SFW expeditures

T

TheElitehornhunter

Guest
I'm not sure how this benefits wildlife, but decide for yourself.

SFWLobbying2011_2-1.jpg


SFWLobbying2011.jpg
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-21-12 AT 12:22PM (MST)[p]haha, are you seriously applying that you have one? I'm just posting a few facts, but if you don't like it then don't read it. It really is that simple.

All I ever hear out of your mouth is the same old doom and gloom sob stories about the DWR not managing the deer herds. Do you need a box of tissue? You need some fresh cheese with that whine.
 
Fighting the battle where it needs to be fought. If you understand how the world functions those numbers make sense. Sad but true.
 
OK, I can agree with that Muley73 XOXOXO, but it all depends on what they are fighting for and who they're fighting against. According to Randy, SFW, fought against the wolf bill that passed. I never have seen anyone from SFW dispute his claims.
 
elite,

in your ideological pipe dream you call reality, do you think we should revert back to the "grass roots" way and fight a good fight hunter by hunter??

i think it's money "better" spent fighting the battles where they are and that is at state and federal gov. levels.
 
Elite, I'm sorry I got you so upset. It's not about SFW but the same could be said if you were talking about some other org. or religion for say. It just gets old when someone goes on day after day, week after week about the same thing. You really should look into some anger management classes too.
Also, now that the RACs have made their decisions, you won't hear my thoughts about the new plan. I'm just going to deal with things the best way I can and move forward. THe DWR asked for input and suggestions, so I gave them some.
 
I was never upset with you ridgetops. People need to be more educated about SFW. You and many others bad mouth the DWR constantly so why is that ok, but if I show facts about SFW then it isn't ok. Every hunter should have a little bit of an interest where SFW is spending money that they receive from public tags. If SFW raised their money through fundraisers without pimping public tags then I wouldn't have a problem with them. BUT since they're pimping public tags (a public resource)then their needs to be more accountability and transparency. So far this hasn't been the case and that is my beef with them.

Yes, the DWR makes many stupid mistakes, but in most cases the DWR have their hands tied by the wildlife board and special interest groups.

I have a problem with SFW reducing opportunity without providing facts instead of emotion from it's very few members.
 
By comparison can you post the corresponding facts for anti hunting groups like PETA and the humane society? Just wondering what kind of ammo Don has when he is battling in DC.
 
We shouldn't be to worried about PETA since SFW has cut more hunter opportunities then PETA could ever dream of. PETA doesn't need to fight when SFW is doing it for them.
 
Elite said--"Yes, the DWR makes many stupid mistakes, but in most cases the DWR have their hands tied by the wildlife board and special interest groups."

The DWR has the right and the ability to override any decision made by the Wildlife Board. If their hands are tied it happens because they decide to let it be that way. They truly are only trying to listen to the public. The fact is none of us get everyting we want, when we want it. I'm with Ridge-- this constant banter about SFW gets real old by you. I still don't understand why you don't start your own organization and really push those things and ideas you believe would help our wildlife--- until you do-- it seems its more about being -- anti-SFW than really caring about the problems our wildlife face. You seem to have alot of passion, why not try to build something that would be a positive force for solving our wildilife problems.
 
And what the heck does all this prove. You have to spend money to get stuff done. Elite do you actually know Don, I do and he is not what you make him out to be. All you can do is criticize every step he takes. Tell us what the hell you have done to help the mule deer out. For that instance any wildlife. He has with the help of many done more for the state of Utah than all you whiners put together. I think it is time for you to put up or just shut the hell up. Sorry for the langauge but I enjoy debate not tearing down one another for you own personnel gain and ideology?s. Ok tear in.
 
What have I done for wildlife? The list is pretty long, but it mostly consists of MANY, MANY MANY habitat restoration projects, guzzlers, predator control etc. I don't have a problem with Don Peay as a person. I have a problem with SFW and the way they have drifted from the reason they were founded because of MONEY AND GREED.
 
Do you really think that the DWR can or wants to "lobby" the political entities involved with wildlife funding ? That is best left up to sportsmans groups like SFW, MDF etc. The money they recieve doesn't just come from conservation or expo tags. It comes from folks that have a real desire to see our wildlife/hunting traditions continue. In order to get some things done, it takes those groups that can exert some leverage politically. It is what it is. If you don't like them receiving money off from the tags and raffles, all you have to do is form an organization then apply to sponsor, direct and manage the whole show. the monies you receive can then be dircted as you see fit to help wildlife in this state. The DWR is very meticulous in their auditng of the groups that recieve monies from the expo tags. If they believe that it is not being used appropriately they can pull the plug on them.
 
