Western Hunt Expo Transparency?

Dr_Hunter

Very Active Member
Messages
1,049
Anyone heard what the Utah DWR is planning to do with the 30% revenue they collect from the $5.00 permit application fee? The below paragraph is on the Western Hunt Expo website. The last sentence is somewhat striking...

"Hunters are charged a $5 per-permit application fee when they apply in the expo permit drawing. The DWR must approve in advance how 30 percent of these funds are spent. Expo organizers (SFW and MDF) spend the remaining 70 percent on policies, programs, projects and personnel that support a significant number of conservation initiatives across the state of Utah. All of the $5 application fee revenue directly benefits wildlife conservation in Utah."
 
I know for a fact, that they helped us in San Juan county with numerous projects. Here are a few off of my head.
-highway fencing
-pond cleaning
-sheep guzzlers
-cleared thousands of acres of juniper and planted habitat
-replanted thousands of sage brush in beef basin, deer winter range
-transplanted deer from antelope island to san juan elk ridge.
-transplanted desert big horn sheep to a new are on san juan that will open up to hunting eventually starting a new hunt.
-transplanted goats to the LaSal Mtns. that will also open up a new hunt soon.
This is not a full list, but a start to what I know personally they have done in san juan county.
Lets list what other groups have done in san juan county. I cant think of any.
 
I can only imagine what 100% of the money going back to the wildlife could have done like the "other group" offered but was denied! Think of how much more they "could have done" with 100% of that money VS 30% of the money. Think how much of that 70% could do that is going towards payroll, admin fees, and so on.

That "other group" could have done 2.5 X more than $FW is doing. Just pointing that out.
 
Actually Robiland you are just stating your opinion. You don't know what the other group could have done.
 
Tri, you dont know either. They wont show us anything. So keep trying to be the savior of wildlife. YOU ARE NOT! But what we do know is that with the %70, Expo organizers (SFW and MDF) spend the remaining 70 percent on policies, programs, projects and personnel. Thats coming straight from them turbo. So how are you going to twist this one Mr Capper!
 
RMEF was going to return a lot more than 100%. They were going to return all of the application fees plus all of the profit from admission. Not to mention, with RMEF bringing their event to Utah we would likely have seen far greater attendance. So a conservative estimate would put the RMEF number around 4-5 times greater than what SFW/MDF are contributing.

In the past SFW was asked to disclose where the money was being spent. They could only come up with a small percentage of the total, and it was mostly spent on scholarships for people they knew. Other public documents have indicated in the past that most of the funds are paid directly to their personnel for paychecks.

Regarding the 30% it's the same as the 60% of conservation tag money. They use if for "approved projects", such as building fences on private land, feel-good projects to make the public think they're doing a good job, etc. Mostly they use this public money on things that will advance their own interests. They have been doing this for many years so there's no reason to believe things will change this year.
 
Actually Robiland I don't know because RMEF has nothing to prove what all was going to be done. It never happened so its nothing but opinion as to who would have done better. Its as silly as arguing Aaron Rodgers would have been the best quarterback in the Superbowl after he didn't make it.

I think its funny to watch yall sit and say the RMEF convention is bigger. I HAVE BEEN TO THE RMEF CONVENTION IN VEGAS. It sucked! I know big guys in RMEF. They say they wanted the SLC deal because their convention sucks. Keep spouting crazy.
 
Heck, even the audit by the Auditor General found the accounting by SFW/BGF to be comingled. There's no way to figure out where all the Expo money goes... except we know that an undetermined amount of Expo tag proceeds goes to "personnel".

RMEF offered to return over 200% more money directly to wildlife than SFW (and that is if not even one additional soul attended the RMEF National Convention than the current Expo) which is a ridiculous argument considering the current attendance of RMEF National Conventions and comparative membership roster size.

RMEF also offered to return 100% of all Conservation Tag funds and to release a full audited accounting of all funds. These are indisputable facts, not opinions.

Grizzly
 
What has RMEF done for San juan County. Nothing. I like to see results. Actually RMEF stopped the increase of elk population on the San Juan unit. That is what they have accomplished.
 
Yes the elk foundations expo is actually quite annemic.

The international sportsmans expo is actually very close
To the same thing.

I do not believe the elk foundations expo could or would
Be bigger than what we have. And furthermore, with the elk foundations proposal, they made claims that they actually didn't have numbers or data to back it up with. And this was part of the divisions problem with their proposal.

