# questions to ask SFW



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

If you had the chance to sit down with Don Peay and his cronies then what questions would you ask him/them?

When are you going to step aside and let deer/elk herds be managed based on Biology and not based on $$$$$$$$?

How much money is going into your own pockets?

Where is the money going from the expo tags?

When are you going to follow your mission statements?

How much money will you gain from Option 2?


----------



## Dannyboy (Oct 27, 2010)

Gotta leave some questions for the rest of us to ask.. :lol:


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Why do you include "Fish" in SFW??????


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

What kind of lies and trickery do you use to get other organizations/conservationists to endorse you? or Does it indicate that they have the same agenda that you do?


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

@ Byron: You yourself stood in front of the wildlife board and stated you felt predators were a major cause of deer decline and that is why you and the SWF recommend Option 2. 

Why would say this as none of the options addressed predators?


-DallanC


----------



## pkred (Jul 9, 2009)

I belive your organization was founded on sound principles. But I also belive your ability to make decisions based on what is best for the animals has been curupted in the name of trophy hunting. Is it documented or can you tell me when the SFW SOLD OUT?


----------



## deerlove (Oct 20, 2010)

How many active (paying) members do you really have? They keep say 10k plus but lets see the CURRRENT numbers.


----------



## elk22hunter (Sep 7, 2007)

Since you say that I have to ask it as a question, I would ask:

Is it OK to thank you right now for the fact that HUGE Elk roam the mountains of Utah. Before SFW, if someone shot a branch antlered bull they would carry it around in the back of their trucks for weeks to show off? 

Is the fact that there are Rocky Mountain Sheep and Desert Bighorn Sheep in many areas of the state giving us a chance to kill one of these animals for about 500 bucks instead of $120,000 in Arizona or Mexico from buying thier tag because I will never draw, over looked by the general hunters of Utah and possibly under appreciated?

Does it ever get tyring as you listen to the many on the forums who are young snot nosed kids and don't remember the way that the Elk, Moose, Antelope, Deer, Goats, Sheep and Bison were managed before and had absolutely little to none of the amounts or trophy values that we now enjoy?

Are you tired of building high fence along highways and deer underpasses to help with the mortality rate of Deer with an already strugling population with money raised from the sell of premium tags as it goes right back into the wildlife that created the money just to hear that you are lining your pockets and those tags are public tags that should go to the public instead of creating more habitat for future generations? 

What can I do to help instead of complaining like so many others do and not getting anything done but wanting to suck off from the breast of those that are getting it done while complaining all the way?


Just wondering Don...............can you answer my questions?


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> Since you say that I have to ask it as a question, I would ask:
> 
> Is it OK to thank you right now for the fact that HUGE Elk roam the mountains of Utah. Before SFW, if someone shot a branch antlered bull they would carry it around in the back of their trucks for weeks to show off?
> 
> ...


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

elk22hunter said:


> Since you say that I have to ask it as a question, I would ask:
> 
> Is it OK to thank you right now for the fact that HUGE Elk roam the mountains of Utah. Before SFW, if someone shot a branch antlered bull they would carry it around in the back of their trucks for weeks to show off? Scott, you know I like and respect you and your opinions. But....... the reason there are "HUGE Elk" roaming is not because of SFW! It is because of extreme rationing of permits. And, is it really the best thing for sportsmen and wildlife to think the bigger the antlers/horns the better/healthier the herd? Why is a 360 bull shot on the Pahvant with a rifle in September more worthy of 'showing off' than a five point killed in 1983 with a bow in August by a 16 year old kid? I have killed 2 bulls that exceed 360" in the last 10 seasons, and neither holds a candle to that five point I killed with a recurve my junior year in high school. This focus on antler size, IMHO, is what will be the down fall of hunting.
> 
> ...


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

Aww come on Scott, that's a new level of sanctimony for you.


----------



## elk22hunter (Sep 7, 2007)

I had an entire speach written but decided that I don't like to argue so I errased it. It's the same old thing so it sufficeth me to say that I am a supporter.


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

elk22hunter said:


> I had an entire speach written but decided that I don't like to argue so I errased it. It's the same old thing so it sufficeth me to say that I am a supporter.


Naaw, you're not a supporter Scott, you're a deceived, duped, Don disciple. If he were passing out green cool-aid and magic tennis shoes you'd be first in line. When are you going to start seeing the trees past the forest?


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

TEX-O-BOB said:


> elk22hunter said:
> 
> 
> > I had an entire speach written but decided that I don't like to argue so I errased it. It's the same old thing so it sufficeth me to say that I am a supporter.
> ...


+1


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

Nobody said anything about magic shoes. Where's my checkbook....


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

Treehugnhuntr said:


> Nobody said anything about magic shoes. Where's my checkbook....


 :lol:


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

coyoteslayer said:


> If you had the chance to sit down with Don Peay and his cronies then what questions would you ask him/them?
> 
> When are you going to step aside and let deer/elk herds be managed based on Biology and not based on $$$$$$$$?
> 
> ...


Check out my post in Everything Else. That oughta give you some more ammo!


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

The questions I would ask have already been asked and Don refuses to answer them.

On a side note to be fair I believe that SFW started with entirely genuine and sincere purposes. They have done some good things in this state for wildlife. But somewhere along the line they got side tracked by money. They no longer speak for the masses, they speak for those with large wallets. 

If you are a trophy hunter with deep pockets...then you should be quite cozy in bed with Don but you if you are an average hunter with modest means then beware because SFW represents a legitimate threat to the future of hunting for you. Tear your rear view off and forget what they have done because they no longer represent you. Big elk and lots of sheep do no good for most of us if you have little chance of hunting one in your lifetime or if you can't afford a tag. That's where we are headed.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

bullsnot said:


> ....On a side note to be fair I believe that SFW started with entirely genuine and sincere purposes. They have done some good things in this state for wildlife. But somewhere along the line they got *side tracked by money*. They no longer speak for the masses, they speak for those with *large wallets.*


This just goes to prove that money begets power, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely!


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

Why don’t you adopt the name that really describes your organization, i.e. Privileged Sportsmen for Wildlife?


----------



## WasatchOutdoors (Sep 26, 2007)

elk22hunter said:


> Since you say that I have to ask it as a question, I would ask:
> 
> Is it OK to thank you right now for the fact that HUGE Elk roam the mountains of Utah. Before SFW, if someone shot a branch antlered bull they would carry it around in the back of their trucks for weeks to show off? They still carry it around in the back of their truck as long as possible before going to the taxidermist. But now instead of it being interpreted as "look what a skillful hunter I am" it's viewed as "look how I won the state wildlife lottery" It doesn't take millions of dollars worth of tags donated by the state to SFW to reduce the number of permits and restrict opportunity, and none of the money generated by those tags have really made a significant contribution to elk size aside from lobbying for restricting opportunity to the point that the next generation will probably never hunt the majority of our state for a branch atlered bull in their lifetime
> 
> ...


As long as we're asking Don some of these hard questions i"ve got a couple of my own

1) why is it that John Bair, your auctioneer seems to draw out one of the coveted tags every year?

2) which unit do you hunt Don, and by any chance is that on a tag donated in another state's chapter to SFW, because I'm betting that you aren't stupid enough to use a Utah donated tag to hunt, but I do strongly believe that you hunt other states on donated tags that have been represented as used to raise funds for wildife

3) given that I was one of the first people to subscribe and donate to SFW in this state, and given my immense dissatisfaction at watching your organization become so corrupted from the original message of "increasing opportunity" that you sold me on in the first place, can I please have a full refund of my membership dues, because I feel like you really misrepresented your organization from the get go.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

It's interesting that you would ask the question about John Bair. Last year I asked John Bair directly if he didn't find the fact that he is drawing such a coveted tag a bit suspicious (fishy was my actual word). He actually replied to me. I am posting the message below.

As a service to my members and the general public which I "serve" through my organization. I would, in his position, abstain from entering a drawing. Remeber he is not only the auctioneer he also sits on the board of SFW.

It just puts my mind to a stwardship position. As a father I want my kids to experience the hunt, I put their interests ahead of mine. In the same fashion I would want the people I supossedly server to be the ones to get the tag. Just goes to show how what they do is for the benefit of their own self serving interests.

* MY MESSAGE*
Sportsmen for Fish & Wildlife 
Online Email Submission 
22-Feb-10 - 05:50 PM 
A "SFW Email Request" has been added/updated to the database by Ramon Segura requires your attention. 
Just a simple question really.... 
Do you not think it's a little fishy that you would draw a sheep tag from the expo pool? Just curious since usually employees and their immediate families are barred from participating in drawings and/or contests such as this one because of perception of preferential treatment.

I am not complaining I am just curious.

Regards, Ramon Segura - Hunter

*REPLY*
From: John Bair 
To: ramon segura
Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 9:23:01 PM
Subject: Re: SFW Email Request Submission

Ramon, When the expo was started I asked those that put it together if I was ok to put in. I have nothing to do with the drawing or the company that does the drawing. I was told I was ok to apply so I did. I have Spent 400$ every year on applications, and have been lucky enough to draw a antelope tag two years ago and a great sheep tag this year. The draw is conducted by a company that is a third party. Ryan Fautz is the one person that deals with them and he is not allowed to apply. The Director of the DWR applies and draws tags in the general draw that he over sees through a third party. If I had anything to do with the draw or the company that runs it then I would not be allowed. All I do at the expo is auctioneer and announce the seminar schedule. Hope this answers your questions. John Bair


----------



## elk22hunter (Sep 7, 2007)

You guys make me realize that there are getting more and more people who will sue their own mother for their inheritance NOW when their father passes. I hunted Utah when most of Utahs animals did not exist. Now that the herds are thriving and have been transplanted within the state from healthy herds as well as out of state trades you want it all and want it right now. You are not realizing that it took hard work, , money and effort to get the animals that we have and most of you never knew the difference. Your entire lives have had Utahs hills full of great animals and you want them to raise the tag numbers and "Kill em All" not ever thinking that we might be the building generation for generations to come. It just seems a bit selfish to me.


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

No, selfish is having all these animals in surplus sitting there and making everyone sit around waiting for their once in a lifetime chance at a 400 inch bull while we watch the rich and the privileged few enjoy the resource. We have WAY too many elk in this state and by doling out tags to a select few and auctioning wait, WHORING off big money tags to the rich it's made elk hunting an elite sport for a select few. Meanwhile our deer herds are suffering because they're being eaten out of house and home by an overabundance of elk. Think about it, the only places the deer are doing really good are where there are NO elk. The book cliffs would be the only exception I can think of.

When I was a kid and my brother and I had to share toys. One of us would always act SELFISH and try to hog all the good stuff for them selves. Then my dad would come in and take ALL of the toys away from both of us leaving nothing. May be wolves wouldn't be such a bad idea after all.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

elk22hunter said:


> You guys make me realize that there are getting more and more people who will sue their own mother for their inheritance NOW when their father passes. I hunted Utah when most of Utahs animals did not exist. Now that the herds are thriving and have been transplanted within the state from healthy herds as well as out of state trades you want it all and want it right now. You are not realizing that it took hard work, , money and effort to get the animals that we have and most of you never knew the difference. Your entire lives have had Utahs hills full of great animals and you want them to raise the tag numbers and "Kill em All" not ever thinking that we might be the building generation for generations to come. It just seems a bit selfish to me.


Scott, I think the air in Wyoming has infected your brain with a virus that has made you delusional. :shock:

Question, where there more or less critters in Utah when you/I first started hunting compared to today? I'm not asking about the different species, I am asking overall number of critters. I contend we have far FEWER critters today. It is also flat out false to give even the majority of the credit for the sheep/turkey/elk numbers we have to SFW. You have been duped by a fork tongued snake oil salesman who gets Peayed to lie! That you and other SFW supporters keep talking about 'quality' and ignore quantity and opportunity is very telling. Question for you; is there more/less opportunity to HUNT big game today compared to the day SFW opened shop? This is easy to make a conclusion of, just look at the total big game permits given to the public, the number of days allowed in the field, and add em up.

