MDF - the end or just the begining?

T

TFinalshot

Guest
LAST EDITED ON Mar-13-06 AT 09:19AM (MST)[p]http://www.monstermuleys.info/dcforum/User_files/44159af053d9790c.jpg

Mr. Abbott, thank you for your reply in the post from Sheepeater. I made a new post so as not to continue to add to the derailment of that post.

I know you're a busy person and taking time to reply to questions on MM is ?extra? work for you. I appreciate the numbers. I do not think you need to post all the projects and their costs, in fact, I believe you already did that in a previous post, and it wont help me with my dilemma, you see I'm not questioning your desire but I am questioning your means to an end.

Before I get into my diatribe, let me say that I don't think that because a person is a good guy or works real, real hard, or has a good personality, that that makes them necessarily correct. I admire hard workers, but that alone does not make them any more correct than a person who sits and paints pictures.

In summary, I believe MT Miller said it as well as anyone could. Nevertheless, I'll take a moment to put some meat on these bones. Besides, I hope Littlefoot is reading this because I know how much he loves my long-winded rants. . . LOL. . . If you don't read on, that's okay, just think about what MT Miller asked us.

I believe there are many reasons to disagree with the tactics of the MDF as it pertains to collecting fees to kill trophy mule deer. First, I don't believe that efficiency is always the best game in town, especially where killing public wildlife is concerned. I believe the people of the West expect to hunt and fish in their own ?backyards,? some literally, without competing with other?s who because they have a lot of money, and ?paid? for the rights, or a lot of power, get to jump to the head of the line or crowd-out the people who spend there lives there, who grow up there, and who give the place its culture. The clashes alone in the field between the exclusive tag holders and the common person are ridiculous. I don't want my son any part of that.

Second, I don't support the user pay system, where the access to the resources is based completely on wealth, i.e., the more you are able to spend, the better, and more consistent access you will have to our public goods. It smells like Abromoff to me, but in the very least, it leads to corruption, and increases the number of people willing to break the law to participate. The more value you place on a deer head, the more likely you are to have people who will cheat the system just to make an easy payday. The MDF is in the forefront of re defining the monetary value of a mule deer head and thereby creating new demands for an animal once prized more for the memory of the hunt than the antlers on it head. Poaching is now becoming more of a big business than ever, so much so that organized crime now is involved (http://www.environmentallawyers.com...Wildlife-Conservationists-Must-Challenge.html).

Third, I believe high bidder fee systems for our public resources are a complete disgrace to the hard working people of this Nation. I believe that this Nation and the 50 states have an obligation to mange our public land and its resources for the public good. I believe that allowing individuals access to public resource based completely on their ability to pay is exactly what the framers of our constitution were trying to guard against. I think that by allowing individuals to pay more for a public resource like a deer, and thereby advancing their status based on the financial means over the rest of the population, sets a very disturbing precedence.

Instead, we should require that our governments properly manage our deer herds in this country so that every unit that can produce a good mule deer buck will, if that's what you want. No more of this put in for the prime unit and sit on the couch and wait for 25 years or more to draw the tag, that's a terrible way to manage our deer. However, the MDF has set that standards and helped to eliminate those alternatives that would bolster herds everywhere not just in the ?prime? units. Governments have learned that they do not have to consider their public responsibly to properly manage deer herds because the MDF will raise "new-money," to pay for it. The agencies now know where their habitat budget comes from, and if you don't think that leads to corruption the MDF is even more of a problem than I imagined in the first place.

I'm very surprised that conservationist, or people who call themselves such, believe that conservation also means the people with the most money get the most benefits. I'm no fan of segregating one-another based on financial means. I also do not believe we should allow our representatives a ?pass? by funding the management of a public resource through private dollars. There are many ways to pay for the proper management of deer, but also by encouraging highest bidder type budgeting, not only are we starting down the slippery slope, but also we are segregating classes of people, while prostituting the publics? resources.

Fourth, once we start slipping down this slope, I wonder where it will end. If 40 tags are worth $500k how much more are people willing to pay? How much is enough? Other states are catching on to this scheme as a way to raise money outside the formal legislative process that includes a public debatable of the budget by our legislature, even before they find more equitable means of raising money. We should ask our elected officials to do a better job before we just inequitably sell off the rights to public resources to the highest bidder. Just look around, this system of selling tags to the highest bidder started very small with usually one big high dollar tag. Then it went to two or three and then to multiple species. Now, every state has a number of tags and the highest bidder can buy all the species. There are literally hundreds of tags in Utah alone!

I have, from the very early days of this process, believed it was the wrong direction and would lead to the type of hunting opportunities that the pilgrims fled Europe to avoid. And by your asking for yet MORE Utah tags because in your own words, the resources are underutilized, helps makes my case very well.

Are you in the Pombo camp too? If not than what's wrong with selling, to the highest bidder, our deer country? Then the state could get out of the business altogether. That would make more sense, especially if they are as inefficient as you make the out to be in your previous posts. Why not turn it all over the private and have the shooter pay the landowner for access, the landowner may even be able to grow two or three 300-inch mule deer. Come to think of it, you may have a much better chance at getting one of those deer for you may be invited to kill one, at no charge, if you play your cards right from now on.

Finally, what happens if someone buys all the tags and lights them on fire? I know of at least one organization that has talked about making that happen. Are you and the MDF ready to start spending more time defending and supporting hunting rights than it is mule deer conservation. Our hunting heritage is headed down this road thanks to organizations that lose the forest while mesmerized by a single tree. It won't be long now until non-hunters buy those deer tags and that's when everyone loses. If all you're interested in is more money, than you also cannot decided whose money buys the tags. Is it worth 500K? That's not much money to Hanoi Jane and the like. Mr. Abbot, if you only answer one more question please make it this one, where does the prostitution of our wildlife end, and can it be stopped?

The funs over, it's time to get back to work. Good luck my friend.
 
I have been trying to say that for a year now...beautifully put. Your pictures are amazing and your opinion is spot-on. Wealth tags benefit the wealthy a great deal while slightly maybe helping the common man when it comes to hunting opportunities...but the whole concept is destroying public hunting in the Western public land states.
We ain't crying wolf people...this is currently happening and now is the best time to grab ahold of this demon and kill it. It will not be easier in 10 years when Utah is selling 2500 tags to the highest bidder. Now!

-RPinenut
 
TF,
Very well put and well-worded post. I have many of the same sentiments myself and have written about such. I think we all WANT to support the MDF (I still give them my money) but I think a lot of their members have legitimate concerns about the direction MDF is going, how it's getting there, and what it is we really want. I do believe that MDF is doing good things and trying hard, but I do not like the way they are raising some of their money and segregating the rich from the poor. This is not a case of the Haves vs. the Have Nots. This is about what we want our heritage to be. We left England for this reason, and I hate to see us heading back there. I hope that MDF will consider these types of things in their planning. If we price the common man out of the sport, we have lost our base support, our heritage, and our rights. I guess then, the big money tag holders can solely support MDF - maybe it could be a club. Money in hunting is not often a good thing. It compromises our ethics, our agendas, and our good will. We need to keep hunting affordable, for our kids and our common man. Some of MDF's tactics do not reflect that currently.
 
TF, very well said. I am in total agreement with what you are saying. It drives me crazy to see these wealthy bozos buying up all the premium tags. Most of these people could care less about our wildlife or their habitat. All they want is the biggest and best trophy on their wall, and to be able to brag to all their "associates."
 
RE: MDF - the end or just the beginning?

TF, you make some very good arguments. I would like to respectfully disagree on a few items however.
First, our ancestors did not leave their European roots for increased hunting opportunities.
Our ancestors came here for financial opportunity & freedom from oppression(political/religious)
Second, if you despise segregation based on financial means, go give socialism a try.
Third, the honorable thing for Tony to do, may be to volunteer all his time & not take a salary because of his love for wildlife,(try explaining that one to his wife)in reality wildlife organizations need to generate considerable cash in order to flourish, all the good intentions & idealism might pay the bills for about a month, MDF had to learn this lesson the hard way by getting spanked by the other organizations who had this figured out early on, remember their old magazine ?
Lastly, I would like to agree with you on the point of too many tags diminishing their overall value, an example of this is Tiburon Island Desert Bighorn permits, 4 years ago 2 permits raised 400 grand, last year 4 tags generated less money. somewhere a limit must be established on these permits where that balance lies I do not know.
 
Some good points TF, but my question is what your personally doing about it? Are you writing legislators, holding meetings, or what? I mean it is easy to sit on a soap box on a message board and voice your opinions but whole different one to act upon your beliefs. Also what personally if the MDF is failing are you doing to better mule deer habitat, hunter opportunity, predator control ect.... I dont think that any conservation organization is perfect, but change begins with action and if you dont agree with the MDFs action and direction why dont you get more closely involved gain popular support if your opinions are popular and try and change the MDF for the better. I personally look at the MDF as a platform to better mule deer and believe that over time, we can fix and make an organization like this better. But it takes action and not words. My other question obviously the tags are a huge source of funding for the MDF, what do you propose to the MDF to make up that source of funding, I think that is your first step and I dont think their is an easy answer. Im not meaning to personally bash you here I am just trying to gain insight and ideas going into this thing. Jamie
hunterrunningfrombearlgclr5ju.gif
 
RE: MDF - the end or just the beginning?

"Mr. Abbot, if you only answer one more question please make it this one, where does the prostitution of our wildlife end, and can it be stopped"?

If taking 5% of the permits that the conservation groups help build is considered prostitution, then I am a pimp.

That facts show that there is more opportunity today because of the auction tags then there would of been without them. Utah's sheep herd is the classic example. And now you are seeing the benefit for Goats, Elk and Turkey.

These "prostitution" dollars are the very dollars that transplanted all those sheep and turkey's and goats. These dollars are the same dollars that have done millions of dollars in habitat improvment on public land that otherwise would not of got done. These dollars have put water in places that are critical to the survival of many species.

It is documented that these dollars have created more permits then we would of had otherwise. The dwr will support this comment. The public benefits as much if not more then the rich guy. If you guys want to understand the program then call me and I will explain it to you. If you would rather just voice your opinion of your limited knowledge then you will never really understand the program.

