bridger
03-19-2009, 02:19 PM
Received by email and thought some of the guys on the site might find it interesting.
Trophy Tag Auctions Bad Business
How about this alternate plan that raises as much money for wildlife conservation but without negative headlines?
By Bill Schneider, 2-26-09
The quarter-million-dollar sheep. Is it worth it?. Photo courtesy of Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks Department.
We might not need to read about yet another example of hunters assuming the role of their own worst enemy in the war to save our hunting tradition, but I can’t resist writing about this one.
Here in the New West, we’ve had at least three recent headliners about our state wildlife agencies and conservation organizations condoning and even promoting the practice of the super-rich paying obscene amounts of money to buy big game licenses. Does this practice really promote the future of hunting or give it another self-inflicted black eye?
Specifically, Dennis Austad, an Idaho contractor, launched a fierce debate when he forked over $150,000 for the right to hunt any elk in any district open to any type of hunting in Utah. Then, with the help of a squad of outfitters and guides (not included in the price of the tag), he managed to bag a world record elk. Click here (http://www.newwest.net/topic/article/boone_and_crockett_club_confirms_new_world_record_ elk/C41/L41/) and here (http://www.newwest.net/topic/article/boone_and_crockett_club_reacts_to_critics_of_new_w orld_record_elk/C41/L41/) to experiencthe push back (be sure to read the comments)
http://www.huntingbc.ca/photos/data/500/medium/DSCN0141.JPG (http://www.huntingbc.ca/photos/showphoto.php?photo=13410&size=big&cat=500)
Then in February, Robert Kay, a Utah resident, paid $205,000 for permission to hunt mule deer (http://www.huntthewest.com/updates2009/UTauction.htm) anywhere in his state and a week or so later, an anonymous Illinois sandwich shop owner bid $245,000 for the right to hunt a bighorn sheep (http://www.greatfallstribune.com/article/20090211/NEWS01/902110304/1002/news01) in Montana. I can’t give you his name because the Wild Sheep Foundation, a nonprofit that conducted the auction, refuses to release his name. What does that say?
These are only three of many examples. This questionable practice has been going on, annually, for twenty years or more. I’m not even sure when it started. And not just in Idaho, Montana and Utah--in most if not all western states and many eastern states.
I understand the nonprofits and wildlife agencies receiving these bonuses put the money to good use, and I certainly have no problem with rich people donating large sums of money to conservation organizations or wildlife agencies for research or habitat improvement. I wish they’d do even more of it.
The economics of the trophy tag auctions is clear. Wildlife research and habitat benefit. But is anybody looking at the image this ritual sends out to all of us have-not hunters and the majority of the non-hunting populace?
I know most hunters of ordinary means spend a lifetime dreaming about the opportunity to hunt bighorn sheep or being able to afford the best outfitter in the state and a dozen guides to make sure something worthy of a taxidermist’s time comes from the high-priced permit. Yet, a high-net-worther can buy it whenever he wants it. And to this person, $245,000 might not even represent a lot of money, nor does he have any trouble taking off the entire big game season from work to make sure he fills his trophy tag.
I remember the days these headlines hit the news. Down at the ORG (Old Retired Guys) table at the coffee shop, everybody had nothing but words of disgust for the idea of selling trophy licenses to the highest bidder.
If a bunch of hunters like we ORGs find the practice embarrassing, what do non-hunters think about it? These are the people who represent the “swing votes” when the next anti-hunting initiative comes around.
And anti-hunting organizations? They must have a heyday with this policy, using it to further smear all hunters as rich, overweight, greedy trophy hunters with big rooms built onto their mansions to display all the mounts. Most hunters don’t fit that mold, of course, but these front-page headlines send out this message.
This is a big deal. Collectively, we’re talking about many millions raised for wildlife conservation courtesy of the richest among us. In Utah alone, the trophy tag auctions netted $1.5 million this year and $17 million over the past ten years.
I hope it’s worth the money because it doesn’t polish the image of hunting, even among most hunters.
So, what’s the alternative? I have a suggestion.
I believe many of the well-heeled hunters who bid on these trophy tags do it in part because they intend to contribute to wildlife conservation. Robert Kay said as much while writing his $205,000 check for a permit to hunt mule deer he could’ve purchased for $35. With this in mind, how about re-formatting the auctions to encourage wealthy people to bid on who can donate the most to elk winter range acquisition or wild sheep research with no trophy tag in return? Then, the headlines would read UTAH HUNTER GIVES $205,000 TO MULE DEER RESEARCH or ILLINOIS HUNTER DONATES $245,000 TO WILD SHEEP PRESERVATION.
