10 pm tonight, Politics and Hunting

Sliverslinger400

Active Member
Messages
159
Just saw a billboard that Chanel 2 will be doing a show tonight 10 pm about "politics with hunting permits." I'm not sure which angle they will be taking but I'm interested to what side they will be taking.
 
I don't know what angle the reporter will be taking but I do know that he will be looking closely at the Expo Tag issue. It is about time that this issue got some media attention. Tune in tonight at 10 on KUTV Channel 2.

-Hawkeye-
 
He's got to have an interview with Peay. Right?

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
LIKE MonsterMuleys.com on Facebook!
 
So I take it they did not talk to you Hawkeye. I wonder why not if they didn't. Seems you have be up front in this fight and could give them the insight of what has been going on especially with the RFP process that happened. I hope they talked with Randy from RMEF. I really hope they ask the right questions but in my gut I keep wondering if they are not bought and paid for like others in this issue and will give SFW nothing but softball questions and let them slide. Will be interesting for sure.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-25-16 AT 09:44AM (MST)[p]curlycoyote-

I have heard that the KUTV reporter spoke with representatives from the respective groups, the DWR, and may have even interviewed sportsmen who were attending the Expo. Given the fact that I volunteered my time helping RMEF pursue the Expo Tag contract, I thought it would be better to have the reporters go directly to the sources, including RMEF. David Allen is best situated to speak on behalf of RMEF, and I did not want my personal comments and views to somehow be attributed to RMEF. Therefore, I did not provide any direct quotes to the reporter from KUTV or the Standard Examiner.

-Hawkeye-
 
>So I take it they did
>not talk to you Hawkeye.
> I wonder why not
>if they didn't. Seems
>you have be up front
>in this fight and could
>give them the insight of
>what has been going on
>especially with the RFP process
>that happened. I hope
>they talked with Randy from
>RMEF. I really hope
>they ask the right questions
>but in my gut I
>keep wondering if they are
>not bought and paid for
>like others in this issue
>and will give SFW nothing
>but softball questions and let
>them slide. Will be
>interesting for sure.
From the commercial they are running it sounds like they are gonna be tackling this head on.hopefully one way or another we get some insight
 
That makes sense. Again I hope they looked into everything including going to the RFP process and how that took place and the WB being mostly SFW guys and why the forth one did not excuse himself from the vote.
They sure are advertising that this will be on tonight. I seen them twice this morning say it was going to be on.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-25-16 AT 10:29AM (MST)[p]I sounds like they dug into the issues but it would be difficult to cover everything that has happened relating to these tags unless they did a 2-hour story. I will take whatever coverage we can get.

Let's see what they say.

-Hawkeye-
 
We would still request accountability and transparency with those monies that are raised from our public tags. The Standard Examiner article did not expose a hidden agenda but it highlighted the lack of transparency and accountability.

-Hawkeye-
 
Good luck! I would really prefer RMEF not have the permits, but I hate lying politics and those who use the system for their own gain. I hate to be a skeptic here, but you RMEF supporters are going to have this glossed over and it will be a little to do about nothing. Regardless of the reporter's outlook on the situation, the news manager will be required to sign off on the report. They do not want to ruffle DWR and never have.

Hope I'm wrong, but if I am right remember you heard it here first.

ps. I really do not object to the 200 permits going for a good cause, but a few extra permits here and there as the years go on and soon you are up to 201 then 221 then 500 - - then it will take a life time for all of us to draw the Bookcliffs and you will never see the Henry tag.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-25-16 AT 10:59AM (MST)[p]Cannonball-

I don't think the Expo Tag contract is going anywhere. Within the last week, the DWR signed a new 5-year contract with SFW, MDF and UFNAWS. That contract also includes a 5-year extension provision. Thus, the Expo Tags are likely locked up for the next decade. At this point, folks like me are trying to make sure the money generated from the application fees is used for actual conservation activities.

News stories like this won't fix the problem but it may help shine a light on it.

-Hawkeye-
 
"He's got to have an interview with Peay. Right?"

Or Peays wife. What I've seen in the past the $FW higher ups like to send their wives out to deal with pesky reporters.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-25-16 AT 11:38AM (MST)[p]Question. Do you feel that the monies off the expo permits should only be used for big game. There is upland game,turkeys, that have tags. Should or could some of the money's be used for say fish, or other Dwr projects?
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-25-16 AT 11:43AM (MST)[p]"Hidden agenda" Birdman, yea like 70 percent MORE to wildlife! Just think how many MORE people to downtown SLC.
 
>Good luck! I would really
>prefer RMEF not have the
>permits, but I hate lying
>politics and those who use
>the system for their own
>gain. I hate to
>be a skeptic here, but
>you RMEF supporters are going
>to have this glossed over
>and it will be a
>little to do about nothing.
> Regardless of the reporter's
>outlook on the situation, the
>news manager will be required
>to sign off on the
>report. They do not
>want to ruffle DWR and
>never have.
>
>Hope I'm wrong, but if I
>am right remember you heard
>it here first.
>
>ps. I really do not
>object to the 200 permits
>going for a good cause,
>but a few extra permits
>here and there as the
>years go on and soon
>you are up to 201
>then 221 then 500 -
>- then it will take
>a life time for all
>of us to draw the
>Bookcliffs and you will never
>see the Henry tag.
Don't affiliate everybody who hates what sfw has been doing as rmef members I am not. I just know wrong is wrong and sfw is wrong
 
Ken, was that question directed to me? If so, then I will take a shot at responding.

