Let your dollars talk

[dryflyelk]

LAST EDITED ON Aug-21-12 AT 04:41PM (MST)[p]I've been very vocal about my problems with SFW, the MDF and the DWR- specifically, the expo and the complete lack of accountability and oversight. We've been barking up this tree for years, and very little has changed. The meeting with the DWR the other day led me to a realization.

I've been a hypocrite.

I've attended the expo every year and spent thousands on the chance at one of the coveted tags. Although I had major problems with whole thing, I still wanted that chance to draw a tag that I'd probably never be able to pull otherwise. I overlooked the fact that the system was flawed and we were stealing money from the public to give to a private entity.

That is no longer the case. Until the DWR, MDF and SFW can come to honest agreement that makes things square with the public, I will no longer attend. I won't be buying anymore tickets or paying for concessions. I can't feel good about it.

Obviously, it's a personal choice for all of you. The allure of hunting deer in the Henry Mtns or a sheep or goat may just be too much. But, if it's not, I'd urge you folks who agree with me to do the same.

Sure, it means that the rest of you who don't have a problem will have better odds if you choose to attend. Realistically though, the bottom line is that things aren't going to change until we stand up for ourselves. We do that with our wallets. If attendance and applications go down significantly, perhaps those at the heads of these organizations will realize we're serious. There will be pressure from the public and also from the vendors to change the way things are done.

While we are still working to come to a resolution on other fronts, I'd urge the rest of you to give it some thought. If you don't like what the DWR, MDF and SFW are doing, don't give them any of your money. At this point, we have no idea where our application dollars are being spent. We are just taking their word for it. They're not getting a dime more from me until things change.


Vi Et Armis Invictus Maneo

 

[Deerlove]

Man thats easier said than done. LOL Every year I give (apply for)less but it's hard.

 

[TOPGUN]

This was something I brought up not too long after I joined the MM site. What you are saying is a simple and easy way to get their ear quickly and they WILL change or another organization will take over the EXPO and run it properly. If a person has principles, I don't think boycotting the function one year would be difficult at all. My guess is that it would only take that one year to change things because it became obvious listening to the Board meeting last Thursday that they sure as he** aren't going to do anything to harm their buddies money intake.

 

[chewyman55]

I made that decision a few years ago. If I can't sneak in one of the side doors...I'm not going in

 

[wileywapati]

Never have gone and never will. Also done as
A volunteer




"The future is large scale auction tags.
The majority of the tags should go up
for auction anually. It MIGHT even be
good to allow second sales of auction
tags as in outfitters purchasing tags
and then re-selling them to the public."
TRISTATE 8/17/2012

 

[littlejoe]

I hope everyone boycotts so I can finally get a sheep tag. That is about my only chance. Just dumb luck. I don't agree with everything any of them do but the allure of possibly drawing a tag is to much plus I have several good friends that have booths there and I want to go and see them.

 

[TOPGUN]

That kind of greedy talking is exactly why DP is where he is today!!!

 

[arroyobuck]

Let me see if I understand this. You do not want to pay a private entity $5 for a chance at a tag, but you would be okay paying the government the $5? What if the government said it would cost $15, would you still be okay with it?

I am not getting the logic. Are you concerned that somebody is getting rich off of the $5 fee or is it something else? What exactly would the govt do with the money if you were paying them? Do you think they would spend it prudently?

 

[klbzdad]

AMEN!!!!!!! I haven't yet and never will and my family has all agreed to join the "NO EXPO" bandwagon in fear of being banned from camp!

 

[TOPGUN]

"I am not getting the logic. Are you concerned that somebody is getting rich off of the $5 fee or is it something else?"

Why does that statement not surprise me when you still obviously think DP is better than sliced bread to make it! You know exactly why we are stating this is the way to straighten things out and put the money where it should be going.

 

[Robiland]

Arroyobuck,

Did you just come out of a comma?

Those are tags these groups take from us and should not have the $$$ from those tags put into their own pockets. Public assets need to be accounted for.
These tags or expo is in the name of "conservation". So what conservation is being done? They make 1 + million $ from us and pocket that $. Wake up dude.

 

[SMOKESTICK]

So, are you also going to protest the company in Fallon, NV and boycott their drawing? How many millions of dollars do they take in for running the drawing? How much of that has been put back into wildlife management in Utah?

 

[BuzzH]

I apply in Utah every year in the State drawing...and I'll gladly keep paying whatever Fallon, NV charges.

If the State of Utah did their own drawing I'm quite sure that SFW/BGF/MDF would rig that just like they've rigged every other thing to do with Utah Wildlife.

A third party is the only thing keeping the drawing on the level in Utah now.

Exactly why a third party audit is also needed to see where the expo money is going.

 

[TOPGUN]

LAST EDITED ON Aug-21-12 AT 09:18PM (MST)[p]Exactly BuzzH, and shame on Bob for even making that post when he knows exactly what the score is on this whole drawing deal and the accountablity issue! I'm also wondering why Bob is even asking that question when he keeps saying the state SFW organizations are supposed to operate separately and differently and he's working for WYSFW. Hmm!!!

 

[SMOKESTICK]

Shame on me? I don't think so Michael.

It appears as though many are up set by no one took the time to attend the meeting(s) when the convention permits were being discussed. Even you two guys (BuzzH and his ever faithful sidekick TOPGUN) should see this for what it is. How can people criticize this when they failed to engage in the process? After the fact, some started to question this process. A special meeting was requested and the decision was made by the Wildlife Board.

I am tired of seeing SFW singled out when it has been MDF all along which signed the contract. I have nothing to do with what Utah does but I can tell everyone that the process is clearly laid out. If we (as sportsmen) fail to participate, is it really a problem with the process or us? If things really need to change then engage in the process to fix them. A boycott won't hurt the EXPO as too many will attend anyway. Dividing sportsmen is not the answer either. Perhaps you (BuzzH & TOPGUN) cannot see what is happening but I can see it all to well. The real enemy is not SFW, MDF, BGF, RMEF, SCI, etc.

While we all sit around taking pot shots at each other the very model which many have professed to adhere to is under threat. Wyoming and Idaho are both talking about deviating from the North American Model of Wildlife Management because of budget woes. Which other states have also been quietly meeting or discussing alternative forms of funding? Have either of you googled Southwick & Associates?

I am not afraid of lively debate but one sportsmen's group vilifying another is very harmful, especially to those just entering the conservation movement. Our enemies are watching and celebrating our divisions. I am sure that many of them are eagerly watching us battle as they conspire to end hunting.

I would urge those that feel the convention system is broken to honestly engage with the Wildlife Board. I still believe in the process and so should everyone else on this site that is a hunter/angler/trapper; otherwise, the battle is already lost.

 

[TOPGUN]

LAST EDITED ON Aug-21-12 AT 09:39PM (MST)[p]I'm not going to even argue with you any more on this entire issue because you misspeak every time and then say people responding don't know what they are talking about. You know damn well that people have been arguing and talking about this accountability issue ever since the first contract was issued and it's deepened every year since then and culminated with that debacle of a Board meeting last Thursday, LOL! End of debate!!!

PS: I thought you wanted decent posts by myself and then you came up with the BS comment on BuzzH and his faithful sidekick. Shame on you again MR.!!! Your reading comprehension also sucks because in every sentence in the OP the MDF was mentioned along with the SFW and DWR, so your "we're only attacking SFW" is also baloney. You talk about divisions among us and the simple truth is that there would be no division on this issue with a simple opening of the books by the parties involved if everything was on the up and up. That #10 proposal that was slipped in and passed by the board last Thursday was just another prime exampleof getting around what most peoople feel will end this division and put everyone on the same page. This whole thing will be solved before it's all over, but it's obviously not going to come through anything voluntary on the part of the agency or organizations we're talking about. Your comment about Wyoming also possibly deviating from the NAM is baloney unless you have inside information on something that is being discussed because all that I'm aware of is that they are asking a company to look at other methods to gain more money to support the G&F.

 

[joeaveragehunter]

TopMind, you agree that I'm a moron for calling this pos advertisement for the $xpo tags a sfw propaganda effort? You really are a $fw troll aren't you. Come on admit it, you work for dp and the koolaid factory too. Your one of us or one of them dude.

 

[Wes]

Dryflyelk
That's exactly what I have been preaching since the inception of the Expo. Hunters supporting an organization that does not support the average hunter. You'd be better off donating to PETA. At least then you would get an honest answer of where the money goes
"Let me see if I understand this. You do not want to pay a private entity $5 for a chance at a tag, but you would be okay paying the government the $5? What if the government said it would cost $15, would you still be okay with it?"
I realize there are cost associated with conducting the draw no matter who does it, SFW, System Consultants, or the DWR. I don't care who makes the money. It's what they do with that money that I'm concerned with. System Consultants in a private company that is in the business to make a profit. Utah DWR is a government agency in charge of managing wildlife, which is a public resource, in the best interest of the majority of the public. SFW is a wolf in sheep's clothing, a private entity pretending to be a wildlife conservation organization and claiming to represent the majority of hunters, when in reality they are small group with an agenda representing a minority of special interest hunters, ie; the wealthy hunter who leapfrogs to the head of the line by purchasing tags and hunts every year while the average hunter who cannot afford or chooses to not participate in their scheme sits on the side lines hoping to some day draw a tag. When SFW lobbied for the expo tags they claimed the "Majority and Lions share" of the money generated by the $5 application fee would be used for wildlife conservation. So far they have refused to provide an accounting of where they are using that money. If they are going to be subsidized by a government agency with public resource tags and claim they are using that money for the benefit of the MAJORITY of the public they have an obligation to give the PUBLIC an accounting.
Wes

 

[BuzzH]

Smokestick,

Who has created the division amoung hunters you seem to chirp about every single time SFW/BGF/MDF are questioned?

You act as though the above three groups have ZERO culpability for their actions.

What I get tired of is any time SFW/BGF/MDF are taken to task for the chit they pull, you start blowing smoke (pun there) about how all those questioning non-existant accounting, iffy policies, iffy board appointments, etc. are just dividing hunters. If you keep transparency you dont have a problem.

Let me spell it out...any organization that wont open their books is hiding something. They're stealing, plain and simple. What makes it the most reprehensible is that they're stealing a public asset, they're stealing from all of us.

If I have to create a division to clear up common theft of public resources...so be it. I dont give a chit.

I can assure you that the deceptive practices, underhanded deals, poor accounting of funds, etc. by some of the supposed wildlife orgs are doing more damage than any anti-hunting group ever could. Simply a fact.

This chit has got to stop, and the brakes have been applied in Utah. Too bad if you dont like it.

I'm just not in the business of giving SFW/BGF/MDF a pass on the recent crap they've pulled. I dont find it alright for them to try to derail wolf delisting (which they did), I dont find it alright for them to appoint an AKG&F director through political favor, with ZERO wildlife background/education...who later is charged and found guilty of poaching, I dont find it alright that in 2005 the expo tag money was to be accounted for and it never has been, etc. etc. etc.

Those are just the tip of the iceberg to a bunch of other things that I have reason to believe went on. If half of what I've been told is true, not only are the groups in question going the way of the wooly mammoth...some of the leadership may be going to prison.

 

[bowhunt]

I am done until I see changes.

 

[SMOKESTICK]

BuzzH,

I have no problem with you mentioning all of the groups. What I hate is when only SFW is singled out.

Do not assume that I believe there should be no accounting; however, this things has been beat to death. If someone has done something wrong, then charge them in a court of law. Otherwise, keep working to ensure that necessary changes are made and be prepared to make them when the time presents itself.

Did you think it was okay for Idaho & Montana to throw Wyoming under the bus on wolf delisting? Do you believe that Wyoming should have been punished for fighting to manage wolves on their own terms? That is exactly what I was told by US Rep. Mike Simpson (R-ID) when I talked with him.

I agree with you that no organization should be given a pass. I asked you in another post about your appointment to the Wyoming Governors Big Game License Coalition. What is the process for this to occur? I have asked several people and no one has answered this question. How is someone picked to be on the Board of Directors? Who runs the organization, the Department or the Commission? Would you open your books to your competition?

 

[nvhunter]

just a thought and maybe im way off here. But why not try to set up a booth or something there to inform people of the problem with SFW or whoever not wanting to become transparent, and maybe even get a petition that people could sign to try and pressure the commission or whoever to require them to do so?

 

[TOPGUN]

nvhunter---Do you really think that the organizations running the Expo would sell expensive booth space there knowing that the booth would be for the purpose you mentioned?

 

[Tristate]

So nice to see members of the UWC bringing hunters together again. I can honestly say I have never seen a group of people fail at PR worse than this group. They are literaly the Obamanistas of the hunting community. They are anti-hunters. Just look at this thread. What is amazing is I actually support the main post. Sure vote with you dollars. I will vote with mine. Lets all do that and see what happens in time. But the UWC supporters lash out at anybody that says they are going to keep on going and paying?????????????

 

[BuzzH]

Smokestick,


Do not assume that I believe there should be no accounting; however, this things has been beat to death. If someone has done something wrong, then charge them in a court of law. Otherwise, keep working to ensure that necessary changes are made and be prepared to make them when the time presents itself.

Thats exactly what will happen. However, it takes time and effort to uncover what exactly has happened. You dont build a case in a few hours. Also, the recent meeting with the board was just a step in the over-all process of getting agreed to accountability into the expo funds. If the board is afraid to act, which I believe they are, then you just take the next step.

Did you think it was okay for Idaho & Montana to throw Wyoming under the bus on wolf delisting?

Montana and Idaho didnt throw Wyoming under the bus. All 3 states agreed to a plan that involved each state to come up with a plan accepted by the feds. Wyomings plan failed to pass the requirements of an accepted plan and held up delisting. I have no problem with Wyoming choosing that route, other than the fact that their plan was negatively impacting/delaying wolf management in Montana and Idaho. Montana and Idaho realized their only shot at gaining management control was to cut ties with Wyoming. In hind-sight, the 3 states should have each been stand alone on its delisting requirements, rather than delisting requirement being tied to all 3.

Do you believe that Wyoming should have been punished for fighting to manage wolves on their own terms?

I believe each state should be allowed to propose any plan they want. But, there were pre-negotiated requirements that all the states were aware of. If a state management plan is in contradiction to what they already agreed to...then you reap what you sew.

That is exactly what I was told by US Rep. Mike Simpson (R-ID) when I talked with him.

Then he doesnt understand the process and neither do you. Wyoming wasnt punished, Wyoming made the decision, Wyoming wrote their own plan, and Wyoming new of the requirements that must be in their management plan. It wasnt like Wyoming didnt have 10-12 years to get it right.

I agree with you that no organization should be given a pass. I asked you in another post about your appointment to the Wyoming Governors Big Game License Coalition. What is the process for this to occur? I have asked several people and no one has answered this question. How is someone picked to be on the Board of Directors? Who runs the organization, the Department or the Commission?

You can find that all on the website I provided. It spells out in detail about the WBGLC and how it operates, how it was founded, etc.

Would you open your books to your competition?

If I were a for-profit organization, no I would not. But, thats not we're talking about in this case...or are we? It seems to me that the leadership of SFW/BGF/MDF are more concerned about their side consulting businesses, expense accounts, and salaries than they are about the wildlife they claim to care about. Who are those groups in "competition" with? Is that "competition" dividing or bringing hunters together?

I also think opening your books regarding a public asset should absolutely be a requirement.

Bottom line, if SFW/BGF/MDF want to become for-profit organizations, drop their non-profit status, quit taking public tags and peddling them, fine. I wont question their accounting. But with their non-profit status and the fact they are taking a public asset, that changes the accounting/transparency requirements.

The chickens are coming home to roost...

 

[llamapacker]

I support having a Hunt Expo in SLC and believe it is entirely different than the tag drawing. The entire tag drawing cluster was initially promoted as a way to bring a national hunting convention to SLC. Don't apply for the tag drawings if you don't support that, but go to the Expo and make the show a success.

All hunters in the area are better for having a great Hunt Expo. Whether it is run by ISE (a for profit company) or MDF/SFW, bringing outfitters and vendors to the area to promote hunting is exactly what we need. As the Hunt Expo continues to grow and prosper, the tag draw will become more of a sideshow that will be more easily modified.

I agree with the original premise of this thread. Vote with your wallet. Don't join SFW or even MDF if you don't support their policies. Don't apply in the tag draw if you don't like the drawing rules. And if you don't like the expo show, don't go there either. On the other hand, I greatly enjoy the Hunt Expo show, and enjoy visiting with the outfitters and equipment vendors. I appreciate that this Expo is hunting oriented, and doesn't have all the fishing and "REI" crap that is found at the ISE show. I will support the Hunt Expo through my attendance and entry fees. I strongly support the RMEF with my dollars, do not belong to SFW, and am on the fence with MDF, although currently still a member. I also strongly support the NRA and DSC, although I wouldn't give a dollar to SCI if I suddenly had millions (I don't). I've done my own research, picked the groups that support my passion and are most closely aligned with my views, and give them my financial support, as well as some volunteer time. Groups like SCI and SFW won't see any membership dollars from me. Somehow I imagine they will both survive without my few dollars, but I go out of my way to explain to others and their management where I feel they have gone astray. At one time I supported both SCI and SFW, and whether they lost their way / became corrupted by their own success or I just woke up, it doesn't matter. I won't support those groups unless they change their policies.
But I do support those groups which are largely in agreement with my beliefs. Get involved, and join and support those promoting your values.
Bill

 

[BillyBoB]

I had already decided to forget about the expo. I've spent approx 120$ each year at the expo. Will NOT be attending until SFW is out.
Ever since the meeting, I've been boycotting.







Theodore Roosevelt's guidance concerning conservation...
"The movement for the conservation of wildlife, and the conservation of all our natural resources, are essentially democratic in spirit,purpose and method."

"We do not intend that our natural resources shall be exploited by the few against the interests of the majority. Our aim is to preserve our natural resources for the public as a whole, for the average man and the average woman who make up the body of the American people."

"It is in our power...to preserve game..and to give reasonable opportunities for the exercise of the skill of the hunter,whether he is or is not a man of means."

 

[klbzdad]

>I support having a Hunt Expo
>in SLC and believe it
>is entirely different than the
>tag drawing. The entire tag
>drawing cluster was initially promoted
>as a way to bring
>a national hunting convention to
>SLC. Don't apply for the
>tag drawings if you don't
>support that, but go to
>the Expo and make the
>show a success.
>
>All hunters in the area are
>better for having a great
>Hunt Expo. Whether it is
>run by ISE (a for
>profit company) or MDF/SFW, bringing
>outfitters and vendors to the
>area to promote hunting is
>exactly what we need. As
>the Hunt Expo continues to
>grow and prosper, the tag
>draw will become more of
>a sideshow that will be
>more easily modified.
>
>I agree with the original premise
>of this thread. Vote with
>your wallet. Don't join SFW
>or even MDF if you
>don't support their policies. Don't
>apply in the tag draw
>if you don't like the
>drawing rules. And if you
>don't like the expo show,
>don't go there either. On
>the other hand, I greatly
>enjoy the Hunt Expo show,
>and enjoy visiting with the
>outfitters and equipment vendors. I
>appreciate that this Expo is
>hunting oriented, and doesn't have
>all the fishing and "REI"
>crap that is found at
>the ISE show. I will
>support the Hunt Expo through
>my attendance and entry fees.
>I strongly support the RMEF
>with my dollars, do not
>belong to SFW, and am
>on the fence with MDF,
>although currently still a member.
>I also strongly support the
>NRA and DSC, although I
>wouldn't give a dollar to
>SCI if I suddenly had
>millions (I don't). I've done
>my own research, picked the
>groups that support my passion
>and are most closely aligned
>with my views, and give
>them my financial support, as
>well as some volunteer time.
>Groups like SCI and SFW
>won't see any membership dollars
>from me. Somehow I imagine
>they will both survive without
>my few dollars, but I
>go out of my way
>to explain to others and
>their management where I feel
>they have gone astray. At
>one time I supported both
>SCI and SFW, and whether
>they lost their way /
>became corrupted by their own
>success or I just woke
>up, it doesn't matter. I
>won't support those groups unless
>they change their policies.
>But I do support those groups
>which are largely in agreement
>with my beliefs. Get involved,
>and join and support those
>promoting your values.
>Bill

Bill, very well put! I appreciate your candor and agree with you that the expo should be supported as there are vendors there that help generate money in our communities and help advance our sports.

Shawn Spring
UWC Southern Region Co-Chair
www.unitedwildlifecooperative.org

 

[Outdoors]

Expo and its enablers are dead to me. The list of the enablers is easy to find at the ego show website.

 

[elkfromabove]