You can make claims, but the division wanted concrete proof.

They have the concrete proof from the current expo and the current expo contract holders. They didn't want to roll the dice on an unknown and quite frankly, unproven unknown.

This all being said, I don't know who would've been the better party to run the expo. If you think the elk foundation has a squeaky clean slate, I'm Sure you'll find people who'll disagree.
 
Dconcrete,

Yes!


Hey everybody else, Do elk take Amex? Really how do they like payment? Yall speak in very vague terminology and then add a percent symbol in the sentence and somehow think that makes it more than just a vague unfounded opinion.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-25-17 AT 04:02PM (MST)[p]Sorry, Tri. I'll dumb it down for you since I used percentage symbols.

If one person offers to return 30 cents of every dollar and the other offers to return the whole dollar, then the second individual offered to return over two times the money than the first individual. This factor of "two times" is equal to over 200% more money.

Currently SFW keeps 10% of money from Conservation Tags for overhead (these tags are different from Expo Tags). RMEF offered to return all that money to UDWR. That means that RMEF offered to return 100% of the funds.

Hopefully that helps you understand it.

PS. Its not an opinion. I can give you copies of the actual written proposals if you would like. It is verifiable fact.

Grizzly
 
Grizzly what you think was best is the opinion. I'll try and dumb it down for you.

Very often %10 money spent by the private sector does %1000 more than if the public sector spent it. THAT'S THE PART YOU'LL NEVER KNOW.
That's why all this is lame whining and slanted opinion. YOU CAN"T EVER PROVE RMEF WAS GOING TO BE A BETTER DEAL BECAUSE YOU CAN"T PROVE MONEY FIXED IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR IS BETTER. DO you understand that even if you could make up some story about RMEF giving %300 money back to the state it doesn't mean its a better deal for wildlife. Nooooo matter how much you wish for socialism to be better it never works as efficiently as the private sector. Period.

SO go make some vague story on RMEF giving bla-bla percent to wildlife, whatever the hell that means, and keep the butt sore whining rolling for another year. Then go give %100 OF YOUR MONEY to the government and wait around for them to take care of you since the government does everything so good.
 
>I can only imagine what 100%
>of the money going back
>to the wildlife could have
>done like the "other group"
>offered but was denied!
>Think of how much more
>they "could have done" with
>100% of that money VS
>30% of the money.
>Think how much of that
>70% could do that is
>going towards payroll, admin fees,
>and so on.
>
>That "other group" could have done
>2.5 X more than $FW
>is doing. Just pointing
>that out.

The 'Other Group' Use to at Least Hand Out a Decent/Quality Ball Cap at their Banquets!

The Hats they Hand Out Now are Total F'N JUNK!

Nobody Ever Gave Me an SFW Hat So I Don't Know what they're Like?












[font color="blue"]It Was them Damn Lake Trout that took them Elk
out!:D[/font]
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-25-17 AT 05:52PM (MST)[p]Wow BCat, how thoughtless of me. Do you have a color preference?

Send me a copy of that bobcat logo so I can get one customized, specially for you. And........I promise not a dime of conservation money will go into the customization expenditure. It'll be a fully funded volunteer project, for a dang good cause.

If ya don't send me a logo I'll pick my own.

DC
 
>Actually Robiland I don't know because
>RMEF has nothing to prove
>what all was going to
>be done. It never
>happened so its nothing but
>opinion as to who would
>have done better. Its
>as silly as arguing Aaron
>Rodgers would have been the
>best quarterback in the Superbowl
>after he didn't make it.
>
>
>I think its funny to watch
>yall sit and say the
>RMEF convention is bigger.
>I HAVE BEEN TO THE
>RMEF CONVENTION IN VEGAS.
>It sucked! I know
>big guys in RMEF.
>They say they wanted the
>SLC deal because their convention
>sucks. Keep spouting crazy.
>


Ha Tristate knows high ups in the RMEF funny
 
95259bcat.jpg










[font color="blue"]It Was them Damn Lake Trout that took them Elk
out!:D[/font]
 
"Nooooo matter how much you wish for socialism to be better it never works as efficiently as the private sector. Period."

I always find it interesting how one person tells everyone else here they have no facts to back up their position/opinions yet freely spouts off his opinion, even adding in a "Period" for dramatic effect, yet offers no proof. You just have to believe him. And don't forget his education and that he has hunted all over the world.

