quote:

the money coming into the cause of conservation is whats important.

And there is nothing wrong with that. Some one will always find fault, it is just human nature.

quote:

the money coming into the cause of conservation is whats important.

Exactly! And the fat cats bucks at times of politcal need is just as important.

"the money coming into the cause of conservation is whats important."


Yep, no disagreement with that statement at all! However, that's not the point!!! It's HOW a lot of that money is being raised and a lot of it goes completely against the NAM when many LE tags are taken out of the Utah draw and sold to the highest bidder just because he has money in his pockets. A few Governors Tags are no problem because they aren't taken out of the pools the average guy has a chance at. As drumondlindsey stated, just require these hunts be done during normal hunting season and take this winter range slaughtering out of the equation! It also doesn't matter whether it's only one or two animals taken out of the gene pool, as that again isn't the argument. It's the fact that those top dollar tag buyers are watched closely and anything they do is under close scrutiny by the public. If they don't maintain a high standard of ethical behavior it sets a terrible example for all others. Now this stuff about use of helicopters and other questionable tactics is out in the open being read by the general public. If they continually read about this garbage going on and hunting ever comes up for a vote all of us hunters will be in deep chit!!! Numerous types of hunting have already come under attack and when voted on were eliminated in certain areas(hunting lions, hunting with dogs, baiting bears, etc.). If overall hunting ever comes to a vote, this kind of crap is going to kill all of us and end our sport because we are way outnumbered at the voting booths!

Topgun, I appreciate your point on these hunts. But the vast majority of these hunts do not come out of the general Utah draws. most of the hunts are land owner permits or Resevation tag that are sold to the highest bidder anyway.The Antelope Island hunt has alway's only had two tags available...one draw and one auction, because Antelope Island is a state park which sorly needs the money generated by the auction hunt. All the hunts have to conducted during any legal season so I'm not sure what winter range hunt you are refering to. And your right...the public does watch what these guys are doing but so does the DNR and I can't believe that they are looking the other way if someone is breaking the law.
On the contrary.. if overall hunting ever comes to a vote I think the money that hunting generates for wildlife consevation will be it's only savior.

Max

Topgun, I have to tell you that I personally find your comments WAY off base and bothersome.

Perhaps there have been abuses with these tags, I don't know. What I do know if that I bought a tag in 2010 for Desert Big Horn in Utah. I could have gone to Mexico for less money and took a bigger sheep in all likelihood . Yet I CHOSE to contribute to Utah. My hunt did not involve anything except fair chase hunting .

The first day, I spent all day in rain/snow with 60 MPH winds glassing the old fashioned way. No helicopters, no 4 wheelers, no "goon squads ." The second day, I climbed with my rifle and a pack for 11 hours and shot my sheep at about 350 yards . I did it in mid November NOT in the winter range.

Personally, I am proud of the sheep and proud of the contribution made to conservation in the sheep.

Does this take a tag away from some average guy? Maybe. The fact of the matter is that the normal draw would not raise the money these tags raise. Money which is desperately needed.

I am sorry you can't bid on the tags . Don't automatically assume all such hunts are bad.

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:
Topgun, I have to tell you that I personally find your comments WAY off base and bothersome.

Perhaps there have been abuses with these tags, I don't know. What I do know if that I bought a tag in 2010 for Desert Big Horn in Utah. I could have gone to Mexico for less money and took a bigger sheep in all likelihood . Yet I CHOSE to contribute to Utah. My hunt did not involve anything except fair chase hunting .

The first day, I spent all day in rain/snow with 60 MPH winds glassing the old fashioned way. No helicopters, no 4 wheelers, no "goon squads ." The second day, I climbed with my rifle and a pack for 11 hours and shot my sheep at about 350 yards . I did it in mid November NOT in the winter range.

Personally, I am proud of the sheep and proud of the contribution made to conservation in the sheep.

Does this take a tag away from some average guy? Maybe. The fact of the matter is that the normal draw would not raise the money these tags raise. Money which is desperately needed.

I am sorry you can't bid on the tags . Don't automatically assume all such hunts are bad.

