# Western Hunting and Conservation Expo-Let's see your letter and who you sent them to!



## MWScott72 (May 23, 2011)

In an effort to keep this issue front and center, I thought it might be nice for all of us to post letters or emails that we have sent to our local, state, and federal representatives w/r/t to the obvious issues connected to the Western Hunting and Conservation Expo. My second thought - other than keeping this front and center - is that based on the replies here, we might see a real gauge as to how much actual outrage is out there...or are we just complacent to let the status quo continue?

I will say this...my sheep hunt story from last fall went on for 14 pages with over 14K hits. If this page doesn't exceed that, I have got to question if we as a community are really willing to do what it takes to fix the issue.

...And I promise, this is not intended to be a post padding thread. I am really curious as to the actual outrage and frustration out there and what we as individuals and groups are willing to do about it. 

Lastly, thanks to Hawkeye, 1-Eye (what's with the "eyes"?), and others who have done much to motivate and inspire on this issue. Well done fellas!!


----------



## MWScott72 (May 23, 2011)

Here are those that I sent emails to:

Governor Herbert, State Senator Fillmore, State Representative Kim Coleman, U.S. Congresswoman Mia Love, U.S. Senators Hatch and Lee, Salt Lake City Mayor Biskupski, and...our friends over at the DWR and Wildlife Board:

[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]

Here is a copy of the letter that I sent (maybe by posting our individual letters, it will make it easier for others to pick and choose information to send out in their own emails??)

Dear XXXX:

If you have not seen this story yet on the Western Hunting and Conservation Expo and the alleged corruption with respect to Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife's (SFW) running of the expo, I encourage you to watch. The link is:

http://kutv.com/news/local/allegations-of-corruption-surround-utah-hungtin-and-conservation-expo

To make my comments brief, sportsmen in this state and across the West as well as the general public are being taken advantage of by the corruption and collusion that exist between SFW and the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources (DWR). How is it that SFW was awarded the expo contract for the next 5 years (with an optional 5-year extension) when their bid was obviously inferior to that put forth by the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation (RMEF)? To be clear, I am not a member of either organization. First there was a highly irregular RFP process put in place AFTER RMEF submitted its bid for the expo (prior to the SFW bid being received), then RMEF's bid to give back 100% of the proceeds from tag application fees PLUS 50% of all expo revenue over the term of the contract was somehow trumped by SFW's bid to only return the required minimum (30%) of tag application fees and absolutely no funding from the expo itself. To top it off, SFW refuses to be transparent as to how the other 70% of the application fees are used. When pressed on the issue, both SFW and DWR deflect the questions, with the typical "what we should really be talking about is how successful the expo was. That's the real story". Do they think that we are really that ignorant?

It is true the expo has generated millions of dollars for wildlife conservation. There are thousands of sportsmen in this state that believe that number could and should be much higher - especially where the funds are generated by a public resource (wildlife). Our question is "what exactly is SFW doing with their remaining 70% of the application fees, and how much additional revenue is the State of Utah and the city of Salt Lake City missing out on due to obvious corruption between SFW and DWR (many of those at the DWR and on the Wildlife Board are past and present SFW members...hmmm).

Please use your resources to press for public transparency between the DWR and SFW on this issue. To date there is very little - rather there is obfuscation, delay, obstruction, and plain arrogance when SFW and DWR are pressed for answers.

The expo was a favorite show of mine in the past; however; because of the underhanded dealings between DRW and SFW, I will no longer attend and will encourage those within my circle of influence to follow suit. I don't like this outcome, but something needs to be done, and rest assured there are thousands of sportsmen across this state who feel the same way.

Thank you for your time and consideration of this matter. I look forward to hearing your response.


----------



## quakeycrazy (Sep 18, 2007)

I like your thought, we have to keep up on this in order to change it. My feeling is many hunters in the state don't care because they want to be able to apply for an extra opportunity, even if it means that the corruption continues.. Hopefully that changes because it won't be long before the closest our kids and grandkids get to hunting is watching old Primos videos..


