles that WDFW operates. And I also agree that it is about revenue and I don't see the system will change anytime soon.
Post by: starbailey on April 22, 2013, 04:12:16 PM
Post by: huntnphool on April 22, 2013, 04:12:52 PM
Post by: jackelope on April 22, 2013, 04:13:22 PM
Right. Proved my point. One guy had almost 60% of the raffle tickets. They may as well just call it another auction. I appreciate his money, hope it goes to conservation, etc but I'd like a legit chance too.It's totally unfair if someone spends 40K and it diminishes the odds of someone who buys one ticket.Maybe it's psychological to me. I don't buy raffle tickets anymore. What's the point. How much did the guy spend on the eastside elk raffle last year? $30k?? That's more than 1k tickets isn't it? I don't even remember how much they cost.
But, the sentiment on here is the odds wouldn't change by putting a cap on it. Therefore, maybe we are making too big a stink about it when our odds are the same either way.
I know, easy for me to say but would people have been pissed if they didn't know John Doe bought 40K worth of tickets?
2806 tickets at $6 per ticket. So he got it for a mere $16,836. That is a much better bargain than the auction tag that (from what I understand) the same guy bought. He had 2806/4788 = 58.6% of the total 2012 eastside elk raffle tickets.
Post by: jackelope on April 22, 2013, 04:15:34 PM
Post by: 6x6in6 on April 22, 2013, 04:22:14 PM
Post by: Falcon on April 22, 2013, 09:18:08 PM
Thank you for a well rounded response.
I am a proud life member of the WSF and will continue to support this worthwhile organization.
Lots of people talk about conservation.
This organization is doing the work.
Post by: B.G.hunter on April 22, 2013, 09:33:06 PM
Post by: lhrbull on April 23, 2013, 05:25:08 AM
Post by: boneaddict on April 23, 2013, 06:06:05 AM
If that's the case I am glad I'm not a member of that organization. As was made clear the last couple years, raffle tags have become more of an auction anymore with people dropping $20-30k on raffle chances.
Booo..... put a limit on the raffle tickets that can be sold, otherwise you're taking our wild sheep hunting opportunities away from the regular guys like me.
AGREED!
Post by: Monsterbull11 on April 23, 2013, 10:59:44 AM
I very much apprecite you taking the time and shedding some light on this. As I said in the initial statement, I didn't have all the facts and this has helped greatly.
For better or worse, I've grown very cynical over the years when stuff like this pops up and there wasn't some sort of explanation. Especially when I hear about it from my beloved game department.
Again, thank you for your time and all the facts.
Post by: bugs n bones on April 29, 2013, 02:35:42 PM
Post by: jackelope on April 29, 2013, 02:44:18 PM
I was told 10 tieton sheep tags were given to the natives last week, anyone hear of this??
Is there even 10 Tieton sheep left?
Post by: bugs n bones on April 29, 2013, 02:51:50 PM
Post by: coachcw on April 29, 2013, 03:12:03 PM