Larry, I have never heard any horror stories related to any of the Governers tags for sheep. In fact, the only horror stories I ever really hear are pertaining to the mule deer hunts in CO when you have a controversial guide(not named Doyle Moss) using controversial tactics on deer that are in fact in deep snow on the wintering range.

A dear friend drew the raffle tag for sheep here in CO a few years back and killed his ram at over 13,000 feet in December. That's a HUNT!

Anybody that assumes that all governor tag or raffle tag holders and guides are unethical are idiots.

Congrats on the Utah tag. My buddy ended up buying the CO bighorn tag in Reno so it'll be a busy spring and summer scouting for that one. He had the UT desert tag the past 2 years and bought a tag for California bighorns on the Newfoundland Range last year as well.

The only other thing I'll add is that while I wholeheartedly agree that this money is desperately needed there is very little confidence in our Colorado Parks and Wildlife Department, formerly Division of Wildlife, that the money is used effectively. As I stated previously, DOW "lost" more than 30 million dollars in accounting errors and currently have some ridiculous programs that bleed money. My thoughts, and the thoughts of many residents, are that these animals aren't worth giving up if CPW isn't using the money for programs that have a direct impact on the species the tags were issued for. If these clowns are using these funds to build "green" bathrooms in a state park somewhere then they should find the funds from somewhere else.

It seems Larry is a bit sensitive about his purchased tag.

I generally support auctioning a few tags, and believe in many cases the purchasers intend to support conservation and "donate" to the DWR. Historically this has been true. But it is indisputable that some of the recent purchasers have far less ethical motives, and there have been a few high profile cases of tag purchasers going about these hunts in ways that would be considered highly unethical by the masses. That is the point I think Topgun was making.

In some states, these tag holders have a 365 day season - not the case for the general public, of course. Colorado's season is notorious for being extended for these permit purchasers until all the big bucks are on winter ground in deep snow. Other hunts do not occur at this time for obvious reasons.

Some game departments are becoming addicted to this money, and building infrastructure and programs on the sales of these tags. OK, up to a point, but when one well known conservation group has begun to advocate auctioning all tags to the highest bidder, well, it is obvious we are approaching a line, if not already across it.

In Utah, the antelope island tags are not even sold by the DWR, and the money from these tags goes directly to our Parks Dept. Parks is not affiliated with wildlife, and they can use these funds for general operational expenses throughout the state, whether in campgrounds, city parks, etc. None of this tag money goes back into habitat or conservation efforts for the species. Some say it is only a few tags, so why worry, but it is the camels nose under the tent, and over a $1M a year NOT contributed to conservation efforts, but related to hunting these park animals. Sort of like selling elk and bison permits in Yellowstone park to pay for upkeep on the Washington Monument. Nothing specifically wrong with it, but it is NOT conservation related.

Off my soapbox for now, but there is far more here than meets the eye when you become informed.

Bill

Bill:

I wouldn't say I am sensitive about it. Perhaps bothered by the generalization? Absolutely.

quote:

Originally posted by llamapacker:
It seems Larry is a bit sensitive about his purchased tag.

I generally support auctioning a few tags, and believe in many cases the purchasers intend to support conservation and "donate" to the DWR. Historically this has been true. But it is indisputable that some of the recent purchasers have far less ethical motives, and there have been a few high profile cases of tag purchasers going about these hunts in ways that would be considered highly unethical by the masses. That is the point I think Topgun was making.

In some states, these tag holders have a 365 day season - not the case for the general public, of course. Colorado's season is notorious for being extended for these permit purchasers until all the big bucks are on winter ground in deep snow. Other hunts do not occur at this time for obvious reasons.

Some game departments are becoming addicted to this money, and building infrastructure and programs on the sales of these tags. OK, up to a point, but when one well known conservation group has begun to advocate auctioning all tags to the highest bidder, well, it is obvious we are approaching a line, if not already across it.

In Utah, the antelope island tags are not even sold by the DWR, and the money from these tags goes directly to our Parks Dept. Parks is not affiliated with wildlife, and they can use these funds for general operational expenses throughout the state, whether in campgrounds, city parks, etc. None of this tag money goes back into habitat or conservation efforts for the species. Some say it is only a few tags, so why worry, but it is the camels nose under the tent, and over a $1M a year NOT contributed to conservation efforts, but related to hunting these park animals. Sort of like selling elk and bison permits in Yellowstone park to pay for upkeep on the Washington Monument. Nothing specifically wrong with it, but it is NOT conservation related.