----------



## hazmat (Apr 23, 2009)

quakeycrazy said:


> I like your thought, we have to keep up on this in order to change it. My feeling is many hunters in the state don't care because they want to be able to apply for an extra opportunity, even if it means that the corruption continues.. Hopefully that changes because it won't be long before the closest our kids and grandkids get to hunting is watching old Primos videos..


Quaker crazy the idea behind this is not to shut down the hunt expo. All though some might want the 200 tags back in the general pool.

The idea is to make people and organizations be accountable for the money that is raised from our public resource.

The expo could be an absolute great thing for conservation in the state of utah. The problem is the people running it .sfw is abusing it and making poor decisions on the money they receive from it.

Even if sfw keeps the expo they need to show where they are spending the money from it. How many projects has sfw done in the state as of late. Not many at all.

The other problem is the dwr they had a chance to have 100% of the money raised put back on the ground for conservation but SFW's political strangle on everything hunting in utah shut that down.

Does the expo need to go away no. Does the public have the right to know what happens to the millions of dollars that is raised from their public resourses yes.

Sfw does not care what you or I think they feel they are above the law. They feel they run the state of Utah as far as wildlife that is not a good thing for the general public this has gone on for to long. I encourage more people to tell more people to get involved. Otherwise hunting for our kids will not be close to what it is today


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

WOW, hazmat,

Spot on....:!:...


----------



## TheHunted (Feb 22, 2016)

I have yet to write my letter, I appreciate all you guys posting who to write to and what you wrote about. I have felt that I haven't been informed enough about this issue to write an accurate letter. After seeing the news report and looking into the issue a little deeper I feel I need to throw my hat in the ring and do what I can to get involved. I do feel like this should be more of a fight against the corruption in the DWR then about the transparency of SFW. 
My questions: 
Why was the RFP period extended?
What in RMEF's bid led the DWR to feel that RMEF couldn't protect personal information? (wasn't this one reason why the DWR chose SFW over RMEF?)
Why didn't the DWR take into account the transparency of the conservation organizations? (Here are our public resources, what are you doing with the money from our public resources?)
Have the bids been made public? I feel they should be made public since we are giving public assets to the winning bidder.


----------



## Igottabigone (Oct 4, 2007)

Gramma requests have been filed to get all of the information related to the expo bid. Both with the DWR and with the Division of Purchasing.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Igottabigone said:


> Gramma requests have been filed to get all of the information related to the expo bid. Both with the DWR and with the Division of Purchasing.


Oh man,
This will be INTERESTING...:!:....

Wouldn't be surprised to see some 'Utah Gov' employee's shaking in their boots..;-)


----------



## hazmat (Apr 23, 2009)

goofy elk said:


> WOW, hazmat,
> 
> Spot on....:!:...


Thanks goof

And to the hunted you don't have to be detailed at every point

A simple brief letter from Many concerned sportsman goes along way.

Something as simple as a taxpayer I want accountability on who and where this money from my public resourses goes to works to

Obviously the more facts you have the better but don't be timid on sending something plain and to the point either. The more sportsman they hear from the better.


----------



## Idratherbehunting (Jul 17, 2013)

Below is the email I sent to both my state representatives back in January:

My name is _______, and I live within your district. Recently I have been seeing some reports about some things in the state that are quite troubling to me, that if true I believe has cost the state millions of dollars. I am reading some pretty concerning things regarding the recent renewal of the Western Hunting and Conservation Expo contract being awarded to Sportsman For Fish and Wildlife rather than to the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation. 

If the details I am hearing are accurate, the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation was prepared to move their annual convention to Salt Lake City from Las Vegas. This alone would have resulted in millions of additional dollars in tourism revenue for the state, as well as continued to highlight the incredible outdoor recreation resources that we have in the state. This is just one of the points where the proposal from RMEF was superior to the SFW proposal. 