I posted this on another thread in the General Forum, but I feel compelled to post it here as well.

How about some legislation that prevents individuals from profitting from the sale of big game tags? True conservation organizations are filled with unpaid volunteers that give of their time, energy and even their wealth to support the conservation efforts. The unsung heroes of wildlife management. Some people have tapped into this segment of society to take advantage of the money that is generated for their own personal benefit.

The profiteers use the same model as a couple of other businesses. Take a good cause where a lot of hardworking, honest volunteers are making a difference, like the care and feeding of orphans. Thousands of volunteers give of their time and money to help children all over the world without the expectation of financial reward. Who can turn down the teary face of an emaciated orphan pleading for food? Along comes the profiteer, sees a good thing and starts his racket. The naive and unsuspecting donate and the profiteer funds just enough to appear legitimate and pockets the rest. Or another of my favorite scams, churches. Church A asks the membership to pay tithes, give other offerings and fund special programs. No one in the church is paid, they are all volunteers with no expectation of financial gain. They are interested in performing the Lord's work. All of the proceeds go toward the advancement of the church, helping widows and orphans, disaster relief and feeding the poor. Church B is run by a profiteer. He provides a place for his parishioners to worship collects the same monies, but that's where the similarities end. He pays a franchise fee to the national organization and keeps the rest to pay for his big house on the hill.

In my opinion, the guys that make money off the backs of starving orphans, posing as a man of God, or posing as a conservationist are all the same. They took something good and worthwhile and perverted it for their own benefit.

What started out as a worthwhile program for wildlife conservation, as Tony pointed out, has now been perverted. Sportsmen and G&F organizations in other states see $76 million being raised and think of all the good that money could do. What they fail to recognize is the risk of the profiteers waiting in the wings to sieze their chance. Sportsmen throughout the west need to be vigilant, demand accountability, and refuse to be lulled by the "at least they do some good" mentality. We can make a difference and see the money gets into the right hands.

No one will agrue the merits of working on behalf of the welfare of wildlife. The problem is the business model of SFW, what it has done to conservation efforts throughout the west, and how it undermines the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation.
 
Lack of accountability is always dangerous, regardless of the individuals and organizations involved. I wish the state game agencies would auction the tags themselves and then the funds could be dispersed to organizations as grants. Organizations might be required to meet non-profit legal status, including public availability of annual audits provided by independent auditors.

An organization would present a proposal that would outline how the funds would be used based on research (clearly defined objectives and goals) and with required outcomes measurements. A well rounded board could lend some objectivity to which grant applications are accepted and awarded from year to year. Administrative members of organizations would not sit on the board. The result would be a broader availability of funds based on potential for good in use of the funds, transparency, and accountability. No one is guaranteed the funds from year to year, yet if they can show the use of the funds are beneficial, the funds would likely continue to flow to them.

Both grant proposals and individual board members' votes for allocations would be public record as well.
 
Nebo12000 said: "The DWR is very meticulous in their auditing of the groups that receive monies from the expo tags. If they believe that it is not being used appropriately they can pull the plug on them."

Nebo, I am not trying to pick a fight but I believe that your statement is false. First, there are absolutely no requirements as to how those funds are used. If they wanted to, SFW and MDF could spend all of the proceeds from the convention tags on salaries and bonuses. As it stands right now, we have no idea how those monies are being spent. There is no requirement that one red cent be spent on actual conservation.

Second, although the DWR has the right to conduct an annual "audit" into the convention tags, they did not conduct an audit for the first 3 or 4 years of the expo. Moreover, the administrative code section dealing with the convention permits was recently amended to clarify that a "wildlife convention audit" means an "annual review by the division of the conservation organization's processes used to handle applications for convention permits and conduct the drawing, and the protocols associated with collecting and using client data." In other words, the audit looks at the drawing process to ensure that it is fair. There is no audit as to how SFW and MDF spend the funds.

