What does S. F.W. stand for?

  • Thread starter TheElitehornhunter
  • Start date
T

TheElitehornhunter

Guest
SFW once upon a long time ago stood for Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife, but this was before the GREED.

Now days SFW is know as Sportsmen for the Fantastically Wealthy?

A hot selling item could now be the "Save us from SFW" decal sticker. Or a guy pissing on SFW decal.

SFW has also taken more hunters out of hunting than PETA has in the last decade.

Oh, but wait, SFW is saving us from the wolves. Wait, isn't SFW wolves in sheep clothing?

I also wish that SFW would get it through their thick heads that the guy who pays $40 on a tag is just as important as the guy who pays $200,000.
 
Wow not only do they remove hunters but posts on MM as well.






2010 TOTALS
P.E.T.A. = 0 HUNTERS GONE
UTAH WILDLIFE BOARD = 13,000 HUNTERS GONE
 
Come on, you can't really believe that all bad is because of SFW. That's just foolish.

I agree that when I hear comments like Don's comment about how 100% success might be the way things should be managed, I want to puke, but that's just him. His idea of hunting is far different than myself. That type of management is for high fence operations, not for sportsmen who understand that we can't all be successful every year.

The fact is, SFW is a business that needs to make money to survive. That money comes via conservation tags, antelope island tags, expo tags. It used to come from memberships, but I highly doubt membership dues or even banquet proceeds (minus tag money) is much of anything.
So, to keep the business going, they have to protect what generates them dollars. It's a tough business they're in, because not only are they supposed to do good for wildlife and their members, but also try to keep the business going. Sometimes it doesn't all work out perfectly.

At this point, I think Don is the man when it comes to wildlife in Utah. I would guess that he has "the in" with Wildlife Board members, important people in the division and of course lots of people who appoint board members and who control funds. I think that power gives him a huge advantage over anyone else in this state. I would guess that what most state reps, and US reps in the state know about wildlife is what Don tells them. He's wildlife to those people. So, he has power.
With that power, he can do some real good, or atleast things that some think are "good" and others think are bad. I know of people who think he's putting way too much effort into killing all the wolves, but most of us don't want any of them in Utah. He can't please us all, all of the time.

As I stated, I think Don and SFW do a lot of good, but they also have different views than myself on some issues. I haven't really talked to Don much about this deer thing, but since hearing his statement about 100% success and knowing how much he likes elk rut hunts, I think he would someday like to see far fewer deer tags in Utah and much, much, much better quality. Our elk is what he sees as a huge success.....LOTS of big bulls killed each year, rich guys driving conservation tag prices through the roof at banquets. I believe that is wildlife success to him. I could be wrong, but I doubt it.

Right now, I'm a bit afraid of these tag cuts, cause I don't think we're going to see a real big difference and in a few more years, there will be more tag cuts that will try to get pushed through. Too many people see our elk hunting as a monumental success, and I'm sure those folks would love to see the deer the same, because that's success to them. Unfortunately, that means most people only get to hunt once every many, many, many years.

It's like I was telling Don the other night, these tag cuts hurt the little guys, because many average dudes in Utah can't afford to just go to Mexico deer hunting, or Alaska Dall sheep hunting when they don't get a Utah deer tag.....they're left sitting at home reading about other peoples hunts in magazines and on MM.

I think sometimes the guys who get to travel all over hunting different places and different animals forget that there are some people who just can't afford to do that. Many people only get to hunt their home state.

Anyway, I think you're placing too much blame on SFW. I think they mean to do well all the time, in fact, the guys I knew when I was on the board....Bryce, Dave, and many others, were on that board to really try and make a difference and they do try hard. I also think that all the guys on the executive board....Byron, Don, Troy, John, and Ryan also all want to do what's best. The problem is, what they think is best is not always what some of us think is best, and it never will be.

