HB 5740- Our Resources Sold To The Highest Bidder!

[Bmac]

I was just made aware of Michigan HB 5740 which would allow up to 5 bear and 5 elk tags to be sold to the highest bidder each year with the money going to the Game and Fish Protection Fund. I could almost live with the auctioning of "a" (meaning one) bear tag a year because with the point system it is likely a person can draw one every few years. However, I don't like the idea of auctioning off elk tags when I will likely apply every year of my life and never draw one. I have already contacted my Rep.(who's name is on the Bill) and voiced my opposition.

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/docume...8-hIB-5740.htm

[Rudi's Dad]

I dont hunt big game, its still outrageous to me.

[Ferris_StateHunter]

If the money goes for a good cause, Such as establishing more land and habitat to sustain a bigger herd of elk, I would have no problem with this.... As long as the money is used for the right reasons, I really do not have a problem with it at all..

[Bwilson]

I agree with it should be single. As for them getting a elk permit i really dont see people trying to pay big bucks for the elk. figure you can go out of state have better odds and prolly even big elk. to me this sounds like its not going to raise much funds since michigan is surrounded by places with larger and higher populated areas with these same animals. Who really is going to pay huge amounts of money for a bear that is huge to michigan but average in canada and prolly cost about the same. i would think very few. very few bidders and the numbers probally wont be climbing to an outrageous number. The only thing i see this benfitting is a guide service being able to offer 5 liceances instead of hoping for people to come to them.

[autumnlovr]

Bmac,
There has been some discussion about this in a different section...

http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/showthread.php?t=222895&highlight=5740

I was hoping someone came back with more info, but it kinda got dropped.

[Fecus]

Good idea. Has the potential to bring in tens of thousands of dollars.

From what I hear, Michigan is one of bear huntings best kept secrets. I also hear a lot of bear taken are quality size.

[swampbuck]

The proposal is to put the money in the general fund. I e-mailed my opposition the last time it was brought up, now that you reminded me I will send Rep Sheltrown another e-mail.

[DANIEL MARK ZAPOLSKI]

sounds like a lot of crap to me.:Protest_e:rant: the legislature is stealing even more from the citizens of michigan. now if the bids start at $$100,000.00:woohoo1: and the money goes directly back into the D.N.R.:woohoo1:. i would be in favor of 1 and only 1 elk permit to be AUCTIONED off with the RESTRICTION it must be a MICHIGANDER ONLY. otherwise just S***CAN that whole scam, the whole idea screams of some LITTLE RICH KID :gaga:SCREAMING HIS LUNGS OUT:gaga: because he/she :gaga:has to play by the rules of the raffle and may never get to hunt elk in michigan JUST LIKE THE REST OF US!:grouphug:

[2PawsRiver]

Will be interesting to watch and see what kind of funds it brings in for the DNR.

[SevenMaryThree]

Other states (Kentucky) have done this for a long time. Profiting from the sale of resources isn't always bad.

http://www.courier-journal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080203/SPORTS09/802030551/1002/SPORTS (http://www.courier-journal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080203/SPORTS09/802030551/1002/SPORTS)

Elk tag to be auctioned at foundation banquet

The George Rogers Clark chapter of the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation will hold its annual banquet and auction Feb. 23 at Papa John's Cardinal Stadium's Brown and Williamson Suite. Doors will open at 5:30 p.m.
Items to be auctioned include a commissioner's tag for the 2008 Kentucky bull elk firearm season. That tag allows the holder to hunt anywhere within the 16-county elk restoration zone, pending landowner permission.
Bids for the commissioner's tag can be made by phone.
The banquet is open to foundation members and nonmembers. Tickets cost $65 and include an RMEF annual membership. Tickets for the meal alone are $30.
For tickets, to bid on the elk tag or for other information call David DeCuir at (502) 387-3586.

[7MM Magnum]

ALL I've got to say is I BETTER get drawn before this goes into effect,....

:rant: I've been waiting since this damn elk lotto started,.. and I'm STILL waiting with 3 Preference points under my belt !!! :mad:


:dizzy::dizzy::dizzy:

[bradymsu]

Representative Sheltrown has read, understands and agrees with the arguments made against HB 5740 here. He recognizes that he made a mistake in co-sponsoring the bill. The bill will not receive a hearing.

-Brady (Rep. Sheltrown's office)

[2PawsRiver]

Speak, and yee shall be heard:D

[swampbuck]

Representative Sheltrown has read, understands and agrees with the arguments made against HB 5740 here. He recognizes that he made a mistake in co-sponsoring the bill. The bill will not receive a hearing.

-Brady (Rep. Sheltrown's office)

tell him michigans hunters are grateful.