Building generation? Building what? SFW just rammed through a reduction of permits for reasons that are NOT based on biology and will NOT increase deer populations. Last year they rammed through a reduction of elk permits, again for NO biological reasons and NO increase in elk populations. The only thing these actions are building is road blocks for hunters and potential hunters.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

TEX-O-BOB said:


> When I was a kid and my brother and I had to share toys. One of us would always act SELFISH and try to hog all the good stuff for them selves. Then my dad would come in and take ALL of the toys away from both of us leaving nothing. May be wolves wouldn't be such a bad idea after all.


I have been saying this as well. What good does it do to 'build' up the herds if only a select few get to hunt them? I don't see why letting wolves have them is that much worse of an option. Funny how the group out trumpeting all their hard work to stop the wolves is doing more, or as much to take away hunting opportunity as the wolves could ever do. :O•-:


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

A friend of my cousin was a very philanthropic person. It started in his teens, he would generously give his time and money for great causes, such as working at the food bank, singing songs and interacting with kids at primary children's hospital, coaching and mentoring through the big brother program and being an all around great guy, especially when it came to underprivileged children.

It's about 25 years later now and I was conversing with my cousin at a recent christmas party and happened to bring up this friend of his, who I saw as a really good person and in some ways, was envious of the kind of person he was and his giving nature. My cousin informed me that he had been in and out of jail for the last 15 years, because he had been sexually exploiting many of the children he had been in contact with over the years through his charity work.

So, in my quest to be a better person and to adhere to tenets I see as valuable to be such a person, should I be ignoring his issues as a pedophile? Should I invite him into my home, no questions asked? Or, should I be warning others about his propensities and doing what I can to make sure it doesn't happen, at least to the degree I have the power to control? After all, he's done all of this great work and is revered by many, at least the ones who don't know or refuse to accept that he's a child rapist.

Scott, I see you as a great person and admire you reverence and wisdom, so please, let me know what I should do.

Thanks

Tye


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> ......................................................Scott, I think the air in Wyoming has infected your brain with a virus that has made you delusional. :shock:
> 
> ..........................


I have no dog in this fight, but I will add that the air that Scott and I breath comes from Utah.

o-||


----------



## USMARINEhuntinfool (Sep 15, 2007)

"You guys make me realize that there are getting more and more people who will sue their own mother for their inheritance NOW when their father passes. I hunted Utah when most of Utahs animals did not exist. Now that the herds are thriving and have been transplanted within the state from healthy herds as well as out of state trades you want it all and want it right now. You are not realizing that it took hard work, , money and effort to get the animals that we have and most of you never knew the difference. Your entire lives have had Utahs hills full of great animals and you want them to raise the tag numbers and "Kill em All" not ever thinking that we might be the building generation for generations to come. It just seems a bit selfish to me."



This opinion is interesting to me. From my point of view, which by no means is fact or all seeing, you are up in the night. You speak of all this from an interesting stand point. I can understand your loyalty to SFW, and will concede that SFW has done a great deal for wildlife in this state and others. However, what you are failing to recognize is the stand point of those who are in a lesser position than you. My point is this, I've seen your posts of buffalo hunts here, deer trips there, elk hunts on this mountain, antelope trips to this state, bear trips up there, which tells me that you have a hand up over the majority here. I can't afford to hunt near as much as I would like on my meager public service salary. Do I hold a grudge against you for being able to, no. I think it would be ignorant for me to begrudge your good fortune, I am somewhat envious of your ability to take your children on these hunts and disappointed that I wont be able to do the same for my children. The thing that frustrates me is the fact that there are so many quality animals and litteraly no oppertunity for the general population to hunt them. While you are able to go and hunt out of state hunts every year to fill the time between the years you get to hunt the trophy hunts, the majority are unable to. What is SFW doing for them, litterally nothing, well I take that back, SFW is giving them animals to look at and wish they could hunt. Then telling them they are doing it all for them filling them with the hope to hunt them while SFW is hunting them every year. I agree money speaks, however I disagree that money should be king. I am grateful for SFW's part in habitat restoration and the many other endeavors they have contributed in the past. In my opinion they have lost touch and need to get back to the basics. Will this ever happen? I don't know, statistically it will never happen. Now SFW is great if you are well connected or have money, but does little to nothing for the little guy. Oh and by the way I could give a **** less about who gets what in any inheritance, I have worked for everything I have and own, I work hard to give myself the ability to hunt what I can, and am more concerned about the ability to share hunts with my children than shooting a 400" bull. So call me crazy but I think your view is slightly skewed. Respectfully Marine.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> The thing that frustrates me is the fact that there are so many quality animals and litteraly no oppertunity for the general population to hunt them. While you are able to go and hunt out of state hunts every year to fill the time between the years you get to hunt the trophy hunts, the majority are unable to. What is SFW doing for them, litterally nothing, well I take that back, SFW is giving them animals to look at and wish they could hunt. Then telling them they are doing it all for them filling them with the hope to hunt them while SFW is hunting them every year. I agree money speaks, however I disagree that money should be king. I am grateful for SFW's part in habitat restoration and the many other endeavors they have contributed in the past. In my opinion they have lost touch and need to get back to the basics. Will this ever happen? I don't know, statistically it will never happen. Now SFW is great if you are well connected or have money, but does little to nothing for the little guy. Oh and by the way I could give a **** less about who gets what in any inheritance, I have worked for everything I have and own, I work hard to give myself the ability to hunt what I can, and am more concerned about the ability to share hunts with my children than shooting a 400" bull. So call me crazy but I think your view is slightly skewed. Respectfully Marine.


I agree

SFW is not even close to the same organization from when they first started. We have a lot of bulls that people can hunt,but we give very few tags. Many bulls are even dying of old age. SFW doesn't want to open up units to more tags because that would mean less money for them because the value of a trophy bull would go down.

They hope to sell bull elk tags for x number of dollars and if that tags doesn't sell for X amount then they scream for a tag reduction because we are killing to many bulls so they always want to keep the tags low to keep the tag value high.

If Utahns want to hunt more mature bulls then they need to get rid of SFW's public tag that they receive and make SFW raise the money other ways instead of pimping public tags for money.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

wyogoob said:


> proutdoors said:
> 
> 
> > ......................................................Scott, I think the air in Wyoming has infected your brain with a virus that has made you delusional. :shock:
> ...


Well there you go. I live in a county that pumps out lots of toxins, but it all drifts east. Now, who is smarter? :mrgreen:


----------



## USMARINEhuntinfool (Sep 15, 2007)

Well I'm not sure that is the answer either. I think most good things come from compromise. I don't think anybody should have all the marbles. I don't know the tag numbers that they get? I know they get the 200 for the Expo and imagine they get a few more for auctions and banquets etc. I have no problem with them getting those tags. What I do have a problem with is the way they run it. I don't think anything should be done behind closed doors. If its done behind closed doors its probably wrong, immoral, illegal, or unethical, why else keep it behind closed doors. I think they need to open up more permits, there doesn't need to be 20 plus "premium" elk units in the state. There should be a handful, and on the flip side their should be atleast as many if not more "oppertunity" units. Units that are managed for lower age class branch antlered bulls, and I don't mean any-bull units. These should be units regulated by the draw that offer a quality hunt for a 2-4 year old bull with a decent rack. Sure your quality would slip to low 300 and below class bulls but heck who really wouldn't be happy with a 300 class bull a couple of times in their lifetime. Let the "premium" units be managed for their 8+ year old 400" bulls. If they want their tags value up, then the supply needs to be down. Just remember its about compromise, both sides need some give and take.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> I don't know the tag numbers that they get? I know they get the 200 for the Expo and imagine they get a few more for auctions and banquets etc.


Here is a list of some of the tags that they receive. PLUS the 200 EXPO tags

Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife
Species Unit Condition
Buck Pronghorn San Rafael, Desert Any Weapon
Bull Moose Cache
Bull Moose North Slope, Summit
Bull Moose North Slope, Summit
Bull Moose Wasatch Mountains
Bull Elk Beaver Premium
Bull Elk Beaver Any Weapon
Bull Elk Book Cliffs, Bitter Creek - South Premium
Bull Elk Book Cliffs, Bitter Creek - South Any Weapon
Bull Elk Book Cliffs, Little Creek (roadless) Any Weapon
Bull Elk Cache, Meadowville Premium
Bull Elk Cache, North Any Weapon
Bull Elk Cache, South Any Weapon
Bull Elk Central Mtns., Manti Premium
Bull Elk Central Mtns., Manti Any Weapon
Bull Elk Central Mtns., Nebo Any Weapon
Bull Elk Central Mtns., Nebo Any Weapon
Bull Elk Central Mtns., Nebo Muzzleloader
Bull Elk Fillmore, Oak Creek Any Weapon
Bull Elk Fillmore, Oak Creek Any Weapon
Bull Elk Fillmore, Pahvant Premium
Bull Elk Fillmore, Pahvant Muzzleloader
Bull Elk La Sal, La Sal Mountains Any Weapon
Bull Elk Monroe Premium
Bull Elk Monroe Muzzleloader
Bull Elk Mt. Dutton Muzzleloader
Bull Elk Mt. Dutton Premium
Bull Elk Mt. Dutton Any Weapon
Bull Elk Mt. Dutton Any Weapon
Bull Elk Nine Mile, Anthro Premium
Bull Elk Oquirrh-Stansbury Any Weapon
Bull Elk Paunsaugunt Any Weapon
Bull Elk Plateau, Boulder/Kaiparowits Premium
Bull Elk Plateau, Boulder/Kaiparowits Any Weapon
Bull Elk Plateau, Boulder/Kaiparowits Archery
Bull Elk Plateau, Fish Lake, Thousand Lake Any Weapon
Bull Elk Plateau, Fish Lake, Thousand Lake Muzzleloader
Bull Elk S. W. Desert Any Weapon
Bull Elk S. W. Desert Any Weapon
Bull Elk S. W. Desert Archery
Bull Elk San Juan Archery
Bull Elk Statewide Premium
Bull Elk Wasatch Mtns. Muzzleloader
Bull Elk Wasatch Mtns. Premium
Bull Elk West Desert, Deep Creek Premium
Bull Elk West Desert, Deep Creek Any Weapon
Buck Deer Book Cliffs Season Choice
Buck Deer Cache, Crawford Mountain Muzzleloader
Buck Deer Fillmore, Oak Creek Season Choice
Buck Deer Fillmore, Oak Creek Muzzleloader
Buck Deer Henry Mountains Season Choice
Buck Deer Plateau, Thousand Lakes Season Choice
Buck Deer S. Slope, Diamond Any Weapon
Buck Deer S. Slope, Diamond Any Weapon
Buck Deer San Juan, Elk Ridge Season Choice
Buck Deer Southern General Season Choice
Buck Deer West Desert, Vernon Any Weapon
Buck Deer West Desert, Vernon Muzzleloader
Buck Pronghorn Beaver Any Weapon
Buck Pronghorn Book Cliffs, Bitter Creek Any Weapon
Buck Pronghorn Book Cliffs, South Any Weapon
Buck Pronghorn Mt. Dutton, Paunsaugunt Any Weapon
Buck Pronghorn Mt. Dutton, Paunsaugunt Any Weapon
Buck Pronghorn N. Slope, West Daggett Any Weapon
Buck Pronghorn Nine Mile, Anthro Any Weapon
Buck Pronghorn Plateau Any Weapon
Buck Pronghorn S. Slope, Bonanza, Diamond Any Weapon
Buck Pronghorn San Rafael, N. Any Weapon
Buck Pronghorn Statewide Any Weapon
Buck Pronghorn Southwest Desert Any Weapon
Buck Pronghorn Southwest Desert Any Weapon
Buck Pronghorn Southwest Desert Any Weapon
Buck Pronghorn West Desert, Riverbed Any Weapon
Rocky Mountain Goat N/S Slope - High Uintas West
Rocky Mountain Goat Statewide
Rocky Mountain Goat Wasatch Mountains, Lone Peak
Bull Moose Statewide
Bull Moose Wasatch Mountains
Bison Henry Mountains, Hunter's Choice Early Hunt
Bison Henry Mountains, Hunter's Choice Late Hunt
Bison Statewide
Bear Book Cliffs
Bear Central Mountains, Nebo
Bear Central Mountains, North
Bear Central Mountains, South
Bear LaSal
Bear LaSal
Bear Nine Mile, Anthro-Range Creek
Bear S. Slope, Yellowstone
Bear San Juan
Bear San Juan
Bear Statewide
Bear Wasatch Mountains, Current Creek
Bear Wasatch Mountains, West
Cougar Central
Cougar Central
Cougar Southeast
Cougar Southern
Cougar Southern
Cougar Southern
Turkey Central
Turkey Northern
Buck Deer Central General Season Choice
Buck Deer Central General Season Choice
Buck Deer Northeastern General Season Choice
Buck Deer Northeastern General Season Choice
Buck Deer Northeastern General Season Choice
Buck Deer Northern General Season Choice
Buck Deer Northern General Season Choice
Buck Deer Northern General Season Choice
Buck Deer Northern General Season Choice
Buck Deer Southeastern General Season Choice
Buck Deer Southeastern General Season Choice
Antlerless Elk Northeast
Antlerless Elk Southeast
Antlerless Elk Southeast


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

Question, how many here know the difference between "Conservation Tags" and "Expo Tags"? I would bet a fair amount don't know the difference. Now I would consider people from this forum as well educated in the most things wildlife related. So how many average Joe from across the state know the difference or even better yet even realize that their are these tags? Sorry enough with my rhetorical questions, my point is certain groups make a living off of everyone being ignorant to of how the system works.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Expo tags are the 200 given away in the EXPO DRAW...