In addition, as part of the Western Hunting Expo, incredible hunting opportunities are raffled off in the name of conservation. The concept of the raffle makes complete sense to me. Take highly coveted, once in a lifetime hunt, allow it to be raffled off to generate revenue for the conservation and benefit of all wildlife. The part that is concerning is that Sportsman For Fish and Wildlife currently only is required to spend 30% of the proceeds from the tags to conservation. So they get to pocket 70% of the revenue from very limited and highly coveted state resources. In the RMEF proposal, they would have donated 100% of the proceeds from these raffles. 

In addition, there is significant questions surrounding the entire way that the proposals were received and reviewed. It is being reported that the DWR didn't follow their own rules in the process. 

The entire way that this contract was awarded has been highly suspicious, and appears to have been significantly slanted in SFW favor the entire time, despite it costing the State of Utah millions of dollars. I want to know how this is justified. Why are individuals or organizations within the state getting enriched off of limited state resources, at the expense of the benefit of the State, when there are clearly better alternatives on the table?

Is this something either you can look into, or can bring attention to the correct people? I believe that the state of Utah and the sportsman within the state deserves better than this type of treatment

Sincerely,

One of my representatives, Mike Schultz, replied and we ended up speaking on the phone for about 30 minutes. He assured me he had been monitoring the situation, and has looked into it. I have a limited knowledge about the entire situation, but I think it ended up being a bad deal all the way around.


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

I've emailed Governor Herbert and my state reps. Also thanked KUTV's Chris Miller for the report.


----------



## surf n' turf (Oct 20, 2008)

I emailed everyone at the state and federal level. I want traction with this news report. Emailed Chris Miller and asked him to please follow up on this as there is so much more to it.


----------



## BigT (Mar 11, 2011)

If the state legislation has time to audit the University of Utah athletic department because they cancelled a basketball game, this seems to me like a much bigger fish to fry! 

Sitting through the on-line field day the last couple days with my son... The discussions of public resources kept coming up along with the DWR. All I could think of was this story and it took everything I had not to bring up SFW and the corruption that is the expo right now. 

Letter will be on its way shortly!


----------



## MWScott72 (May 23, 2011)

surf n' turf said:


> I emailed everyone at the state and federal level. I want traction with this news report. Emailed Chris Miller and asked him to please follow up on this as there is so much more to it.


Great idea to email Chris directly. What's his email??


----------



## wileywapati (Sep 9, 2007)

One of several

Ladies and Gentlemen, I’m writing you today to ask for your help. This is an issue
you are partially responsible for. Wildlife management, funding and the rule making 
process in Utah has become an absolute joke. The system is so dominated by special 
interests and lackadaisical leadership that it does not represent the Utah Sportsman or Woman
any longer.

You continue to swallow the sales pitch of a few special interest groups that have you all convinced
that they speak for sportsmen or the majority of sportsmen. Truth is a gentlemen like Don Peay does not 
speak for me or the majority of sportsmen in this state, yet he has managed to gerrymander the process
to the point that the system is nothing more than his hand picked appointments to key positions. You
along with Governor Herbert are responsible for this mess. Im asking you to do something about it.

Recently there has been some contention with the way the public permits were awarded for the 
Western Hunting and Conservation Expo. I would also ask you as a group, or one of you with the guts
to get to the bottom of this issue to please do so. The perception of wrongdoing is prevalent among the outdoor community. Warranted or not, I make no accusations against any person or group, I simply ask you to look at this through an official Legislative audit or other means.

Fortunately, this has brought many sportsmen in to a state of political awareness like never before.
We are watching exactly who is trying to steal public lands, watching who restricts stream access
to Utah’s Hunters and anglers and watching as critical funding for wildlife is diverted to other lesser causes. The days of the past are gone, the little letter before or after your name is no longer a guarantee.