Do not continue to judge this book by its cover.

Tony
 
RE: MDF - the end or just the beginning?

I agree with BFE that there is a balance and I too don't know exactly where that is. But I think Utah has gone over the balance.
And I would love to see the Anti's spend there money on these tags. Think about it, they'd be giving a lot of money to a hunting organizations that could otherwise be spent attacking hunting in a more effective manner. And there'd be more trophies surviving for us common folks.
 
RE: MDF - the end or just the beginning?

Face it, our wildlife is now on the auction block. They do it in the name of Conservation, but what it really is a pool of premium tags available only to a select few. The good ol boy network is alive and well.

There is a way to raise 2x the amount those auction tags do, but it would take away the sure thing tags that they crave.

They could charge $50 per tag NONREFUNDABLE IF YOU DON'T DRAW, and still raise the same amount of money and still keep the system fair for 99% of the people. There will be a few still that cannot afford to part with the $50,but it sure beats 99% of the people not being able to even bid on a tag.
 
Wow! Well written and thought out I agree and letters like this are one of the reasons that I frequent this site.
 
Darn wealthy bozo's anyway...first they want too pay 90% of the taxes,provide most of the job's in the country ,and now they want too bid on 2% of the tags...what next?
 
RE: MDF - the end or just the beginning?

>Face it, our wildlife is now
>on the auction block. They
>do it in the name
>of Conservation, but what it
>really is a pool of
>premium tags available only to
>a select few. The good
>ol boy network is alive
>and well.
>
>There is a way to raise
>2x the amount those auction
>tags do, but it would
>take away the sure thing
>tags that they crave.
>
>They could charge $50 per tag
>NONREFUNDABLE IF YOU DON'T DRAW,
>and still raise the same
>amount of money and still
>keep the system fair for
>99% of the people. There
>will be a few still
>that cannot afford to part
>with the $50,but it sure
>beats 99% of the people
>not being able to even
>bid on a tag.



I gotta say I agree, with yah on that point.
 
Maybe I am dense.I think we are all winners . Sure Mr Big gets to have an opportunity most of us never will . Then again most of us never will anyway ! Regardless if it is ego or a genuine and generous donation to a personal cause .The point is MDF gets funding . The little guy gets to hunt as he always did and probably better hunts at that.
Why are we worried about them paying the big bucks for the big bucks if the experiance of hunting is what it's about then we should not be too concerned with the Biggest Rack.The percentage of sacrificial bucks if you want to call them that is negligable compared to the greater good.
Cracks me up to see people think they are more pure because they hunt hard and don't have the resources of the next guy .The man with the resources : Money,Equipment,Knowledge access etc.. will always have the edge.Let Mr Big enjoy his hunt and you enjoy yours .
 
"If taking 5% of the permits that the conservation groups help build is considered prostitution, then I am a pimp, (Tony Abbott, MDF, 2006).? Well said Mr. Abbott.

In truth, (I meant no disrespect, those were your words), I want to thank everyone for keeping this post clean and to the point. I think it's a first that I know of when discussing such a sensitive set of issues. In addition, thank all of you for not trying to shout others down or call them horrible names that they themselves do not use to describe their actions. I think our passion is one indicator of how much mule deer really mean to each of us. Let's face it, most of the regular's on this forum are not the guys paying $50,000 for a deer. No offence to those that can afford that, but I think it's fair to say that most of us just love mule deer whether we get to kill one every year or not. Again thanks for keeping this dialogue clean and open! These are my opinions. I do not believe you need to have done a thing for wildlife to be critical of wildlife issues and polices. Your opinions are your own, they are not right or wrong, your opinions represent your personal views. I invite all opinions on this or any other issue, after all this forum is meant to invite people to discuss issues, not shout them down.

Now for my reply to Sheep. I'd hate to keep track of all my volunteer time, meetings, field work, donated goods and services, (I co-authored a river guide with ##### Thompson, for a conservation organization, the 30 page fold-out guide, now is in it's third printing, and I made not a single dime from it, http://www.worleybuggerflyco.com/booksvideoscds/recreational_yakima_map.htm). I'm not pushing this product, but figured if I did not prove it, some would continue to call me out for doing little more than griping. That guide now has raised $1000?s for wildlife habitat and conservation in Central Washington. That money has been used for everything from bird and elk feed, to habitat enhancement projects.

I wont go into the list of all the photo?s I've donated to support wildlife and natural resources organizations. Nevertheless, if it comforts you at all, I'm involved everyday doing my part. I'm a senior scientist with a private consulting firm; I taught college environmental science?s and geography; I write and comment on dozens of EIS?s and EA?s, I go to many meetings and discuss ideas and alternatives; I give away my art to all the wildlife and environmental organizations in my state, at no cost to them; I donate much time, effort, and energy to a whole host of wildlife and natural resource organizations; it's my life and my passion. Without listing everything I've done over the years, I will say this much, I've gotten more on my own than I ever would or could have with the MDF. I believe that if I were to run a chapter I'd be putting all my time into administering the ?club? or having picknicks and banquets, meant to raise money to send to corporate, both of which I choose not to do.

I'll say a bit more directly related to the MDF, starting with hosting two of my own open meetings to discuss forming a chapter of the MDF only to conclude that what was offered at the time, was a nice banquet package, called a drop camp, some office help, a logo, and a platform. None of which I really thought was worth my personal effort and the member ship fees. That does not mean that it's not worth your time. There are other valuable reasons to have a MDF chapter, but to me, the value did not out-weigh the costs. Finally, if you're so inclined, or want more information type my name and the word conservation, or watershed, or resource management or Yakima, or whatever closely related word you like and you may find more information.

For me the MDF is not worth the costs, the total costs; therefore, it's not a matter of replacing the funds or supporting another high-priced and arguably minimally successful organization. You, like many, sound like a person that thinks just because it's there it should be supported, for the simple fact that it it's called the MDF. I'm not inclined to support an organization that, in my view, is racing to help destroy our hunting heritage. Just one mans opinion. I'm sure there have been some good projects and one?s that would not exists without the MDF. But overall, I choose to do my own thing and save my cash for making a positive difference in a way that fits my ethics and capacity.

If sending in a check for $40 bucks to get a magazine and say you're helping, is your idea of resources management so be it, to each their own. Unfortunately, that $40 bucks, little more than covers the cost of administrative fees to send you that stuff in the mail, and produce the mountains of trinkets like t-shirts, coffee mugs, coolers, and daytimes, that for the most part, have been nothing but a drain on the MDF resources. Mr. Abbott can tell you that the bulk ? almost ALL ? of its money comes from the transfer of deer tags to a select few with deep pockets. In turn, those few get the exclusive right to leap to the front, regardless of their real dedication to wildlife, of the mule deer harvest line. To make matters worse, those dollars, called ?donations? are in many cases used as tax deductions, therefore, who really is paying the bill ? yes, you and me.

We all have a place in this system of wildlife and resource management. I'm not completely against the novelty tags, but enough is enough. I also am not against people who have a lot of money. I am against what the combination of money and inequitable access to publicly owned land to harvest public wildlife is doing to our human relationships, especially those formed in the field. Finally, I'm against the inequitable use of the public?s resources as the natal grounds for mule deer, for private gain.
 
fishon, what do you think about the idea that moneyman has? I personally would be glad to give $50.00 or even $100.00 nonrefundable to ensure that every man, woman and youth has a fair chance at a tag. fatrooster aka Drew Edwards.
 
Drew

Happy to address the question. The way things are set up is that license fee's and applications fee's go into the dwr budget to be spent on salaries, trucks and meetings. Very little of it actually goes on the ground for wildlife. Also sportsman complain everytime there is a license fee increase, that is why this year conservation groups (SFW,MDF) busted their butt at the capital to help insure that dwr got 2.2 million dollars for their raises and cost of iving expenses, so average joe hunter did not have a license fee increase that would not of helped Utah's wildlife.

So I ask you, Do you want to pay $50 or $100 knowing that most of it will go into overhead which means almost none will go into the resource? Or do want want to let 150 rich guys buy tags every year and raise 1.8 million dollars of which 90% of goes on the ground for habitat,transplants,education and water development? Which in turn creates more wildlife so Joe hunter can then benefit.

Is 5% really a big deal when these tags have generated a 50%to 500% growth?

You answer me these questions and then I will entertain others.

tony
 
Steve (mo)

Glad to see you surfing MM. Hope all is well. I am glad you can find humor in the ignorance. Someday's I have to sit back and actually take a deep breath when I read some of this stuff.

Some will never understand that this country was built on free enterprise. They do not understand that most of the guys that buy these tags do not even need the tax right off.

I believe our Pledge says it best, "I pledge allegence to the flag of the United States of America, and to the REPUBLIC for which it stands"

Last time I checked socialism was in another country and we believe in capitalism.

Guy's just don't get that they actually are receiving more from these dollars then they are giving up.

Thanks for all you have done Steve.

call me anytime

tony
 
Sorry Tony but I disagree with your implied statement:

'That facts show that there is more opportunity today because of the auction tags then there would of been without them. Utah's sheep herd is the classic example. And now you are seeing the benefit for Goats, Elk and Turkey.'

EVERY western state around us has had increase in tag numbers, quality and opportunity without the stinking MONEY tags.

When your Mentor, Don Peay was going around throwing out 'statistics' to get his Convention Tags shoved down our throats he kept saying that the increase opportunity and tags for the public was 200% or 400% depending on species going back 10 years.

Every western state has had similar if not GREATER tag increases over those same 10 years. Without having to pimp the tags to the so called wealthy

The Utah Cash-Cow tags have average 900% increase in those same 10 years......

Take for example 9 stinking sheep tags at the UtahFNAWS banquet... this year.... tell us who does the math to get 5% of tags to equal...... 9 sheep tags ..excluding the Governors tag??

Sorry Tony but sometimes this 'good for wildlife SPIN' is pure bull.................... and GREAT for 'Charity PayChecks' to BOD membership.

Robb
 
I recently had the benefit of attending the Casper, Wyoming chapter of the MDF banquet, of which I am not a member. Although I am not aware of the benefits the MDF provide to wildlife, I can tell you that from what I witnessed the banquets them selves are not designed to promote the ?average Joe? to contribute to their funds.

