NEW EXPO TAG PROCESS

Hawkeye,

At no point did Grizzly refer to a broken system in his original post. He had an idea regarding a new method for Focusing money on wildlife projects and tag distribution. You saw that as an opportunity to beat a dead horse which has rotted into a skeleton under you long ago.


What is bad is I have told yall for years I would listen to other ideas regarding tag distribution, making more money for wildlife, or streamlining government agencies for wildlife. I know some other people feel the same. So along comes Grizzly with an interesting idea that maybe it would work, maybe it wouldn't. Maybe it could be a start that could be improved upon. Instead the whole thing devolves into the same group of people just trying to beat a dead horse.

For once Grizzly did the most pro-active thinking on here I have seen in a long time and its going to die like a whisper under your screams.
 
"It's very clear you have people asking reasonable, fair questions about how public resources are being managed and accounted for. On the other side you have almost childish, incomprehensible 'reasons' as to why an organization can't be transparent."


I think its pretty clear how these resources are getting managed. I don't think anyone here has any misconceptions about how these tags are distributed. In fact it couldn't be any more clear. YALL JUST DON'T LIKE IT. That's why it is beating a dead horse.

The fact is that yall keep crying for "tansparency" because that's the only way it doesn't look like you are throwing a greedy fit for some big game tags. This is a class warfare struggle and yall are mad that state wildlife orgs are going broke trying to keep you happy and so they finally had to start listening to people with money. YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND. YOU ARE GETTING THE WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT YOU DESERVE.
 
>"It's very clear you have people
>asking reasonable, fair questions about
>how public resources are being
>managed and accounted for. On
>the other side you have
>almost childish, incomprehensible 'reasons' as
>to why an organization can't
>be transparent."
>
>
>I think its pretty clear how
>these resources are getting managed.
> I don't think anyone
>here has any misconceptions about
>how these tags are distributed.
> In fact it couldn't
>be any more clear.
>YALL JUST DON'T LIKE IT.
> That's why it is
>beating a dead horse.
>
>The fact is that yall keep
>crying for "tansparency" because that's
>the only way it doesn't
>look like you are throwing
>a greedy fit for some
>big game tags. This
>is a class warfare struggle
>and yall are mad that
>state wildlife orgs are going
>broke trying to keep you
>happy and so they finally
>had to start listening to
>people with money. YOU
>DON'T UNDERSTAND. YOU ARE
>GETTING THE WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT YOU
>DESERVE.

Correct - everyone knows where the tags go...and personally, I don't really care how the State decides to raffle/auction them. Where the issue comes in...how is the money used from those tags (a public resource)? If the State is giving a private organization a public resource to raffle/sell, why in the hell does the public not have a full accounting of how that money is being used? If it's not being used as efficiently as possible to conserve and manage wildlife and habitat that is a shame...that's what the citizens deserve, and nothing less. If SFW is getting these tags, but pocketing a chunk of money for personal gain...that is wrong and should be ended. If that is not happening, its hard to understand the lack of transparency.

Your assertion this is about people wanting tags makes no sense to me...LE tags are tough to come by - demanding transparency from SFW has nothing to do with people being mad about not getting a hard to draw tag.
 
Idahohuntr,

The hunter still has to buy the tag from the state. That is a fact. The state is getting the same amount of money for the tag. A company is contracted to aid in the distribution and marketing of those tags. They shouldn't be allowed to keep money for either profit or expenses on a job well done????????? The state doesn't loose a penny so it doesn't effect negatively in the tiniest little bit the states wildlife budget. SO why would you be hung up on "transparency"?????

"Your assertion this is about people wanting tags makes no sense to me...LE tags are tough to come by - demanding transparency from SFW has nothing to do with people being mad about not getting a hard to draw tag. "

Maybe you don't read the posts on these threads. There are plenty of people here who believe these tags should be right back in the regular draws.
 
>>Robiland,
>>
>>What question related to the original
>>post would you like for
>>me to answer?
>
>
>The Pig is hungry for his
>slop.


Yep! EVERYONE---Please quit feeding the pig/troll because this thread will then be strictly him spouting his BS that has nothing to do with what is actually happening in UT! The dude lives in Texas where public land is so few compared to OTC tags that are easy for anyone to buy to hunt the private lands that predominate Texas. He has no idea how the Utah taxpayers are getting raped by taking all those tags from the general pool with SFW then making a killing selling chances at them and all he wants to talk about is how we want to kill the last deer, LOL!
 
Tricycle stated: "At no point did Grizzly refer to a broken system in his original post."

Grizzly's original post stated: "This seems far more productive than giving groups millions of dollars in welfare tags and then hoping the public money will be used wisely and productively and for the "best use".

That my friend is the broken system that we are all discussing.

-Hawkeye-

My Favorite Expo Tag Quotes:

"It is fair to ask how much comes in with the five dollar application fees and how much went onto the ground.? Don Peay of SFW during 3/31/2005 Wildlife Board Meeting.

"There will be a full accounting of how the applications fees are spent.? Don Peay of SFW - 9/26/2006 - Monstermuleys.com
 
"He has no idea how the Utah taxpayers are getting raped by taking all those tags from the general pool with SFW then making a killing selling chances at them and all he wants to talk about is how we want to kill the last deer, LOL!"


How do the taxpayers get raped when the state still gets paid the exact same amount for those tags just as if they were in the general draw?????? You might want to check your facts Topgun. By the way, you don't live in Utah either.
 
>Idahohuntr,
>
>The hunter still has to buy
>the tag from the state.
> That is a fact.
> The state is getting
>the same amount of money
>for the tag. A
>company is contracted to aid
>in the distribution and marketing
>of those tags. They
>shouldn't be allowed to keep
>money for either profit or
>expenses on a job well
>done????????? The state doesn't
>loose a penny so it
>doesn't effect negatively in the
>tiniest little bit the states
>wildlife budget. SO why
>would you be hung up
>on "transparency"?????
>
>"Your assertion this is about people
>wanting tags makes no sense
>to me...LE tags are tough
>to come by - demanding
>transparency from SFW has nothing
>to do with people being
>mad about not getting a
>hard to draw tag. "
>
>
>Maybe you don't read the posts
>on these threads. There
>are plenty of people here
>who believe these tags should
>be right back in the
>regular draws.

It's not all the same to the state and it's citizens or their wildlife. Reality is Utah has created a second mini-draw with these expo tags, and SFW is making a bunch of money off a public resource - and the public is getting screwed because they don't have any accountability over the funds or a good portion of the funds...and the salt in the wound is when an organization bids to give 100% of the raffle proceeds to Utah conservation, but loses out to an organization that promises only 70%...only in Utah does that kind of math fly.

If SFW was making this money from private sources...nobody would care and I certainly would not be asking to see their books or that they be more accountable. Again, the issue is the State is giving them this public resource - and its a shame to see it squandered. Really - I don't like the morals and ethics of what SFW is doing, but as a private group I suppose kudos to them and their ability to get rich screwing Utah's citizens and wildlife. The real blame belongs to the incompetent State leadership and elected officials...they are who should be under criminal investigation for pulling the kind of crap that has allowed SFW to hold the expo contract.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-18-18 AT 05:44PM (MST)[p]> "He has no idea how
>the Utah taxpayers are getting
>raped by taking all those
>tags from the general pool
>with SFW then making a
>killing selling chances at them
>and all he wants to
>talk about is how we
>want to kill the last
>deer, LOL!"
>
>
>How do the taxpayers get raped
>when the state still gets
>paid the exact same amount
>for those tags just as
>if they were in the
>general draw?????? You might
>want to check your facts
>Topgun. By the way,
>you don't live in Utah
>either.

I asked others not to feed the troll and I'm not going to either. Figure it out for yourself dufus!
 
> "He has no idea how
>the Utah taxpayers are getting
>raped by taking all those
>tags from the general pool
>with SFW then making a
>killing selling chances at them
>and all he wants to
>talk about is how we
>want to kill the last
>deer, LOL!"
>
>
>How do the taxpayers get raped
>when the state still gets
>paid the exact same amount
>for those tags just as
>if they were in the
>general draw?????? You might
>want to check your facts
>Topgun. By the way,
>you don't live in Utah
>either.

There's no difference on the price of the tag, but if those tags were back in the regular public draw, the DWR would get $6.99 per APPLICATION instead of the $1.50 they are now getting. That's a difference of $5.49 per app. $5.49 x approx 250,000 apps = $1,372,500 they are losing out on.

And if they set those 200 tags aside for a special public draw with the same rules they currently have for the Expo draw (minus the need to verify on site), they'd probably sell twice as many apps.
 
Elk, I didn't know that there was even that much brought in each year. Top tells tri it's not his fight since he lives in Texas. Typical of top. As always he knows everything. Hawk, do you think RMEF could post how they spend their money they get of state welfare? Haven't seen it. Must be going in their pockets. And yes it is separate from national.
 
Now you went and gave him what he should have known already or figured it out by himself Lee! You can bet your boots that he'll be back with BS though!
 