Conservation tags are sold to the highest bidder at banquets..
And there are a few conservation tag sold at the Expo as well...


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

Goofy, what you say is true, I think the rhetoric Jahan speaks of refers to:

Conservation tags- 90% earmarked for approved wildlife projects.

Convention/Expo tags- 100% earmarked for NOTHING. 200 tags for animals owned by the public, sold by a private entity with no earmarks and no accountability= PROBLEM.


----------



## USMARINEhuntinfool (Sep 15, 2007)

Probably should have clarified that in my post, sorry Jahan..


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

Ok here would be my question.

Don, how on earth did you get the sportsmen of Utah to buy off on giving you support. How did you take the power any from the DWR and the Biologist. Why were the majority of hunters willing to give you support in the begining?


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Muley73 said:


> Ok here would be my question.
> 
> Don, how on earth did you get the sportsmen of Utah to buy off on giving you support. How did you take the power any from the DWR and the Biologist. Why were the majority of hunters willing to give you support in the begining?


 -_O- Boy now if that ain't the truth!

Sportsman were pizzed, no trust for the DWR at all...

In the mid 80s sportsman were pretty happy, lots of deer , a guy had two
buck deer tags in his pocket and could hunt all three hunts, good times.

May be to good, 200,000 + deer hunter took a toll, when they lifted the
antler restrictions things went down hill FAST.......

1000',s of hunters flooding the Henry's , book's , the paunsy , and the rest.
And just when thing were getting bad ,,,,the winter of 1992-93 topped it off..

12,000 sportsman march on the SLC capital,,And SFW is born.........


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

Goofy,
So what you are saying is that before the SFW, the biologist and DWR were not correct and successful in deer management? Come on how can that be, they are the pros!!!


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

Come on guys, come out and play.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Muley73 said:


> Come on guys, come out and play.


I thought about it, but I ain't much for trolling..........


----------



## elk22hunter (Sep 7, 2007)

Sorry guys but I just don't see my hunting life, (past, present or future) the same way that you do. I stood on those afore mentioned steps of the capitol when this entire ball started rolling. Sportsman wanted "Change". I have been more involved with helping wildlife through SFW than I EVER was before SFW and I know that not much would have changed in my service to the sport that I love if it were not for helping on many projects through the SFW. I have built fences to keep Deer out of peoples orchards that wanted them killed. I have built fences to stop the domestic sheep getting to the Wild sheep and spreading disease. I have built boat ramps on Utah Lake. I have cleaned 3 feet deep of Cow poop in a barn that was purchased by the DWR to give them more property to create habitat for Pheasants. I have taken a bow saw into a wilderness unit to cut back limbs and shrubs off from trails. I have poured a concrete pad that they needed poured at the PG ranger district buildings. I have torn up concrete on about 5 acres of ground at the Springville DWR sight. I have graded roads on the Wasatch front in the canyons for them. I have done a Mtn. Goat study for the DWR and I was involved in a few Rocky Mountain Bighorn transplants where I was able to handle the sheep and put them in Straight Jackets for their Helicopter ride. ALL of these projects were because of SFW and since their organization. Before that day at the capital, I did the same thing that most of the hunters in this state do now and that is sit back and complain. I am a better citizen, hunter and person because of SFW. Yes I am deep rooted. Yes I am going to stand up and be proud of thier accomplishments. They have done MORE for wildlife wether you want to admit it or not for Utah, you and me than any one else ever cared to do. I am beating the same dead horse with the same people (besides Pro who used to understand) that I have been for the last few years on this forum. Pro has been on as many projects as me but truth be known, I'd bet he owes that opportunity to SFW as well. We complain that the Granola eaters get to enjoy wildlife for nothing and we have to buy tags to enjoy them and our money goes into funding them so why don't the earth muffins have to help out? This is the TEAT that I am speaking of when I say that SFW has gone to bat for you weather you believe in them or not! My belief in God does NOT change the fact that he is REAL or not. Just the same holds true whether you want to get on board and help or not will not change the fact that we have MANY more Moose, Buffalo, Sheep, ELK, Antelope, and Mtn Goats in Utah dispite what Pro wants me to belive. Deer are struggling. That is being addressed in so many ways and SFW is creating money from YOUR wildlife to help in the battle. That money is benifitting YOUR wildlife. I am just a little old sportsman from Utah and Wyoming that loves to hunt. I do not have money! I have never had money! I have never bought an auction tag! I get my hunts the same way that you guys do and that is over the counter and through the draw. Yes, I had some great photo's of hunts form this year. My nephew and I killed great bull Elk. My one brother killed a nice Billy Goat. My other brother killed a big ole Bison. We gave up 61 points for those tags! Not even ONE of them was on a luck draw. We KNEW that we were going to get every one of those tags because we had waited our time and paid our dues. Our money spent was the same as anyone elses. Regular tags though regular draws that we had EARNED by doing projects and waiting our time. Come on people, you tell me that you had much more respect for me before I was brain washed by Don Peay. You are acting like the Little Red Hens barn yard friends. You want it all and are not willing to pay any price for it. Freedom is not Free and neither are healthy herds.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

elk22,,I agree..

Guys get on here and bash SFW to no end, That group is the biggest reason we have 
good hunting in Utah today. Countless millions of dollars raised and put back into wildlife.

Now , that said, I am NOT a member of SFW......And do not agree with HOW many tags
are given to the expo or conservation banquites.......................

BUT IF NOT FOR SFW, we probably would NOT have the wildlife diversity , and numbers
that now exist to support these permits and programs they provide dollars for........

I've been hunting for 40 years,,,,NO DOUBT, hunting has been far better since the birth of SFW.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> I've been hunting for 40 years,,,,NO DOUGHT, hunting has been far better since the birth of SFW.


No Drought or No doubt?

If hunting has been so great since the birth of SFW then why is our deer herds still struggling? Has SFW been focusing more on elk and sheep then our mule deer?


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

The deer are getting the focus now and some are whining like kids on the playground.  

Now, if you'll excuse me , I'm going for a hike with my dogs.....


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> The deer are getting the focus now and some are whining like kids on the playground.


Because the "focus" SFW wants isn't going to solve the deer herd issues.

If you're lion hunting you should have left earlier this morning


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

Hmm, I'm not sure I saw one post that eluded to SFW being "do nothings", however many _have_ eluded to them doing great things. To me, the gist of most of the complaints about SFW are not about what you spoke to 22. We pretty much all recognize their accomplishments and they have done quite a bit.

What I am seeing is folks do not just roll over and take the good with the bad, why should we? SFW can still accomplish what they have with a little clean up of the system, some accounting of where the money from our tags is going and some balance of power in their world. It'd be one thing if it was a few crazies like myself and pro screaming fire, but it aint.

It still amazes me that the defense for the questions raised concerning SFW is; "SFW DOES A LOT OF GOOD STUFF!!!".

Bernie Madoff gave millions to charity......


----------



## JERRY (Sep 30, 2007)

TreeBernie Madoff gave millions to charity......)
Nice comparison! :shock: :lol:


----------



## elk22hunter (Sep 7, 2007)

Something that I might point out as well is that I am not a current member as well. I feel bad about that. I have been for many years but I have never been so broke in my life as right now and have not been able to justify putting this over my family. I do what I can but don't make the banquets of any kind. I used to go to the Mule Deer foundation, Elk Foundation, SFW and FNAWS. Sometimes I feel that I am sucking off the teat of the hard workers since my family has drawn some great tags. Other times I feel that I am reaping the rewards of hard work and money spent. Hopefully more profitable days are coming.


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> wyogoob said:
> 
> 
> > proutdoors said:
> ...


I would be smarter, obviously.

I live in a county that pumps out lots of deer, antelope, elk, moose, small game, game birds, waterfowl, and a fish or two. Besides all the "hot air" drifting over here, the westerly winds blow 1000s of Utahns here to hunt and fish. It's uncrowded and there is no state income tax. People don't get too excited here, move kinda slow.

I can live anywhere as long as I'm relatively close to an airport, I "smartly" chose Southwest Wyoming. :mrgreen:


----------



## USMARINEhuntinfool (Sep 15, 2007)

"Freedom is not Free and neither are healthy herds."

Couldn't agree more and know this better than most. Like Tree has said the majority of us aren't saying that SFW is a bunch of Terrorists or anything. What we are saying is simply this. SFW has to much power and is running unchecked. They are now pushing their agenda and getting their way. This is at the expense of the average joe. All I'm asking for is more balance in the system. Like I have said before, I am not against them getting expo tags, conservation tags, etc etc etc. My problem is this that there is no accountability. These tags should be accountable to the state and public. Also, the SFW should not have anymore sway in the dealings of the WB and DWR than anyother groups or persons. The general public is not getting adequate representation in my opinion. This is abundantly clear when RAC's are saying one thing, then SFW walks into a WB meeting raises their voice and all things are subject to what they say. Like I have said befor SFW has lost its outlook, they need to get back to the basics. If they are truly still just for the Wildlife and seeing them excell then that will be shown. I think they have fallen off kilter in favor of the all mighty dollar, but thats just my opinion, actions speak louder than words. Oh, and elk22 if all the hunts you have been on are strait draws that is outstanding and I hope to be that lucky one day. I hope I am able to take my children on half those hunts. Hope the profitable days are still headed your way my friend. Respectfully, Marine.

On a side note, I would like to see this forum organize some wildlife related service projects that we could all get together and do. Anyone else up for that? Put our money where our mouths are?


----------



## elk22hunter (Sep 7, 2007)

Excelent comments and insite by all who commented on this thread. We all have to be held accountable and if the accountability is out of control, you don't look at the 800 pound Gorilla to put him in check but the Gorilla trainer which in this case is the DWR.


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

elk22hunter said:


> Excelent comments and insite by all who commented on this thread. We all have to be held accountable and if the accountability is out of control, you don't look at the 800 pound Gorilla to put him in check but the Gorilla trainer which in this case is the DWR.


This is where we have some common ground on this issue elk22. I think this is where some of us are at right now. Accountability is the problem. I personally do not universally disagree with SFW on every subject. There are many issues that I agree with them on.

The problem with the whole process, then and now, is that the wildlife resources that exist in Utah belong to all Utahns yet we have no real way of having our voice heard. It's such a problem that has existed for so long I would argue that hunters in Utah are probably one of the most apethetic groups in the state. It's not our fault we're that way, it's the system we were all born into and have lived in our entire lives. We can vote in and out politicians based on whether or not they support our wants, our needs. We can sign petitions and even force a majority vote on key issues. But we cannot do ANYTHING about wildlife regulations. We can make a lot of noise, and sometimes the squeaky wheel gets the grease but once enough money gets involved not even that works.