Other then my $20.00 bottomless beer mug with the MDF logo, and the 5 card stuff game, I was unable to afford any of the auction items, not surprisingly any of the auctioned tag either. I am not even aware of what they went for. It did seem as though they were catering to a select few.

It was also interesting to note that nowhere at the banquet that I could locate, did they have any indicator of where the money went to exactly. I was actually interested in what they did, or where the money went. Thought as though it might have been similar to the FNRA banquet where they list the previous year?s benefits to the state of Wyoming.

One other thing that I noticed is they were all about the ?trophy?, at least the people I meant. Seems as though they were not interested in you, or took you as a serious hunter, unless you have something worth looking at. Might seem crazy, but being a single father of one (about to be two) boys, bringing home an elk has a lot greater value then bringing home antlers. Sure the cost/benefit as far as meat goes might not be that great, but I hunt for the experience and the meat, antler is just a bonus. I have notice what I call the ?you don't know nothing? trend in all social hunting related groups increasing however.

This is not to say I did not have a good time at the MDF banquet. I had a whole lot of beer for $20, got a cool mug and 3 cool wine glasses, and a sweet hat. The meal was good, and the talk with my buddy was great. He even one a Remington 700 7MM and only spent $40.00! I would like to know more about the benefit of becoming a member of MDF and what exactly they do however. If anyone cares to help me out you can post here or send me info to [email protected]. Thanks

Michael
 
fishon-Tony,
thankyou for answering my previous question. You mentioned that only 5% of the tags are sold at this time. Is this going to be the final percentage or is MDF after a bigger percentage? Drew aka fatrooster.
 
To answer your question...YES! 5% is a big deal. Another excellent point brought up is that all of the states around us have had very similar success with all species of game...trust me Utah is nothing special (if not the worst!). The selling of these tags have done such a minimally amount for Utah but the concept of them is greatly harming public land hunting for public wildlife far more than the money they raise is helping.

The only people really benefitting are a superrich class of hunters and the real people behind the whole program: high-profile guides! A certain 10-15 guides benefit more from this program than everyone else...we all know who they are. I cant say i blame them if the system (through their friends) is handing them a ton of money...but i can try to stop the handouts. A lot of these guides are ranking members of SFW and MDF so i really question these groups intentions when it comes to auction tags in Utah. Without the auction tags all of these high-profile guides would lose a large percentage of the clients. (And we would all lose out on watching a bunch of $30,000 bulls hit the ground on video...but that is a price i am willing to pay)

-RPinenut
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-14-06 AT 08:59AM (MST)[p]Tony, I am very disappointed to hear you call your own membership ignorant on a public forum. That just goes to show a lack of professionalism from a man supposed to be leading the charge for MDF.
You seem to fail to grasp that a significant portion of your own membership is having serious issues with tags being taken away from public opportunity and given to the highest bidder. The real issue is what we want our heritage to be.
Think Utah has a great elk heritage after all their tags are given away at auction? Tell that to all the people that have been waiting 15 years to draw one the "normal" way when they can't afford a $17,000 landowner tag - again pushing the rich to the front of the line. Hunting elk once every fifteen years is not a heritage. Think your kids will be able to play this game? What about their kids? Demand and supply pushes the price up as we become more populated, and if we don't make conscious efforts to keep money out of hunting, in another fifty years, only the wealthy will hunt. Is this a case of the Haves vs. the Have Nots? No- it's a case of watching our heritage being stripped from us in front of our very eyes. Prostitution, as TF called it, is not far off base. We are privatizing and commercializing a public resource.
This trend is very disturbing to a lot of us who care about the future of our hunting heritage and the common man's ability to perpetuate it. I am a member of MDF and would like you to address this, unless I am just "ignorant" and not worth your time.

Also, you claim that F&G is nothing but bureaucracy and that all that money would go just to salaries, etc. Could you please let me know what your salary is as well as your regional directors? This is not an accusatory question, just would like to know where my money is going. Thanks.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-14-06 AT 09:48AM (MST)[p]

Fishon,

This country was built on Capitalism and we are a representative Republic on those points we agree. I fully embrace and support Capitalism and believe that it makes our country great however:

I love it when a non-profit entity, which gets preferred tax status, uses Capitalism to justify their actions.

Capitalism is one thing but generally it does not include privatizing a public resource. In order for capitalism to work there must be a free and willing market on both sides of the transaction. Of course the wealthy like the system they get to jump the line and not have to mingle with commoners. Selling hunting opportunity to the highest bidder in the name of conservation is not capitalism it is greed. There are hundreds of ways to increase funding for conservation but this is the easiest route apparently.

Can you guarantee that 5% of the tags is all that SWF, MDF and all the rest of the conservation organizations want to take. Why should average Joe's care about improving habitat to watch some rich guy shoot a 200 inch Mule deer? Your members most likely will never have a similar chance at such a trophy.


Nemont

P.S. It is no wonder an outfitter like MO would support you selling wealth tags.
 
RE: MDF - the end or just the beginning?

fishon,

I believe that some of the worry of the average sportsman lies in the fact that the DWR may be pimping of all these groups. I know that in Utah groups like the MDF and SFW have thrived by promising to change things that the public felt the DWR would not. However I believe that it is the DWR that allocates these tags. Well if the MDF or the SFW rub the DWR the wrong way would it not jepordize them getting these tags. Maybe this is why nothing gets changed and the tags go up? The DWR knows that if they keep these groups happy they will not be asked to make tough changes. So the tags go up and the average sportsmans voice grows quiter because they no longer serve a purpose for these groups. Does this mean that these groups will die? Never, because without them the sportsman that do have the big bucks would not have the option of buying these tags. Like you have shown, their dollars are the only ones that really count. Pretty scare stuff if you are not in that circle.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-14-06 AT 09:35AM (MST)[p]http://www.monstermuleys.info/dcforum/User_files/4416f0c87292a565.jpg


Capitalism brought to you by a not-for-profit, 501 (c)(3); You've got to be joking!

Mr. Abbott, please tell me you really did not mean all that capitalism stuff. You're over the top. You cant be serious. I think I've heard it all now. The MDF really is what I've though of it all along. . .
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-14-06 AT 09:38AM (MST)[p]
Fatrooster, the limit to the conservation tags is bound only by your imagination and your willingness to let the MDF continue to coerce the legislature to allow more. And so long as big bucks (literally both kinds) and politicians are involved, they will manage to find more ways to sell their program as conservation. They will not stop; there really is no limit so long as there are "projects" that, in the mind of the MDF, benefit wildlife.

Moreover, so long as they use a percentage of the tags to describe their take, all they have to do to get their cut is to insure that the total number of tags goes up, they then still get only a "measly" 5%. They would have you believe this 5% is worth it. That's the great thing about the "conservation" tags (they should be called condemnation tags) they are a gift that can just keep on giving so long as politicians and greedy men are involved. The one thing that might be true about Utah, and incidentally helped to lead to this system, is that they may have had little choice. They were ripe for this take over as the deer herds were in bad shape anyway and the solution was to raise money to fix the problem; to me the entire things been a sales pitch for the elitist soon after the governor styles tags brought in lots of money. So, in the long run, their program may work well for them, but other states have different values systems and different wildlife management programs, and It is my hope, a backbone to tell people who want to prostitute public goods, to go some place else.

Mr. Abbott, thanks for the offers, but I completely understand the system that you and your constituency have built. I also understand clearly, that you and some other?s believe 100% without a doubt, that you are doing the right thing. I hope you understand that you cannot sell some people your program, to some, me included, our public wildlife is not for sale, period. As far as your previous posts go, it appears that you have no moral limits so long as it's inflating the all-mighty dollar. Call me whatever you like, it still does not change the fact that what the MDF is doing will lead to the destruction of open access, wild and free hunting opportunities in at least Utah. I know I'll continue to be skeptical and even reverent against allowing it to destroying the hunting opportunities for the common man.

Martinhunter ? your explanation is exactly what I've seen out of the MDF. Just go take a look at their home page www.muledeer.org, and you will see their priorities, it's TAGS, TAGS, TAGS. I believe the MDF cares little about their membership because almost none of it's budget comes from it's members directly, it's all TAG sales. Now, some of those guys are members, but they are not donating money to the cause, so to speak, but instead are paying for the exclusive right to hunt trophy deer year in and year out with fewer restriction. To be fair, the MDF does raise about $100k from it's membership, through dues etc. If you think as members you really matter, you're completely mistaken. Your money could completely dry up and your membership blow away, the so long as the MDF had those ?conservation? tags, the people who buy them would insure the existence of the Foundation, regardless of it's membership numbers.

I believe the MDF should no longer have a not-for-profit status as long it's just a front for exclusive tag sales.

To each there own.
 
Tony (Fishon)

I think that the idea that Monyman and Fatrooster had, was to take the tags that the MDF is allocated and have a raffle with the price for tickets at $50 or $100 dollars each - I don't think that they were talking about raising tag prices. I think that this is a great idea, and could at leat be given a try. I think there should also be some sort of limit to haw many tickets could be bought by one individual. This would give people who aren't extremely wealthy almost the same chance at these tags as those who are. It would also allow your organization to raise the funds that put conservation on the ground.

Keep the Sun at Your Back and the Wind in Your Face
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-14-06 AT 10:01AM (MST)[p]Some great thought provoking posts.

I do not agree with the ever growing number of conservation tags in Utah. I hate to see such a large number public resources being sold to private parties for money. We hear the ?capitalism? argument all of the time, and I have to wonder if individuals would feel the same if it was public land that was being sold off. Sadly, public land and access is being sold off for the sake of money. And to a certain extent we're being told the same, ?It's for the common good of the majority.?

I don't fault the individuals that are making money from the opportunities that these tags create. However, I do feel that it's some muddy water we're swimming in. When do we put our foot down and say enough is enough. Or do we?
 
The only problem with the $50 or $100 raffle is that it is againts the law in Utah and they have said it cannot be done with the resource.

As far as the Ignorance comment goes it was not directed towards any one person but it was directed to the ignorance of people of how the permit process works, and what it accopmlishes.