I would like to see the monies generated from the Expo Tags earmarked for actual conservation projects. We could have discussion about what that would look like but the simplest way to address that issue would be to impose similar requirements on the Expo Tag revenues that already exist for the Conservation Tag revenues. The relevant rule for Conservation Tags states that "eligible projects include habitat improvement, habitat acquisition, transplants, targeted education efforts and other projects providing a substantial benefit to species of wildlife for which [Expo Tags] are issued, unless the division and conservation organization mutually agree in writing that there is a higher priority use for other species of protected wildlife." (R657-41-9).

This is essentially what we proposed when drafted an amendment to the Expo tag rule and took it to the Wildlife Board in 2012. As you know, however, the Board rejected that proposal.

How do you think the Expo Tag money should be used?

-Hawkeye-
 
I also think rmef has taken the high road on this matter. I am glad they put sfw on blast and reports like this are coming out. So maybe I should become a member because I get a feeling rmefs motives are for preservation and Conservation of our wildlife.
 
One more time. Could the expo tag money be used for all wildlife, upland game, fish, projects associated that would help ALL sportsmen?
 
So all sportsmen should not benefit in the expo tag fee? Utah now considers fish as wildlife. I would hope the expo tag money could be used for all wildlife. If not, why?
 
The high road? RMEF took the high road?

Once upon a time, there was a little red hen who lived on a farm. She was friends with a dog, a cat, and a yellow duck .

One day the little red hen found some seeds on the ground. The little red hen had an IIDEA. She would plant the seeds . The little red hen asked her friends, "Who will help me plant the seeds ?"

"Not I," barked the dog .
"Not I," purred the cat .
"Not I," quacked the yellow duck .

"Then I will," said the little red hen . So the little red hen planted the seeds by herself.

When the seeds had grown, the little red hen asked her friends, "Who will help me cut the wheat ?

"Not I," barked the dog .
"Not I," purred the cat .
"Not I," quacked the yellow duck .

"Then I will," said the little red hen. So the little red hen cut the wheat by herself.

When all the wheat was cut, the little red hen asked her friends, "Who will help me take the wheat to the mill to be ground into flour?"

"Not I," barked the dog .
"Not I," purred the cat .
"Not I," quacked the yellow duck .

"Then I will," said the little red hen . So the little red hen brought the wheat to the mill all by herself, ground the wheat into flour, and carried the heavy sack of flour back to the farm .

The tired little red hen asked her friends, "Who will help me bake the bread?"

"Not I," barked the dog .
"Not I," purred the cat .
"Not I," quacked the yellow duck .

"Then I will," said the little red hen. So the little red hen brought the wheat to the mill all by herself, ground the wheat into flour, and carried the heavy sack of flour back to the farm .

The tired little red hen asked her friends, "Who will help me bake the bread?"
"Not I," barked the dog .
"Not I," purred the cat .
"Not I," quacked the yellow duck .

"Then I will," said the little red hen. So the little red heN baked the bread all by herself.

When the bread was finished, the tired little red hen asked her friends, "Who will help me eat the bread ?"

"I will," barked the dog .
"I will," purred the cat .
"I will," quacked the yellow duck .

"No!" said the little red hen. "I will." And the little red hen ate the bread by herself.

This is not another of my "back of the bus" explanations, I didn't write the story, it's a story that has resonated with people for decades. Because it accurately portrays human nature and combines a not so subtle lesson on living with the consequences of your decisions.

I'm betting this evenings KUTV report will be a subtle or not so subtle rebuke of the Governor, the DWR, the AG's Office and misguided or worse, sportsmen. The investigation was motivated by calls for change and calls for the news media to follow a specific philosophical belief in hunting and fishing conservation, so, it started with a bias and I'm predicting it will make every effort to justify it's bias beginnings.

What's more, if this investigation is unsuccessful in the any "mean justify the end" for the boy in the back of the bus, there will be another, an another, an another, for at least another ten years. It'll give us something to attack each other here on the "home of the brave". And that's good.......NOT!

I'll record the KUTV report, in the event anyone happens to be off baking bread and gives a darn.

Kenny, SFW's mission is all hunt-able wildlife species, MDF and the Sheep Foundation are species specific. These three orgs. are the little red hens, doing the work, I guess I would suggest those organizations should be given the lions share of the decision as to how these revenues are spent. The turkey tags would seem to justify upland game besides big game. Fish? That's a more complicated issue. I'm more of a holistic conservation kind of guy but iI understand categorical funding helps make sure deer and elk raised revenue does NOT get spent on prairie dogs.

DC
 
Deerlove, don't you think that if they could use that money for all sportsmen it would make them more relaxed as to where the money goes. Right now no matter what they do some group jumps all over them.
 
Hey BIRDMAN...i mean Ken..I guess this is your real name.just a couple easy questions for you.you may or may not want to answer but is your last name Clegg?if so..have you or did you do some consulting for the DWR?
 