There is no oversight or accountability as to how these groups are spending revenues generated from the Expo tags. This problem is very disturbing given that one of the two stated purposes for these tags is to ?generate revenue for wildlife conservation.? If you are privy to some information that I am not, please post it up. I have been following this issue for a couple of years and I am surprised by the number of sportsmen that believe that DWR is carefully ?tending the store.? They're not!

Hawkeye

Browning A-Bolt 300 Win Mag
Winchester Apex .50 Cal
Mathews Drenalin LD
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-24-12 AT 01:57PM (MST)[p]MMWB said-"Lack of accountability is always dangerous, regardless of the individuals and organizations involved. I wish the state game agencies would auction the tags themselves and then the funds could be dispersed to organizations as grants. Organizations might be required to meet non-profit legal status, including public availability of annual audits provided by independent auditors."

At present, according to DWR officials, they neither have the resources, manpower or inclination to take over the work being done by the different wildlife organizations. They benefit tremendously by the money raised by them through raffles, auctions etc. If they had to be totally responsible for the organizing,managing and lobbying-- they would have to hire additional employees. There is no questions that the bueraucracy included in the DWR would have to grow. So much for downsizing government. Do you believe that "private" enterprise can't do it as well as government ? I have no problem with scrutinizing those groups that are recieving monies through raffles, auctions etc. They certainly use some of those monies to run their organizations-- is that bad or do we all benefit in a general way. Just because you don't archery hunt doesn't mean that the efforts of UBA to improve wildlife habitat doesn't benefit you too.
Also, do you think the DWR should also manage the hunt draws ? They pay out over $1.2 million to Fallon NV to conduct the draws.I researched it pretty thoroughly and discussed it with a number of DWR folks. I figured they ought to be able to do it themselves-- but they don't for a number of reasons including the reasons they don't run the Expo etc as I have stated already.
IMO we need these groups to help keep hunting available for the generations yet to come.
If it makes sense to pull some of these activities in-house in the future, I am sure it will happen.
 
Nebo-

When you get a minute, please respond to my post #19 above. I believe that you are a member of the Central RAC, and I am wondering if you are privy to information that I am not aware of. I am interested in your thoughts and comments.

Thanks.

Hawkeye

Browning A-Bolt 300 Win Mag
Winchester Apex .50 Cal
Mathews Drenalin LD
 
mmwb

You just described the Arizona Habitat Partnership Committee that already exists in our state. A great model of how conservation organizations, state agencies and the average joe can make things happen for wildlife without anyone skimming any money out of it.

http://www.azgfd.gov/w_c/documents/AHPCRevisedCharter-Final6-3-2011.pdf

The HPC and the Local Habitat Partnership Committees are subject to the Arizona Open Meeting Law which requires the meeting time and place to be published, a formal agenda and requires no committee members can meet outside of the formal structure to make decisions. Wildlife projects all are submitted to the LHPC's on the same form so they get fair and equal representation and the LHPC's choose which projects go to the HPC for funding and resource allocation. Game & Fish reviews all the projects to be sure they are consistent with good wildlife management practices and agency goals. Completed projects are audited for performance, results and finance. Any unused funds are returned. ALL RECORDS, meeting minutes, project proposals, budgets and audits, are available for public inspection anytime. This is how funds are disbursed to conservation organizations like Arizona Elk Society, Arizona Desert Bighorn Sheep Society and others that use volunteers to do the work under G&F supervision. These guys go out and build and maintain the over 1,000 guzzlers in our state. They remove barb wire fences, cut down PJ, re-seed burns and take on the myriad tasks required to keep places like the Strip, the Kaibab Plateau and our sky islands productive wildlife habitat. And no one makes a living from it.
 
>LAST EDITED ON Apr-24-12
>AT 01:57?PM (MST)