It is fair to say that none of you understand the permit process as well as I do. I constantly read how the majority of the MDF membership and others disagree with it yet I receive no phone calls or emails concerning this. Yet I continue to post my phone number for all if they choose to use it.

There are things I am ignorant to but the conservation permits and raising funds for wildlife is not one of them. At anytime an MDF member can call me and voice their opinion or concern regarding anything that MDF is doing.

I will spend as much time as needed to address the question they have. I would prefer it on the phone or in person but if email is what they are comfortable with then that is fine.

It is funny how MDF and other groups are critisized for "protituting" wildlife yet Taxidermist,Sporting good stores, Guides,Wildlife artists and photograpers make money off of wildlife and it is OK. Why is ther a double standard?

Yes opinions can and will be shared on this and other sites, but if any of you really want to change how things are then you need to do it with actions and not words. Get involved with whatever group or orgination you fell is right. Maybe start your own, I welcome it. But understand that I also welcome any phone call from any of you especially MDF members.

MDF members raise hundreds of thousands of dollars for wildlife, not just ny their membership but by their banquets and time spent working for a cause. Just because some of you do not believe in it does not make it wrong. TF said it best when he said,

"Your opinions are your own, they are not right or wrong, your opinions represent your personal views. I invite all opinions on this or any other issue, after all this forum is meant to invite people to discuss issues, not shout them down".

Again if you do not believe in something don't try to tear it down try to change it for the better. If you can't change it then do it your way for someone else.

MDF is strong and supportive of its members. I cannot say it any clearer, please call if you have a concern. We are only ignorant if we choose not to learn.

Tony
801-885-1274
 
Prism I dont think we as individuals putting our foot down will help, it's going to take a new organization to do that. A large group of ordinary hunters tired of wealth tags. When Tony left SFW I thought this would happen, but he just took his knowledge of high dollar tags to MDF. Russ
 
Fishon,

Can you direct me to where your budget info is available? I cannot find it on your website.

Nemont
 
Howcome Abbott thinks that if he just keeps talking and offering up his phone number that somehow we will see the light? He does not understand that some have a problem with the philosophy and the system, and it just cant be sold to everyone, especially those of us who have something to lose - our hunting heritage. . . Mr. Abbott, it's not a matter of, convincing us, or thinking to yourself, "if these guys would just listen, they would all agree and think this is the best thing for mule deer." Mr. Abbott, it's a much more sophisticated understanding of the issues that allows people to think for themselves and obvioulsy they are doing that and telling you to consider other alternatives. We all like the mission of the MDF, it's the means to the end that we dont like.

I encourage anyone who thinks they dont have enough information to do what you like to get more, but dont be sold down the river by the narrow minded, short-term perspectives of a few elitists.

By the way Mr. Abbott, most of the wildlife that people observe and photograph live on lands set aside for that purpose. Dont try to spin this into an equity issue while you run your "not-for-proffit" organization to suit mainly private rights, you simply have zero ground to make that argument.

Keep posting your thoughts, youre digging your hole deeper with every word.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-14-06 AT 12:15PM (MST)[p]Nemont, I have the forms if you like I'll email them to you. but for now here's a summary. In fairness, these are 2004 numbers.

This information is directly from the MDF?s 2004 IRS Form 990. According to the U.S. Department of Revenue, the MDF is a 501(c) (3). It is categorized as, ?scientific study and preservation of mule deer.? In 2004 Pat Juhl signed the form 990. In that same year, the MDF had a total gross of $3.2 million. Of that, $114,000 came from direct public support ($93k from memberships). It had direct expenses of $1 million and total expenses of $1.8 million. The Foundation spent $524,000 on habitat projects, $445,000 on merchandise, $110k on advertising, $8,500 on meals, $20k on vehicles, $21k on miscellaneous, $46k on insurance, and $5k on chapter development. $60k for an office, $20k on the phone, $31k on travel . . . .
The director (Terry Claoutier) made $62,000, and the total outlay for wages was $336,000.

The MDF accepted $60,000 in loans, some from its own employees, including $10,000 from Mr. Juhl ? accortding to the IRS, most loans were associated with the banquette. I won't name the others who loaned money, but if youre interested they are listed on the form 990.

My question now is, how can an organization who receives its tax exemption because it is, ?preserving mule deer? be allowed to maintain its tax-exempt status when its primary source of income is tag sales to private individuals for the exclusive access to KILL a mule deer?

If I understand the numbers, nearly all the money the MDF generates is through tag sales and those sales are in many cases sold in a less than an equitable manor. Raffles are another matter.

Mr. Abbott, care to discuss this?
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-14-06 AT 11:58AM (MST)[p]"Your opinions are your own, they are not right or wrong, your opinions represent your personal views. I invite all opinions on this or any other issue, after all this forum is meant to invite people to discuss issues, not shout them down".

I think you said it best right there Mr. Bynum.
I have no intention of changing your views or anyone elses, but people have a right to know both sides of any story.

You give yours and others give theirs. I think it is funny for you to justify your making a profit off wildlife but yet you condem others. Again I refer to you comment above, "they are opinions they are not right or wrong". Continue to live by your opinions and MDF will continue to enhance habitat and grow more deer, to create more opportunity for everyone.

Thanks for you opinion.

tony
 
Mr. Abbott, the MDF does zero for the deer herds I frequent, zero and until your oganization changes it's direction, I hope it stays that way.
 
I find it interesting that most hunters on this Board talk about wanting equal access to the wildlife and that hunters who have the resources to buy premium tags are the downfall of hunting. If you honestly fell that way then why do you scream foul when NR want equal access to Federal Lands and have the same benefits as R in regards to access to Tags and pricing.

You think it is fine for R to payless and get more benefit from a Federal program. If you have the RIGHT to demand that NR pay for most of the hunting cost and YOU get the most benefit from this resources then why do you begrudge a hunter with $ resources the right to have access because he has money? Money cures lot's of ills. Just because a hunter has money doesn't mean he is any less of a hunter that you or I. He gains access because he has money. You gain access because you are a R. They are the same.

If you want equal access to Premium tags then why not make all LE units equal draw? That would give ALL hunters the same access to the wildlfe resource. It won't happen because the R hunters don't want it to be equal. Until it is equal across the Board then quit crying about someone else getting access because have $ and can buy the access they would not get otherwise because of the current DOW programs. The money has to come from somewhere.

Sorry For The Rant, Darran
 
"Mr. Abbott, the MDF does zero for the deer herds I frequent, zero and until your oganization changes it's direction, I hope it stays that way". (Tony Bynum 3-14-06)

It is sad that someones personal vendetta with a group would cloud his mind to the point that he wishes they would not do anything for the area he frequents and the animal he proclaims to love.

Can anyone explain that to me?

tony
 
BChunter,

Buying a premium tags and access to federal lands are two very different issues.

Anyone can access federal lands but the privelge to hunt the animals on them is reserved for the States. It is a States Rights issue and not an access issue.

The problem of premium tags being sold by conservation groups is that it harms the very people it says it is helping. In addition it leads to privatization of what is a public resource. I know Texans as a rule view this issue differently but in much of the Rocky Mountain west wildlife is held in trust by the State. Residents are simply exercising their rights to use what is held in trust for them. They charge NR hunters more and use that money to take care of the resource. Again it is a privelge and not a right, sorry.

The talk of capitalism and wealthy hunters jumping the line just further points out that privatization of wildlife is a bad deal. Groups like SWF and MDF don't have any skin in the game. The tags cost them nothing, they have no tax issues to deal with and they don't "sell" to just any willing buyer they auction them off. For every $125,000 state wide tag there is one less chance for an averag hunter to obtain a license. Whether there is more game, hence more licenses is a chicken or the egg arguement.

I don't know why most hunters who enjoy hunting in the west can't see that wealth tags are bad for hunting and the tradition of hunting.

Nemont
 
Nemont you better hurry up and tell me where I can find my "OUTFIT" so I don't get turned in for animal neglect...probably some skinny assed mules running around somewhere.
 
I can't believe this but I am going to defend Tony
NOT THAT I AGREE WITH HIM but his job is to bring in as much
funding to the MDF as he can. These wealth tags are not his
doing, but it is the current hand of cards, we as Utahn's have
been dealt. Tony is simply playing his hand to the best of his ability.

To get real results you must go after the people that make these rules. Such as the current DWR Director Jim Karpowitz
he got this out of control train rolling a few years ago with a handfull of tags and a unique sales tactic. Now the Don Peay's and Tony Abbott's of the world are scholars of this program.

I am pretty sure a new five year agreement for these tags was either just completed or will be completed in the near future.
I suggest that we as concerned rape victims take our energy that we are wasting on Tony and direct it to those that truly deserve it and can truly help solve the problem.

As I always recommend to you Tony, PULL OUT OF THE CONVENTION NEXT YEAR OR GUARANTEE THAT 100% OF THE FUNDS EARNED GOES BACK TO WILDLIFE NOT TO PAYING BILLS AT THE DELTA CENTER.

Thanks Gordy
 
The problem is the SFW and MDF where started with the intention of holding the DWR resposible. Instead they have found a way supplied by the DWR and funded by the wealthy to do what they see fit ( is that not why Tony left the SFW. He was not getting his own way?) and pay little or zero attention to the average hunter. They justify this by throwing the table scraps to the average hunters at their annual banquets. Then they remind us that without those big dollars we would be right back where we were 25 years ago. No one standing up for all hunters rights. Hey wait a minute I am now talking in circles. It seems like that is what happens when anyone tries to explain these groups. When will somebody hold the DWR responsible to do their job. It is the DWRs job to manage the wildlife and resources. These groups have turned into nothing but buffers between the DWR and the sportsman. The DWR ensures this by giving them tags so they can generate big dollars for Tony and Don to throw out in defense of their jobs. So how are these groups really working for? Not the average sportsman!!!
 
RE: MDF - the end or just the beginning?