LAST EDITED ON Aug-23-12 AT 01:15PM (MST)[p]>>I support having a Hunt Expo
>>in SLC and believe it
>>is entirely different than the
>>tag drawing. The entire tag
>>drawing cluster was initially promoted
>>as a way to bring
>>a national hunting convention to
>>SLC. Don't apply for the
>>tag drawings if you don't
>>support that, but go to
>>the Expo and make the
>>show a success.
>>
>>All hunters in the area are
>>better for having a great
>>Hunt Expo. Whether it is
>>run by ISE (a for
>>profit company) or MDF/SFW, bringing
>>outfitters and vendors to the
>>area to promote hunting is
>>exactly what we need. As
>>the Hunt Expo continues to
>>grow and prosper, the tag
>>draw will become more of
>>a sideshow that will be
>>more easily modified.
>>
>>I agree with the original premise
>>of this thread. Vote with
>>your wallet. Don't join SFW
>>or even MDF if you
>>don't support their policies. Don't
>>apply in the tag draw
>>if you don't like the
>>drawing rules. And if you
>>don't like the expo show,
>>don't go there either. On
>>the other hand, I greatly
>>enjoy the Hunt Expo show,
>>and enjoy visiting with the
>>outfitters and equipment vendors. I
>>appreciate that this Expo is
>>hunting oriented, and doesn't have
>>all the fishing and "REI"
>>crap that is found at
>>the ISE show. I will
>>support the Hunt Expo through
>>my attendance and entry fees.
>>I strongly support the RMEF
>>with my dollars, do not
>>belong to SFW, and am
>>on the fence with MDF,
>>although currently still a member.
>>I also strongly support the
>>NRA and DSC, although I
>>wouldn't give a dollar to
>>SCI if I suddenly had
>>millions (I don't). I've done
>>my own research, picked the
>>groups that support my passion
>>and are most closely aligned
>>with my views, and give
>>them my financial support, as
>>well as some volunteer time.
>>Groups like SCI and SFW
>>won't see any membership dollars
>>from me. Somehow I imagine
>>they will both survive without
>>my few dollars, but I
>>go out of my way
>>to explain to others and
>>their management where I feel
>>they have gone astray. At
>>one time I supported both
>>SCI and SFW, and whether
>>they lost their way /
>>became corrupted by their own
>>success or I just woke
>>up, it doesn't matter. I
>>won't support those groups unless
>>they change their policies.
>>But I do support those groups
>>which are largely in agreement
>>with my beliefs. Get involved,
>>and join and support those
>>promoting your values.
>>Bill
>
>Bill, very well put! I
>appreciate your candor and agree
>with you that the expo
>should be supported as there
>are vendors there that help
>generate money in our communities
>and help advance our sports.
>
>
>Shawn Spring
>UWC Southern Region Co-Chair
>www.unitedwildlifecooperative.org

Ditto! (Imagine, Shawn and I are on the same page. Who'da believed it?)

Lee Tracy
UWC Southern Region Chair

 

[dryflyelk]

You guys bring up some good points. To be clear, I don't hold it against anybody for going, and I don't hold it against anybody for wanting to take part in the drawing. Heck, I did it for years. It just seems that now we've come to a point where I've got to draw my own line in the sand - but everyone's will be different.

I feel that even attending the expo without entering the drawing, even though I love it and look forward to it every year, would be a bit disingenuous. Money generated from that expo goes into financing the same things and people that I have disagreements with. Debate has not helped anything, so now I withhold my dollars.

I know that there are many very good, honest men that make a living at that expo. I wish nothing but success to those guys. Unfortunately, it's all tied together at this point. Until MDF, $FW and the DWR get their crap together, I won't attend.

Hopefully, the vendors will help put pressure on those organizations to fix things. Just as the most effective way to put pressure on a popular TV or radio show is to talk to the advertisers, and in turn effect their revenue stream, the way to get through to those making the money here is to put pressure on those giving it to them. That's me, that's you, and that's everybody in that place that has a booth.

There is no reason for those taking in the money to change a thing at this point. That will stay the same until the money stops coming in.

Vi Et Armis Invictus Maneo

 

[elkfromabove]

>You guys bring up some good
>points. To be clear,
>I don't hold it against
>anybody for going, and I
>don't hold it against anybody
>for wanting to take part
>in the drawing. Heck,
>I did it for years.
> It just seems that
>now we've come to a
>point where I've got to
>draw my own line in
>the sand - but everyone's
>will be different.
>
>I feel that even attending the
>expo without entering the drawing,
>even though I love it
>and look forward to it
>every year, would be a
>bit disingenuous. Money generated
>from that expo goes into
>financing the same things and
>people that I have disagreements
>with. Debate has not
>helped anything, so now I
>withhold my dollars.
>
>I know that there are many
>very good, honest men that
>make a living at that
>expo. I wish nothing
>but success to those guys.
>Unfortunately, it's all tied together
>at this point. Until MDF,
>$FW and the DWR get
>their crap together, I won't
>attend.
>
>Hopefully, the vendors will help put
>pressure on those organizations to
>fix things. Just as the
>most effective way to put
>pressure on a popular TV
>or radio show is to
>talk to the advertisers, and
>in turn effect their revenue
>stream, the way to get
>through to those making the
>money here is to put
>pressure on those giving it
>to them. That's me, that's
>you, and that's everybody in
>that place that has a
>booth.
>
>There is no reason for those
>taking in the money to
>change a thing at this
>point. That will stay
>the same until the money
>stops coming in.
>
>Vi Et Armis Invictus Maneo

While boycotting the EXPO will certainly send a message, I don't think it's now neccessary and I'm not sure it's the right message!

