# GSL wetlands threat today



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

As of yesterday, the FFSL (State Lands Dept) had their phragmites control funding removed from their budget request to the legislature. Apparently they are going back today to try and get some of the funds back in their budget. This is a huge blow to the wetlands that are being destroyed by phragmites, and to duck hunters in general. Hopefully, they will get some money back in their budget to help protect our GSL wetlands.

On a related note, it is rumored that Representative Noel will be asking for funds from the FFSL Great Salt Lake fund (the money from brine shrimpers, minerals, lake-bed leases, etc) to pay for a lobbyist to continue the fight against wolf de-listing and also to fight against Sage Grouse de-listing. Apparently, he will be asking for this money today. It is tough to get real accurate info on on this particular topic because they play it close to the vest. If it happens, then that means that monies intended for GSL programs would be used for anti-wolf and anti-sage grouse programs.
I'll fill you in later as I get more info...
R


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

Thanks for the update r. 
Phragmite spraying is important, but at some point all that dead stuff is going to have to be burned. It really is a jungle out there. I think in most cases the dead phragmites are more difficult to navigate through than the living stuff. Gasoline and road flares are cheap!


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

Yeah, pray for a lightning strike! The FFSL phragmites funds cover a variety of things like equipment for getting around in the phrag (track vehicles), research on control methods, spraying, phrag smashing, etc. If the legislature takes this money away, we go back to the way it has been...no controls, and let nature take its course. We all know how that worked out. The hope is that by killing the phrag, smashing it down, and letting it decompose while allowing sunlight to hit the ground again, it may allow some new growth to take hold. If nothing else, the new phrag shoots are a tasty snack for cattle and the smashed phrag lets them get around to munch on it. We will see if it helps...
R


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

OK, so I just got some stuff confirmed:
1. Yes, they got the phragmites money removed from their budget, but it has to go to the Natural Resources appropriations committee for a vote.
2. Yes, Rep Noel is seeking to raid the *Great Salt Lake restricted account* to help fund lobbying efforts to fight wolf, and sage grouse delisting.

Folks, both of these items are a direct blow to waterfolwers in Utah. It shows howlittle regard the legislature has toward our natural resources (wetlands, waterfowl, etc). 
I will see if I can get the names of the Natural Resources Appropriations Committee members posted up and hopefully we can send a few emails to them asking that the money for phragmites efforts be restored to the FFSL budget.

I hope you can step up and send an email...our duck hunting heritage needs you!
R


----------



## Idratherbehunting (Jul 17, 2013)

Is this Michael E. Noel? From Kanab?


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Get the list up and I'll give them all an email.


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

Yep, that's the same Mike Noel! Here is a copy of an email I just sent out to some of my friends (with legislator's emails), and hopefully some of us (waterfowlers) can help out.
thanks, 
R

Hello ladies and gentlemen,
You are on this email because you have shown that you support our Great Salt Lake wetlands. And phragmites is a MAJOR concern. Well, I just found out that the State Lands Division (they have jurisdiction over the GSL wetlands and marshes) got their phragmites control monies yanked from their budget by our thrifty government fiscal analysts. They are going to go back to the Natural Resources Appropriation Committee to try and get it back but we need some emails sent to the committee members to urge them to keep money in the FFSL budget for phragmites control.
On a related note, I just found out that Representative Mike Noel is going to propose raiding the Great Salt Lake FFS restricted account for money to keep funding the fight against the wolf and sage grouse. The problem is that this money is for GSL problems and projects...not for wolf and sage grouse lobbyists.
Anyway, here is a list of the committee members. Hopefully you can take a minute and send an email (and ask your friends) urging the appropriations committee to keep funding the FFSL phragmites control money and to keep greedy legislators from raiding the GSL restricted account for their pet projects that have nothing to do with the lake or its wetlands.
Thanks, R. Jefre Hicks

Natural Resources Appropriation Committee Members:

Representatives:
Mike McKell [email protected]
Kay Christofferson [email protected]
Brian Greene [email protected]
Stephen Handy [email protected]
Tim Hawkes [email protected]
Ken Ivory [email protected]
Justin Miller [email protected]
Mike Noel [email protected]
Lee Perry [email protected]
Marc Roberts [email protected]

Senators:
David Hinkins [email protected]
Jim Dabakis [email protected]
Margaret Dayton [email protected]
Scott Jenkins [email protected]
Peter Knudson [email protected]
Ralph Okerlund [email protected]
Kevin Van Tassell [email protected]
Scott Chew [email protected]
Susan Duckworth [email protected]


----------



## utahgolf (Sep 8, 2007)

just looking at the list, you'd think senator duckworth would be sympathetic for the fight for phrag removal.