SFW started out representing the masses. They did a lot of good. Now they are getting off track and money and inches are becoming more important than hunting itself.

To me the fight goes deeper than just opportunity vs. inches. If we make hunters too small of a fraternity then a tipping point will cause hunting to become irrelevant and extinct. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## Finnegan (Sep 7, 2007)

bullsnot said:


> To me the fight goes deeper than just opportunity vs. inches.


Most definitely. The fight is about whether big game hunting in Utah will become a private business. That's SFW's bottom line...their sole purpose and agenda in everything they do and claim to do.

I'm not a "customer". I'm one of those "We..the people" ... the people who actually own our wildlife and the lands that they live on. So I'll be damned if I'll let Don Peay and his inner circle of businessmen take away my heritage without a fight. Otherwise, how can I face the generations to come?


----------



## Nambaster (Nov 15, 2007)

In the beginning SFW was doing great in contributing to my over all outdoor experience. I was very greatful for their efforts in predator control and habitat restoration. 

While I am still greatful for such efforts last year I realized that such an entity is not completely altruistic. The dark side of SFW revealed itself when opportunity was reduced and limited. I have now realized that SFW is my friend who hung out with me because I had a hot girlfriend with a twin sister, now that my girlfriends twin sister has taken an interest in SFW he has given her breast implants, botox, and laser hair removal. Now as a brother inlaw SWF never hangs out with me. In family pictures there is a big difference between what SFW has and what I have...

So my question for SFW is this... Is it really an equal experience to harvest a big buck with political tactics?


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

Finnegan said:


> bullsnot said:
> 
> 
> > To me the fight goes deeper than just opportunity vs. inches.
> ...


This should be the driving factor that pushes us to take back what belongs to all of us. Facing our children and grandchildren and telling them we were apathetic and we just lay down without a fight is the worst example we can give them. Everything that is for the people in this great nation of ours was created by the people through blood, sweat and tears. It was the intention of previous generations to leave a great nation for their posterity and so it should be ours.


----------



## WasatchOutdoors (Sep 26, 2007)

elk22hunter said:


> Excelent comments and insite by all who commented on this thread. We all have to be held accountable and if the accountability is out of control, you don't look at the 800 pound Gorilla to put him in check but the Gorilla trainer which in this case is the DWR.


Bingo. The issue I have is that the "gorilla trainer" is out back taking a nap and letting the gorilla run the show.

SFW started with very noble intentions, and as I mentioned, I was one of the earlier ones on board to sign up as a member. The issue I have is that their focus is limiting opportunity, and I'm looking at it from the perspective that in all reality, a mature bull elk tag will soon be a once-in-a-lifetime tag. Maybe not officially in the drawing, but the way the point spread keeps jumping back 2 points every year, we all know that a 14 year old just starting the drawing process won't have a prayer to draw intheir lifetime.

Look I get that SFW has done some good things for wildlife, but unless you're extremely wealthy or extremely lucky, most of that wildlife will have zoo status for the majority of the next generation. You can look but don't touch.

The other major issue with SFW is accountability. We all know that there's something shady about the 200 expo tags with no accountability. We can do the math and know that those tags generate millions of dollars in entries, and yet they have no accountability for the way those funds get used. And we all know that its' pretty fishy that SFW employees can take part in the drawings and that guys on top like John Bair draw out year after year.

Anyone care to take a wager on whether or not John's name shows up on the list of lucky winners again this year? I personally don't think he's got the brass to do it 3 years in a row, but I won't be too shocked to read that name under a once in a lifetime species.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

WasatchOutdoors said:


> The other major issue with SFW is accountability. We all know that there's something shady about the 200 expo tags with no accountability. We can do the math and know that those tags generate millions of dollars in entries, and yet they have no accountability for the way those funds get used. And we all know that its' pretty fishy that SFW employees can take part in the drawings and that guys on top like John Bair draw out year after year.
> 
> Anyone care to take a wager on whether or not John's name shows up on the list of lucky winners again this year? I personally don't think he's got the brass to do it 3 years in a row, but I won't be too shocked to read that name under a once in a lifetime species.


If anyone on the board of SFW draws a tag this year I will make a stink so big it's going to wreak so much that the whole lot of them will be afraid to breath. That is a promise!


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

WasatchOutdoors said:


> The other major issue with SFW is accountability. We all know that there's something shady about the 200 expo tags with no accountability. We can do the math and know that those tags generate millions of dollars in entries, and yet they have no accountability for the way those funds get used. And we all know that its' pretty fishy that SFW employees can take part in the drawings and that guys on top like John Bair draw out year after year.
> 
> Anyone care to take a wager on whether or not John's name shows up on the list of lucky winners again this year? I personally don't think he's got the brass to do it 3 years in a row, but I won't be too shocked to read that name under a once in a lifetime species.


If anyone on the board of SFW draws a tag this year I will make a stink so big it's going to wreak so much that the whole lot of them will be afraid to breath. That is a promise!


----------



## WasatchOutdoors (Sep 26, 2007)

Oh and if you take a look at the "independant drawing firm" that John reported did the drawing last year, you'll probably shudder a little to find out that it was conducted by "Sportsmen for Habitat"... that's completely independant and in no way associated or connected to Sportsmen for Wildlife i'm sure.....


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

WasatchOutdoors said:


> Oh and if you take a look at the "independant drawing firm" that John reported did the drawing last year, you'll probably shudder a little to find out that it was conducted by "Sportsmen for Habitat"... that's completely independant and in no way associated or connected to Sportsmen for Wildlife i'm sure.....


Where did you come up with that information? That would be highly unethical and stupid, if not illegal, since they are one and the same organization, as you well know!


----------



## WasatchOutdoors (Sep 26, 2007)

take a look at their website, it might be on there. I looked back at my old application from last year before I got all pissed off. If it tells me nothing else, I know i need to clean my desk out more often. Anyone applying this year, if it gives you any information on it, please make a screen capture and save it as a jpeg, because i'm betting it didn't change from last year.

And unfortuntely, no it isn't illegal. As long as it is separately organized, (the main organization is Sportsmen for Wildlife, but the drawing is billed and conducted as Sportsmen for Habitat, legally a separate entity) they can do it, even if there is some overlap of personnel. I had a loooong discussion with my sister who is an attorney for the IRS about this and how they get away with it. It's full of technicalities, but unfortunately, legal.



> Where did you come up with that information? That would be highly unethical and stupid, if not illegal, since they are one and the same organization, as you well know!


 while it is completely obvious, from a "legal" standpoint, they are both probably filed as separate entities. I imagine the "Sportsman for Habitat" title is the legal filing for the profit portion of the group, a separate entity, "Sportsmen for Wildlife" is probably a non profit group filing. That way SFW would have to pay taxes on income for subscription dues, but could easily wash them out with "operating" expenses, showing them barely clearing a profit. Conversely the "habitat" branch being profit would be able to take the tags and generate funds. SFW could use a large portion of the auctioned tags for their habitat projects, While the "habitat" branch could take the money from the drawing portion and hire a "consultant" someone like Don Peay, to advise the drawing process to the tune of say maybe... $485,242? That way your "profit" from the drawing is minimal or even negative, because your operationg costs and consultants fees were more than the amount generated by the drawings. Thereby relieving you of the tax burden associated.

Interchange the filing status and names of the two separate entities, it really doesn/t matter, the equation I imagine runs about the same, or one of probably more than a dozen ways to run the tags through the system.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

coyoteslayer said:


> If you had the chance to sit down with Don Peay and his cronies then what questions would you ask him/them?


Your 2007 IRS Form 990 shows a "CONSULTING FEE" of
$485,242. Who did you consult with and about what?

It also shows $64,991 spent for "CONSERVATION PERMITS" and $429,995 for "TAGS". Can you and are you willing to give an accounting of those public tags?

Your 2008 IRS Form 990 shows a $156,000 salary for Don (Peay), a $96,000 salary for Ryan (Foutz), and an $84,000 salary for Byron (Bateman), all based on a 40 hour work week. How do you justify such large salaries for officers of a non-profit organization, especially when a great deal of the organization's income comes from the sale of publicly owned hunting permits?


----------



## WasatchOutdoors (Sep 26, 2007)

elkfromabove said:


> coyoteslayer said:
> 
> 
> > If you had the chance to sit down with Don Peay and his cronies then what questions would you ask him/them?
> ...


That right there is the best set of questions in the bunch....


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

WasatchOutdoors said:


> take a look at their website, it might be on there. I looked back at my old application from last year before I got all **** off. If it tells me nothing else, I know i need to clean my desk out more often. Anyone applying this year, if it gives you any information on it, please make a screen capture and save it as a jpeg, because i'm betting it didn't change from last year.
> 
> And unfortuntely, no it isn't illegal. As long as it is separately organized, (the main organization is Sportsmen for Wildlife, but the drawing is billed and conducted as Sportsmen for Habitat, legally a separate entity) they can do it, even if there is some overlap of personnel. I had a loooong discussion with my sister who is an attorney for the IRS about this and how they get away with it. It's full of technicalities, but unfortunately, legal.


You're undoubtedly correct, but it's enough make a person go crazy, especially when their 2008 990 lists the name of the organization as "SPORTSMEN FOR HABITAT DBA SPORTSMEN FOR FISH AND WILDLIFE". Of course the IRS makes us all go crazy this time of year anyway!!!

In any case, to conduct a drawing in this manner is unethical and foolish.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

Some of the bigger differences in org structure has to do with what the org. is legally capable of doing. A 501(c)4 can lobby with 100% of the funds, but outside contributions cannot be written off as charitable donations. 501(c)(4) organizations are not required to disclose their donors publicly. A (c)3 allows donors to write off contributions. Section 501(c)(3) organizations are subject to limits or absolute prohibitions on engaging in political activities.


----------



## TopofUtahArcher (Sep 9, 2009)

elk22hunter said:


> Excelent comments and insite by all who commented on this thread. We all have to be held accountable and if the accountability is out of control, you don't look at the 800 pound Gorilla to put him in check but the Gorilla trainer which in this case is the DWR.


I must interject an observation here... the gorilla trainer is NOT DWR, but the WB, which is run by a Zookeeper, SFW. I was at 3 rac meetings in Nov, as well as the WB meeting, and the DWR could pull a Pontius Pilot and wash their hands of the decisions made there... simple as pie, the WB had a decision made long before the WB meeting, as was proven when a typed and spellchecked letter was presented following a vote outcome that was opposed by the DWR, a majority of the RAC membership, as well as 70% oppostion by the public - and specifically WOULD NOT IMPACT THE DEER HERD SIZE/QUALITY as was proven scientifically by the DWR.

Thanks SFW for all you have done. 
Thanks for creating a system that rewards large landowners for shutting their gates to public sportsmen in favor of selling tags for a public resource to the highest bidder. 
Thanks for letting the wealthy be able to buy whatever tag they want every year while the people who funded the DWR and wildlife management for decades before your organization came about now have to wait 6+ years to even have the chance to hunt their old family stomping grounds. 
Thanks for lobbying to put a non-elected wildlife board in place to intelligently oppose all science and to openly criticize the public decry for changes in favor of raising the value of deer tags by further limiting opportunity.
Thanks for putting together a program where my two boys will likely NEVER draw a tag for the opportunity to hunt many species of game that were not here 25 years ago, and to boot they likely will only get to hunt deer and elk a handful of times for that same reason. 
Thanks SFW for taking the hunt out of hunting and working so hard to make your success rates 100% and the "Age class" so high that it actually hurts the growth potential of a herd. 
Thanks for lobbying to have the highest success weapon during the most vulnerable time of the elk rut so everyone with limited range weapons can have a significantly reduced chance of success and reduced seasons to accomodate even fewer people in the woods.

Thanks SFW, I think I will hunt other states every year, not cause they have any better animals, but cause I can actually have a tag in my pocket every year.