Off my soapbox for now, but there is far more here than meets the eye when you become informed.

Bill

Yeah, I remember how you kept us informed about your Zimbabwe episode. You are despicable.

quote:

Originally posted by llamapacker:
... but there is far more here than meets the eye when you become informed.

Bill

Dickwad,

What are you still doing here? I thought I told you to go fuck off.


Apologies to the rest. Now back to your regularly scheduled program...

quote{shawnmc---Speaking of another real fine, ethical guy, I wonder how good old George is doing! He's another real ethical dude the Feds caught using fixed wing aircraft to spot game and relay it to his goons on the ground. Did the Feds ever get his airplane that I believe was supposed to be confiscated as a part of those illegal activities that he got nailed on?}quote

Couldn't agree more. He tried to steal hunting, make it more commercialized than it already is, and screw the average joe!

Well, since this thread has degenerated into ARPF fodder, I'm probably pissin into the wind anyway...

My question is this: if these auction tags are so good for conservation & direct so many dollars to programs which would otherwise be the redheaded step-sister, then why aren't more sportsmen of means making donations regardless of whether they're the winning bidder?

After all, how many of the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th place bidders are saying "you know, its for a good cause, so why not - here you go."?

If you know of losing bidders who've done just that, let me know, and I'll eat crow with a smile and a fork!

friar

Bill, you need to check your facts. 90% of the money generated for the Antelope Island deer tag goes back to the Island deer herd and is dedicated to the park only. The Mule Deer Foundation and SFW watch it closely. This program was started by the MDF and SFW to propagate the deer herd and improve habitat there.
I think you guys are the victims of misinformation and off base here. To end auction funds generated for consevation because you think some rich guy is going to loose sight of the meening of hunting to kill a big deer is not clear thinking. It would be great if every hunter was supremely ethical and moral but the good out ways the bad here.

Just so I'm clear - I think it's great if someone wants to bid big $$$ on a tag, and I'm glad for that person.

But please, don't tell me this is going to do anything significant for the future of conservation or hunting public lands.

And don't tell me these guys do so out of pure altruism.

If they've got the money and want to make a donation and get a nice tag and put a head up on the wall, super. I hope that I could do the same someday.

If a person's really concerned about conservation & the betterment of hunting, though, take a friend along. That will do more good than 5 big expensive tags.

friar

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:
Topgun, I have to tell you that I personally find your comments WAY off base and bothersome.

Perhaps there have been abuses with these tags, I don't know. What I do know if that I bought a tag in 2010 for Desert Big Horn in Utah. I could have gone to Mexico for less money and took a bigger sheep in all likelihood . Yet I CHOSE to contribute to Utah. My hunt did not involve anything except fair chase hunting .

The first day, I spent all day in rain/snow with 60 MPH winds glassing the old fashioned way. No helicopters, no 4 wheelers, no "goon squads ." The second day, I climbed with my rifle and a pack for 11 hours and shot my sheep at about 350 yards . I did it in mid November NOT in the winter range.

Personally, I am proud of the sheep and proud of the contribution made to conservation in the sheep.

Does this take a tag away from some average guy? Maybe. The fact of the matter is that the normal draw would not raise the money these tags raise. Money which is desperately needed.

I am sorry you can't bid on the tags . Don't automatically assume all such hunts are bad.