[trapstercarl]

Maine does this every year for there some moose tags and it makes them a lot of money. now as for its easier and more productive to hunt elk out west, are you serious? I'm pretty sure Michigan boast one of the highest percentage elk hunts in the nation.And from what I'm told it's not entirely to hard especially with a guide (no mountains to climb and non educated elk) These tags would bring approx $10,000 to $15,000 apiece for the elk tags based on Maine's moose tag (another once in a lifetime hunt). I'm all for it if the money goes to helping expand Michigan hunting and fishing opportunity. Theres a very good chance I will never draw a Michigan elk tag , so I will continue to drive out to Colorado.But if we can use them to make money for other natural resources so be it. carl

[Ferris_StateHunter]

Representative Sheltrown has read, understands and agrees with the arguments made against HB 5740 here. He recognizes that he made a mistake in co-sponsoring the bill. The bill will not receive a hearing.

-Brady (Rep. Sheltrown's office)

to bad I would have liked to seen something like this, and I am a michigan hunter... Shoot put a min bid on it.. if it does not meet the goals then give it to the public as normal... try it for a few years, see if it brings in any substantial income, and go from there.

[7MM Magnum]

Maine does this every year for there some moose tags and it makes them a lot of money. now as for its easier and more productive to hunt elk out west, are you serious? I'm pretty sure Michigan boast one of the highest percentage elk hunts in the nation.And from what I'm told it's not entirely to hard especially with a guide (no mountains to climb and non educated elk) These tags would bring approx $10,000 to $15,000 apiece for the elk tags based on Maine's moose tag (another once in a lifetime hunt). I'm all for it if the money goes to helping expand Michigan hunting and fishing opportunity. Theres a very good chance I will never draw a Michigan elk tag , so I will continue to drive out to Colorado.But if we can use them to make money for other natural resources so be it. carl

So OK,... you'd rather make it so only the wealthy can hunt elk in Michigan :rant:

I've been waiting over 20 years to get drawn now,... probably longer than you've been around. :rolleyes:

I say HELL NO ! :rant::mad::rant:

No ELK for sale to the highest payer / bidder in Michigan. :16suspect

You just keep on drivin' out to Colorado there bucko,.. makes one less I have to compete against ! :cool:

[swampbuck]

to bad I would have liked to seen something like this, and I am a michigan hunter... Shoot put a min bid on it.. if it does not meet the goals then give it to the public as normal... try it for a few years, see if it brings in any substantial income, and go from there.

WELL ITS DEAD NOW:D.

[utan]

Representative Sheltrown has read, understands and agrees with the arguments made against HB 5740 here. He recognizes that he made a mistake in co-sponsoring the bill. The bill will not receive a hearing.

-Brady (Rep. Sheltrown's office)


:lol:


Ya sure.:rolleyes:
He ran it up the pole to see who would salute. Some things never change.

[DANIEL MARK ZAPOLSKI]

Representative Sheltrown has read, understands and agrees with the arguments made against HB 5740 here. He recognizes that he made a mistake in co-sponsoring the bill. The bill will not receive a hearing.

-Brady (Rep. Sheltrown's office)

I THANK YOU AND THE VAST MAJORITY THANK YOU! DMZ:)

[Nick Adams]

WELL ITS DEAD NOW:D.

If this were oil/gas/mineral royalites we were talking about would you be interested in seeing the State receive top dollar for the resources or offering them up at a subsidized lower rate to local firms?

Is it dead because we are concerned about adequately funding the management of our state resources, or because we are individually afraid of losing the benefit of a low, subsidized price?

-na

[swampbuck]

If this were oil/gas/mineral royalites we were talking about would you be interested in seeing the State receive top dollar for the resources or offering them up at a subsidized lower rate to local firms?

Is it dead because we are concerned about adequately funding the management of our state resources, or because we are individually afraid of losing the benefit of a low, subsidized price?

-na

Its dead because Rep. Sheltrown puts the people of the state of mich first. They opportunity to hunt a elk in michigan is something that we wait a lifetime for and most will still not have a chance. The amount of money raised would not be significant enough to even be noticed in the overall budget. do I think that they should auction a tag off to some bigwig that would have went to the working stiff down the street thats been dreaming his whole life of a chance to hunt michigan elk hell no I dont. in the case of michigan elk they shouldnt be for sale to the highest bidder. IF THEY HAVE THAT KIND OF MONEY THEY CAN GO ON ONE OF THE HIGH DOLLAR HUNT OUT WEST.

As far as auctioning bear tags I feel slighly less opposed but the minimum price I would suggest is still more than anyone would pay.

If the dnr needs more money and if it is for the elk herd. then a better solution would be to raise the price of an elk tag to $200 and even raise the bear tag to $100 it will raise more money than the auction idea and would be far more acceptable and fair.

[Nick Adams]

Its dead because Rep. Sheltrown puts the people of the state of mich first.

I fully understand where Rep Sheltrown's interests lie.

What I am asking about is our motivations. You and me. We the people. Are we insisting on first class management of our public resources or on dibs to shoot an elk without have to compete for that opportunity based on price?

I don't understand why it's OK for you or me, for someone from the DNR or someone in the legislature, to set a higher price on a tag but its not OK to let the marketplace set a fair price.

