Conservation Permit funds

wileywapati · May 2, 2015

So I replayed the Cliven Bundy Rally also known as this
Weeks Wildlife Board meeting while I was working around
The house this morning.

There was some discussion about using some of the funds
From these wealth tags to buy off ranchers and small private
Land owners that have had their fill of feeding elk. Can't blame
Them a bit.

Of course this was a Peayday brainstorm, so of course I'm gonna
Have a couple of issues with it.

By doing this we are essentially adding another party to the greed
Train that these tags have become. Are grazing interests going to
Be given a percentage of the current allotment of permits or will
More be added?? Who is going to allocate these funds to the landowners
And how will funds be divided??

John Larsen, SFW President, repeated the statement that $FW would
Support this kind of plan and also said he spoke for the MDF and RMEF.
Shouldn't matter to any of the above as long as they still get their 10%.

There has to be strings attached to this that has to be tied to public access
To public wildlife. Otherwise we are simply paying landowners to close off
More lands.

Sticky issue.

"The State of Utah has not given BGF anything.
They have invested in BGF to protect their
interests."
Birdman 4/15/15

dillon · May 2, 2015

LAST EDITED ON May-02-15 AT 05:29PM (MST)[p]I have been to several Wildlife Board meetings and this latest one I watched on YouTube. That was a joke. There are three board members that hate anything that eats what cattle will eat, and two board members that seem to have good reasoning abilities. The cattle ranchers stole the show this round.

It sounds to me like the Forest Service and BLM are taking away AUMs from ranchers, blaming the big game and the drought, and successfully plotting sportsman and ranchers against each other.

I sure hope I draw my LE elk tag before they all get slaughtered. I feel bad for the Wasatch and SW Desert elk herds.

As for conservation permit funds I think they should be put in a safe for next years habitat work.

Dillon
www.dillonhoyt.com

Tristate · May 4, 2015

You gotta love people who start every argument by talking about "their" wildlife, but want to believe there is no liability in ownership when their wildlife starts costing other people money.

YBO · May 4, 2015

Plus one tristate

wileywapati · May 4, 2015

Comprehension issues there Tri???
I believe this is exactly what I said.

"that have had their fill of feeding elk. Can't blame
Them a bit."

How much more clear do you need it to be??

On private lands, I believe landowners should be paid
For loss of feed and damage caused by wildlife. Savvy??

AUM's on leased lands gets a bit stickier.

And taking money from the wealth tag pool or adding more
Tags to the wealth tag pool for landowners that deny public
Hunter access to solve this issue, will always be a steaming
Pile of BS in my book.

"The State of Utah has not given BGF anything.
They have invested in BGF to protect their
interests."
Birdman 4/15/15

elkantlers · May 4, 2015

How about we start charging the cattelmen what they are worth for the AUM's rather than the pennies on the dollar they are paying now.

wileywapati · May 4, 2015

Life is hard for you isn't it Tri??

"The State of Utah has not given BGF anything.
They have invested in BGF to protect their
interests."
Birdman 4/15/15