Thanks for your time.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

eVoice: News from Sportsmen for Fish & Wildlife
March 2, 2016
SFW Reports $6M+ Conservation Successes of 10th Anniversary Event


Sportsmen for Fish & Wildlife released information on the successes of the 2016 Western Hunting and Conservation Expo (WHCE) event, which exceed previous records for attendance and donations raised for Utah wildlife conservation topping 40,000 attendees and $6 million in wildlife conservation donations.

The success of the WHCE makes it the largest non-profit fundraiser in the state. Sportsmen for Fish & Wildlife (SFW) and the Mule Deer Foundation (MDF) partnered in presenting the 10th Annual WHCE event held last month, a gathering that is also becoming one of the most important annual events for the protection and enhancement Utah’s diverse wildlife and habitats.



One of the primary attractions to the WHCE is 200 special Utah hunting permits available to the public for a $5 application fee each. The $5 drawing alone raised more than $1 million for Utah conservation this year. One dollar and fifty-cents of each $5 application fee is retained for the Utah Division of Wildlife and its wildlife conservation programs, and $3.50 evenly split between SFW and MDF, all of which is used to bolster wildlife conservation throughout the state of Utah benefiting multiple species. This commitment to utilize 100% of the application fee revenue to support Utah Conservation Initiatives included in the contract that SFW recently signed with the State to distribute expo permits from 2017 to 2021. We will annually disclose how these funds are utilized to benefit Utah wildlife.

Through evening auctions of Utah conservation tags, an additional $2.5 million was raised to support the Utah wildlife conservation efforts of SFW, MDF and the State of Utah. In the Friday night auction, the Antelope Island mule deer tag sold for a record-breaking $410,000.

“We applaud Utah lawmakers and our state wildlife agency for their vision in making these conservation permits and the two hundred permits available to our expo,” said SFW President Jon Larson. “Without that support, this level of contribution from the hunting public simply would not be available to Utah’s wildlife conservation programs.”


SFW and MDF use their portion of the $5 application revenue to fund a wide variety of meaningful wildlife conservation projects in Utah. For example, SFW has invested nearly $300,000 of the application revenues in the past few years on youth outreach and pheasant augmentation programs. The group has also funded over $280,000 of a groundbreaking, multi-year study in partnership with Brigham Young University involving the capture, transplant and radio collaring of Utah mule deer along southern Utah’s Parowan Front. An ongoing $125,000 research study to determine causes and solutions to Utah’s dip in moose populations has also been funded using SFW’s portion of the $5 application revenues, as has a two-year water protection and storage program that is enabling wintering deer to survive on the trophy east Paunsaugunt unit of Southern Utah. Additionally, SFW has funded over 30 ongoing annual habitat improvement projects that enhance critical habitat benefiting mule deer, elk, bighorn sheep and other species in Utah. One of the most high-profile of all Utah wildlife conservation projects partially funded through the application revenues is the much needed money and volunteer labor in capturing, radio-collaring and transporting mule deer captured in Bountiful and the Parowan Front and releasing them at various locations in the Uintah Basin, northern and southern Utah. SFW accepts important responsibilities in these projects and believes in transparency with its $5 application expenditures. Details of these and other projects as well as SFW’s 990 tax audit reports are available online.

Both SFW and MDF use portions of the $5 application fee revenue in a collaborative and leveraged approach to implement real solutions to conservation challenges in the state of Utah. These funds are important to wildlife conservation efforts in the state of Utah enabling Utah’s unique conservation model to function effectively. The importance of this leveraged approach is measurable in the significant support the WHCE partners have provided to the State of Utah since the 200 Expo tags were first offered in 2007.

The WHCE partners have raised more money for conservation in Utah than any other hunting conservation groups combined. The WHCE partners account for over 86% of all of the direct conservation funding raised by the top five groups participating in Utah’s Conservation Permit Program. Since 2007 the partners have raised over $22 million in direct funding to the state of Utah, which represents the bulk of private funding for conservation programs in the state and nearly 10 times that of the next closest competitor.