I'm sure we already have their attention, and I think things will change because of it! I was at the meeting and saw some body language and heard some conversations that don't show up on the recording. There was a lot of squirming, whispering and head shaking going on and it wasn't happening with those who were in favor of the proposal. Purhaps it's just the beginning of the process, but DWR, WB, MDF and SFW know we're serious and committed and that this isn't just going to be swept under the rug.

The Wildlife Board skirted the decision, but recommended (practically insisted) that the opposing parties sit down to get this sorted out and UWC will not let that go by. If MDF and SFW resist the request, they'll find this issue of transparency being discussed in other RAC and Wildlife Board meetings and/or in some court.

Thanks, in part, to the viral dicussions from both sides on these forums, DWR, WB, MDF & SFW have viewed this proposal as an attack on them and the EXPO, but that's also in big part, because they don't want to show the books. I have no idea whether or not they have something to hide or just have an issue with accountability or haven't kept the books in a manner that is legal or acceptable by current accounting practices, or what it is, but, since that money is generated by public assets, the public has a right to know what is happening to it. And the public has the right to determine how it's used! More importantly, these permits were/are used to help promote and finance a private non-profit enterprise and were issued under certain agreed upon conditions and many of us don't think those conditions have been met, but they need to be! Believe me, they got the message loud and clear, though not as clear as we sent. (They, and some of you, still insist we want part of the money generated by public permits. WE DON'T.)

As far as the message being sent by boycotting the whole EXPO, UWC has clearly said we don't want to shut down the EXPO (Nor MDF, nor SFW, nor the Conservation tags, nor even the Convention tags). We simply support a proposal that gives an accounting of the money generated by the Convention tags.

Will our efforts go beyond that? That all depends on what the audit shows. If it actually costs more than .50 per application to process the draw, then that currently proposed 10%-90% split can be adjusted to compensate. If some of the current expenditures aren't the type to likely be approved by DWR to be wildlife related, that also can be adjusted. Are there too many (or too few) high valued permits being used? Another possible adjustment. UWC understands the system well enough to know that we don't have all the answers for everyone, but neither do the others.

Finally, UWC has been accused of dividing hunters, but they were already divided a long time ago, thus our existence. We aren't creating disenchanted Utah hunters. They were/are already out there. We're just finally giving them a voice in the matter. Let's hope that voice is accepted by those who make the rules and decisions pertaining to wildlife.

 

[klbzdad]

>You guys bring up some good
>points. To be clear,
>I don't hold it against
>anybody for going, and I
>don't hold it against anybody
>for wanting to take part
>in the drawing. Heck,
>I did it for years.
> It just seems that
>now we've come to a
>point where I've got to
>draw my own line in
>the sand - but everyone's
>will be different.
>
>I feel that even attending the
>expo without entering the drawing,
>even though I love it
>and look forward to it
>every year, would be a
>bit disingenuous. Money generated
>from that expo goes into
>financing the same things and
>people that I have disagreements
>with. Debate has not
>helped anything, so now I
>withhold my dollars.
>
>I know that there are many
>very good, honest men that
>make a living at that
>expo. I wish nothing
>but success to those guys.
>Unfortunately, it's all tied together
>at this point. Until MDF,
>$FW and the DWR get
>their crap together, I won't
>attend.
>
>Hopefully, the vendors will help put
>pressure on those organizations to
>fix things. Just as the
>most effective way to put
>pressure on a popular TV
>or radio show is to
>talk to the advertisers, and
>in turn effect their revenue
>stream, the way to get
>through to those making the
>money here is to put
>pressure on those giving it
>to them. That's me, that's
>you, and that's everybody in
>that place that has a
>booth.
>
>There is no reason for those
>taking in the money to
>change a thing at this
>point. That will stay
>the same until the money
>stops coming in.
>
>Vi Et Armis Invictus Maneo

Another very excellent point! Its not the vendors or the expo itself at issue here. NEVER HAS BEEN! Its the money train/trail that has caused frustration and division among all of us no matter what group you belong to. In the end, we are all sportsmen and we all feel as though we have a vested interest in our wildlife. Most of us here follow rules every day of our life and it doesn't serve either SFW or MDF any good to not be completely transparent with OUR assets (wildlife via tags). Again, very good discussion here.