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

She may very well be sympathetic to GSL wetlands. She will get to have input on whether they give the phragmites funding back or not. She needs to hear from us so she can have the opportunity to represent us in this issue. 
Also, she has the name for it!
R

P.S. Here is a copy of my short email to the committee members. Please feel free to use it as a guide if you want.

*To: Members of the Natural Resources Appropriations Committee*
* It has come to my attention that the phragmites control funding has been taken out of the FFSL budget request. This funding is desperately needed to help save what's left of our Great Salt Lake wetlands. The FFSL has made some great strides recently in fighting back against this invasive species. *
*I've also heard that some legislators are looking to raid the Great Salt Lake restricted account to help fund other projects (wolf and sage grouse lobbying) that have nothing to do with the Great Salt Lake and it's related threats.*
*The Great Salt Lake contributes approx 1.3 Billion dollars to the state economy each year and protecting this public treasure is of paramount concern. *

*PLEASE consider keeping the phragmites control funds with the FFSL, and protect the GSL restricted account from greedy raids. As a hunter and an outdoor recreationist, this is crucially important to me and to the people of this great state.*
*Thanks for your consideration,*


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

I sent mine


----------



## stuckduck (Jan 31, 2008)

Done!! Thanks R

Peter Knudson was at one time a duck hunter.. Was a owner of the old Davis club.. you think he might give a dang!!


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

It would probably be nice if some ducks unlimited and delta waterfowl chapters would weigh in as well.


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

Yes sir, we will soon see who actually steps up on this issue that directly affects our LOCAL wetlands and LOCAL duck hunters...
R


----------



## Finnegan (Sep 7, 2007)

We know who Noel works for.
We know who's after wolf lobby money.
We know who's after sage grouse lobby money.

Anybody see the elephant?


----------



## A.Oakley28 (Jun 25, 2013)

Sent. Appreciate the quick email format, that was nice  Thanks R


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

Noel has always acted against the best interests of hunters. fishermen, our wild places and wild things. But he does have an "R" behind his name, so he wouldn't screw us, right? Thank the voters in Kanab who keep sending him to the Capitol.


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

Paddler, do you honestly think it would make a difference?


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

Longgun said:


> Paddler, do you honestly think it would make a difference?


Yes.


----------



## The Naturalist (Oct 13, 2007)

Is it any wonder that a lot of the names on the legislators list are also co-sponsors of the public lands bill?
Good luck, but I'm afraid there are a lot of deaf ears on that committee that only hear the sound of money in their pockets.


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

The Naturalist said:


> Is it any wonder that a lot of the names on the legislators list are also co-sponsors of the public lands bill?
> Good luck, but I'm afraid there are a lot of deaf ears on that committee that only hear the sound of money in their pockets.


What are the party affiliations of the land bill sponsors? I know all the Democrats see that it's a stupid idea.

I know most of the guys on here are staunch Republicans. I even had a lengthy discussion with one very involved poster here about party affiliation. He said he preferred to remain a Republican and work within the party for change. That was a few years ago, and nothing has changed since. Ain't gonna work. Ever. It's amazing to me that people continue to elect "representatives" who don't represent hunters and fishermen, and who actively try to destroy our resources.

It goes beyond hunting and fishing, though. Look at the debate over the governor's Healthy Utah plan. Somewhere between 68% and 88% of all Utahn's are in favor of it, depending on wording. Yet the legislature resists, and one of the main opponents happens to sell insurance. He just happens to be a Republican, but I'm sure that's a mere coincidence. This would all be funny if peoples' health and lives weren't at stake, but of course they are.


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

May I remind the waterfowlers reading this thread that *we have until this Thursday (Feb 12th)* to keep getting people to send an email to these folks on the appropriations committee? It only takes a minute or two, and regardless of your party affiliation, this is the marsh's health we are talking about here, this is the *very basic component* to what we all love. There is a VERY good chance of them allowing the phragmites funding to be put back into the budget...if people tell them it is important. If we, as duck/goose hunters don't care enough to send an email, why should some legislator care enough to allow funding for wetland protection?
R

Natural Resources Appropriation Committee Members:

Representatives:
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]

Senators:
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]


----------



## utahgolf (Sep 8, 2007)

further proof that the state can't handle the lands or care to manage them. I sent one to that snake Ivory. He is bad for Utah and is out for his own financial gain.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

utahgolf said:


> further proof that the state can't handle the lands or care to manage them. I sent one to that snake Ivory. He is bad for Utah and is out for his own financial gain.


Make sure you send a copy or some sort to most or all of the rest of that list to get support to bring the money back where it should go.

And I agree with you, I've also sent Mr. Ivory a few emails.