“Money raised by the WHCE partners through the $5 application revenue is often leveraged or matched as high as 10-1 in current state programs,” Larson added. “This approach has led to millions of dollars in on-the-ground habitat improvement projects since the expo began yielding critical benefits to the health and survival of Utah wildlife.”

Significant projects and programs funded by SFW and MDF’s portions of the $5 application revenues include but are not limited to the following:
The Utah Mule Deer Recovery Act
Transplanting and translocation of deer, moose, elk, bighorn, bison, turkeys, antelope, mountain goats, fish, and other wildlife species
Advancing funding for programs to improve quality wildlife management programs in the state
Highway underpasses for migrating deer, elk and wild sheep
Purchasing horse trailers and equipment for transplants and habitat projects.
A contract for the state’s 200 expo tags was recently awarded to SFW for use over the next five years in its annual WHCE events. As the WHCE continues to expand, SFW and MDF foresee expanded and even more significant results for wildlife conservation in Utah through the $5 application fee revenues. The conservation groups already work closely with their more than 31 chapters throughout the state in prioritizing and planning conservation projects and how monies will be invested on regional and local levels. Beginning in 2016-2017, the groups are initiating an even more intensely collaborative planning program with five or six major categories of conservation project categories that will enable a greater level of partnering between conservation organizations and state and federal wildlife agencies that will benefit Utah wildlife for the next generation. Reporting targeted expenditures to sportsmen and tracking results will also become more vigorous.

The WHCE is perhaps the most unique gathering of hunters from all socio-economic and diverse backgrounds in North America. It is also the fastest growing expo event for western hunters and represents the single greatest opportunity to raise funds for the benefit of Utah’s diverse wildlife and conservation programs.

Next year’s Western Hunting and Conservation Expo will be held again at the Salt Palace Convention Center in Salt Lake City February 16–19, 2017.

# # #



215 North Redwood Road, #1 • North Salt Lake, UT 84054


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Oh my lord....:shock:

This is WAAAAAY better than watching TV.....op2:


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

A few notes from the release:

Attendance was record breaking, but they are using the same exact figure "over 40,000" that they used last year. Was it really record breaking, or just pretty close to last year?

They are very good at painting things in a positive light. It's easy to point to yourself as doing the lion's share of the "conservation fundraising" when you receive the lion's share of the public resource made available for said fundraising(i.e. expo and auction tags).

I don't doubt in the least that there are a lot of SFW faithful that do an awful lot of good here in the state for wildlife. It is obvious from the details in the release and the things that were pointed out that SFW and the DWR are feeling some serious heat on the issues being discussed. 

The details and the accountability being discussed in the release seem to be a step in the right direction. It seems to me that this is the DWRs attempt to tone down the pressure they are currently facing while pointing to the remedies being somewhat implemented for SFW as RMEF had proposed.

Interested to see how this plays out. In the end, I hope that the wildlife and sportsmen of Utah really do see the benefit of this controversy. However, I still don't believe that the DWR's handling of this issue should be left untouched. The relationship between the DWR and SFW as currently constituted leaves the two groups much too intertwined.

I certainly think there is a place for SFW in Utah conservation efforts. That doesn't mean they need to be at the head of every wildlife decision that is made in Utah in one way or another.


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

Anyone else receive a verbatim quote of Michael Canning's response to the issue from the Governor's office?

_Dear Kevin:

Thank you for your email to the Office of the Governor regarding the Division of Wildlife Resources (DWR). I have been asked to respond on behalf of the Governor.

Our office appreciates hearing from constituents and your comments and opinion on this issue have been noted. As much misinformation has circulated, I wanted to share a statement from Michael Canning, Assistant Director at DWR. I hope the below details remove any doubt you may have had regarding the expo selection process, as transparency and objectivity are paramount.

