Raffle permit numbers.

[idahohuntr]

WDFW is going to have to pay for their transparency on these freedom of information requests they handle for those that understand the information is there if you just ask for it.

I was at a town meeting with the WDFW. A guy was complaining about the elk season in his rural area. Had a petition signed by 500 people wanting the season changed. After explaining it all to David Ware, David asked if he could have the list of signatures to review. The petitioner said yes but asked why. Dave said he was going to take a sample of the names on the list and see if the even had hunting licenses or elk tags.

He said if they don’t pay into the system and participate I’m not going to put as much weight on how they think they game should be managed.

It would be really nice to know how much skin everyone has in the game that are complaining about the players and the game.

That's an easy one to answer: if you are a citizen of the State of WA you are an equal co-owner of all the wildlife found within its borders.  That's the 'skin' in the game.

[Skyvalhunter]

How does one go about getting their portion?

[Ghost Hunter]

updated.  Looks like more are buying them now.

Yup, I came off the hill for a trip to town for parts.  Figured I should get in the game.

[Rainier10]

WDFW is going to have to pay for their transparency on these freedom of information requests they handle for those that understand the information is there if you just ask for it.

I was at a town meeting with the WDFW. A guy was complaining about the elk season in his rural area. Had a petition signed by 500 people wanting the season changed. After explaining it all to David Ware, David asked if he could have the list of signatures to review. The petitioner said yes but asked why. Dave said he was going to take a sample of the names on the list and see if the even had hunting licenses or elk tags.

He said if they don’t pay into the system and participate I’m not going to put as much weight on how they think they game should be managed.

It would be really nice to know how much skin everyone has in the game that are complaining about the players and the game.

That's an easy one to answer: if you are a citizen of the State of WA you are an equal co-owner of all the wildlife found within its borders.  That's the 'skin' in the game.

So you are okay with the citizens of King county voting to ban hound hunting of cougars and bear baiting? They don’t all hunt or buy licenses but they want the rules changed and they got it done. They are citizens with skin in the game.

[idahohuntr]

WDFW is going to have to pay for their transparency on these freedom of information requests they handle for those that understand the information is there if you just ask for it.

I was at a town meeting with the WDFW. A guy was complaining about the elk season in his rural area. Had a petition signed by 500 people wanting the season changed. After explaining it all to David Ware, David asked if he could have the list of signatures to review. The petitioner said yes but asked why. Dave said he was going to take a sample of the names on the list and see if the even had hunting licenses or elk tags.

He said if they don’t pay into the system and participate I’m not going to put as much weight on how they think they game should be managed.

It would be really nice to know how much skin everyone has in the game that are complaining about the players and the game.

That's an easy one to answer: if you are a citizen of the State of WA you are an equal co-owner of all the wildlife found within its borders.  That's the 'skin' in the game.

So you are okay with the citizens of King county voting to ban hound hunting of cougars and bear baiting? They don’t all hunt or buy licenses but they want the rules changed and they got it done. They are citizens with skin in the game.

Each voter in King County has the same ownership as a voter in Stevens County.  While I do not like or agree with the initiative it is the prerogative of the citizens of the state to decide how their wildlife is managed.  In this state, a majority do not want their bears and cats chased with hounds. Me being a hunter and not liking it does not mean my vote counts more than another citizens...however uninformed they may be. 

For sake of keeping this thread at least on the raffle permits...lets presume one is arguing you must buy raffle tickets to have a valid opinion on how (or IF) the raffle is conducted.  My contention is that is absurd...its a public resource being raffled off and we all have equal say in how public resources are managed.

I don't need to buy a $6 raffle ticket to have an equal and valid opinion on raffling off extremely limited public resources...No more than I need to be a drunk driver to have a valid opinion on legal BAC limits for traveling a public highway.     

[Bango skank]

Lets all just agree that the raffle system is crooked and wrong and nobody should buy anymore.  Especially whitetail, moose, ne pkg, and three deer.  Everybody should at least boycott those categories.

[jackelope]

WDFW is going to have to pay for their transparency on these freedom of information requests they handle for those that understand the information is there if you just ask for it.

I was at a town meeting with the WDFW. A guy was complaining about the elk season in his rural area. Had a petition signed by 500 people wanting the season changed. After explaining it all to David Ware, David asked if he could have the list of signatures to review. The petitioner said yes but asked why. Dave said he was going to take a sample of the names on the list and see if the even had hunting licenses or elk tags.