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

Here is an exerpt from an alert I got this morning from a legislative watchdog group:
"The Fiscal Analyst for the NRAE Appropriations Committee recommended new funding for the Bear River Conservation Plan, Bear Lake access and law enforcement, Jordan River bank stabilization, navigational hazards removal, and catastrophic wildfire reduction efforts. However, he did not prioritize a number of budget requests from the Governor and the Division of Forestry, Fire and State Lands, including money for marina dredging on the Great Salt Lake ($1 m.) and Utah Lake ($500,000), Phragmites removal on the GSL $300,000), Spatial Data for the Wetlands on the GSL ($240,000), $12,000 for salinity sampling relating to the GSL RR Causeway breach, and $50,000 to finish a study of the effectiveness of phragmites grazing. _Please consider contacting NRAE members to urge funding these priorities._
On Tuesday, 2/10, NRAE Appropriations will hear over two dozen requests from legislators for new projects funding, many of which could reduce funding for FFSL programs. Since the Sovereign Lands Restricted Account is funded by revenues from economic activities on the Great Salt Lake, we believe those revenues should be used to address the issues and concerns directly related to the GSL and other state lands first. "


----------



## king eider (Aug 20, 2009)

R,

I sent in an email to all those listed. Also working on getting Mr. Noel out on a airboat ride. I will keep you updated.


Paddler, do us a favor and keep your partisan crap our of this debate. the R or D makes no difference here. Go ride that pony somewhere else.


----------



## A.Oakley28 (Jun 25, 2013)

Here are the two emails I have received in reply so far:

Michael McKell <[email protected]>

The Division of Forestry, Fire, and State Lands has in their base budget $400,000 ongoing for phragmites treatments. There is an additional request from the division for $300,000 that has not recommended by the Fiscal Analyst's Office at this point. This means if the legislature approves the base budget for the Division of Forestry, Fire, and State Lands which is has done at this point, the division budget for phragmites treatment will be exactly the same as last year. I am not aware of any proposal to take funding from the divisions base budget request.

Thank you for your concerns expressed in your email. I hope this clarifies the issue.

Mike McKell

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ralph Okerlund <[email protected]>

I want to begin by thanking you for contacting me. As a Senator I strive to represent the people and that is only possible if I understand what you, the people, are thinking.

The Great Salt Lake is a pivotal element of our state. I will keep your email in mind as these pieces of legislation move forward. I think it is wise to weigh the risks and benefits of legislation, especially regarding the future of Utah. The budget is always a heated topic, but know I am working to make sure money is appropriated to the best and most efficient locations.

Senator Okerlund
District 24


----------



## king eider (Aug 20, 2009)

R,
I received the same replay as Oakley posted from Michael McKell.


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

FYI--The FFSL has $400 k in their budget for STATEWIDE invasive species control...phrag is an invasive species, so it is under this umbrella. *We all know how that has worked out.* The FFSL has been using additional fund requests specifically for GSL phragmites control, research, spraying, phrag smashing, cattle research, etc. This is the dinero that got axed from their budget request. This is also the only real money they would have to fight phrag on the Great Salt Lake marshes each year. That's why we need to ask the appropriations committee to put the phrag money back in the budget...so the State Lands folks can fight phrag where we need it most...along the GSL marshes. 
The Great Salt Lake marshes have value to us as hunters, birders, and other recreationists. The state has a mandatory obligation to protect the public trust associated with managing our public land. They have failed miserably in the past, and they have recently begun stepping up to protect our public wetlands...but this is a big step backward from that public trust obligation.
R
P.S. sorry for the rant.
P.S.S. BIG thanks to those of you that care enough to send an email!


----------



## wileywapati (Sep 9, 2007)

Public trust in Utah = Cronyism. 

Here's some facts and figures. 

In the next decade SFW will get over 1000 conservation permits to auction and profit from. 

In the next decade SFW will split 2000 convention tags with MDF to pay for their expo and profit from. 

Many of you will rush to the Western Hunting and Conservation Expo, give them your cash which in turn will be donated to certain politicians campaigns. 

These certain politicians will in turn award SFW and Big Game Forever
Millions of dollars in the next decade. 

Don't even get me off on the tangent of managing our herds to benefit Conservation tag sales. 

The point of this rant is that now the scourge of greed that is big game hunting in Utah is taking a bite out of our fragile ecosystem and what we all love. 

How long will this be acceptable and how long will we continue to cut our own throats by electing the fools and allowing them to appoint and pay their crony's??


----------



## HeberHunter (Nov 13, 2014)

I just sent out an email to all of them and so did my wife. I had a return that said that Rep. Noel's email address was incorrect. This is what is posted on his page as the address: [email protected]


----------



## The Naturalist (Oct 13, 2007)

king eider said:


> R,
> 
> I sent in an email to all those listed. Also working on getting Mr. Noel out on a airboat ride. I will keep you updated.
> 
> ...