>And if it comes out in
>the end that there is
>no hidden agenda will you
>people accept that?


Yep if they can show where the millions of dollars (every dollar) has gone for these tags and that it went to help the wildlife of Utah and not someone's checking account I sure will. But it can't be someone from SFW saying trust us we have done so much good. It needs to be in black and white with the money accounted for.

Now if it shows that they have not or will not account for the money (every dollar) will you accept that and call them out to do so???

I used to support them until all of this back door stuff came up and the addition of the RFP process at the last minute. For me 100% back to wildlife is better than 30% any day and any way you look at it. My frustration is as much with the DWR and the process and cover up on how and why this happened as it is with SFW.

I would even more like to see a lot of the 450 conservation tags given to all the groups back in the draw. that's 4,500 tags given out for the conservation auctions in the last ten years and that is a lot of regular folks that could have received tags. Other states do not need to do this so why does Utah? I could even go along with 10 or 20 or maybe even 50 at most but 450 is just plain ridiculous. But that's a whole different subject and should be address separately from this conversation.

I will add of the two types at least the regular folks get a chance at the convention tags (unlike the conservation tags) so my heart burn with the convention tags is more where the funds raised have went no matter what group gets them. I just want the money accounted for on them. Simple as that.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-25-16 AT 01:15PM (MST)[p]Yes ALL sportsman should get 100% of expo tag monies, including fishing, the percentage I don't know. Their not giving up tags for the macks at the Gorge.
 
Kenny, you and I should approach the Governor and the Legislature to see if they will give us a 100 thousand to front end a "Western Fishing Expo" We could use the money to buy 50 guided fishing trips on Strawberry, Flaming Gorge, Lake Powell, the Green River, Lee's Ferry, the High Uintas, and Boulder Mountain. We could get another 50 fishing lodge owners to each donate a trip to Alaska, Florida, Louisiana, Texas, Oregon, California, British Columbia, North West Territories, the Caribbean, South America, etc. for a total of "100 trips."

We'll have a $5 application fee, put on a big fishing exposition, charge a small admission gate fee, make a ton of money for the Salt Lake business community, put 88% of the proceeds back into fish habitat, new species, cleaner water, winter survival, and we should, DO IT FOR NOTHING, WITH OUT A FRICK'EN BIT OF HELP FROM, the boy in the back of the bus. Course he'll want full disclosure.

Thank about it Kenny, could work for the fish and the fishermen, pay no attention to the dissension and the tinkling brass.

DC
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-25-16 AT 01:29PM (MST)[p]Lumpy, no more nursery rhymes . . . please! SFW is not baking bread, it is selling our public tags in the supposed name of conservation.

Birdman, sportsmen want to make sure that the money is spent on actual conservation activities -- not salaries, not bonuses, not consulting fees, etc. So far, we have been unable to have a conversation as to what consitutes appropriate conservation expenditures because the groups have been unwilling to have any such discussion. My prior reference to the model used with Conservation Permit revenues allows monies to be expended for a wide range of conservation activities. Plus, it is a model that the DWR, the groups and the public are already familiar with. If SFW is truly committed to spending the Expo Tag revenues on a broad range of actual conservation activties, that includes fishing, then prove it. Put SFW's money where its mouth is so to speak.

Finally, I have never spoken with this reporter. However, it is my understanding that he has reached out to the groups involved. IF SFW, MDF or the DWR have a way to explain away or justify this situation then let's hear it. My grandpa used to say that "you can put lipstick on a pig but at the end of the day it's still a pig." If SFW, MDF or the DWR had a good explanation or justification for this issue then this would have been resolved long ago. Instead, they watch these forums from afar and then send Lumpy and Birdman to do their bidding with the caveat that they are not authorized to speak on behalf of the group.

-Hawkeye-
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-25-16 AT 01:49PM (MST)[p]Let's make this very simple for Lumpy (sorry but I don't do nursery rhymes except with my four-year old son):

1. SFW and MDF have taken 200 public tags from the public draw to "generate revenues for wildlife conservation activities." (See R657-55-1).

2. SFW and MDF have been generating revenues to the tune of $1 million a year for the last decade from those public tags.

3. The public (that includes me) wants to know if the millions of dollars generated from our public tags have been used for "wildlife conservation activities."

4. If point #3 is asking too much, could you at least put some controls in place to make sure that future revenues are used for "wildlife conservation activities."

Sincerely,

"The boy in the back of the bus" ;-)

-Hawkeye-
 
So what are you going to do with the other 12% Lumpy?

Might as well just give 30% to fish projects and pocket the 70%. Seems to work for your buddys.
 
If you help make the bread, you get to see where the 12% goes. Other wise, me and ole Kenny will get to "eat the bread" and y'all get to howl at the window.

DC
 
Let's say SFW were to tell you that they give Don Peay's lobbying business a half million dollars a year to wine and dine powerful people, to take them on hunts, to donate to political campaigns, to buy $2k banquet dinners to rub elbows with guys like Donald Trump, etc.? If they told you that they believe that having friends in high places will benefit wildlife in the long run, and that's why they donate to politicians, or wine and dine sports stars, etc., would that be enough? Is that what is wanted?

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
LIKE MonsterMuleys.com on Facebook!
 