I have to say, sometimes I think there is too much thought put into the money side of things, but SFW is also a business that needs conservation tags, antelope island tags, & expo tags to prosper. Banquets and membership dues might cover overhead, but that's it. The real money is in those tags. So, like many businesses, I'm sure making money is one of the most important things they keep their eye on. They're just in a tough business, cause most of the business is supported by public tags.

Anyway, I've typed long enough. I think you're a bit too harsh on SFW. I think you have exaggerated your comments. I would hope that most who read this are smart enough to atleast appreciate the difficult position that decision makers are in. Heck, just on this site you would have a hard time finding two people who agree on everything. Try pleasing 10,000 members, or 97,000 deer hunters in Utah. Won't happen. All a person can do is the best they can.
Just like this thread, some would say I should have just deleted it, others would say leave it. I made a choice and it won't please everyone.

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
 
You dont see the SFW guys mad because there not hunting! They just enter there name in the expo hunt and get a star by there name. Hey john congrats you drew ANOTHER sheep/elk/deer/goat tag what would you like to hunt this year we will let you pick!
 
Sfw is not the great organization they try to come across as. I'm working on some info on them and will post it when I get it all complete.

If you support them now, you won't after reading my post.
SFW needs to get the hell out of utah!

4b1db2ac644136c4.jpg
 
While I agree that SFW does some very good and important work in our state, I also agree with much of what EliteHornHunter posted here.

Don Peay isn't quite the heaven-sent angel for wildlife (or specifically for most hunters) that he pretends to be.
 
Also...I have to disagree with Founder on one key statement.

I don't think we're placing too much "blame" on SFW at all. If they want to take ALL the credit for wildlife expansion in Utah (which they DO...just talk to Don!) then they sure as hell deserve some blame too.

Don doesn't want to accept any of it that's for sure (what POLITICIAN would?) but there will be some to go around if (when?) the deer situation turns out like Utah's elk...big critters in the hills, but severly limited opportunity to GROW OUR SPORT, which is already in danger.

Sure...Don will probably get on this thread and write another novel about how hard he and the rest of the SFW'ers work to grow wildlife, which I don't doubt. Problem is, all the wildlife in the world won't do OUR SPORT any good when the opportunity to hunt them is run into the ground.
 
SFW doesn't have a very big presence in Colorado and they seem to have a pretty high hunter satisfation.......Hmmmmmm!Makes a guy wonder
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-07-10 AT 09:49AM (MST)[p]While I agree that it may be harsh to place the blame squarely on the shoulders of SFW, they are without a doubt representative of the problem, which is special interest.

This whole mess is only about what hunters want, and that should not be the focus. It should be a consideration, but not the focus. It seems to me the priority list should read as follows:

1. Bioligically what is best for the deer.

2. How to raise enough money in permit sales (not special interest B.S.) to be able to do what's best for the deer.


The answer I think would be simple, but will not be popular. To that I say.... "too damn bad". As hunters we claim that the reason for hunting is to be conservationists. If that is true, we have a responsibility to submit to what's best for the animals we love to hunt. I think the DWR knows what's best and would do it, but they are powerless to make any decisions because of all of the special interest bunk they have to deal with, and all the ridiculous crap they have to do to make "hunters" happy.

My opinion of what the answer would be if the DWR had the ability to do what's best no matter "popular opinion", is that they would increase archery opportunity ten fold, do everything in their power to entice archery hunters, and make rifle hunting less desirable by limiting permits, limiting seasons, etc.

Over time permit numbers would not only increase, but herd objectives would be met, and better trophy quality would be achieved. All of us interested would get to hunt healthy herds with good trophy quality every single year. To prove that this works, you need not look further than the Wasatch Archery only Unit.

The key difference is that we would only get to "hunt" a deer every year. That's right, most of us would go home without one, but at least we would get to see them, and at least we would get to be out there enjoying the resource together, instead of sitting on the couch wishing we could hunt.

I don't know about you idiots, but I'd much rather bowhunt every year and never kill a damn thing, than to sit on my couch for the rest of my life watching my kids grow up playing video games instead of enjoying the outdoors, all so that I can go hunting MAYBE once in my lifetime and be able to "shoot" a 200"+ buck on a 100% success rate "hunt". And, I think, the DWR would say the same, if they could speak their minds (which they can't).