"The purpose of the wildlife expo permits is to raise revenue for conservation, but also to bring a large wildlife exposition to Utah for all of the economic benefits such an exposition would provide to the state. Whenever the state desires to procure goods or services, we follow the process described in state procurement code. In this case, state procurement code required that the state issue a formal "Request for Proposal", which not only asks that proposals be submitted, but it also clearly defines how those proposals will be scored. The RFP for the expo permit distributor clearly stated that proposals would be scored on: 1) the viability of the business plan and potential to put on a high quality expo (40% of total score), 2) the ability to organize and conduct a secure and fair permit drawing (20%), 3) the commitment of the organization to use revenue generated for wildlife conservation in Utah (30%), and 4) the historical contribution and previous performance of the organization in Utah (10%). All of this information was made available to potential applicants before proposals were written.

After proposals were received, an independent four-person committee (comprised of members from the Department of Information Technology Services, the Department of Natural Resources, the Governor's Office, and the Division of Wildlife Resources) reviewed the proposals and scored them based on the pre-established criteria. The independent committee unanimously agreed that the proposal submitted by Sportsman for Fish and Wildlife (SFW) was the superior proposal, because it better addressed the criteria in the RFP, and consequently had the highest total score. The SFW proposal scored particularly well because it contained a detailed expo business and marketing plan that included data to support the claims in the proposal, and it also provided a detailed data security plan to protect the personal information of the state's customers, as well as the credit card information of people that attend the expo. The other proposal provided a much less detailed business plan, and its data security plan provided little to no detail. The lack of detail in the data security plan was particularly troubling, as a data breach could cost the state millions of dollars. As I'm sure you can understand, we could not put the social security numbers and credit card numbers of our customers at risk due to the lack of a detailed data security plan. If you would like more information about the committee's decision, please read the justification statement for their selection, which is located at: http://wildlife.utah.gov/pdf/2015-12-18_justification_statement.pdf.

As many have noted, the SFW proposal did not directly return the most money to the state on a percentage basis (and as you can tell by the justification statement, that component of the SFW proposal was scored accordingly). However, it was the only proposal that provided enough detail to give the state certainty that a high-quality expo would occur and that customer data could be secured. Because of these concerns with the losing proposal and the lack of detail it provided, there is no way to say with any certainty that the total amount of money directly provided to the state would have been higher if the losing proposal was selected. In fact, the losing proposal may have cost the state money if the expo was not economically viable or if there had been data security issues. Although both proposals had their strong points, the state purchasing process selected the best proposal in a fair and unbiased manner. Finally, it is important to note that the contract recently signed between the state and SFW to distribute expo permits clearly states that all of the money raised from expo permit application fees will be used specifically to "support conservation initiatives in Utah". No money has been lost, and all proceeds will benefit Utah wildlife conservation."

Thank you for taking time to contact us regarding this matter. If you have additional questions, please feel free to contact the Governor's Office again.

Sincerely,

Austin Cox
Constituent Services_

Is anyone else bothered by the "It's in the contract for SFW now, so let's just move past the way the RFP was handled." bit ? If that was an important enough criteria for the DWR to make SFW include it even though it was clearly not part of their proposal, doesn't that strongly suggest that maybe these proposals truly weren't considered equally?

For example, if SFW is allowed to remedy this issue in the contract, why was the same luxury not afforded to RMEF in regards to clarifying or expounding on the plan for data security(pointed to again in the response here)?


----------



## hazmat (Apr 23, 2009)

So all of that rambling from sfw about how big and bad they are but no accountability or numbers to prove where they have blown the millions upon millions of dollars. And exact projects they have done what a faint attempt by them


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

hazmat said:


> So all of that rambling from sfw about how big and bad they are but no accountability or numbers to prove where they have blown the millions upon millions of dollars. And exact projects they have done what a faint attempt by them


Pheasants for everyone man!