I guess I'll play along with your kindergarten nonsense.

You are helping bake the bread, so you must know where the 70% is going.

Please tell us so we can stop whinning and we'll all become members and supporters of $FW.
 
>Let's say SFW were to tell
>you that they give Don
>Peay's lobbying business a half
>million dollars a year to
>wine and dine powerful people,
>to take them on hunts,
>to donate to political campaigns,
>to buy $2k banquet dinners
>to rub elbows with guys
>like Donald Trump, etc.? If
>they told you that they
>believe that having friends in
>high places will benefit wildlife
>in the long run, and
>that's why they donate to
>politicians, or wine and dine
>sports stars, etc., would that
>be enough? Is that what
>is wanted?
>
>Brian Latturner
>MonsterMuleys.com
>LIKE MonsterMuleys.com on Facebook!

No what is wanted is for the money to be put on the ground going forward
 
Damn!! I had no idea that Hens, dogs and Ducks could talk and bake bread and all them other things.
Learn someting new everyday.
I'd sure like to have a talking dog,anybody know where i could get one?
Thanks Lumpy for that very informative post.
 
desertpointbrian - I would imagine many would agree with you, but SFW, from the beginning, has not shared that view. "Feel good" projects have always been what the general public like to see wildlife associated money spent on. MDF and RMEF have done "feel good" projects for years. Many have been a waste of money. I believe when Don got all this going (SFW and SFH) that he saw that the political powers could do bigger things and effect more than what a few thousand dollars raised at an MDF banquet could. And so, that is what SFW does, and they pay Don Peay to do it for them.

I would imagine that some of the places where money is spent, and the people that is spent on, would not sit well with most Utah residents, but I'd bet that sportsmen are benefiting.
If Don sucks up to Donald Trump, buys the dude dinner, takes the little Trumps hunting, then Don is beating that somewhere down the road when he needs Donald Trump to hear him (if Donald is president), that Donald will give him the time. That's how it works. Lobbyists do it all the time!!!

Problem is, none of you, nor me, really want to hear that our wildlife tag money might have sent the little Donald's hunting. They're billionaire's! Why should we be taking them hunting? Well, who knows, it's how the system works and that's why I believe SFW and the others don't want a list of places where all this money has been spent.

Public doesn't want to see that their money bought rich dudes hunts, or lunches, or whatever. Public wants to see it spent on seeds, trees, and all that other stuff that has failed many times in the past.

It's all a matter of perspective.

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
LIKE MonsterMuleys.com on Facebook!
 
OK shotgun1, I'm sorry. Let me know when I can comment again.

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
LIKE MonsterMuleys.com on Facebook!
 
>Founder if you don't know what
>is wanted by now then
>feel free to go back
>to not commenting on this
>subject.


+1 for sure!
 
Founder-

You and I have gone the rounds on this one before during a long drive to Wyoming. No, we do not want SFW taking our public tags and selling them off so that they can hand the money to Don Peay and he can hob-nob with the rich and famous in the name of wildlife conservation. If SFW wants to fund Don's lobbying business that then SFW should use their own money (membership fees, banuquet revenues, donations from rich men and little old ladies). That would be none of my business.

However, if that is what SFW intended to do with the money from our public tags then they should have never stated in the public meeting and in the administrative rule that created the Expo Tags that the money would be used for "wildlife conservation activities." And Don Peay should not have stood in front of the Wildlife Board and the public on 3/31/2015 and stated that "it is fair to ask how much comes in with the five dollar application fees and how much went onto the ground."

Thanks for your comments. And feel free to chime in any time since this is your website.

-Hawkeye-
 
Desert, what part of real life do you not understand. It is not just putting money on the ground that helps wildlife and hunters, but the sage grouse issue that can stop hunters of all kinds from hunting. If it takes political people to make hunting better, then so be it. You can put all the money you want on the ground, but if political issues do not go your way, you can loose your right to hunt. Think of proposition 5. We could possibly be in big trouble right now if that did not pass. The thing that is not being looked at, is the money IS going on the ground. Anyone can make books look the way that they want. What is the difference between using the $5 expo money to pay wages and the money that used to be used to pay wages goes on the ground. If sfw wanted, they could show 100% of the expo tags going on the ground according to the books. Then use other money for things. It makes no difference as long as the money goes on the ground. Sfw does not cook the books, but keeps each thing seperate. I guess it their desire to really be honest is not the best way to go.
 
Ken said: "If sfw wanted, they could show 100% of the expo tags going on the ground according to the books. Then use other money for things. It makes no difference as long as the money goes on the ground. Sfw does not cook the books, but keeps each thing seperate. I guess it their desire to really be honest is not the best way to go."

If SFW can manage their affairs in such as way that they can put 100% of the Expo Tag revenues on the ground and document it, then let's do it. Why all the excuses and fighting?

However, you lost me with your final statement that SFW's "desire to really be honest is not the best way to go."

-Hawkeye-
 
Ha Ha, I got permission to chime back in!!!!

Well, "wildlife conservation activities" is exactly what SFW and Don would consider his lobbying funds to go towards. I know everyone wants to see bushes planted with that money, and that's fine with me. Keep up your fight and someday you can plant more bushes.