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

Mike Noel [email protected]

... is the adress i recieved my reply from. He wanted me to call and discuss the "Natural Resource Budget", but when i informed him id rather keep the discussion electronic/email's so i can refer back to it later for clarification, he vanished.

funny, ****roaches vanish when the lights get turned on also.


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

paddler213 said:


> Yes.


I knew that was coming... ;-)

As like with past issues, we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

IMO, its about the money.


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

king eider said:


> R,
> 
> I sent in an email to all those listed. Also working on getting Mr. Noel out on a airboat ride. I will keep you updated.
> 
> Paddler, do us a favor and keep your partisan crap our of this debate. the R or D makes no difference here. Go ride that pony somewhere else.


Just review their records, then get back to me. It really is all about the "R". Those who say otherwise are kidding themselves so they can keep voting against their best interests. It's called cognitive dissonance. Google it.


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)




----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

Longgun, do you remember HB141 in 2010, the one that restricted public access to streams? Written, sponsored by Republicans, passed along mostly party lines with Republicans in favor and Democrats opposed, then signed by our Republican Governor. 

If you think my post is off topic, you need to think again. Virtually everything that comes out of our legislature that is anti-conservation, and thus against the best interests of Utah's hunters and fishermen, is the work of Republicans. You can blame in on money in politics if you like, but nothing absolves our legislature of taking responsibility for their actions. Unless we hold them responsible it will be business as usual. Remember, Einstein told us that insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Keep electing these guys, just don't complain when they do things you don't like.


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

FM? I'm not in this argument.


----------



## hamernhonkers (Sep 28, 2007)

Fowlmouth said:


> FM? I'm not in this argument.


Guess Paddler has you on the brain FM.........................LOL.


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

Fowlmouth said:


> FM? I'm not in this argument.


Sorry, Foulmouth, brain fart. Fixed it.


----------



## massmanute (Apr 23, 2012)

king eider said:


> ...Paddler, do us a favor and keep your partisan crap our of this debate. the R or D makes no difference here. Go ride that pony somewhere else.


Ever notice that when someone requests to keep partisanship out of a discussion it is almost always in response to a post they disagree with and almost never in response to a post they agree with?


----------



## king eider (Aug 20, 2009)

massmanute said:


> Ever notice that when someone requests to keep partisanship out of a discussion it is almost always in response to a post they disagree with and almost never in response to a post they agree with?


You want a political debate I'm all for it. But rather than bitching there are those of us who are trying to act. More than cutting and pasting a letter some of us are going further. I'm trying to get some of these guys out on a fan boat ride and do the walk, not just the bitching. Many got involved with the GSL mineral expansion and shut that down. Took a few folks out on the fan boat, got involved more than just wanting to have a debate about which pair of dirty underwear you want to put on, the (R)red one or the (D)blue one. As I see it, politics is all about the money. Trying to do my home work on this. The guy from Kanab is an avid outdoors man as I'm told. Just not from up here, so it's possible he doesn't view the GSL in the same light as those of us who are up this way. Just a thought....


----------



## The Naturalist (Oct 13, 2007)

king eider said:


> You want a political debate I'm all for it. But rather than bitching there are those of us who are trying to act. More than cutting and pasting a letter some of us are going further. I'm trying to get some of these guys out on a fan boat ride and do the walk, not just the bitching. Many got involved with the GSL mineral expansion and shut that down. Took a few folks out on the fan boat, got involved more than just wanting to have a debate about which pair of dirty underwear you want to put on, the (R)ed one or the (B)lue one. As I see it, politics is all about the money. Trying to do my home work on this. The guy from Kanab is an avid outdoors man as I'm told. Just not from up here, so it's possible he doesn't view the GSL in the same light as those of us who are up this way. Just a thought....


 Actions speak louder than words....good job on taking an active role!


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

paddler213 said:


> Longgun, do you remember HB141 in 2010, the one that restricted public access to streams? Written, sponsored by Republicans, passed along mostly party lines with Republicans in favor and Democrats opposed, then signed by our Republican Governor.
> 
> If you think my post is off topic, you need to think again. Virtually everything that comes out of our legislature that is anti-conservation, and thus against the best interests of Utah's hunters and fishermen, is the work of Republicans. You can blame in on money in politics if you like, but nothing absolves our legislature of taking responsibility for their actions. Unless we hold them responsible it will be business as usual. Remember, Einstein told us that insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Keep electing these guys, just don't complain when they do things you don't like.


I totally agree with what you are getting at, just when this state has such a long history of gathering monies for certain projects, then stealing those monies for other projects, that issue isnt going to be fixed anytime soon by just swapping a few D's for a few R's. Its a money issue, cut and dry. Always has been, throw the D & R out the window, always will be.