Opinions are just that. Opinions. Everybody has one. Period. 100% of the time. Not %100 of the time, unless you are writing in Arabic or trying to impress the forum with your knowledge and worldliness. *yawn*
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-25-17 AT 10:12PM (MST)[p]"Nooooo matter how much you wish for socialism to be better it never works as efficiently as the private sector. Period."

There a millions of people, here and abroad who do not believe this to be true. From farm workers in Malawi to Bankers in Qatar and millions in between. Apparently millions here at home, in the US as well.

However, I do. In this way. On a national or even on a large scale, socialism "never works as efficiently as the private sector". Now, we can all point out cases where government solutions can be, under certain circumstance, cheaper than having it done by the private sector, but on a large scale or on a national level it never is.

That's my opinion. Period! ;-) ;-) ;-)

Mostly just razing ya NVB but......... in this case, I understand the point he's making and agree with TriState.

Sorry, no proof will be provided, just my empirical observations, and we all know how good empirical observations are.

DC
 
USPS vs. FedEx
Social Security vs. Retirement planner
Private land deer herd vs. Public land deer herd
Venezuela vs. USA
 
>USPS vs. FedEx
>Social Security vs. Retirement planner
>Private land deer herd vs. Public
>land deer herd
>Venezuela vs. USA

I'll add one more for you...

SFW (which has so infiltrated DWR and Wildlife Board that they're indistinguishable from each other, and relies almost solely on government handouts of public tags and millions in cash from taxpayers) vs. RMEF

Grizzly
 
Griz,

I know your a smart young buck. However, I remember the days when the DWR were not that pro on big game hunting. Buck to doe ratios were 3-7 per 100 on many units. The RMEF just kept 25-30% in Utah, most of the money from banquets went to MT headquarter. Big game hunting was poor and getting worse. The RMEF did do some projects,but were not making much difference. They were not in the political process, where important decisions were made. The DWR director said hunters would always buy deer permits, "It is a family tradition."

You may think that hunting in Ut would be far better, without political influence from having SFW and sportsmen involved in the political process. Not all DWR employees were pro hunting in the past.

Our Cache SFW banquet is pretty well sold out, 6 weeks prior to the banquet. We can't have more than 520 people. I remember when you said were were going out of business a couple years ago.

Our SFW chapture, with the DWR and other sportsmen (Who are not SFW supporters) are feeding deer at about 30 locations in Cache Valley. When there are issues like this the DWR talk with local SFW chapture leaders to decide what will be best. They are the ones that get things done for wildlife.

RMEF maybe a good group. They are a different organization. SFW is a get R done type group. We have some local control, and a good relationship with DWR biologists and leadership. That makes it possible to get things done fast when needed.

How long would it take for RMEF to get the deer feeding started?
1. Is it part of their mission?
2. Do they have the leadership and volunteers?
3. Would they need to get the OK from MT headquarters?

Enough said. You have a lot of passion, to try to improve things. You have your freedom to voice your opinion. Obviously not everyone agrees.

RMEF lost the Expo contract. Get over it. It's the same thing as Hillary supporters not getting over the election.

Best wishes.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-26-17 AT 01:58PM (MST)[p]I wrote a response but decided to save it for a different forum. Best wishes to you too.
 
I'm sure both organizations have done and will do some good for UT wildlife and it's hard to verify which organization can do the best job without the financial issue. However, when an organization will not disclose how it's spending the money like SFW has consistently demonstrated, simple logic would point to that being a BIG RED FLAG. The wording of how the money is spent is so wide open they could use it to pay their staff significant amounts and call it part of "programs and policies" (not saying this is true but just an example). I find it hard to fathom that many people defend this organizations practice of not telling people where/how they spend the money other than generic mumbo/jumbo.
I'm not contributing anymore to the Expo on that principal and really sorry to miss a great show but I do decide where I contribute based on having some clue where my money is going. Seems like a lot of people don't really pay attention or they just don't care.
 
RMEF doesn't disclose everything either. These groups RMEF included aren't funded well enough to sit and provide true total disclosure and then defend themselves from the armies of internet crazies who think they deserve answers to every single nickel.

The transparency argument is a crybaby distraction for a bunch of people who think being greedy for deer tags is how you preserve hunting.
 
"Lets list what other groups have done in san juan county. I cant think of any." -cantkillathing

Didn't some groups just get the old president to declare a national monument down there in your neck of the woods? That seems pretty significant! (I kid, TP. I kid.)

