Super Tags

[Lawnboy]

With all the ranting and raving that is going viral about SFW and other organizations I pose a question to get some feedback. There is little argument that every state Fish and Game department could use more income to help habitat, block programs ect... It seems that the Super Tags are a way to generate some extra income while not totally exploiting the game in the respective states. I guess I am more in favor of this approach because it is the States F&G departments that are running it rather than an outside organization that seems to have no oversight.
I noticed that Montana has only 8 available tags for this. I looked at Idaho's and they have 32. I would think that Montana could easily add a few more and greatly increase some extra revenue without hurting the resource or opportunity.
Just wanted to get your thoughts as to whether or not you think these tags are beneficial and if you think Montana at least could add a few more?

For the record I am in favor of a price increase for tags (long overdue) as well. Like I mentioned I am completely against outside groups having any control over these tags. They all want to do their part (they say) to help with habitat improvements etc.. so why couldn't they just volunteer alongside our state agencies and help with these projects that the state is funding through the extra income gained through super tags, tag fee increases etc...? I'm sure I know the answer to that question. Somehow volunteerism has turned into " How much can I make $"

Also if anyone knows how much money is currently being raised through these tags that would be great info to know.

Give me your thoughts.

 

[6speed]

I like our states super tags and I too would rather see a tag fee increase as opposed to selling them to the highest bidder.

 

[Big Fin]

The MT idea was brought forth by the Private Lands-Public Wildlife Council, or PLPW as we call it. They brought that bill forward to the legislature with specific issues they thought it could help with. It was pretty much supported by most the hunting groups.

If I recall, most of the money is used to help with Block Management, not toward the specific species. I could be wrong, but I think access was the big focus with the MT tags.

The Idaho program, if I understand correctly, is used for their Access YES program. They sure do give away a lot more than MT. But, we have a lot of other funding sources for our Block Management than ID has for their Access Yes program.

Personally, I think MT has the right number of tags for the species. Not that a few more would hurt the herds.

 

[npaden]

I didn't find anythign more recent, but I would guess it is still pretty close to what it was in 2008.

In 2008, the sale of the super tag lottery generated $356,595. The total number of super tags sold was 71,319—38,229 chances bought by residents and 33,090 chances by non-residents. This represented a $30,000 increase above 2007 according to Aasheim.

Here are the number of tags sold by species in 2008:

Sheep 22,429
Goat 6,393
Moose 11,222
Elk 15,541
Mule Deer 6,866
Bison 5,018
Antelope 2,335
Mountain Lion 1,515

All but one of the eight winners in 2008 were from Montana:

 

[mtlion]

I agree with Fin, I think one per species is enough.

 

[npaden]

My personal feeling is that they are probably tapping the majority of the revenue stream available. If they switched to 2 sheep tags instead of 1, I doubt they would sell twice as many tags.

Not everyone is going to suddenly think that because there are 2 licenses available now they are going to buy 20 chances instead of 10, they will still just buy their 10 chances and hope for the best.

 

[Lawnboy]

My personal feeling is that they are probably tapping the majority of the revenue stream available. If they switched to 2 sheep tags instead of 1, I doubt they would sell twice as many tags.

Not everyone is going to suddenly think that because there are 2 licenses available now they are going to buy 20 chances instead of 10, they will still just buy their 10 chances and hope for the best.

I can buy that logic. I guess the other idea would be not necessarily having them as super tags but tags allotted to a specific unit like the expo tags.

 

[Corax]

By npaden's figures, the numbers of residents and non-residents applying in 2008 was similar but residents won 7 out of 8 of the tags. Are there any figures on distribution of resident vs non-resident tickets? For example if most of the non-resident apps went to sheep, this would explain it.

 

[thecrittergitter]

I didn't find anythign more recent, but I would guess it is still pretty close to what it was in 2008.

As my wife was one of those supertag holders in 2008, we just want that tag back on a year the Bison actually come out of the park!

 

[noharleyyet]

As my wife was one of those supertag holders in 2008, we just want that tag back on a year the Bison actually come out of the park!

Careful now, a Texan makes that same statment and the dogpile is instantanous.

 

[theat]

I feel that one super tag per species is about right for Montana.

Don't forget that Montana also gives a sheep and goat super tag to the Wild Sheep Foundation to auction every year, a mule deer super tag to the Mule Deer Foundation to auction every year, and an elk and moose super tag to the RMEF as well.

The one change I would support would be to convert the auction tags to a raffle run by the FWP similar to the super tags currently available but maybe in a differnet price range (20$/chance). As far as it goes MT appears to have a pretty good accounting system for these auction tags with 90% of the money going back to the FWP. My main concern is that there are currently individuals/organizations (hint hint MTSFW) trying to influence legislators to introduce bills that would take more tags out of the general pool to give to these groups with minimal oversight. Its a slippery slope and we are on it!

 

[TheTone]

One thing I like about Idaho's program are that the tags don't operate outside of the normal season frameworks, they just let you pick and choose what seasons you want to try out. The fact they are really a raffle tag and not an auction system is also good IMO. That said there are some people dropping a ton of money on them every year. I personally know of more than a few people that have drawn them and not filled them. The fact we do two drawings (one early, one late) also probably increases the interest from some people.

 

[fishing4sanity]

If I recall, most of the money is used to help with Block Management, not toward the specific species. I could be wrong, but I think access was the big focus with the MT tags.

I don't consider myself much of a gambler, but I always buy a few MT super tag chances, as well as for my home state of WA, and sometimes maybe another state. I think they're a good deal for the states and if Big Fin is right and most of the money is going to Block Management then I hope they keep going because that's where I've had my best luck. I really appreciate being able to hunt MT, beautiful state and the seasons fit my farm work schedule much better than my home state's seasons. I've never drawn a super tag anywhere, but I'll keep trying and as long as MT lets me I'll graciously keep coming back from time to time.