He said if they don’t pay into the system and participate I’m not going to put as much weight on how they think they game should be managed.

It would be really nice to know how much skin everyone has in the game that are complaining about the players and the game.

That's an easy one to answer: if you are a citizen of the State of WA you are an equal co-owner of all the wildlife found within its borders.  That's the 'skin' in the game.

So you are okay with the citizens of King county voting to ban hound hunting of cougars and bear baiting? They don’t all hunt or buy licenses but they want the rules changed and they got it done. They are citizens with skin in the game.

Each voter in King County has the same ownership as a voter in Stevens County.  While I do not like or agree with the initiative it is the prerogative of the citizens of the state to decide how their wildlife is managed.  In this state, a majority do not want their bears and cats chased with hounds. Me being a hunter and not liking it does not mean my vote counts more than another citizens...however uninformed they may be. 

For sake of keeping this thread at least on the raffle permits...lets presume one is arguing you must buy raffle tickets to have a valid opinion on how (or IF) the raffle is conducted.  My contention is that is absurd...its a public resource being raffled off and we all have equal say in how public resources are managed.

I don't need to buy a $6 raffle ticket to have an equal and valid opinion on raffling off extremely limited public resources...No more than I need to be a drunk driver to have a valid opinion on legal BAC limits for traveling a public highway.     

If you’re referring to my comments, I was just trying to figure out if the guy was a disgruntled participant or just trolling us. I’ve openly voiced my displeasure in the system in years past and not participated. I wish it was capped. It could be a high cap, like 100 or 500 tickets, but I think more folks would participate if they knew people weren’t buying thousands of tickets at a time in an effort to essentially “buy” the raffle. If I could do that, I might, but I don’t have that kind of dough, and most people don’t. I also greatly appreciate, on the other hand, the $$$ those folks put back to conservation of our wildlife. Not sure how we’d have it otherwise.

[Bango skank]

WDFW is going to have to pay for their transparency on these freedom of information requests they handle for those that understand the information is there if you just ask for it.

I was at a town meeting with the WDFW. A guy was complaining about the elk season in his rural area. Had a petition signed by 500 people wanting the season changed. After explaining it all to David Ware, David asked if he could have the list of signatures to review. The petitioner said yes but asked why. Dave said he was going to take a sample of the names on the list and see if the even had hunting licenses or elk tags.

He said if they don’t pay into the system and participate I’m not going to put as much weight on how they think they game should be managed.

It would be really nice to know how much skin everyone has in the game that are complaining about the players and the game.

That's an easy one to answer: if you are a citizen of the State of WA you are an equal co-owner of all the wildlife found within its borders.  That's the 'skin' in the game.

So you are okay with the citizens of King county voting to ban hound hunting of cougars and bear baiting? They don’t all hunt or buy licenses but they want the rules changed and they got it done. They are citizens with skin in the game.

Each voter in King County has the same ownership as a voter in Stevens County.  While I do not like or agree with the initiative it is the prerogative of the citizens of the state to decide how their wildlife is managed.  In this state, a majority do not want their bears and cats chased with hounds. Me being a hunter and not liking it does not mean my vote counts more than another citizens...however uninformed they may be. 

For sake of keeping this thread at least on the raffle permits...lets presume one is arguing you must buy raffle tickets to have a valid opinion on how (or IF) the raffle is conducted.  My contention is that is absurd...its a public resource being raffled off and we all have equal say in how public resources are managed.

I don't need to buy a $6 raffle ticket to have an equal and valid opinion on raffling off extremely limited public resources...No more than I need to be a drunk driver to have a valid opinion on legal BAC limits for traveling a public highway.     

I’ve openly voiced my displeasure in the system in years past and not participated. I wish it was capped.
I think more folks would participate if they knew people weren’t buying thousands of tickets at a time in an effort to essentially “buy” the raffle. If I could do that, I might, but I don’t have that kind of dough

So, you dont like the sysytem and wish it was capped so people couldnt dump thousands, but if you could afford to do so you might?
  Basically youre saying, "i would like to be a whale but i cant afford it, so i dont want other people to be allowed to." Thats some serious integrity youre displaying there.

[Rainier10]

WDFW is going to have to pay for their transparency on these freedom of information requests they handle for those that understand the information is there if you just ask for it.