>There's no difference on the price
>of the tag, but if
>those tags were back in
>the regular public draw, the
>DWR would get $6.99 per
>APPLICATION instead of the $1.50
>they are now getting. That's
>a difference of $5.49 per
>app. $5.49 x approx 250,000
>apps = $1,372,500 they are
>losing out on.


Dude I wish you could see how hard I'm laughing right now. You actually think the $6.99 is profit for the state. You literally have zero idea what their cost is per application. FOR ALL YOU KNOW EACH APPLICATION IS COSTING THE STATE $10 AND THEY LOOSE MONEY ON EACH ONE. Have you ever asked for complete transparency of that $6.99????? I didn't think so. However that $1.50 you laugh at is free and clear money for the state. All they have to do is cash the check. All profit and no risk or loss. That's your business lesson for the day.
 
>>Idahohuntr,
>>
>>The hunter still has to buy
>>the tag from the state.
>> That is a fact.
>> The state is getting
>>the same amount of money
>>for the tag. A
>>company is contracted to aid
>>in the distribution and marketing
>>of those tags. They
>>shouldn't be allowed to keep
>>money for either profit or
>>expenses on a job well
>>done????????? The state doesn't
>>loose a penny so it
>>doesn't effect negatively in the
>>tiniest little bit the states
>>wildlife budget. SO why
>>would you be hung up
>>on "transparency"?????
>>
>>"Your assertion this is about people
>>wanting tags makes no sense
>>to me...LE tags are tough
>>to come by - demanding
>>transparency from SFW has nothing
>>to do with people being
>>mad about not getting a
>>hard to draw tag. "
>>
>>
>>Maybe you don't read the posts
>>on these threads. There
>>are plenty of people here
>>who believe these tags should
>>be right back in the
>>regular draws.
>
>It's not all the same to
>the state and it's citizens
>or their wildlife. Reality
>is Utah has created a
>second mini-draw with these expo
>tags, and SFW is making
>a bunch of money off
>a public resource - and
>the public is getting screwed
>because they don't have any
>accountability over the funds or
>a good portion of the
>funds...and the salt in the
>wound is when an organization
>bids to give 100% of
>the raffle proceeds to Utah
>conservation, but loses out to
>an organization that promises only
>70%...only in Utah does that
>kind of math fly.
>
>If SFW was making this money
>from private sources...nobody would care
>and I certainly would not
>be asking to see their
>books or that they be
>more accountable. Again, the
>issue is the State is
>giving them this public resource
>- and its a shame
>to see it squandered.
>Really - I don't like
>the morals and ethics of
>what SFW is doing, but
>as a private group I
>suppose kudos to them and
>their ability to get rich
>screwing Utah's citizens and wildlife.
> The real blame belongs
>to the incompetent State leadership
>and elected officials...they are who
>should be under criminal investigation
>for pulling the kind of
>crap that has allowed SFW
>to hold the expo contract.
>

SFW promised only 30% NOT 70% making it even worse.
 
>
>>There's no difference on the price
>>of the tag, but if
>>those tags were back in
>>the regular public draw, the
>>DWR would get $6.99 per
>>APPLICATION instead of the $1.50
>>they are now getting. That's
>>a difference of $5.49 per
>>app. $5.49 x approx 250,000
>>apps = $1,372,500 they are
>>losing out on.
>
>
>Dude I wish you could see
>how hard I'm laughing right
>now. You actually think
>the $6.99 is profit for
>the state. You literally
>have zero idea what their
>cost is per application.
>FOR ALL YOU KNOW EACH
>APPLICATION IS COSTING THE STATE
>$10 AND THEY LOOSE MONEY
>ON EACH ONE. Have
>you ever asked for complete
>transparency of that $6.99?????
>I didn't think so.
>However that $1.50 you laugh
>at is free and clear
>money for the state.
>All they have to do
>is cash the check.
>All profit and no risk
>or loss. That's your
>business lesson for the day.
>
Actually, I do know the DWR's general costs to administer the public applications additional to the $3.01 per app. It's in the Statement of Work portion of their contract with Systems Consultants out of Fallon NV and it amounts to about .80 per app. (for postage, some special printing paper for the permits and credit card processing fees).

So, yes, I'll concede and correct my numbers to $6.19 per app. which means that the DWR is now only losing about $1,172,500 per year on those Expo tags.
 
>Elk, I didn't know that
>there was even that much
>brought in each year.
>Top tells tri it's not
>his fight since he lives
>in Texas. Typical of
>top. As always he
>knows everything. Hawk, do
>you think RMEF could post
>how they spend their money
>they get of state welfare?
> Haven't seen it. Must
>be going in their pockets.
> And yes it is
>separate from national.

I shouldn't even respond after I said I was done with you, but you are so dang far off on everything you post that it deserves a response even though you won't understand! Tri lives in Texas where there isn't enough public land to even talk about and no public tags like the western states. IMHO he's in the DP mold where he feels everything should be and would be better if it was privatized. You also made another absolutely stupid comment to Hawkeye about RMEF. That organization gets not one penny of "state welfare" as you called it and their books are always open to see where every single dollar comes from and where every single dollar goes. You need to quit posting about anything to do with SFW or RMEF because it makes you look more ignorant with every post you make and Hawkeye has pretty well told you the same thing!
 
Has anyone else noticed that Topdog has to get the last post in no matter what?

Anyhow carry on...
 
Elk where you coming up with 250,000 applicants. First off most of those putting in at the expo put in on the general hunt. If the tags go back into the draw it nullifies things
 
>Hawk, do
>you think RMEF could post
>how they spend their money
>they get of state welfare?
> Haven't seen it. Must
>be going in their pockets.

Here is a screenshot of RMEF from Charity Navigator rating their accountability at 97%. Anybody can peruse their website for more info. RMEF also posts audited financials on their website annually.

4799920180718225146.jpg


I can't find anything for SFW, maybe I was searching the wrong entity name.

I did find a sheet on Big Game Forever that shows they're currently unrated. Here's a screenshot that says a non-rating isn't necessarily indicative of positive or negative assessment.

1849220180718225204.jpg


One thing that is crystal clear is that questioning the transparency of RMEF is a fools errand. Especially when doing it against the backdrop of the Legislative Audit I posted in #66.

Grizzly

-----------------------------------------
"This is a classic case of a handful of greedy fly fishermen getting too greedy." -Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as told to KUTV

"It's time to revisit the widely accepted principle in the United States and Canada that game is a public resource."
-Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as quoted in Anchorage Daily News
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-19-18 AT 01:21AM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Jul-19-18 AT 01:16?AM (MST)

Regardless, there is 10 million dollars that has not been accounted for and was not written in the administrative rule which you would have to be na?ve to believe that it was a coincidence. Especially after the dog and pony show the DWR put on to give SFW the bid. If the writing wasn't on the wall for you then...probably won't ever be.

The point the OP was making is that there could be a better process. But it won't happen cuz there's too much money to be made for certain people, interest groups "all in the name of wildlife conservation":/. Not you Birdman, you keep doing your volunteer work while DP collects your cut. :)
Who went online and put in for Arizona tags? Utah doesn't need SFW. Other states know that they don't need them either.






"Wildlife and its habitat cannot speak. So
we must and we will."
Theadore Roosevelt
 
ANd you think that's all???????? :D You don't know government spending well.

Elk, you are desperate and pulling numbers out of your keester. You keep trying to compare apples to oranges with made up figures and all you have is a rotten tomato.

Face it the state is still making money off of the expo system. Plus other industries are making money off of it besides just the DWR. AND THATS GOOD FOR BUSINESS AND POLITICS. When the antis start in against your hunting you will have people that don't hunt, but profit from the hunt, on your side.
 
> Has anyone else noticed
>that Topdog has to get
>the last post in no
>matter what?
>
> Anyhow carry on...

That's pure BS and what I'm also sure of is that you never add anything positive to a thread other than comments like that which have no basis!
 
Glad billybob you KNOW where all the money goes. Yes i volunteer because of the great things they do. No i didnt want my million dollars a year. You are quite a dreamer. Keep guesing billybob, your good at it.
 
Its funny that there are actual #'s here and people (the usuals) think they are made up #'s. Lets look in the mirror before we start to call others "DREAMERS"
 
Of course you cant, we all know that. We have seen it for years that you can not read or comprehend. Maybe if it was a picture book with little pop ups and coloring sections, it may make some sense.
 
"Elk, you are desperate and pulling numbers out of your keester. You keep trying to compare apples to oranges with made up figures and all you have is a rotten tomato."

If those are wrong numbers then post up the real numbers Pig Boy.

Yea that's what I thought, just talking out your a$$ as usual.
 
Towelie, soit those 200 tags go back to the general draw then talks figures go away. Most if jot all people putting in on the 200 tags have already put in for the reg draw. They are just looking at a second chance.
 
You can't get the right numbers because there isn't enough transparency from those organizations which are actually screwing you.

:D


Hey Towlie, if this is all so corrupt where is the FBI in all of this? If you have all the evidence that it's corrupt why haven't they indicted someone yet????????? You are living in a fantasy fueled by hate and jealousy.
 
