Crap, if I had read WHOLELOTOFBULL's post I could have gone to bed three hours ago but since I didn't and since I poured out my heart and soul I'm going to go ahead and repeat much of what he said. Sorry to bore you, I doubt our saying it twice will change any minds but it will make me feel better.
boardfork
I believe your orginal inquiry was an excellent question. Do you think you might get this volume of information when you inquire of the other wildlife organizations?
You wanted to join an organization what was getting something done as I understand it?
Now that you've heard from a few (very few actually) folks, could I ask you a few questions regarding what you've read?
Even though you have heard from very few MM members, SFW members and non-members, do you think there would be this many opinions and as many passionate people who will discuss your inquiry so openly, with total strangers, if SFW wasn?t getting alot of wildlife related things done?
There isn't much to say, for or against, a passive organization, is there?
If your not drawing lightning it's generally because you're laying on your stomach. The winners are the player that play above the rim, that steal the ball, that make the no look pass, that take the charge and get it in the hole inspite of the bad calls. Is that not true?
I hope you don't mind if I take a minute and share a little of my history so you can appreciate why I would ask you to consider these questions and why I support SFW and especially Don Peay.
In my opinion, if you want to study groups that straddle the fence on hunting and fishing issues you may want to ask some of these questions to the presidents of the National Wildlife Federation and the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation. These are but two examples of groups that have found themselves having to back away from many hunting and fishing issues because they find themselves offending one side of their membership as they attempt to support the other side and they grow less and less effective as they try to please more and more people. Haven?t you noticed that as you've observed other organizations, be they for wildlife or whatever.
During the 1980?s I was elected to the board of the Utah Wildlife Federation, the organization that two future Division of Wildlife Directors belonged to at that time. The two were Mr. Robert (Bob) Valintine and Mr. John Kimball. In spite of the Utah Wildlife Federation?s (UWF) desire to support hunting and fishing the organization choose, on many issues, to ?not take a position? because it was offensive to some of it's members.
In my opinion it was cowardly and wrong and I told my fellow board members that many, many times. You might ask, ?why did you stay in the organization.? I stayed for two calculated reasons.
Prior to 1993, as weak as the UWF was, it was a statewide organization with the largest sportsmen membership and it's president was always appointed, by the Governor of the Utah, to the most powerful wildlife board in the State, that being the State of Utah Wildlife Board. It performed the same task as the current State of Utah Wildlife Board but it functioned prior the current RAC system. In the 1970?s, through the 1980?s and until the early 1990?s if you wanted any chance of influencing wildlife issues in Utah, as a sportsman, you had the best chance, in my opinion, of doing it through membership in the UFW. Mr. Valintine and Mr. Kimball must have believed the same or I doubt they would have taken the time to be involved. The other reason I stayed with the UWF was to battle for what I believed was in the best interested in the hunting and fishing issues that we were dealing with at that time. I figured, someone needed to push the UWF to do what I believed was in the best interest of wildlife/hunting and fishing. I fought them, they didn't like me much and I'm still not on their Christmas card list.
Mr. Valintine and Mr. Kimball delighted in introducting me as ?one of those hook and bullet types?. I didn't care, I pushed them, I fought them and I won my share for battles for sportsman. I'll take 100% credit for the 15/100 buck/doe ratio objectives that the DWR still uses today. If it hadn't been for one well intended but misguided member of the UWF board we would have had the state wide buck/doe ratio set at 25 buck per 100 doe back in the early 1990?s. If time permitted I could share with you of many other fights that were won and lost and why. The point I'm attempting to make is so you might have some appreciation for what Don Peay and SFW are attempting to do now.
During the early 1990?s the UFW become so weak and so impotent there become absolutely no reason to stay involved. There is no greater waste of time that beating a dead horse. UFW became a dead horse, beating it was a foolish investment in anymore time.
Who filled the void? In 1993, because the UWF had become inept SFW and Don Peay had little trouble rallying a hostile and frustrated sportsman community to work toward more and better herds of wildlife, specifcially mule deer and to re-establish sportsmen with political power in Utah. (Yes, I know about the deer and know they've expanding beyond Utah but lets deal with one thought at a time if you don't mind. It's hard enough for me to focus on just one thought let alone two or three at once.)