Mark my words, we will have the same situation with deer in this state that we do with elk if the special interest continues to run the show, be that SFW or just ignorant rifle hunters claiming that they want the hunting opportunity to be "fair".

If I'm wrong about what the DWR would do, fine. That may be the case, but the fact remains; we cannot continue to try to please the hunters and special interest groups. Instead we must manage our deer herds based on sound biological management practices, and we must raise enough money to allow us to do that.

Truthfully, the SFW way is one answer to the problem. I hope, however, that it isn't the one that is ultimately chosen because it leaves most of us on the outside wishing we could get in. I also believe there are other solutions that let all of us in, but they won't work without some willingness on our part to change. Changes like picking up a bow and arrow, or flintlock rifle instead of the centerfire.
 
First of all let me state that I am not a member of SFW. I was very active in wildlife issues back in the late 70's and early 80's. As I recall, SFW came into being in the early 80's at a time when there was huge controversies in regards to big game hunting. Many of the DWR folks were layed off, big game herds were declining etc. I talked to Don several times in those years and was impressed with his passion for wildlife. Say what you want-- SFW is not responsible for the decline in mule deer numbers in the state. They are a major voice in the debate but as a RAC board member I listened as much to the hunter "representing himself" as much as any one group. The reason we are where we are in regards to mule deer hunting is because of the decline of mule deer numbers over the last 30 years. I can almost gaurantee you that if there were not the different organizations involved with the decision making process, deer hunting in the state would definitely look different than it does today and I don't think for the better. Most all of what is going on today is because there is alot of very passionate groups of people that have very strong opinions.Not one of those groups gets everything they propose-- not even SFW. Lets be real about the reason this state is in the situation it is in regards to deer hunting--- THE DECLINE IN MULE DEER POPULATIONS--
If we still had the same number of deer we had in 1965, we would be talking about how many second tags should be issued and how far into November we should allow hunting.
I lost count of the e-mails and phone calls I recieved before the November RAC meeting in regards to the deer (hunter) management options. Added all up, there was not a clear majority- the closest to a majority was those that wanted option 2. Our RAC voted for option 1. I felt that if the DWR would do their job and manage each unit within the regions the way that option 2 will now require them to do they could accomplish the goals of option 2 and not have to cut tags as deeply and allow hunters to continue to hunt region wide.
The best thing to come out of this whole process is the focus that is now in place to do everything we can to help the mule deer numbers increase. There is no doubt that increased predator harvest will yield the quickest and most visible results. I personally believe that there should be a fund set up to encourage predator harvest-- coyote in particular-- to pay a bounty for those that take coyotes near and in the fawning grounds. It has become apparent to me that we need to focus on protecting the fawns during their most vunerable time.
If we as sportsmen want more and better opportunity to hunt mule deer, we have to grow the herds. If we do- much of what we are discussing will solve itself very quickly.
 
I agree with founder's sentiment BUT, Wildlife and hunter management has become very political. The problem is, there is no check and no balance. SFW's position in todays climate is akin to having the democratic or republican party running unchallenged on every issue.

Our country is based on a few principles that completely contradict what exists in our state. It's time for balance and proper representation.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-07-10 AT 10:27AM (MST)[p]Just to be clear here...I don't think anyone is trying to say that SFW should be to "blame" for the decline of mule deer numbers.

The way the hunting of mule deer in Utah is handled is the issue.
 
tworay-yes i have spent around $200 every year they have done the expo! But when SFW puts on the event and the higher ranks are drawing tags year in year out makes a guy wonder. If they are so good to the hunters they want to represent why are they drawing the tags that they want us to have? Because its there way of filling there pockets and cutting the corner of putting in for the D.W.R draw tags! Really do you know the tags that the higher rank SFW guys have magicly drew out for at the expo? I do.
 