I was at a town meeting with the WDFW. A guy was complaining about the elk season in his rural area. Had a petition signed by 500 people wanting the season changed. After explaining it all to David Ware, David asked if he could have the list of signatures to review. The petitioner said yes but asked why. Dave said he was going to take a sample of the names on the list and see if the even had hunting licenses or elk tags.

He said if they don’t pay into the system and participate I’m not going to put as much weight on how they think they game should be managed.

It would be really nice to know how much skin everyone has in the game that are complaining about the players and the game.

That's an easy one to answer: if you are a citizen of the State of WA you are an equal co-owner of all the wildlife found within its borders.  That's the 'skin' in the game.

So you are okay with the citizens of King county voting to ban hound hunting of cougars and bear baiting? They don’t all hunt or buy licenses but they want the rules changed and they got it done. They are citizens with skin in the game.

Each voter in King County has the same ownership as a voter in Stevens County.  While I do not like or agree with the initiative it is the prerogative of the citizens of the state to decide how their wildlife is managed.  In this state, a majority do not want their bears and cats chased with hounds. Me being a hunter and not liking it does not mean my vote counts more than another citizens...however uninformed they may be. 

For sake of keeping this thread at least on the raffle permits...lets presume one is arguing you must buy raffle tickets to have a valid opinion on how (or IF) the raffle is conducted.  My contention is that is absurd...its a public resource being raffled off and we all have equal say in how public resources are managed.

I don't need to buy a $6 raffle ticket to have an equal and valid opinion on raffling off extremely limited public resources...No more than I need to be a drunk driver to have a valid opinion on legal BAC limits for traveling a public highway.     

Fair enough. I personally don’t like the fact that a non hunter in King County can i act legislation that overrides what the game department has decided is the best way to manage our game. In my opinion you should be more involved and more informed than just being a citizen of the state to make those kinds of decisions. Kind of like Mike Roe says, if you are not informed about the candidates don’t go out and vote based on a TV commercial that pulls at your emotions.

Sticking with the topic, I think the raffle system does exactly what it is intended to do, generate a ton of revenue for a financially strapped agency at the very low cost, in my opinion, of a handful of big game animals.

I also believe there are way more big game animals lost to poaching than are taken by these raffle permit holders and there is no revenue generated by poaching for the department.

I think the energy to support the North American model of wildlife management and conservation should be focused on stopping the poaching before we worry about raffle permits.

If the energy in the debate over the raffle system is how to make them more fair so everyone has the same chance of winning one I will say there are definitely areas that energy should be used on in my opinion.

If the goal is for everyone to have the same chance get rid of the raffles and add the one California sheep tag back into the general draw and don’t generate the additional $74,000 that one raffle did last year.

[idahohuntr]

WDFW is going to have to pay for their transparency on these freedom of information requests they handle for those that understand the information is there if you just ask for it.

I was at a town meeting with the WDFW. A guy was complaining about the elk season in his rural area. Had a petition signed by 500 people wanting the season changed. After explaining it all to David Ware, David asked if he could have the list of signatures to review. The petitioner said yes but asked why. Dave said he was going to take a sample of the names on the list and see if the even had hunting licenses or elk tags.

He said if they don’t pay into the system and participate I’m not going to put as much weight on how they think they game should be managed.

It would be really nice to know how much skin everyone has in the game that are complaining about the players and the game.

That's an easy one to answer: if you are a citizen of the State of WA you are an equal co-owner of all the wildlife found within its borders.  That's the 'skin' in the game.

So you are okay with the citizens of King county voting to ban hound hunting of cougars and bear baiting? They don’t all hunt or buy licenses but they want the rules changed and they got it done. They are citizens with skin in the game.

Each voter in King County has the same ownership as a voter in Stevens County.  While I do not like or agree with the initiative it is the prerogative of the citizens of the state to decide how their wildlife is managed.  In this state, a majority do not want their bears and cats chased with hounds. Me being a hunter and not liking it does not mean my vote counts more than another citizens...however uninformed they may be. 

For sake of keeping this thread at least on the raffle permits...lets presume one is arguing you must buy raffle tickets to have a valid opinion on how (or IF) the raffle is conducted.  My contention is that is absurd...its a public resource being raffled off and we all have equal say in how public resources are managed.

I don't need to buy a $6 raffle ticket to have an equal and valid opinion on raffling off extremely limited public resources...No more than I need to be a drunk driver to have a valid opinion on legal BAC limits for traveling a public highway.     