As for which expo would be bigger, let's look at numbers. RMEF in December 2015 had "almost 87,000" people attend in Las Vegas. SFW/MDF in February 2016 had "over 40,000" people attend in Salt Lake City. Now, these reported numbers leave some ambiguity, but even the most SFW friendly estimate shows that over double the amount of people attended RMEF than attended SFW two months later. And RMEF didn't have the attraction of 200 tags to lure people either.

Reasonable people can disagree on many things. But arguing the Utah expo as is bringing in more people than RMEF is factually inaccurate, and quite frankly, silly. It isn't even close.
 
How many of those people were there strictly for the elk foundation?

I may be wrong on this, but this last December when I was there, it was sistered up with the cowboy Christmas expo.

So if there were no cowboy Christmas going on, how does that change those numbers? We may never know but one does need to consider this fact.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-26-17 AT 08:00PM (MST)[p]If Vegas RMEF was so good why would they want to move the show to SLC? Sounds like nothing but risk for them.


Maybe things aren't as good as many here want to believe.

I want complete transparency of the head count. I want RMEF to provide scanable wrist bands with accounting numbers when people came in and people left. I don't want people who came, left, then went back to be counted multiple times. RMEF is hiding the accurate figures. ;D

If you think the head count is the measure of success you haven't ever worked a convention.

If head count is so great and all that matters WHY DID THEY WANT TO PACK UP THE WHOLE SHOW AND MOVE?
 
That is actually a very easy answer--The lure of 200 tags. Keep in mind, the contract is not for the expo itself, it's for the 200 tags.
 
Bull crap. That isn't the answer if what yall say is true. SFW has the 200 tags and according to yall only pull a quarter of what RMEF does in Vegas. You want to try and use the logic that a company that whose convention is 4 times larger than their competitor wants to move their location over 200 tags they, according to you, won't get a dime from???????? You've been working the public sector too long, Vanilla. Either the numbers yall keep posting are fabricated lies or there is another motive.
 
I'm probably not as up on this issue as many so can someone please clarify. I was of the understanding that the Expo contract was for an organization to run the Expo "as is". In other words, same location, same tags, auctions, and prizes etc. so just new management of the operations. I see this discussion of moving the event and combining it with an RMEF event, only for the 200 tags, etc. which is the first I've heard of that and totally different that anything I'd seen previously. So just asking for an honest clarification!
 
>I'm probably not as up on
>this issue as many so
>can someone please clarify.
>I was of the understanding
>that the Expo contract was
>for an organization to run
>the Expo "as is".
>In other words, same location,
>same tags, auctions, and prizes
>etc. so just new management
>of the operations. I
>see this discussion of moving
>the event and combining it
>with an RMEF event, only
>for the 200 tags, etc.
>which is the first I've
>heard of that and totally
>different that anything I'd seen
>previously. So just asking
>for an honest clarification!

Doug,

Its all about the tags. SFW owns the Expo. That is their gig. The 200 tags is what brings all the people. So RMEF would have (should have) won the bid, they would have had to find their own place and own name but would have the 200 tags.
 
Colelkman,

It basically boiled down to if it ain't broke don't fix it. Or certainly don't gamble with someone who has no evidence they can fix it.

Why didn't RMEF go to another state and convince them to give them 200 tags for their convention? THAT'S AN EVEN BETTER QUESTION.
 
I've always wondered how 'policy' costs money. Where do you purchase policy? Who sells it? What is the average price of a dozen policy? Is there ever a sale on policy? Does the state get a bulk discount?
I've got some policy I'd like to sell. 1/2 price today only.
 
"Why didn't RMEF go to another state and convince them to give them 200 tags for their convention? THAT'S AN EVEN BETTER QUESTION."

WELL PIGBOY THATS SIMPLE. BECAUSE OTHER STATES AREN'T STUPID ENOUGH OR CORRUPT ENOUGH TO HAND OUT 200 OF THEIR MOST SOUGHT AFTER TAGS FOR THE PURPOSE OF WELFARE.
 
Two fictional examples where $30K is needed to feed deer on the Cache.

Example 1 where SFW has the expo tags:
SFW sends $30K for the feed. SFW then sends $70K to the personal pockets of their upper leadership.

Example 2 where RMEF has the expo tags:
RMEF sends $30K for the feed. RMEF then looks for other UT projects to use $70K more on.
 