>
>MMWB said-"Lack of accountability is always
>dangerous, regardless of the individuals
>and organizations involved. I wish
>the state game agencies would
>auction the tags themselves and
>then the funds could be
>dispersed to organizations as grants.
>Organizations might be required to
>meet non-profit legal status, including
>public availability of annual audits
>provided by independent auditors."
>
>At present, according to DWR officials,
>they neither have the resources,
>manpower or inclination to take
>over the work being done
>by the different wildlife organizations.
>They benefit tremendously by the
>money raised by them through
>raffles, auctions etc. If they
>had to be totally responsible
>for the organizing,managing and lobbying--
>they would have to hire
>additional employees. There is no
>questions that the bueraucracy included
>in the DWR would have
>to grow. So much for
>downsizing government. Do you believe
>that "private" enterprise can't do
>it as well as government
>? I have no problem
>with scrutinizing those groups that
>are recieving monies through raffles,
>auctions etc. They certainly use
>some of those monies to
>run their organizations-- is that
>bad or do we all
>benefit in a general way.
>Just because you don't archery
>hunt doesn't mean that the
>efforts of UBA to improve
>wildlife habitat doesn't benefit you
>too.
>Also, do you think the DWR
>should also manage the hunt
>draws ? They pay out
>over $1.2 million to Fallon
>NV to conduct the draws.I
>researched it pretty thoroughly and
>discussed it with a number
>of DWR folks. I figured
>they ought to be able
>to do it themselves-- but
>they don't for a number
>of reasons including the reasons
>they don't run the Expo
>etc as I have stated
>already.
>IMO we need these groups to
>help keep hunting available for
>the generations yet to come.
>
>If it makes sense to pull
>some of these activities in-house
>in the future, I am
>sure it will happen.


No, I'm not suggesting they take over the programs or manage the funding as used in the programs. I am suggesting, they auction the tags and disseminate those funds to organizations based on research based grant applications. The organizations would still do the work and manage the funding, but as is usually the case with grant recipients, they would need to be accountable for the application of those funds and independent auditors document the use of those funds. The DWR auctions the tags or contracts the auction and the funds go back to the DWR into the grant fund. A board that would probably require one sitting DWR employee as a member and other non DWR employees award and track the grants.
 
Call Greg Sheehan, I think he can explain the oversight that the DWR engages in, in regards to conservation groups and the money they recieve.
If you can believe the figures that have been presented at different RAC meetings-- The DWR recieves $100's of thousands of dollars a year back from the different groups, and yes it comes as a result of the tags that are provided by the DWR. Some of the figures I have seen are impressive. According to Alan Clark, many, many projects that are done are as a direct result of the monies that come back through the various wildlife groups. This is money that does not have to be taken out of their budget and according to Mr. Clark, it funds projects that would not be possible if they had to use their budget monies to do them.The DWR at this point seems to be okay with the way the process is set up. I am only speaking from my perspective and I am not saying in any way that what I understand, is exactly the way the DWR would present it and state it. Just my view of it.
 
The original post with the "lobbying" cost info-- If I am not mistaken was primarily for lobbying in regards to wolf delisting.I believe Tim is an attorney/lobbyist that is also a passionate hunter/outdoorsman.

You also might be interested in this-

Salt Lake City ? Utah?s wildlife received a $1.3 million gift recently. The gift came courtesy of Utah?s conservation permit program. Here?s how the program works:

?The Division of Wildlife Resources allocates a small number of big game, black bear, cougar and turkey hunting permits to conservation organizations in Utah.
?The groups auction the permits at their yearly banquets.
?After auctioning the permits, at least 90 percent of the money the groups raise must be used on DWR-approved projects that benefit Utah?s wildlife.
Seven groups received conservation permits in 2011: Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife, the Mule Deer Foundation, the Wild Sheep Foundation, the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Safari Club International, the National Wild Turkey Federation and the Utah Bowman?s Association.

On April 11, representatives from the seven groups met with DWR biologists to decide which projects the money would be used to fund. A total of 66 projects received more than $1.3 million in funding.

Mike Canning, Habitat Section chief for the DWR, says allowing these groups to auction the permits is a windfall for Utah?s wildlife. ?The amount of money that ends up going into on-the-ground work to help wildlife across Utah is astounding,? he says.

Canning gives some examples of how conservation permit funds are used:

?Much of the money the conservation permit program generates each year funds habitat projects that are part of Utah?s Watershed Restoration Initiative.
The initiative started in 2005. Since it began, more than $76 million has been used to restore more than 778,000 acres of wildlife habitat across the state.

The conservation permit program provided more than $5.4 million of the $76 million.
 
Thanks for the info Nebo.

5% of tags is a lot. The problem is perception. No other state has that many permits. Some tags are set aside for outfitters only in other states. I agree their needs to be accountability. It looks like there is. What is the public getting from conservation permit program. It is an investment for future hunting and wildlife populations. Just like you put 10% of your check in an investment account so you can retire.