Funny how they have no problem cutting 13000 public tags, but are the expo tags getting cut? Those damn tags belong to the public too, how did they get their grubby hands on our tags, and make that much $ off something that should be ours in the first place? I also find it way too conveniant that they can put in for the tags, and have no outside governing body do the draw. Just my .02

Athens Archery Field Staff
Wicked1 Bowstring Staff
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-07-10 AT 07:11PM (MST)[p]You are correct, SFW, will support cutting tags, but they won't ever cut the 500 plus tags that they get a year to sell. Maybe SFW needs to explore other ways to raise money instead of constantly grabbing from the public.

SFW will also be getting more tags in 2012 when option 2 is put into practice.
 
I'll tell you, I'm definitely against anymore conservation tags, but I'm quite sure that once there's demand for general season Utah tags, there will be conservation tags being sold. And, it's not just SFW, MDF, or the other groups who just love that "easy" money, the UDWR loves that easy money too. Very little work goes into turning those tags into huge amounts of cash.
In my opinion, I believe that somewhere along the line, the grand plan on replacing the funds they loose by cutting tags, is with the use of conservation tags. I'm sure that these tag cuts didn't come without a longterm plan on how to replace that revenue at some point.

I'm telling you, we all need to fear those who think Utah elk management is so great, cause those people who believe that, and who have some weight to throw around, most likely want to see our deer hunting also world-renowned, and the only way to get there is to cut the vast majority of us out of the game. Then, they'll be pushing for hunts with super high success rates, and of course 5% of tags will still be offered as conservation tags, and lots of dollars will be rolling in to those who "market" the tags for their 10% cut and to the UDWR.
And, everyone will be talking about how great the deer hunting in Utah is.

That's my opinion, but I can assure you, some definitely disagree with me. I hope I'm wrong, cause if I'm not, 20 years from now most of us won't be hunting, but rather just sitting home reading stories and seeing photos of big bucks that the small percentage got to hunt. Is that the hunting you want your kids to look forward to?

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
 
Well said Founder. That's EXACTLY where all of this is going.

If you are a deer hunter you are soon to have a couple of options.

1. Quit deer hunting.
2. Save your money and go out of state.

Because there isn't going to be anyone hunting deer in Utah except the ones who draw the one tag (maybe) they'll ever get, and those with more money than they know what do with who can buy them from our good friend's over at SFW who have done us so many wonderful services.

It's ugly, but it's true.
 
100% AGREE Founder...couldn't be put any better.

It's a scary thought for sure, and I can almost guarantee that special interest groups, led by Donnie-Boy, can smell blood in the water with our deer herds. Time to attack and take them down the elk road I'm afraid.
 
DWR brought the 3 management plans to the racs and the board not SFW.

The DWR is responsible for the bogus deer counts(classifications) not the SFW.

The DWR issues doe tags not the SFW.

DWR has been manageing the deer herd the last 25 years not the SFW. The years prior to 1985 ranchers had more to do with the deer management than the DWR.

SFW isnt responsible for making deer hunting in Utah better or worse. DWR is though. Lets not give SFW more credit than they deserve good or bad.

Yes they get some auction tags but, the DWR issues those tags to the "self" interest groups to sell. The DWR makes as much and sometimes more on those auction tags. Hell they auction em off to the highest bidder out of all the SI groups themselves.

Put the blame were it belongs good or bad, the DWR not SFW.

I dont hear anyone b!tchin when the SFW, MDF, RMEF,and the WTF fork out 90% of the money for habitat restoration projects, airiel gunnings for coyotes and bountys paid for coyotes. The division makes up the rest some of the time. Just sayin...

Just sounds to me like sour grapes and SFW supported the option that some didnt and the SFW is an easy target.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-08-10 AT 10:03AM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Dec-08-10 AT 10:00?AM (MST)

Brutus, brutus, brutus, the DWR is forced to make presentations at the RAC whether they agree with them or not. The Wildlife Board and special interest groups like SFW have been making the decisions NOT the DWR.