Sorry I don't have a question for the SFW crew. Every time I come up with one they already have an answer already typed out for presentation following their public "donation"of publicly owned monies.


----------



## TopofUtahArcher (Sep 9, 2009)

MadHunter said:


> If anyone on the board of SFW draws a tag this year I will make a stink so big it's going to wreak so much that the whole lot of them will be afraid to breath. That is a promise!


Im glad you posted that twice so noone missed it. If you'll pm me with your intentions of how to go about it I'd like to help you plan it out and make it happen... cause it will happen.


----------



## WasatchOutdoors (Sep 26, 2007)

I've got to wonder how much the surrounding states LOVE the work SFW has done in Utah. I only ask that because I'm pretty sure the surrounding states have seen a huge increase in Utah applicants into their big game programs in the last few years. 
I know that I personally will probably only be putting $45 into Utah's big game tags this year for an archery deer tag, because that's probably the only tag I'll be able to draw, even with 5 points for deer. Meantime Wyoming has already recieved and is collecting interest on a little over $600 in application fees for tags for myself and my daughter, and a matching contribution from my neighbors family for the same tags. Because chances are pretty good that we'll draw and harvest several animals there. Go figure.

But I guess when you can net a cool quarter million for a single donated tag in Utah, it makes the average sportsman look like a beggar and a lowlife as far as our status in the equation.

Here's a question though. How is it that while SFW has chapters in other western states, Utah is the only one that has been this badly corrupted? It it because SFW was started in Utah and hasn't had time to spike the kool aid in the other states, or are they just smart enough to learn from our mistakes?


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

WasatchOutdoors said:


> Here's a question though. How is it that while SFW has chapters in other western states, Utah is the only one that has been this badly corrupted? It it because SFW was started in Utah and hasn't had time to spike the kool aid in the other states, or are they just smart enough to learn from our mistakes?


Could it be that other states have wildlife agencies that actually have the authority to implement their own rules, unlike our DWR, which is subservient to an independent Wildlife Board in approving regulations? (I don't know the answer for sure, just asking)


----------



## WasatchOutdoors (Sep 26, 2007)

Good Question Catherder....

Or quite possibly it could be that in other states the people who make the decisions aren't allowed to accept gifts. Because unless something has recently changed, there isn't anything legally stopping the WB from accepting "gifts" from groups like SFW that might have an effect on wildlife decisions and tag numbers...


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

WasatchOutdoors said:


> Good Question Catherder....
> 
> Or quite possibly it could be that in other states the people who make the decisions aren't allowed to accept gifts. Because unless something has recently changed, there isn't anything legally stopping the WB from accepting "gifts" from groups like SFW that might have an effect on wildlife decisions and tag numbers...


Precisely. I would think that it would be much easier to gain undue control over 4 of 6 political operatives picked by the governor as opposed to a large bureaucratic organization like the DWR.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

WasatchOutdoors said:


> Here's a question though. How is it that while SFW has chapters in other western states, Utah is the only one that has been this badly corrupted? It it because SFW was started in Utah and hasn't had time to spike the kool aid in the other states, or are they just smart enough to learn from our mistakes?


I would guess it's because the money isn't there yet and *the officers aren't yet drawing salaries*. (The Arizona group has less than $10,000 in assets and the Wyoming group has less than $75,000 in assets.)


----------



## hopper1197 (Jul 26, 2010)

The SWF originally opposed and fought the option 2, the wildlife board voted for it.


----------



## indyrxl (Aug 22, 2008)

hopper1197 said:


> The SWF originally opposed and fought the option 2, the wildlife board voted for it.


Byron sure didn't sound like that. Where did you get that idea from :roll:


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

hopper1197 said:


> The SWF originally opposed and fought the option 2, the wildlife board voted for it.


That isn't what I saw at the RAC meetings or the wildlife board when Byron gave the WB a virtual hand job with his check.


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

I'll bet that the WB would have voted against Option 2 without the check. Ya I'm sure of it! 

hopper1197, 
You may be on to something? Things are not always as they seem! :O•-:


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

Muley73 said:


> I'll bet that the WB would have voted against Option 2 without the check. Ya I'm sure of it!
> 
> hopper1197,
> You may be on to something? Things are not always as they seem! :O•-:


It was a poor attempt at a joke :lol:  , I know the check was what SFW owed the DWR from the sale of conservation tags. Unfortunately there are many people that aren't aware of what that check really was. Just very bad place to give the check IMO.


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

You are correct not a lot of people knows how it really works. Yet still many on this site tried to make it look crooked to those that did not know. I agree the timing was in VERY bad taste! But so is acting like that the reason Option 2 was passes was because of a pay off.

Hope to see ya all at the expo this weekend!


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Muley73 said:


> You are correct not a lot of people knows how it really works. Yet still many on this site tried to make it look crooked to those that did not know. I agree the timing was in VERY bad taste! But so is acting like that the reason Option 2 was passes was because of a pay off.
> 
> Hope to see ya all at the expo this weekend!


I think you fall into the category of not knowing how it "really works".  I am positive that what Bateman did at the December WB meeting has NEVER happened before. Under 'normal' conditions the monies are handed over under less hyped/public circumstances, such as when the CPP is being discussed (not when talking about a policy that supposedly has nothing to do with the CPP, or in private!) Now, I don't recall anyone saying the WB would have suddenly grown a pair and voted for the welfare of the wildlife and the majority of hunters for a change, but it was an intentional act meant to make a statement. Anyone who denies that is either delusional or has no FREAKING clue how things "really work"! SFW thinks through EVERYTHING they do many times over, NOTHING they do is random or accidental. They are master chess players, and they are usually 4-5 moves ahead of us dummies, the DWR, and even their puppets sitting on the Wildlife Board.

As for this weekend, I think I will have my fingernails pulled out instead of attending the glorified thievery of Utah resources. Plus, I am guessing they probably wouldn't let me in. :mrgreen:


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

SFW does know how to play the game. You ever thought about the possibility that they want you to think they have more control? Alot of power is in the perception. 

Then again I really don't have a clue. So don't mind me I'm just funnin, that's all!


----------



## Finnegan (Sep 7, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> As for this weekend, I think I will have my fingernails pulled out instead of attending the glorified thievery of Utah resources. Plus, I am guessing they probably wouldn't let me in. :mrgreen:


You're in good company. Me and 100 kids are disinvited, too. At first, I was miffed. But then it occurred to me that the expo is a piss poor way to introduce the next generation to hunting, anyway.

You're welcome to come out and visit us...

Jefferson Jr. High School
Saturday, Feb. 5
5850 So. 5600 West, Kearns
11:00 am - 3:00 pm


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Finn, I truly wish I could attend and help on Saturday! I have family commitments that I would be shoot and quartered if I skipped. Hopefully I can be of help in the future to your great efforts. You have my utmost respect, as a person and as a sportsman. Now, if we could find a way to get the taxidermy show to change venues and stop abetting in the destruction of our wildlife. Yes, Tex, I think you MUST find a different venue for your show after this year!


----------



## ntrl_brn_rebel (Sep 7, 2007)

Wait a minute Pro, if you take away the Taxidermy Competition I might be out as well as it is THE reason I go down!!

I was thinking about what a shame that was Finn-Good Luck man and good on you for what your doing. I will voicing my concerns with a few people about this issue as it really upsets me and I have nothing invested in the youth involved. I hope the shoot goes great and I am glad you found an alternate site.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

ntrl_brn_rebel said:


> Wait a minute Pro, if you take away the Taxidermy Competition I might be out as well as it is THE reason I go down!!


Exactly why the venue MUST be changed! I am positive many of those involved do NOT support what SFW is doing to our wildlife, so why are they intentionally helping put money in SFW's growing back account! O|*


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

Maybe..... Not as many are upset about this as this site believes?


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Muley73 said:


> Maybe..... Not as many are upset about this as this site believes?


Well, since I have personally talked to some of the higher ups, I think I have a pretty good idea on where they stand. How about you, have you talked to ANY of them, or are you just making another uneducated assumption? :O•-:


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

No no pro! I am speaking of the common folk, myself included! The general public. Not the guys that are higher up. Most of us common folk don't talk to them, unlike yourself.... I guess?


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

It is funny how Fins kids get thrown out and one of SFW's best clients gets put in. Rick Valdez is one who purchases an auction tag almost every year. 

Its a good old case of ill scratch your back Rick and stab your back Finn!!


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

Muley73 You truly have your head in the sand when it comes to SFW. :roll: 

Pro and I were once in your shoes defending them on every forum about two years ago. We also had our heads in the sand at that time.  I hope you have your eyes opened like we did so we can stop there nonsense...


----------



## WasatchOutdoors (Sep 26, 2007)

Muley73 said:


> No no pro! I am speaking of the common folk, myself included! The general public. Not the guys that are higher up. Most of us common folk don't talk to them, unlike yourself.... I guess?


I think you nailed it right there. I don't think the 'common folk' have any idea how any of this is being conducted. When I talk to most sportsmen, they all seem to think the DWR is still in charge, most of them don't even know what a RAC meeting is, and either don't know the wildlife board exists or think that the board is the DWR. And none of them in past conversations have ANY idea what's happeneing with SFW and these tags. They're all excited because they see it as an additional opportunity to draw a tag that the 'DWR will never let them draw' and don't understand why the 'DWR keeps cutting permit numbers'


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

Really guys I don't think my head is in the sand. I promise you I do not agree with alot of what the SFW does. But tell me this which group out there does more? They all have their own issues. 

I hear you all saying they hold the DWR hostage? This is burying your heads in the sand. The main reason for the birth of the SFW is the failure of the DWR to do their job successfully. That is a FACT. This was all before the WB or RACS were in place. They were failing and it opened the door for Don and the SFW and the WB and RACS. Why should I believe that the DWR would do any better now then they did before all of this took place. Please please answer that question. 

With any issue in business or personal life you should search for the root cause. The SFW is not the cause of our problems. They are a result of the problem and that is poor wildlife management in the state of Utah! Now please dont tell me that is because they are not allowed to do their jobs. The inablity to do so in the past has brought us to this mess.

So I feel I am looking at a bigger picture than most. Just because I disagree does not mean I don't understand. I believe this, if the SFW were gone tomorrow we would be no better off than today. The root cause would still be there!


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

Muley73 said:


> Maybe..... Not as many are upset about this as this site believes?


You are correct on that but ONLY because most don't know what's going on there. I won't name any names here but recently a legislator was made aware of the situation with the expo tags and his jaw hit the floor. I suspect the expo tag process will be examined in the next little while, obviously nothing will change for 2011 but I bet we'll see this become a topic of conversation with legistlators.

For the record I don't have an issue with the expo tags.....I have an issue with using public tag to raise money that is not earmarked to go back into Utah wildlife. If you guys are ok with that process then I want my tags to auction off....I want a new truck and got some bills to pay!


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

bullsnot said:


> Muley73 said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe..... Not as many are upset about this as this site believes?
> ...


And that my friends, to me, is the big fat elephant in the room that nobody seems to be bothered by.


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

All results of poor management to begin with. That is the root of all this evil. If you keep a bad employee around it will always burn you!


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> All results of poor management to begin with. That is the root of all this evil. If you keep a bad employee around it will always burn you!


Your head is in the sand deeper than I thought. :lol: :lol:

BTW SFW hasn't even begun to fix any of the problems with our deer herds which was one of the main reason they got started, right?

SFW is in the game for the money. GS units aren't big money makers for SFW. They are more interested in high dollar tags like sheep, elk, Henry Mtn deer, antelope deer, etc.



> But tell me this which group out there does more?


SFW might do good things, but they also do a lot of bad things that PETA can only dream of doing.

You can't only focus on the good things and ignore the bad things.

Which group out there does *MORE BAD* things?

Answer: *SFW*


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

Coyote,
Again SFW is the root problem? They are not hurting our herds. They may hurt opportunity which is debatable. What has hurt our herds is mismanagement which was the cause of the SFW ever getting power. To argue that is head in the sand.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

BUT my point is.......Since SFW came into power they have really done NOTHING to help our deer herds on GS units. 