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

SFW 2013 Tax Numbers (http://www.sfw.net/data/SFW-990-2013.pdf)

4a Expense (2,916,439.)

PROMOTE THE PROTECTION AND ENHANCEMENT OF WILDLIFE HABITAT, ASSIST IN PROVIDING QUALITY WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS, EDUCATING THE PUBLIC ABOUT THE ROLE HUNTERS PLAY IN WILDLIFE CONSERVATION, AND PERPETUATING THE FAMILY TRADITION OF HUNTING AND FISHING

Doesn't sound like a lot of conservation going on. 

I'm not an accountant, but here are some numbers of notable expenses from SFW in 2013.

Other $317,284

Big Game Hunts and Permits $1,138,797

Landowner Tags $540,750

Big Game Habitat Improvement $184,588

Mule Deer Study $106,431

Other $283, 132

I don't know what the two others are about, but there is a half of a million going somewhere.

SFW's membership only generated $104,729, so they are essentially living on the Utah and Federal Government - which is our tax monies.

I couldn't find a newer one than 2013, but it might be out there.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

hazmat said:


> Quaker crazy the idea behind this is not to shut down the hunt expo. All though some might want the 200 tags back in the general pool.
> 
> The idea is to make people and organizations be accountable for the money that is raised from our public resource.
> 
> ...


Well said. 
Maybe someone could come up with an electronic petition to sign.


----------



## MWScott72 (May 23, 2011)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> SFW 2013 Tax Numbers (http://www.sfw.net/data/SFW-990-2013.pdf)
> 
> 4a Expense (2,916,439.)
> 
> ...


Muscle-
There is ~1.7 million in big game and land owner fees. Are these expenses in procuring tags to auction later? I'm having trouble following. 

~300K for Mule Deer study and habitat improvement - OK

~600K "Other"? Not Ok unless we know what "Other" is.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

MWScott72 said:


> Muscle-
> There is ~1.7 million in big game and land owner fees. Are these expenses in procuring tags to auction later? I'm having trouble following.
> 
> ~300K for Mule Deer study and habitat improvement - OK
> ...


It's just listed as an expense.

Auction tags are normally given and the results are divided afterwards. It might go to the full curl permits, which would still be short of the 1.1 million unless they are generous in the estimation in price.

Landowner tags usually have to be bought beforehand, but if they spent 500k on landowner tags that is ludicrous. Especially, since they spent more on that than the did with Big Game Conservation.

For a million dollars (auction & expo tags) with 30% going the DWR, 30% going to MDF, 30% going to SFW, and 10% going to fees, is plausible. If they made over a million, then it is pure dog chit.

The other can include small game habitat, transplants, and coyote bounties or could be money they chose not to disclose.

When you figure in that SFW spend almost 3 million in 2013 and only 300k went to big game conservation, I think that is the only story that you need to hear.

But they can tell us again how successful the expo is and how much it helps Utah and how the money goes back into the wildlife.

I guess I view their numbers differently than they do.


----------



## The Naturalist (Oct 13, 2007)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> It's just listed as an expense.
> 
> Landowner tags usually have to be bought beforehand, but if they spent 500k on landowner tags that is ludicrous. Especially, since they spent more on that than the did with Big Game Conservation.
> 
> .


It would be interesting to see who these "landowners" are.... if some of them may be the SFW leadership.


----------



## MWScott72 (May 23, 2011)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> It's just listed as an expense.
> 
> Auction tags are normally given and the results are divided afterwards. It might go to the full curl permits, which would still be short of the 1.1 million unless they are generous in the estimation in price.
> 
> ...


Thanks Muscle. These are the numbers that need to be made public and need to find their way into the hands of Chris Miller or other reporters/journalists! If people see that out of a budget of 3 million, only ~300K went for actual conservation, they would throw a fit!!

SFW could always clarify the other expenses too, and if they were legit, great. But they need to clarify it. For an organization that depends heavily on the 200 public expo tag app fees for their funding, it's a no brainer.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

Some other numbers. I really feel bad for CPA's at this point.

