RobG
Well-known member
Maybe this round, but what’s to say it won’t happen with the next governor?AND... yet they picked BHA... BHA is notorious for their rhetoric towards Gianforte.
I think we can drop the political agenda b.s. for this round.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Maybe this round, but what’s to say it won’t happen with the next governor?AND... yet they picked BHA... BHA is notorious for their rhetoric towards Gianforte.
I think we can drop the political agenda b.s. for this round.
Who should get to decide then?Thanks. The problem I have with that is the governor-appointed commission gets to pick who gets the windfall.
Who should get to decide then?
Good question. Therein lies my problem with these tags that are auctioned by NGOs.Who should get to decide then?
re past role in conservation... my memory of Idaho is the commission thought predator control was conservation. And isn't Utah in love with SFW? I could be wrong, but to me, the whole idea of any organization getting a windfall is a bad one.I could imagine some sort of scoring criteria - much the same as hiring a state employee. It seemed the commissioners weren't even sure what considerations dictate who they choose.
Some I would include, the weight of each would need to be figured:
-Amount they will potentially raise
-From Montana
-Past role in conservation
etc.
Maybe it is just a threshold, and from there is an element of lottery for the lottery. For example, if ten groups meet the criteria for receiving a single auction/raffle tag they are pursuing, then those ten groups would be placed in a pool and the recipient randomly drawn.
I think there are a lot of fair and effective ways to do this and at the least, the commissioners should know what criteria merits their decisions.
Sounds to to me that is already being used. Some of the commisioners wanted to try something new with the mule deer tag, especially since it has not been bringing in a lot of revenue lately.I could imagine some sort of scoring criteria - much the same as hiring a state employee or a public entity awarding a contract. It seemed the commissioners weren't even sure what considerations dictate who they choose.
Some I would include, the weight of each would need to be figured:
-Amount they will potentially raise
-From Montana
-Past role in conservation
etc.
Maybe it is just a threshold, and from there is an element of lottery for the lottery. For example, if ten groups meet the criteria for receiving a single auction/raffle tag they are pursuing, then those ten groups would be placed in a pool and the recipient randomly drawn.
I think there are a lot of fair and effective ways to do this and at the least, the commissioners should know what criteria merits their decisions.
Sounds to to me that is already being used. S
Yes. Seemed odd when I heard of the result too, but there is no dedicated Moose conservation org. At least DU doubled the money through the federal PR funding and used it on actual conservation projects. This year from MOGEI we get something like “Moose Awareness Week”.WTF DU is given a big game tag where they pocket 10% of auction or raffle to use towards wetland is beyond me, maybe because wetland is inclusive of moose? Therefore some justification?
He said he wants "more" specific criteria. That means he had criteria to make a decision. My interpretation reading the article, is Tabor wanted to find a reason not to select the BHA proposal. 3 other Commisioners out weighed his vote. Ultimately 5 people get to interpret that criteria, and sometimes they will interpret it differently.I guess I missed where "what is already being used" is explicitly mentioned. I don't think it is.
From the article:
“If we’re going to continue to get more and more competitors, if you will, for each license, it would feel a lot more comfortable to this commissioner if we had more specific criteria that we’re trying to achieve,” said Commissioner Patrick Tabor, of Whitefish.
Yes. Seemed odd when I heard of the result too, but there is no dedicated Moose conservation org. At least DU doubled the money through the federal PR funding and used it on actual conservation projects. This year from MOGEI we get something like “Moose Awareness Week”.
These sales provide valuable funds for conservation projects. Ended them would be bad, but a more transparent selection process could help resolve many questions.
Why can't FWP auction them directly?Yes. Seemed odd when I heard of the result too, but there is no dedicated Moose conservation org. At least DU doubled the money through the federal PR funding and used it on actual conservation projects. This year from MOGEI we get something like “Moose Awareness Week”.
These sales provide valuable funds for conservation projects. Ended them would be bad, but a more transparent selection process could help resolve many questions.
Why can't FWP auction them directly?
Why can't FWP auction them directly?
Really? Then we would have to hire 5 more FWP employees to run this auction that would undoubtedly turn into a SS and would bring in a fraction of what is currently being raised. That makes a hell of a lot of sense!This is a great question. Whether it is an auction or a raffle, seems we could skip the middle man.
I am so burned out from politics I don't, but I don't see how an auction is going to cause any more problems because it comes from FWP instead of an NGO.They are not allowed per statute, iirc.
And I think if the agency starts auctioning them off, then the politicians start licking their lips even more. Remember this gem?
Really? Then we would have to hire 5 more FWP employees to run this auction that would undoubtedly turn into a SS and would bring in a fraction of what is currently being raised. That makes a hell of a lot of sense!
What if one of GG’s acquaintances “won” the tag?I am so burned out from politics I don't, but I don't see how an auction is going to cause any more problems because it comes from FWP instead of an NGO.
Tongue in cheek. As I pointed out, having 10% to recoup the cost of the auction makes a larger organization more attractive because they have efficiencies of scale having run auctions before, and it made DU even more attractive because they doubled the money through PR funds.You aren't getting "moose awareness week,"