Utah Conservation Permit $$$$$

Founder

Founder

Founder Since 1999
Messages
11,473
Many ask where the dollars raised by conservation permits and the organizations go. I am on the SFW board, so I am a little familiar with where SFW dollars go.
Examples:

1 - Just got this info. today. The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver, Colorado upheld All Aspects of Utah?s Proposition 5. We helped pay for the lawyers to keep prop. 5 from being overturned by anti-hunters. SFW dollars.

2 - 55 Bighorns transplanted on Stansbury Mts. Conservation permit dollars.
http://www.sfwsfh.org/currentevents/site.pl?page=12506

3 - Wolf and Grizzly De-listing. Lawyers and lobby money is needed to encourage lawmakers to make this happen. SFW dollars.

4 - Sage Grouse, Predators, Habitat Study. SFW donated $10,000 to this study. SFW dollars.
http://www.sfwsfh.org/currentevents/site.pl?page=11006

5 - 400 Antelope Transplanted - Removed from Park Mtn. and moved to other areas. Conservation permit dollars.
http://www.sfwsfh.org/currentevents/site.pl?page=120605

6 - MASSIVE 150,000 acre elk/deer habitat and restoration effort in Utah. Conservation permit dollars pay for this.
http://www.sfwsfh.org/currentevents/site.pl?page=112705

7 - Huntsman Appoints Avid Sportsmen to Wildlife Board. Sportsmen helped put Gov. Huntsman in office. SFW and SFW members had a great deal to do with this.
http://www.sfwsfh.org/currentevents/site.pl?page=82405

8 - Private Meeting With VP Cheney Great for Sportsmen. Powerful people can make a difference in habitat, etc.
http://www.sfwsfh.org/currentevents/site.pl?page=81605

9 - 125,000 Acres, $8.1 Million in Utah. Conservation permit dollars buys land.
http://www.sfwsfh.org/currentevents/site.pl?page=70705

I could probably go on and on, but some of you will continue to ask, "Where does the money go?" Go the the SFW website and look through the Current Events, News, etc. and you can read about some of where SFW dollars and Conservation permit dollars go. Don't expect someone else to come on these forums and answer every little question. Except some of the burden and research it a bit.
The MDF and SFW magazines always have articles talking about WHERE THE MONEY GOES.

As far as SFW, a good portion of the money we raise goes into politics. That's what SFW does. We contract Don Peay as our lobbyist. He's good. He has friends who donate millions of dollars. He has well-known friends who make appearances, sign basketballs, etc. and expect nothing but better quality hunting in return. Don deals with the political power in the country who work on helping us get wolves delisted, who help to get the BLM in gear to get habitat back into shape for our deer and elk herds.

I'm not as familiar with SFW-Idaho, SFW-Wyoming, or SFW-New Mexico, but they all do the same. Nate Helm in Idaho is making a huge difference up there. Bob Wharff is kicking butt in Wyoming.

In summary, SFW membership dollars go partly into paying for a few projects each year, land purchase, habitat studies, transplants, etc. And, part of the money goes into paying for the political side.

I hope this answers a few questions. If you have more questions, visit the websites of these organizations, read their publications and base your opinion on information YOU gather yourself.

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
 
Brian,

THanks for posting the information. THe one question I have...the 125,000 acres of land that was purchased...is that land open for public hunters to hunt on, or is it closed off to public access???

SCOTT
 
Thanks for bringing these projects to light, I was aware of the bighorn transplants in the Stansburg Mtns and of the antelope transfer from Park mnt. but not the rest.

You awnsered anouther question about how much money went to political Lobbying and that sort of dealings.

Nate
 
LAST EDITED ON May-18-06 AT 01:08PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON May-18-06 AT 01:00?PM (MST)

LAST EDITED ON May-18-06 AT 12:57?PM (MST)

Thanks Brian,

And SFW does good in some ways and other ways I feel it is wrong. I feel and many others feel that with the amount of money these tags raise the money goes elsewhere. Now there are projects here in Utah that have benifited us but for the most part it hasn't. I have a hard time swallowing down the millions of dollars that is raised off Utah and the lack of return we get. Call it selfish what have you, but there are other ways that SFW can raise money without these tags, or if they do get the tags that all money raised off Utah tags goes right back on the ground to Utah.

The politicains don't need money or kick backs. They get a paycheck, they have their campaigns to raise money which does not need to come from a foundation that takes from the poor and gives to the rich. I do feel that they can use and are welcome to sell tags but why the amount that is given now? If it is so important to have these tags numbers to raise the money then why don't they get their politicians in different state to pass a law to allow them more tags to auction off???? Why does it all have to come from Utah?

One last thing, In all of those post you hyperlinked, not one of them tells the total amount for the project that SFW donated. In one of them it talkes about Huntsmans donated 2 million and then feds donated 6 million for scrub clean up.I went through every one of those and it does not give a total amount of direct funds coming from SFW. Why is that? Also if you don't mind can you give me a total amount that was raised off of tags last year? And total from banquets and then how much was really spent on SFW donating money to wildlife.???
 
Scott,

I don't know exactly what the status of the land is. I'm not sure exactly, but I believe it can be hunted, but any roads into it are closed in an effort to keep the game from being run around during the winter. It is winter range.
Byron Bateman can answer that and anyone is welcome to call him and ask. His number is on the SFW website.

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
 
This has been said before, 90% of conservation tag money goes back to the F&G, but goes into a special fund that is to be used ONLY for habitat improvements, etc. to benefit the wildlife. It is not used to hire more people, buy new trucks, or pay to take care of colorful song birds. This money goes into huntable game.

The other 10% goes to the group who sales the tags. Utah conservation tags sale for incredible amounts, they do because of the marketing. Do you really think Utah has a better Gov. tag than Arizona or Colorado? Yet, the marketing helps to generate just as much money as the tags in those states.

In addition, the 10% allows the organizations to spend some of the money on projects they want, that don't have to go through the process.

Some say, why not let the state take care of all of it. Well, if you want the conservation money spent on new freeways, colorful song birds, etc. then you would get it. The conservation groups are who help keep the F&G spending money on our huntable game. You eliminate SFW, MDF, etc., then I believe you will see things return to where they were 10 years ago when NO MONEY was spent on improving hunting.
Conservation groups keep our F&G and state in check and focused on what sportsmen want in this state.

As far as politicians not needing kickbacks, you're probably right. They don't need it, but THEY GET IT. If not from us, then from the other side---anti hunters. And believe me, they have money to throw at politicians. It's pretty common knowledge that lobbying is how things work on capital hill, LIKE IT OR NOT.

Why so many conservation tags? I don't know. I guess because the general public and members of these groups have never stood up and said, "Enough is enough". If you think there are too many, get them cut back.
I agree there seems to be quite a lot of them and they do seem to be a sore subject, atleast from my chair.