----------



## massmanute (Apr 23, 2012)

It seems impossible to completely remove politics from a political issue, but anyway, here's a quote from the 2012 national platform of one of the major political parties.

"Congress should reconsider whether parts of the federal government’s enormous landholdings and control of water in the West could be better used for ranching, mining, or forestry through private ownership"

This isn't exactly on the issue of phragmite control, but it is closely related to it.

It's always a balancing act who to vote for, but perhaps if one is an avid outdoorsman it would be good to consider the possibility of not voting for candidates from that particular political party.


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

Well, these folks on the Natural Resources Appropriations Committee have the opportunity (tomorrow Feb 12th) to do the right thing and restore the GSL phragmites funding to the FFSL budget request. We will see if they give a rat's patoot about protecting our public lands for uses other than mineral extraction. I certainly hope they will do the right thing, because the GSL has been ignored for the last 100 years or so...and it is time to step up.

I'm not sure how the whole Facebook network really works, but this seems to be a good time to reach out to our friends and ask for help via social media. I will supply some short sample letters if anyone wants a little help with that. Just say the word...
R


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

Longgun said:


> I totally agree with what you are getting at, just when this state has such a long history of gathering monies for certain projects, then stealing those monies for other projects, that issue isnt going to be fixed anytime soon by just swapping a few D's for a few R's. Its a money issue, cut and dry. Always has been, throw the D & R out the window, always will be.


I disagree. Democrats are pro conservation, Republicans want to extract. They don't want to listen to us, they are in the pockets of oil and gas and others who want to profit from public lands. Those public lands are ours. Period.

If you want to fight all the time interminable battles to preserve our natural resources from greed, just keep electing Republicans. If you want to protect our resources, vote for people who will act in our behalf. Simple as that.



massmanute said:


> It seems impossible to completely remove politics from a political issue, but anyway, here's a quote from the 2012 national platform of one of the major political parties.
> 
> "Congress should reconsider whether parts of the federal government's enormous landholdings and control of water in the West could be better used for ranching, mining, or forestry through private ownership"
> 
> ...


Agreed.



king eider said:


> You want a political debate I'm all for it. But rather than bitching there are those of us who are trying to act. More than cutting and pasting a letter some of us are going further. I'm trying to get some of these guys out on a fan boat ride and do the walk, not just the bitching. Many got involved with the GSL mineral expansion and shut that down. Took a few folks out on the fan boat, got involved more than just wanting to have a debate about which pair of dirty underwear you want to put on, the (R)red one or the (D)blue one. As I see it, politics is all about the money. Trying to do my home work on this. The guy from Kanab is an avid outdoors man as I'm told. Just not from up here, so it's possible he doesn't view the GSL in the same light as those of us who are up this way. Just a thought....


I really doubt Noel is a true outdoorsman. He has a long history of acting against outdoormen like you and I. Sneaky, too. Given that, why should we have to always be on guard and have to worry about what shenanigans he's going to pull next? Why should we have to try to convince him to protect our resources? Why not just give him his walking papers??? While I applaud your efforts, it seems counterproductive to keep electing people we know will screw us every chance they get.

Again, I'm hearing cognitive dissonance here. How long will outdoorsmen keep ignoring the elephant in the room?


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

paddler213 said:


> I disagree. Some Democrats are pro conservation, not all... Some Republicans want to extract. Again, not all... They don't want to listen to us, they are in the pockets of oil and gas and others _cattlemen/ranchers_ who want to profit both monitarily and or personally from public lands. Those public lands are ours. Period.
> 
> If you want to fight all the time interminable battles to preserve our natural resources from greed, just keep electing Republicans. Bulls*it... If you want to protect our resources, vote for people yes, people... who will act in our behalf. Simple as that. Well, not really but ok ill go with it...
> 
> ...


Cognitive dissonance? Bull*hit... as a nation, we as a public are being fleeced, party affiliation be dammed... i could give a rats rosey red a** about party. Walk the talk.

A start is in finding the hypocrites/wolves in sheep's clothing, calling them out on the carpet for what their actions -or- ideas identify them for what they are or could be, _*thiefs*_, then getting dealing with them accordingly. The twist is when the $$$ is so _attached_ it swings the votes. Boil it back to its roots, it will always be about the money.

I had a very brief email conversation with Noel, where he asked for me to call to discuss the Nat Resource Budget. I politely refused to call, and requested any info be exchanged strictly by email for later review if needed.

... surprise, i havent heard from him since.


----------



## utahgolf (Sep 8, 2007)

There's a reason we don't want the Republicans in this state to get their hands on federal land. Yet people will still vote the same way. There's also a reason why many people in Utah fall for ponzi schemes. Easily manipulated.