I just can't see why everyone keeps asking where the money goes. The ones who know how it works, know where it goes. Some of it does go towards things that SFW talks about, but other money that you probably can't account for goes to lobbying efforts. Seems simple to me. That's what SFW does. That's what they've always done. Don is a lobbyist! Lobbyists need money to buy politicians and others they are trying to influence.

It's a no win for Don Peay and SFW to tell you all where Don has spent that money, because many of you guys would be pissed to know who he takes to lunch or how much he donates to campaigns, or who he takes hunting. And, much of the general non-hunting public would side with you all. But, most politicians and the higher ups in the game agencies understand that money buys friends and friends of power can be very helpful in times of need. That's why they support it. It's the dirty little stuff politicians, lobbyists and the like don't talk about. It's ugly, greedy, and we all hate to think that's how the world works, but it is.

If sportsmen aren't buying politicians, then the anti-hunters will win, because they lobby too. They have an agenda, as do sportsmen.

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
LIKE MonsterMuleys.com on Facebook!
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-25-16 AT 03:30PM (MST)[p]Dang it Kenny, there you go being polite and logical again. Where are we ever going to get to if you continually spell everything out for the whole bloody world to see. You keep this up and we're going to have to call a meeting and at club house for the Grand Mystic Royal Order of the Nobles of the Ali Baba Temple of the Shrine"


We're gonna have to change the secret code, again! Dang it Coy, you be at the secret conclave TONIGHT, immediately after the KUTV boardcast! Hear!

DC
 
Hawkeye - Like I was saying on our drive, it's a no win for SFW to show you where they spend money, so I doubt they ever will. They'll avoid it to the end, because you aren't going to like it.

They spend where they do because they believe it makes a difference. Whether it does or not, is another subject.

I can't imagine that SFW or DON Peay will ever post a list of all those lunches and dinners bought for politicians or game agency personnel, or hunts for rich dudes, etc. It would not benefit them at all, because it looks bad. It's the ugly part of the world we live in. But they believe it works, they may be right, and that's what they do.

The DNR, being a government agency, probably just turns their heads and plays ignorant, but I'm quite sure they get plenty of benefit from what Don does.

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
LIKE MonsterMuleys.com on Facebook!
 
I don't think that sportsmen ever would have agreed to give up 200 premium tags so that Don could use the proceeds "to buy politicians and others they are trying to influence." I don't think that is the type of "wildlife conservation activities" that folks had in mind.

And what about Don's response to concerns expressed about the money at the Wildlife Board Meeting where these tags were created? And I am quoting the DWR's own minutes: "Mr. Peay said it is fair to ask how much comes in with the five dollar application fees and how much went onto the ground." (3/31/2005 Wildlife Board Minutes at 22). I guess SFW had a change of heart after the fact?

-Hawkeye-
 
You are actually right lumpy. And founder has hit it right on the head. If we want hunting to continue in this state, and country, we need lobbyists to keep it going. It goes on in all worlds. Even attorneys and most businesses. I guess no one has ever had a company buy them dinner. It is not to be nice, but to be on their good side. Weather it is a 501-c3 or or a private organization, the dwr, the state, if that is what is needed to get things done, like being able to hunt, then do it. After all the animal rights people are working hard to stop hunting, shouldn't he hunters work just as hard to keep it going? If you like it or not, it all takes money. I guess people batching on here really have no business sense. Maybe they are all socialists thinking that the government will always let them hunt. You have the Democratic party saying we will put the nra out of business. That they will if the nra doesn't lobby the right people. If sportsmen do not lobby the right people hunting will go away. Just look at California. Sportsmen better pull their heads out of their butts and face reality. You don't think rmef, or other organizations don't lobby?. SFW is fighting for all sportsmen for their rights to hunt. People, sportsmen better wise up.
See you at the club house after the news tonight lumpy. Your turn to bring the fun.
 
Kenny being logical? Yea right.

Kinda like how Kenny says that if the Sage Grouse gets listed it "can stop hunters of all kinds from hunting".
That's BS and you and Kenny know it. All that will do is stop public land grazers and oil and gas extractors from destroying anymore public land then they already have. I hate to break it to you two logical guys but there's a lot of endangered species out there besides the Sage Grouse, yet you're still accessing and hunting public land.

Kenny can you name 1 endangered species that stopped anyone from anywhere from hunting or accessing public land?????

Patiently waiting for your answer that I'm sure will never come like always.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-25-16 AT 04:21PM (MST)[p]Ken-

You are confusing the issues, yet again. Nobody said that "rmef or other organizations don't lobby." What we said is RMEF is not selling our public tags and then using that money to lobby. SFW should earmark the money from the Expo Tags for actual conservation activities and then use SFW's other financial resources to buy politicians and lobby til' the cows come home. Are you tracking?

-Hawkeye-
 
I agree Hawkeye, that's not what sportsmen want to see. Most people want to see the "feel good" projects. It's makes them feel good.

Don taking Karl Malone hunting so that Karl Malone will support SFW also isn't what people want to hear, but if that $10k spent on Karl results in Karl using his influence to bring in donors who contribute $50k, isn't that a good use of $10k? $40k profit!
Now there's $50k in the bush planting piggy bank instead of $10k.