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
 
LAST EDITED ON May-18-06 AT 01:17PM (MST)[p]I do believe that cutting the tag numbers is what most people are wanting right now and is the main purpose of alot of topics on the forum. The problem is that when we go to take a stand on what we want at the RAC's we get shut down. When you have rac's and boards filled with those nominatied from your orginization then they are going to favor what is in the good of their foundation.

I do support these tags to a certain extent but not to the amount that we have. Their are other ways for you to raise money for wildlife. This is just a big crutch you use to get people to the banquets. Is it wrong? Probably but we allowed it at first and now that we are trying to put an end to it we just get met with a back hand across the face
 
WHS - Why are you asking me to get you all this info. I've spent an hour providing what I can. Call the accountant for SFW or MDF and request this stuff.
I don't have the time to do it for you. I provided what I can. Spend a little time of your own reading through all the past issues of SFW's magazine, the website, call the SFW account, whatever----but do your own investigation if that's what you want. Don't expect someone else to do it all for you.

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
 
Thank you for posting this information.

I read the links and the website and still cannot see if the conservation permit money was used or not. I am not calling you a liar. The articles just don't say anything specific about how much the organization spent.

These groups need to show where the money is going. A statement of fact showing where the percentage of all the money raised goes would really help them sell themselves.

I trully believe these groups are looking out for wildlife and hunters it just bothers me that you cannot find out what the percentage going to wildlife is compared to lobbing, overhead etc.
 
I have searched all over SFW website for this info. I can go to RMEF and find it, I can go to the MDF and find it. I have searched all over and can not find it. So with you being a part of SFW I just figured you would have these number's. I am in the military and I get a monthly, yearly and quartly report of all we spent, recieved and have left over. This info goes out to everyone in the dept. Other compaines I have worked for have shared this info with us foreman's. Just figured that the office would share all this great and exciting info off all the money they raised with 1- with the public 2- Chapter officers
 
I believe that for the most part those in charge of making Utah?s wildlife decisions have their hearts in the right place, but I also believe there is a lot of justification for what's going on right now in the state.

That being said I know a lot of these guys and would gladly share my hunting camp with them.

There is money being put on the ground here in Utah. I believe the majority of it is on projects that the average Utah hunter will never enjoy, but it's going on the ground for wildlife nonetheless.

One of the main problems with the whole deal in Utah right now is the lack of OPEN communication and education on what is really taking place.

I don't think there would be a fraction of the bitterness towards all of the conservation tags if the majority of Utah?s hunters felt that it was doing what it was meant to do.

I think we all understand that it may take many years to see the fruits of current conservation projects. Habitat improvement projects take time, and it may be 10 years from now before we see the benefit of them.

Personally my main frustration is the quality of hunting in states that don't have all of the conservation tags, and supposed conservation dollars going on the ground. Plain and simple the general season hunting is likely better in those states.

I think a lot of us feel that we're paying conservation groups for their services with our public tags and the product sucks for the majority of us.

I think we'd be happy to ?show the money? if we were shown the results. Perhaps 10 years down the road Utah will be the envy of the nation for the AVERAGE HUNTER, and I'm mainly speaking on deer.

Money raised from the selling of Utah?s conservation tags should stay in Utah, just as Arizona?s, Nevada?s, and on down the line should stay in that state.

Hypothetically, what would happen in if there were no conservation tags???
 
Again, you would need to call the SFW account.

I don't know for sure, but would guess that with SFW, much of what is raised at banquets goes towards paying the employees, lobbyist, magazine, overhead, etc.
Most, or a little more than, the 10% from conservation tags goes into projects, land ppurchases, etc.

SFW is a group that differs from the other groups. Its focus is in the political arena.

The SFW board, including myself, VOLUNTEER and more than anyone, would not allow the organization to fleece its members or us.

Some have suggested that Don Peay controls how we think. I can promise that's not the case with me or any of the other folks. Don is quite smart and informed, so his opinion is always valued, but the board does not always agree with his opinion.

Just like with myself (SFW webmaster) and the magazine publisher, the SFW board can discontinue Don's contract as our lobbyist. He is contracted by SFW and has done a very good job. I can't imagine that we could find a lobbyist who could do better for sportsmen.

The bottomline, even if 100% of what SFW raises goes to lobby efforts, that is fine with me. That is what the organization is. Read the SFW home page. Though SFW does fund research, purchase land, and other on the ground projects, that's NOT what the organizations focus is. The primary focus is to work at a higher level, within the government to make changes that are bigger than just installing a guzzler or throwing some brush into the ground. SFW works to get money from the federal government pointed towards huge projects that benefit sportsmen.

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
 
LAST EDITED ON May-18-06 AT 03:27PM (MST)[p]People just like to b!tch about stuff sometime it just best to let them get it off their chest. I know most of the Deer and Elk groups that are trying to get project's done in Utah AZ, ID CAN'T get enough people to help,Labor or in materials, So next time some-one ask if you can help out one of these project please do,Step up to the plate just don't talk about what or where just do a project or 2. Some spend big money to buy a(1) tag what that money does is make all the other moneies go farther, just like your time on a project can make it all go farther the more of us that help with free labor or materials the better the areas will be for the wildlife.
 
LAST EDITED ON May-18-06 AT 04:29PM (MST)[p]Brian,

I welcome our conversation that we are having. I am glad that you cleared up the mission statment of SFW now. Cause on the website it says.


SFW Mission

Sportsmen for Fish & Wildlife and Sportsmen for Habitat, Inc. were organized to promote the protection and enhancement of wildlife habitat, the quality of wildlife management programs, and protect America?s family heritage of hunting and fishing.

I agree with you that some money needs to be used for political reasons. But there is alot and I mean alot of money that SFW raises that can be used else where for the bettering of the herds. With the 109 tags that you get there is alot of money that should be used here on the ground.I have no hate for what you do, I respect that, I have been on chapter boards and its hard. It just makes me the upset when we try to change these things and get slapped in the face.

Ray
 
WHS - When you say; "alot of money that SFW raises that can be used else where for the bettering of the herds."

I disagree, I believe, as does the rest of the SFW board, that SFW spends money correctly.

I believe that between all the conservation tag sells, it totals around $2.5 million. That means $2.25 million goes into the fund for wildlife projects. $250,000 total goes to the organizations who market the tags--MDF, SFW, NWTF, RMEF, etc.

By the time you split up the 10% or roughly $250,000 each year that the groups get between all of them, SFW really doesn't get that much. If we get $100,000 out of that, it really doesn't go that far. Instead of taking that $100k and buying a bunch of bushes, we use that money to get more money from the federal government. That's what SFW does.

It takes a LOT of money to do anything these days. I believe SFW spent $50,000 to keep the coyote control plane in the air this past winter.

SFW also gets LOTS of donation dollars from private citizens who believe in what we are doing. That money didn't come out of your pocket, mine, or conservation permits, but we ALL will hopefully someday enjoy what it buys us.