Yeah now you are going to tell all of us that RMEF doesn't have paid employees?


Sell that garbage somewhere else.
 
Hey Muley73, shouldn't you be posting in the Idaho thread in support of no auction tags in Idaho so Idaho doesn'y become another Uath. You know, so you and your boys can have a place to hunt and fish since Utah is doing such a great job shutting you out.
 
Puffy,
I''ll always find somewhere to hunt and fish with my boys. Lol

Brian,
Been here way longer than you and long enough to know exactly what game Tri plays. It's a game of reality. Nobody likes reality.
 
>Puffy,
>I''ll always find somewhere to hunt
>and fish with my boys.
> Lol
>
>Brian,
>Been here way longer than you
>and long enough to know
>exactly what game Tri plays.
> It's a game of
>reality. Nobody likes reality.
>


Muley I was referring to tristate
 
If your argument held any merit at all this thread wouldn't be talking about man love sixty posts in. Just like the greedy people you are you run to childish instincts and pray that the truth will get scared away.
 
>Dpb, muley73 is tristates biggest fan.
>Man love if you will...
>


Boy crush huh Lil bit of broke back Mt both are irrelevant in the state of utah
 
>Jeepers,
>
>Here we go again.

One of only three SFW-fanboys is now the only fanboy of the troll that posted the infamous sheep pic and then became the only guy that defended the "great guide" involved.

Funny how the birds of a feather always find each other eventually.

Grizzly
 
Lol,
Reality vs personal attacks. The MM usual. Reality moves forward and you all cry and complain. And through all this rubble I still look for another group to step up and yet none appear.

Only 3 support yet in the world of reality who controls the real power and how many of the masses will attend again not just the expo but all the banquets across the state. I'll take reality and results you guys can have you MM Hate Club.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-29-17 AT 11:47AM (MST)[p]Oh boy. So according to M73, tristate is dishing out "reality" in his posts. Yes, and the sky is green and the sun rises in the west. Most folks with any common sense see these discussions for what they are.

The harsh reailty is SFW and MDF have played the game well for a very long time. They have spent many years cultivating relationships with the key decision-makers within the DWR, the Wildlife Board and our state government. As a result, the state was more than happy to take hundreds of tags away from the average hunter so that these groups could raise millions of dollars with no accountability or transparency.

What little transparency exists today is the result of sportsmen getting involved and demanding it. And ironically, the conservation groups and the DWR resent us for "failing to trust them" and "sowing division." Transparency, accountability and the North American Conservation Model have given way to politics, back room deals, influence and money. M73 call this "hate" but I call it "reality".

And the irony is that this all occurred in the name of "conservation."

-Hawkeye-
 
Wonderful!!! I knew Hawkeye would come out and play if I posted. A reality fought in the court of MM because in the real world it's gained enough support for Gov Herbert to be elected again in a landslide.
 
>Wonderful!!! I knew Hawkeye would come
>out and play if I
>posted. A reality fought
>in the court of MM
>because in the real world
>it's gained enough support for
>Gov Herbert to be elected
>again in a landslide.

All that election showed was that the majority that re-elected Herbert are morons! I won't use the term "Utards" seeing as I might offend Utah citizenry since I don't live there and will just let them call themselves that, LOL!!
 
Gets like this every year about this time. These guys start putting in their draw applications and getting depressed about the reality of what a socialized welfare system they have become beggars to. Add in a kick ass hunting expo at about the same time and suddenly theyhave a scapegoat in which to focus their anger and escape their shame and depression.

Highs and lows, strikes and gutters. It's almost February again. You can always tell by reading the internet hate.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-29-17 AT 09:31PM (MST)[p]From Hunt Expo Website... "Expo organizers (SFW and MDF) spend the remaining 70 percent on policies, programs, projects and personnel..."

Its entirely reasonable to believe (considering SFW is the only group to not oppose the land grab, has had Chapters officially endorse the land grab, their position on closing public stream access, and Peay endorsing Mike Noel for BLM head) that the remaining 70% of Expo funds could go to support the land grab.

EDIT: Changed one word to help the professor who can't follow a train of thought to possibly stay on point.

Grizzly
 
Does anyone know how much money RMEF has to into the state of Utah for Elk or any wildlife in the past few years. We know the auctioned Tags is putting over a million into UTAH dirt this year. It's approved, transparent and happening as we speak with the emergency feeding of deer and elk right now. How much has RMEF done for Utah????
 