Even though it seems like SFW will at time take a ?no position? stance on an issue there is a huge different between the UWF and SFw. Do you think, in 15 years has SFW ever had to ?check it's bet?, have they ever had to ?fold?em?? By their admission they have. Has any CEO, Board President, Governor, U.S. President ever had to say to his Board and membership, ?this sucker is a tar baby (no racial slur intented, just a figure of speech to make a point), there is no way we can touch this subject without getting covered in black sticky tar, so let's step back and fight it another day in another way?. That is a huge difference than simply not taking a position out of fear. If, as sportsmen, we can't step back and see that, regardless of what Don Peay says on-line or off-line, we'll always have trouble understanding what SFW has to do to get things done for sportsmen. What kind of leader is going to charge into a fight, spend limited resources, and waste collateral, when they know, for certan, that even if they win, they lose. Who wants to invest time or money in that kind of foolishness. The holding and folding of a dynamic and agressive organization is far different than the fearful hesitation of an inept one. I'm not wishing to be disrespectful of the UWF, as I said, I was on the board for many years, I am just sharing some facts from the past. Does that make sense?
I too am actually shocked that Don is willing to respond on-line at all. Everything anyone say?s, you, I or Don, is subject to constant argument, questioning, sarcasum, and leaves one open for even more critizim.
I have no idea who the Presidents of FNAWS, MDF, RMEF, etc. are but I wonder how anyone one of those folks would react to the kinds of questions and demands made on SFW.
As I mentioned earlier, maybe you would be interested in asking the original question to the RMEF or FNAWS, Trout Unlimited, or the Wild Turkey Federation, see if they will invited hostle non-members to analyze their stratagies and the plans they have to leverage their resources. Do you believe the other organizations would open their every detail to anyone who asks. If the folks for PETA or Friends of Animals sent Don an e-mail and wanted to see the goods, would you want him to do that too? Where do you draw the line? How many of us have asked to see the records, the budgets, the coming strategies of the DNR or the DWR. Why not, they are public, they have to show you. They spend far more of your money that SFW does. Why aren't we asking these questions to DWR or the DOT? What are you spend on gasoline taxes, are we asking to see the DOT?s doings? I'd invite you to try to understand it , even if you were fortunate enough to get it. I can't imagine any of them would even consider responding.
Don seems determined to try and satisfy even those that seem to loth him. Why would he do that if he was hiding something?
I would suggest a possible answer.
He cares about SFW and believes what it is doing is the best that can be done and he seems to believes he has worked out a reasonable and responsible way to get it done. If he was hiding something is doesnt
seem to me he would be as confrontational as he is to criticism. When someone confronts Don about doing what he thinks is best for sportsmen and wildlife he returns resistance. Isn?t that what you'd want from a leader that is fighting for your cause? Have you ever noticed the behavior of someone questioned by the press the has something to hide? They aren't responding to on-line forums, as far as I can tell.
Further to the transparency issue. I believe, although I'm not certain, that there is division of SFW or a SFW affiliates or whatever you call those other groups like the habitat stuff that are non-profit. Other parts of SFW are not non-profit and subject to taxation. If I'm not mistaken non-profits are different from for profit organizations. If you were to look into the regulations that govern the non-profits you can determine what your allowed or not allowed to see, according to state law. So far as the ?for profit? side of the business, I guess it wouldn't be rude to suggest that it's no ones business but the owner. You choose to do business with the company or not, its your choice but your not usually invited to see how it spends its money.
Suggesting that SFW has purchased the DWR could be a little risky but I guess we all get passionate and I understood what you meant. I don't believe SFW is powerful enough to control the DNR or the DWR. I've watched SFW loose too many battles with the DWR over the last 15 years. I'd guess the DNR/DWR have a love/hate relationship with SFW. Some days SFW comes with solutions, some days they come with a pole axe. Depends on the issue and the big picture. There is one thing for certain, you better being something to the table that works for everyone once in a while unless you want to find the door lock everytime you want in. If your always the problem and never the solution, well, you know how that works after a few years.
You have to trust someone, somewhere, sometime. Go up to the DNR Offices and the DWR Offices and ask the Directors the question you've asked the members of MM. Why would individuals in these State agencies risk their jobs and reputations if they believed SFW was doing something what could further stain an already battered agency. Would you risk your job so Don Peay could boost about planting bitter brush? If you're really worried there has been an inappropriate use of funds at SFW I guess you could ask the State Tax Commission
In case you have a question regarding my relationship with SFW and Don Peay. I know Don, but not well. I am not on his Board but he will e-mail me once in a great while and ask me what I think about some issue that he's trying to decide on. Many times we see things differently but not always. He respects my perspective, I usually understand his. I've never been in a SFW Board Meeting. I do not know any SFW board members. I'd guess I've seen some of them at various events I've attended but maybe not, I have no idea. I've never asked him who they are, never cared. I only care what they do. I have children and grandchildren and I want wildlife/hunting and fishing for them. I try to see the big picture but you have to be much more involved that I am to see it or understand it to the degree that you can be of much value. I've done my time in the hunting/fishing wars. Times have changed, there are different enemies today than there were 15 years ago. I trust his intent and his judgement. Don can do it now, he's twenty years younger and still has fire in his belly. The fire will burn down soon enough but for now why not try to help keep it burning.
Let me say this, Don and I have been the rounds on mule deer. I care more about mule deer than any other species we hunt. I spend every minute I can enjoying this magnificent creature. It drives me crazy to see what has happened to them. I have never given Don a minutes peace about doing more for mule deer. Here is what I have come to believe. If there was any thing more he could do, he would do it. I don't know why deer are still in the tank but they are and there are a hundred opinions and probably an hundred reasons why they are doing so poorly. I know Don knows the mule deer issue is the horse he rode to the parade and I know that if he could he'd have done more by now. If for no other reason just to shut me up. I have been on his case for the entire 15 years. I know hundreds of others have been as well. He can't walk down a street in South Central Utah and not get bombarded with people asking him what can be done about our deer herds. I believe Don still wants to do more for mule deer. I know he does but what do you expect him to say? ?I failed, I guess I'll quite?. I hope not, I prefer optimism and aggression. I like people that get up when the Federal Judge knocks them down and plans another round. So......inspite of my personal frustration with deer I want him fighting for me, fighting when he can for deer and fighting for other wildlife issues when he can't get anyone to do anything about our deer. Let me ask this question. If SFW can't do something about our deer herd tell me one other person or group of people who can, I'd would love to know. I imagine a hundred thousand others would like to know as well.
Regarding the expo draws, I don't know what was said or not said before the expo or exactly what folks want to see when they speak of transparency. Unless you believe names were selected rather than drawn what would is the there to see. Is the question, ?how many bought a chance?? Are folks worried about the odds? What? I guess if sportsmen wouldn't buy a chance if the odds were too high that would make some sense as to why people want to see the odds? Maybe odds have nothing to do with why they are asking to see more transparency at SFW. Maybe it's some other principal they are wrestling with. Wouldn?t those answers be just a available at throught the DNR/DWR. The agencies control the expo tags. Do people actually believe that the DNR/DWR are in some kind of collusion with SFW? We have an Attorney General that answers those kinds of concerns.
I get asked to purchase raffle tickets for hunts in Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, etc almost every year. I've never even heard anyone ever asking what the odds are on those draws. What is the difference? It just makes me believe that folks sucking a bruise because SFW has taken a position on an issue they disagree with and forever afterward they want to harass and frustrate Don Peay personally. Is that what this is about?
I have never considered buying a chance at the expo as a real chance to draw a tag. I've always considered it small donation. I want to help a little with the fund raising effort. I can't donate thousands for a tag so I do what little I can by buying a $100 worth of raffle tickets. I have never expecting to draw a tag. Sure I hope too but, really..........
Yes Brine, I did draw an expo tag this year. For some reason you seem ti want to infer that because I support SFW I was selected rather than drawn. We had this conversation in your kitchen before this post was ever started. Fact is, you never posted until you saw that I posted, recommending boardfork join SFW. It makes me wonder if you were attempting to discredit my comments or suggest others view my opinion with a jaded eye. I know you suspect there is something wrong, I do not. Don Peay owes me nothing, what could I possibly do for him that would cause him to risk his entire organization on me, or any other person. I have no money, I have zero polictical influence, all I have is a big mouth and I've used it on him as often as not. I guess you think he selected the lady from Glenwood that drew the antelop tag too. Tell me, did the DWR select rather than draw our names fairly when you, Kay and I drew the Paunseguent tags in 1994? Was that fixed too? If it was, you too were in on the fix.
Of course, everything is a conspiracy, right? Elvis is alive, the U.S. flew those planes in to the world trade center and killed all those people, they've never been to the moon, the earth is flat, and what else, Don Peay selects the expo tags. Give me a break. I don't think it's funny that you would infer that on a public post, just to be contrary. Your a good friend and I think the world of you and your family so don't get offended now, you said what you did, so I get to respond, that how this works I guess.
boardfork, I would offer this final observation and so far as I'm concerned, I do mean final, if SFW and Don Peay fold up their tent and go home, you better be ready to pucker up and kiss?er good-bye because there is no other organization that will fight the fight they are giving us for $20 a year. If you want to win some fights for hunting and fishing, join SFW. If you want to join some great groups that love wildlife, fishing and hunting, there are truly a lot to choose from. Join a half dozen or them, seriously, $15 to $20 for membership and you get a nice magazine, sometimes get invited to a fun banquet (you pay extra for that of course, same with SFW). You get to meet some great people with common interests that love wildlife but if you want to belong to a group that's got the gloves off (old hockey term that just came out) and ready to rumble join SFW along with any others you join. I did, no regrets.
Respectfully,
DC