The spending of that $10k in my example isn't something SFW or Don want to share with the public because it sounds ridiculous. But, it's quite often the way the world works. Heck, many restaurants give pro athletes free meals just for eating there, because that athlete's presences draws even more customers.

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
LIKE MonsterMuleys.com on Facebook!
 
Brian-

This conversation is like deja-vu except we are working instead of hunting. Your comments make alot of sense in private business but that is not how it works (or at least how it should work) with public assets. When you deal with public assets you better be prepared to account for them.

And you forgot to address Don's promise at the March 2005 Wildlife Board Meeting. Do you think that was a typo in the minutes or a change of position by SFW?

-Hawkeye-
 
I'm not sure I like where this "ends justify the means" justification is going, Founder. This is a very, very slippery slope.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-25-16 AT 04:37PM (MST)[p]Founder thanks for make your #53 post. I agree 100%, accept with the State agencies turning their heads. I believe they are fully aware and perfectly comfortable with what SFW does with some of the money because they too believe those kinds of expenditures put more money on the ground, in the long run, than spending every penny on cedar posts and bitter brush seed.

Apparently you are a friend or at least a traveling companion of the young man leading this witch hunt. Judging from observing his past and present behavior, your opinion has had and will continue to have no effect on a life dedicated to "settling a score" with Don Peay and other executives with in the organization.

One side or the other, will, one day, cross a line and the courts will take it from there. Until then, it keeps a lively albeit sorry conversation going on your web site.

Again, thank you for looking in and sharing your observations.

DC
 
Shotgun, stand back and look at the sage grouse issue. Only released from private lands. Feds have very strict regs because of the sage grouse. Best take a look at strawberry reservoir. Had it had private land added, no cattle or sheep etc would be allowed. Right now around the strawberry Valley even the private property owners are at a stand still as to what they can do. You are right, I don't know. Just cause I sit on a committee that works with the dwr, forest service, and property owners for the drainage to strawberry valley.
Hawkeye, not trying to confuse anything. All I said is that the money is going on the ground. The expo tag money is not going to lobbying. But in reality if it did it would still be beneficial to sportsmen. Those things are very much needed. Walk around blind hawkeye. You as an attorney know the process even if you want people to think it is not needed.
 
>One more time. Could the
>expo tag money be used
>for all wildlife, upland game,
>fish, projects associated that would
>help ALL sportsmen?


Fishing? No, trying to block public stream access should not count...Helping all sportsman, that's cute.
 
Kenny, Kenny, Kenny, there you go again, assuming to boy in the back of the bus cares about lobbying, or doing good for wildlife through developing positive relationships with public and private factions that have the power and reources to actually help us common folk.

He's going to burn it all down, if he can, like WW wants to do. But for a different reason than WW.

WW's reasons are a pure different of opinion on how wildlife should be managed, the boy's motivation is vengeance, and nothing more. imo. So...........your rational is never going to matter here.

Think about that Western Fishing Expo, it's time for a napkin planning lunch bud!

DC
 
Cheater. Good name to pick. What do you cheat at. Hoping it is not hunting. Do you really know what is going on in the stream access issue? Most likely not. It will most likely not be totally solved for years. Not a cut and dried issue.
 
To those saying it is okay for SFW to use state funds to lobby for wildlife... Actually, it is not. BGF was chastised for such in the State audit of their activities and expenditures.

State money cannot legally be used to lobby state officials and since we know SFW lobbies state officials, they can't take/use state money to do it.

Grizzly
 
>Founder if you don't know what
>is wanted by now then
>feel free to go back
>to not commenting on this
>subject.

JUDAS!

F'N!

PRIEST!

I Just SPEWED a Perfectly Chilled DEW all over the Place!

Can Somebody turn this General Forum in to the SFW Forum?

Seems like a few Months Back We had a little Break without all of the BS!

But Here We go again & again & again & again!






[font color="blue"]"I Don't get No Sleep!I Don't get No Peace!"
[/font]
 
Very true. I would bet you a pound of FF black powder that not a single dollar of State money has been spent by SFW or MDF to lobby any state officials. That would be the first thing any investigator worth his salt would review. Yes?

DC
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-25-16 AT 05:25PM (MST)[p]LOL, now we're taking internet handles literally. Are you part bird, part man? See how quickly this exercise gets stupid.

I didn't say it was cut and dried. SFWs stance on it would make it seem that way though. I welcome enlightenment on their position.
 
Kenny, why don't you enlighten us what's really going on with the stream access issue. After all you brought it up.
 
I've asked this before but no answers, how can SFW get a quota of tags but when you apply Utah won't give the number of permits for the hunts because they don't do a survey until April, how does Utah justify this?
 
Whine and whine and whine and whine and whine and whine and whine.

I love now how the state let's them keep %70 but y'all still get to call it state funds. So I guess all those civil servants you pay better account for our money???????

This conversation isn't honest Hawkeye and that's why it is nothing more than years of whining.
 
"I didn't say it was cut and dried. SFWs stance on it would make it seem that way though. I welcome enlightenment on their position."

If you are genuine in your desire to be enlightened, and I trust you are, scroll back up and review Founder's" post #53 and #58, it's just about as succinct as it can be said.

If you can imagine different variations of Founder examples, that is the best enlightenment there is for SFW 's rational .

Now then.......just because you know the why and wherefores doesn't mean it will change anyones opinion in one iota.

Life goes on huh, some of us believe in Obama, some in Clinton, some in Cruz, Rubio or Trump. Shall we call for an audit on each other? Yes?

Hear those tires spinning? This pick-up hasn't got traction, yet. The bus boy is going to keep throwing dirt under the tires to see if he can't get something to stick to the rubber, like those girls in the hall, there isn't anyone getting their hair pulled out yet so you gotta keep trying different things.

Tune in tomorrow, same time, same station!

DC
 
>"I didn't say it was cut
>and dried. SFWs stance on
>it would make it seem
>that way though. I welcome
>enlightenment on their position."
>
>If you are genuine in your
>desire to be enlightened, and
>I trust you are, scroll
>back up and review Founder's"
>post #53 and #58, it's
>just about as succinct as
>it can be said.
>
>If you can imagine different variations
>of Founder examples, that is
>the best enlightenment there is
>for SFW 's rational .
>
>
>Now then.......just because you know the
>why and wherefores doesn't mean
>it will change anyones opinion
>in one iota.
>
>Life goes on huh, some of
>us believe in Obama, some
>in Clinton, some in Cruz,
>Rubio or Trump. Shall
>we call for an audit
>on each other? Yes?
>
>
>Hear those tires spinning?
>This pick-up hasn't got traction,
>yet. The bus boy
>is going to keep throwing
>dirt under the tires to
>see if he can't get
>something to stick to the
>rubber, like those girls in
>the hall, there isn't anyone
>getting their hair pulled out
>yet so you gotta keep
>trying different things.
>
>Tune in tomorrow, same time, same
>station!
>
>DC
#53 & #58 Pathetic!
 
I am more than thrilled a news agency is bringing this debacle to light. I hope this is just the beginning of many changes that need to take place concerning wildlife in Utah and it needs to start at the top.

I will say this...Politicians have and will continue to collect money from lobbyists and then give em the middle finger after you wine and dined them or an all expense paid trip to wonderland. So if Founders possible scenario is actually the case with how Peay spends the expo monies, you can bet it will piss off a lot of folks. You can put money hand over fist toward a politician and it will never guarantee he/she will stay in your back pocket when crap hits the fan!


















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

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

"It is in our power...to preserve game..and to give
reasonable opportunities for the exercise of the
skill of the hunter,whether he is or is not a man of
means."
 
"Now then.......just because you know the why and wherefores doesn't mean it will change anyones opinion in one iota."

Yes?

DC
 
Come on Lumpy!

You said you help bake the bread there for you know where the 70% is going. Tell us so we stop whining. Or are you just talking out a$$ and in circles again like bird boy.

Birdy, you're the one who made the claim if Sage Grouse got listed it can stop hunting. Back up that claim, give an example and try not to get side tracked with some sorry story about the Strawberry Valley.
 
I'm talking out my azz and in circles.

I didn't build or create the Western Hunting Expo, so do I care what SFW considers a conservation expenditure. But.....if ole Kenny and I create a Western Fishing Expo, he and I will decide who get the secret conclave pass word. Want to help SG1? Better help now, when there's some risk SG1, or the partnership fee might be a little pricey, after we've plowed ground for 6 or 8 years.

What you think, you in?

o o o o o, GOP debate just started, so time out. We'll tall more later? ;-)

DC
 
I've been following the stream access lawsuits very close. So far the courts, from the district court to the Supreme Court, have said it's pretty cut and dry. Non-supporters of stream access, like sfw, have lost every court battle thus far.
 
>I'm talking out my azz and
>in circles.
>
>I didn't build or create the
>Western Hunting Expo, so do
>I care what SFW
>considers a conservation expenditure.
>But.....if ole Kenny and I
>create a Western Fishing Expo,
>he and I will decide
>who get the secret conclave
>pass word. Want to
>help SG1? Better help
>now, when there's some risk
>SG1, or the partnership fee
>might be a little pricey,
>after we've plowed ground for
>6 or 8 years.
>
>What you think, you in?
>
>o o o o o, GOP
>debate just started, so time
>out. We'll tall more
>later? ;-)
>
>DC
>

Hell yes I'm in Lumpy. We can split the government cheese 30/70. Of course I get the 70.
 
Outstanding.

Moral compass on a sliding scale.

I guess even crack dealers help the economy right??








"WE USED TO HUNT GAME TO
MANAGE, NOW WE MANAGE TO
HUNT"
Finn 2/14/16
 
Bigone. What courts are you talking about. The stream access has has some statements,partial areas of streams. As I see it it is still up in the air. Biggest problem going on right now is people, not sportsmen, think it is OK now to trespass to get to the streams. The court is being bombarded with complaints and have requested the sheriff's department answer those calls. It is creating a mess. The state needs to reright the bill. SFW is not involved in the court case but land owners and the dwr are. If fishermen do not obey the law, things could change. Not how would I think I know this. Because I sit in on meetings at the dwr on this issue. The state, legislators, attorney plus are part of this issue.
 
