The Trail Cam Celebration

[twigsnapper]

 

 

 

Red- they are not going to give more tags to the various groups to raffle and auction? Just G&F will produce additional tags for the Big Game Super Raffle. Good to know.

IF raffle tags are used, and that's still an IF, a new program similar to the Big Game Super Raffle would be created. The current Big Game Super Raffle is mandated by legislation to disperse its funds to HPC. This one would be similar except funds would be Game and Fish. No outside organization would get any money.

Who get's the HPC money? I am pretty sure its the critter groups and they guys that run the critter are the same people on CPAZ.

Your are 100% incorrect. All the money raised goes back to the G&F and is held separate from the other funds of the G&F. Absolutely no money is kept by the critter groups.

[Nefarious Red]

what if we do all this and humane society still gets lion hunting banned

That's a good question. I can tell you this much. I have a recorded phone conversation that HSUS President Kitty Block and Arizona HSUS director Kellye Pinkleton made to the Arizona staff after they conceded the initiative. They both made it very clear that they are in Arizona to stay, and that they will be back. I also have a sheet from HSUS that describes their initiative process and how they choose States to employ the initiative process. In that sheet is also a list of every initiative by State that the HSUS has enacted a ban or prevented a hunting measure from going to the ballot.

 

Arizona is their number one target. They do something in Arizona every 2 years since 1994. They soundly outspent and defeated us when we tried to do Constitutional right to hunt and fish in 2010. They may beat is in 2020, but if they do, they won't stop there. They got their ban in California and still do something there every election cycle. This year they did a factory farming bill that will cripple the egg industry.

 

So we need a long term systemic plan. This is a start. They conduct massive polling before they do an initiative, and hopefully we can change the polls enough that they pick a different State. We may in fact lose, we have been losing for a long time. I don't know what plan B is at the moment.

[trophyseeker]

 

 

Red- they are not going to give more tags to the various groups to raffle and auction? Just G&F will produce additional tags for the Big Game Super Raffle. Good to know.

IF raffle tags are used, and that's still an IF, a new program similar to the Big Game Super Raffle would be created. The current Big Game Super Raffle is mandated by legislation to disperse its funds to HPC. This one would be similar except funds would be Game and Fish. No outside organization would get any money.

 

Who get's the HPC money? I am pretty sure its the critter groups and they guys that run the critter are the same people on CPAZ.

 

 

In the above, I'm pretty positive ALL of the money from any auction/raffle tags is returned to the AGFD by law. That money is earmarked as HPC funds per species accordingly and is meted out for projects as determined by dept. and critter group committees for each game species. In short, the critter groups reap no financial benefit from any of it. The groups gain their owm operating revenue from dues, banquets and the other items that are auctioned or raffled during the year.

 

And while we're at it, there appears to be a bit of misinformation that has pervaded this threads on the subject. It has to do with the "Utah model." Over the years I have followed most of the threads at MM on that topic. The set-up in Utah is quite different than the proposal here. Off the top of my head, I can't recall the percentage, but Peay's group keeps a large percentage of the money it raises from the raffles/auctions and offers little in the way of accounting for what his organization does with that money other than enrich the administrators. It's pretty much a mess.

 

In contrast, the proposal here is for AGFD to receive and control 100% of the funds from any raffle/auction tags for the purpose of "educating the publc," akin to how it is now with HPC. And if that comes to pass, funds to battle the antis supposedly would come from other "sources" as was done this year with the lion initiative. Now, I'm guessing here, but other sources might include some sort of expo, banquets and private donors. In any case, it seems to be quite different than Peay's mess.

 

Of course, a concrete proposal needs to be thoroughly put forth because the "devil in in the details."

[Flatlander]

 

 

 

 

 

Red- they are not going to give more tags to the various groups to raffle and auction? Just G&F will produce additional tags for the Big Game Super Raffle. Good to know.

IF raffle tags are used, and that's still an IF, a new program similar to the Big Game Super Raffle would be created. The current Big Game Super Raffle is mandated by legislation to disperse its funds to HPC. This one would be similar except funds would be Game and Fish. No outside organization would get any money.

