Not at all. Takes more than just $'s to get good conservation results. I have no idea whether Montana manages those dollars wisely or not. No amount of auction dollars are going to control the weather. And if domestic sheep grazing is a contributing factor in disease in the bighorn population, then it is going to take far more dollars than can be raised from a sheep tag auction to affect that issue. So what's your point?
Never made the claim that the auction tag helps everyone. I did state that if more dollars leads to more sheep on the landscape, that is a good thing. I take it you disagree that a larger sheep population has the potential to result in more tags being made available to all (sheep) hunters. Suggest you work on your reading comprehension.
Again, you need to work on your reading comprehension. Auctions are just another way of generating funding just like raffles, direct appeals for donations, etc. outside of direct government expenditures. And arguably the most efficient in terms of generating the most $/tag. Funding (nominally/hopefully) supports conservation efforts. Are you arguing that funding for conservation has no impact on sheep populations? How do you know that funding to date hasn't at least kept the population from going to zero in Montana? So to take your logic to its natural conclusion - since no amount of fundraising for sheep conservation (auction, raffles, etc.) over the last 40 years has resulted in more tags, it is a complete waste of time and effort and Montana should just throw in the towel.
Your argument for auction tags was that more sheep were being put on the mountain. That's just not true. Not to mention that almost all, if not all, of the sheep herds in Montana were put on the mountain long before an auction tag existed. That's a simple fact.
A larger sheep population would increase tags, but the one with the comprehension problem seems to be you. There are LESS sheep in Montana now, LESS tags issued now, than before the auction tags existed. That's a simple fact. If they're working so well, why is that the case?
That tired line of "well, if it weren't for the money from auction tags it would be worse" is lame. I don't see how that could be the case, we throw a boatload of money at the issue with less results all the time in Montana.
I would suggest that if all great auction tag money is not netting the desired result, the tag may as well be raffled so that everyone has a chance at it. If there were better results from the tag, I might feel differently, but I base my decisions on these things with results. In the case of Montana, the money being spent is not equaling better results, period, end of statement.
Its also not true that auctions always generate more funding either, WYBHA had a commission tag that raised the most money ever for a commission tag, $57K and the guy that won it bought 3 tickets. We also donated every penny to a perpetual easement on Raymond Mountain in Western Wyoming.
I also believe that auction tags piss all over the North American Model where wildlife is supposed to be accessible/available to ALL, not just those with the fattest wallet.