Its no coincidence that capital means money, its the root word of capitalism for a purpose, its the reason we are a dominate nation.
Things in our country don't get done because of good will or moral obligation its "capital" that directs our country, exemplified in Business & politics.
All the diatribes or well thought out arguments here will not change that simple truth.
In order to get things done, conservation agency's must play by the same rules as our society, I thought the numbers of the contributions to MDF were very telling, all the good members combined contributed less than 3% of the budget.
Its pretty simple, all the good folks with good intentions & no money won't get much done, argue that one till your blue in the face, or like Tony challenged, build your own better mouse trap to make it happen, I can almost assure you won't get to far without financial backers. Sucks but its true.
I think a lot of the emotion associated to this aspect of conservation groups is the fact that we always see some fat-cat rich bastage posed behind an incredible trophy that usually came easy to them, I would argue that if they shot cow elk or management deer, there wouldn't be half the bellyaching. I've herd here several times its about our heritage & we can only hunt ever 15th year, you know that's BS, Utah has over the counter deer & elk permits.
Is your hunting heritage associated to trophy hunting ?
If it is your the pimp, the trophy type.

Keep up the good work MDF !
 
RE: MDF - the end or just the beginning?

NeMont, I respectfully disagree. You say it is a privaleage (sp) for me to hunt out West. I pay dearly for that privaleage. You say R have more Rights that NR because you live there. You should have some but not the extent they are now. The NR pays the majority of the cost for your Right to hunt.

If you have the Right to hunt on Federal Land that others pay for then why shouldn't an individual have the Right to pay his own way an in addition pay for other services if he has the resources on Federal Land? The money has to come from somewhere and the R have made it abundantly clear it's not coming from them. Their battle cry is to raise NR tags because it is a privaleage. In this case, you have one NR that is saying I'll pay for the privileage and give the DOW or MDF $50,000 to boot.

The Tags purchaser will kill 1 MD or Elk or whatever. To collect the same amount of money, you would have to sell 1,000 tags at $75 apiece to the R to raise the same money. At that rate, all of the MD et al would be gone in short order. Most R don't pay $75 for a tag.

Sorry, it is the same issue. The DOW or MDF has to get the money from somewhere. The R aren't going to pay, so sell it to the highest bidder is the only other choice. I just wish I had enough jack to get in on the bidding.
 
RE: MDF - the end or just the beginning?

> The NR pays the
>majority of the cost for
>your Right to hunt.

Not when they aint paying state taxes they arent.
 
RE: MDF - the end or just the beginning?

It is my understanding that non of your State Tax money goes to the DOW.
 
RE: MDF - the end or just the beginning?

>It is my understanding that non
>of your State Tax money
>goes to the DOW.

Its not just a DOW issue. For example my home town pushed for a tax increase to preserve a huge chunk of undeveloped land from developement. This is common. To think that the only $$$ residents pay is in the form of a lisence fee to support wildlife is in error.
 
RE: MDF - the end or just the beginning?

LAST EDITED ON Mar-14-06 AT 04:57PM (MST)[p]BCHunter,

Disagree all you wish but the courts have ruled, congress has spoken and States have affirmed that tag allocation is a States Rights issue. Thank your friends at USO for getting the issue clarified.

Who has limited your access to federal lands? Nobody. The privilege to hunt big game animals owned by the States is one that has been affirmed.

Do you really believe that these weatlh tags are a federal lands issue? I am willing to bet most hunting done by these guys is on private deeded ground.

The auctioning of tags is just one more symptom of the privatizing of public wildlife. Do you think SWF or MDF really cares of about Joe Average contributing $50 a year or the guy spending $125,000 on a tag. Who do you think get a personal thank you from the executive director and glad handed by all the big wigs.


I host NR hunters every year. Have met many, many really quality people through hunting. I am always willing to offer a hand or give advice. I don't believe that NR should be fleeced like some of my fellow resident hunters. When I hunt out of state I pay higher fees even to hunt of public lands. When I hunt waterfowl in Texas I pay alot more for good access to land because the public stuff is over run.

You are barking up the wrong tree by saying this is a federal lands issue. It is a big money greed issue. I guess I don't blame MDF for taking the money but it is kind of like where every your money lies your heart lies there also.

NeMont
 
RE: MDF - the end or just the beginning?

1. I was not referring to raffles in my previous comment. My suggestion was to not refund all or part of the application money and use that to fund the projects. Yes, the G&F department would get the money, but they could then give it to various organizations to fund their projects. It's a win/win. The organizations, or even individuals could write a proposal for a project and if accepted, receive a grant from the money raised through the non-refunded tag fees. The projects get funded, the public gets equal access to all tags, and the G&F does not have to spend man hours on habitat, water, access projects,etc.

2. No state can keep you from accessing your public land (for the most part), camp, hike, etc. Just don't take any critters off of it without a state issued license or tag. The Fed land issue is really a weak argument for NR's to use.
 
RE: MDF - the end or just the beginning?

I have been interested in joining the MDF . I really appreciate both sides being civil and addressing some very valid concerns .

So much focus is directed at Utah , WHY ? How many tags were auctioned off last year .

Thank You
 
RE: MDF - the end or just the beginning?

So if my post #52 gets deleted, right along with post #39, please PM why. That is all I ask.

Tony, Would you support the following idea:

Another thought on this subject and conservation tags.... 10 Years ago Utah had a $5 habitat stamp which you had to purchase along with you licenses. The money was earmarked for Habitat improvements, so NONE of it could go to buy trucks etc. Why not let the hunters and fishermen share the burden; $10 a person to buy a Habitat Stamp. Utah sells licenses to over 150,000 different people. That would generate over $1,500,000. Conservation groups could then apply to use these funds on approved projects.

Then you keep the Governor's Tags at 1 tag per species. The Deer sells for $150,000 + $60,000 elk + 75,000 sheep + $15,000 for Mtn goat + $10,000 for antelope + $15,000 for moose + $1,000 for turkey = another $325,000 for habitat. The funds would go into the Habitat Account, with the Groups keeping 10% for overhead.

Then the 600+ tags currently given to conservation groups go back to the public draw. Over the next 10 years 6,000+ people (both residents and Nonresidents) get cycled through Utah's point system. There is no doubt in my mind that Utah gives WAYYYYY to many tags to be auctioned.
 
I have been back and forth on this issue for some time without knowing which side of the fence to stand on. The only thing I've ever wanted is to know that any money or support that I give an organization is put to good use. Why is it so hard to get the facts?

If it is true that in 2004 the MDF grossed $3.2 million but only spent $524,000 on habitat projects then I've found what I've been looking for. That's only 16%!!! That's not even close to good enough to gain my support.
 
RE: MDF - the end or just the beginning?

I too have noticed the many references to Utah. Are the MDF funds donated concentrated there? Do most of the auction tags come from Utah? Are most of MDF monies spent in Utah? I admit I am uneducated as to the goals and direction of the MDF. After following this discussion, I want to know more. Which states get what? From the posts here, it seems the Foundation is biased in one direction. Maybe it is just more Utahns (is that right?)responding. The mule deer deserves our concern and attention. In every state. mtmuley
 
RE: MDF - the end or just the beginning?

You made DAMN good points and its frustrating to no end that people here arent allowed to view them.

"Collusion" anyone?



-DallanC
 
RE: MDF - the end or just the beginning?

600+ tags!? Ouch!

So my question is this:

If all these rich guys are buying these tags in the name of a donation to wildlife conservation why do they need to kill a trophy animal for it? Why not just make the donation in the name of conservation and call it good? They can obviusly afford it. And it is a tax write off. Just think of how they would be praised at the donation and then have to put in with every one else.

-Lowedog
 
prn, I was surprised to see that too, and I can't believe nobody else has brought it up yet.

fishon, how about addressing that directly? Are those numbers correct? Sixteen percent directly to habitat projects????

Oak
 
Yeah holy cow 600 tags, Man if they tried that here in Montana, there would be lynchings for sure, we are not without our problems up here, but pulling 600 tags out of the pot isnt one of them. We give away a few, and even have outfitter sponsor tags, but If my memory serves me correctly, it is all part of the 10% NR quota on special draws. I think Utah residents especially have a right to be concerned and pissed. I dont really blame the MDF too much though, they are only taking advantage of what is there, just like FNAWS and everyone else going after these tags, I think you boys need to get after your legislators. Unless of course I win the lottery and then any help with a spot to find a moster non-typical mule deer would be greatly appreciated.
hunterrunningfrombearlgclr5ju.gif
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-14-06 AT 11:15PM (MST)[p]sheepeater, it is my belief that the MDF IS the reason those tags exist. I believe that the MDF, with help, lobbied for those conservation tags. That's part of the problem, in my view. The Foundation did not step in as the "middle man" to distribute those tags. I believe the MDF generated the political support to have those tags allocated, to itself, in order to sell them to generate funds for enhancement projects. To be fair, in my experience, (I have managed tens-of-millions of public dollars and investigated the expenditure of millions of state and federal moneys meant for wildlife enhancement and restoration projects in the state of Washington) that the administrative portion is very slight, and well below acceptable margins for that type of fieldwork.

It is my observation, that this very issue is part of the reason there is so much concern, notwithstanding the larger, and I think more important and long-lasting consequences of what is happening to our hunting heritage. I conclude that the Foundation IS the agent that generates the demand, then it supplies that demand with the tags that it convinced the state to issue. In some cases the money paid for the tag is a donation and therefore is tax deductible. Finally, to make matters more interesting, in the past, the MDF has controlled the transfer of the tag to the buyer by operating the auction. I was not present at this year?s banquet, so I'm only relaying what has happened before this last round.
 
"Your opinions are your own, they are not right or wrong, your opinions represent your personal views. I invite all opinions on this or any other issue, after all this forum is meant to invite people to discuss issues, not shout them down".(Tony Bynum 2006)

All of these things you guys bring up are opinions and I respect them and appreciate them.

What I can promise you is that there is not 600 permits in Utah for rich guys. Also if the current reccomendation goes through that MDF is supporting then there will be about 50 less permits next year ans there will be no increase in pemits for 3 years.

Yes you heard me right, no increase in permits for 3 years if the deal gets done that we are working on.

Also 90% of the money is spent in Utah on projects that UDWR approves. The audit has been done and the money is accounted for. Again, all of the 60% that MDF keeps is spent on utah projects. Not 1 penny goes to overhead,gas,food,travel,salary.
DO YOU NOW UNDERSTAND?

I became the GM od MDF in April of 2005 so I cannot speak on previous budgets before I was involved because I do not know.