The DWR uses the same model to do there counts as Colorado. You LOVE colorado. Is Colorado's counts bogus since they're using the same model?

SFW shares a big part of the blame for our deer herds when they inject their ideas to the Wildlife Board. Now we have Option 2, LE units, thanks to SFW which in turn will profit from Option 2 because they will get to sell more tags to rich people.

Meanwhile you keep drinking the Koolaid.


"I dont hear anyone b!tchin when the SFW, MDF, RMEF,and the WTF fork out 90% of the money for habitat restoration projects, airiel gunnings for coyotes and bountys paid for coyotes. The division makes up the rest some of the time. Just sayin..."

The Money that SFW has been raising is taking tags from the public and selling them to the highest bidder. SFW isn't going out and earning this money on their own. There are lobbying to get these tags from the DWR.
 
You are right brutus, those conservation tags, expo tags, and antelope island tags benefit the UDWR and the state more than they do the groups who get to sell them. Sportsmen need to be very concerned about that. The state (UDWR and legislators) have found that selling hunting tags can bring easy money. But, to get top dollar for tags, units have to be producing top notch game.
Another worry I have had of late, is that management in this state will be influenced by how money conservation tags bring at past banquets.
When conversations are being had, I'm sure comments such as, "Our elk herd is being shot out, and elk conservation tags sold for far less this year than last. We need less elk tags to bring quality up"
I would bet comments like that have been thrown out there to decision makers who always have an eye on revenue.

I guess my biggest concern is that money is playing too big of a role in wildlife management.

brutus - You are right, it's not SFW's fault that our deer herd is struggling, and SFW does do a lot when it comes to funding projects, aerial gunning of coyotes, wolf stuff, etc. They do lots of good.
BUT, they also live off conservation tags, expo, and soon antelope island tags, so one has to wonder if all decisions are being made based on what's good for wildlife or their members, rather than what might allow them to grow their business. And to grow, they need mroe tags to sell. SFW memberships aren't going to cut it.
That is why I think many people throw blame to SFW.

I personally am still bummed out that SFW couldn't have gone to bat for the average sportsmen in this state and tried to get all antelope island tags available in draw. I have to wonder if the reason they got behind the auction tags is because they get to sell it at their expo and most likely pocket 10%????
I'm also scared when I hear Don talk about how 100% management might be how things should work.

I don't know boys.......................

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
 
How many of you out there think that it would be a good idea to get a bill passed threw legislature that outlaws organisation's in the state of Utah from receiving conservation tag's expo tag's ect. Instead the DWR could offer them at auction and keep all the proceed's for conservation. They could do away with the middle man and have twice the fund,s for conservation projects, predator problems, land easements ect ect. Just wondering what some of you out there think about something like this working?????
 
Yes, Don, has said numerous times that he would like 100% harvest rates. Can you just imagine the tag cuts? Fewer and fewer average joe people will be hunting, but more and more rich people will be hunting Utah.
 
It would be nice to see SFW taken off the tag grabbing nipple, but it will take a lot to make that happen.

SFW is more like a business. They need tags or they will go out of business.
 
Brutus just a reminder NONE of the $ generated at the expo with the publics tags has to go back to wildlife. Dosen't that make you feel warm and fuzzy. The DWR and the public gets screwed! ERR the wildlife is the one who gets screwed.
 
OK here is my buck fitty on the deal.

SFW has become a master in working the system as it currently sits. They are simply playing the hands they've been dealt and they are freaking rock stars at making things happen.
I couldn't disagree more with the SFW philosophy of severly limited opportunity and 100% success rate hunts, but there are those that do support this. I'm sure they disagree with my philosophy of maximizing opportunity where ever possible.

Unfortunately these are the guys that show up and get things done. Don is the guy with the talent to get things done on the Hill, give him credit. Now I would suggest that if you don't like the direction things are headed you get off your asses and MAKE SOME CHANGES... You won't ever win a fight if you let the
opponent make all the rules, we are fighting with both hands tied behind our backs and SFW has the baseball bat... It's their system.