Some think that wildlife populations and projects that support wildlife will maintain of grow with out funding. This is not true. This will be debated.

Less money is less projects. Less projects is less habitat, less transplants, less water projects, less predator control, less youth hunting activities, etc.

The expo money is another issue. I personally trust the individuals who are spending the money generated by the expo. I have known them for 15 plus years. I have watched how they conducted themselves over the years concerning wildlife, family, helping others in need, helping our service men with hunts. Buying hunts and starting an organization Full Curl Society, that allow rich sheep hunters to help buy hunts for ave Joe hunters, etc.etc. etc.

I could see where some would think that they are doing the expo to get rich at sportsmens expense. I don't have this opinion.

One thing that bothers me a little. Some want to complain, not get involved with any group. Not lift a hand to help out on projects, but on the other hand,expect to always be able to buy a permit to hunt and always expect to have healthy populations to hunt. Human population numbers are growing, more roads, less habitat, more predators and laws to protect predators, etc.

Being involved in politics where the future decisions are made for hunting and wildlife is imporant on the local and national level to help protect the future that we all love.

Sportsmen need to work together.
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-25-12 AT 01:57PM (MST)[p]huntin50 posted: "The expo money is another issue. I personally trust the individuals who are spending the money generated by the expo. I have known them for 15 plus years. I have watched how they conducted themselves over the years concerning wildlife, family, helping others in need, helping our service men with hunts. Buying hunts and starting an organization Full Curl Society, that allow rich sheep hunters to help buy hunts for ave Joe hunters, etc.etc. etc."

Greg, I am happy to hear that you personally trust the individuals that are spending the hundreds of thousand of dollars a year generated from the 200 convention permits that are supposed to be used to "generate revenue for wildlife conservation." Unfortunately, that is not enough for me and many others. Those permits are a public resource, and there should be strict oversight, accounting requirements and transparency. As it stands right now, none of that is in place.

I have been researching this issue for a couple of years. During that time, I have spoken with most of the major players and as far as I can tell the facts are as follows: (1) There are no statutory requirements as to how the proceeds from the convention permits are to be used--these groups could spend all of the money on beer and peanuts if they wanted to; (2) SFW resisted any effort to impose such a requirement at the time the convention permits were created (why?); (3) There is no requirement that the DWR audit how these funds are being spent; (4) Although the rule authorizes the DWR to conduct an annual audit of the convention tags, this has rarely ocurred--and when it has occurred, the DWR only looks at the fairness of the drawing process--not what these groups do with the resulting revenue; (5) Most people confuse conservation permits with convention permits and don't understand the different requirement placed upon those permits; (6) SFW and MDF have resisted prior requests to voluntarily provide information regarding how much money is generated and how it is being used; (7) The State of Utah and the DWR could care less that there is no oversight regarding the use of this public resource.

I do not think it is the least bit unreasonable for sportsmen to request an accounting from these groups. For me, it is not enough to simply say that the indviduals involved are "good guys" and we simply need to trust them. If everything is on the up and up, then open up the books. It also rings hollow for these groups to blame the lack of transparency adn accounting on the State or the DWR. The fact is these groups lobbied for and created the current system, and now they are benefitting from it. Plus, there is nothing to prevent these groups from voluntarily providing this information.

At Nebo's suggestion, I have a call in to Greg Sheehan with the DWR to see what oversight the DWR has in place. I am fairly confident that none exists but I will report back.

Hawkeye

Browning A-Bolt 300 Win Mag
Winchester Apex .50 Cal
Mathews Drenalin LD
 
I don't disagree with anything you say Hawkeye. I just said I don't have a confidence issue with those involved. I agree their should be better accounting.

Question for you. How good is the transparency of the groups that are trying to take away our rights to hunt. What about transparency of the groups that first agreed to 150 wolves each in ID,WY,and MT. now we have nearly 2,000 wolves and these groups want 5,000 wolves suing for genetic diversification with some liberal judges. These groups certinly don't show all of their cards.

most of the 200 permits go to ave Joes. The application money goes to those doing the work, a lot for wildlife, instead of NV.
 
Greg-

These groups currently provide no accounting for the convention permits. So "any accounting" would be a "better accounting." If you agree that there should be increased transparency then please share your thoughts and concerns with SFW's leaders. The only way things will ever change is if SFW feels pressure from the masses, including its own members.