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

Longgun, if you voted Republican, you're part of the problems we face as outdoorsmen. Just look at the record. Whose mantra is "Drill, Baby, Drill"? It's all about the "R". Attitudes like yours ensure it will never change. Ever.


----------



## king eider (Aug 20, 2009)

paddler213 said:


> Longgun, if you voted Republican, you're part of the problems we face as outdoorsmen. Just look at the record. Whose mantra is "Drill, Baby, Drill"? It's all about the "R". Attitudes like yours ensure it will never change. Ever.


And Democrats are pro hunting, pro gun etc?? Arguing over dirty underwear....
Both parties sold their soul long ago. Can I get an Amen?!


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

king eider said:


> And Democrats are pro hunting, pro gun etc?? Arguing over dirty underwear....
> Both parties sold their soul long ago. Can I get an Amen?!


King, what I said to Longgun applies to you as well. If you voted for a Republican, look in the mirror. You'll see somebody who contributes to the Republican assault on our resources. Simple as pie!


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

Yes, King Eider...I'll give you a big AMEN!!
There is always hope though. It doesn't have to always be this way. We'll see tomorrow if they vote to keep GSL Phragmites funding in the State Lands budget or if they determine that the same old course of action on the GSL wetlands is sufficient. Cross your fingers and hope for them to care about the health of our public lands.
R


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

paddler213 said:


> Longgun, if you voted Republican, you're part of the problems we face as outdoorsmen. Just look at the record. Whose mantra is "Drill, Baby, Drill"? It's all about the "R". Attitudes like yours ensure it will never change. Ever.


... hyperbole! all things are not black and white, blue or red.


----------



## massmanute (Apr 23, 2012)

Longgun said:


> ... hyperbole! all things are not black and white, blue or red.


True, but can you name many Republicans in the State Legislature or Governor's office who are are truly on the side of most outdoorsman on most issues?


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

I don't know how it will turn out today, but I do feel that the biggest obstacle to getting our wetlands protected is our elected officials. It is sad that it has to be political, but these are sovereign lands owned by the public and the people that the public elect are the ones to determine if our public lands are worth protecting. So far, they have not shown a willingness to take meaningful action, and we have lost most of the GSL wetlands to phrag. 
We have to take an active role in letting our elected officials know that waterfowling and our GSL wetlands are important to us. If they don't hear from us (the people that actually use these lands), then why should they care? As a waterfowler, please look in the mirror...if *you* didn't send an email asking to protect *your* wetlands from phragmites, then *you* are the problem here, not just a small problem, but a big problem. 
R


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

rjefre said:


> I don't know how it will turn out today, but I do feel that the biggest obstacle to getting our wetlands protected is our elected officials. It is sad that it has to be political, but these are sovereign lands owned by the public and the people that the public elect are the ones to determine if our public lands are worth protecting. So far, they have not shown a willingness to take meaningful action, and we have lost most of the GSL wetlands to phrag.
> We have to take an active role in letting our elected officials know that waterfowling and our GSL wetlands are important to us. If they don't hear from us (the people that actually use these lands), then why should they care? As a waterfowler, please look in the mirror...if *you* didn't send an email asking to protect *your* wetlands from phragmites, then *you* are the problem here, not just a small problem, but a big problem.
> R


My representatives are both Democrats, Jani Iwamoto in the Senate and Patrice Arent in the House. I have spoken with them in person and had their campaign signs in my yard. I don't have to beg them to conserve our resources.

R, the Republicans haven't listened to us. Rather, they have demonstrated a clear pattern of behavior over many, many years. The only question I have is why any outdoorsman can be or vote for a Republican.


----------



## Dunkem (May 8, 2012)

Please do not make posts about politics. RULES GENTELMEN,READ THEM. take it to the P.M. This is starting to go downhill.Forum Rules


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

So is there an update from what was decided?


----------



## massmanute (Apr 23, 2012)

Dunkem said:


> Please do not make posts about politics. RULES GENTELMEN,READ THEM. take it to the P.M. This is starting to go downhill.Forum Rules


I understand. However, the thread is political in nature from first to last, since its topic deals with legislative action, so it might be best to just shut it down and pretend like it isn't of interest to the outdoor community.


----------



## Dunkem (May 8, 2012)

massmanute said:


> I understand. However, the thread is political in nature from first to last, since its topic deals with legislative action, so it might be best to just shut it down and pretend like it isn't of interest to the outdoor community.


Thanks for your thoughts,Ive read all posts and there are a few posters who just want to wave the R and D flag.Just tone it down. Thanks.