Shawn Spring
UWC Southern Region Co-Chair

 

[hossblur]

"do you have problem giving the governement $5"? No, last I checked the brown trucks driving around the mtn. are government trucks. The guys out in the swamp are government employees, and the dudes out putting fish in the lake are government employees. THE DON is a lobbyist. Byron is a retired railroad employee and cat guide. Neither checks tags, plants fish, etc... both enrich themselves via SFW and its connections. So lets rephrase your question. Are you ok with giving the DWR $5 to continue hunting and fishing, or wouldn't you rather give $5 to THE DON, to ??? (no one seems to know for what, he won't say).

The date of the expo is genius, it rolls around when cabin fever has just about killed me, apparently a lot of others as well. BESIDES, 2013 THE OAK RIDGE BOYS!!!!

Talking to the companies that sponsor is a good idea. When the PIG MAN was baiting elk here in Utah, I contacted his sponsors about how cowardly this practice is, and he lost one, and others directly contacted me(which was followed by his lawyer and him and a threatened lawsuit). All these companies PR/Ad divisions know is what THE DON tells them, perhaps they should get another message. By the way, the threat of a lawsuit is HORRIBLE PR, thats why none of us is ever sued by SFW/MDF. They would have to open themselves up(never gonna happen), and the "conservation groups who take public money(tags) are suing the public" line in the media is a death sentence for them. The wildlife board needs to force SFW/MDF's hand, let them sue the golden goose, I would love to see that!

Trollstate, thanks for you input again. I guess us Utah guys got you in the trade? We sent you pollygamists, Texas sent us you? Inbred for inbred, what you gonna do?



When they came for the road hunters I was not one so I said nothing. When they came for the oppurtunists I was not one so I said nothing. When they came for the public land hunters I was not one so I said nothing. When they came for me there was no one left to say anything!

 

[hopper]

So I am reading the original application send by Miles Moretti to Jim Karpowitz for the 5 year application to recieve the convention tags. It was dated Aug 4 2010. On Page 2 on the section "application" It states, as written by Miles Moretti and Byron Bateman, that they will "word for word" Maintain records demonstrating that the drawing was conducted fairly;SUBMIT TO WILDLIFE CONVENTION AUDITS BY A DIVISION APPOINTED AUDITOR UPON DIVISION REQUEST.

So if in the application it states that they maintain records, and will submit to an audit, should we not be screaming at the DWR? We have proof that they are willing to subject themselves to an audit, so lets push the DWR to do one.

Or am I wrong???

 

[elkfromabove]

LAST EDITED ON Aug-24-12 AT 11:47PM (MST)[p]>So I am reading the original
>application send by Miles Moretti
>to Jim Karpowitz for the
>5 year application to recieve
>the convention tags. It was
>dated Aug 4 2010. On
>Page 2 on the section
>"application" It states, as written
>by Miles Moretti and Byron
>Bateman, that they will "word
>for word" Maintain records demonstrating
>that the drawing was conducted
>fairly;SUBMIT TO WILDLIFE CONVENTION AUDITS
>BY A DIVISION APPOINTED AUDITOR
>UPON DIVISION REQUEST.
>
>So if in the application it
>states that they maintain records,
>and will submit to an
>audit, should we not be
>screaming at the DWR? We
>have proof that they are
>willing to subject themselves to
>an audit, so lets push
>the DWR to do one.
>
>
>Or am I wrong???

They have interpreted those two sentences to mean an audit of the drawing process, not an audit of the application fee funds and they have been doing that "audit" all along. The drawing process is actually contracted out to a third party and their computer-based process is audited as acceptable. Under pressure, MDF has submitted a written report for 2012, but it's vague and there's no way to verify it and some of the "projects" are questionable when it comes to benefiting wildlife. You're correct for suggesting the DWR request a financial audit of those monies. That was supposed to be part of the contract in the first place.

And UWC IS pushing the DWR to do an accurate financial audit. That's what the proposal was all about.