Other 600k. 

200k in Deer Transplants
5k Payroll Tax
400k in Permits payable.
Other notable expenses.

888k was for 11 guided hunting tours in the Northwest Territories in Canada.

The 888k is inexcusable for any non profit. That's almost a million that isn't going to Utah. Some of these may be full curl hunts, but I am skeptical because even a stone sheep hunt is only valued at 45-55k - this is 88k a person. With an organization with 10 members taking 11 to the NW territories is odd.

Contractor 261k was for Don Peay Consulting.

I don't know why you need to contract a consultant in an organization with 10 people that makes more than everyone in the organization.

Expo 2 million income and a 1.9 million expense. They are getting hosed by the SLCC, I'm sure they can find a place cheaper than this.

If the 2 million is correct for 2011 the minimum amount they have to spend on conservation in 2013 would be 600k.

Did they?

200k Deer Transplant

300k Habitat and Mule Deer Study

283k Other

It looks like they did depending on the amount of the other.

It still doesn't excuse the fact that they spent more money outside of Utah and the US than in Utah.

They are definitely abusing the Non-Profit tax exemption which many non profits do.


----------



## hatch000 (Aug 4, 2011)

I originally only sent an email to our state representatives. 
I got quite a few responses from them. One of them forwarded my email to the DWR which was the beginning of several emails sent back and forth between the Assistant Director Mike Canning and myself. But there were several state reps and other DWR members who were tagged to our emails. 

Although I am sure that my emails didn't help Mr Canning understand where frustrated hunters, like myself, are coming from, it was nice to share my thoughts with them. I am still frustrated and will be until this is resolved properly. But I believe that I was sincere,honest and respectful toward the DWR.

I think the purpose of the EXPO FAQ is to address those who are not aware of all the details with hopes of closing the blinds on the real issues at hand in hopes of turning a blind eye.

I still have huge concerns on the recent contract that was signed in January between the DWR and conservation organization SFW. It did not resolve any of the issues. It simply changed the wording. Nothing more.

I urge everyone to voice their concern.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Thanks for everyone's input, I have yet to write anyone on the issue, just offered "support" in other areas regarding this issue.

In the bigger picture of the focus on SFW and accountability, we should all remember how SFW came to be in the first place, and what they said they were _going_ to do about it. SFW was formed in response to massive wildlife declines 20 years ago. Don was really good at stomping his feet about it, and pointing at the DWR. SFW was going to fix the the problems of wildlife management in the DWR, and declining wildlife numbers. That was the impetus and stated goal in the formation of SFW.

In response I would normally say "show me the money", but we have already seen all of that. The bigger accountability issue here is "Show me the wildlife!", specifically the deer and deer tags to support the claim of increased deer. Under the SDFWR of the last 20 years we have seen the largest decline in deer and other wildlife since the turn of century, when massive declines rallied the actual heros and founders of the conservation movement. I know some like to dispute this, but there is one simple metric to prove all of this, and that is the decline of hunters, that is intrinsically tied to the loss of deer and deer tags.

SFW has succeeded in raising more money, and monetizing wildlife at a level never before seen. And yet in all of that success, they have absolutely failed at what they claimed to have set out to do. How is that? I can come to only two conclusions: They have no business and no idea about how to accomplish that original goal, or they simply profit far too greatly from these declines and tag shortages to be motivated to do anything about it.

Either way it is bad for hunters and wildlife all the way around.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

Very well said, LT!


----------



## hazmat (Apr 23, 2009)

Can anyone confirm who sfw uses to hold their draw.

There are people saying that it is one single person that resides in bountiful utah.

If this is true this is even more disturbing how easy would it be for a sole person or a small few persons to rig the draw wich also has been rumored and or to sell my info out. 

Can anyone shed some light on who handles SFW's drawing process


----------