***Gee that's too bad that the truth is the truth and you don't like it! Further, I didn't say anything about you or your hunt or that all the hunts were conducted improperly now did I? It only takes one or two like the ones we happen to be talking about to take the whole hunting scene down the drain! Incidentally, if I wanted to bid on them I most certainly could since you have no idea of my wealth just like I don't know yours!!! As for the comments from our member in CA, you need to go back to the drawing board and get your information straight. Utah has more auction tags than all the other western states combined and we're not just talking Governor tags! Many of the Utah tags are taken right out of the LE tags that would have gone into the draws for the average joes. That, in turn, extends the time it will take for even those with the most points to draw a tag if they ever do. Look up the list of tags just auctioned off, as well as the ones raffled off last week if you don't believe me. You are also incorrect in that many of these governor tags that are sold are for an entire year or after the normal hunting seasons are closed. The buck in the picture in this thread that was shot in CO was in December on the winter range after all seasons were over, was found by helicopter, and then sat on by a bunch of people who also got paid for their ground work until the shooter got there. That's why people are so up in arms over it and it will spread if something is not done to put a stop to it. The AI tags you referred to have not been in existence that long and it's amazing the general public hasn't started a rebellion against them because if you ask anyone that knows that island it's like a petting zoo. Anyone that has the money to buy that high priced tag will get a trophy animal with no real hunting involved and the only question is whether it will be the biggest of the species on the island. When they then pay an outfit like Mossback to also go on that island to find their animal so it will be the biggest it's a farce to even equate something like that with hunting as we have known hunting to be over a number of generations.

quote:

Originally posted by friarmeier:
Just so I'm clear - I think it's great if someone wants to bid big $$$ on a tag, and I'm glad for that person.

But please, don't tell me this is going to do anything significant for the future of conservation or hunting public lands.

And don't tell me these guys do so out of pure altruism.

If they've got the money and want to make a donation and get a nice tag and put a head up on the wall, super. I hope that I could do the same someday.

If a person's really concerned about conservation & the betterment of hunting, though, take a friend along. That will do more good than 5 big expensive tags.

friar

Friar,

I've read and enjoyed your posts in the past as they often hold words of wisdom. But I have to say, these generalizations concerning the wealthy tag holders is way off base. I don't want to embarrass him but I know and have hunted with Larry Shores. All the things you mention, he has done and then some, and continues to do so.

Case in point, awhile ago, a professional hunter was injured in the field. Larry was one of the first guys to donate money to help him with personal and medical bills. All done for no expected return, in fact, I'm not sure Larry has even met the man. Then, a few months later, a benefit hunt was auctioned, with all proceeds being sent to this injured PH. Larry also purchased that hunt. Larry routinely takes a friend, or 15 along on hunts! He is a hunter in the truest sense of the word. He works for his hunts, no helicopter, or group spotters, etc. Want to see an example of how serious he is? Go take a look at his thread about his upcoming sheep hunt and look at the preparation he is putting into it to ensure he can keep up physically with the guide. He doesn't care a rats ass about who has the biggest or baddest. He cares about conservation and hunting and is the most generous fellow you'll ever have the pleasure to meet and know.

You simply cannot make a generalization about all men of means by the actions of a few bad apples. Like I stated earlier, 1 bad apple will ruin the program's reputation, even if there are 100 guys like Larry participating. Yea, there is a tag involved in the donation. That is, the donation you hear about. How many donations do guys like this make where there is no tag, but you don't hear about it. Like I said, I know of a couple guys that can compete for these high dollar tags. I'm not one of them. But all of them I'm acquainted with are 100%! And by the way, about the hunts donated for the injured PH, another wealthy guy on this forum that almost all know of, ponied up and matched $ for $, all of the combined funds collected for the donated hunts on the PH's behalf. That was done with no expectation of return either as he isn't even hunting, just matched what the donations were for the hunts.

This class warfare and jealousy stuff really needs to end. Self pity because another man has more solves nothing. Never has! Somehow, we Americans have lost sight of this fact.

What more can I say? I hear people keep saying things like: this is about jealousy & class warfare. For me it really isn't. What I've written was about auctions & tags - not about people's actions in other areas. And I don't think that's splitting hairs.

Yes, I'm sure there are many people who are quite wealthy who are very generous towards conservation. These people are typically generous in more than just one area of their lives. The congregation I serve happens to have a more than a few of these people, and I am well acquainted with their words matching their actions. Typically, they are people of few words, but that's a different topic.

My point is this: high dollar tags/auctions do not further our cause. I've said that many times now. I'll also say that, for each person who is well to do and well intentioned, there's probably another 2 people who do it for the wrong reasons. I have/had more than a few of these in my congregation(s) also.