Contact your Senators and Representatives... Do it today. Tell them the system is broken.

Both Biologic and Social data is being ignored...

http://le.utah.gov/house/DistrictInfo/newMaps/State.htm

If you want to make something happen here is how to do it.
Speak to these people, they want to hear from you and those that I've spoken to were quite suprised at what had been going on in the last few years.

POST UP THE RESULTS AFTER YOU MAKE THE CALL










2010 TOTALS
P.E.T.A. = 0 HUNTERS GONE
UTAH WILDLIFE BOARD = 13,000 HUNTERS GONE
 
>DWR brought the 3 management plans
>to the racs and the
>board not SFW.

At the request of the board to come up with plans that implemented 18-25/100 buck to doe ratios statewide.
>
>The DWR is responsible for the
>bogus deer counts(classifications) not the
>SFW.

Conjecture. What proof do you have to contradict their information?
>
>The DWR issues doe tags not
>the SFW.
>
>DWR has been manageing the deer
>herd the last 25 years
>not the SFW.

Really? So are you suggesting they do not have a heavy influence on the board and division?

>prior to 1985 ranchers had
>more to do with the
>deer management than the DWR.
>
>
>SFW isnt responsible for making deer
>hunting in Utah better or
>worse. DWR is though. Lets
>not give SFW more credit
>than they deserve good or
>bad.
>
>Yes they get some auction tags
>but, the DWR issues those
>tags to the "self" interest
>groups to sell.

In behalf of the public, after all, the animals belong to tax payers.

The DWR
>makes as much and sometimes
>more on those auction tags.
>Hell they auction em off
>to the highest bidder out
>of all the SI groups
>themselves.


>
>Put the blame were it belongs
>good or bad, the DWR
>not SFW.

If SFW wasn't able to manipulate and leverage the division, I'd agree, but that's not the case.

>
>I dont hear anyone b!tchin when
>the SFW, MDF, RMEF,and the
>WTF fork out 90% of
>the money for habitat restoration
>projects, airiel gunnings for coyotes
>and bountys paid for coyotes.
>The division makes up the
>rest some of the time.
>Just sayin...
>
>Just sounds to me like sour
>grapes and SFW supported the
>option that some didnt and
>the SFW is an easy
>target.

Oh how easy it is to be cognitively dissonant and chalk everything up to sour grapes.
 
Exactly, sometimes I start to wonder if SFW is more interested in the MONEY than the animals were hunting.
 
>Exactly, sometimes I start to wonder
>if SFW is more interested
>in the MONEY than the
>animals were hunting.

Seriously, you wonder that?! Me, I already know it!
 
perhaps I missed something FOUNDER but is there a post on this website that has SFW 2010 financial books? If there is can you direct me to it? Oh and by the way the wildlife board is responsible for 173,000 lost hunters(roughly 250,000 to 90,000 and now another 13,000) Funny how when the heat was up Don held that dog and pony show, yet where are all the things he promised? Anyone that doesn't think SFW has WAY TO MUCH POWER, come out to Antelope Island and see what $150,000+ will buy. Almost no one I know wanted the hunt, but somehow it is happening, wonder who pushed it? Why would they, was it biologically necessary? How did the state come up with the dollar figure they were throwing around, bet no one behind the scenes put that figure out there. Again, WE allowed for CWMU's(ranching subsidy), now they are basically all of Northern Utah and are heading south. That created that market. It was only natural that the guys forking out $15k for an elk would then get a lobbying group(SFW). The beauty of SFW is they mangaged to sucker us into helping them. YES i do put in for the tags, afterall they are my tags(resident of Utah). Funny thing is how hard it is to get rid of the leach(SFW) after it is attached. Write your RAC and ask them to cut them off. Talk to the DWR. Face it boys, unless you can pay off the state the way SFW has(tag money, lobbying money, hunts, etc.) we are stuck with them.
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom