SFW to given 5% tags for a convention part 2

schmalts

New Member
Messages
0
Well i just talked to the President of SFW to find out how the vote went. They got the approval.
I was on the phone for over an hour talking to the guy. I have to say that my opinion was that when i brought up the fact that the nonresidents were to lose 25% of the tags in the normal drawing he was unaware that percentage was really the case. He kept referring to half of the total 5% and i kept reminding him that Don peay himself said it did come out to 25% of the total tags even though it was 2 1/2 percent of the total combined tags overall, but with nonres only getting 10% of all the states tags that meant SFW and the other groups were taking 10 times the percentage of tags from nonresidents over residents (2.5 of every hundred resident tags, 25 of every hundred nonresident tags). Then I stressed the fact that the average nonres guy will not attend the convention for vacation and $ reasons. It took a while to get my point across but i feel i did somewhat. Of course i was a little hot at first but I am very passionate about hunting as they at SFW are. I calmed down and it started to become a good conversation.
A few points i brouht up to him was this.... the nonres average guy cannot afford to fly out and spend rental and motel and valuable vacation time on this. He kept asking what the average guy was?, i said I am the average hunting guy. 2 weeks vacation and under 60k job. My point was this.... I come out there, spend 320 on airline, 100 on motel, 120 on rental car, 60 meals..... so roughly 600$ on something OTHER THAN WILDLIFE habitat. Dont you think i would rather spend 30-50 bucks directly on the application fee or an internet version of this convention drawing instead?? because i can tell you as the average guy the 600$ version wont happen at all for me and every guy i know applying as a nonres to UT. Why make the airlines rich instead of the F&G. Leave the nonres out of this completely on this event. I stressed that the average nonres was not even aware of this proposal!!. we dissagreed on that point as he said they asked several nonres guys opinion... Several???????Who?? Guys living in adjoining states who may have a shorter drive that a resident on the other end of the state? thats not an accurate number.
He also said i was the first nonresident to call up directly and state my point like i did.
I stressed him i am for SFW but this will not be a support gaining idea for them. I suggested that they conduct one of thier online polls they do for just the nonres ONLY to ask the following:
Can you come to such a convention?
Are you for this way of raising money (very important to gain support from the rest of the hunters other that UT)?
Would you rather spend hundreds on travel maing airlines rich or 30-50$ on an application instead directly funding wildlife?
One more debate. he said he polled the hunters if they would spend more money on an application fee and he said they couldnt afford a 40$ increase. I asked if they told the hunters that this was the alternative?? what about the nonresident on the same topic? after all, the nonresidents lost 25% of the normal drawing tags.
All in all after the heated conversation i did get him to say that things are not set in stone and percentages may need to be tweaked. HE DID SAY NONRES HUNTERS SHOULD EMAIL SFW with opinions so please let them know how you feel about this. The link is http://www.sfwsfh.org/contact.html .
His side of the coin was that we lost roughly one in 4 tags to the drawing but if we show up at the convention we have a chance to also get a part of the resident tags..... while competeing with a probably overwhelming resident attendence this didnt sound like a good deal, even if a guy could make it.
Also, I was under the impression this would take effect this year but he said it wouldnt until 2006. Thats a good thing as it gives them time to hopefully get thier finger on the pulse of the average nonresident hunter. I dont want to see SFW loose support from us, and told him that is why I was calling. I support 90% of what they are doing but this was a huge mistake that was not thought out as far as nonresident suport goes.
I personally would like to see the poll get posted and if i am wrong so be it but I firmly believe I represent the opinion of most nonres guys. Please lets give SFW the sportsman's voice on this. We all want habitiat improvement without making it benifit only the rich guy.
Please dont sit on the sidelines for this one. help SFW out in making the right decision.
Schmalts
 
Schmalts,

Good to hear you went to the source. I think Don is very passionate about building our herds, but certainly I can sympathize with the dillema you NR guys face.

I hardly agree with everything Don does, but he is doing something which is better than nothing. I hope Utah hunters will not be punished in other states by taking away our allotment because of this convention. Turnabout is fair play, or so they say.

I hope Don listened to you. I think he does listen, he may not do what you suggest, but he does respond to complaints, gripes, ideas, and arguments.

You make a good point Schmalts. I believe, if asked or maybe better yet required, to put say $50 like you say into wildlife, this is a better alternative than spending the cash on Delta, Motel 6, and Arby's. Now we get into the debate of Utah economy. I say bad argument. I say this is about wildlife conservation and conservation only.

I too do not believe that the odds of getting these tags is worth the trip to Salt lake City. Your odds will be somewhere between Sportsman Permit odds and the resident draw odds. 1 in 800?

I joined SFW because I felt maybe I could help in some way. I wonder at times. I can say, and I do not know who gets credit, but our elk are better, our turkey are better, sheep are better (if ya care.;-)), deer are worse off more now than ever. I have emailed Don and pleaded with him to get our deer on their feet again. I think he is trying or at least it is on the agenda.

Just to toss my nickle in on the subject. I cannot understand this age objective, age class lowering, opportunity increase for elk. I hope nothing dumb is done in that regard. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Maybe a tweak, but no overhaul.
 
I didnt talk to Don, I talked with the president of SFW, Byron Bateman. Seemed like a good guy. I am little perplexed that he didnt really know himself that the nonres were getting 10 times the percentage of tags yanked for this proposal?? kind of disturbing. But... like i said, he at least said the numbers may need to be tweaked.... but in reality they need to be dropped if SFW wants continued support from the majority of nonres hunters. maybe i brought up something he didnt think about before? maybe not.
As far as local economy, it has not much to do with wildlife in general and shouldnt be an issue, you think motel 6 is going to throw anything towards elk habitat from the profits?? I doubt it. Majority of funding comes from hunters like all of us here wanting to hunt, the feds toss in some cash to maintain federal land with BLM.
Bottom line is this guys, it seems that they didnt get much feedback or ask for much. let them know you want to help but in the ways the majority of us want to do it, not just guess at what we want and go through with some muddled up scheme that most of us nonres guys cannot afford to participate.
As far as the resident guys go, if you guys ever leave your own state you better be honest enough to speak up the same for us if you feel the shaft will be given. keep in mind Nonres hunters stood up overwhelming against USO even though it helped their odds. Also keep in mind SFW may and will spread to other states and you will have to deal with the same thing there as a nonres. If you live in UT and hunt WY, AZ, NV,CO, MT would you want to have to go there in person to get back the 25% of tags that you used to get by just applying in the normal draw? food for thought.
 
Schmalts....good post. It's interesting to hear the different view points on this subject. If your statements are accurate, they are very discouraging. I hate to see this trend of limiting the nonresident hunter to the extreme. It seems to be very short sighted. If you expand on what Utah seems to be doing and apply the concept to other states..... the future of hunting could one day be limited to resident hunting only. This doesn't seem so far fetched anymore. Is that the kind of opportunity we as hunters want, to be able to hunt only in the state we reside in? Man, I hope not. On a second note, Utah's situation is interesting. It's been mentioned before that it wasn't all that long ago that Utah elk hunting left much to be desired and Utah residents where traveling to other states to hunt. Now, with some successful herd growth, it interesting how some people seem to care less about nonresident opportunities. A little selfish, short sighted, and potentially damaging to the future of hunting in the long run in my opinion. Thanks for reading.
 
Your right. One point i brought up to Byron. he kept saying that this will help make more hunting tags for the future, and thats all great but... a little more math here.. take 1 of every 4 tags for this convention from the nonres, and only 2.5 of every 100 from the residents and lets look at future opportunity. Nonres only will gain 1 tag for every 10 resident for the normal drawing. So.... take saun juan for instance, you would have to increase the resident tags 20 total just to gain the nonresident 1 tag over when you first pulled the tags. thats not going to be very productive for the nonres. Of course this is all if you cannot come to the convention and beat poor odds without a bonus point system. not a good money and support raising plan for the future. Screw the local economy, lets pump money into the wildlife but the economy will be the winner and the nonresident average Joe will get the shaft.
 
Seems to me like Byron is pretty clueless and naive. First, east of the mississippi I would guess about 1% of NR hunters applying to UT are aware of this. To say most is plain stupid. Second not understanding the math is dumb. It is pretty basic. I think I could teach my dog to do that simple of math.

Glad you "got through" to him but I really do not think he grasped what you were saying.

It is completly nuts to think any NR who do not live very close will fly out for slim odds in a "special" drawing.

The more I think about it this guy is an idiot. I better calm down before I send me email and just put them on the defensive.

Like you I make under $50k, I am paying back student loans and have 2 weeks vacation to do all my hunting, visit my out of state family, hunt back home, and take my wife somewhere, WHO IN THERE RIGHT MIND THINKS I CAN AND WOULD FLY TO UTAH TO ENTER A DRAWING! THAT IS NUTS!

Good for you for making the call, please send me the phone number [email protected] and I will give it a try too.
 
If they simply made it a raffle where you could mail in a ticket - or anything where attendence was not mandatory to enter the draw that would be fine.
 
Please don't be a jerk DonV. Byron is a VERY smart guy. He has donated many dollars and hours supporting SFW and other organizations and has closed some huge deals to secure land for ALL Utah hunters.

I have no problem with you guys questioning this stuff, but don't come on here and put people down. If you want to do that, go somewhere else.

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-12-05 AT 09:27AM (MST)[p]

I agree, Byron seemed like a good guy. It just seemed (my opinion) that he like the rest at SFW didnt get any real up front response from the nonres crowd before proposing this. The right thing to do is to let them know our feelings so SFW can do things to gain our support, not shun them.
I suggested to him that the nonresidents pool be left alone and not included in this. If they want to include us do it in a manner that we can try for these tags online and not have to make airlines rich instead of the F&G.
At the least they could pull the tags proportionatly, 1 nonres tag for every 10 resident tag would be more fair since nonres only get 10% to begin with.
Don,email them with your concerns, everyone should, they want input
 
While you guys are calling SFW, try calling the Foudation for North American Wild Sheep, the National Wild Turkey Foundation, the Mule Deer Foundation, and the Rocky Mtn Elk Foundation. All these groups get THESE TAGS. It is not just a SFW grab, it is a multiple conservation group idea. I am not taking a side on it, but you guys need to get your facts straight!!! All the groups I listed were present at the Public meetings supporting this idea. It does not come soley from SFW! Each one of these groups stood and asked for THIS IDEA.

So while you are making calls, don't forget to call the aforementioned groups.

And yes Byron is a good guy, with good intentions.
 
I did email and I apologize for getting hot under the collar. I do not know him and I had no right to say that.

Sorry.

Got email response from Don P. promptly, pretty much the same stuff he wrote on other post.

Again I am for everything except how they are isuing the permits. Make it a mail in raffle.
 
Im from Montrose Colo and apply to Utah for
LE elk. I agree with ALL of the above comments.
If I pay extra money I want it to go to
WILDLIFE and not businesses. This convention
balony plain stinks. I salute Utah for
mananging much of their herd for quality. Colo
takes the prize for the worst management in the
nation for quality. Money and greed always wins here.
Roy in Montrose
 
Hey Schmalts, I sympathize with you. Being a Utah resident doesn't change my feelings about how this State is starting to change all the rules. I prefer to hunt out of state and now the West is going to get worse after USO and now this tag grab. I did have an option on the 5% tag grab and even wrote Don P. about it and his response was how much would it generate? Perhaps you could help my statistics out. What if the raffle was for a lifetime limited entry or once in a lifetime tag. What I mean is that this raffle would put up one each of the limited entry tags, (elk, deer, antelope, etc.) and one each of the Once in a lifetime tags (Moose, goat, etc.). The lucky bugger who won one would get to hunt any limtited entry unit within the seasons set by the proc. for a lifetime. Non-transferable of course. This would only add one hunter to any of the units per year thus making it statistically insignificant on any unit. Even with ten years of the raffle this would have no effect due to all the habitat that will be saved. Of course the cost per ticket should be about $20 per shot but look at the prize. Would this chance entice you to come to the convention?
Just a thought. I think it makes more sense than screwing the average Joe out of more tags. Your input would be appreciated. Do you think we could raise more with this as the prize? I'd even allow for your power of attorney but would much rather see you come out and see what we got to offer.
 
Have any of the Utah residence heard anything about what tags they are going to take to give to the convention? The LE archery elk unit that I put in for, only had one tag issued last year for NR's, along with 4 other units that also only had one tag available. With NR's losing these tags to the convention,will some of these units now lose that tag. I don't want to apply for a unit that may lose it's only tag to the convention. Or is that just a risk that I am going to have to make? PLEASE HELP!!!

Marty
 
Have the residents heard anything?

No, we are in the dark also. One post stated no public input was made. Made where?

To answer your question Marty. I am speculating of course, because no one seems to have a answer to tag numbers. If 25% of the tags go to this meeting thing, I would say there would have to be 4 or more tags to take any away. So if there is one tag it would have to stay in the draw. Remember, supposedly this does not take place until 2006, so you should be safe this year. Then again, who knows, the elk committee got their hands on stuff so tag amounts could be just about anything. Pray you draw this year before things get changed too much.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-12-05 AT 07:48PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Jan-12-05 AT 07:45?PM (MST)

LAST EDITED ON Jan-12-05 AT 07:21?PM (MST)

>Hey Schmalts, I sympathize with you.
> Perhaps you could
>help my statistics out.
>What if the raffle was
>for a lifetime limited entry
>or once in a lifetime
>tag. What I mean
>is that this raffle would
>put up one each of
>the limited entry tags, (elk,
>deer, antelope, etc.) and one
>each of the Once in
>a lifetime tags (Moose, goat,
>etc.). The lucky bugger
>who won one would get
>to hunt any limtited entry
>unit within the seasons set
>by the proc. for a
>lifetime. Non-transferable of course.
> This would only add
>one hunter to any of
>the units per year thus
>making it statistically insignificant on
>any unit. Even with
>ten years of the raffle
>this would have no effect
>due to all the habitat
>that will be saved.
>Of course the cost per
>ticket should be about $20
>per shot but look at
>the prize. Would this
>chance entice you to come
>to the convention?
>Just a thought. I think
>it makes more sense than
>screwing the average Joe out
>of more tags. Your
>input would be appreciated.
>Do you think we could
>raise more with this as
>the prize? I'd even
>allow for your power of
>attorney but would much rather
>see you come out and
>see what we got to
>offer.

No,I wouldnt attend it ever. When i have to jump through hoops and kiss ass just to do what i should be able to do with a simple application i will support someone else or join those who want to see hunting banned on federal land in general. I would do that to spite the guys who brought it to that level. I only have 2 weeks vacation. When am i supposed to hunt?? I have many other things i need to get done with my vacation time. I have already spent 6 hours at least studying the UT draw stuff, and thats only one state! Besides, if this is going to be the future of every state SFW gets their fingers into who will have time to go to other states as well to do the same? trust me if this flys in UT it will follow in every state SFW takes hold in. I am sorry but it is assinine to expect someone to have to fly into someplace to participate in any tag convention. I am looking into legal matters about this. I want to find out if legally they can turn down someone with power of attorney that would put in for someone. Byron said they wouldnt allow it and when i asked him if he knew if it was legal he wasnt sure. They may be opening themselves up to a lot of legal matters if they try to turn down someone applying for these tags in person through a power of attorney. here is a breif description of a power of attorney....A Power of Attorney is a written document stating that one person gives to another the full power and authority to represent him or her. The person who gives the power is the principal, and the person who receives the power is the attorney-in-fact or agent. A Power of Attorney must be signed by both the agent and the principal, witnessed by two people and notarized.
There are many ways to designate a decision-maker for you with a Power of Attorney document. You can assign a General Power of Attorney that covers all of your legal, financial and personal decisions except those pertaining to your medical care and treatment, or a Limited Power of Attorney that only covers decision-making in areas that you specify. You can have your Power of Attorney made immediately effective, which means that the agent has the power to represent you now. If you also make the Power of Attorney Durable, the agent's power to represent you will remain in effect in the event you become mentally unable to make decisions on your own (incompentent). Or, you can make it Springing, which means that it becomes effective only in the event you become incompetent.
A very popular use of the Power of Attorney has absolutely nothing to do with mental incompetence. Many military people and overseas contractors prepare Powers of Attorney that are immediately effective, so their wives, husbands or other family members in the United States can deposit paychecks, make purchases, pay bills and otherwise represent them financially or legally while they are away or otherwise not available to handle these matters themselves.
BTW, you can download a power of attorney for free, just type in "power of attorney" in yahoo and its all over the place. This is how USO and other services are allowed to apply for clients via mail drawings, they cannot be turned down or it is discrimination.
Hmmmm, sounds like they cannot legally turn down someone in person with power of attorney. I said thats all the more reason to let nonresidents apply by mail and keep it simple. I really feel that they have so much riding on this that they are afraid it will fail and make them look like an undesireable organization for any out of state hunters. I dont think they thought this out very well and will lose popularity very fast once the nonres hunters find out what is going to happen. They havent gotten feedback from nonresidents because the nonres guys dont know!!!! they are doing this all on assumption. I tell you what, the dozen or so that I told about it not one had a good thing to say about it. I hope SFW MREF and other poll the nonres hunters before they make a huge mistake. As it sits now with the way its proposed i know myself and everyone i know will not give a dime towards any one of these orgs anymore. UT just made a huge tag price increase for nonres, and now next year they propose to remove 25% of the normal tags on top of that due to this idea. When will the residents of states carry a little more of the burden?? When is enough? when will we start thinking that our sons will never afford to hunt any state but where we live? i think there is a lot of us here that hunt more than one state, beware.
Speak out or dont complain what happens in years to come. Thats how SFW gets what they want. let them know what the sportsman want NOW. Dont just vent here call them, email them. they said i was the first nonres to complain!
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-12-05 AT 07:29PM (MST)[p]>Schmalts,
>
>
>
>I hardly agree with everything Don
>does, but he is doing
>something which is better than
>nothing. I hope Utah hunters
>will not be punished in
>other states by taking away
>our allotment because of this
>convention. Turnabout is fair play,
>or so they say.
>
Dude, what do you think will happen to any state that SFW takes hold in if this blows through? Are ready to fly to 5 states every spring to have a better chance to draw a tag or let them all get scarfed up by residents?? If you are like me and apply for 4 states you better bet this will happen. If Peay and Company thinks this is great for UT why wont they try it in NM, NV, ect. A little of this is one thing but 25% is punishment to the common man.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-12-05 AT 08:45PM (MST)[p]Schmalts,

I am in your corner. By SFW doing something, that is good. They have done alot of good. I think Don wants to do good, but is not considering the "common man" as you say. I disagree with him on this. I would like to see billions raised for wildlife. However, I agree with you, NR's are put in a really bad position in this case. Make a 25 dollar check out to Don with an application is better than a convention, just use the funds as intended.

My concern from the get go has been my rights as a Utahn, to apply in other states, being taken away as yours is. I am concerned the floodgates will open on minimal out of state opportunities. I worry I will be a hated Utard.

You are also right that NO ONE can ignore a Power Of Attorney. You are acting for that person. I am acting as one now. I can do anything in this person's behalf (Durable Power of Attorney). Anything. You can also make POA's that are specific to one action. So, if you want someone to apply for tags in your behalf, specify that action (Limited Power of Attorney), and no other action can be taken other than the one specified. In fact, get a copy of your P.O.A. at your local Office Max. I would think that whoever told you this is not valid would seek accurate answers first.

We have a great elk herd here, SFW takes a lot of credit for that, but NR's deserve a reasonable portion of the tags that are not up for grabs to everyone.

One more thing, if it comes to me having to attend a convention in other states to apply, I will quit hunting. It is already a crap shoot that is expensive. I cannot afford an application fee that includes a week long holiday.
 
Schmalts, You are missing a big part of the picture. You keep blubbering about SFW this and SFW that, all the while not recognizing that this "Raffle" tag idea was formulated by multiple groups. Are you a member of MDF, RMEF, NWTF, or FNAWS? Have you called them?? Leading higher-ups in each of these organizations were at the PUBLIC meetings (RACs and Board) here in Utah, pushing for this idea! The blame needs to go around and put on other Conservation Groups also.

I do believe that 25% of the NonRes tags are too many. 2.5% of Res tags are also too many. Utah gives MORE of its tags to Conservation groups than any other state which I am aware of, 8% for orignal conservation tags and 5% for these "Special" tags, 13% of Utah's tags go to conservation groups.

I also believe Utahns pay more than surrounding states for tags.
 
Trust me, I went and emailed every sponser that RMEF had on its web page a link to this topic. I know its not just SFW, but is it not their convention? Your point is taken, and noted. But this is one topic under the ELK section, so I dont want to talk sheep and moose here. Maybe start it up in other forums??
 
No, it is not their (SFW) convention. It is a Multi-Conservation Group Convention. The idea is to have this "Utah" convention be held so all Groups and Booth operators combine into one "Super" convention. The groups beleive that more people will come attend such an Extravaganza.

This is not an elk only issue. All species are effected the same. Each group uses each species. Heck the MDF received numerous elk tags + moose, goat, turkey, deer, etc tags to auction. So if you are going to be fuming about SFW you better have the same feelings toward ALL these groups involved, no matter what their species affiliation is. FNAWS and MDF were big supporters of this idea. Even the NWTF wanted a lsice of this pie.

So are you a member of any of these groups??
 
Interesting read. I just have to add a vote to the pile that the normal nonresident hunter out there will have a very hard time justifying a trip to a Utah convention for a chance at a permit. I have a hard enough time finding the vacation for the actual hunt. If I had more, I would want to use it for a scouting trip, not a convention gathering that will cost me a significant amount of money to attend. Money that will in no way help elk or wildlife habitat. I just don't see the reasoning. From my perspective, it appears to be an unrealistic situation for the majority of the people that this directly impacts. Also, call me a pessimist, and I apologize for mentioning this twice in the same thread, but what is going on here in Utah along with the situation in Arizona and the general trend to limit hunting opportunities in this country really worries me. If this is where we are going, is it too far fetched to see residents of Wyoming or Montana or New Mexico, etc... get pissed off enough about the limited hunting opportunities available to them in Utah and decide to reciprocate? Where the heck are we going with this and when will it end? The fact is, this is almost like politics. We hear a lot of discussion of strengthening hunting by banding together and increasing participation in hunting....the whole brotherly love thing. But when it comes down to it, most people end up selfishly looking out for themselves and their own interests. This appears to be an ever increasing occurrence. I can't help but wonder if this is the case here. Thanks for reading.
 
I think it is rather unfair to belittle Byron.

He is a stand-up guy and has given many hours to wildlife issues in Utah.

There are numerous guys; Rusty, Troy, John, Byron, Bob 'kill whitey' ha, involved on the SFW BOD that are good people and I think they truely believe that the ultimate focus is an obtainable goal. Sure they are on a payroll and ofcourse they defend the SFW, but all of us defend our job-income if it gets challenged.

Granted, there are some that feel Brian 'Founder' sold out with his new position with SFW but it is the only real source of IN STATE wildlife goals.

The main idea from Don Peay, back in the day, was to have Wildlife pay for Wildlife. This generation of wildlife would pay for the next and future generation via Conservation tags and the use of those funds to generate a better environment for the future of hunting and more wildlife.

With that said, Hell no I don't think they need another 5% of tags for this great big Convention. It would stand on it's own with out the additional tags.
 
Besides DonV, no one here is belittling Byron. I am just telling what was some of my conversation and informing the sportsman about it. 2point, like i said you point was taken, but this is the elk forum, so for that matter i dont want to bring up sheep because its a pretty different topic and if you agree or disagree i wish you would start a stopic in the sheep section. And yes, everyone should harp to the RMEF on this as well. this is not right.
 
Again I am sorry, wrote that when I was pissed.

Bottom line I think the idea of helping wildlife is great, saving habitat etc. I strongly dissagree with the tags going to a convention. This is a bad idea.

I cannot thank all those involved enough who helped increase the numbers of elk and sheep (and everything else for that matter).

Recap:
Sorry Byron
Convention tags bad idea
Work already done and going to be done in the future great!

I will say it again, why not simply a mail in raffle, there is not question 10 times as many will participate and raise 10 times as much? The only reason I can see against this is they want to get more tags to Utah residents since there is no doubt they will be the strong majority present. I am only speculating here.
 
How many guys here go to the national shows for FNAWS, MDF, RMEF, GSCO or NWTF annually?

Seems like I make it 2 out of 3 years or so to national FNAWS. The thought of one super show sounds very exciting and as a non-resident (not from Utah) the thought of being able to attend one show versus four (I can only afford to attend one per year) makes it even more appealing.

Looking for some middle ground here so here is my solution:

Using FNAWS as an example, the raffles held there do not require the winner to be present to win. Instead, tickets not purchased at the show are more expensive. So, let's all attend this single great event and pay the $5 per hunt we want to enter. If some cant make it (and I may fall in this group) let me be able to order tickets at a cost of say $10 or $20 each versus the show price of $5. This allows me (a non utah resident) a chance again at the disporportionate number of non-resident tags used for this super drawing while contributing to nationwide conservation efforts.

Glen
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-13-05 AT 10:58AM (MST)[p] Ramslam, that isnt very good reasononing. Why should you pay more? you already cannot make it because you cannot afford to go so you want to pay more for a chance than a guy who can afford to go there?? Once again, this is not about the show, the tickets ect, its about a totally unfair percentage of tags alloted to this. Make it fair and allot 2.5 out of 100 tags across the board. thats the only fair solutuion. Stop putting the burden on the nonresidents hunters and penalize them for their inability to travel on top of it. In my opinion that is the only thingthat would settle my stomach.
 
Schmalts look at it this way the conservation tag allottment
for these groups in Utah is around 340 tags now, Last years Gov deer tag went for $81,000. great keep the 340 tags that are designated for conservation organizations, but why do these groups now need another 188 tags?? Keep in mind the Utah DWR doesn't own these tags to give them away. The taxpayers of Utah do. I have heard that wildlife will only realize about 50% of this money anyway. These groups do not need anymore Utah Taxpayer/hunter property especially with only a 50% return!!!
 
Just curious if this kind of crap goes on in surrounding states or if Utah is being a testing ground for other states and these types of actions!

Like I have always said IF ITS WORKS LEAVE IT ALONE WHEN IT BREAKS FIX IT!

NOTHING BROKE HER IN UTAH JUST MY WALLET EVERY YEAR WHEN I HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO PAY FOR THE DRAWS. " ESPECIALLY THIS YEAR "

I'm not rich I just want to hunt and enjoy the outdoors!!

I say we have a convention and everybody comes who loves the outdoors and signs up for volunteer projects and we can get rid of all these money hungry groups!!! That would work in the old days, but not now!
 
Schmaltz, we need you to head up the fight against the unfair nonresident gouging on tag prices. Let's start with Oryx and Ibex in NM. If Utah charged a similar percentage over resident tag costs, a Utah premium elk tag would cost you over $11,000.00. Next on the list may be Arizona. Seems they don't want any non-res hunters there either.
 
lets do some math for Don Peay and Byron since they keep saying this will benifit the nonresidents in the future. with the proposed numbers the amount of tags will have to exactly DOUBLE for nonresident to get back to where they started with this plan.
How you ask?? simple math, correct me if i am wrong.
Residents lose 2.5%, but the nonres take it in the shorts and lose 25%, or ten times as many percantage wise.
So... as the tag numbers do increase, how many will the nonres get back?? of course the usual one out of 10!!
So take away 10 times as many but then give back 10% in the future and you need the total tag amount to DOUBLE from what it is now!!
Is this your idea of helping your orgs get support from hunters who travel arcoss state lines??
 
I don't usually reply that often, but I'm going to put my .02 worth in. Is this convention raffle a one time deal? The way it was explained above the NR is getting hosed. And I Live here.

I agree this money generated form this and other auctions allows us to improve habitat for the future. Yes, we can all do more to help! As I looked though the Huntin' Fool UTAH offers approx. 195 tags for auction and raffles. The next closest state was WY with 20.

UT should have the biggest and most deer and elk in the West. Yes, we are right there on the elk. Yes, we have a very nice sheep program going. You might hunt one in your life if your very lucky or have a ton of money.

We need help with deer. What we need SFW and other groups to do, along with generate revenue is help guide the Fish and Game to manage are deer herds. The state needs to be broken up into smaller units. and limit the tags Intel the herds rebound. Look at most of the neighboring states, they have done it and in my opinion they are doing a better job without raping are limited resources (Tags) for money.

Is this convention/raffle a one time deal?

buckshot
 
>I don't usually reply that often,
>but I'm going to put
>my .02 worth in. Is
>this convention raffle a one
>time deal? The way it
>was explained above the NR
>is getting hosed. And I
>Live here.
>
>>Is this convention/raffle a one time
>deal?
>
>buckshot

No, it is supposed to be an annual thing. so it isnt a one year only hoseing of NR tags.
 
I would be willing to pay twice as much and enter without being present. Again all I do not like it having to go to the convention. If it were 10 times closer, free to get in and a month long there is still no way I would attend.
 
Just as a point of clarification; each state SFW organization operates independently of the rest. In other words, just because something happens in one state doesn't mean that it will happen in any of the other states.

I have set back and read the many posts regarding the 5% tag allocation or the "Super Bowl" of conservation events as it has been presented. I find it interesting that many are focusing on how it impacts them. Perhaps, we should be asking how will it benefit the resource? It also seems as though many nonresidents believe they should have a say in how Utah manages its wildlife resources. I don't recall any other state asking or polling nonresidents on how the manage their wildlife resources either. That being said, I might also make a point of explaining why everyone should consider attending such an event. As was mentioned earlier, if we consolidate ALL of the participating groups individual National Conventions into one main event overall it would be cheaper than attending each individual National Convention. Perhaps you have only been able to attend one National Convention per year. Now, for about the same amount, you could attend one event and benefit several organizations. In addition, think about the other benefits of everyone working together. Conservation groups would be spending less money on conventions (money away from our resources and each organizations specific goal), a bigger event would attrack more media attention, that many sportsmen and women coming together for a common goal would increase our ability to leverage a political advantage into a greater voice for hunting, fishing, trapping, habitat emphasis for wildlife.

SFW has been successful by looking at the BIG PICTURE rather than simply asking how does this impact me. I would encourage you to think outside the box. Perhaps you might not be able to make it to Utah every year. Perhaps, if this "bad idea" is successful other states may offer something similar. The "Super Bowl" convention could happen in your state one year. That would require all of those in Utah to spend some travel time and money as well.

Just so you know, I don't have a dog in this fight. Utah must decide how they want to manage their wildlife resources. If we don't like how they are managing their resouce, we can all stay home and protest, or hunt in another state.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-15-05 AT 10:36AM (MST)[p] Smokestick, You expect the sportsman to be happy to help wildlife when only a certain majority will benefit from it? Now your talking like an anti-hunter mentality. You must give 25% of you paycheck to charity your so noble.
The big picture thing your spouting is a pretty lame thing. I am saying this ia a bad idea because it will lose support of nonres hunters everywhere because they are expecting the nonresidents to "support" this convention 10 fold over the residents, and get what in return?? a double royal screwing when they give us back just 1 in 10 increase in tags after we just lost 1 in 4?? what dont you get about it??
Let me ask you something in perspective. Would you like it if the Social security said it was going to take an additional 25% of your paycheck from now on because you didnt live in washington DC, and when you retired you will only get 1/10 of what the politicians in DC will get when they retire because once again you dont live there ? But its helping the cause..... get real and wake up. this is not helping wildlife, its seperating hunters and hunting values. Its putting a border between those who are rich and those who are not and cannot afford to hunt, of go to conventions. Even though the poor guys are willing to help they cannot because it is not possible and they are shut out.
A true sportsman wants to help out, but in a way we can at least benifit on equal returns. No one is saying we want more allotment in tags, no one is saying we want equal pricing, we just want to participate in a way that we at least can.
This is pretty much just a plan to shut out more nonres hunters in UT unless you have wads of cash, plain and simple.
Why should nonres hunter be so happy to help that? This little plan will do nothing more than shut out nonres hunters. The tag numbers will have to double just to get back what we gave up, and the residents will get what?? double the tags. Yea, right, i should be happy to support this "big picture" its worst than welfare ranching.
 
Smokestick

If you want all of the tags to go to residence, than just say that. We as NR's won't like it, but at least we will know where you stand,without your "smoke and mirrors" comments.

I don't know what posts you are reading, but I don't see any of the NR's saying that this Convention "Super Bowl" is a bad idea, or that the cause is not just. Quite the contrary. Most of the NR's are trying to help find different ways to help the NR's contribute, or participate in this raffle without having to spend the time and money to travel to Utah to have a chance at these tags. I too, don't like the fact that they can continue to raid Utah's public tag system for fundraising, but there is a part of me that would rather see these organizations get the money than the state. We all know what happens then. The money will get appropriated somewhere else, other that habitat restoration. As for everyone who is against this, just thinking of themselves... Please, if your going to insult our intelligence, you have to come up with something better than that! In 2004 utah issued 1268 LE Elk permits total.(Res & NR)Of those 105 went to NR. That's 8.3% (added all the tags issued for archery, any weapon, and muzzleloader out of the proclamation) I wish we as NR could get more tags, but I can live with this. Residence, without question, should get the greater majority of the tags. That being said, these tags that are going to go towards this convention will reduce that 8.3% by alot, and we as NR's are just supposed to not care?,and we're selfish because we do? If anything Smokestick, it's the residence if favor of this plan, the way it stands, that are selfish! They want NR's to spend money in their state,give up alot of their NR tags so the Res. have a shot at them, so we can all raise money for for habitat resoration(most of which, I'm sure, will be conducted of Federally owned land)for "their" animals,that slowly but surely NR's are losing rights to even hunt! and we're selfish?!

Again, if Utah and it's residence don't want any NR's in their state, fine. But if your going to allow us tags, we shouldn't have to jump through hoops to get them.

I am for SFW and their cause. I am even for this tag raffle, only because I think any money raised would accually get to where it is supposed to go. But why can't you take 9 Res. tags to every 1 NR tag?

You can let your Dog out to fight now.

Marty
 
Apparently you think I am a resident of Utah. I live in Wyoming. While Wyoming may be closer to Utah than your state, I still contend that Utah should decide how to manage their wildlife resources, just as your state(s) decide how to manage their wildlife resources.

You can chose to participate or not.

You both continue to say it impacts you and your opportunity. That is only true if you don't participate. It appears to me that a simple solution is to allow for non-residents to apply without attending; however, that would run counter what Utah is attempting to achieve.

Have either of you attended any National Conservation events in the past? I have been able to attend SCI's National Convention once, RMEF's National Convention twice, MDF's National Convention four times, and FNAWS's Natinoal Convention once. If they all happened at the same time and location my conservation dollars would be more likely to go towards the resources rather than towards paying for convention centers, etc. It would also be more attractive to vendors and cheaper for them as well. Most of these vendors support all of these diverse groups by supplying them with products for their fundraisers. If they only needed to attend one show and get coverage to a significant number of sportsmen and women, perhaps they would be able to even provide much more support to conservation efforts. The work load of running the convention events would be shared by all conservation organizations allowing their resources to be better utilized and get more bang for your dollars. Like I said before, if it works perhaps other states would desire to participate allowing the "Super Event" to travel around to various states, not just Utah. MAybe you should be asking how your state can put something together as well. You claim it is to screw the non-residents, I believe it is to benefit the wildlife resources of Utah, raise awareness of Utah's wildlife issues (most importantly, declining mule deer numbers), increase media coverage of wildlife needs, and return sportsmen to a place of importance as the primary wildlife conservationist we have been for the last century.
 
> You
>claim it is to screw
>the non-residents, I believe it
>is to benefit the wildlife
>resources of Utah, raise awareness
>of Utah's wildlife issues (most
>importantly, declining mule deer numbers),
>increase media coverage of wildlife
>needs, and return sportsmen to
>a place of importance as
>the primary wildlife conservationist we
>have been for the last
>century.

Its both. The nonrsidents are getting screwed to benifit the resident hunting opportunity, sorry but you cant argue with the math. Nonres supplying 10 times the tags for a mostly resident function with only 1/10th the future return.
 
Smokestick,

You have always helped me to look at things in a different light, to understand, and convince me to think differently. Not this time.

You say this "Super Bowl" bring all groups together for one big convention so people will not have to have the burden of attending several fund raisers or conventions. These groups already get tags for that purpose. Use the tags they already have for this super event. But wait, no, they say we need more for this event, so we can still do our other stuff. If these groups were so convinced this was a great idea, then they would add their existing tags to the pot. Not going to happen.

I have waited since I was 16 to hunt LE elk. These groups ask for tags and it is like, sure go ahead, how many do you need? What do I need to pay to get a tag. Surely their is a price on these tags. What is it? You say it is not up to the NR to say how Utah manages their herd. OK, I can agree with that, but ask Arizona if mismanaging these tag allocations was a good idea.

I do not see a whole lot of good from this. Sure lots of money, potentially, but is it worth the damge control that will follow? I hope I can draw this year then maybe I can start thinking like the rest of the crowd here and the elk committee.
 
ktc,

I always appreciate your comments as well.

I believe that the tags you mention will still be used for fundraising at the "Super Bowl" event. Perhaps "The Main Event" is a better term.

Either way, I thought this was a way for the average joe to obtain a chance at a great conservation permit. I have heard, as well as you I am sure, that sportsmen wanted more opportunity for the average guy. The conservation permits that are currently allocated are to maximize dollars for conservation. Raffles (or $5.00 application) have not produced enough money so most groups run the conservation permits through an auction as opposed to a raffle. I can't remember the amount of money the Sportsman's permit raises but I know it pales in comparison to the statewide conservation permits. One of the biggest problems with raffling conservation permits is that people will tend to only participate if they have better odds than thru a regular drawing.

I haven't drawn my bull elk license yet as well. I have 10 points but now I apply as a nonresident. No ones fault, just happened that way. I still think there are some ways to fine tune this proposal and comments are great to obtain. However, when the dust finally settles, it should be the Utah that decides how to manage their wildlife resources. I even believe that Arizona should be able to manage they way they want to. Nonresidents have a voice but I would tend to put most the weight with regards to decision making in the hands of the residents.

Like I have said before, if you don't like hunt somewhere else. If enough non-residents boycotted Utah my odds would improve. Maybe I do have a dog in this fight after all.

As always, thanks for the dialogue, ktc.
 
smokestick are you the person that was affiliated with the MDF a few years back and don't you help with SFW Wyoming??
I apologize in advance if I am confused.
 