Again, it's my firm belief that if you want the most bang for your buck when it comes to hunting, you've just got to get more people involved - no matter how much disposable income they have.

Besides, how do you know how much money I've got?

Have a good evening!

friar

quote:

This class warfare and jealousy stuff really needs to end. Self pity because another man has more solves nothing. Never has! Somehow, we Americans have lost sight of this fact.

Sir, I, myself, have stated before that I'm not jealous of anyone and yet there have been a number of statements on here like yours that ones responding on this thread are jealous. I don't believe anyone is jealous of anyone and it's not class warfare. It's strictly like you and I have both stated that it only takes a few rotten apples to spoil the whole barrel. In no way was I referring to larry shores in my comments because I know nothing about him. I was referring to Denny Austad and ones like him that are ruining it and for people like larry shores that's a dang shame. I would also like to comment on the crude language used by a member several posts prior to this one, as well as the other that was derogatory to Bill. Anyone who has to resort to that type of language and posts will not be respected or even looked at as being remotely pertinent to this or any thread IMHO. Bill hit the nail right on the head as to what I meant in my other posts and everything he also mentioned on the tags and the AI monies was accurate whether it was liked or not!

quote:

My point is this: high dollar tags/auctions do not further our cause. I've said that many times now.

Yeah, you've said it enough....already. Do you have one scintilla of evidence that the high dollar tags/auctions do not further the cause of conservation? If not, then you're just pulling an OPINION out of your ass and parading it around like it is a fact.

There is nothing new about people donating money to a cause while buying a trip/hunt/car or almost anything you can think of. They do it for many reasons, some more admirable than others, but the bottom line is, the cause gets monies to support its efforts. Apparently you seem to find something wrong with this approach.

The auction permits are very divisive in Utah. One would not realize the profound negativity associated with these permits unless they live here. Just visiting the Expo won't give a guy the truth of the situation. Two sides have been created and it is not about class envy.

Here is a story about an auction tag. A couple years ago the State of Colorado was doing a deer study with funding from the sales of the governor's deer tags. They collared deer in a unit. Within one year the Governor's tag holder shows up with a well-known possee guide and they shoot the collared buck. He shot a deer the State of Colorado has spent $xx,xxxx's monitoring. The same guy buys the gov tags in Utah and has purchased tags on Antelope Island. You make the call as to whom he is serving: the resource or himself.

You can watch the footage here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSNVODAw2ds

Guys like Larry are fine. They are just playing the game.

quote:

A couple years ago the State of Colorado was doing a deer study with funding from the sales of the governor's deer tags. They collared deer in a unit. Within one year the Governor's tag holder shows up with a well-known possee guide and they shoot the collared buck. He shot a deer the State of Colorado has spent $xx,xxxx's monitoring.

I don't see any tag in that clip. I'm not saying the tag story didn't happen, because I don't know, but it would clear up any doubt if you'd source it.

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:

I don't see any tag in that clip. I'm not saying the tag story didn't happen, because I don't know, but it would clear up any doubt if you'd source it.

It's there but they do a good job of not showing it in the video. Its around the neck

Well, I've looked again and I STILL don't see any tag. A little internet research indicates the "tag" story (which apparently is true) happened with a different hunter in 2009. This hunt was in 2011.

To be clear, I'm not defending anything about this "hunt", just trying to stick to the facts.

The guy that found the deer photographed him without a collar in December of 2010. The buck was then caught with a helicopter by DOW and tagged it with a radio collar in January of 2011. The buck was then relocated by the same guy that had photographed him previously and he took the hunter and "guides" in after him. He was killed in mid to late December 2011.

I am pretty sure that timeline is correct but don't bet the farm on it. As a point of fact the deer had a radio collar around his neck when he was killed

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:
Well, I've looked again and I STILL don't see any tag. A little internet research indicates the "tag" story (which apparently is true) happened with a different hunter in 2009. This hunt was in 2011.

It was not a "tag" that the deer was wearing, it was a collar. It is pretty easy to see at about 2:43, before the deer walks behind the tree. If you pause it right when his neck becomes visible, but before his neck is again hidden by a limb, you will see it.