The other 200 permits you are talking about are permits that are for a drawing for all attendee's. These permits are not sold they are given out if you apply. The application is a $5 fee for each unit. You can only apply 1 time per unit. So these permits are availiable to everyone that attends.

I think I addressed everything but if not please remind me and I will continue.

Tony
 
I'm all for "auction tags". When I want to go hunting, I want to go hunting, plain and simple. I do all of my hunting on private lands, if I want to book a hunt or get invited by a friend to hunt his land I should be able to. I dont, and will not, sit on my butt and wait years to draw a tag for an animal. I've got better things to do and greater things to put my energy towards. I'm from the state of Texas where all the tags can be bought OTC at Wal-mart which is the way I like it. I can see having a drawing system for public lands, but when it comes to private property the landowner should have the right to let who ever he wants come out and hunt. Each landowner, based on how much land they have, should get an X amount of tags that he can give to his friends/family each year. Thank godness I live in Texas where the landowners run the show.

I would much rather look throw a list of 500 tags and pick out the one I want, wright a check, and know that I'll be hunting that year. Unstead of sending off applications each year, getting my name thrown in a hat with 10,000 other guys, and hoping that "maybe" this year I can actually hunt. I dont know why anybody would like that system of getting a tag. It seems silly to me.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-15-06 AT 07:31AM (MST)[p]Mr. Abbott, you deserve a thank you. Thanks for staying engaged. If nothing else, from a professional standpoint (I'm commenting on your professional life, as I know nothing about you outside the MDF) you're a dedicated guy who believes in what you're doing, thanks for taking the time to write! I know I really appreciate it for without it, I think people, like me, would be even more clueless about what's taking place right before our very eyes. Again, thanks!

Sincerely,
 
Money Man-Wrong answer, maybe 90% in Utah but not in the west, just the facts man, just the facts.
hunterrunningfrombearlgclr5ju.gif
 
Oh come on Tony. The Conservation groups got approx 380 permits this year for auction. By this time next year they will have another 50+ from tag increases in this year's proposals. That puts the number of conservation tags for 2007 at approx 430 tags. Then the Conservation Orgs get 200 convention tags for 2007. Add 430 + 200 = 630+- tags. The conservation ORGS get to keep these monies. How many of you guys, who arn't from Texas, would like to see over 600 of your best permits go to Special Interest Groups??

Spin it all you want, these 630 tags will be taken OUT of the regular draw. Over 10 years we will see 6,000+ people NOT cycled thru the Utah Point System. Sad, selfish deal indeed.

Thanks for responding to my post earlier, not. The usual "spin it all you want", but never address the real questions.
 
Great article, very good insight from alot of people. We were
a MDF Chapter in California, the actual amount of money, that was being put back in to the projects, youth progarms, etc was
mind boggling, to find out the real truth. We join the California Deer Assoc. when it was set up, 75% of the money had to be returned back in to projects, youth progarms, etc. CDA
has a great youth progarm, & is only getting better.CDA does
auction off tags, I think it is around five or six tags a year,
in state tags.If it does not exceed this amount, I am find. We don't have the deer herds, as other states. If I lived in Utah, I would be very un happy about the situation. There a lot smart people in Utah & every other state, but the bottom line some one is going to have to step up & lobby against, what you don't like. I am in private busniess, if you would run a non- profit company like a private busniess, you might be surpise the amount you would have. Not all private busniess are ran correctly. I under stand that. It always seems that when a non profit company, starts rolling in the money, they become real loose with the money. The over head increases, people become sloopy with money. When there is money invovled you have be held accountable. I really don't know what happens with MDF in Uath, other than , what I read on this site. But the tax returns in the year of 2004,if they are correct, I am sure they are, there is a problem. I don't know Tony, & what is direction his, with MDF. But, hopefully he will listen to the average hunter, & make it right, for all people that have a right to hunt.If he decides not listen, you as hunters have a lot more control, than you think. Bottom line, If you do not support the foundation, then a move will have to be made, to go in the direction you hunters want to go. You can always find away to have someboby remove from his or her position, if thats what it takes. Hopefully it will work. Mike
 
NeMont, You are absolutely correct it is a money issue. The NR situation is what it is and just because everyone does it doesn't make it right.

You guys stand on the ground it is a State issue and the NR have no say on Federal Land. That being the case, then why do you mind if the DOW generates money from other sources? As I have stated before, the money has to come from somewhere. Selling Premium Tags is a way to fund projects that thru normal Tag sales would not get done.

You are correct it is a money issue, but OUR hunting sport has become a Trophy issue as well. R seem to think it is their Right to any, all and everything in hunting in their State at Someone Elses expense (that's a fact). If you as a R have the Right to tell NR to take a second class seat to you as a R, why do you begrudge the DOW the Right to make addition funds by selling these Premium Tags? You just want it all at someone elses expense.

I have several friends we have made in CO that are R and we have a great time in our hunting area. My feelings toward this issue are not aimed at individuals but the system. However, if you support the current bias in the system which CAN NOT generate enough funds for the DOW then the battle cry is THE MONEY HAS TO COME FROM SOMEWHERE.

You still get to hunt. If this was not a Trophy issue then why do you care? I just added that because that was the answer I got from CO DOW and CO R when I objected to the new reg changes.

Have a great day. Darran
 
BCHunter,

Are you telling me that selling these tags to wealthy individuals is only way to fund the dept. of FWS? Then why does the MDF take 60% of the proceeds?

In Montana a NR can hunt every year without waiting in line. They can hunt deer, elk, upland birds, waterfowl, varmits etc. They are guaranteed a tag through the outfitter set aside.

Can you quote me where I said NR have no say on Federal Lands? Would you like me to show you the laws and court cases saying states have the right to manage wildlife as they see fit? I don't know why the federal lands issue is such a hang up for people. Do you think residents of the Western States don't also pay taxes? Do you get unfettered access to Lackland AFB or Fort Bliss or do you have to obey the rules there? Those are Federal Lands also.

Why do you say the current system cannot generate enough money? It seems to me there are more applicants attempting to get a tag in Montana then there are tags available. How do I know? Because people post on here every year that they didn't get drawn.

Please take a moment look up Senate Bill 339, Sponsored by Sen. Harry Reid of NV, Which dealt with the Dormant Commerce Clause. In addition in Baldwin Vs.Montana the Supreme Court Noted (quoted directly from the court decision) This case dealt with the privileges and immunity clause:

"Does the distinction made by Montana between residents and nonresidents in establishing access to elk hunting threaten a basic right in a way that offends the Privileges and Immunities Clause? Merely to ask the question seems to provide the answer. We repeat much of what already has been said above: Elk hunting by nonresidents in Montana is a recreation and a sport. In itself - wholly apart from license fees - it is costly and obviously available only to the wealthy nonresident or to the one so taken with the sport that he sacrifices other values in order to indulge in it and to enjoy what it offers. It is not a means to the nonresident's livelihood. The mastery of the animal and the trophy are the ends that are sought; appellants are not totally excluded from these. The elk supply, which has been entrusted to the care of the State by the people of Montana, is finite and must be carefully tended in order to be preserved.

Appellants' interest in sharing this limited resource on more equal terms with Montana residents simply does not fall within the purview of the Privileges and Immunities Clause. Equality in access to Montana elk is not basic to the maintenance or well-being of the Union. Appellants do not - and cannot - contend that they are deprived of a means of a livelihood by the system or of access to any part of the State to which they may seek to travel. We do not decide the full range of activities that are sufficiently basic to the livelihood of the Nation that the States may not interfere with a nonresident's participation therein without similarly interfering with a resident's participation. Whatever rights or activities may be "fundamental" under the Privileges and Immunities Clause, we are persuaded, and hold, that elk hunting by nonresidents in Montana is not one of them...."


If according the court these animals are "entrusted to the care of the State by the people of Montana." Then we, the people of Montana, get to have more of a say regarding how we want tags allocated.

I don't advocated gouging NR hunters, I do believe residents should get first preference. I also believe selling wealth tags is the easy way out that does not engage the vast majority of hunters. These tags allow organizations to fund themselves and cater to wealthy hunters and bypass the bulk of hunters because these organizations don't want to have to rub shoulders with the great unwashed.

Nemont
 
NeMont, Selling these Tags is the most cost effective way to raise money. I understand the regs governing R vs NR. I am not argueing about States Rights. To answer your question, NR have no say on Federal Lands. That's part of the problem, but as I stated before it is what it is.

The DOW caters to the R with at least 80% of the LE tags. I'm not argueing that point. My point is why if you guys are getting 80% of the Premium Tags as it is then why are crying about someone (a wealthy person) buying his way to a Tag that they would mostly likely not get otherwise due to the current DOW regs? You gain an advantage because you live there in getting other people to pay for the majority of your hunting area expense and allottment of LE and other Tags. They gain an advantage because they have money and are WILLING to pay a huge Premium for a Tag which benefits everybody in paying for programs that desperatly need funding.

It just seems you guys want everything ie low cost Tags, almost all of the LE unit Tags and someone else to pay for it. A few Hunters gain an advantage because their money is needed and you guys start crying a river. I just see that as going overboard on gimme gimme gimme.
 
BCHunter,

You are saying that selling these tags helps fund the a State DOW but that isn't accurate. Read where the money goes. It goes to organizations like the MDF and SFW etc. That money bypasses the budget for the state. Okay here is the problem: They are taking a public resource, packaging it in an Auction Tag to help wildlife and selling a publicly owned animal off to the highest bidder. Does the public, ie the people of the State, also called the voters have a say in how that money is spent or now have you created a situation where public has to join another organization to have a say.

If that animal is "entrusted to the state by the people" then why should the MDF or any other organization get to sell the chance to hunt that animal and profit from it.

Do you see all the problems created when you take a public resource and privatize it? Did you see that the director of the MDF got to jump the line and go shed hunting prior to the public getting a chance. Suppose he would have gotten that chance without the title behind his name.

Again can you tell me where I have said gimme, gimme, gimme. I am engaged in Montana in many hunting issues as well as conservation. I hunt out of State most years. I hunt in Texas at least every other year for waterfowl. I make my donation as a NR to every state and country I hunt in. I don't really take issue with what they charge me. If it is too extreme I don't hunt there.