Yes, I along with Troy Justensen, Cal Bambrough, and a few others started MDF up in Utah in 1993. I was the state chair for several years, then went to work for MDF in 1999. Currently, I am the Executive Director of SFW WY. SFW WY has its own Board of Directors and acts independently of SFW in other states.

Bob Wharff
aka) SMOKESTICK
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-17-05 AT 03:15PM (MST)[p]Smokestick, i have a problem with your logic. for one, your comment about letting UT decide what to do is true, but dont you think the nonres opinion should have some bearing on how the allocated NR tags should be handled??
second, the "if you dont like it hunt somewhere else statement" will be SFW's downfall. SFW didnt get crap for input from nonresidents on this idea about allocating 10 times the percentage of tags to this. If they do not reconsider this i hope it will destroy them for being so arrogant. I dare them to put a poll on the website and see what the outcome is. The bottom line is all of the Orgs went after the tags with blinders on, and didnt care what the outcome will be. they just wanted those tags to make themselves look good in the end by showing $$ and not caring where or who it will hurt. Joe hunter will take the hit. If this tag allotment stands as is i recommend SFW change its name to "rich hunters who killed tradition"
 
I'm not saying that I approve 100% with the program but have you concidered that NRs will have an equal chance at the tags taken from the residents as well? It is entirely possible that NRs will draw more of these tags than were taken from them. Just something to think about. I would agree that NRs should be allowed to apply by mail. I'm just glad that I'll have a chance at drawing an elk tag now since I have committed to applying for deer.
 
schmalts,

I do agree that nonresidents should be allowed to provide input regarding matters in any state for which they may be interested in hunting. You may think we disagree. I believe you should be providing comment; not just on a web site. I believe you should be sending comments into the Utah Division of Wildlife. Furthermore, you should continue discussing the issues as you see them. However, you must also realize that you may not obtain your desires either. Hopefully, everyone can work collectively to come up with a solution that works.

I would also encourage you to contact all of the other organizatinos involved. This doesn't just include SFW. Many other groups are also looking at this proposal as accomplishing Utah's goals. I know several sportsmen have complained that too many of the current conservation permits are going to the rich and the poor are left out. I am certain that this is one factor that has moved so many of these groups to come together.

In addition, as ktg mentioned, nonresidents will also have an opportunity at resident licenses as well. And in truth, the majority of the conservation permits auctioned are allocated to nonresidents. Don't give up on your ideas though. I didn't want to enter this debate but I believed from what I was reading there was more to this than Utah simply making a grab for nonresident licenses. Keep looking for a (the) solution. It is only when you walk away that you loose you voice.

Keep up a good debate. I would encourage you to continue, but make sure that you are looking at the same goal as are the conservation groups.

I am not worried about Utah's decisions affecting Wyoming's decisions, nor any of the other SFW states. Each state works towards their own issues. As I also stated, this is not simply an SFW thing.

I might also point out that ktc is a resident of Utah. He doesn't like everything about this proposal either. I am confident that this is not about putting it to the nonresidents.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-17-05 AT 08:49PM (MST)[p]While it is true that nonres will have a chance at the resident tags you still need to look at the math and say the nonres were far better off left out of this. You have to admit that the attendance will be overwhelming resident at this event. To top it off, my whole complaint has been that the rich are always winning out with the auction tags, and this is no different. Besides the few nonres who live in a next door state only a few "rich" nonres will afford to attend this convention.
The two thing that go unanswered by anyone on SFW's side is why the hell is the nonresidents supplying 25% of thier tags vs 2.5% of the resident tags going to a in-state function!!!!!
Why is SFW afraid to admit they never got input from hunters about this event that may destroy thier nonresident support?? If i was a chairperson of any of these groups i would be very concerned. This will not go away, it is a year off and there is a lot of time until then for the public to find out was is going down. I can tell you one thing, i bet 90% of UT nonres applicants do not know yet and poop will hit the fan if these numbers are not put in check.
One other thing< now that UT is only giving 7% of the tags to the nonres what will they do to avoid a lawsuit like the AZ deal?? this is now worst that the AZ percentage for the drawing.
 
Smokestick,

The biggest complaint people have about this shaft job is that these groups already have an S load of conservation permits and now they are STEALING 188 more from the public and depriving them the opportunity to apply in the manner that the 188 were set aside for. No one on this site that I know is against conservation or habitat improvement. I would also venture to say that a lot of us belong to 1 or more of these groups involved in this debacle. That does not make it right. Should we contact the other groups involved? Of course we should. However, Everyone knows who runs UTAH. It is SFW. They are the driving force behind every change for good or bad. The problem is it is ALWAYS the public that loses. I have yet to see the good ole boys at the top who hunt UTAH's LE elk units EVERY YEAR take a 5% permit loss. They get more and more "opportunity" every year. They also have NO waiting period. The abuse of the conservation permit program has gone on long enough I just don't know how to stop it. I tell everyone I know about it and maybe someday the general public's voice will actually be represented in this state. Until then we can all just grin and bear it because the Process is flawed. Have a great day.

Chad
 
Damn Chad you are going to end up at " THE LUNCH " for sure!!
don't you know you shouldn't poke the Utah 800lb gorilla.
Ever ask yourself what happened to fishon and his silence of late??? Remember he wasn't going to let SFW dominate wildlife in Utah anymore. Very curious
 
Fishon is at MDF pimping tags for them now. They bought like 100 x the tags this year compared to last.
 
Gordy,

If I felt like lunch would make things better I would be there with bells on! I just don't see it in my future however! Have a great day!

Chad
 

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