If we continue down the SFW elk management path then you will see our elk herd crashing because we cannot keep killing cows to create more room for bulls thus they are hurting our elk herds.

OUR ELK HERDS ARE MANAGED FOR MONEY AND NOT BY BIOLOGY


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

I believe the SFW did not support the added spike tags? Are you saying they are the ones pushing all the cow tags?


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Muley73 said:


> I believe the SFW did not support the added spike tags? Are you saying they are the ones pushing all the cow tags?


Not true, SFW stood up and supported the spike tags going statewide at the Wildlife Board meeting. I almost fell off my chair I was so stunned.

As for cow tags, what else can the DWR do BUT sell cow tags? They are not allowed to issue more bull tags, and BY LAW they have to keep elk populations at/below objectives. If they are not allowed to kill more bulls, they are FORCED to kill more cows. It was SFW that spearheaded the increase in harvest age objectives that was implemented last spring that means even MORE cow elk will be killed. So, in reality, SFW is indeed pushing all the cow tags!


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

Look at how we manage elk.......AGE CLASS OBJECTIVES. Some brainless SFW guy thought Age class objectives would be a great way to manage elk because SFW believes that if bull elk are of a certain age then they will be trophy bulls. They should have taken a class in genetics first.

Some bulls will never be above a 350 bull even if they live to be 12 years old. So why manage elk with age class objectives instead of bull/cow ratios?

What was Don Peay's occupation again?


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

I get it guys anything that is bad is coming from the SFW. You guys have made it more than clear that you dislike the SFW and that they do more harm than good. I agree on many of your points. For that reason I have never been a memeber, EVER. 

Still the "pros" not being successful in doing their jobs opened the door to this group. If the SFW is gone tomorrow do you think they will get it right. I have seen no evidence that they will. Look at some examples. 

The Parker pronghorn herd crash.
The inaccurate deer counting.
The Fishlake elk slaughter.

All from the group that failed so badly 20 years ago that WE supported this evil regime instead. YOU SUPPORTED!!!!! Tell me how the SFW being gone is going to fix anything? You all keep talking about starting another group. What will this group fight for? How will they fight. How will they hold the DWR responsible to do their jobs correctly? These are the things I want to know? In the end it will more than likely be the by the same tatics used by the SFW? POOR MANAGEMENT IS NOT A RESULT OF THE SFW, THE DWR HAD THAT FIGURED OUT BEFORE THE SFW ARRIVED!


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

Muley73 said:


> I get it guys anything that is bad is coming from the SFW. You guys have made it more than clear that you dislike the SFW and that they do more harm than good. I agree on many of your points. For that reason I have never been a memeber, EVER.
> 
> Still the "pros" not being successful in doing their jobs opened the door to this group. If the SFW is gone tomorrow do you think they will get it right. I have seen no evidence that they will. Look at some examples.
> 
> ...


I agree with almost everything you said, SFW did a lot of good things, especially when they first started up, but now they are the only voice that matters. What we need is another voice to counter SFW, you know even things out. We need to have a voice for the average joes since there is already a voice for the rich guys. The good news is this may be more possible than we all believe. 8)


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

Another group still solves zero if you do not improve management? To create the voice needed it takes money. That is what everybody says has caused the SFW to become evil. So tell how does two evil groups help?


----------



## WasatchOutdoors (Sep 26, 2007)

Muley73 said:


> Another group still solves zero if you do not improve management? To create the voice needed it takes money. That is what everybody says has caused the SFW to become evil. So tell how does two evil groups help?


Actually I woul argue exactly to the contrary. I think that if anohter group were to add a check and balance to the equation, with a focus on habitat development and good biological principles, it might even the keel a bit.

Right now SFW is the only voice that matters, the only one that is listened to, because they have the money. I wouldnt even care about that if SFW stood by any of their original principles and put that money back into habitat. The issue most of us have is specifially that the vast majority of funds raised by these tags by SFW is absorbed in the form of consulting and administrative fees.

Add that to the fact that SFW can't claim the increase in trophy class elk has anything to do with habitat improvement or good management. The entire reason we have bulls this big is because SFW has taken away the ability for the average sportsman to have access to any of them. Its a no brainer that if you take away the publics ability to harvest a mature bull, it'll get bigger and older.

And yet the carrying capacity and herd size has stayed relatively the same for over a decade. This has NOTHING to do with good management or habitat work, but instead comes at the cost of opportunity to the public. And age class objectives, what an inaccurate way to measure success. All it shows is how big of a bull it takes for a guy to pull the trigger. Most hunters in the face of a 330 class bull think it will score much closer to 400 on the hoof. Of coourse they'll shoot a smaller bull than a unit is capable of producing, they've never had that kind of opportunity before and know that odds are they wont EVER draw again, so why let the bird in the hand get away?

I think that the vast majority of us just want a compromise, some increase in opportunity, and a group that has some influence, carrying the voice of reason, so that we don't have to watch the next generation's opportunity decay year after year. we want a group who is willing to fight for the average guy and ensure the opportunity for our children, rather than SFW's version of pushing towards a privatized herd. Is that so bad?


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

Your last paragraph sounds great. Is that not what the SFW promised? So another group will do it, because why??????? The DWR must step up and do a job, if they don't these groups will always have support. Please don't blame it on the SFW or the WB. Playing the victim is a ploy used by many bad employees. They have had plenty of opportunity to step up and make changes and fixes.


----------



## luv2fsh&hnt (Sep 22, 2007)

I think the best start to bringing some balance to the table and neutralising the,at least conceived control and/or influence,SFW has with the board is two seat at least two of the divisions biologists with voting power and the divisions director should have veto power on the boards decisions. I think that would bring some balance back to the equation.


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

Ya let's give the failing boss more power. I agree that independent biologist on the board is a very good idea. But one that is employed by DWR would be a conflict of intrest is that not what we are trying to avoid?


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

luv2fsh&hnt said:


> I think the best start to bringing some balance to the table and neutralising the,at least conceived control and/or influence,SFW has with the board is two seat at least two of the divisions biologists with voting power and the divisions director should have veto power on the boards decisions. I think that would bring some balance back to the equation.


Where have I heard that before? -Ov-

And yes, it certainly would!!!


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

A couple of things:

1 - The DWR is required by legislation to the counts the way they do them. Their hands are tied.
2 - The DWR/Mule Deer committee put together a great mule deer plan in 2008 that has not been followed. So if you blame mismanagement be sure to blame the right folks for that i.e. the wildlife board. In the last 20 years its very debateable as to what has caused deer declines. Elk? Human encroahment? Mismanagement? I think simply blaming mismanagement may be a bit narrow minded.
3 - SFW may have been a good org at one time but it's clear they will not be the ones to lead us in the right direction going forward. Things may or may not get better with another org to balance out SFW but I believe they will certainly get worse for the average hunter without another org.


----------



## luv2fsh&hnt (Sep 22, 2007)

To my mind the bioligists should be employed by the division because they spend more time observing our wildlife and ranges than an independent bioligist ever could without some serious cash. The director should have veto power to prevent the board from enacting policies that go contrary to science.


----------



## luv2fsh&hnt (Sep 22, 2007)

Catherder said:


> luv2fsh&hnt said:
> 
> 
> > I think the best start to bringing some balance to the table and neutralising the,at least conceived control and/or influence,SFW has with the board is two seat at least two of the divisions biologists with voting power and the divisions director should have veto power on the boards decisions. I think that would bring some balance back to the equation.
> ...


If this has been brought by you or someonelse before I apologise this is something I have been thinking about since the debacle of the board meeting that gave us option 2. Here I thought I had come up with an original idea,I should have known better. Alot smarter people than me thinkin about this stuff.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

luv2fsh&hnt said:


> Catherder said:
> 
> 
> > [quote="luv2fsh&hnt":2bdgpw8j]I think the best start to bringing some balance to the table and neutralising the,at least conceived control and/or influence,SFW has with the board is two seat at least two of the divisions biologists with voting power and the divisions director should have veto power on the boards decisions. I think that would bring some balance back to the equation.
> ...


If this has been brought by you or someonelse before I apologise this is something I have been thinking about since the debacle of the board meeting that gave us option 2. Here I thought I had come up with an original idea,I should have known better. Alot smarter people than me thinkin about this stuff. [/quote:2bdgpw8j]

No apologies needed bro.  Great minds think alike? :idea: It is excellent that multiple people are starting to come up with real possible solutions to the problem at hand instead of the endless whining and arguing about buck/does ratios and age classes we have been getting instead.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

2010 SFW CONSERVATION
PERMIT PROJECTS SUMMARY

REGION PROJECT NAME AMOUNT
1. Central Sharps Valley Habitat Improvement $5,000
2. Central Springdell South Vegetation Treatment Phase I $10,000
3. Central West Onaqui Bullhog Phase 4 $10,000
4. Central Winter Springs Bullhog $10,000
5. Central Rockwell Ranch Bullhog $10,000
6. Central Clover Creek Bullhog Phase 3 $10,000
7. Central Wallsburg Knapweed Control - Phase 2 $20,000
8. Central Northern Wasatch Front Restoration - Phase 2 $7,500
9. Central Dairy Fork WMA Habitat Improvement - Phase 1 $5,000
10. Central Black Hill WMA Habitat Restoration/Access $5,000
11. Central Dry Canyon Wildlife Improvement/Fuels Reduction $2,500
12. N.E. Rock Springs Bullhog $15,000
13. N.E. Big Park Sagebrush $7,500
14. N.E. Brush Creek Bench Seeding $5,000
15. N.E. Book Cliffs Spring Protection and Enhancement $7,500
16. N.E. Bitter Creek Riparian Protection $2,500
17. N.E. North Book Cliffs Wildlife Guzzler Project $7,500
18. N.E. Green River Cottonwood Restoration $1,000
19. N.E. Book Cliffs Water Distribution Project $5,000
20. N.E. Upper McCook Lop and Northern Scatter $5,000
21. N.E. Monument Ridge Bullhog $1,000
22. N.E. McCook Ridge Bullhog $1,000
23. N.E. Rock Spring/Cherry Mesa lop and scatter $5,000
24. Northern Curtis Ridge prescribed burn $1,500.00
25. Northern Hoop Lake Sage Wildlife Habitat Improvement $10,000
26. Northern Henefer-Echo water project $2,500
27. Northern Carrus/Birch Creek Habitat Improvement $5,000
28. S.E. Reservation Ridge $5,000
29. S.E. Indian Springs Fuels Project $100,000
30. S.E. Swasey Wildlife Improvement Phase 2 $2,000
31. S.E. Hiawatha/Miller Creek Bullhog Project $5,000.00
32. S.E. Black Ridge Fuels Reduction - Phase II $5,000
33. Southern Twin Springs Phase II Seeding/Vegetation $2,500
34. Southern Upper Kanab Creek Seeding Maintenance $25,000
35. Southern Sawmill Point/Baldy's Ridge Aspen Improvement $2,500
36. Southern Black Mountain Clearing $2,500
37. Southern Sheep Creek chaining $5,750
38. Southern ***** Liza Spring Exclosure $2,500
39. Southern South Beaver Vegetation Enhancement Year 5 $10,000
40. Southern West Grass Valley Bullhog $2,500
41. Southern South Canyon $2,500
42. Southern Eight Mile Habitat Enhancement Year #2 $2,500
43. Southern Water Canyon Forage Enhancement Phase #2 $2,000
44. Southern Beaver North Creek WMA Habitat Improvement $7,500
45. Southern Fillmore Nixon WMA Habitat Improvement $2,500
46. Southern Indian Peaks WMA Lop and Scatter $5,000
47. Southern Cow and Cottonwood Creek Lop and Scatter $2,000
48. Southern Panguitch Creek/South Beaver Habitat Projects $2,800
49. Southern Buckskin Mountain Water Development $75,000
50. Southern New Harmony Fuels Treatment FY11 $2,500.00
51. Southern Spanish George/Arrowhead Pass Shrubsteppe $5,000.00
52. Southern Buckskin Lop and Scatter FY2011 $2,500.00
53. Southern Cedar City Guzzlers $5,000.00
54. Southern Corral Flat guzzler tank replacement $1,000.00
55. Southern Cedar Mountain Guzzlers $1,000.00
56. Southern Table Mtn. guzzler fencing $1,000.00
57. Southern Pine-Nut Guzzler Storage Expansion $5,750.00
58. Southern Gymon Seep Guzzler Reconstruction $2,500.00
59. Southern Gray Hills Guzzler Reconstruction $2,500.00
60. Southern Tebbs Water Pump $2,000.00
61. Southern Buckskin Water Yr2 $18,750.00
62. Statewide Wildlife Crossings Structure Designs - Year 1 $10,000.00
63. Statewide Placement of Wildlife Water Developments $10,000.00


2010 SFW CONSERVATION
PERMIT PROJECTS SUMMARY
SUBTOTAL $439.550
UNCOMMITTED & OVERSIGHT FOR PROJECTS $160,450
DWR PROJECTS $300,000
TOTAL ABOVE PROJECTS $900,000


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Muley73 said:


> Please don't blame it on the SFW or the WB. Playing the victim is a ploy used by many bad employees. They have had plenty of opportunity to step up and make changes and fixes.