What are the public resource benefits to holding the prices of harvest tags to below market rates? Why shouldn't we insist on doing the same thing with oil, gas, timber and minerals?

-na

[Direwolfe]

NA has it right. Raise the price for a resident elk tag? There's no shortage of opposition on this forum to any proposed hike for any hunting license. Its much easier to claim the DNR should do more with less than to agree to adequately fund the agency. Many think that subsidized hunting is their entitlement.

[wally-eye]

I fully understand where Rep Sheltrown's interests lie.

What I am asking about is our motivations. You and me. We the people. Are we insisting on first class management of our public resources or on dibs to shoot an elk without have to compete for that opportunity based on price?

I don't understand why it's OK for you or me, for someone from the DNR or someone in the legislature, to set a higher price on a tag but its not OK to let the marketplace set a fair price.

What are the public resource benefits to holding the prices of harvest tags to below market rates? Why shouldn't we insist on doing the same thing with oil, gas, timber and minerals?

-na


Nick you hit the nail square in the head with your post. Sad state of affairs that this state has squandered away millions and millions of dollars by basically giving away oil, gas, minerals, timber and license fees.............way way way below what the market would bear...........

[swampbuck]

I dont think you would find much opposition to a higher price for a once in a lifetime elk tag or a once every few years bear tag.

subsidized hunting? I think you should explain that. the last I knew the dnr or state for that matter arent supposed to make a profit, only cover expenses. If they can justify a price increase so be it. but first they should make sure they dont have any more millions laying around somewhere. I agree with what Rep Sheltrown said earlier this year. if they want a higher fee they need to provide a better product. And I am not talking about trophy bucks.

as far as oil gas timber etc. that is a sale of commoditys between the state and a business. I dont know what they get but I would agree that it should be wholsale market price. How does that even compare to hunting. venison goes for about $8 a pound average, so do you think we should pay about $500 for a deer, trophy bucks go for about $10,000 in a high fence would you buy a license for that?

[joefsu]

I fully understand where Rep Sheltrown's interests lie.

What I am asking about is our motivations. You and me. We the people. Are we insisting on first class management of our public resources or on dibs to shoot an elk without have to compete for that opportunity based on price?

I don't understand why it's OK for you or me, for someone from the DNR or someone in the legislature, to set a higher price on a tag but its not OK to let the marketplace set a fair price.

What are the public resource benefits to holding the prices of harvest tags to below market rates? Why shouldn't we insist on doing the same thing with oil, gas, timber and minerals?

-na

I agree that we need to keep our natural resources management properly funded. Our natural resources; however, belong to everyone in this state. I do not see a "fair" market price as the utmost maximum price that someone is willing to pay. Hunting and fishing is for everyone. Not just those with the most cash in their pocket. Do I think that license prices need to go up across the board to ensure that the DNR is properly funded; yes. Do I believe that putting our hunting licenses out for the highest bidder is in the best interest of our natural resources; NO! In the long run that would probably be detrimental to our resources by causing a decline in the overall number of people who hunt and fish and thus decrease support for conservation of OUR wildlife.

Ok I'm off the soap box,

Joe

[bradymsu]

The difference between selling state oil, gas, and mineral resources at market rates (timber, sadly is a different story) and subsidizing the private taking of public fish and game at below market rates is simply an issue of public interest. Michigan residents have long found it to be in the public interest to subsidize parks, recreation areas, game and fish management, trails, etc. for the direct recreational and cultural benefits and the indirect externalities provided by outdoor recreation for the public good.

These social benefits are often ignored by advocates of a fee based or user pay system. Sadly, due to the budget problems Michigan has faced over the past nine years, both Engler and Granholm have deeply cut General Fund support to the DNR (subsidies for outdoor recreation) in order to help prevent deeper cuts to the core areas of state government. While most will agree that some level of fee increases are needed, funding the DNR almost exclusively through user fees as oppossed to combining a fee increase with other options like a restoration of General Fund support, earmarking certain tax dollars collected, the license plate surcharge proposal, etc. will discourage participation rather than encourage it.

There are people who would like Michigan hunting to become a rich man's sport with far less but more experienced hunters in the field pursuing trophy league game. But the difference in the public benefit between that concept and Michigan's traditional style of managing game for popular recreation is considerable when all the benefits hunting provides to society in general are taken into account.

Turn hunting into a rich man's sport and Michigan's hunting future will be determined by the Humane Society of the United States and PETA. And then there's the effect it will have on the preservation of gun rights, etc.

[trapstercarl]

Elk hunting is a rich mans sports. ever price a tag out west? Colorado $528 and they are the cheapest. Instead of raising Michigan elk license to $200 try $800 or $1000. Then maybe that will be in tune with the rest of the country . World class hunting is expensive thats a fact of life . If Auctioning off 5 tags will keep our elk license at $100. Than that is the cheapest world class hunting opportunity we will ever see, even if it takes a lifetime to draw a tag. At least applying only cost $4 here. Colorado and every other western state license fee up front then a refund if your not drawn ,even if only applying for a preference point.