twigsnapper Report post Posted March 19 For sheep, elk and deer the raffle tag raises much less money. And…. The raffle can no longer be sold outside of AZ, a recent change that will severely limit raffle sales. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wildwoody Report post Posted March 19 Im seeing about a $100,000 difference, so do the 10 extra January February tags with the $13 put in fee, BAMM were there. Im still eating Jimmy Johns. Just saying. Or raise tag fees by $5 , now there's a chunk of change.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wildwoody Report post Posted March 19 Oh ya, just a quick ? Do we still believe that average age of hunters are going up every year? And theve been saying this I was a kid so the average hunter would be 48 yrs old now. Just thoughts Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
twigsnapper Report post Posted March 19 25 minutes ago, wildwoody said: Im seeing about a $100,000 difference, so do the 10 extra January February tags with the $13 put in fee, BAMM were there. Im still eating Jimmy Johns. Just saying. Or raise tag fees by $5 , now there's a chunk of change.. Tags fees go into the general account, so they don’t go toward habitat projects. But you knew that already…. They study purple footed guppies with the general fund money from your tag fees. My guess is there will be about a $1,000,000 loss of revenue with this decision for habitat projects per year. Putting this here to look back on in 5-10yrs. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coues247 Report post Posted March 20 59 minutes ago, twigsnapper said: Tags fees go into the general account, so they don’t go toward habitat projects. But you knew that already…. They study purple footed guppies with the general fund money from your tag fees. My guess is there will be about a $1,000,000 loss of revenue with this decision for habitat projects per year. Putting this here to look back on in 5-10yrs. So you're just gonna ignore the fact that they posted the numbers of roughly how much they will lose off the sheep, elk, and deer and the fact that they will make MORE money off of every other animal and pull a random $1,000,000 guess of loss of revenue out of your as$? They explained that they can make it where the raffle tags can be sold out of state. There might be a small loss of revenue but it won't be significant. Better to make a little less money than let Jimmy John buy the best tags on the planet every year. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wildwoody Report post Posted March 20 1 hour ago, twigsnapper said: Tags fees go into the general account, so they don’t go toward habitat projects. But you knew that already…. They study purple footed guppies with the general fund money from your tag fees. My guess is there will be about a $1,000,000 loss of revenue with this decision for habitat projects per year. Putting this here to look back on in 5-10yrs. Yes I do know that, but still not stopping them from adding the $5 and specifically alot it to the projects. But they wouldn't do that. I get it both ways. I could also say if they tightened there belt a little they could save much more the that, but we couldn't do that either. Good place to open a DNR that could care a little more about the animals instead of hunter opportunities. Just me means nuttin. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
trphyhntr Report post Posted March 20 6 hours ago, bonecollector said: I used to think like a lot of guys on this forum until I was invited to attend a monthly meeting of one of the wildlife groups. Man it opened my eyes quite a bit and changed my way of thinking. These projects are not cheap to do and a lot goes into the planning and getting approvals for the projects. It also feels good to volunteer on these projects with the sheep society, meeting a lot of great people and going around the state seeing new country and places I probably wouldnt ever go to. But why would the projects stop, because azgfd won’t allocate funds for them? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
654321 Report post Posted March 20 1 hour ago, wildwoody said: Yes I do know that, but still not stopping them from adding the $5 and specifically alot it to the projects. But they wouldn't do that. I get it both ways. I could also say if they tightened there belt a little they could save much more the that, but we couldn't do that either. Good place to open a DNR that could care a little more about the animals instead of hunter opportunities. Just me means nuttin. There isn't a wildlife agency in this country that manages the wildlife strictly for trophy opportunities. If you want an agency that cares a little more for the animals let the humane society manage AZ's wildlife. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bonecollector Report post Posted March 20 2 hours ago, trphyhntr said: But why would the projects stop, because azgfd won’t allocate funds for them? Are they going to raise fees on tags and licenses to be able to do that? Where would they get funds from? Cut employees? 🤷🏻♂️ 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
forepaw Report post Posted March 20 2 hours ago, wildwoody said: Yes I do know that, but still not stopping them from adding the $5 and specifically alot it to the projects. But they wouldn't do that. I get it both ways. I could also say if they tightened there belt a little they could save much more the that, but we couldn't do that either. Good place to open a DNR that could care a little more about the animals instead of hunter opportunities. Just me means nuttin. Don't forget about the hunter survey from 15 - 20 yrs. ago that was intended to determine management direction of the department for at least the next generation of hunters. I don't recall the name of the survey, but it was a big deal at the time and considered to be a watershed decision point with respect to what did the hunting community want - a wildlife resource managed for trophy potential (older age class animals, less opportunity), or more opportunity overall? The vote from all of us hunters was pretty decisively in favor of more opportunity. Of course this was before anyone could anticipate the trail cam issue, OHV issue, or Arizona's exploding population. Anyway, some of the others on the forum can weigh in a provide more detail but that is my recollection. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wildwoody Report post Posted March 20 I don't think we meant the double massacred in 22 and the triple hunts down south. Years ago we also got pink slips in the mail and you couldn't put in for 3 years if you were drawn for elk. Now don't get me wrong , but I usually am, anyway I don't believe the hunter success rate is very high anymore. Smarter animals and they move to the cover. Anyway I meant raise it five bucks and problem solved. But I do love memory lane. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wildwoody Report post Posted March 20 2 hours ago, 654321 said: There isn't a wildlife agency in this country that manages the wildlife strictly for trophy opportunities. If you want an agency that cares a little more for the animals let the humane society manage AZ's wildlife. Very well put, but never said a darn thing about trophy hunting, could care less. I said raise the fee $5 dollars and your covered. Cant eat horns, I've tried. This only my opinion and it ain't enough to buy you a beer.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wildwoody Report post Posted March 20 Humane Society, they kill animals. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
twigsnapper Report post Posted March 20 5 hours ago, Coues247 said: So you're just gonna ignore the fact that they posted the numbers of roughly how much they will lose off the sheep, elk, and deer and the fact that they will make MORE money off of every other animal and pull a random $1,000,000 guess of loss of revenue out of your as$? They explained that they can make it where the raffle tags can be sold out of state. There might be a small loss of revenue but it won't be significant. Better to make a little less money than let Jimmy John buy the best tags on the planet every year. Well it’s a relatively educated guess actually. Raffles are saturated right now and I don’t think 3 sheep raffle tags will triple the volume of raffle sales. The raffle sheep tag historically generates about $100k-150k less compared to auction tags. Similar results with deer and elk and you get to about $1,000,000 difference in total revenue. If they can sell raffles outside AZ why the heck don’t they give that a try for a year and see how it goes before cutting the auction tags? They are banking on raffle sales and this is literally the worst environment for raffles sales in a decade. I’m actually not against getting rid of auction tags but the current lack of planning and bold assumptions being made by the dept and commission make me very, very skeptical. But hey, I’m just a conservative numbers guy.. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Redman Report post Posted March 20 I thought all the G&F cared about is the money, I must have read that 100 times on CWT over the years. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