Let me ask you this about Federal Lands. Do you think Resident hunters get to have more input on the management of Federal Lands then you do? You may be surprised to learn that Federal Land managers don't answer to the locals. Their boss's are in Washington DC.

I don't know what else to tell you. Privatizing public resources to enrich the few at the cost of the many is not the correct model.

You still haven't shown me where I have said rape the NR hunters. Here is thread where I defend them and say the cost of resident tags should rise. http://www.monstermuleys.info/dcforum/DCForumID5/7339.html

I have been a resident of Montana my whole life. Do you know how many Limited entry tags I have drawn? 0, Zip , Nada. I have put in for sheep, goat and moose for the 29 years and I have put in for a Missouri River Breaks Bull Rifle tag for 16, I have never drawn a Trophy Mule deer tag in 652 or 270 even though I apply every year. My odds of drawing a Resident antelope tag are less then NR hunters in the districts around here. So I don't know why you think as a resident I am cutting a fat hog. There is a simple solution to it if you don't like the way you are treated by a states DOW then don't hunt in that state.

Wealth tags open the door to hunting simply being about who has the money and that is not the tradition in most western states.

Nemont
 
Nemont
I think that you may have hit it on the head. Privitation of wildlife is not the tradition in most western states. However that is exactly what the tradition in alot of eastern and southern states. If you notice they are he ones with no problem with the privitation, as stated above some welcome it. I believe this is because they have no Fedral land in their states. There forefathers did not fight to keep these lands open to everyone they closed them and they no longer have open access without paying. So to them it is tradition to pay to hunt. The problem that I have is they chose to push for a change in our traditions. If they want to have the same access as R then they should move to the state they want to hunt the most and pay the NR prices for the rest and be ok with it. I have never complained that I can not go hunt in Texas because it is too expensive. If I really wanted to do it I would save the money and do it. The problem is the person that lives in Texas also thinks that it is to expensive to hunt there, so they want to come hunt the Federal land in another state. You are right that wildlife is a state issue and long ago their states chose to sell out to the highest bidder. Why then are they upset when we are trying to prevent the same thing in our states? It looks like to be that the NR are the ones saying gimme gimme gimme.
 
NeMont, The States have the right manage the resources on Federal Land. That's the current system. Yes they are Federal Land and no the NR has no say because we do not vote in that State. That's why we pay the majority of the expenses and have very limited access. That's just the facts. I guess that's why most NR hunters want more access. because we pay the majority of the cost.

I realize that privatizing a public resource may not seem to be the right move, but once again, where is the money going to come from? The MDF is just like every other organization. It needs to be run better and appears to need better leadership. However, to get anything done you have to have an organized effort by someone or something to get it done. If an organization submits a plan to the DOW and shows them they can build a water system (for example) in a needed area that benefits the wildlife in a given area at the cost of only 1 Premium Tag, why would the DOW turn that down? The DOW does not have the resources to build it. No matter how in-effecient the organization is, it gets the job done that benefits everyone that hunts the area. Wildlife is a renewable resource.

73, 90% of Texas is private. You can go hunting in East Texas if you want on Federal land. I guess us ole Southern boys think that if you are going to use something you need to pay for it. Some not all, but some of you think someone else needs to pay for your hunting opportunities. That's Welfare.
 
I am not saying that the NR do not pay a higher %. What I am saying is I am willing as R or NR to pay a higher price if that is what I have to do to hunt. I also feel if I want a say in a state about how they run their wildlife I should move there or accept what regulations they implement. I am not saying that this issue is the fault of the good ole southern boys. I am just saying the western states are not in the same situation as the southern states and do not want to be forced into that situation.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-15-06 AT 02:47PM (MST)[p]
BCHunter,
Have you read anything I have posted? Tell me what I don't pay for? Why do you think the current system exists and whom does it benefit?

You are flat wrong that resident hunters expect or get a 100% free ride. Look at where the revenue comes from, notice the amount that comes from Pittman-Robertson that is the State's portion of the execise tax on ammo and guns sold. Who do you think spends more on ammo and guns in the State of Montana Residents or NR's.

http://fwp.mt.gov/insidefwp/goals/revenue.html

Here is a little fact for you to consider. Total License revenue last year was $42,933,858 two thirds from NR hunters So

$42,933,858 x .67= $28,765,684 of NR hunting license revenue.

The total budget was $80,313,845.

NR License Revenue $28,767,584/Total budget $80,313,845= 35.81% of the budget is paid for by NR hunting fees.

So please show me where you as a NR is funding 100% of my hunting experience and that I am raping NR hunters. You have never answered how much input you think locals have on Federal Land Managers. You must have not read anything regarding court cases or the law regarding states having the right to manage wildlife.

Yes you pay alot, I pay alot and anyone who hunts out of their home states pays alot.


Did your read the conclusion of the U.S. Supreme Court:

hunting by nonresidents in Montana is a recreation and a sport. In itself - wholly apart from license fees - it is costly and obviously available only to the wealthy nonresident or to the one so taken with the sport that he sacrifices other values in order to indulge in it and to enjoy what it offers. It is not a means to the nonresident's livelihood. The mastery of the animal and the trophy are the ends that are sought; appellants are not totally excluded from these. The elk supply, which has been entrusted to the care of the State by the people of Montana, is finite and must be carefully tended in order to be preserved.

So before you accuse me of being greedy and wanting to hoard anything you need to stop and look at the opportunities Montana already affords NR hunters.

Do you realize that 72.7% Montana is private land? That is about the same percentage as Texas. We aren't awash in Federal lands like other states in the West.

http://www.unce.unr.edu/publications/FS01/FS0132.pdf

So figure it out your aren't paying for all of my hunting opportunity. Selling wealth tags is a philosophical problem for me because these organizations are selling something owned by every resident of the state and taking that money to spend how they see fit. There are other ways to make money.

Your last sentence regarding old southern boys and implying that residents of Western states don't believe in paying what they use is very offensive.


Nemont.

P.S. Can you explain why if NR prices are so over priced that there are always more applicants then tags available? While you are at can you explain why I as a resident have it so much better then you.
 
Fish-On,

I am still wondering if you pocketed $15k on the state mule deer tag. Do that 2 years in a row and maybe you can buy a Pahvant elk tag and keep $3k!:p It is the gift that keeps on giving!;-)
 
ktc- well MDF sold around $650,000 worth of tags last year so that would have been $65,000 into someone's pocket. wink,wink That is already 2 Pahvant Tags plus a 4wheeler and a new Christensen Arms rifle. hahahaha

It is too bad the Antelope Island thread came up. Now our questions will never be answered....or sidestepped.

KTC- Only 5 more weeks before your card gets hit with 2 $280 fees. Your horse won't know what to do actually packing-out an animal. :)
 
Thanks Packout.

After I draw, (please let it be over!) I am going to start my own group. I am going to help out the Average Joe.:p I need a new rifle, horse, and 2 Pahvant tags. Maybe a Pahvant and Indian Peaks would be fun? Maybe a Diamond Mountain with the Pahvant and Indian Peaks proceeds.;-)

I wish all of these messes could get straightened out.

Good luck. 44 days left.:)
 
Tony A. and Tony B.

This is a post I have actually enjoyed following; I think you both have valid arguments. Here is my two cents--as if I have any credibility.

Wealth tags are viewed by the hunting public as "wrong" because, lets face it, they are sold to some rich guy that likes to kill stuff and has no appreciation for what it really takes to kill a trophy animal on public land during a normal hunting season. Hunting magazines and guides usually portray these guys as really good guys and hard hunters (brown nosers, so they can be invited to spend his money next year at a banquet, and than watch him whack a 240 buck on the winter range). I do not doubt these guys are dang good guys, and I really mean that, but it gives these hunts more of a black eye when they appear on the front cover of every magazine with a story have how hard they worked to kill the animal. The truth is, and every hunter knows it, when a trophy animal is spotted, the tag holder is immediately notified and arrives to pull the trigger. If MDF, SFW, Muley Crazy and all the other organizations and editors want to get the public support of these "wealth tags", put an END to the lame a$$ stories and simply publish a picture of the animal (without the hunter and guides) with maybe the score and region it was killed in. Really, the picture itself will do just fine.
Now that I have killed, skinned and quartered "wealth tags" I need to state the facts;they are funding wildlife projects that otherwise would not be getting funded. I do not agree with everything these organizations are doing or stand for, but I have to admit, at least they are doing something, and I support any organization that is actually doing something for wild life.

Mike
 
Tony,

Did I read that right? I believe you said that you were working towards reducing the conservation permit numbers by 50% with no increases for 3 years. I for one will do everything possible to help you recruit support. Let us know if there is anything we can do to help. I believe a drastic reduction in permits is necessary and would do wonders to increase your support and efforts. Thank you for taking the time to discuss these topics with us. Have a great day.

Chad
 
Regarding non residents tags in Montana. I happen to live California. Good thing, being in contracting private buisness great, deer heard sucks. Trying to get drawn for a great deer tag sucks. I have max. points, 49 years old most likely won't
get drawn for the Goodale hunt. If I decided to pay between $9000 to $16,000 for a auction tag, yes, then I could hunt for the special tags. Can I afford it, you bet, will I pay it, hell no.Will I hunt out of state. You bet I will. I put in last year for tag in Montana last year, 65 % chance of getting drawn, did I draw, heck no, but I am in the drawng this year, with a point. Put in for Nevada,Utah, New Mexico,Colorado,Airzona, but I am still hunting Ca. I really have bad luck in drawings, but thats ok. I am willing to pay the NR price. When a NR draws for California tags they are more, why would they want to hunt California who knows. Nr pay more money regardless what state you hunt. I don't have a problem paying more for a Nr tag. But
when foundations start selling out the average hunter, then pressure starts to build, something will give. We just have to stick together, & demand a change. If they decide not listen, then don't support there actions. Let me ask a question of Utah residents. There are alot of Utah hunters, within these hunters, there are alot of smart hunters. Think about this, why don't you form a non-profit Utah Deer Assocition. I am guessing that MDF stands for Mule Deer Association, am I correct? I am
guessing that it stands for that, how much money stays in the state of Utah, that was raised in Utah? I am guessing, that MDF spreads its money, through out, there chapters, through out all states that are involved. Some more, than others. If this is true, again I am guessing, I am not a expert, I would form Utah Deer Assoc. where 100% stays in the state of Utah. It will take work to get it off the ground. When you start adding chapters through out cities of Utah, you would be amazed the money you could raise, when the money stays in Uath 100%. 75% back in to projects, youth progarms,etc. 25% to salaries & over head. It can be done. Question to TFinalshot, hope you read this, can you post a non profit for Elks Foundation, why much money is put back in to projects,& salaries for the big dogs? One last question to TFinalshot, of all the property that is private owned by the Elks Foundation, how many average hunters are allowed to hunt these propteries? Of all you hunters out there, have you been asked to hunt, private land that Elks Foundation own? Not unless you know somebody, or you are high up on the committe, I find this interesting. TF very good insight. Give them hell Uath hunters. Mike
 
RE: MDF - the end or just the beginning?