That is not true Vanilla! Don't get the RMEF Cowboy Christmas in conjunction with the NFR finals confused. Yes 87k people passed through but it was the 80k without RMEF there in the years before. The RMEF convention is in March in The great Elk state of Tennessee!

Your last paragraph kills me! How bout getting some of your facts straight before posting on something you clearly know nothing about and let me give you some advise "dont believe everything you think!
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-30-17 AT 06:56AM (MST)[p]ihunt4200,

This is a great question. And since RMEF has perfect "independent transparency" I bet it is one Hawkeye can answer in a split second.

By the way that was sarcasm.

I heard they gave a cow and calf elk near the turnpike at Spanish dagger $50 cash last year.

:D
 
4200,
It's not about helping Utahs wildlife for these guys. It's all about toppling the only organization in the state of Utah that has pushed hard for Utahs wildlife. 99% of the loud voices against SFW are based on personal slights and vendettas. Not real issues. They have done a decent job on a micro level with gathering a band of manipulated internet minions. So round and round we go, in the end for nothing more than entertainment.
 
>4200,
>It's not about helping Utahs wildlife
>for these guys. It's all
>about toppling the only organization
>in the state of Utah
>that has pushed hard for
>Utahs wildlife. 99% of
>the loud voices against SFW
>are based on personal slights
>and vendettas. Not real
>issues. They have done a
>decent job on a micro
>level with gathering a band
>of manipulated internet minions.
>So round and round we
>go, in the end for
>nothing more than entertainment.

BS is all I will say to that bunch of baloney!
 
M73 said: "99% of the loud voices against SFW are based on personal slights and vendettas. Not real issues." This is M73's version of "reality" again.

Most all of the sportsmen that I have met that have spoken out about the lack of transparency and accountability involving the DWR, SFW and MDF are average joe sportsmen who are frustrated with the backroom deals, lack of transparency, lack of accounability, etc. However, it is easier for some folks to label us all as haters, whiners and scorned lovers then to address the legitimate questions and concerns that gave rise to this discussion.

If you would like a summary of the amounts of money spent by RMEF in Utah over the last several years then you should ask them. Unlike many groups, I am confident that they would be happy to respond to your request. As you can probably imagine, the total amount spent in Utah will likely be less than SFW over the same time period because they have not received 200 Expo Tags each year and they receive a much smaller portion of the Conservation Permits. Therefore, the gross number would probably be smaller but the level of transparency, accountability and return on investment would be much higher.

-Hawkeye-
 
Hawkeye,
I have no doubt those that surround you show the same concerns as you their leader. That's how these things usually work. Yet the reality I speak of will manifest itself in real numbers at the expo at the banquets and at the voting booths come election time.
 
M73,

How do your boys feel about $FW backing the states decision to lock them out of 2700 miles of rivers and streams?

That's a real issue isn't it?

Good thing for Idaho so they can continue to be the Instaface heros that they are.
 
So M73, you're ok with your public lands being sold off?

Is that a real issue?

Btw, Herbert won in a landslide because Utards are like dumb lemmings. They don't vote on or for real issues thay vote rather who has an R next to their name.
PERIOD.
 
"If you would like a summary of the amounts of money spent by RMEF in Utah over the last several years then you should ask them."


Ooooooh no. I shouldn't have to ask. It should be completely transparent with an itemized breakdown on specific projects and their costs and it shouldn't be from RMEF it should be from a truly independent auditor. YOUR STANDARDS HAWKEYE, NOT MINE.

They must be hiding something and screwing people, right?????
 
Tri, do you homework before you open your mouth. RMEF (just like every other conservation group that participates in the conservation permit program, including SFW) provides an annual report that shows how the required 90% of the conservation permit proceeds were spent. Unlike SFW, RMEF also provides audited financial statements to the public. With regard to the Expo Tags, which is the issue raised in this thread, RMEF has not received any Expo Tags and, therefore, has nothing to account for. However, their offer to the State of Utah in response to the 2015 RFP speaks for itself. RMEF offered more transparency and accountability than the State of Utah even requested.

-Hawkeye-
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-30-17 AT 12:25PM (MST)[p]Hey puffy call out my kids again and I'll let you know face to face. Come out and play. Or are you just gonna hide behind an interet name????? In all seriousness come out and play sport! :)
 
Deerlove,
I've answered those two questions multiple times. Educate yourself and know what you're talking about.
 