I'm not going to argue about it anymore. I CAREFULLY looked about 5 more times, pausing at each frame in the critical moments, at the whole sequence of that clip and I still didn't see a collar. That streak of white about 2:43 is snow showing between 2 trees behind the deer. Maybe he has a collar and I just can't see it. It would seem to me that if anyone wanted to tag a deer for research and didn't want it shot, then they should use a more visible collar. At any rate, and I'm assuming that the film clip is correct when the guide says 2011, towards the end of the clip, I can't find any stories on a tagged/collarred deer shot in 2011 by an auction purchaser and the references I do find are about a different hunter, different guide in 2009. Maybe this deer was collared but unless it was illegal to shoot him, really, so what?

That type of hunt is not something I would do, but I'm not him.

FWIW, here is a story with photos on a Dec. 2012 tagged mule deer shot on a private ranch by an editor of "Outdoor Life". Apparently the tags are part of a study involving hunter mortality on big mulies, so the above story of the hunter killing a tagged deer is just the end part of the study. Tagged Mulie 2012

I'll also have to admit that after looking at these still pics, I can understand why I can't see the collar in the above film clip.

You can see it quite clearly at 2:03 and 2:32. When I seen it was austad, I knew the posse was there. Real sport hunting, that really doesn't hold much over high fenced hunting.

quote:

You make the call as to whom he is serving: the resource or himself

Vast majority, themselves, not the resource. Some tags are donated to organizations, 4H, Mule Deer Foundation, RMEF and the like, so the funds help them.

Thanks, I see it now. Of course, that has nothing to do with anything since these collars are apparently part of a study of big mulies hunter mortality.

As far as the auction purchases goes, I'm sure they're doing it for both themselves and the resource......and I find it amazing that anyone would think otherwise. I don't see the problem, the "hunter" (in the case of the clip) gets a deer and the resource gets money.

Yep, that was old white tooth Brownlee leading Austad to that buck in late December on the winter range in 2011 with snow up past their knees just like Austad stated. In all the video when they get to the deer notice that they never lift the head up and to the left or the collar would have been visible. It was always with the deer's head turned to the right and down. Yes, the fact is that it was not a violation to shoot a collared deer, but that deer was killed in just about the same fashion on the winter range as the one they led the guy to in late December of last year with the helicopter and big ground crew and it sucks!

Gato- So what? Really? If you need to have it explained to you then you'll never understand.

Governor's tags are sold on the premise that the money generated benefits the resource. The simple pull of the trigger wiped away any benefit from the sale of the tag. This hunter has killed numerous giant bucks, yet chose to shoot a studied buck which is smaller than many of the bucks he has killed.

Too bad some abuse the very program which they use and defames it to the masses through their actions.

quote:

Originally posted by Topgun 30-06:
...but that deer was killed in just about the same fashion as the one they led the guy to in late December of last year with the helicopter and big ground crew and it sucks!

I have mentioned the use of a helicopter but I was mentioning it because of the article in the Gunnison paper. As it stands it appears there is an ongoing investigation but I've seen people make allegations that weren't true in the past. If a helicopter was used I hope these guys are hammered.

As for the deer that was killed by Austed last year, I have not heard anything that would lead anybody to believe that there was anything wrong with that hunt. I think it sucks that they killed a collared buck but it wasn't illegal to do so

To the best of my knowledge there was nothing illegal involving either of the winter range bucks killed by Austad in 2011 in that video or by the other guy whose name escapes me in 2011. We are talking things most people deem to be unethical, not illegal. From my understanding in talking with the guy who lives where the latest buck was killed in December of last year, Brownlee and crew knew the Game Wardens were watching their every action, including the use of the helicopter. That's why the ground crew had to sit on the buck for quite a while until time had elapsed and they wouldn't be cited for illegal use of the chopper in the hunt. To the best of my knowledge nothing illegal occurred on the Austad hunt in this video either.

Just to make sure people understand, I didn't say it was illegal for him to shoot a collard buck. I just think it defeats the argument of being beneficial to the resource. Call it unethical, selfish, stupid, egotistical, whatever. Just don't say it was done to aid the resource and the donation was a noble gesture. Compared to his other deer, the collared buck was small. His actions sure didn't help the cause.