All we can hope for, as far as deer are concerned, is that what we're dong now has a positive effect in years to come.

The Utah deer herd is a tough issue to tackle. Prism compares our herd to Colorado. That's unfair. Colorado has FAR more habitat and twice as many deer. Utah will never have that many deer again. Too many people, too many recreationalists, too much development, and too many people wanting to hunt.
All that we can hope for is to increase our herd a little (25% or so), and have just a few more bucks surviving.

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
 
Gator,

Your right! Let them "#####" too get it off their chest.

Now that is done, Please everyone GET INVOLVED.

Your help is needed. Man hours is one of the biggest issues. I have said already, there are lots of things out there to do, there is even money for some of them. What has been lacking is manpower.

The Conservation Tag Money is a good thing. There are some issues about accounting for it, but the money is still there.

Brian stated SFW has a different idea on how to manage its money for bigger results. Thats okay, I do not always agree with that idea but without the efforts of what SFW does, I think the state would have been overlooked on different funding issues from the Feds.

There are other groups out that have sold Conservation Tags for good money. I would suggest that everyone, me included, contact Tony Abbott with the MDF and suggest some use of the Tag Money. (If you do not like the MDF call someone else) Remember they do have a process to go through to spend the money, but if we come up with some good ideas, I know Tony would support them.

The issue of too many tags, poor accounting, not being used properly, are valid concerns. I am sure there are even more if we want to list them all. I'm glad to see that people are concerned about that stuff. However, there has been a lot of cash raised in the last two years from the sale of the tags. Lets get a project that the majority of the public can get behind and push for it, before all the moeny is spent and we do not have a say.

GET INVOLVED with planning a project!!
 
The most frustrating part about this whole discusion is that Brian has to explain everything. Their web master shouldn't be having to explain what they are about. The SFW should do a better job of getting information out to people. When there is a information void, it will be filled with rumor and speculation. Get the information out and rumor and speculation will go away.

SFW should state specifically what they are doing. vague statements about being involved, organizing etc. do not say much and it makes the org. look like they are taking credit where it may not be theirs to take. The information needs to be specific.

People see tags being taken away and not seeing the return. People close to SFW may well see the return but, that does the organization no good. From where I sit the specific information isn't getting out past the SFW inner circle.
 
I am not going to ramble too much because I already have an opinion about SFW. I hope it changes. I think the volunteers do a lot. I won't comment on the other paid employees until I do a little more research.

But I will say this: Minus the "paid" employees of SFW I am sure members and non members agree there is too many conservation tags. As far as I know Utah awards more of them than all the other states combined.

I did find some info. on their site that does list where some of the money goes. This kind of info. definately helps their image.

http://www.sfwsfh.org/news/site.pl?page=projectfunding71504
 
If you really want to know what is going on then go to the meetings! SFW is a 501(c)3 and c(4) organization. Thier financial records are public, they must submit a tax report every year just like IBM and president Bush. At every meeting they will have a tresurers report, you can request a copy at the meeting.
 
I'm not just talking about Colorado. I've been lucky enough the last few years to hunt deer in not only Colorado but Nevada, Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana. Plain and simple the mule deer hunting is better than what we have around Heber City by a long shot and most of the general areas in the state.

It's not just about Colorado's habitat. We know that because for the most part Colorado was sucking hiney not long ago when it came to muleys. They saw the writing on the wall and made some drastic changes with how they distributed hunters and walla-BIG BUCKS.

Utah's general deer herd and deer hunt does not seem to be a priority to the DWR, the MDF, or SFW. That's just the way I see it.

Last I checked there were way more average joe deer hunters in Utah than sheep, turkey, and trophy elk hunters. Trouble is most of them are making under $100k a year and don't have much influence when it comes to the DWR or the "Big 5."

There is no longer strength in numbers unless you're talking about numbers of DOLLARS!

How many of you on here would rather have a general season southern Utah deer tag than say a G or K tag, Idaho, Montana, Nevada 10, Colorado 62????? I'm just using those because they're about as difficult to draw as a southern Utah deer tag, some are easier OTC and have leftover tags.

We have the habitat, we have the genetics, what we don't have is the management!

As far as the $%%@% and moaning, thank goodness we can do that. Can you imagine what this country would be like if we couldn't, wouldn't, and didn't?

And as far as saying this isn't the place to do it. Hog wash! Where else can you say your piece to potentially thousands of individuals including those that make the decisions???

As far as projects go maybe we should have a project board on here so guys can see what's going on. I know the DWR website has dedicated hunter projects, but I'm willing to bet projects would get more visibility on here.

Better yet why don't we get a monster muleys project going somewhere in each region on general season public lands, get our hands dirty and put to use some of the $$$?

As far as open books I'd like to know if there is ANYONE on this site that has seen them when they've asked for them?
 
Prism-

Very good points. I agree totally that it's not just Colorado. I hunt states all around Utah and think Utah missed the boat on Deer a long time ago and have little in the plans to change.

Regarding one of the "Big 5" and the lack of caring for deer was when I attended the Ogden MDF banquet and heard ALL about Elk. Opened my eyes in a hurry. I asked MDF about it on this very board and I was told Elk is a "hot topic". Sure it is, but I was at a MDF banquet for hell's sake!

My biggest worry is the future of hunting in Utah and how all of these things add up to a bleak future. The trend appears to let Deer be the stomped on species. Let everyone beat them up, don't kill them all, but let everyone blast em'. Make Elk and rich tags a priority. Let everyone hunt Elk once in their lifetime.

While this happens... what are we doing? Leaving the state. I'm hoping to be in Wyoming and New Mexico this year. My buddies will be in Idaho, Colorado and also Wyoming. Since Utah is off their rocker at left the age at 14, I'll be taking my 12 yr old son out of state. He will experience his first hunt on foreign soil. Where will he go when he gets older? Why would he stay in Utah? The prices of tags are skyrocketing. A LE RESIDENT elk tag in Utah is more expensive for him than a Non Res YOUTH tag!!! What do Youth pay in Utah?! $60/$280! Are you kidding me!?!?

I'd like to see these Orgs/DWR worry about Deer more, work on providing our Youth more opportunities and build this state back up. I'd like to spend my hard earned money in Utah, but quite frankly, our product isn't worth it.

Other states around us seem to be doing fine, why can't Utah grasp this? or catch on?
 
P.S. I think these Orgs mean well and have a place in the system. I just think:

- We could cut the Cons. tags back a bit

- Orgs needs need to change the perception people have about them. They brag about "marketing" these big tags as a skill, yet can't barely tell us what's going on or convince their members much is going on or we hardly know of anything?!
 
Hey guy's,

I believe the RAC's start up again this next week. One of the main topics this round is CONSERVATION TAGS! I have been in contact with almost all the members on this very topic. I am in favor of the concept but totally against the numbers that are given. When I voice my oppinion to them the feed back is simple. They say no one has said a word about it at the meetings. So, How about we ALL go to the RAC's and let them know our thoughts on the issue. We can *%#@%^ and moan all we want but until we let the right people know nothing will change. It is time these tags are cut in half and have a hard cap put on them. Obviuosly this is my oppinion and each of you are entitled to your own as well. Have a great day guy's.

Chad
 
I'm hoping to make the one in Springville.

Some great posts and ideas. I hope this thread doesn't get nuked as well!
 
Someone said SFW is a charity and that they have to open their books. That is wrong. SFW is a for profit organization, thus they do not have to open their books. SFH is a 5013cbxyz that handles the charity side of things.

I appreciate that Founder has posted the above items. Excluding the 10% for overhead, the Conservation Tag monies should be used only for habitat in Utah. So how do the following items figure into the Conservation Tag monies?

1- Prop 5.
2 - 55 Bighorns transplanted on Stansbury Mts. Conservation permit dollars.
http://www.sfwsfh.org/currentevents/site.pl?page=12506
3 - Wolf and Grizzly De-listing. Lawyers and lobby money is needed to encourage lawmakers to make this happen. SFW dollars.
5 - 400 Antelope Transplanted - Removed from Park Mtn. and moved to other areas. Conservation permit dollars.
http://www.sfwsfh.org/currentevents/site.pl?page=120605
7 - Huntsman Appoints Avid Sportsmen to Wildlife Board. Sportsmen helped put Gov. Huntsman in office. SFW and SFW members had a great deal to do with this.
http://www.sfwsfh.org/currentevents/site.pl?page=82405

These items, while a worthy cause, have nothing to do with "Habitat". Habitat is why we have the tags, right.?.

Then the following is a interesting:
8 - Private Meeting With VP Cheney Great for Sportsmen. Powerful people can make a difference in habitat, etc.
http://www.sfwsfh.org/currentevents/site.pl?page=81605
I can understand trying to receive gov't funding to aid with habitat restoration, but how much are we paying the Lobbiest? Is the Lobbiest some how tied into the groups who wrote the New Rule concerning Utah's Conservation Tags??

Just some interesting food for thought.

Only 2 more RACs to go... Northern and Central.
 
I would definitely recommend that those who would like to see conservation tags cut, rally together and show up at ALL the RAC meetings. Pack the house and make sure everyone voices their opinion. That's the way you'll get it changed.

I can assure you, there are folks at the highest levels of the DWR who view this site. I know for a fact. HOWEVER, if you want your voice heard, you will probably need to voice it in person to the RAC's and Wildlife Board.

Has anyone been to a RAC meeting yet? Have you yet to see a packed house of sportsmen opposing Conservation Tags?

Also, I'm the SFW committee chair in Salt Lake and on the SFW Board, however, I have yet to receive one call from a member saying that he/she would like to see conservation tags cut.
When I get no calls, I take it that the members are OK with things as they are.
I won't simply except an opinion in this forum. If it really means that much to someone, they will make the effort to call. That's probably how the DWR feels about these issues also.

PACKOUT - I believe the 10% that the groups get can be used for whatever they want. If they use it to pay salaries, that is OK by rule.
The 90% that the state gets is earmarked for things that benefit Utah huntable wildlife. Habitat, whatever. SFW-Utah does spend all of ther 10% here in Utah. Other groups may not, I don't know.

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
 
PRISM - I'd like to know where in Nevada, Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana, (that are open areas and easy to get a tag) that have that much better deer hunting than Utah?

Nevada is next to impossible even for residents to get tags. Idaho's general areas are no better than Utah. Wyoming's region G and H might be a little better, but most of the state is like Utah. Montana's general season areas aren't that great either.

You need to compare apples to apples. When you compare Nevada's unit 10 and Colorado's unit 62, you need to be comparing them to Utah's Paunsaugunt, which still produces as good of bucks as CO's 62 and NV's 10.

You're comparing Utah's southern region to areas that are highly limited, that's just not fair.

Utah would need to drastically cut tags to turn the entire state into a premium hunt unit like CO's 62. That will not happen, nor should it. Not every hunter is after a huge buck. The VAST MAJORITY don't care that much, they just want to go hunting. I would hope that SFW would never try to turn the entire state into a highly limited hunting unit inwhich people only get to enjoy every 5 years.

You have had a taste of great hunting in Colorado and Wyoming the past couple years, but in highly limited areas. You've done well in Colorado and Wyoming, but did your deer come from public land areas that are as easy to draw, as most of Utah is?

My point is that the only way Utah can better its deer herd is;
1 - Cut tags
2 - Grow the deer herd
Option 1 means people don't get to hunt as they always have. Most people are not willing to give up their annual family hunting trip so that a few of us trophy hunters can have big bucks to chase.
Option 2 takes time, LOTS OF TIME, and is the option that the DWR, SFW, MDF and others are taking right now.

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
 
I'm suppose to be heading out to Wyo. this early morning but that trip has been falling apart all week... so I might just as well post on this topic before I leave....

First and foremost, Brian, the following has nothing to do with you as a person, parent, fellow hunter or anything along those line..... Your a stand-up guy and there is very little doubt in my mind that ALL the SFW BOD members are the same.

The whole 90/10 gig isn't really that true or accurate, it is more like 30% is going on the ground, 60% is set-aside for future--approved DWR/Conservation Org.s wildlife projects and 10% to the Con.-Org.s for whatever...

If and when that 60% is used/spent/done has no timeframe to it.

These Conservation tags are taken from the public and given to Con.-Org.s. The money raised via these public tags is OUR money and WE have the right to a better Accountability of how this money is spent.

These Con.-Org.s are in a sense the middle man for getting wildlife habitat projects done for the public not the other way around.....

I could care less if there are salerie's and some compensation for expenses. To do and to travel and to set-up all the projects is a full time job with most probably a never ending cycle of start to finish and start again.... mind boggling at best. BUT, I think that as this is Public moneys raised via the Con.-Org's WE have the right to know these saleries and expenses that are rightfully paid.

Don Peay has on of the most gifted minds of anyone I have ever watched or chatted with. He could be the CEO of any top 50 corporation. And yes, I still am a little 'hot' about him typing his 'Suddenly Susan' post in a prior 'debate' thread but I don't think the premise of these Conservation Tags was established so he could take the money from SFH non-profit/tax deductible side of the house for SFW and turn the public's money into his own SFW business. Doing political contributions is not very fair with all the folks having mabye different political logic or political party desires.

I personally feel the public is having a very hard time with all the doom and gloom logic that comes across from these Con.-Org.s that without them and all these conservation tags we would be in worse shape than we are now.......

Yes, every state around us is different and has different rules, draw units and so forth, but many of us, all you reading this include, certainly dump alot of our money going to Idaho or Wyo or Colo. to hunt becasue of the way our state has turned into a 'bid for a tag' or wait forever to draw one....... mentality.

Sorry but I gotta roll out a here...