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

Ok so here is the update...and it isn't entirely bad news:
The good news is that all of our emails and calls REALLY made an impact. Although they did NOT vote to fund the GSL phragmites control, there were a sizeable number of senators and a few legislators that got the message, and they are now working on adding in some extra money in a different fund that the State Lands folks will be able to access for the same purpose. Duck hunters that sent emails were a BIG part of this change in attitude. We will not know until later this month how it all will work out because this is all inside the workings of the sausage factory.
The bad news is that it looks like they will still get to raid the RESTRICTED account to help fund the fight to seize public lands , fight against wolves and against sage grouse. That may be a fight we will have to focus on again next year when they try and raid the Great Salt Lake restricted account again.
For WATERFOWLERS, this showed them that we care about our wetlands, and about our duck hunting areas. BIG THANKS to all that cared enough to actually do something for our local marshes!

P.S. I didn't intend for this topic to get so political in nature, but the sad truth is that to save our duck hunting areas, sometimes we have to get involved with the workings of the legislature that control these lands...and I look at it as a duck hunting issue that needs to be worked on from every angle.
R


----------



## Dunkem (May 8, 2012)

rjefre said:


> Ok so here is the update...and it isn't entirely bad news:
> The good news is that all of our emails and calls REALLY made an impact. Although they did NOT vote to fund the GSL phragmites control, there were a sizeable number of senators and a few legislators that got the message, and they are now working on adding in some extra money in a different fund that the State Lands folks will be able to access for the same purpose. Duck hunters that sent emails were a BIG part of this change in attitude. We will not know until later this month how it all will work out because this is all inside the workings of the sausage factory.
> The bad news is that it looks like they will still get to raid the RESTRICTED account to help fund the fight to seize public lands , fight against wolves and against sage grouse. That may be a fight we will have to focus on again next year when they try and raid the Great Salt Lake restricted account again.
> For WATERFOWLERS, this showed them that we care about our wetlands, and about our duck hunting areas. BIG THANKS to all that cared enough to actually do something for our local marshes!
> ...


Thanks for the update.I understand the politics involved,lets just keep it civil like this update.Appreciate the information rjefre.


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

I believe down the road the GSL will get a lot of attention. We are now at record low water level, the snowfall this year is lacking, and I'm guessing the lake will drop even lower this summer. People will pay attention to the GSL when they start getting affected by it. Just wait for the winds to start moving toxic dust from the dry lake bed into cities, neighborhoods and communities. I'm sure there will be enough methylmercury, selenium and arsenic to get peoples attention.


----------



## Pumpgunner (Jan 12, 2010)

That's good news that they heard our voices-frankly I'm pretty concerned about the future of waterfowling in the next decade or so. The phrag control and the proposed taking of water from the Bear River will be a big issue in the coming years, and if we're going to be able to fight it we need to put any partisan BS aside and fight together as waterfowlers.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

It's too bad they didn't put the money back, is there still some money to fight the phragmites?


----------



## tallbuck (Apr 30, 2009)

I sent mine. Hopefully more people will step up and keep this issue on the front burner!


----------



## massmanute (Apr 23, 2012)

It is good that there has been some progress made to (indirectly) fund phragmite control. However, it seems clear that the State is demonstrating an unstable approach to funding and managing even this relatively modest public resource.

In addition, the fact that they are responding to pressure from duck hunters can be seen as a positive development, except for the fact that this responsiveness is a two-edged sword. They would probably be just as likely to respond to pressure from the other side, especially if the other side were better funded and/or more persistent.

I hope that we can all see that there are larger lessons to be drawn from these events.


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

So, they'll raid the restricted account to fund the futile fight to seize public lands? Nice. That's land currently used by all outdoorsmen. State control would mean more development, extraction, etc, to the detriment of hunters and fishermen. The good news is that according to all the legal experts, it will never happen. The bad news is they're wasting tax dollars in the attempt. And the fight against protecting the sage grouse is purely to allow extraction industries to destroy wildlife habitat. And this is all supposed to be good news? 

Sorry but this is 100% political. Our Republican dominated legislature is pro development, pro extraction, and against conservation and outdoorsmen. Period. Policy matters, who represents us matters, your vote matters. If you like groveling every year in hopes that our legislature won't screw us, or maybe even throw us a bone once in a while, by all means keep electing them. If you're tired of their misconduct, maybe we should elect people who will act in our behalf.