I have switched sides. Now that there is Internet evidence that someone did something unethical, I believe I hate all auction tag buyers and their filthy money going toward conservation.

Thanks for showing me the light.

I know unethical doctors, layers (surprise), booking agents, outfitters, dog groomers, baseball players and professional cyclist ... Name it, there are crooks and scoundrels in every industry and sport.

Knowing that there is no such thing as a perfectly efficient system when it comes to conservation and wildlife, As a whole, is it possible to agree that the money from these tags is a very good thing for wildlife and hunters?

quote:

Originally posted by MC:
Gato- So what? Really? If you need to have it explained to you then you'll never understand.

Governor's tags are sold on the premise that the money generated benefits the resource. The simple pull of the trigger wiped away any benefit from the sale of the tag. This hunter has killed numerous giant bucks, yet chose to shoot a studied buck which is smaller than many of the bucks he has killed.

Too bad some abuse the very program which they use and defames it to the masses through their actions.

"The simple pull of the trigger wiped away any benefit from the sale of the tag."

Well horseshit. The bucks were being tagged to study big buck hunter mortality, so how does one being killed "wipe away" any benefit? If you need to have it explained to you, then you'll never understand.

I think a big part of your argument is INTERNAL, not external and, like Wendell, I'm out of here.

First the wealthy hunter argument and now the collared animal argument. The issue of shooting collared big animals has been discussed extensively over on the African Hunting forum. Many elephant and lion have been collared within the boundaries of national parks with the understanding that should they leave the park and venture into the surrounding designated safari areas, they are fair game. I don't know the specifics of what was being studied with the collared mule deer here but the thinking on the African game is that they want a realistic representation of whatever the animal is exposed to. If that ultimately be an encounter with hunters, so be it. Valuable data concerning animal mortality is retained. In fact, NOT shooting a specific animal just because it wears a collar would be counter productive to an honest mortality study as it would skew the results. Not big game but similar to the shooting of banded ducks. The bands are not placed on the animal to give it special status, but rather to collect data on whatever happens to the animal in it's normal course of activities.

Seems like red herrings to me guys. Let me explain my point a bit. Go over and take a look at the issues facing the New Zealanders concerning heli hunting of Tahr on public lands. It is not sporting in anyway, shape, or form. And despite the local's efforts to get the 16 outfitters authorized to conduct those types of hunts shut down, they have been unsuccessful. Why? Plenty of reasons I suppose but I submit that one of their major problems has been that in any discussion of unethical heli hunting activities, one cannot read more than 3 statements into the discussion before the issue of class warfare raises it's ugly head in the form of "Rich American hunters are ruining the resource because the average Kiwi can't afford to do this" and the such. Lots of animosity about how the local guys will spend days upon days hiking and climbing to get into position an a good bull, only to have a chopper fly in, disturb the stalk at the last minute, with a guy getting out and shooting the animal out from under them.

They have some very legitimate issues to sort out with unethical methods of take going on. But they don't seem to be able to hold the attention of the law makers long enough to get the problems sorted out. My opinion is that the jealousy issue seriously demeans the validity of the argument. I think they would be much more successful in their efforts if they would just stick to the real issues of how unrestricted, easy access to the remote places by use of heli hunting is affecting the herd numbers. Put yourself in the lawmakers position. Would you be more willing to take up and support an issue which is presented based on substantiated facts or one that is based on emotion and riddled with pettiness and half truths? Most serious minded individuals in a position of power, at least the honest ones, will be more easily motivated to see an issue through fruition if he can hang his hat on substance.

So, admitting that I don't know all the issues surrounding these high dollar tags in the Western states, I can tell you that I'm less interested in finding out the details here because I'm having to sort through the "he has more money and went to the front of the line and then used a chopper to locate the animal and then had a posse of guys sit on the animal until he finished his business and flew in and just shot it" crap. Doesn't matter that parts of one hunt are mixed with parts of another hunt that took place 2 or more years earlier. Doesn't help that "and yeah, the deer was also collared" and so on and so on. It tends to go in one ear and out the other because frankly, it begins to sound like something my younger kids would come to me seeking resolution over.