Please don't take anything personal out of this, it is about the Con.-Org.s not any one person....

Robb
 
Brian,

C'mon now I tried to compare areas that were about as difficult for a nonresident to draw as a southern Utah deer tag.

For the most part it's close to apples to apples.

You know the draw odds in the areas listed, they aren't really that tough to draw. There's no way those areas can be compared to the Paunsaugunt when it comes to draw odds or limited number of hunters.

We both know there are leftover tag areas in Colorado with deer herds that rival some of Utah's best LE units.

You know the Colorado bucks were taken on public, all but 2 Wyoming bucks, Idaho all public, and Nevada all public, I've taken deer on public and private in Montana, and I've spent pretty much a whole lifetime of hunting public land in Northern Utah with the exception of the last few years.

I really appreciate all of the work that you and others have done for Utah's wildlife, and especially for providing an avenue for guys to discuss these things.

One does have to wonder if some the reason the groups want the tags to be set for the next 3 years is because they recognize the growing unhappiness about them and they want to have it secured?

I think I'll give this whole deal a rest for a day or two. I'll try to make the RAC in Springville say my 2 cents, and call it good.

You wont hear anymore from me on the subject (atleast for a week or two);)

Hunting season can't get here soon enough!:)
 
Prism hit the nail on the head in regards to why the groups want a three year deal. Though I am from AZ I have watched the growing concern in UT over the conservation tags. I am sure they see that eventually UT sportsmen will band together and stand up! You better do it now!

Packout, SFH is a 501c3 and SFW is a 501c4. With a c3 organization all contributions are tax deductable and only a small portion of the groups income can be used for political purposes (10% I believe.) A c4 organization is still "not for profit" but any contributions made to a c4 are not tax deductable. A c4 group can spend any amount they want on political causes. That is why the NRA started the "Friends of the NRA", so they could take advantage of the tax deductions and spend money on firearms education. SFW is not a privately held company nor a publicly traded company. I am not an expert but I believe I am correct.
 
I could care less what sfw posts or announces in there magazine or website. No matter what it is it will always be a biased opinion. It is to easy for them to toot their own horn. Show me what the external auditor's report has to say and where they say the money is going. I have not been able to find this info anywhere and I have spent some time now looking for filings with the sec, dwr, or anywhere for that matter. Someone in my opinion has to be accountable. As for me when I think of this topic or thread the term "whistleblower" comes to mind. Big Business is what are great sport has turned into and this seems a little scandalous to me.
I also think that all the talk about the 10% being used for marketing or some of it used for it is BS. Most of the people purchasing those tags are already clients of guides and outfitters in the state. I would say the outfitters and guides are footing that bill. I have never seen any marketing for those tags unless it was here on this site and that was word of mouth only. I always got the feel it was more of a hush hush type of thing.
As for me I have no disclaimer, I am just a resident concerned that something is not right on the Conservation tag #'s and the use of the money generated from these tags.
 
Brian, you no doubt have some valid points. I wouldn't want to be the organization to tell several thousand hunters they will not get to hunt every year.However, back in 1999 CO DWR didn't want to be the bad guy either. They new the deer herd was in bad shape and they did something about it, and now look where all of us trophy hunters are hunting. I'll be willing to bet all those guys that were cursing the CDOW for cutting tags state wide are the ones now praising the system. I think this habitat campaign that SFW is pursuing is Good.A very worthy cause, no doubt. Consequently, as you have said, it will not benifit deer for years too come. So what do we do in the mean time? Our only solution is to kill fewer deer and build habitat. I think too many people have the idea that if we go to smaller units that there will be no more oppurtunity to hunt every year. This may true of your favorite area, but as you know in CO there are plenty of oppurtunities in undersubscribed areas. If you want to hunt in CO, and you have O pref points there is always an undersubscribed area for you to hunt. I think it would be similar in Utah if we could follow a similar system. You can be assured that several hunters who have to sit out a year or two are going to be upset;that is until they draw a tag and have a quality hunt. If we manage for trophy quality, every one benifits because we end up having a good representation of all age classes of bucks. Take for example the arieal suevey the CDOW conducted in unit 65 (which is not really touted as being a trophy unit).There numbers are as follows, and are based on the number of bucks per 100 does: 10.3 yearling bucks 6.9 2 year olds bucks and 13.9 mature bucks. Now thats a bunch of bucks that would make any type of hunter happy. I guess whats frutrating is after all the DH projects, RAC meetings and countless hours spent on conservation projects we still have to sit back and watch our 97,000 hunters whittle away at an already dwindling deer herd. In 7-10 years when we see the fruition of many of these habitat projects I expect it will be a very small herd that will benifit from it. And we may even have some more drought years between now and than. Thats why in conjunction with habitat projects we need to manage specific herds ,and not a state wide herd (cut tags where needed, allow more tags were we can). I guess its just very difficult for me to understand why the DWR and other organizations can't see what is so clearly the solution.

Mike
 
LAST EDITED ON May-21-06 AT 12:27PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON May-21-06 AT 12:27?PM (MST)

I am a member of the Southern RAC and represent the sportsmen. Until I received the information from DWR for the May meeting, I too was undecided and skeptical on the validity of this controversial issue.

I, like others commenting on the ?Conservation Tags? did not have a clear picture of the process or the rules and regulations that apply to the groups who sell these tags. I will attempt to clear this up once and for all. Before I do, understand that in reading comments on this forum about this issue, I first check your profile, if you are not up front with your name, I did not read your comments, if you won't put your name on what you say; your comment has no value to me.

In the interest of time and my typing forever, I will not mention thing that are not of real importance in getting the message across. The rules for the conservation tags are many pages long and contain a lot of legal garble, tables and repetition.

This is for your information, do not expect me to reply to questions about what I am providing here, and instead, notify the appropriate organization in which you have a question. (DWR, SFW and so on.) Here we go?

To apply: The ?Conservation Organization? (SFW&H, MDF, RMEF etc.) must be a nonprofit chartered institution, foundation or association founded for the purpose of promoting wildlife conservation and must have tax exempt status under the Internal Revenue Code, Section 501C-3 as amended. This must be supported with documentation.

? They must submit the names of individuals responsible for the administrative operations of the conservation organization.

Number of tags: This is decided by the Wildlife Board on the following factors.
? The species population trend, size, and distribution to protect the long-term health of the population.
? The hunting and viewing opportunity of the general public, both short and long term.
? The potential revenue that will support protection and enhancement of the species.

There are new proposals this year that will be decided by the Wildlife Board at a later date, these include; Tags will be issued on a multi year basis (3yrs) for eligible Conservation Organization?s, only one (1) state wide tag (governor tag), no general hunt tags, no small game tags, and a 7 tag max on any given unit. This results in a cut in the total number of tags to 356 (includes sportsmen permits) for all species.

The Money: The permit revenue (money) payable to the DWR (90%) may NOT be used by the conservation organization operation as collateral or commingled in the same account with the organization?s operation and administration funds, this to insure that permit revenue (money) is not lost.

Failure to remit 30% of the total permit revenue to the DWR by Sept 1st of the year the tag was sold may result in criminal prosecution under Title 76, Chapter 6, Part 4 of the Utah Code, and may further disqualify the conservation organization from bidding on any future conservation permits.

10% of the revenue may be retained and used by the conservation organization for administrative expenses.

?Retained Revenue? means 60% of the revenue raised by the organization from the sale of the conservation permit (tag) which the organization retains for eligible projects, excluding interest earned thereon. Eligible projects include:
? Habitat improvement, habitat acquisition, transplants and other projects providing substantial benefit to the species of the wildlife (deer, elk etc.) for which the conservation permits are issued.
? Retained revenue may NOT be committed to or used on any eligible project without first obtaining DWR director?s written concurrence.
? Retained revenue may NOT be committed to or used on any eligible project that does not provide a substantial and direct benefit to the species located in Utah.
? Retained revenue may NOT be committed to or used on any eligible project that is inconsistent with Division policy, including feeding programs, depredation management, or predator control.
? Retained revenue may NOT be committed to or used by the conservation organization operation as collateral or commingled in the same account with the organization?s operation and administration funds, this to insure that permit revenue (money) is not lost.
? Retained revenue MUST be completely expended (spent) on or committed to eligible projects by Sept 1st two (2) years following the year in which the relevant conservation permit was awarded by the Wildlife Board. Failure to commit or expend all revenue by the deadline will disqualify the Conservation Organization from bidding on any future conservation permits until the unspent money is committed to an approved eligible project.
? All records and receipts for projects must be retained by the Conservation Organization for not less than five (5) years, and shall be produced to the division for inspection upon request.
? The DWR shall perform annual audits on all project expenditures and conservation permit accounts.

That is a brief account of the program.

If we were to drop this program it would take a $15.00 increase on each and every license sold in Utah to make up the revenue gained and used on wildlife. That total is $2.5 million. (2005)

For the record, at the southern RAC meeting there were four (4) people from the public that commented on this issue, they were; Bill Christenson (RMEF) Don Peay and Byron Bateman (SFW) and Tony Abbott (MDF). There was not even one person that commented in a negative way. The DWR had a great and informative presentation on this issue. The southern RAC voted unanimously in support of the program.

I am dedicated in my representation of sportsmen on the southern RAC and will listen to all comments. I am also committed to getting the deer herd back on public land and will not vote for any increase in the southern end of the state until satisfied that the herd is back in a healthy state, with numbers to support the number of hunters applying for tags. This includes the limited entry units.

I hope this helps and answers some of the questions,
Sam Carpenter
 
Sam,

Thanks for taking the time to do that.

I still don't agree with all of the tags, but I do appreciate the service that guys like you do for our state's wildlife.

Paul Kendall
 
Thanks Sam, I appreciate your time spent to share info on this topic. But along with prism I disagree with #'s of tags that are being used to fund so called conservation projects. Another problem I see is lack of public access to detailed information that the DWR requires the Conservation groups to maintain.

Example:
? All records and receipts for projects must be retained by the Conservation Organization for not less than five (5) years, and shall be produced to the division for inspection upon request.
? The DWR shall perform annual audits on all project expenditures and conservation permit accounts.

It would be nice for a detailed list of projects and which org. funded that project. I am not saying that we need to look at every last receipt but info than we are getting.
I don't have time to complain about all the things I see wrong. But I do know money makes people and Orgs for that matter act in a funny ways. The way I see it to many hands in the cookie jar. No, Maybe just to many cookies!!!
 
LAST EDITED ON May-21-06 AT 06:12PM (MST)[p]Sam,
I appreciate your passion and all you do for wildlife in Utah.

The rest of my post isn't directed toward anyone in particular.

Why is it that the New Rule is always talked as being an all or nothing proposal? Above is said it will cost $15 per license to make up for lost funds if the Conservation Tags are discontinued.

First, I don't see many who want to get rid of ALL the tags, rather cut them back to be inline with other states.

"If we were to drop this program it would take a $15.00 increase on each and every license sold in Utah to make up the revenue gained and used on wildlife. That total is $2.5 million. (2005)"

Second, lets do some quick math with a $15 increase:
approx 100,000 deer licenses x $15 = $1,500,000
approx 30,000+ elk licenses x $15 = $450,000
approx 130,000 fishing licenses x $15 = $1,950,000
approx 40,000 Combo licenses x $15 = $600,000

We already are at almost $4.5 million and we havn't included small game licenses, limited entry licenses, once in a lifetime licenses, furbearer, bear, swan, sandhill crane, anterless, etc. We needed to make up $2.5 million.

I sure hope that the RAC was not told "it would take a $15.00 increase on each and every license sold in Utah" because we can all see that is an extreme falsehood. Try a $5 increase on each and every license IF ALL Conservation Tags were discontinued. If we cut conservation tags by 50% then we would see less than $2 increase.

I don't mind that we have differing opinions, but I can't stand it when LIES and False information is spread to further one's points.

Now, if they are talking just fishing, combo, and small game licenses then they are still high on the $15 and it leads one to believe the increase would be on all priveledges purchased from the state.
 
The increase of $15.00 per license was in the presentation by DWR at the RAC meeting, my take was that they were referring to the license sales for the species included in the conservation program. So? if you want further clarification you will have to take it up with them.

I personally have witnessed the improvements these tags have provided and will continue to support them.

Remember this? the money these tags bring in will ultimately, through the constant improvements, and over time, increase the tag numbers for each species far beyond the number we have sacrificed to support the program. I certainly would not support any increases, and, if the public (sportsmen) wants cuts, they need to go to RAC meetings and voice their concerns.

I am of the opinion that Utah is leaps and bounds ahead of other states in getting wildlife back to a healthy state. Arizona has decimated their deer herd to the point of disgrace and Colorado, New Mexico and Wyoming have unlimited habitat to work with. Remember, we are running out of habitat with the growth factor state wide in Utah and we don't have the potential we once had.

You can pick this apart all you want, but it is working, but not without sacrifice.

Take the time to get in touch with DWR, get the documentation and look closely at the distribution and species involved. Get the all the facts on this program and the management thereof.

And Packout?You should put your name on your profile if you want me to consider your comments as valid and useful. Why hide?
 
>And Packout?You should put your name
>on your profile if you
>want me to consider your
>comments as valid and useful.
>Why hide?


How do you know any of the other "real names" in profiles here on MM or any other website are actually real? Heck you can pick out anyone of a bazillion names from a phone book complete with address but it doesnt make the account any more real.
 
Sam,
"And Packout?You should put your name on your profile if you want me to consider your comments as valid and useful. Why hide?"

Where did this come from? If you look at my post above you will see that I gave you credit for all that you have done. Then I said my the rest of my comments were not directed at anyone in particular.