>Towelie, soit those 200
>tags go back to the
>general draw then talks figures
>go away. Most if
>jot all people putting in
>on the 200 tags have
>already put in for the
>reg draw. They are
>just looking at a second
>chance.

Which is countered by the removal of "first chances" by people in the regular draw.

Option 1: 100 tags offered in 1 Draw = 100 successful hunters

Option 2: 80 tags in 1st Draw and 20 tags in 2nd Draw = 100 successful hunters

Furthermore, if your argument is that the same people are applying for both regular tags and Expo tags, than that just bolsters my argument that odds (or chances) are not improved by having the Expo. The same people are applying for the same tags, just multiple times. The overall odds are unchanged.

You don't actually think you're increasing the chances of people drawing tags, do you?

Grizzly

-----------------------------------------
"This is a classic case of a handful of greedy fly fishermen getting too greedy." -Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as told to KUTV

"It's time to revisit the widely accepted principle in the United States and Canada that game is a public resource."
-Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as quoted in Anchorage Daily News
 
Back to the OP.
Grizz,

The process you suggest would work quite well with the Conservation Permits, but I don't see how it would work with the Expo Permits. Perhaps you could allow organizations other than the Expo Partners to bid on those projects/permits and then run the whole draw from a central multi-organization application booth at the Expo. But then you'd have to separate the funds, expenses, booth space and workload which could be a logistics nightmare.

Another problem I see is anticipating all those projects that far in advance. Weather, fires, winterkill, etc. have ways of messing up priorities, schedules and budgets.

Also, what would be the incentive/s for bidding on the projects/permits, especially the low app. hunts? Would the organizations get a 70% commission like they do now?

Thoughts and/or explanations?
 
>>Towelie, soit those 200
>>tags go back to the
>>general draw then talks figures
>>go away. Most if
>>jot all people putting in
>>on the 200 tags have
>>already put in for the
>>reg draw. They are
>>just looking at a second
>>chance.
>
>Which is countered by the removal
>of "first chances" by people
>in the regular draw.
>
>Option 1: 100 tags offered in
>1 Draw = 100 successful
>hunters
>
>Option 2: 80 tags in 1st
>Draw and 20 tags in
>2nd Draw = 100 successful
>hunters
>
>Furthermore, if your argument is that
>the same people are applying
>for both regular tags and
>Expo tags, than that just
>bolsters my argument that odds
>(or chances) are not improved
>by having the Expo. The
>same people are applying for
>the same tags, just multiple
>times. The overall odds are
>unchanged.
>
>You don't actually think you're increasing
>the chances of people drawing
>tags, do you?
>
>Grizzly
>
>-----------------------------------------
>"This is a classic case of
>a handful of greedy fly
>fishermen getting too greedy." -Don
>Peay, Founder of SFW, as
>told to KUTV
>
>"It's time to revisit the widely
>accepted principle in the United
>States and Canada that game
>is a public resource."
>-Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as
>quoted in Anchorage Daily News
>

I'm glad you could interpret that Grizz, because I have know idea what all that jibberish meant.
 
>ANd you think that's all????????
>:D You don't know
>government spending well.
>
>Elk, you are desperate and pulling
>numbers out of your keester.
> You keep trying to
>compare apples to oranges with
>made up figures and all
>you have is a rotten
>tomato.
>
So, please tell me what you think I missed that isn't already in the contract and/or the $3.81 costs per app I quoted or DWR costs not specifically related to the draw and if it's not covered, I'm more than willing to add it! Maybe we can come up with enough to show they are losing money on the regular draw as you suggested.
 
Who?s laughing when over a million dollars per year is being put back into the dirt for wildlife conservation? And the thousands of dedicated hunters and volunteers who are doing the work? I don't see another other state with the caliber of giant animals we have because of 15+ yrs of conservation work- how much is ID, NV WY,CO putting back into wildlife conservation in their states- many people may not like the system but when the state is broke and has Zero money to throw at conservation what do they do?......... nothing!!!!
 
You bet, I do live in Utah and have zero affiliation with DP SFW or anything other than doing service projects for wildlife. Have been on 15+ water Guzzler installations. Pounded dozens of High fence posts to keep wildlife from getting smashed. Reseeded Critical habitat that was burned. Blocked unauthorized Roads ATVs have made- All to get the opportunity to hunt all 3 seasons of my choice of units. Buy over the counter Elk Archery Tag for Open Bull areas, that you can kill a cow in as well or over the counter Spike Elk on about every unit in the state. I guess the difference between me and you Top gun is I'm a hunter and you a Whiney ass Trophy Hunter. I do shed hunt the Henry?s, Pauns and book cliffs and clean house on giant bucks and bulls and also go film the antelope a island bucks in mid November in the rut and occasionally get to shed hunt the island as well- Maybe if you stopped worrying about stupid stuff you have no control over and got off the computer and got outside. You may see what you do have instead of everything you don't. People are corrupt, people are rich, take a good look at your government but I don't see you bitching about any of that. Why?s that? DC is the most corrupt place on earth but your still proud to be an American- How is it your so wound up and bugged by stuff you can't control that your not even a hunter. Dude pull your head out of your ass and appreciate what you do have instead of being so worried sick that you spend most your life on a Forum debating strangers because you think your right. Do yourself a favor and ?don't believe everything you think? and if you live in Utah and it Bugs you so much.... move or quit hunting. This whole thing is political so unless your going to ACT on it shut up- your a broken record who thinks anyone who doesn't think like you is drinking the Kool aid or a DP cronie- aren't you tired of this. If not for god sakes please get some new material. Or try logging off and go hit the hills for a while. You?ve been on here daily for the last 3 years arguing the same thing- Do something about it then. Or is this what you do- regardless man there's more to life that MM- Tags- Expo and DP. If that's what your life is-you need some help. DM me, I know some great docs who can help with your Don Peay, Expo Tag PTSD- or just go hunt- there are giant bucks and giant bulls on EVERY UNIT in the State- Nut up and go kill one!
 
>when the state is broke
>and has Zero money to
>throw at conservation what do
>they do?

SFW obviously doesn't believed that or they'd certainly oppose the Land Grab knowing the state couldn't afford to manage and protect public lands, backcountry roads and trails, camp sites, fight fires, etc...

Instead, they think we should "revisit the widely accepted principle in the United States and Canada that game is a public resource."

Grizzly

-----------------------------------------
"This is a classic case of a handful of greedy fly fishermen getting too greedy." -Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as told to KUTV

"It's time to revisit the widely accepted principle in the United States and Canada that game is a public resource."
-Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as quoted in Anchorage Daily News
 
Ihunt4200-

If SFW/MDF are truly putting $1 million a year from the expo back on the ground in the form of actual conservation projects, then why don't they account for it? It is really simple. If you are doing the right thing then why hide the ball for the last 12 years?

-Hawkeye-

My Favorite Expo Tag Quotes:

"It is fair to ask how much comes in with the five dollar application fees and how much went onto the ground.? Don Peay of SFW during 3/31/2005 Wildlife Board Meeting.

"There will be a full accounting of how the applications fees are spent.? Don Peay of SFW - 9/26/2006 - Monstermuleys.com
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-24-18 AT 08:54AM (MST)[p]>Who?s laughing when over a million
>dollars per year is being
>put back into the dirt
>for wildlife conservation? And the
>thousands of dedicated hunters and
>volunteers who are doing the
>work? I don't see another
>other state with the caliber
>of giant animals we have
>because of 15+ yrs of
>conservation work- how much is
>ID, NV WY,CO putting back
>into wildlife conservation in their
>states- many people may
>not like the system but
>when the state is broke
>and has Zero money to
>throw at conservation what do
>they do?......... nothing!!!!

Your post is so far out in left field and with no facts regarding money or overall quality of animals that it's outright ludicrous! First off, there should be a lot more than a million dollars going back on the ground every year from the millions of dollars that SFW actually rakes in from the EXPO and Banquets that isn't accounted for so that the taxpayers can see what comes in and where it goes out to. Birdman stated in a PM to me last week that his position in the organization allows him to look at the books, but he doesn't because he wouldn't be able to decipher them. That's why he said he looks at the IRS tax returns for proof that the organization is on the up and up and I've said many times that the way they lump things together like the IRS allows on those returns that there is no way to know that money isn't being laundered and not all going back on the ground other than salaries and a few incidentals. You make statements about other states and ask an absolutely stupid question as to how much they are putting back into conservation. Wyoming is a good example that it's G&F Department is self sufficient and doesn't get a single cent from the General Fund. I think anyone familiar with the opportunities for big game hunting in Wyoming for the common man, including thousands of NRs every year, far exceeds what Utah does and will ever do for reasons to numerous to mention. Just keep drinking that SFW Koolaid because you're another one like Birdman that is very naive and has been so duped that you think SFW is the best thing since sliced bread!
 