----------



## Dunkem (May 8, 2012)

What the hell, have at it guys,Ill let someone else clean up this mess.Thanks paddler for your tremendous effort to keep the R and D out.-O,-


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

paddler213 said:


> So, they'll raid the restricted account to fund the futile fight to seize public lands? Nice. That's land currently used by all outdoorsmen. State control would mean more development, extraction, etc, to the detriment of hunters and fishermen. The good news is that according to all the legal experts, it will never happen. The bad news is they're wasting tax dollars in the attempt. And the fight against protecting the sage grouse is purely to allow extraction industries to destroy wildlife habitat. And this is all supposed to be good news?
> 
> Sorry but this is 100% political. Our Republican dominated legislature is pro development, pro extraction, and against conservation and outdoorsmen. Period. Policy matters, who represents us matters, your vote matters. If you like groveling every year in hopes that our legislature won't screw us, or maybe even throw us a bone once in a while, by all means keep electing them. If you're tired of their misconduct, maybe we should elect people who will act in our behalf.


I couldn't agree with you more. I don't think the public land thing will happen but I'll make my opinion known and it's a hell of a lot of money going to waste for something that won't happen. Obviously the state is looking to get there greedy hands on developing and destroying that land, why else would you want the land? What exactly is the BLM and forest service doing wrong? Not destroying it for greed? I support the feds. As for the safe grouse if it doesn't show you rebreed of the state idk what could convince you. You want to stop the listing of it, stop with the bull**** lobbying and put the money into protecting important areas for the bird showing the state actually cares . But they don't, they want to lobby so they don't have to so anything productive for the sage grouse just keep it unlisted so they can destroy the places it inhabits. Look at morgan county, in lew of a listing, is really being considered to develop an important Lek, that ought to show them how the state can manage the bird. Start throwing that money to landowners to put conservation easements on there land to protect it . It's all frustrating, they take money from something productive that's actually physically accomplishig something and throw it somewhere it's doing absolutely nothing but being thrown into a gas fueled fire. Good job Utah, our resources should be in great shape for our children and grandchildren.


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

Dunkem said:


> What the hell, have at it guys,Ill let someone else clean up this mess.Thanks paddler for your tremendous effort to keep the R and D out.-O,-


Dunkem, attempted to keep the "R" and "D" out of this discussion, when the "R"s continuously act against our interests, is unrealistic. It is in fact the "R"s who are raiding the RESTRICTED fund, which should be used for phragmites control, in order to do the bidding of the oil and gas industry, fight for state control of federal lands, etc. The "D"s think the public lands battle is stupid. These issues affect us directly. Why do people resist holding our representatives accountable? Not doing so ensures more of the same.


----------



## Dunkem (May 8, 2012)

Like I said Im done with this political crap.Thanks to those that tried.


----------



## Helldiver (Sep 12, 2007)

Having been "trolling" this forum for many years, I have yet to get involved with posting and sharing pictures with friends and others on here. Just not my style to internet brag, or get involved in debates/discussions behind a computer. I usually watch for friends postings and generally have enjoyed many of the stories and memories shared on this forum. However, this topic is near and dear to my heart and I couldn't help but chime in. 

Big-ups to Rjefre for getting the word out to those that care, and even bigger-ups to those that took some time to contact their reps. Several individuals within this post are completely right, this is a political problem, and Paddler is completely right. Even though, over several years, I don't think I could say I've agreed with Paddler much. I get sick and tired of hearing sportsman bitch and complain about the governments dealings when it comes to our natural resources, yet the same SOB's or others with the same mindset continue to get elected. Some just need to pull their head out and realize the root of the problem. (Insert well known quote of the definition of insanity here).
What's re-assuring is that many of the members of this forum, were willing to get their voice heard, despite party affiliations. 

On another note, some have brought up the debate about the public land grab. When thing I don't hear many people talking about, and I am surprised it has not come up on this forum somewhere, is the fact the ALL of the States wetlands are funded by Pittman-Robertson (PR) money; a federal tax on gun and ammo sales. Has anyone read the new monuments as you enter Ogden Bay. Ogden Bay was the first PR funded wetland in the nation. All of the "State" managed wetlands have a yearly budget that is funded by 75% PR (federal money), including 75% of the biologists salary that manage these wetlands. What happens to our management of these wetlands if something as absurd as the public land grab makes it through?????

These issues are not just waterfowl hunter issues. I hope some of us who have friends that are non-consumptive users of this wonderful resource, are letting them and their favorite advocate groups, know about these attacks and problems so they too can contact reps and voice their opinions. Over the years I've heard many bitch about the "elitists", "tree-huggers", "naturalists", "bird-watchers" etc., but many of these people share our views about protecting the resources we love. Also, many of them are well connected, well educated, with high incomes that could be used as more ammo against those who want to destroy our wetlands. 

Sorry for the dissertation, but as you can I am very passionate about these topics. I've done enough ranting to last me a lifetime. Again, I commend those who spoke up and let their reps know how they feel, no matter what affiliation you have.


----------



## wileywapati (Sep 9, 2007)

Amen!!


----------

