Is it common for states to give a Commissioner’s tag to raise funds?

[WCB]

Understood. But the rest of license/ tag money goes right back to fish and game and it has seemed to work for a long time. What’s so special about money from the governer’s tag?

Wild Sheep Foundation

www.wildsheepfoundation.org

Go to this link. If you don't want to read it (only 1 page) here is a snapshot of it:

"In all, an astounding $4,488,500 was raised in three evening auctions from conservation permits. Depending on the permit, eighty-five to one hundred percent of these funds are directed to these fish and wildlife agencies for wild sheep conservation, management, and enhancement programs."

"According to the Western Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies 74% of all agency wild sheep conservation funding comes from an auction or raffle conservation permit."

 

[Wyobull]

Commonly known as a governor's tag.


I think Co does 18 of them, not certain on Wyoming, but I know they have several.

Wyoming does both Commisioner and Governor tags, Dube taking this away just proves his loyaty

 

[ODB]

Wild Sheep Foundation

www.wildsheepfoundation.org

Go to this link. If you don't want to read it (only 1 page) here is a snapshot of it:

"In all, an astounding $4,488,500 was raised in three evening auctions from conservation permits. Depending on the permit, eighty-five to one hundred percent of these funds are directed to these fish and wildlife agencies for wild sheep conservation, management, and enhancement programs."

"According to the Western Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies 74% of all agency wild sheep conservation funding comes from an auction or raffle conservation permit."

I read it. Thanks.

 

[rayporter]

my gut says it was no accident that the tag got jerked!

 

[MattB]

Yes.

That's pretty much how they have always been used. Auction or raffle.

Wyoming different in that they do the super tag, and it benefits Wyoming directly, but they still do at least a few other tags for orgs.

In CA the DWF gets the bulk of funds (auctioning group gets to keep a small % to cover marketing expenses), but the DFW is required to use the funds for specific types of expenditures related to the species.

 

[Billy Goat]

In CA the DWF gets the bulk of funds (auctioning group gets to keep a small % to cover marketing expenses), but the DFW is required to use the funds for specific types of expenditures related to the species.

How much do they get for administrative fees?


I don't think currently there's a great way to get a high percentage of funding to projects. I don't like the giving money straight to orgs as there's still no oversight, however, on a state level there's too much oversight.


This coming from someone who is actually hired to do the work.

 

[MattB]

How much do they get for administrative fees?


I don't think currently there's a great way to get a high percentage of funding to projects. I don't like the giving money straight to orgs as there's still no oversight, however, on a state level there's too much oversight.


This coming from someone who is actually hired to do the work.

I have been out of the loop on this for a bit, but I think in CA it is 5%. The $'s themselves are not so much the benefit to the conservation non-profits, but auctioning the tags at banquets does help put butts in seats which has indirect benefits (drives raffle ticket sales, etc.).

You hit on a really challenging point - it is easier for the conservation non-profits to get projects done, and it seems the funds raised for species-specific programs tend to sit rather than be deployed. The sad things is they are often intertwined - meaning that the conservation non-profits can be dependent on governmental agencies to do their thing before projects can be completed. That can be very frustrating as it pulls everything back to the government agency's pace.