I'd rather pay $5 and let the high bidder take the tag. Silly idea IMO.
 
WoW! This is one of the greatest threads I've seen on MM.com! I appluad you guys on keeping it civil. I myself don't have a whole lot of insight on the topic, but I do have a question (Anybody feel free to answer!).

One person stated that people were making an effort to keep the tag costs down, while still supplementing the salaries of the big corporations (sorry guys, don't know the whole "lingo"). Do you think that if the big corporations actually had a gain in income, that they would truly increase their conservation efforts for the good of the future generations? Or would they say "Eh, we got our salary covered, lets go hunting!". Not sure if this makes sense, but if you know what I mean. Speak up.

Michael~All Gods creatures welcome... right next to the mashed potatoes and gravy.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-16-06 AT 08:51AM (MST)[p]THE MDF, THE PUBLIC CHARITY THAT KEEPS ON TAKING. . .

Here's another little interesting fact about the MDF. It's NTEE (National Taxonomy of Exempt Entities) has categorized the MDF as a, D34 - Wildlife Sanctuary/Refuge, ?This classification System was developed by The National Center for Charitable Statistics as part of its keyword searching criteria.? Choosing a good, representative NTEE code will help your organization be more easily found by users searching our database."

Let's compare three of the more well known wildlife organizations in north America, the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation (RMEF), the Boone and Crockett Club (B/C), and the Mule Deer Foundation (MDF), just for fun. The RMEF is a C30 -- Natural Resource Conservation and Protection organization and the B/C is a C30?Natural Resource Conservation and Protection, a D30?Wildlife Preservation/Protection organization, and a C60?Environmental Education and Outdoor Survival Programs.
Just so we are clear, the MDF is a D34 Wildlife Sanctuary/Refuge -- and the D series contains the following other classifications:

D30 Wildlife Preservation/ Protection
D31 Protection of Endangered Species
D32 Bird Sanctuary/Preserve
D33 Fisheries
D34 Wildlife Sanctuary/Refuge

Looks to me like when the MDF was classified it may have had very, very different ambitions or someone has made a serious error in filing their paperwork, or someone had miss classified them. It's reveling that an organization that promotes the harvest of trophy mule deer, through the sale of exclusive tags, would have a same classification as that of a Wildlife Sanctuary/Refuge - very interesting. I suggest the MDF make an adjustment when it files it's next federal tax papers.

Let's dig a little deeper. I'll call this the tag that keeps on taking ? here we go.

The MDF is a charitable organization and under the current federal tax structure, and that makes your contributions tax deductible. The purchase of the tag is a ?contribution.? Therefore, it is tax deductible.

Now, Mr. Abbot has said before that the people who buy the tags don't need, or take the tax deduction, i.e., deduct the cost of the tag from their income. If this is true, why is the MDF not a 501 (c) (7) instead? The (c) 7 (Social and Recreational Clubs) gets to be a non-profit, completely subsidized by the citizens, but the ?contributions? a.k.a, tags in this case, are not tax deductible. I find it extremely offensive that a person who buys a tag, and gets to avoid the application process that most other people must follow, also gets to deduct the cost of the tag from their income.

I personally find incredible, that most hunters have to wait to hunt in Utah, but then, to top it off, they also get to pay for the exclusive hunting trip for others. In essence, the pubic is footing the bill so that some person can go directly to the MDF, buy the tag, and go hunting while we pay for it.

In fairness, Mr. Abbott was not around when the organization was established, so I don't blame him for the tax classification, but if the MDF really is in this for the average hunter, you have to ask what has the MDF done to modify its status in order to eliminate these very offensive provisions?

If you would like to see this for yourself, you can. Just go to: http://www.guidestar.org/pqShowGsReport.do?finId=101417877&npoId=410057, and read down the page, at the bottom you will see acrobat files to 7 years of tax information. I am not implying that the MDF has deliberately tried to hide behind this status, or that it's even being deliberately fraudulent, but it does cause me to question their true motives.

Some may say so what, it's a mistake in the classification, but this is just the type of fleecing of America, we should no longer accept. It also tells me that they run a loose ship! I think our mule deer deserve better, don't you?
 
In the past Utah did have several groups with this in mind. In steps the SFW. They promised to make everything right. They got bigger and stronger and followed the money. Then one of their top dogs decided that SFW was headed in the wrong direction. He leaves promising to make things right his way. That invidual would be the one and only head of the MDF (aka fishon). Now the MDF is not only headed down the same road as the SFW they are trying to pass. It seems all these groups forget where their intial support and foundation came from. It was the average sportsman. The wealth where not involved until these groups offered something for them to gain. Premium tags without waiting in line. Where were these wealth sportsman when this groups where starting? I know I will be told that there are great sportsman that have contributed all along and that is absolutly true. However there are alot more now and it is obvious they are in control.
 
RE: MDF - the end or just the beginning?

mr abbot we're pimpen all over the world baby for you RC ML out
 
hymen you are getting all busted up over being the top dog. the more money you guys make mdf sfw rmef nwtf on the permits the less the dwr needs to come up with to fund all projects through out the state keep up the work and find more of these rich hunter guys to help us out. them control freaks
 
Still the Utah connection. Most of my questions weren't answered. Anyone familiar with the organization care to respond? (post57) PM me if you want. mtmuley
 
I think the IRS statement is the most interesting. If those numbers are true, then MDF spends < 17% on habitat. I checked on Charity Navigator (http://www.charitynavigator.org) and MDF is not listed. But for comparison I looked at some other groups to see what % they put into program expenses which is basically on the ground stuff(this exludes advertising, salary, printing, phones, office, etc) .

BRACE YOURSELF!

DU = 86%
RMEF = 90%
RGS = 91%
QU = 86%

I am in disbelief! 17%, can that be right? Is that the right figure? Somebody please tell me that was a mistake! If not, MDF has some serious explaining to do. I intend to contact Charity Navigator and have them rate MDF.

P.S. I am betting this thread gets locked real soon, as did 2 others today.
 
MD103, I know my last poset was, way long, in fact, they all are too long, however, read the last few paragraphs. I put the link to the tax returns right in my post. So no one has to believe my numbers, you can see for yourself where the money went. I've made no conclusions, I've only posted the numbers. You can see 7 years of returns on that site. You will have to register, but that's they way it is on just about all sites now a days.
 
NeMont, yes read your post. Never said we paid 100%. Just the majority which based on the organizations paying that is a fact. Sorry. I would probably bet that more money comes from ammo and such sales in Texas that in most states.

There have been numerous articles written that state NR pay the majority of the cost (Zumbo-Pertersens Hunting and others). You $40. I pay $499. You get 80% access to Le units and other tags, I get 20% and no access to tags ie cow elk or does. Those are facts NeMont. We understand we have to pay to play. R (not all)seems to think everyone else needs to step up and pay when they get the least cost and the most benefit.

You have a birdnest on the ground and some of you ##### and then get excited about it and ##### somemore about cost. I don't get it. I guess I'm just a slow witted Southern Boy.
 
BCHunter I love to debate facts so when I see mistated "facts" I like to point them out.

"You get 80% access to Le units and other tags, I get 20% and no access to tags ie cow elk or does"

Would you show me in writing where you as a NR cannot hunt cows and does? Because that is not a Fact.

Check it out and look under the Special Cow Elk and Deer B licenses. Plus there are OTC NR whitetail tags. Not to mention that there are oftern OTC antelope doe tags. I don't know many NR who travel to Montana to hunt does period. If would like to come hunt does I would host you at my house and take you to where the landowners would love you.

http://fwp.mt.gov/hunting/seasonslicenses/nonresidents.html

In addition if you look at the resident pool vs. NR pool there are many districts where NR hunters have the same or better odds of drawing LE tags. Don't believe me then go look that the numbers.

I am not bitching about the cost of tags and support raising resident tag costs. My problems stem from whoring out a public resource so that some wealthy dude gets to jump the line. The Federal Lands Arguement doesn't hold water with me because every tax paying American pays for things they don't get access to. You can fight that fight if you wish but you may want to die on another hill.

This is my final post on this issue as you will not change my mind and I can't get through to you about the issue.

The invitation is open if you want to come hunt does and cow elk I will play guide for you and set up all access and provide lodging. Let me know.

Nemont
 
Keep digging TFinalshot, you are on to much more than you may realize.

I would LOVE to see the list of projects they funded to the tune of $524,000 in 2004.

Hey MDF, post a detailed project list here for 2004!

While you're at it let's see how much was funded with tag money, and how much from banquet proceeds and donations.
 

Similar threads

J
Mule Deer and CWD
Replies
45
Views
1k
HIcountryman
HIcountryman
D
Beware of Guided Mule Deer Hunts in Huntsville UT
Replies
97
Views
5k
wstrntines
wstrntines
Deerlove
Winter conditions
Replies
15
Views
2k
ridgetops
ridgetops

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

IMG_2327.jpeg
IMG_4493.jpg
Fantastic Bull Elk Score
1681495706155.jpeg
Screenshot_20230706_080518_Chrome.jpg
20211015_174327.jpg
IMG_7.JPG
Rocky Mountain Ranches Mule Deer
DSCN2599.JPG
713413F0-DA38-42C7-8C99-D451B0A95CC4.jpeg
Taker Buck???
IMG_20201109_155208566_HDR.jpg
Back
Top Bottom