>You bet, I do live in
>Utah and have zero affiliation
>with DP SFW or anything
>other than doing service projects
>for wildlife. Have been on
>15+ water Guzzler installations. Pounded
>dozens of High fence posts
>to keep wildlife from getting
>smashed. Reseeded Critical habitat that
>was burned. Blocked unauthorized Roads
>ATVs have made- All to
>get the opportunity to hunt
>all 3 seasons of my
>choice of units. Buy over
>the counter Elk Archery Tag
>for Open Bull areas, that
>you can kill a cow
>in as well or over
>the counter Spike Elk on
>about every unit in the
>state. I guess the difference
>between me and you Top
>gun is I'm a hunter
>and you a Whiney ass
>Trophy Hunter. I do shed
>hunt the Henry?s, Pauns and
>book cliffs and clean house
>on giant bucks and bulls
>and also go film the
>antelope a island bucks in
>mid November in the rut
>and occasionally get to shed
>hunt the island as well-
>Maybe if you stopped worrying
>about stupid stuff you have
>no control over and got
>off the computer and got
>outside. You may see what
>you do have instead of
>everything you don't. People are
>corrupt, people are rich, take
>a good look at your
>government but I don't see
>you bitching about any of
>that. Why?s that? DC is
>the most corrupt place on
>earth but your still proud
>to be an American- How
>is it your so wound
>up and bugged by stuff
>you can't control that your
>not even a hunter. Dude
>pull your head out of
>your ass and appreciate what
>you do have instead of
>being so worried sick that
>you spend most your life
>on a Forum debating strangers
>because you think your right.
>Do yourself a favor and
>?don't believe everything you think?
>and if you live in
>Utah and it Bugs you
>so much.... move or quit
>hunting. This whole thing is
>political so unless your going
>to ACT on it shut
>up- your a broken record
>who thinks anyone who doesn't
>think like you is drinking
>the Kool aid or a
>DP cronie- aren't you tired
>of this. If not for
>god sakes please get some
>new material. Or try logging
>off and go hit the
>hills for a while. You?ve
>been on here daily for
>the last 3 years arguing
>the same thing- Do something
>about it then. Or is
>this what you do- regardless
>man there's more to life
>that MM- Tags- Expo and
>DP. If that's what your
>life is-you need some help.
>DM me, I know some
>great docs who can help
>with your Don Peay, Expo
>Tag PTSD- or just go
>hunt- there are giant bucks
>and giant bulls on EVERY
>UNIT in the State- Nut
>up and go kill one!
>


This is a typical SFW cronie response. ihunt4200, you paint yourself as a badass, and I am sure you are. Topgun may hunt more than you do. He has helped countless people in other states that he does not live in. He hunts the West as much as he can, along with a lot of us. But to come on here and tell him or the rest of us to move out or quit hunting is just what you SFW guys want. Stop fighting the fight. What you may not know ihunt4200, many of us on here have begged to have these groups show us what they are doing with all the $$$ and tags they take from us. And on a few occasions have been given the middle finger.

It sounds like you're fight is alot like ours. We fight for the better of wildlife and we ask questions of where and why. You just go and do and dont care what happens as long as you get your dedicated hours in so you can hunt all your baddass seasons. And hunt all your elk tags and video deer on the island and shed hunt. Let me guess, you drink Mtops and have a few tank tops of theirs and you wear blinged out jeans? Thought so!!

Carry on!
 
Yes top but does the fact that you compare an srart, wyoming, bigger than Utah and one fifth the people make them comparable. You do say a lot of things with your hatred for SFW but as I have said before. Your head is in the sand when you think you know what they do with the cash. I will maintain they are on the up and up and until i see different i will defend then. If all these guys you talk about getting rich off of SFW, they sure do hide it
well. They sure dont live high on the hog.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-24-18 AT 03:54PM (MST)[p]>Yes top but does the fact
>that you compare an srart,
>wyoming, bigger than Utah and
>one fifth the people make
>them comparable. You do
>say a lot of things
>with your hatred for SFW
>but as I have said
>before. Your head is
>in the sand when you
>think you know what they
>do with the cash.
>I will maintain they are
>on the up and up
>and until i see different
>i will defend then.
>If all these guys you
>talk about getting rich off
>of SFW, they sure do
>hide it
>well. They sure dont live
>high on the hog.


First off, all I did was respond to his stupid comments saying Utah has so much better quality of animals than the other western states along with talking like the other states are broke and Utah game management would be too if it weren't for SFW. He specifically mentioned Wyoming and so IMHO I have more than enough right to rebuke what he mentioned. Wyoming doesn't need SFW for proper game management and neither do any of the other states and FYI, as well as his, the game in all of them is just as good or better and the hunting for the common man to get a lot of good tags is one hell of a lot better and easier than Utah is and ever will be with SFW running the show. Just face it that Utah is the laughing stock of all the states when it comes to it's politics and game management tag system and the main reason is the clout that SFW has. If DP isn't living high off the hog in what I would call a mansion he has in Bountiful where BGF is also located I give up, LOL! Yea, now come back as always and tell me it's all money he made before he ever founded SFW, BGF, and the other organizations he's involved in and I'll say BS!!! He makes more money at his con games (wolves to name just one) and lobbying than the majority of people in the good old USA ever will. You can say he's on the up and up all you want, but until the books are opened and found correct nobody will believe that there isn't hanky panky going on! PS: I have never said I know what is done with all the money, but it's easy to conjecture that some isn't going where it should when there is no transparency within SFW to show I'm wrong.
 
Topgun, First off Utah has more population than Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho combined. Check it out. With many more people putting in for tags for what is available. Thuys hard to draw. Nothing to do with management of game. If you think it does, your crazy. Second do your homework. Don Peay had a hugh engineering business long before SFW ever started. Tes that is true and im sure if you really wanted to know the truth you would search it. After selling the business he pushed SFW. His money came elsewhere. I realize you know everything but you head is where the sun dont shine in that issue. Those in Utah familiar with Don know even if they hate him. Face the truth. Do your research and quit trying to have othets do it for you.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-25-18 AT 09:07PM (MST)[p]>Topgun, First off Utah has
>more population than Wyoming, Montana,
>and Idaho combined. Check
>it out. With many more
>people putting in for tags
>for what is available.
>Thuys hard to draw. Nothing
>to do with management of
>game. If you think
>it does, your crazy.
>Second do your homework.
>Don Peay had a hugh
>engineering business long before SFW
>ever started. Tes that
>is true and im sure
>if you really wanted to
>know the truth you would
>search it. After selling
>the business he pushed SFW.
> His money came elsewhere.
> I realize you know
>everything but you head is
>where the sun dont shine
>in that issue. Those
>in Utah familiar with Don
>know even if they hate
>him. Face the truth.
> Do your research and
>quit trying to have othets
>do it for you.


Man you are dense! I didn't say anything about number of overall tags issued in Utah has compared to Wyoming. I specifically mentioned the quality of animals in Wyoming and the other states as he stated Utah has quality animals like none of the other western states and that just isn't true. I strictly speak of the number of tags SFW takes from the Utah pool that then deprives the common man of those tags that go to high rollers along with the raffle tags where a small percentage of the money from the $5 goes to wildlife and not the total number of tags issued in the regular draws! I also know the business background of DP before he started SFW and all those other sham organizations that he makes money from. If you aren't aware that he makes a lot of money from and through them every year as a lobbyist among other ways, then you are definitely the top SFW Koolaid drinker in Utah and even more duped and naive than I thought, LOL!
 
Will top i guess i love their coolaid. By the way look at the b&c entries of Utah and wyoming.
I understand your jealousy of Don Peay and the amount of great things he has accomplished in the hunting industry. What great things have came out of his thoughts and other SFW people that has much approved hunting herr in Utah. Your knowledge of all this lacks extremely. Maybe some day you will come down off your high horse and realize you are not the only person who has accomplished much good in hunting. Only problem i have is i have only found your bitching abd moaning about what others have accomplished.
 
>Will top i guess i love
>their coolaid. By the
>way look at the b&c
>entries of Utah and wyoming.
>
> I understand your
>jealousy of Don Peay and
>the amount of great things
>he has accomplished in the
>hunting industry. What great
>things have came out of
>his thoughts and other SFW
>people that has much approved
>hunting herr in Utah.
>Your knowledge of all this
>lacks extremely. Maybe
>some day you will come
>down off your high horse
>and realize you are not
>the only person who has
>accomplished much good in hunting.
> Only problem i have
>is i have only found
>your bitching abd moaning about
>what others have accomplished.


Me jealous of Don Peay, LOL! You have to be friggin kidding me! The sucker is good at what he does, which is a lobbyist and con man and that doesn't mean squat when it's not for the good of all hunters and recreationists. Read the friggin quotes in Hawkeye's posts a few times because they are really what your hero believes and it sure isn't for the good of anyone but himself and high rollers. You also can't read English because more than once I have complimented the people such as yourself that are in the trenches doing all the hard work while your hero schmoozes with the big shots all the way to President Trump himself.
 
Yep you have topgun. But then afain i am in the trenches and do is Don. Consrantly fighting for all hunters. Even you and hawkeye. You may not like it but he continues to fight for more hunting for all. How glad i am to be involved in such a straight up organization fighting every dY for the average joe. Wish people like you would fight for hunting and fishing and increasing game for all. As your jealousy continues to grow knowing you are not near the man Don is i understant your disappointment with yourself.
 
Ken, please tell us you're drinking because your posts are completely unintelligible.

PS. Were you a delegate at the Republican Convention? Asking for a friend.

Grizzly

-----------------------------------------
"This is a classic case of a handful of greedy fly fishermen getting too greedy." -Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as told to KUTV

"It's time to revisit the widely accepted principle in the United States and Canada that game is a public resource."
-Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as quoted in Anchorage Daily News
 
JEALOUS???

$FW has taken more hunters out of the field than all anti hunting groups combined.

carry On




"If the DWR was just doing its job, and
wildlife and hunting were the actual focus,
none of this process would even matter.
But that is not the focus or the goal in any
of this. The current DWR regime, and
SFW were born out of wildlife declines,
and are currently operated and funded
under that paradigm. Those 200 Expo
tags would not even be worth anything if
the focus was where it was supposed to
be, and wildlife and tags were plentiful.
But under the current business model,
that is how the money and power is
generated. It is generated through the
rising "value"(monitization) of a declining
resource. A resource that is supposed to
be being beneficially managed for the
masses that own that resource, ie. US.
The problem is obvious, hedging is not a
long term sustainable strategy, and
others have to lose, for some to win. In
this case it is us, the many, and our
resources, that are being forced to lose,
because there is a minority who's power
and money is derived from our loses."

LONETREE 3/15/16
 
Since SFW claims to be fighting on my behalf, please let the SFW Board of Directors know I support stream access, the North American Conservation Model, and accountability with funds raised from our public tags. Thank you.

-Hawkeye-

My Favorite Expo Tag Quotes:

"It is fair to ask how much comes in with the five dollar application fees and how much went onto the ground.? Don Peay of SFW during 3/31/2005 Wildlife Board Meeting.

"There will be a full accounting of how the applications fees are spent.? Don Peay of SFW - 9/26/2006 - Monstermuleys.com
 
>Since SFW claims to be fighting
>on my behalf, please let
>the SFW Board of Directors
>know I support stream access,
>the North American Conservation Model,
>and accountability with funds raised
>from our public tags.
>Thank you.
>
>-Hawkeye-
>
>My Favorite Expo Tag Quotes:
>
>"It is fair to ask how
>much comes in with the
>five dollar application fees and
>how much went onto the
>ground.? Don Peay of
>SFW during 3/31/2005 Wildlife Board
>Meeting.
>
>"There will be a full accounting
>of how the applications fees
>are spent.? Don Peay
>of SFW - 9/26/2006 -
>Monstermuleys.com


Has anyone noticed that $FW changed their motto. They?re not ?The Voice? anymore, they are now the ?Future?.

That's appropriate because the future is looking more and more like the west will become a giant private land $h it hole like Texas.
 
Thanks all for your input. I am greatful for your concerns. Hawkeye, do you really understand what is going on with stream access. I dont think you do. You see what is going on but mostly from news and papers. Is it just Utah? Not really. Educate yourself on what the issues are on stream access and the benefits and negatives are to what is going on. It is still a long ways from settled. Dont think of just yourself, look at the whole picture of the situation. Both sides.
Everyone talks about the money issue. How these other states have money to do their stuff. They do. They get it from the lottery those states have. Utah has no lottery. Other states flurish because of it. Still, Utah has done more habitat work than all the western states combined. If you guys would put as much effort into promoting wildlife and helping out as you do complaining about what happens think where things would be. Complaining gets you no where. Action working gets you places. Stop complaining and start working for success.
 
Birdman, somebody hacked your MM account.

They're posting in complete sentences.

You better change your password.

BTW, as the fishing coordinator for $FW, do you know how much money $FW as donated to USAC? You know the ones who are fighting to get our access back to our rivers and streams.
 
Will towelie as far as i know, none. They do have one person who works on the issue that being me. Yes i sit in meetings at least twice a month. So far i have been updated as to what is going on. But then towelie, do you know what the issues are in stream access. I didnt think so. But then again keep trying to figure things out. Who knows, you may learn something.
 
Please enlighten us as to why a group that has Fish in it's very name supports the closure of public waters, something that was written into the State Constitution, and has been decided as such in the first of two adjudications (the second ruling is pending).

Is SFW a Fish group or a "private property rights" group? Which, of course, is nonsense since the waterways were never private property to begin with.

Privatize Water - check
Privatize Land - check
Privatize Wildlife - check

Grizzly

-----------------------------------------
"This is a classic case of a handful of greedy fly fishermen getting too greedy." -Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as told to KUTV

"It's time to revisit the widely accepted principle in the United States and Canada that game is a public resource."
-Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as quoted in Anchorage Daily News
 
Will griz. SFW is a fish group. We spend thousands of dollars a year on fishing. Much to your dismay, there are other issues than stream access. Because we decide to stay nutral on this issue doen not mean we are agianst it. I guess in your eyes it does cause you keep them closed a lot to the truth. We are neutral because of the vote of our members. Unlike some groups we support our members desires. Thus neutral.
 
Well Birdman seeing how you're the fish guy for $FW maybe you could put in a request for some funds to help the men, women and children of Utah get their access to their rivers and streams back that was ripped from them.

It's for the children Birdman!
 
I know exactly what is going on with stream access. I have closely followed both cases before the Utah Supreme Court and I was personally impacted by HB 141. Thank goodness for the USAC because I have no faith in SFW or the State of Utah on this issue.

By the way, the first several times we exchanged pm?s on the stream access issue you had no clue what you were talking about. Hopefully, your attendance at bi-monthly meetings has helped bring you up to speed in the issue.

-Hawkeye-

My Favorite Expo Tag Quotes:

"It is fair to ask how much comes in with the five dollar application fees and how much went onto the ground.? Don Peay of SFW during 3/31/2005 Wildlife Board Meeting.

"There will be a full accounting of how the applications fees are spent.? Don Peay of SFW - 9/26/2006 - Monstermuleys.com
 
Towelie, As was said before we put thousands of dollars into fishing in the state of Utah. We are neutral on stream access. That is our decision. We are plenty busy in other issues in the state on fishing.
The stream access issue will most likely take a few more years. With the judge only opening up 1 mile of stream and stream access requests for people to stay out of it. There is plenty of proof that curtain rivers were used for transportation that will go to the courts to decide. No matter what the courts decide not all streams will be open to access. When the legislators decide what the state wants to do after the court decision then some rivers will be open. Smaller streams may be kept closed. Therr is also the issue as to what happens in Colorado. That will set up decisions in Utah.
 
What does Colorado have to do with Utah?

Sounds like typical $FW BS to me.

If what goes on in Colorado is so important than what goes on in Idaho and Montana is equally important. You know the Idaho and Montana which had the same trespass laws regarding rivers and streams as Utah did before Donny boy went up on the capital whining about pesky fly fishermen.
 
Stream access?now we're speaking my language.

SFW may publicly claim neutrality on this issue now, but if those still associated with them and claim to speak for them speak AGAINST public use...is that really neutral? And even if they try to sit out now, SFW was not always that way. In fact, the organization very actively and openly fought against the public during these battles. So, the damage was already done, and done very publicly.

And Bird, we've already talked about this. There weretwo lawsuits. The one was simply navigability of a one mile stretch. The other is about a law impacting ?all waters of the state.? All. Some sort of political compromise may result of that forthcoming decision, but the decision is all waters. You don't know as much about this as you think you do.
 
Colorado has much to do with the outcome. There is an issue there that very much could affect Utah. Vanilla not all streams will be open. The current rivers and court cases depends on if it has been used in the past for say floating timber. If it follows Idaho the stream must float a 6 inch log 6 feet long down the waterway. If not it is not open. Stream access has already said not all waters will be open.
 
?The current rivers and court cases depends on if it has been used in the past for say floating timber. If it follows Idaho the stream must float a 6 inch log 6 feet long down the waterway. If not it is not open.?

This is 100% factually inaccurate. Like I said, you don't know as much about this issue as you think you do. I've tried to educate you, and you refuse to listen or understand. So be it, it's no sweat off my back if you want to continue to look ignorant.

The ONE case that depends upon historical use for commerce, IE-navigabilty, is already over. The Utah Supreme Court ruled in USAC?s favor. That holding will undoubtedly bring new lawsuits, but the ONE case is already over, nothing is pending in the court on that.

The other case has NOTHING to do with navigability or historical use of commerce. It has to do with challenging HB 141 on a completely different argument. But I've already told you all of this before, in even more detail, and you didn't get it then, so I have very little confidence you'll get it now.

I'll say it again, you don't know as much about this as you think you do. That's not meant as a dig or a slight, but a simple assessment and statement of fact based upon your factually inaccurate posts on the topic.
 
Vanilla-

I have also tried to explain the difference between the Weber River and the Provo River cases to Birdman with no success. He attends meetings twice a month and apparently knows more than the rest of us. Don?t bother trying to convince him otherwise. Thanks for your efforts on this issue.