Who get's the HPC money? I am pretty sure its the critter groups and they guys that run the critter are the same people on CPAZ.

In the above, I'm pretty positive ALL of the money from any auction/raffle tags is returned to the AGFD by law. That money is earmarked as HPC funds per species accordingly and is meted out for projects as determined by dept. and critter group committees for each game species. In short, the critter groups reap no financial benefit from any of it. The groups gain their owm operating revenue from dues, banquets and the other items that are auctioned or raffled during the year.

 

And while we're at it, there appears to be a bit of misinformation that has pervaded this threads on the subject. It has to do with the "Utah model." Over the years I have followed most of the threads at MM on that topic. The set-up in Utah is quite different than the proposal here. Off the top of my head, I can't recall the percentage, but Peay's group keeps a large percentage of the money it raises from the raffles/auctions and offers little in the way of accounting for what his organization does with that money other than enrich the administrators. It's pretty much a mess.

 

In contrast, the proposal here is for AGFD to receive and control 100% of the funds from any raffle/auction tags for the purpose of "educating the publc," akin to how it is now with HPC. And if that comes to pass, funds to battle the antis supposedly would come from other "sources" as was done this year with the lion initiative. Now, I'm guessing here, but other sources might include some sort of expo, banquets and private donors. In any case, it seems to be quite different than Peay's mess.

 

Of course, a concrete proposal needs to be thoroughly put forth because the "devil in in the details."

The references to the Utah Model are stemming from Petes comments on the podcast and at other meetings. He referred to it explicitly in several of the podcasts. And in the first podcast which was a recording of the CAPAZ kickoff meeting for the initiative he talked about how beautiful Peays system was and how when people raised concerns he shut them down right there on the spot. He discussed the importance of controlling the narrative around the initiative and the importance of having people engaged on all the social media platforms to refute any one who opposed the idea. This is how we came to know Dustin (nefarious red) as a regular poster.

 

Thats the reason folks keep referencing the Utah Model because Pete keeps bringing it up.

[Nefarious Red]

Are you accusing me of something, Andrew? If you are, come out and say it so we can get this started.

[trophyseeker]

 

 

 

 

Red- they are not going to give more tags to the various groups to raffle and auction? Just G&F will produce additional tags for the Big Game Super Raffle. Good to know.

IF raffle tags are used, and that's still an IF, a new program similar to the Big Game Super Raffle would be created. The current Big Game Super Raffle is mandated by legislation to disperse its funds to HPC. This one would be similar except funds would be Game and Fish. No outside organization would get any money.

Who get's the HPC money? I am pretty sure its the critter groups and they guys that run the critter are the same people on CPAZ.

In the above, I'm pretty positive ALL of the money from any auction/raffle tags is returned to the AGFD by law. That money is earmarked as HPC funds per species accordingly and is meted out for projects as determined by dept. and critter group committees for each game species. In short, the critter groups reap no financial benefit from any of it. The groups gain their owm operating revenue from dues, banquets and the other items that are auctioned or raffled during the year.

 

And while we're at it, there appears to be a bit of misinformation that has pervaded this threads on the subject. It has to do with the "Utah model." Over the years I have followed most of the threads at MM on that topic. The set-up in Utah is quite different than the proposal here. Off the top of my head, I can't recall the percentage, but Peay's group keeps a large percentage of the money it raises from the raffles/auctions and offers little in the way of accounting for what his organization does with that money other than enrich the administrators. It's pretty much a mess.

 

In contrast, the proposal here is for AGFD to receive and control 100% of the funds from any raffle/auction tags for the purpose of "educating the publc," akin to how it is now with HPC. And if that comes to pass, funds to battle the antis supposedly would come from other "sources" as was done this year with the lion initiative. Now, I'm guessing here, but other sources might include some sort of expo, banquets and private donors. In any case, it seems to be quite different than Peay's mess.

 

Of course, a concrete proposal needs to be thoroughly put forth because the "devil in in the details."