WTF? Are you completely naive? Stupid? I can't figure you out....who makes the decisions regarding our wildlife? The DWR only makes recommendations, not decisions. Guys like you look for the easy scapegoat--the DWR--and blame all wildlife management issues on them. You like to say: "poor management". But you always leave the decision makers--including the state legislature and state laws--out of the equation and fail to even acknowledge that weather patterns have a much larger impact on wildlife than it is given credit for. For example, you forget that post-hunt counts of antelope on the parker were still above objective last fall and that by law the DWR was required to issue more doe permits to bring that number into line. You also fail to realize that the Forest Service and cattlemen in that area put loads of pressure on the DWR to bring that herd back UNDER objective because of the level it had been at for years. The DWR, in all truthfulness, has very little decision making power and the individual unit biologists really have virtually no say in what happens....

True, SFW has done some good things for wildlife...but they have also put a dagger into the heart of us opportunists. How much has the average joe sacrificed so that SFW can auction of those tags? What has the average joe received in return for that sacrifice? Sorry, but the direction SFW is heading and the agenda they are pushing stinks of selfish misguided tag grabbing for a select few individuals who can pay big money. What SFW knows and too many of our hunters do NOT understand is that if deer/elk tags can be limited to a point where both big mule deer and big elk exist at high rates, SFW and the Don Peays and Byrons maintain those sweet salaries and their coveted convention tags still will bring in high dollar amounts....but, on the flip side, if the quality of deer and elk slip and opportunity is raised too much, those tags aren't worth nearly as much. So, they push to limit opportunity to keep money in their pockets and to keep bringing in big dollars at their conventions....and at whose expense? The blue-collar hunters.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

goofy elk said:


> 2010 SFW CONSERVATION
> PERMIT PROJECTS SUMMARY
> SUBTOTAL $439.550
> UNCOMMITTED & OVERSIGHT FOR PROJECTS $160,450
> ...


Versus $5,000,000+ revenue from public owned tags?


----------



## WasatchOutdoors (Sep 26, 2007)

elkfromabove said:


> goofy elk said:
> 
> 
> > 2010 SFW CONSERVATION
> ...


I think its great that they did these projects, but I've got to agree that there is a major misbalance between the amount they take in vs the amount going back to habitat. Am I missing something to think that maybe 18% is pretty low as far as returns on the tags? I mean I appreciate and applaud the effort, but I'm thinking that they raise way more than 5 million on these tags, considering a single deer tag last year pulled a quarter million on its own. Am I alone in thinking that 4.1 million dollars in administrative costs for $900,000 worth of habitat work might be a tad excessive?

I can't help but feel like they could have raised the funds for the above mentioned projects with about 10 good tags, as opposed to the hundreds they currently are alloted.

I guess that maybe it is time for a new non profit group to come in and compete for these resources. Because we know that the remaining 82% of SFW's raised funds was eaten up in administrative costs and 'consulting fees'

Just imagine what a well founded, smaller, leaner non profit group could accomplish with even half of that same kind of funding.


----------



## WasatchOutdoors (Sep 26, 2007)

Oh. My bad. I forgot that SFW's corporate non profit license is listed as a political organization. And lobbying against average sportmen and paying off the wildlife board to remove more of us from the field each year costs a lot of money..... Forget my oversight on my last post. I may have inadvertantly implied that SFW's purpose was to make improvements for wildlife. My bad.


----------



## WasatchOutdoors (Sep 26, 2007)

But if you're still looking for a valid reason for a second non profit organization. There's already too many political organizations out there. I think it would be a refreshing change to have one who's PRIMARY objective is to get out there, work the land and get their hands dirty from work on Utahs habitat, instead of gladhanding and lobbying. Call me an idealist if you will.


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

goofy elk said:


> 2010 SFW CONSERVATION
> PERMIT PROJECTS SUMMARY


Right. SFW by law has to return 90% of the funds from conservation tags back to widlife in one form or another.

The same cannot be said for expo tags. I would like to see the project list from expo tag dollars.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

Muley..... I am going to be blunt and direct and this in no way is intended to offend you. I am just calling it as I see it.

Do you have some kind of connection, loyalty or advocacy towards SFW? Do you have something against people organizing to find a solution to a problem? You seem to be very steadfast on the notion that there is nothing that can be done.

You have a tendency to shoot down any and all of the things that are being proposed here and to disagree a lot (note that not always) with many of us here. In my eyes you are defending SFW and putting a lot of blame on DWR and then saying than neither are the solution, but, neither is a new organization.

Letting the current system go unopposed or unchecked for use of a better word, is the worse thing we can do. So I say to you..... Join up to the left, join up to the right or join up wherever you want and work towards a solution or get the heck out of the way. your comments however intelligent they may be show no signs of where you stand nor where you wish to see things go. 

A lot of us here are going to do something about this and mark my words we will succeed if only by virtue of our detemination to not let what belongs to all of us be handled by a privileged few.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

WasatchOutdoors said:


> But if you're still looking for a valid reason for a second non profit organization. There's already too many political organizations out there. I think it would be a refreshing change to have one who's PRIMARY objective is to get out there, work the land and get their hands dirty from work on Utahs habitat, instead of gladhanding and lobbying. Call me an idealist if you will.


You Idealist!


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Ok boys,,,I'm starting a new topic to show you were the REAL fight is
going on right this second ,,LOOK at what Defenders of wild life is up to!!!

And what SFW is doing in this fight with $$$$$...


----------



## deerlove (Oct 20, 2010)

Lets take the expo profits and fight the defenders of wildlife, no that would be too easy. We have to pay and join another one of sfws organizations. What a joke!


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

Madhunter,
PM sent


----------



## USMARINEhuntinfool (Sep 15, 2007)

"But if you're still looking for a valid reason for a second non profit organization. There's already too many political organizations out there. I think it would be a refreshing change to have one who's PRIMARY objective is to get out there, work the land and get their hands dirty from work on Utahs habitat, instead of gladhanding and lobbying. Call me an idealist if you will."

You idealist you  I like it, I like it a lot.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

WasatchOutdoors said:


> But if you're still looking for a valid reason for a second non profit organization. There's already too many political organizations out there. I think it would be a refreshing change to have one who's PRIMARY objective is to get out there, work the land and get their hands dirty from work on Utahs habitat, instead of gladhanding and lobbying. Call me an idealist if you will.


I applaud your intentions, but I do indeed think you are being an idealist. There has been MILLIONS dumped into habitat projects, with what to show for it? Also, what is accomplished if we gain all this improved habitat and then we aren't able to reap the fruits of it because of how the wildlife are managed? Like it or not, politics IS the heart of the problem and the CURE. There is a group being formed by some very fine individuals that will NEVER pimp a tag, or support any policy based on how much revenue they can garner. I will let them, once fully formed and open for business, explain what their mission and priorities are. But, the main focus will be on ensuring sound biology is followed, and that the voice of ALL will have an avenue open to be heard and actually LISTENED to. Putting pressure on the lawmakers is the ONLY way this will get turned around. Anything else, while born of great intentions will be wasted energy/resources, until the process of how decisions are made is fixed/changed.


----------



## a_bow_nut (Feb 25, 2009)

Hell if we are going for crazy ideas then lets have the SFW still put on their hunting expo but have the DWR manage the auction of the high dollrs and keep the money for theirselves. The SFW can still get some money for the booth spaces that they sell out. It's a win win situation.


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

Putting pressure on lawmakers? Now that would be alot like.........SFW? Except this group would do the things you would like to see happen so it is good. Am I understanding that right? :? 

I know they will not get tangled up in the money. Hats off, that's a huge task to pull off for free! :shock: 

I'm very interested to see how this all works. Hopefully it is something sportsmen can get behind, or should I say.....stat behind. o-||


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

Muley73 said:


> Putting pressure on lawmakers? Now that would be alot like.........SFW? Except this group would do the things you would like to see happen so it is good. Am I understanding that right? :?
> 
> I know they will not get tangled up in the money. Hats off, that's a huge task to pull off for free! :shock:
> 
> I'm very interested to see how this all works. Hopefully it is something sportsmen can get behind, or should I say.....stat behind. o-||


Have to hand it to ya muley, you're pretty good at twisting things around to roll your own spin on things! Must have had a lot of practice there bud. And yep, it will be VERY interesting to see this new org get rolling and see what happens. o-||


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Muley73 said:


> Putting pressure on lawmakers? Now that would be alot like.........SFW? Except this group would do the things you would like to see happen so it is good. Am I understanding that right? :? Are you kidding me? Either you are just being a TROLL and are just trying to get a rise out of people, or you have the most closed mind ever! I do NOT dislike SFW because I disagree with what policies they support/oppose, I detest SFW because of HOW/why the support/oppose policies. Motives, agendas, and tactics matter to this cowboy. Sadly, they seem to hold no water with you. This new group will NEVER profit from the policies they support/oppose, SFW **** well can't make such a claim now can they? Honestly, trying to have a discussion with you on the ills of SFW and why they have become corrupted is like trying to explain calculus to a 5 year old who has just eaten a ton of candy and washed it down with a Mountain Dew. O|*
> 
> I know they will not get tangled up in the money. Hats off, that's a huge task to pull off for free! :shock: Who said they would operate for free? Is your reading comprehension that poor? I CLEARLY stated they would not raise money, nor profit, from policies they support. Try and slow down and actually THINK before typing a response.
> 
> I'm very interested to see how this all works. Hopefully it is something sportsmen can get behind, or should I say.....stat behind. o-||


Funny how you are so **** supportive and defensive of SFW while being so skeptical of a group determined to do things the right way. Very telling, yes? :O•-:


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

Pro,
I love it when you bring out the red ink on me. I would type in a nice calming blue, but I'm not really computer smart so you will just have to imagine it that way.  

For the 100th time. I have never ever been a member of the SFW. I just do not agree with too many issue to join up. Root issue is a long story that is more personal than anything. So please don't think that is the angle I am coming from. :| 

My point is another group scares the helllll out of me. The SFW started with the same intentions as many that you have listed. Guess what they learned really really quick. It takes money to be heard and have a meaningful voice. If your group can accomplish things without money then again, HATS OFF. It takes money to play in the political game. Wildlife is usually pretty low on the agenda for most politicians......unless you can show a benifit to them. Well what is a benifit to politicians....power. Where does power come from.......money.  

I'm sorry but I do not feel another group fighting for their own agenda is the answer to the common sportsmens problems. What happens when that group makes a decision that a bunch of members dislike. Should they form another group, and another group, and another group? Pretty quick you have a bunch of groups and guess who gets the most done? I believe it is the group with the most money. :shock: 

Support for the current system with some tweaks is a better option than forming group, after group. But that is just my over sugared 5 yr old brain trying to put a "spin" on things.