-Hawkeye-

My Favorite Expo Tag Quotes:

"It is fair to ask how much comes in with the five dollar application fees and how much went onto the ground.? Don Peay of SFW during 3/31/2005 Wildlife Board Meeting.

"There will be a full accounting of how the applications fees are spent.? Don Peay of SFW - 9/26/2006 - Monstermuleys.com
 
It seems interesting that stream access continues to go through history of ALL rivers to see what they have been used for. At a recent meeting one of the officers of stream access gave a report on what they had come up with and on what waters have been used for commercial use. They said it is very important to prove that throughout Utah. He said that the state legislators will have to come up with rulings as to high watermarks and size. He referred to Idaho where a 6 inch log 6 feet long must be able to float the stream saying Utah could come up with the same ruling. He also mentioned a Colorado issue along the same lines and that it could affect much as to what goes on. Now Vanilla and Hawkeye you can try to discredit me all you want on that issue but those things are fact.
 
>It seems interesting that stream access
>continues to go through history
>of ALL rivers to see
>what they have been used
>for. At a recent
>meeting one of the officers
>of stream access gave a
>report on what they had
>come up with and on
>what waters have been used
>for commercial use. They said
>it is very important to
>prove that throughout Utah.
>He said that the state
>legislators will have to come
>up with rulings as to
>high watermarks and size.
>He referred to Idaho where
>a 6 inch log 6
>feet long must be able
>to float the stream saying
>Utah could come up with
>the same ruling. He
>also mentioned a Colorado issue
>along the same lines and
>that it could affect much
>as to what goes on.
> Now Vanilla and
>Hawkeye you can try to
>discredit me all you want
>on that issue but those
>things are fact.

You wouldn't know what a fact is if it bit you in the azz, LOL! In your capacity as the fishing guru for SFW are you considered a Board member like another member thinks you are?
 
Will top gun your knowledge is beyond me. I had no idea I was a board member. I will be sure to ask them where my chair is.
I understand I am not as intelligent as top gun, Hawkeye, vanilla, hosblur and grizzly among others. I have to attend meetings and get involved to try to understand what is going on unlike some mm members who know it all without being involved. I loved it in the past where some have said they listen or read transcripts of the meetings that take place. That's bull. First not all meetings are recorded. They don't have to be by law because because the state does not run them. Still you know all about everything. Top gun thanks for letting me know I'm on the board.
I have to attend meetings and learn things because I don't know everything. I do know about stream access in most part. I do know what goes on in and with SFW. I am not one who sits back tearing SFW and the DWR apart saying how dishonest they are. I learn. Those above named seem to be sexual intellectuals on all these things. I really hope I don't become like you people. I want to continue to learn about things coming up. I want to learn first hand and not by hearsay as many on her do.
If you people would put as much energy in pushing good things in the state instead of trying to tear a new butt hole on anyone who believes that SFW @ DNR are doing a great job.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-29-18 AT 04:21PM (MST)[p]First off, again your reading comprehension sucks because I didn't say you were a Board member. Another member inferred you were and my post was a question. That's what the symbol ? is after a sentence in case you aren't aware of that! I have no friggin idea what your reference to us as "sexual intellectuals" means, so please come back and in your infinite wisdom please tell us what in the He** that is! The more you post in case you aren't aware of it the dumber you make yourself out to be!
 
Birdman-

I am not trying to discredit you or your comments. You do a fine job of that yourself. Next time you are in one of your bi-monthly meeting discussing the stream access issue, ask the group to explain the difference between the Weber River case, which has already been decided, and the Provo River case, which should be decided soon. Understanding the difference between the two cases and the issues raised in the two cases would be a good start to carrying on an educated discussion on the topic.

-Hawkeye-

My Favorite Expo Tag Quotes:

"It is fair to ask how much comes in with the five dollar application fees and how much went onto the ground.? Don Peay of SFW during 3/31/2005 Wildlife Board Meeting.

"There will be a full accounting of how the applications fees are spent.? Don Peay of SFW - 9/26/2006 - Monstermuleys.com
 
You know top, you really are a sexual intellectual. You need to Google it. You speak constantly about all that goes on with SFW And the DNR. You know nothing and the more you talk about it the more you show just how stupid you are. Try talking about a subject you know cause you don't know cause you don't know anything about SFW or the DNR. You have no idea how meetings take place and what was talked about.
 
I need to apologize it was me that referred to Birdman as a SFW board member in the other thread going about BHA. I assumed that for the way to which he speaks on SFW issues and his involvement. Again I apologize my lack of understandement.
My point there was why is Birdman naive, kool-aid drinker or worse a liar when he states his side of his knowledge of what the SFW stands for or accomplish.
But Hoss,Grizz,Topgun or many of others can make any statement they want and we should believe it is the truth.
My point was Birdman let us know he was involved with the SFW to a more extent than just helping at a Banquet but Grizz never mentioned anything about being on the board of the BHA.
 
I don't know anything about griz being on any board. And yes hawk I am aware of the different court cases. I also know that stream access has been working to show the Provo and all the streams that they have been used in the past and that is for a reason. I k ow that the court ruled on the Weber on the one mile stretch. I am also aware that it all has to go again before the legislators as to how it will be unforced when the courts are done. I am aware not all streams will be open to access when the courts ruling is finished.
I am also aware there is an issue in Colorado that can cause problems in Utah. I suspect that as a guess until Colorado is finished no more will be done in Utah. My opinion.
I know much more about what goes on than you know. I have never expected you to believe me and in fact expect I am not in the know. Don't call me a liar if you have no proof I have lied. You can suspect all you want. I work on the truth coming out. Always will. Just because you don't believe what I say does not make me a liar. What it does tell me you have no idea what happens in hunting and fishing in the offices of groups or the dnr
 
Birdman---Please tell us where anyone has called you a liar on this Forum. Saying you don't know what you're talking about like Hawkeye and several others of us have doesn't mean anyone is calling you a liar. It's just that you don't know the facts about things that you are trying to convince people on. Oops, there's that dirty word facts again, LOL! You also really need to slow down when you make a post because, as several others have also mentioned, trying to read some of your posts is so frustrating that it looks like the person making the posts hasn't even finished grade school and IMHO when trying to listen to a person that makes such poor posts it's hard to believe he knows anything about which he speaks.
 
Will top, I am not trying to convince anyone about my beliefs. I do want the truth. Why is it I have to prove or have the FACTS for what I say but you and others it is ok the guess or assume. You have no FACTS about most of what you say and same with Hawkeye and others. They assume and when questioned about what they say the answer is prove it. It always up to me or someone to prove but you guys don't need to prove what you say. Interesting but try being equal.
 
Everything I have posted is backed up by facts, including contracts, minutes, rules and even direct quotes from SFW?s leaders. And for the record, I never called you a liar. I simply mentioned that you often make statements that are way off base.

You posted a few weeks ago that SFW is putting 90-95% of the Expo tag money on the ground. Please back that statement up with some actual factual support. Don Peay promised sportsmen a ?full accounting? of the Expo tag revenues. How about backing that statement up with an actual accounting?

I am more than happy to stick to the facts if you will do the same.

-Hawkeye-

My Favorite Expo Tag Quotes:

"It is fair to ask how much comes in with the five dollar application fees and how much went onto the ground.? Don Peay of SFW during 3/31/2005 Wildlife Board Meeting.

"There will be a full accounting of how the applications fees are spent.? Don Peay of SFW - 9/26/2006 - Monstermuleys.com
 
They are putting it back on the ground. They showed it at the expo that you chose not to attend. It was put out. They gave you your chance just like they did a couple of years ago when you refused. Now I am guessing they would expect you to twist things up since you proved you really didn't want to know.
 
The meetings you may or may not be attending have absolutely nothing to do with the current Provo River court case challenging HB 141.

Not one single argument made either at the district court level or at the Supreme Court had to do with commerce or size of logs. I'll give you a hint: google ?public trust doctrine.? If you include the ?? it will help narrow your search.

No meeting taking place right now, or in the last year, has anything to do with the pending Provo River case that we're awaiting a decision. I don't doubt that the discussion has turned to navigability, because if that one mile stretch of the Weber is navigable, so is the entire Weber, and so is the entire Provo. But, none of that has to do with the court case waiting a decision. Nothing. Nada. Zilch.

I do wonder, Bird...if you are attending all these meetings, what is your position? What is your interest that got you a seat at the table? Say hi to Chris for me. He?s a great dude, and will gladly educate you on the issues as well.
 
Tell me vanilla, what does your buddy say about the issue in colorado as related to Utah. And yes there is two meetings each month where a member of stream access updates as to what is going on.
 
>I asked you first. If you'll
>answer my questions, I'll answer
>yours.


He can't answer any questions because he just knows it's true and that's a FACT, LOL!
 
I don't care about the pizzing match. I am legitimately curious what Bird?s position on this issue is.

Bird, are you for or against the public use of publicly owned water?

And what got you a seat at the table in these meetings?
 