By the way shotgun. I did not bring up stream access. Cheater did. Guess you are so angry you can't keep things strait
 
Two courts have ruled on the stream access issue. The most significant ruling was Judge Pullan's ruling late last year declaring HB 141 to be unconstitutional. That is the law of the land as of today. The landowners and developers are appealing that ruling but that is the law unless and until it is reversed. Who will SFW support on this issue? Sportsmen or the developers and landowners?

-Hawkeye-
 
Cheater, yes I am part bird. Can fly high and dump on who I want.
Mag. You need to pay more attention as to what is going on and how the system works. Find things out yourself and quit depending on others to find out. The tags for the expo come from the spring count. In April the wildlife board will set the numbers. After those numbers are set, then the tags for the coming expo are decided. It is all out there on the open. If you look on the Web or make a phone call you can really find out what is happening instead of these partial truths and lies that everyone else talks about
 
Looking forward to the news segment tonight. Just hope the reporter took his kid gloves off for this one. Eager to see if Don Peay manned up and faced the cameras. I SEVERELY doubt it. If so he brought his jumbo hookah pipe and several large mirrors.
 
From Conatser to the Weber River (navigability case) to the Provo River (trial wherein Judge Pullan in a lengthy and well written decision concluded the statute 141 unconstitutional) the sportsmen have won. It's pretty cut and dry the stream bed belongs to the public through an easement which landowners have trampled on for decades. Guess who did NOT support sportsmen? You know Sportsmen for FISH and Wildlife.
 
The US Internal Revenue Service has a special designation for non-profit organizations that wish to do unlimited lobbying, it is called a 501c4. SFW is registered as a 501c3, I believe they leave their primary lobbying to Big Game Forever which is a 501c4. 501c3 orgs are allowed to do some lobbying but have to file special documents and track it closely so that the dollars for lobbying activities are kept within specific limits. Here is a link to a good description of the differences

http://www.nj.com/helpinghands/nonp...f/2008/07/the_difference_between_501c3_a.html

This portion was especially interesting. ?In regards to supporting these organizations, donations made to 501(c)(3) organizations are deductible to the full extent of the law as charitable contributions. Donations made to 501(c)(4) organizations are not deductible, though some businesses who make these contributions often write them off as advertising or business expenses. (Please consult your accountant.)?

Arizona used to have a wildlife conservation organization that was registered as a 501c4, they had a partner 501c3 group. They shared many of the same principals and emails used to come from the same person. I suspect the lack of separation became a problem since that group is no longer around. Curiously, that group had letters in their name that matched the group being covered in the story tonight.

I also question when a group mentions how many dollars they raised for wildlife ?on the ground? activities. Are they including Federal matching P&R dollars? Should they be including Federal dollars? I don't think so since it isn't new money. That money was already earmarked for conservation. And does SFW include the $400,000 that was raised from the Arizona muley permit in the dollars raised press release. All that money comes back to Arizona, so if it is included in the total then than Utah residents deserve a footnote at the bottom of the press release.

And as I mentioned in a prior post, the Wounded Warriors organization was just called out in the press for lavish spending associated with using for profit like fund raising tactics. The justification their CEO used to justify this sounds similar to some of the posts on this thread. End justifies the means kind of thing. If they can be called out, SFW certainly can too.

Bottom line. When a group gets the benefits of 501c3 designation they sign up for a high standard of financial transparency. Especially when some of the dollars are used for lobbying and some of those lobbying dollars could be supporting lobbying relationships that are against the interests of hunters like transferring Federal lands to the States.

Ryan
 
>By the way shotgun. I
>did not bring up stream
>access. Cheater did.
>Guess you are so angry
>you can't keep things strait
>


I know he is the one who brought it up. However, you were the one questioning him if he knew what the "real issues" were. I asked you to enlighten us on the "real issues".

BTW, you still have'nt backed up your claim that SG listing can stop hunting.

Did you make that up yourself or is that the load of crap that Benson is feeding you and all the other kool-aid drinkers?
 
Bird Sh*t once the SFW learns what transparency is then I will believe you give a rats.


?If men were angels, no government would be
necessary.? John Adams
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-25-16 AT 09:43PM (MST)[p]Birdman, no the Supreme Court did NOT rule to overturn Judge Pullan's decision. SFW crew needs to get the facts straight. (Not that they ever let facts control their statements on this issue anyway...)

Hawkeye- Justice Lee granted Victory Ranch's motion for a stay pending appeal just today in the stream access fight. I'm still trying to figure out where the irreparable harm is here?

I'm still confident USAC will prevail on appeal, but the law is back to what SFW wanted now---over 2,000 miles of public water not accessible to the public to fish.
 
Will deer, don't give a crap what you think.
As far as stream access is concerned, on this round sfw is neutral. But the fact still remains the streams are closed again. Stream access is asking for donations again so guys, if you really care about the issue, empty your pockets. They need their money to continue the fight.
Fishermen trespassing and not following the rules have not helped the issue.
 
Like hell SFW is neutral!

I wonder if USAC can get the statewide deer tag to auction to help pay for "administrative costs," or...I mean, conservation. After all, if they buy off some legislators and re-open up access to thousands of miles of public water again...that's a good thing, right? The way it happened shouldn't matter.
 

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