----------



## cacherinthewry (Dec 20, 2007)

goofy elk said:


> 2010 SFW CONSERVATION
> PERMIT PROJECTS SUMMARY
> 
> REGION PROJECT NAME AMOUNT
> ...


*62 projects, and NOT A SINGLE ONE FOR FISH! Why??? It's right there in the name, right?*

I see some projects on the list for WMA's. How many of the other projects were on CWMU's? How many were on land with complete public access?


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Muley73 said:


> My point is another group scares the helllll out of me. The SFW started with the same intentions as many that you have listed. Guess what they learned really really quick. It takes money to be heard and have a meaningful voice. If your group can accomplish things without money then again, HATS OFF. It takes money to play in the political game. Wildlife is usually pretty low on the agenda for most politicians......unless you can show a benifit to them. Well what is a benifit to politicians....power. Where does power come from.......money.  For crying out loud, PAY ATTENTION! It is obvious money is needed, the key is where the money comes from. Selling public tags, while at the same time having immense power over how tags are issued/sold is a recipe for corruption. Staying away from such peril is the key. How many **** times does this need to be explained to you? I have been highly involved in several Tea Party events over the last 3 years, and I have seen first hand how politicians change what their priorities are will some pressure, NOT simply money. You are right though, money makes everything go round, and showing politicians the huge amounts of lost revenue to the state by rationing permits for the SOLE purpose of egos/power hits a nerve with many politicians. We have been talking to several politicians over the last couple of months and the response has been very encouraging. Power can come from money, but it can also come from other venues.
> 
> Support for the current system with some tweaks is a better option than forming group, after group. But that is just my over sugared 5 yr old brain trying to put a "spin" on things.  The system is broke, it will take much more than a few tweaks to fix it. The way the Wildlife Board is setup is flawed, there needs, at the very least, to be some checks and balances instilled. That can't be done any other way than through the legislature.


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

Pro,
With money comes obligation and agenda. That is when the conductor starts to lose control of the train. That is why so many political trains end up at a destination not intended when said train leaves the station. Just a simple thought I have about doubting the true need for another "sportsmens" group in Utah.

I understand your frustration with the current system. You see a system that has rejected your ideas. Even when you have followed the proper steps and feel you agenda is correct. I see a system that can still be used to get things right because I have seen recent success with agendas passed that I agree with. There are also many politicians and lawmakers out there right now that are happy with system. They believe the WB has made the right decisions and are willing to show much support for it. So I guess we will see how the cookie crumbles. My fear is that with two powerful groups the common sportsman will be left with less crumbs than we currently have!


----------



## JuddCT (Sep 7, 2007)

Muley73 said:


> My fear is that with two powerful groups the common sportsman will be left with less crumbs than we currently have!


Competition is not a bad thing. Good things can come of it as well.


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

Muley73 said:


> My fear is that with two powerful groups the common sportsman will be left with less crumbs than we currently have!


I understand your concerns.

What if there was a group that existed that was about the message it carried rather than the funds it could raise? All board members would have a shelf life, after a few years they must be replaced. This includes all officers of the org. The board works like a round table and ALL members must agree on key issues, especially money. No one would ever get rich or make a nest egg working for this org.

What if the foundation of the organization is that it educates and speaks for the masses? The purpose of the organization would not be anti-any other org, it would simply provide balance to special interests by speaking for the masses pure and simple. The org may agree with special interests on some issues, and disagree on others. But because it does nothing else but speaks for hunters, once it stops doing that it would have nothing else to stand on.

Is that an org you could get behind?

The problem with many of the org's that exist today is that they need a bunch of money to fulfill thier mission statements. Buying land, transporting animals, habitat restoration, along with lobbying is very expensive. Combine that with the heads of these orgs can make a very handsome, life long, living you get a bad mix. This causes a situation where an org needs to make a bunch of money monthly just to stay in business. An organization that only needs minimal funds to fulfill its mission statement is much less likely to go down the dark road, especially when combined with officers of the org having a shelf life.


----------



## WasatchOutdoors (Sep 26, 2007)

the other thing I'd like to see from a new organization is one that actually ASKS the masses what they think instead of telling them what they think. 

I was a member of SFW for quite a while, and I still dont remember Don or any of the bunch ever asking their members if they were on the right track. I watched that train head completely the wrong direction for me and as far as I can tell, their opinion is either get on board with their philosophy, or sit out of the game while we tell everyone else what to think.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

WasatchOutdoors said:


> the other thing I'd like to see from a new organization is one that actually ASKS the masses what they think instead of telling them what they think.


Agreed!


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

WasatchOutdoors said:


> the other thing I'd like to see from a new organization is one that actually ASKS the masses what they think instead of telling them what they think.


+2


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

bullsnot said:


> WasatchOutdoors said:
> 
> 
> > the other thing I'd like to see from a new organization is one that actually ASKS the masses what they think instead of telling them what they think.
> ...


+3


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

Are the masses always right?


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

Muley73 said:


> Are the masses always right?


No but they must have a voice. They should always be consulted and have input.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

What exactly do you mean by "right"? The word right by definition is very subjective. 

Listen to some Jerry Cody, you'll understand.


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

I do believe it's all a "Touch of Grey"!!! So, I will get by.


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

bull,

Now I'm confused. Is the RAC and WB not allowing ANYONE come and express a view or opinion. Are they no longer allowing questions? The ability to have a voice is currently there is it not. The masses have every right to show up and make those meetings last days! :shock: 

Ok I get what you are saying, I hope you get what I'm say?


----------



## GPA (Jan 8, 2009)

Muley73 said:


> Are the masses always right?


The more posts of yours I read, the more I am convinced your opinion is that we are better off doing nothing than attempting to make any improvement at all. I think it is pretty clear that for most (yes, MOST), the current situation is intolerable, regardless of what good may have happened in the past.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

Cacherinthewry, Here's what I found out about those SFW projects. Some I can't pinpoint (?) because there are too many possibilities for the name given. And I've only done them for deer and elk.



goofy elk said:


> 2010 SFW CONSERVATION
> PERMIT PROJECTS SUMMARY
> 
> REGION PROJECT NAME AMOUNT
> ...


I'm not sure how to interpret the above information because most of the elk units in the state are LE, but it _appears_ that the projects lean toward trophy hunting areas. In any case, 18% of their revenue for projects doesn't impress me much!


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

elkfromabove said:


> 18% of their revenue for projects doesn't impress me much!


 Not only is this a small amount, what little they have used has had, at best, weak returns so far. All these projects and the deer herd is still struggling. If a company were to dump this much funding on an 'investment' with such a small return after all these years, it would be out of business. Funny how Mr. Peay tries to make it like he is a 'capitalist', yet he lives off the public teat, has no accountability for the lack of real results, and he gets preferential treatment from the government. He would make Karl Marx proud!


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

Muley73 said:


> bull,
> 
> Now I'm confused. Is the RAC and WB not allowing ANYONE come and express a view or opinion. Are they no longer allowing questions? The ability to have a voice is currently there is it not. The masses have every right to show up and make those meetings last days! :shock:
> 
> Ok I get what you are saying, I hope you get what I'm say?


I think I understand your point....but I've been known to be a bit slow at times.

The RAC and WB process was a well intentioned idea when it was put into practice. Unfortunately I believe that it has proven to be a poor conduit for getting public input. You must attend in person and timings are what they are.

The world we live in has been made small by technology. There are LOTS of ways to get peoples opinion without making them show up in person some where.

So if the state won't go out and get everyone's opinion why not have an org do it and then respresent those folks at the RAC and WB meetings? I just don't see a down side to this. If people choose to be apethetic still...they can be. But if people want to have their opinion heard but they can't show up to a RAC meeting because they are putting food on the table for thier family, on vacation, injured, have the flu, baby sitting for thier aunt Nancy, or what ever else prevents people from attending then they will still have a way for their opinions to be heard if they so choose.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

The RAC & BOARD process works just fine!

http://wildlife.utah.gov/dwr/hunting/bo ... ement.html

I've followed opt2 for 6 years now..
When the board passed it in December some hunters have thrown a fit.. :twisted:

BUT THE TRUTH BE KNOWEN,,,,option 2 was passed , and approved by 3 of the 5
RAC committees....

Most of the time the board gos along with RAC recommendations, SO the key here
is to get your RAC to vote your way..  Get it :?: :?: .....Politics.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

I still think the current system leaves the door open to a lot of questionable decisions. I also think the wildlife board should include a DWR biologist and possibly an independant biologist as well. Not having checks and balances will put us in the same position that we are in with the supreme court. An entity that has amassed too much power and has forgotten that they are there to server the constitution and the public.


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

goofy elk said:


> The RAC & BOARD process works just fine!
> 
> http://wildlife.utah.gov/dwr/hunting/bo ... ement.html
> 
> ...


Sorry have to disagree with you on this one. This was a perfect example of why the system is broken. I don't care if all 5 of the RAC's voted for option 2. The majority of hunters were not represented!!!!

My whole point is that the current RAC's are not representing the masses....so responding by saying the RAC's voted in majority for something doesn't make a lot of sense. What's worse is there is no real mechanism or effort in place to get the opinion of the masses.

I'm glad you brought up politics. It will take fire to fight fire. The masses won't just be represented in a new org at the RAC and WB meetings.


----------



## JERRY (Sep 30, 2007)

Voting totals:

Option #1 30 votes

Option #2 18 votes

Option #3 2 votes

You call option #2 what everyone wanted?


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Bull, You say "the system is broken" because the majority doesn't get what it wants?

So what, You think the DWR should run decision making through a public poll?

OR policy and hunting regulations should be CHANGE to what the majority wants?

OR we should set permit numbers to what the general public opinion is??

Hope you can see were this would end up.....


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

goofy elk said:


> Bull, You say "the system is broken" because the majority doesn't get what it wants?
> 
> So what, You think the DWR should run decision making through a public poll?
> 
> ...


You obviously are not able to grasp (Or not wanting to intentionally) the idea of social vs. biological issues. Get real, no one is saying that the majority of hunters should be the consideration with issues that pertain to science.

Honest question; Do you have a learning disability? If that's the case then a bunch of us owe you an apology for being so hard on you.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Treehugnhuntr said:


> Honest question; Do you have a learning disability? If that's the case then a bunch of us owe you an apology for being so hard on you.


**** good question. 8)


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

I've learned how to irritate pro & tree...


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

goofy elk said:


> I've learned how to irritate pro & tree...


Irritated? No. Astounded by your lack of willingness to learn, or admit when you are wrong? Yes.


----------



## luv2fsh&hnt (Sep 22, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> goofy elk said:
> 
> 
> > I've learned how to irritate pro & tree...
> ...


It is really sad what happens to otherwise good people when their frontal lobe is lobotimised. :roll:


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

goofy elk said:


> Bull, You say "the system is broken" because the majority doesn't get what it wants?
> 
> So what, You think the DWR should run decision making through a public poll?
> 
> ...


Tree addressed this but let me ask you this.....if you feel that it's time for tax cuts then don't you vote for candidates in the next election that campaigned for tax cuts? Have you ever signed a petition?

Now if you want something with regards to wildlife what are your options? Pretty much you support a special interest group with your dollars to get what you want. There are no elections...there are no televised debates. No polls, no hanging chads. That sounds like a broken system to me.

Now to answer your questions.

1 - The system is broken because the majority HAS NO VOICE and there is nothing to hold the wildlife board's feet to the fire. What the majority wants should always be heard, considered and become part of the decision making process.

2 - There is no reason to run everything through a poll, but with something like the recent deer changes.....whay not? It was purely social.

3 - It is my opinion that the majority should never manage Utah's big game. The majority should decide though how it wants to use ITS resource. If the debate is opportunity vs. trophy and there is no benefit to the resource either way....then yes majority's wishes should be honored.

Don't create a double standard with your argument...because you are close to saying that the majority is clueless and management should be left to professionals....because if you are saying that then you have no business ignoring Utahs biologists.

Pick a side....do you believe people should be heard?

OR do you feel that professionals should save us from ourselves?

Because when you look at what is happening there is nothing but special interests and dollars ruling our wildlife. It's not about majority or professionals.


----------