I will send you an Email.

It was easy to pick apart the statement of a $15 increase "for each and every license". I don't care who said it, don't take offense at an item you did not state to the RAC. Rather take offense to the fact that it was presented Wrong, by whomever it was.

And it is good you are seeing projects in your area. Most of us do not see the progress inour areas. The Pauns has received a lot of attention, but it is an area that most Utahns will never hunt, while 30+ can hunt it every year. Putting that money on the ground is great, but what about the general deer herds.
 
Sam C
I am pretty sure your from Kanab and so I can see why you are so excited about all the improvements they are doing on the paunsguant.I have no problem with the tags personally as long as they keep the numbers low.I do have a problem with them spending large amounts on limited entry units where a guy will only get to hunt 1-2 times in his lifetime, or maybe not at all. The real issue here is the public land hunter has to sit back and watch the best tags in Utah sold off to the highest bidder while they hunt general season areas year after year that have very poor quality. I personally think that 80 percent of the revenue of these tags should go to improve general season public land deer areas, 15% percent should go to other species, and 5% to improve limited entry units.

Mike
 
LAST EDITED ON May-22-06 AT 06:19PM (MST)[p]Again rumors are going strong. The fact is... there have been 3 projects that any money has gone towards, 2 were pond liners and the other was a small tank, the labor was all dedicated hunters, LLOTP and the ADA whom also donated part of the money. I believe the total for all projects was in the neighborhood of $150K. So who ever are saying that there is a lot of money being dumped into the Pauns is no up to speed.

I agree that we need to work on public hunt land and I believe if you will do your home work you will find that that is exactly where most is going.

Here is some food for though: During the years 2002 thru 2004 the doe to faun ratio in southern Utah was below 30%. That is 3 fauns for every 10 does. Now how many were bucks ??? The bottom line is that there are very few bucks age class 3 to 5 years old coming into herd over the next 3 years (2006 thru 2008) meaning that only bucks age class 1 to 4 years old are going to be out there to hunt, that is, unless you find a big ole good one. So? it will be a while before we see much in the way of more mature bucks in the field.

The doe to faun ratio jumped to 80+% in 2005 and will put more bucks in the field, I hope 2006 will be as good. So if we let them grow we will again have mature bucks starting 2008 and beyond. Providing we don't get into another drought.

I am told that the rest of the state saw similar results in 2002 thru 2004, and, the better ratio in 2005. So don't look for much change in buck numbers for a year or two even if we don't harvest a high percentage during the hunts.

Have a little faith and support a group or project that will help the deer.
 
LAST EDITED ON May-22-06 AT 09:33PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON May-22-06 AT 09:01?PM (MST)

Sam,

I'm sorry, but you saying that other states have unlimited habitat is FUNNY STUFF!!! (I guess it's no wonder the other states don't need all of the conservation tags!!!);)

From what I've witnessed with my own two eyes I think Colorado is losing habitat just as fast if not faster than much of Utah.

Crap, everytime I go over there to scout or hunt there's a new development going in or golf course, and guess what the areas are still producing awesome hunting and huge bucks. Just look at what the heavily populated and over-developed Wasatch front can produce with limited harvest in the archery only section.

The same goes for about every WESTERN STATE.

I'm NOT saying that habitat isn't important, but to say that other states don't have problems just isn't true!

Geeze, and I thought I was done with this thread:)
 
While attending the Northeast region Rac DWR Director Jim Karpowitz stated that 3 audits had been completed on the conservation permit program within the last year. One from the Attorney Generals Office and I believe he said two internally. He also stated that this is one of the the most carefully watched programs within the DWR. In all the audits the program came out clean.

Like them or not one cannot dispute that this program has done some great things for wildlife within the state of Utah. Granted I am a little more privey to what has been accomplished because of my involvement with SFW. I agree 100% we and the DWR need to do a better job of informing the public on what has been accomplished with these funds.

Within the group I am associated with we cannot raise enough money to fund all of the projects that are brought to us by the BLM, Forest Service, DWR and our local chapters. The rule states the moneys have to be spent with in two years or the funds have to be returned to the DWR. Very little if any money is seldom carried over to the next year. There is simply to many projects to fund.

Alot of money has been spent on the Paunsaugunt,Henry Mtns and other limited entry units granted all of us will not get to hunt these units but at least thier are a lucky few that get to go on a hunt of a lifetime. To me it would'nt make sense not to protect and make these units continue to get better for the lucky hunter who gets to purse his or her dreams there.

General season units are no different than the limited entry units. In that I mean alot of conservation permit money has been pumped into these area's.
I had the priviledge of riding around with Krieg Rasmussen of the Fish Lake Natinal Forest. Krieg and Larry from the BLM are the men behind all of the treatments on the Monroe,Fish Lake, Boulder and others. It was impressive to see the numbers of Deer Elk and other wildlife using those treatments. The majority of these projects where completed with conservation permit money and they are on general season deer area's.
These arent the only area's, down I-15 above Holden and Filmore there are several Pinion & Cedar removal projects going on. I think I would be safe in saying there is not a region within the state that is not recieving conservation permit money to put into projects on public ground to benefit mule deer and the majority of them are on general units. Like I stated before we need to do a better job of informing the public on the projects that have been funded with these money's

The success of the Big Horn Sheep program as well as the Turkey program can be attributted all most 100% to these funds. Not to mention Mt Goat, Moose and Antelope transplants all made possible by this program.

One thing to consider is this. Several of the States around Utah have Guide and Outfitter Tags. Meaning those permits are set a side for only those people willing to hire a guide.Oregon, Nevada, New Mexico, Montana etc. Utah does not I dont know what the number of permits are in comparison to Utahs Coservation Permits but I would dare say it is close. My point is this these tags are still out of reach for most of us average joe's the major difference being the conservation permit program dumps alot of money back into the resource every year to benifit you and me. If you had to choose between the two programs which one is most benefical to all parties involved.


I doudt anything I could say will change the opinion of some who dont like this program.
Do I benefit from this program? Yes In several different ways. Yes I am a guide and several of my clients have purchased these permits. I am also a hired fundraiser for SFW.
But by far the most rewarding thing is to see the difference these funds can make and what has been accomplished so far. The next RAC meeting is tomarrow night we will see you there.

Troy Justensen
 
"Several of the states around Utah have guide and outfitter tags.Meaning those permits are set aside for only those people willing to hire a guide. Oregon ,Nevada, New Mexico, Montana, etc. Utah does not. I dont know what the number of permits are in comparison to Utah's conservation permits but I would dare say its close."

Its true what they say, you can spin anything . Utah has plenty of guide and outfitter tags, they just dont call them that. Please ad landowner and CWMU permits to the list of tags out of most of us average hunters reach. Add them all up please! I'm about beyond caring how much opportunity we lose each year in the name of people making money and Whatever that money is used for. Just please STOP telling us its for our own good. As far as opportunity for the average income hunter,It sure feels to me like were going backwards.
 