The references to the Utah Model are stemming from Petes comments on the podcast and at other meetings. He referred to it explicitly in several of the podcasts. And in the first podcast which was a recording of the CAPAZ kickoff meeting for the initiative he talked about how beautiful Peays system was and how when people raised concerns he shut them down right there on the spot. He discussed the importance of controlling the narrative around the initiative and the importance of having people engaged on all the social media platforms to refute any one who opposed the idea. This is how we came to know Dustin (nefarious red) as a regular poster.

 

Thats the reason folks keep referencing the Utah Model because Pete keeps bringing it up.

 

 

 

As I stated. the the devil is in the details. Currently, the details on the revenue stream that have been proposed are much different than what Peay has going on. Now, is it possible Pete meant that the idea of the raffle tags in conjunction with an expo is working good?

[idgaf]

 

 

 

Red- they are not going to give more tags to the various groups to raffle and auction? Just G&F will produce additional tags for the Big Game Super Raffle. Good to know.

IF raffle tags are used, and that's still an IF, a new program similar to the Big Game Super Raffle would be created. The current Big Game Super Raffle is mandated by legislation to disperse its funds to HPC. This one would be similar except funds would be Game and Fish. No outside organization would get any money.

 

Who get's the HPC money? I am pretty sure its the critter groups and they guys that run the critter are the same people on CPAZ.

 

 

In the above, I'm pretty positive ALL of the money from any auction/raffle tags is returned to the AGFD by law. That money is earmarked as HPC funds per species accordingly and is meted out for projects as determined by dept. and critter group committees for each game species. In short, the critter groups reap no financial benefit from any of it. The groups gain their owm operating revenue from dues, banquets and the other items that are auctioned or raffled during the year.

 

And while we're at it, there appears to be a bit of misinformation that has pervaded this threads on the subject. It has to do with the "Utah model." Over the years I have followed most of the threads at MM on that topic. The set-up in Utah is quite different than the proposal here. Off the top of my head, I can't recall the percentage, but Peay's group keeps a large percentage of the money it raises from the raffles/auctions and offers little in the way of accounting for what his organization does with that money other than enrich the administrators. It's pretty much a mess.

 

In contrast, the proposal here is for AGFD to receive and control 100% of the funds from any raffle/auction tags for the purpose of "educating the publc," akin to how it is now with HPC. And if that comes to pass, funds to battle the antis supposedly would come from other "sources" as was done this year with the lion initiative. Now, I'm guessing here, but other sources might include some sort of expo, banquets and private donors. In any case, it seems to be quite different than Peay's mess.

 

Of course, a concrete proposal needs to be thoroughly put forth because the "devil in in the details."

 

AZGFD receives 100% of the funds I understand that completely. I am asking who uses the HPC money after it goes back to AZGFD? I am surmising that its the critter groups.

[trophyseeker]

 

 

 

 

Red- they are not going to give more tags to the various groups to raffle and auction? Just G&F will produce additional tags for the Big Game Super Raffle. Good to know.

IF raffle tags are used, and that's still an IF, a new program similar to the Big Game Super Raffle would be created. The current Big Game Super Raffle is mandated by legislation to disperse its funds to HPC. This one would be similar except funds would be Game and Fish. No outside organization would get any money.

 

Who get's the HPC money? I am pretty sure its the critter groups and they guys that run the critter are the same people on CPAZ.

 

 

In the above, I'm pretty positive ALL of the money from any auction/raffle tags is returned to the AGFD by law. That money is earmarked as HPC funds per species accordingly and is meted out for projects as determined by dept. and critter group committees for each game species. In short, the critter groups reap no financial benefit from any of it. The groups gain their owm operating revenue from dues, banquets and the other items that are auctioned or raffled during the year.

 

And while we're at it, there appears to be a bit of misinformation that has pervaded this threads on the subject. It has to do with the "Utah model." Over the years I have followed most of the threads at MM on that topic. The set-up in Utah is quite different than the proposal here. Off the top of my head, I can't recall the percentage, but Peay's group keeps a large percentage of the money it raises from the raffles/auctions and offers little in the way of accounting for what his organization does with that money other than enrich the administrators. It's pretty much a mess.