That sounds a little better, don’t you think?
Trophy Tag Auctions Bad Business
How about this alternate plan that raises as much money for wildlife conservation but without negative headlines?
By Bill Schneider, 2-26-09
The quarter-million-dollar sheep. Is it worth it?. Photo courtesy of Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks Department.
We might not need to read about yet another example of hunters assuming the role of their own worst enemy in the war to save our hunting tradition, but I can’t resist writing about this one.
Here in the New West, we’ve had at least three recent headliners about our state wildlife agencies and conservation organizations condoning and even promoting the practice of the super-rich paying obscene amounts of money to buy big game licenses. Does this practice really promote the future of hunting or give it another self-inflicted black eye?
Specifically, Dennis Austad, an Idaho contractor, launched a fierce debate when he forked over $150,000 for the right to hunt any elk in any district open to any type of hunting in Utah. Then, with the help of a squad of outfitters and guides (not included in the price of the tag), he managed to bag a world record elk. Click here (http://www.newwest.net/topic/article/boone_and_crockett_club_confirms_new_world_record_ elk/C41/L41/) and here (http://www.newwest.net/topic/article/boone_and_crockett_club_reacts_to_critics_of_new_w orld_record_elk/C41/L41/) to experiencthe push back (be sure to read the comments)
http://www.huntingbc.ca/photos/data/500/medium/DSCN0141.JPG (http://www.huntingbc.ca/photos/showphoto.php?photo=13410&size=big&cat=500)
Then in February, Robert Kay, a Utah resident, paid $205,000 for permission to hunt mule deer (http://www.huntthewest.com/updates2009/UTauction.htm) anywhere in his state and a week or so later, an anonymous Illinois sandwich shop owner bid $245,000 for the right to hunt a bighorn sheep (http://www.greatfallstribune.com/article/20090211/NEWS01/902110304/1002/news01) in Montana. I can’t give you his name because the Wild Sheep Foundation, a nonprofit that conducted the auction, refuses to release his name. What does that say?
These are only three of many examples. This questionable practice has been going on, annually, for twenty years or more. I’m not even sure when it started. And not just in Idaho, Montana and Utah--in most if not all western states and many eastern states.
I understand the nonprofits and wildlife agencies receiving these bonuses put the money to good use, and I certainly have no problem with rich people donating large sums of money to conservation organizations or wildlife agencies for research or habitat improvement. I wish they’d do even more of it.
The economics of the trophy tag auctions is clear. Wildlife research and habitat benefit. But is anybody looking at the image this ritual sends out to all of us have-not hunters and the majority of the non-hunting populace?
I know most hunters of ordinary means spend a lifetime dreaming about the opportunity to hunt bighorn sheep or being able to afford the best outfitter in the state and a dozen guides to make sure something worthy of a taxidermist’s time comes from the high-priced permit. Yet, a high-net-worther can buy it whenever he wants it. And to this person, $245,000 might not even represent a lot of money, nor does he have any trouble taking off the entire big game season from work to make sure he fills his trophy tag.
I remember the days these headlines hit the news. Down at the ORG (Old Retired Guys) table at the coffee shop, everybody had nothing but words of disgust for the idea of selling trophy licenses to the highest bidder.
If a bunch of hunters like we ORGs find the practice embarrassing, what do non-hunters think about it? These are the people who represent the “swing votes” when the next anti-hunting initiative comes around.
And anti-hunting organizations? They must have a heyday with this policy, using it to further smear all hunters as rich, overweight, greedy trophy hunters with big rooms built onto their mansions to display all the mounts. Most hunters don’t fit that mold, of course, but these front-page headlines send out this message.
This is a big deal. Collectively, we’re talking about many millions raised for wildlife conservation courtesy of the richest among us. In Utah alone, the trophy tag auctions netted $1.5 million this year and $17 million over the past ten years.
I hope it’s worth the money because it doesn’t polish the image of hunting, even among most hunters.
So, what’s the alternative? I have a suggestion.
I believe many of the well-heeled hunters who bid on these trophy tags do it in part because they intend to contribute to wildlife conservation. Robert Kay said as much while writing his $205,000 check for a permit to hunt mule deer he could’ve purchased for $35. With this in mind, how about re-formatting the auctions to encourage wealthy people to bid on who can donate the most to elk winter range acquisition or wild sheep research with no trophy tag in return? Then, the headlines would read UTAH HUNTER GIVES $205,000 TO MULE DEER RESEARCH or ILLINOIS HUNTER DONATES $245,000 TO WILD SHEEP PRESERVATION.
That sounds a little better, don’t you think?