Cody, I am a little slow so be patient with guys like me and deerlove. Please educate us one more time on what SFW's official position is with regard to the transfer of federal lands. Not the position of the rogue Dixie Chapter of SFW but SFW's official position as articulated by its leadership. If you have explained this before then I must have missed it.

I have had conversations with SFW leadership in the past and at that point in time they were not taking any position. Has that changed? Because from my perspective, and most of the folks on this site, it is tough to straddle the fence (pun intended) on this issue. SFW does not want to offend its allies on the governor's office or the legislature by coming out against the transfer. That could have serious financial impacts (e.g., decreased wolf/sage grouse lobbying money for BGF, loss of Expo Tags, increased accountabilty and scrutiny, etc.). However, if SFW were to openly support the proposed transfer then they would be run the risk of offending their supposed base (sportsmen). Although from my perspective, if their base was not offended by SFW' position on the stream access issues then I doubt this issue would bother them much either.

Educate us one more time as to SFW's official position on this important issue. Thanks.

-Hawkeye-
 
>LAST EDITED ON Jan-30-17
>AT 12:25?PM (MST)

>
>Hey puffy call out my kids
>again and I'll let you
>know face to face.
>Come out and play.
>Or are you just gonna
>hide behind an interet name?????
>In all seriousness come out
>and play sport! :)


Easy there cupcake. Asking what your boys thought of $FW supporting the startes decision to lock them out of 2700 miles of rivers and streams isn't "calling the out", so settle down Francis.

Oh wait I see what you're doing.

Dodge duck dive and dodge.
 
>No I'm totally serious puffy let's
>talk face to face.
>Let me know and I'll
>be there all smiles.


Ok when do you want to meet, at recess or after school?

Dodge duck dive dodge.
 
No for serious let's talk like big boys or are you just about taking shots at my kids like an internet biitch?
 
You are dodging Hawkeye. How much money did RMEF spend in Utah last year? You have said they are totally transparent. Practice what you preached.
 
This may come as a surprise to you tristate but I am not the RMEF. I am not an officer of RMEF. I am not a member of RMEF. And I am not currently the lawyer for RMEF. Therefore, I do not speak on RMEF's behalf nor do I have all information pertaining to RMEF at my fingertips. My connection to REMF is that I highly respect them as a conservation organization and I volunteered some of my time and services to RMEF on the Expo Tag issue because I greatly appreciated what RMEF was offering the State of Utah.

If you have questions regarding RMEF feel free to contact David Allen, President/CEO of RMEF, or Bill Christensen, Utah Regional Director of RMEF. These two gentlemen are extremely professional and transparent, and would be willing to spend their valuable time talking to a complete tool like you. Best of luck to you.

-Hawkeye-
 
But you said they are totally transparent. You even used their financial statement as evidence. Right now it doesn't feel transparent. Right now it feels like your show pony has something to hide. YOU HELD THEM TO A STANDARD WHICH YOU THOUGHT ALL OTHERS SHOULD MEET AND NOW YOU ARE DODGING.
 
I'm not all about taking shots at your kids if you think the Instaface comment was a shot at your kids then I sincerely apologize. You need thicker skin like your buddy Trist. After all, according to you this is all just entertainment right?

For entertainment sake do you want to answer the questions or dodge duck dive and dodge like your buddy Trist?
 
RMEF is transparent. Remember that they offered a completely independent audit of every dollar generated from the expo - not just the money raised from the expo tags. Where is the link to SFW's audited financial statements? If you have a specific question that goes beyond the RMEF financial statements then pick up the phone an call them. But we all know that you won't put any effort into finding real answers.

-Hawkeye-
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-30-17 AT 05:21PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Jan-30-17 AT 05:16?PM (MST)

No puff I'll stay on this subject. Let's talk about that. I'm all in on that. My skins more than thiick enough but l'll call your play. So let's finish.
 
>RMEF is transparent. Remember that
>they offered a completely independent
>audit of every dollar generated
>from the expo - not
>just the money raised from
>the expo tags.


And there's your problem. Those two sentences sum up your bull. The first is just a blanket statement that they are transparent but your supporting second sentence is nothing more than a would be promise HAD THEY GOTTEN THE BID. Truly they are unrelated although you think they sound good.

Folks that's lawyer fast speak. It sounds like support but in reality it's vague less than half truths.