I don't know which Chris you are talking about. My personal belief from past experience I do not want people walking through my property. As a rep for SFW I have not been ether way. I was appointed by the Governor two years ago to work on rivers and fishing in the state. As it deals with rivers the group I meet with discusses twice a month on the issues of stream access. There is a officer of stream access that comes and updates us twice a month as to what is going on.
 
Quote from same post.

Right now, the application fees you pay in the normal stae drw go to a computer company in Nevada. Not one dime goes for conservation.

I've always wondered the same thing. How much do you think that company makes? I thought it was strange that UTAH Game n Fish didn't set up a system for that and they use a Nevada company for processing those apps which in that state they do not reveal who owns any and all companies. Crazy isn't it?

Just think how much more money would be made (odds would go to the dogs though) if you didn't have to attend the Expo to put in for that draw. I do think having to attend brings so much more revenue to the state and the area. I'm all about helping the communities grow and make monies.

Thanks for your time

Joe

"Sometimes you do things wrong for so long you
think their right" - 2001
"I can't argue with honesty" - 2005
-Joe E Sikora
 
Vanilla, Birdman, Hawkeye,

I'm not an expert on the stream access fight so please help me out. Here's how I understand it, please correct me if I'm wrong.

My understanding is the decided ruling (Conatser) applied specifically to the navigability of one section of Weber River.

The undecided ruling regards the Constitutionality of HB141, which closed access to public waterways, based on Article XVII Section 1 of the Utah Constitution, which states, "there is a public easement over the water regardless of who owns the beds beneath the water."

My understanding is that the suit pending at the Utah Supreme Court is regarding HB141, passed by the Utah Legislature, perhaps in violation of the Utah Constitution.

If my understanding is correct, then how could this have anything to do with Idaho and Colorado as it seems to be strictly a Utah case?

Any idea on a ruling date?

Grizzly
 
This is a long history, I'll do my best to be succinct. Conatser was decided in 2008, I believe. It simply asked the question if the incidental touching of privately owned beds to fish or otherwise recreate on public water was legal and part of using the water. The answer to that was yes, the incidental touching was within the public?s right to utilize public water following over private stream beds. It involved the Weber River, but had nothing to do with navigability. It simply interpreted state code that declares all water owned by the state, and therefore public water.

Rep Ben Ferry ran a bill in 2009 to overturn Conatser legislatively, but HB 187 was killed that year on the House floor. Ben Ferry was voted out at the convention the following year on this issue alone as anglers assembled enough delegates in his area to remove him from office.

HB 141 was a legislative reaction to Conatser the next year (2010) stating that public ownership of water gave the public no right to utilize that water. It came after all interested parties had spent a year working out a compromise under the direction of Rep Lorie Fowlke. On the eve of the start of the legislative session, Rep Kay McIff came out with HB 141 and the landowners all walked away from the table on promises that the former judge was a water law expert, and they had the votes to screw the fishermen.

The Utah Stream Access Coalition (USAC) was formed and the organization assembled a legal team that over the course of the next few years filed two separate, and mostly unrelated lawsuits.

One lawsuit was filed on a one mile stretch of the Weber River stating that based upon historical use for commerce at the time of statehood, that this section was ?navigable.? If a body of water meets this test, the state must retain title to the streambed and it cannot be privately owned under federal law. Coincidentally, I personally told multiple landowners on this very section back in 2010 and 2011 that they should work out the compromise the anglers were trying to work out because if we filed a navigability lawsuit, they'd lose and would not only lose the sbility to keep anglers out, they'll lose title as well. They didn't listen to me and the many others informing them of this, and wouldn't you know, the Utah Supreme Court agreed. The one mile section of the Weber is navigable. Therefore, in fact, basically the entire Weber is navigable. Stay tuned, you'll hear more information about this soon enough. Those wealthy, influential landowners should have listened 8 years ago...

This is the case that could potentially be influenced by the Colorado case. The Weber case was filed in state court. State courts were asked to interpret federal law, which they are allowed to do. However, if the federal courts come to a different conclusion on the same issue of federal law, the federal court decision will trump (no pun intended) the state court's decisionon that issue. The Colorado case, I believe, is basically asking the federal court to rule the same way based upon tie drives and log drives. If the federal courts ruled that this does not meet the commerce at time of statehood requirement, it could impact the recent Utah decision on the Weber River. But the federal courts won't rule the other way. That would be a shocking decision if they did. Either way, we're probably many years away from that one being resolved.

The other case filed by USAC was filed against the state and the owners of Victory Ranch on the upper Provo. This case challenged the constitutionality of HB 141, stating (in very simple terms) that under the Utah constitution and due to the public trust doctrine, the state could not pass a law keeping the public from utilizing publicly owned water. The district court ruled in USAC?s favor, and the Supreme Court took jurisdiction of it and we're now over a year since oral arguments. A decision should be forthcoming any time. This case has nothing to do with navigability, and therefore will not be impacted by any decision out of the Colorado case. The Provo case is strictly about Utah code and the Utah constitution.

I know there is a lot of talk about navigability going on, and that is why Bird is so confused on the procedural posture of this situation. But this talk is just about what FUTURE cases will come based upon the ruling in the Weber case. Can anyone think of any other rivers in the state where log drives were done for construction and for the railroad at the time of statehood? Hint: there are a lot of them! And many of these rivers have high amounts of private property adjacent to them. It would behoovd these landowners to be wise about how much they dig in their heels on this. Learn a lesson from your friends on the Weber River. Just my opinion...
 
And Idaho?s floating a 6 inch log at high water test has nothing to do with anything in Utah. That was something we pitched in 2009, and basically every year since as a compromise and the landowners and Utah Farm Bureau vehemently rejected it, even though the Idaho Farm Bureau has stated the law works pretty well up there and has for 40 years.

My guess is that if it is starting to gain traction now, it's because those groups are getting worried they will lose the Provo case which will have universal impact over all waters of the state.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-31-18 AT 05:28AM (MST)[p]>Quote from same post.
>
>Right now, the application fees you
>pay in the normal stae
>drw go to a computer
>company in Nevada. Not one
>dime goes for conservation.
>
>I've always wondered the same thing.
>How much do you think
>that company makes? I thought
>it was strange that UTAH
>Game n Fish didn't set
>up a system for that
>and they use a Nevada
>company for processing those apps
>which in that state they
>do not reveal who owns
>any and all companies. Crazy
>isn't it?
>
>Just think how much more money
>would be made (odds would
>go to the dogs though)
>if you didn't have to
>attend the Expo to put
>in for that draw. I
>do think having to attend
>brings so much more revenue
>to the state and the
>area. I'm all about helping
>the communities grow and make
>monies.
>
>Thanks for your time
>
>Joe
>
>"Sometimes you do things wrong for
>so long you
>think their right" - 2001
>"I can't argue with honesty" -
>2005
>-Joe E Sikora

I beg your pardon and I'll have to GRAMA a request for an update, but the 2014 Utah DWR contract (Statement of Work portion) with Systems Consultants of Fallon NV shows that SC only gets $3.01 of each Utah hunt $10.00 application fee (or $1.25 depending on the number of applications) while Utah DWR retains $6.99 (or $8.75, again, depending on the number of applications). Other than returning some of it to SC for some postage, credit card processing fees and some license and permit printing paper, the DWR uses their portion for whatever they want. Whether or not some of it is for direct wildlife conservation I can't say, but it is used for Utah wildlife management in some form.

And for that $3.01, Systems Consultants not only processes those applications, they also print and send out 182,000 hunt reminder postcards, 4,000 letters to lifetime license holders, they handle 8 phone trunk lines (and 1 FAX line) 24/7 for 11 months (Feb thru Dec) for questions and inquiries and they call applicants up to 4 times for declined credit cards, they attempt to correct all applications with errors or missing information, they send out the successful/unsuccessful emails, they print and mail the permits, they send out the harvest reminder emails and letters and collect the information to print out the odds reports on the internet, they manage the after-hunt phone surveys and collect and publish the results. In other words, much of your contact with DWR on the phone, internet and in the mail is actually either with Systems Consultants directly or is data provided by Systems Consultants.

How much do they make on Utah public draws? $3.01 (or less) for every application in the Buck and Bull, Antlerless, Swan, Crane, Bear, Cougar, Sagegrouse, and Sharptail grouse drawings. Somewhere around $2 Million, I'd guess.

Is it worth it? I'd say so, considering all they do for as many tags as they deal with.

Compare that to the approx $700,000 SFW/MDF makes for dealing with 200 Expo tags. That's $3.50 per application with a lot less service.
 
" I'd guess."


These are the most important words for anyone that just read Elkfromabove's last post.


Good thing UDWR is a money machine that has absolutely no costs of operation.
 
Vanilla provided an excellent summary of the two stream access cases that made their way to the Utah Supreme Court. I would like to add a few additional points since we are trying to educate folks with this post.