Fin little

I believe several of these others states also have Land Owner tags as well as set a side Guide & Outfitter permits. CWMU's are a totally different topic. And really have no coralation to Conservation Permits or Guide & Outfitter tags for the simply fact you are comparing Private Property to Public Property. I dont think it is the same thing.
Whether the CWMU program exsisted or not the property owner still dictates if he is going to allow hunters on his or her property.
With the other programs you are dealing almost exclussively with Public Lands.
No spin was intended merly a point of view.

Troy Justensen
 
One of the problems with these tags and the conservation groups is the fact that the organizations are the ones getting the tags and they don't clearly show where the money goes. They make broad non-specific statements about all they are doing and expect people to trust them. These groups make the saleing of these tags the cornerstone of the success of thier banquets. The tags and the banquets should should be seperate.

The concept of the tags is a good one but, it is clear that, if they are spending the money, nobody but the people in the groups is aware of the projects and where the money is going. That is a big problem for the general public who sees more tags being given out to these organizations benifit, and less opportunity for the general public.

The organizations should spend less time on getting more tags and more time on addressing the communication problem they have. If they did that, the tags would follow.
 
Troy,
Your logic and insight are a welcome part of the discussion.

It would be great if the public could see the audits, the list of actual expenses and a list of actual projects which are completed by the Conservation Tag Monies. A post above tells us that only a couple projects have been done on the Paunsaguant totaling around $150,000. Then I read in my Sportsman's Voice that SFW/SFH has put hundreds of thousands of dollars on the ground and have been involved in brush hoggs and dixie harrowing on the unit. Who can know what to believe.

It is also a poor rule that the groups can use the interest from the monies on items other than Utah's Wildlife. It was a poor decision to not have an "Unpaid" Rep on the committee which wrote the new rule. These items make many people nervous as to what is actually happening with the Conservation Tag issue. I know many people who feel the same way concerning the issue.
 
I seriously doubt anything typed or argued here is going to change anybody's opinion about whether they are going to support a wildlife organization or not.
I think there are many cheep basturds that wouldn't pay one red cent for whatever the cause. This group takes delight in finding fault & picking apart any & all the current organizations, since it only justifies there stingy predisposition.
By financially supporting whichever group, you are making a vote for their agenda over another one, easy choice, vote with your pocketbook. If you don't vote or attempt to organize another effort in order to advance your goals, then your opinion is about as worth while as teats on a bore pig.
Incidentally these caustic emotions & efforts better serve to divide & anger hunters against each other, rather than create a vehicle to achieve common objectives.
Even-though I appreciate your efforts Brian, sometimes I've got to wonder why you bother.
 
Troy the CWMU's IMO are directly related to your comment. The CWMU is private property but the deer are public property that often times spend different times of the season being hunted by the public. Every tag issued on a CWMU is one more unavaiable to the general public. I'm not saing its right or wrong im just saying it should be considered a tag beyond the means of the majority. Sorry about the spin comment. BFE IMO your post may be the most divisive on this thread. You assume that because someone disagrees with a position a conservation org. is taking on some issues that they are not members.
 
LAST EDITED ON May-23-06 AT 05:03PM (MST)[p]Sam,

I will agree that the money raised can and could help the herds. The problem is,millions of dollars can be raised by the DWR or these foundations by other means then giving out these tags.
1-An example of this is having all funds sent in with your hunt application. Putting that money in a CD would result in alot of money. I am willing to bet probably close to 4 times more a year would be raised then what is raised at these banquets.
2-The DWR could do its own auctions. Raising the money itself and keep all money raised. No paying 10% for foundations need.
3-If the foundations are so keen on giving back to the wildlife then they can raise money without these tags. I have said it before but Ducks Unlimited is a prime example for this. Alone in Utah DU raised $340,255 after expenses. Nationally DU raised $3,402,545. All this without high dollar tags.
4-Charge a fee to those that get CWMU tags. They currently have to give nothing back to the state for these tags. These animals that they kill are public and money from hunting public animals should go back to public resources. Forest service charges a fee for those that want to guide, why can't Utah charge the CWMU's a percent of the tag cost to give back to the DWR.

There are alot of ways to raise money without raising tag fees and without giving out all of these tags. These tags are not for us, its for those that are so set on giving themselves a pat on the back for their great back breaking effort that was put out. If these foundations were so willing to give back to to the herds then they would find other ways to raise their own money to give, not take from us and then give a percent back.

Also my name is included in my profile and incase you missed that its Ray Carter and I am from Payson.
 
Just think how much good the orgs could do with 20% of the tags! Ridiculous? Why? Any number is abritrary and if one justifies the loss of the public resource to the highest bidder based on good intentions, there's no logical nor obvious stopping point. It's already been made crystal clear that the money can be raised in other means that leave the vast majority of th tags in the pool and yet that hasn't happened. Why? Because it's not in the orgs interest and their interest sometimes runs with and other times COUNTER to the interest of Utah's citizen hunters.

The frog is being boiled Utah. Take a look at the water your siting in already.
 
LAST EDITED ON May-24-06 AT 08:59PM (MST)[p]I think the Conservation tags have their place to an extent. What worries me is the process. This has been brought up above regarding the "2 Options". They are forced to pick one of two, but most don't like either one. It's time to stand up and voice your opinion to those that matter. Your voice won't be heard on this website.

EDIT- Nothing bad at ALL towards MM/members, just meant not the ears of the DWR/RAC/Board, etc.

http://www.wildlife.utah.gov/public_meetings/wb-members.php
http://www.wildlife.utah.gov/public_meetings/rac_members.php

I think all we ask is a Rep. from the public and accountability. Why can't the rule be written by someone besides the "Big 5". Nothing against any of them, I think they have good intentions.

This does have conflict on interest written all over it and might not stand up in a court of law if really put to the test.

Voice your opinion to the Board and RAC members, not on deaf ears.

ODDNUT1
Kirt C.
Hunt Odds.com
 

Similar threads

hossblur
Where's all the conservation money?
Replies
10
Views
759
eelgrass
eelgrass
R
Utah draw Question?
Replies
16
Views
1k
JakeH
JakeH
E
Texas, Welcome to ALL the state of Utah
Replies
10
Views
984
elkfromabove
E

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

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

37356.jpeg
Bull_04b.jpg
The best view
163056AD-56FD-4CF9-96DF-DF11FE3A18FF.png
23067C58-4049-46B0-82EF-A4303A231957.jpeg
Rocky Mountain Ranches Elk
29FE5F2C-C9BF-47C1-A1DC-C7C1A9637E17.jpeg
IMG_4275.jpeg
Deep Forked Buck
E663EFE3-83CE-4696-B750-8D1A54F1FA41.jpeg
IMG_9627.jpeg
20231002_122428.jpg
Back
Top Bottom