If there are real and legitimate issues with how these tags are being issued and the resulting hunts conducted, present the facts without the superflous emotion. If a hunt went down unethically in 2008, don't take parts of that hunt and insert it into the 2011 Governor's Tag hunt in an attempt to discredit it. If wrong doing was committed, present the facts specifically and seek correction and justice for that event. Don't make generalizing statements that are unfair to the legitimate participants. It lessens the possibility of correcting the wrongdoing as most of the people in a position to do something about it will simply pass it off as jealousy. If the consensus is that shooting a collared animal is wrong, change the law to reflect that. Depending on what data the specific study is attempting to collect, shooting a collared animal may be more valuable than letting it walk simply because it wears the collar. By that I mean, if the scientist are attempting to study mortality rates, part of what affects those rates is being shot by hunters. Sparing the animal simply because of the collar, skews the mortality rate by artificially preserving that animal. Just stick to the facts and leave the fluff out of the argument. Just my 2cents.

Gato- didn't you already say you were leaving? Addicted to arguing on AR still, I see. You obviously would rather argue than see another viewpoint (hard to even get you so see a radio GPS collar). It cost a substantial amount of money (generated by the tag sales) to tag and monitor that buck, which offsets the donation. The study is IN SEASON hunting and deer mortality, not who can shoot the buck on the winter range where it was collared. If you knew anything about studies, then you'd understand multiple years of data is important. Not one season and shoot the deer on its winter range.

Wendell- Yep, some good is done and some bad. Why not try to clean up the bad. Being from Texas, you probably don't have the first hand knowledge of what is associated with SOME of these tags.

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:

"The simple pull of the trigger wiped away any benefit from the sale of the tag."

Well horseshit. The bucks were being tagged to study big buck hunter mortality, so how does one being killed "wipe away" any benefit? If you need to have it explained to you, then you'll never understand.

I think a big part of your argument is INTERNAL, not external and, like Wendell, I'm out of here.

I'm not sure what the collar was helping them study but if it was in fact a study based on hunter mortality it would have been very interesting to let that deer live to see if and when he was killed and where he was killed during the seasons that the DOW has set forth. No good data comes from that deer being killed on wintering ground in late December when that buck is most visible and vulnerable. Anybody could have killed that deer in the wintering ground but obviously the deer was elusive during the fall when there were thousands of hunters pounding the hillsides.

It would be interesting to know exactly what they were studying and it would have been great if they could have gotten more data from the collar.

IMO it was a little ridiculous to shoot a deer that was collared and being studied on a tag that's used to promote conservation. That buck is a shooter to most but not the caliber of deer that one normally shoots with that tag. I guess tag soup was out of the question?

Drummond-- Well said. These are the issues which creates the heart-burn over these permits. It isn't class envy for me.

On the other hand

Larry's donation will help transplant sheep and study mortality. His hunt will take place during the season. I appreciate his donation and he appreciates the Tax Deduction and tag without waiting. Win-Win. I just don't want to see more games because the Win-Win will become a huge loss for draw applicants.

MC and Drummond,

Your comments about shooting the collared buck outside the normal season certainly has merit. However, I would also have to say, that however the normal season affects overall mortality, that Governor's tag and the accompanying timeframe allowed for its filling has to be factored into the data as well. So I'm not sure that should be ruled out.

What seems more realistic to me would be to restrict when the tag can be used. Do not allow it to be filled while the deer are on their winter range and most vulnerable. Which is what I think you guys are proposing in the first place. But that message gets lost in the fluff surrounding the fact that a collared deer was shot by a rich guy.

It shouldn't matter if the deer was collared or not. If shooting it on it's winter range is the problem, focus on the problem, not the collar, nor how much money the hunter has. Which is the entire point I was trying to make all along. Legitimate issues can and should stand on their own merit and will more likely be addressed satisfactorily when presented as such.

MC, I am also from Texas and you are correct in that I'm not privy to the first hand knowledge of what goes on with these tags. But should you desire for guys like me to become interested in the subject, tell me facts that I can verify and feel comfortable supporting. You'll find allies in that approach!