Fair enough. I personally don’t like the fact that a non hunter in King County can i act legislation that overrides what the game department has decided is the best way to manage our game. In my opinion you should be more involved and more informed than just being a citizen of the state to make those kinds of decisions. Kind of like Mike Roe says, if you are not informed about the candidates don’t go out and vote based on a TV commercial that pulls at your emotions.

Sticking with the topic, I think the raffle system does exactly what it is intended to do, generate a ton of revenue for a financially strapped agency at the very low cost, in my opinion, of a handful of big game animals.

I also believe there are way more big game animals lost to poaching than are taken by these raffle permit holders and there is no revenue generated by poaching for the department.

I think the energy to support the North American model of wildlife management and conservation should be focused on stopping the poaching before we worry about raffle permits.

If the energy in the debate over the raffle system is how to make them more fair so everyone has the same chance of winning one I will say there are definitely areas that energy should be used on in my opinion.

If the goal is for everyone to have the same chance get rid of the raffles and add the one California sheep tag back into the general draw and don’t generate the additional $74,000 that one raffle did last year.

I think we can all agree efforts to stop poaching are worthy and good for conservation...but it is not mutually exclusive to other attacks on the NAMWC.  Auctions and raffles erode at the bedrock principle that wildlife is owned by the public in that they set aside the highest quality opportunity for an exclusive few...much like the European model of wildlife management.  Part of the reason raffle permits and auction tags sell for high value is because of the tight harvest limitations imposed on all the rest of the public.  That eastside elk tag sells for what it does because bull harvest is extremely restricted in E. Wa...if we continue on with programs that cater to the privileged few at the expense of the rest of the public...well, lets just say I don't like the idea of going down the road of European game management and hunting. 

However, the pragmatic side of me says, well, what's one sheep or elk given the revenue it generates?  And for me, it comes down to two things:
1. WDFW is awful at using money effectively.  While their budget is restricted and its not just one big checking account to use as they please, they still have a very large budget and I do not believe for one second that critical and valuable projects would go to the way side if they didn't bring in $74k from any given raffle. Fire one wolf facilitator and put each of those raffle and auction tags in the regular draw...there...revenue neutral.
2. Perhaps more importantly, in principle I don't support erosion of the NAMWC and that's exactly what auction/raffle tags do...no matter how well the money is spent nor how generous and well meaning the buyer is.   

And to be clear...I have no criticism towards any of the folks buying raffle tickets or auction tags.  Those folks are playing by the established rules...my discontent is with WDFW commission for allowing such a game to exist...they are not being good stewards of precious public resources.  Like jackelope, if I had the means and the state refused to eliminate auctions/raffles...I'd probably be first in line to buy tags and wheelbarrows of tickets. 

[jackelope]

WDFW is going to have to pay for their transparency on these freedom of information requests they handle for those that understand the information is there if you just ask for it.

I was at a town meeting with the WDFW. A guy was complaining about the elk season in his rural area. Had a petition signed by 500 people wanting the season changed. After explaining it all to David Ware, David asked if he could have the list of signatures to review. The petitioner said yes but asked why. Dave said he was going to take a sample of the names on the list and see if the even had hunting licenses or elk tags.

He said if they don’t pay into the system and participate I’m not going to put as much weight on how they think they game should be managed.

It would be really nice to know how much skin everyone has in the game that are complaining about the players and the game.

That's an easy one to answer: if you are a citizen of the State of WA you are an equal co-owner of all the wildlife found within its borders.  That's the 'skin' in the game.

So you are okay with the citizens of King county voting to ban hound hunting of cougars and bear baiting? They don’t all hunt or buy licenses but they want the rules changed and they got it done. They are citizens with skin in the game.

Each voter in King County has the same ownership as a voter in Stevens County.  While I do not like or agree with the initiative it is the prerogative of the citizens of the state to decide how their wildlife is managed.  In this state, a majority do not want their bears and cats chased with hounds. Me being a hunter and not liking it does not mean my vote counts more than another citizens...however uninformed they may be. 

For sake of keeping this thread at least on the raffle permits...lets presume one is arguing you must buy raffle tickets to have a valid opinion on how (or IF) the raffle is conducted.  My contention is that is absurd...its a public resource being raffled off and we all have equal say in how public resources are managed.

I don't need to buy a $6 raffle ticket to have an equal and valid opinion on raffling off extremely limited public resources...No more than I need to be a drunk driver to have a valid opinion on legal BAC limits for traveling a public highway.     