Your gang of internet haters brought up RMEF again and Muley73 asked a valid question and I will repeat it.

HOW MUCH AND ON WHAT HAS RMEF SPENT IN THE STATE OF UTAH?
 
Right about here is where the taunting playground bully wannabe would get his ass kicked over by the monkey bars. Grow up Tristate.
 
Well lucky for you NVB we all grew up and like most grown men sometimes you have to face the music. Since Hawkeye is too scared I'll ask you. HOW MUCH MONEY DID RMEF SPEND LAST YEAR IN UTAH AND ON WHAT, TOUGH GUY?
 
It is very apparent that Tri refuses to answer questions but thinks that it's ok to demand answers for others. Please don't feed the troll.

Good luck in the draws.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-30-17 AT 06:35PM (MST)[p]Well tough guy, apparently you did not grow up. The way you sit there acting like a 10 year old proves that. Your "I know you are but what am I?" nonsense is all anyone needs to see.

I dont even care how much RMEF spent. That's not my argument. Its yours.

Let me ask you. How much money did YOU spend in Utah and on what? If you did spend money there how much extra did you kick in to the wildlife coffers since you're getting such a smoking deal. Surely a guy who thinks we should be paying more for hunting would have paid two or three times as much as the going rate just to do his part. LET'S HEAR IT, BOY.
 
So yes puffy that is your game? Talk ##### on kids and then shrug it off cause you get called out on it. Step up man, back up your talk.
 
Somebody else asked the question utah400 and none of y'all could answer it.

I know y'all try and make these threads about me but y'all brought RMEF INTO THIS SO it deserves an answer.

How much did RMEF spend in Utah last year and what projects?


NVB,

Y'all started this junk I didn't. Y'all brought RMEF into this. Now you decided to get all macho and talk about butt kickings. The more you type the more lost you look sweetheart.
 
Save your "yall" BS for your Texas pals. It makes you seem illiterate here.

I never brought RMEF into anything. I have no dog in the fight just like you. I dont live in Utah.

As for the butt kicking comment... you act like a 10 year old wannabe bully. Once a 10 year old wannabe bully pushes his luck to a certain point, some quiet 12 year old kid steps up and kicks his ass. You tiptoe along that line all the time. When you start your childish mocking crap you are over that line. In real life somebody would step up and kick your ass. But this is the internet, right cupcake?
 
Apparently Tris pays WL a lot! A lot more than you knuckleheads! Someone has to hold his hand he might get lost. The Wy wilderness guide law was meant for azz clowns like him, search and rescue can't get expensive.
 
Agianst my better judgement I will answer some questions. I know many will not agree but this is the correct info. RMEF is 5th among the conservation groups in money spent in Utah. I am only talking about conservation groups. Conservation tags are issued by the state according to the amount each organization can raise for the division. SFW is first, MDF second with Utah FLAWS third and I think SCI 4th. It is again set on the amount a organization has raised. Also to be fair RMEF is a national organization as is MDF and SCI. Also remember this is only conservation tags and money must be spent in Utah. Members of each organization by the tags raising the money.
RMEF spends an average the past three years of $333,000 dollars a year.
Stream issue stance, neutral on the issue and land issue neutral on that issue but do not want the land sold. When the membership voted on these issues it was down the middle. Membership makes the decision. These issues I know because I sit on some of the boards that discuss this for the state.
Now I made this much of a statement. I have not been on for a while and will not be on again for a while. Everyone injoy trying to tear each other down to prove how super you are, or maybe go and really learn what goes on.
 
To all you guys that talk about the measly SFW banquets of 500 people and then pretend it means something other than guys trying to win a Remington 870 and maybe visit with old friends to talk hunting... RMEF has a record paying membership of over 222,000 as of January 1st. How many paying members does SFW have?

To those SFW-fanboys that claim only SFW is helping feed the deer in Utah, educate yourself (http://rmefblog.blogspot.com/2017/01/rmef-steps-up-to-help-starving-deer-in.html?m=1) as there's a lot more coming from RMEF than you apparently know about.

RMEF has spent over $1 Billion on over 10,000 projects covering over 6,700,000 acres.

SFW doesn't have a pot to piss in compared to RMEF and their accomplishments for wildlife.

But at least they have an erroneously-earned Expo and a bunch of taxpayer-funded welfare that nobody can track, not even the Auditor's General office. Oh yeah, and Tristate thinks they're pretty awesome too.

Grizzly
 

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