 

In contrast, the proposal here is for AGFD to receive and control 100% of the funds from any raffle/auction tags for the purpose of "educating the publc," akin to how it is now with HPC. And if that comes to pass, funds to battle the antis supposedly would come from other "sources" as was done this year with the lion initiative. Now, I'm guessing here, but other sources might include some sort of expo, banquets and private donors. In any case, it seems to be quite different than Peay's mess.

 

Of course, a concrete proposal needs to be thoroughly put forth because the "devil in in the details."

 

AZGFD receives 100% of the funds I understand that completely. I am asking who uses the HPC money after it goes back to AZGFD? I am surmising that its the critter groups.

 

 

It is used for habitat projects as selected by the HPC. That could include a combination of critter group volunteers for the designated specie and AGFD personnel. Regardless, 100% of it gets used on the ground as it was intended when the legislation was drawn up.

[azelkhunter2]

IDGAF...I have offered several times to explain the process to you in detail and provide you links to the Department that will support what I tell you. If you want the information call me. Dave

[AZkiller]

 

The argument could be made that offering tags for $5 per chance instead of $13 is more supportive of the North American Model.

You could argue that, but you would be lying to yourself.

 

If 300 tags are given to the raffle and tickets are sold for $10 and a 10 ticket per person limit were imposed then that would mean if someone were to max out on all of the rafffles it would cost him $30k. For his investment he would have 3000x more chance of drawing a tag than someone who bought a single ticket. That is the definition of disparity.

 

Even for a single hunt anyone can purchase 10x more opportunity than another for $90 more investment.

 

This is exactly my concern with these systems. They are built to exploit economic disparity among sportsmen. So will anyone please for crying out loud tell me why it HAS to be tags. Why is that the only option a certain group of people will advocate for?

Your math is wrong. That's not how odds work. I thought you were the odds guy

[idgaf]

IDGAF...I have offered several times to explain the process to you in detail and provide you links to the Department that will support what I tell you. If you want the information call me. Dave

Dave, my work for the last few weeks required my full attention, unfortunately. I just need to now do the critter groups get any funding directly or indirectly from HPC funds for projects or otherwise after the money has been handed back to AZGFD?

[azelkhunter2]

Fred...Pm sent....If anyone would like info on how the HPC program works, is funded and how the funds are dispersed and by who PLEASE call me. You can post are conversation so no one thinks Im try to hide or be evasive about anything. There are many many layers to the program that cant in my opinion be conveyed in a short post....Dave 602-228-1719

[Ringer]

Red, show me some photos of you with animals you have harvested. You show up at the CPAZ meeting with photos of you infiltrating HSUS which was good. After that you show up here preaching the gospel of tag grabbers. Next time I see you you are all cleaned up and pitching tags to the Commission. Why are you involved? Show us your handle on other hunting sites you frequent. My bet is you are working for Don Peay just like old Petey.

[twigsnapper]

 

 

The argument could be made that offering tags for $5 per chance instead of $13 is more supportive of the North American Model.

You could argue that, but you would be lying to yourself.

 

If 300 tags are given to the raffle and tickets are sold for $10 and a 10 ticket per person limit were imposed then that would mean if someone were to max out on all of the rafffles it would cost him $30k. For his investment he would have 3000x more chance of drawing a tag than someone who bought a single ticket. That is the definition of disparity.

 

Even for a single hunt anyone can purchase 10x more opportunity than another for $90 more investment.

 

This is exactly my concern with these systems. They are built to exploit economic disparity among sportsmen. So will anyone please for crying out loud tell me why it HAS to be tags. Why is that the only option a certain group of people will advocate for?

Your math is wrong. That's not how odds work. I thought you were the odds guy

My point isnt that your odds would be better, my point is that offering a chance at a tag for $5 makes it more accessible for some people than having to pay $13. Flatlander keeps arguing that the North American model is at being violated beacuase of the proposed raffle tags but its not. The North American Model doesnt say anything about keeping draw odds at a particular level. Auctioning tags is a different argument but a raffle is no different than a lottery tag through a normal draw system.

[twigsnapper]

#4 Hunting Opportunity for All

Every citizen has an opportunity, under the law, to hunt and fish in the United States and Canada.