I’ve openly voiced my displeasure in the system in years past and not participated. I wish it was capped.
I think more folks would participate if they knew people weren’t buying thousands of tickets at a time in an effort to essentially “buy” the raffle. If I could do that, I might, but I don’t have that kind of dough

So, you dont like the sysytem and wish it was capped so people couldnt dump thousands, but if you could afford to do so you might?
  Basically youre saying, "i would like to be a whale but i cant afford it, so i dont want other people to be allowed to." Thats some serious integrity youre displaying there.

Sort of the way it came out I guess.  I’d really prefer everyone had a legit chance. If this current system was the way it had to be and I could afford it, I would dive in but I’d like to see it changed if I had a choice. I don’t dislike the people who do it because they can. Probably isn’t coming out right I guess.

[Rainier10]

WDFW is going to have to pay for their transparency on these freedom of information requests they handle for those that understand the information is there if you just ask for it.

I was at a town meeting with the WDFW. A guy was complaining about the elk season in his rural area. Had a petition signed by 500 people wanting the season changed. After explaining it all to David Ware, David asked if he could have the list of signatures to review. The petitioner said yes but asked why. Dave said he was going to take a sample of the names on the list and see if the even had hunting licenses or elk tags.

He said if they don’t pay into the system and participate I’m not going to put as much weight on how they think they game should be managed.

It would be really nice to know how much skin everyone has in the game that are complaining about the players and the game.

That's an easy one to answer: if you are a citizen of the State of WA you are an equal co-owner of all the wildlife found within its borders.  That's the 'skin' in the game.

So you are okay with the citizens of King county voting to ban hound hunting of cougars and bear baiting? They don’t all hunt or buy licenses but they want the rules changed and they got it done. They are citizens with skin in the game.

Each voter in King County has the same ownership as a voter in Stevens County.  While I do not like or agree with the initiative it is the prerogative of the citizens of the state to decide how their wildlife is managed.  In this state, a majority do not want their bears and cats chased with hounds. Me being a hunter and not liking it does not mean my vote counts more than another citizens...however uninformed they may be. 

For sake of keeping this thread at least on the raffle permits...lets presume one is arguing you must buy raffle tickets to have a valid opinion on how (or IF) the raffle is conducted.  My contention is that is absurd...its a public resource being raffled off and we all have equal say in how public resources are managed.

I don't need to buy a $6 raffle ticket to have an equal and valid opinion on raffling off extremely limited public resources...No more than I need to be a drunk driver to have a valid opinion on legal BAC limits for traveling a public highway.     

Fair enough. I personally don’t like the fact that a non hunter in King County can i act legislation that overrides what the game department has decided is the best way to manage our game. In my opinion you should be more involved and more informed than just being a citizen of the state to make those kinds of decisions. Kind of like Mike Roe says, if you are not informed about the candidates don’t go out and vote based on a TV commercial that pulls at your emotions.

Sticking with the topic, I think the raffle system does exactly what it is intended to do, generate a ton of revenue for a financially strapped agency at the very low cost, in my opinion, of a handful of big game animals.

I also believe there are way more big game animals lost to poaching than are taken by these raffle permit holders and there is no revenue generated by poaching for the department.

I think the energy to support the North American model of wildlife management and conservation should be focused on stopping the poaching before we worry about raffle permits.

If the energy in the debate over the raffle system is how to make them more fair so everyone has the same chance of winning one I will say there are definitely areas that energy should be used on in my opinion.

If the goal is for everyone to have the same chance get rid of the raffles and add the one California sheep tag back into the general draw and don’t generate the additional $74,000 that one raffle did last year.

I think we can all agree efforts to stop poaching are worthy and good for conservation...but it is not mutually exclusive to other attacks on the NAMWC.  Auctions and raffles erode at the bedrock principle that wildlife is owned by the public in that they set aside the highest quality opportunity for an exclusive few...much like the European model of wildlife management.  Part of the reason raffle permits and auction tags sell for high value is because of the tight harvest limitations imposed on all the rest of the public.  That eastside elk tag sells for what it does because bull harvest is extremely restricted in E. Wa...if we continue on with programs that cater to the privileged few at the expense of the rest of the public...well, lets just say I don't like the idea of going down the road of European game management and hunting. 