First, according to the USAC, HB 141 (ironically named the "Utah Public Waters Act") shut down approximately 2,700 miles of fishable rivers and streams that were previously open to sportsmen for fishing and recreating. That equates to roughly 43% of Utah?s fishable rivers and streams, and included one of my favorite fly-fishing spots on the Provo River. HB 141 gives sportsmen a glimpse of how our legislature feels about the issue of public access and should give us pause as we ponder and debate the issue of who should control public lands and what would happen if the State of Utah ever gets control of all public lands without our borders.

Second, although the ruling relating to the one-mile stretch of the Weber River is fairly narrow is scope, it lays the groundwork for similar determinations on other stretches of the Weber River and many other rivers that were used historically for log drives and other similar acts of commerce. Therefore, regardless of what happens with the other case still pending before the Utah Supreme Court, the Weber River ruling will have a much broader effect than just the one-mile stretch at issue in that lawsuit.

Third, Vanilla is correct that the other case (the Provo River case), which is still pending before the Utah Supreme Court has nothing to do with navigability and is premised on the argument that HB 141 violates the Utah Constitution and the public's right to use public waters. If the Utah Supreme Court affirms the ruling of the trial court, HB 141 will be struck down entirely on constitutional grounds. The impact of such a ruling would be much broader than the Utah Supreme Court's ruling in the Weber River case and would have nothing to do with navigability or what is currently happening in Idaho or Colorado. So yes grizzly, you are correct on that point. If you are a sportsman that cares about public access to our rivers and streams, then keep your fingers crossed that the Utah Supreme Court rules in our favor in that case.

Fourth, it was during the period of debate in 2009 and 2010 that Don Peay and SFW sided with the landowners and developers, and actively lobbied against sportsmen on the stream access issue. Don Peay was quoted by KUTV news as stating: "This is a classic case of a handful of greedy fly fishermen getting too greedy." Ask yourselves why would SFW, who purports to represent sportsmen and fisherman, side with private landowners, developers and the legislature to actively lobby against the interests of sportsmen and fisherman on this issue? The answer should seem fairly obvious to those who have been paying attention. Vanilla was involved in lobbying on behalf of the USAC and has previously posted about some of the statements that he heard Don Peay make on the stream access issue during this period of time. Perhaps he will share them again.

Finally, after taking a great deal of heat for picking the wrong side on the stream access issue in 2009 and 2010, SFW has apparently chosen to remain neutral this time around. What does that mean? The conservation group with the most influence and loudest voice in Utah is going to sit on the sidelines and refuse to advocate for sportsmen and fisherman on this important issue? Or does that mean that SFW still privately supports the interests of landowners, developers and the legislature but they don't want to publicly take a position on this critical issue because they know they rank and file members will be pissed. How can a conservation group that purports to represent sportsmen and fisherman straddle the fence on this issue? We know exactly where Don Peay stands on the issue. And if you ask Birdman he will tell you that he does not support public stream access. Go figure?

Thanks for the comments guys. I enjoy discussing these types of important issues and learning from others on this forum.

-Hawkeye-

My Favorite Expo Tag Quotes:

"It is fair to ask how much comes in with the five dollar application fees and how much went onto the ground.? Don Peay of SFW during 3/31/2005 Wildlife Board Meeting.

"There will be a full accounting of how the applications fees are spent.? Don Peay of SFW - 9/26/2006 - Monstermuleys.com
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-31-18 AT 10:23AM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Jul-31-18 AT 10:21?AM (MST)

LAST EDITED ON Jul-31-18 AT 10:19?AM (MST)

>
>Good thing UDWR is a money
>machine that has absolutely no
>costs of operation.

Huh? What do UDWR's total costs of operations have to do with how much money Systems Consultants makes from the Utah public draws?


Per the last page of the 2014 Buck and Bulls draw Statement of Work:

"COST:
The contractor will be paid $3.01 per application based upon a guaranteed application pool of 330,000 and then $1.25 for every application processed thereafter.

Minimum application pool 330,000 at $3.01---------------$993,300.00

Postage reimbursement will not exceed Bucks Draw------$132,641.00

Number of Surrender Letters Processed
Letter cost at $.50 per letter will not exceed-------------------$250.00

Estimated 50,000 additional applications beyond the
minimum Guarantee of 330,000 at $1.25--------------------$62,500.00

Harvest survey $2.00 per permit requiring survey
(Mail all letters)----------------------------------------------$18,000.00

Total cost of the Bucks Statement of Work
will not exceed-------------------------------------------$1,206,691.00"





Per the last page of the 2013 Antlerless draw Statement of Work:

"COST:

The contractor will be paid $3.01 per application based upon a guaranteed application pool of 39,000 and then $1.25 for every application processed thereafter.

Minimum application pool 39,000 at $3.01---------------$117,390.00

Postage reimbursement will not exceed Antlerless Draw--$29,620.00

Number of Surrender Letters Processed
Letter cost at $.50 per letter will not exceed-------------------$50.00

Estimated 4,000 additional applications beyond the
minimum guarantee of 39,000 at $1.25----------------------$5,000.00

Harvest survey $1.00 per permit requiring survey
(Only mail last letter)----------------------------------------$15,000.00

Total cost of the Antlerless Statement of Work
will not exceed----------------------------------------------$167,060.00"


I only have the two above Statements of Work and so my "I'd guess" of $2 Million was just a matter of not knowing how many processed applications the other draws had, nothing more! In any case, Systems Consultants only gets a maximum profit of $3.01 per processed application.
 
You want to guess what the UDWR pays to run that draw, and don't just fall back on the $3.01 payment which you think covers everything in some make believe you guess land?

You really don't know how government agencies work just to pi55 your money away do you????? Why would you? You've been so busy screaming for accountability of a few dollars over here while millions upon millions get blown with no more transparency than milk.

Hey you ever wonder how much the UDWR spends on transparency?????? Well do you? Do you ever wonder how much they spend giving you those numbers that you like to guess about????

Elkfromabove, You are totally lost. You guess at this and that and you expect all of us to some how lynch people over your guesses.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-31-18 AT 10:58PM (MST)[p]>You want to guess what the
>UDWR pays to run that
>draw, and don't just fall
>back on the $3.01 payment
>which you think covers everything
>in some make believe you
>guess land?
>
>You really don't know how government
>agencies work just to pi55
>your money away do you?????
> Why would you?
>You've been so busy screaming
>for accountability of a few
>dollars over here while millions
>upon millions get blown with
>no more transparency than milk.
>
>
>Hey you ever wonder how much
>the UDWR spends on transparency??????
> Well do you?
>Do you ever wonder how
>much they spend giving you
>those numbers that you like
>to guess about????
>
>Elkfromabove, You are totally lost.
> You guess at this
>and that and you expect
>all of us to some
>how lynch people over your
>guesses.

So, show us the actual figures so we know you're not guessing!

BTW, isn't mind reading a form of guessing? I notice you do a lot of it.
 
Elkfromabove,

There isn't enough TRANSPARENCY to not guess. But I have enough experience dealing with government agencies to know when they contract a job to a company that ain't the total cost.
 
Nice use of that buzz word, Tri. File a GRAMA request, you can get every bit of info you'd like. No need to guess.
 
You mean elkfromabove could file a GRAMA request and suddenly he wouldn't have to "GUESS" anymore???????????? Say it ain't so Vanilla. But then what's the fun in using guesses and assumptions to demonize other people who are providing a service for you?

I also like how you cued in on "transparency" being nothing more than a "buzz word". Hawkeye and others have been spitting that buzzword on here for years and leading dozens around here like the pied piper with it. You see Vanilla that's why this has stayed a controversial topic that never sees a resolution. There is no honesty in the argument.
 
EFA wasn?t deaminzing anyone. He was responding to an inaccurate post that said SCs kept $10 app fees.

You?re reaching.
 
Go read a little farther back Vanilla.

You're not paying attention and you realized you just marginalized your allies.
 
First, I don't have allies, so that would be tough to marginalize anything.

Second, you're attacking EFA based upon post #188, which was a direct response to post #184. I don't need to read any further back.

Third, as usual, you're grasping at straws. But I'm sure you'll tell me what I think, how it's wrong, and how you are the almighty. Ready, set, go!
 

Similar threads

F
Change UNIT-WIDE elk designation in New Mexico to RANCH ONLY!
Replies
54
Views
2k
MrRogers
MrRogers
Founder
Montana Mule Deer, Whitetail, Antelope, Archery Elk
Replies
0
Views
549
Founder
Founder

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

6FD42523-5D09-4E75-A18A-0A445313BD6F.jpeg
F1559611-F9A0-48D2-B0A9-3708B884DC32.png
IMG_2791.jpeg
9E10A8C8-BD16-4C25-891E-BE4EE1A0C3EA.jpeg
IMG_2910 copy.jpg
60B9822B-DD75-46BD-8DFE-0452D5687C00.jpeg
2023-09-16_07-28-01_277.jpeg
BCAE53E7-5852-44D4-B203-FD37A1FD19F7.jpeg
Wyoming Bull 2.jpg
5393imgp2416.jpg
IMG_1557.jpeg
IMG_2788.jpg
Back
Top Bottom