I am not sure what the lack of transparency on the part of anti-hunting groups has to do with SFW? Is SFW trying to justify its actions by what anti-hunting groups are doing? Once again, if there is nothing to hide then open the books. If everything is on the up and up then SFW should be anxious to provide a full accounting and demonstrate to the public that the revenues from the convention permits are being used for their stated purpose--for wildlife conservation.

Hawkeye

Browning A-Bolt 300 Win Mag
Winchester Apex .50 Cal
Mathews Drenalin LD
 
>We shouldn't be to worried about
>PETA since SFW has cut
>more hunter opportunities then PETA
>could ever dream of. PETA
>doesn't need to fight when
>SFW is doing it for
>them.

You went from fact to opinion. How much money is being spent to lobby for wolves? Your all about facts, so put some numbers in context.

While your proving points and chasing numbers. Where have they taken oppoutunity away from hunters. Paying to transplanted animals, funding underpasses, guzzlers, restoration projects, oh and predator control. Check again on where the money came from on your projects. It could very well be from those you are complaining about. Remember, facts...
 
Nebo 12000 said

"The DWR has the right and the ability to override any decision made by the Wildlife Board. If their hands are tied it happens because they decide to let it be that way."

Nebo, your are 100% incorrect and wrong and that is a fact. The DWR under rule and statute are required to make suggestions to the racs and wildlife board on management of Utah's wildlife. Then the Wildlife board has the ULTIMATE authority to set policy and procedure. Only the Legislature and courts can over rule the Wildlife Board.

In a few circumstances the DWR director can implement emergency feedings, closures, hunts etc.

Please do your homework before you post things that are simply NOT TRUE.....


Tony Abbott
The next buck to have a fawn will be the
1st.
 
Nebo12000-

I spoke with Greg Sheehan from the DWR today and he confirmed what I already expected to be the case. There is no requirment that any of the revenues generated from the 200 annual convention permits be used for actual conservation projects. Additionally, when the State of Utah audits the convention permits, it does not enquire as to how those monies are being spent. Rather, the audit focuses primarily on the fairness of the dawing process.

Although I disagreed some of Greg's opinions, he was knowledgeable, professional, and took the time to answer all of my questions. Thanks for suggesting that I contact him.

Hawkeye

Browning A-Bolt 300 Win Mag
Winchester Apex .50 Cal
Mathews Drenalin LD
 
fishon---I missed that statement that you corrected Nebo on in your last post or I would have been all over it! Normally all states are set up as you described with a Board of some sort and it varies by name from state to state. However, with very few exceptions like you mentioned, the Board members have the final say and provide the direction that the department takes on any issue.
 
LAST EDITED ON May-02-12 AT 09:36AM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON May-02-12 AT 09:34?AM (MST)

According to Alan Clark, if the DWR feels or determines that any particular thing that is passed by the WB is determined to be improper in terms of managemenet etc, They can invoke measures that effectively change the decision. It is true that they are "bound" by the decisions but they do have a way out if they deem it deterimental biologically and/or financially.
Just what I was told---
You need to chill Tony-- The DWR does have a way to invoke their will if they so choose based on certain criteria. AND that is the truth. At RAC training meetings Mr. Clark has repeated sevearl times that all decisions made by the RACs and WB must be revenue neutral.
 
good info nebo12000, thanks. what do you mean by revenue neutral, specifically? thanks again.
 
LAST EDITED ON May-02-12 AT 10:18AM (MST)[p]They do not want the RACs or WB to vote to do anything that would decrease revenue-- as in decrease tags in one area without somehow offsetting the loss of revenue by increasing tags in another area. It is interesting to note that the DWR determines and proposes the tag numbers. Their are some areas that tag numbers for elk are decreasing (bulls and antlerless) but their are other areas that they are increasing. Everything I have seen as far as determining tag numbers seems to be legit in regards to why the tag numbers need to be adjusted. I do believe that the DWR folks manage within the appropriate biological standards for healthy herd numbers and it is not primarily driven by revenue. I believe they do a good job for the most part at balancing the need for revenue and appropriate and sound biological decision making.
 
Thanks nebo12000, I kinda thought that was what you meant. I would agree with you that is the case in how the division trys to manage things. But there are others who think it is all about the money, and I don't agree with that, just doesn't make sense to me.
 

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