However, the pragmatic side of me says, well, what's one sheep or elk given the revenue it generates?  And for me, it comes down to two things:
1. WDFW is awful at using money effectively.  While their budget is restricted and its not just one big checking account to use as they please, they still have a very large budget and I do not believe for one second that critical and valuable projects would go to the way side if they didn't bring in $74k from any given raffle. Fire one wolf facilitator and put each of those raffle and auction tags in the regular draw...there...revenue neutral.
2. Perhaps more importantly, in principle I don't support erosion of the NAMWC and that's exactly what auction/raffle tags do...no matter how well the money is spent nor how generous and well meaning the buyer is.   

And to be clear...I have no criticism towards any of the folks buying raffle tickets or auction tags.  Those folks are playing by the established rules...my discontent is with WDFW commission for allowing such a game to exist...they are not being good stewards of precious public resources.  Like jackelope, if I had the means and the state refused to eliminate auctions/raffles...I'd probably be first in line to buy tags and wheelbarrows of tickets.

Thanks for the clarification. I can totally see where you are coming from. I think you have very valid points.

[idaho guy]

WDFW is going to have to pay for their transparency on these freedom of information requests they handle for those that understand the information is there if you just ask for it.

I was at a town meeting with the WDFW. A guy was complaining about the elk season in his rural area. Had a petition signed by 500 people wanting the season changed. After explaining it all to David Ware, David asked if he could have the list of signatures to review. The petitioner said yes but asked why. Dave said he was going to take a sample of the names on the list and see if the even had hunting licenses or elk tags.

He said if they don’t pay into the system and participate I’m not going to put as much weight on how they think they game should be managed.

It would be really nice to know how much skin everyone has in the game that are complaining about the players and the game.

That's an easy one to answer: if you are a citizen of the State of WA you are an equal co-owner of all the wildlife found within its borders.  That's the 'skin' in the game.

So you are okay with the citizens of King county voting to ban hound hunting of cougars and bear baiting? They don’t all hunt or buy licenses but they want the rules changed and they got it done. They are citizens with skin in the game.

Each voter in King County has the same ownership as a voter in Stevens County.  While I do not like or agree with the initiative it is the prerogative of the citizens of the state to decide how their wildlife is managed.  In this state, a majority do not want their bears and cats chased with hounds. Me being a hunter and not liking it does not mean my vote counts more than another citizens...however uninformed they may be. 

For sake of keeping this thread at least on the raffle permits...lets presume one is arguing you must buy raffle tickets to have a valid opinion on how (or IF) the raffle is conducted.  My contention is that is absurd...its a public resource being raffled off and we all have equal say in how public resources are managed.

I don't need to buy a $6 raffle ticket to have an equal and valid opinion on raffling off extremely limited public resources...No more than I need to be a drunk driver to have a valid opinion on legal BAC limits for traveling a public highway.     

I’ve openly voiced my displeasure in the system in years past and not participated. I wish it was capped.
I think more folks would participate if they knew people weren’t buying thousands of tickets at a time in an effort to essentially “buy” the raffle. If I could do that, I might, but I don’t have that kind of dough

So, you dont like the sysytem and wish it was capped so people couldnt dump thousands, but if you could afford to do so you might?
  Basically youre saying, "i would like to be a whale but i cant afford it, so i dont want other people to be allowed to." Thats some serious integrity youre displaying there.

Sort of the way it came out I guess.  I’d really prefer everyone had a legit chance. If this current system was the way it had to be and I could afford it, I would dive in but I’d like to see it changed if I had a choice. I don’t dislike the people who do it because they can. Probably isn’t coming out right I guess.

   

I didn't think it came out that way. I feel the same way there are rules I would like changed but if they are the rules I will still take advantage of the opportunity if I can.  I don't necessarily like the two deer tags option in Idaho either but I have purchased a second deer and elk tag  maybe I lack integrity too  I don't feel bad about it I am following the rules but if I had a choice it would be better if they didn't offer the second deer or elk.  My take on what you said was if you had the excess dough you might flood the raffle but regardless you think it would be better if it was capped? Doesn't matter if you can afford it or not just a better system if its capped in your opinion. I don't really care what they do with raffles but will buy a few tickets. 

[Rainier10]

The issue in my mind of capping it is you will lose the revenue it generates. At that point just put the tags in the general pool, why add another category.

Some of the numbers are high sales already this year, close to normal sales for previous years. By the end of the week they will be high and close to historically normal levels because big money is seeing a value in gambling to win on low ticket sales.

[teanawayslayer]

Everything looks right at where it should be for the time frame. The only one that looks low in numbers is the moose. Some high some low changes year to year depending on which whale wants what.