Don Peay - Randy Newberg Debate - Postponed

Hawkeye

Hawkeye

Long Time Member
Messages
3,014
I regret to announce that the much anticipated debate between Don Peay and Randy Newberg has been postponed indefinitely. Although the parties have successfulyl negotiated and resolved several issues relating to the format of the debate, there has been a disagreement for some time as to whether SFW would produce its financial statements. Despite multiple requests to Don and Bryron Bateman, SFW remains unwilling to do so. Don?s position is that this is a debate between him and Randy, and he has no control over whether or not SFW will produce its financials. SFW has not formally responded to Randy?s requests.

Randy sent both Don and me an email yesterday stating in part: ?By copying Jason on this email, I am now notifying Jason, as the facilitator, that the debate is postponed until receipt of the financial information requested. I stand ready to debate any, and all, of these topics, once the financial information is provided.? As a result of Randy?s email, I felt obligated to post this on monstermuleys.com so the public would be aware and could clear their calendars.

On a personal note, I have tried to stay out of the substance of the debate and merely help facilitate the details of the event. However, I have to admit that I understand Randy?s frustration on this issue. From my perspective, Randy has been quite accommodating on a number of issues, and his only request was for access to SFW?s financial information so that he could adequately respond to Don?s arguments regarding conservation funding. This information is directly relevant to the issues at hand, and I still do not understand the reluctance on SFW?s part to open its books if everything is on the up and up. This continued lack of transparency is the primary reason I am no longer a member of SFW even though we probably see eye to eye on the majority of issues affecting Utah's wildlife.

To say that I am disappointed by this development would be an understatement. I am hopeful that Don and Randy will be able to resolve this issue in the future so that the debate can go forward at some point in time. If and when that occurs, I will be sure to let you know.

Thank you for your patience and for all of those who offered to help support this event.

Hawkeye

Browning A-Bolt 300 Win Mag
Winchester Apex .50 Cal
Mathews Drenalin LD
 
Thanks for the heads up Hawk. Pretty much says it all doesn't it? For all you SFW supporters that will either look the other way and claim ignorance, or try to justify this through some other smoke and mirrors BS... all I can say is they must have someone who knows how to work under the desk for you boys to keep coming back in support of them!

EG

campfire2.gif
"A man can be hard to find in the mountains, but you're welcome at my fire anytime."
 
Thanks for your info and willingness to help resolve conflicks. I didn't think the debate would solve many issues, but help some sportsmen better understand each other, future plans and concerns to help hunting and wildife.
 
The Don even made Randy sign a disclosure that meant he legally couldn't even talk about what he saw and they still won't show the books. It must be really bad.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-05-12 AT 02:09PM (MST)[p]That is not fact, as I thought that was also the case and it was found out that Randy made the offer to sign it and it was not a stipulation by DP. This incident does really make the case that something is rotten in Denmark like we have been saying all along though!
 
How many of you thought it really would happen???? I for one did not....


How to start an argument online:
1. Express an opinion
2. Wait
 
I was hopefull, but as Hawkeye posted updates/demands from a certain side, I knew it was going south, and not south to the tour of bsfw projects.
 
Regardless of how much good SFW may do, if they being a non-profit can't open their books to potential members, they don't deserve one red-cent. Even if there's nothing shady going on, it still gives the appearance, fugg 'em.
 
Can't say I'm surprised Don spun his way out of this.

Screw SFW.

"Whatever you are, be a good one."
- Abraham Lincoln
 
Your right Topgun my bad Don didn't ask Randy offered. It still looks bad though when someone offers to do that and they still won't show the books
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-05-12 AT 06:50PM (MST)[p]don peay is a cowerd. what more proof does people need to come to the conclusion. sfw is crooked. there is the poaching cases,the crooked way they deal there tags,and worst of all they absoulutly refuse to show there books. it is right in front of everybodys eyes they are hiding ALOT. it had to come down to legal reasons why he wont show the books
 
Randy, I thank you sincerely for everything you've done regarding this debate.

Your time and resources have not been in vain. The fruits of your efforts will come to bear with the shinning beacon of light that their reffusal to provide you full disclousure to their financial statements has shed upon the true integrity of the SFW.

I have a tremendous amount of respect for you for sticking you neck out on this subject, although we all knew in our hearts that this was the most likely outcome the moment this all began.

Thank you again for standing up for all us, "common Joe's"!!

Like Bobby Bouche's momma would say... "SFW is the Devil Bobby" (Water Boy)

Now all we need to do is make sure that as many people as possible become enlightened about what has transpired here.

Actions speak louder than words, right?!
 
Can't say I am surprised about the outcome either, but I was really looking forward to this going down.

I guess this really helps shows their true colors. I agree with others that this should be spread so all sportsmen can make an informed decision about what type of organization they support.

I haven't heard much yet from the SFW supporters. What say you? This has got to be a red flag for even the most staunch SFW supporters!


"The problem with quotes on Internet Forums is that it is often difficult to verify their authenticity." - Abraham Lincoln
 
"I haven't heard much yet from the SFW supporters. What say you? This has got to be a red flag for even the most staunch SFW supporters"

Not much of anything they can say to defend what has happened is there?, LOL!
 
>Randy, I thank you sincerely for
>everything you've done regarding this
>debate.
>
>Your time and resources have not
>been in vain. The fruits
>of your efforts will come
>to bear with the shinning
>beacon of light that their
>reffusal to provide you full
>disclousure to their financial statements
>has shed upon the true
>integrity of the SFW.
>
>I have a tremendous amount of
>respect for you for sticking
>you neck out on this
>subject, although we all knew
>in our hearts that this
>was the most likely outcome
>the moment this all began.
>
>
>Thank you again for standing up
>for all us, "common Joe's"!!
>
>
>Like Bobby Bouche's momma would say...
>"SFW is the Devil Bobby"
>(Water Boy)
>
>Now all we need to do
>is make sure that as
>many people as possible become
>enlightened about what has transpired
>here.
>
>Actions speak louder than words, right?!
>
>
>
>


i think randy and hawkeye deserve a thank you for at least trying to put it together
 
"I haven't heard much yet from the SFW supporters. What say you? This has got to be a red flag for even the most staunch SFW supporters"

Not much of anything they can say to defend what has happened is there?, LOL!"

No, not much I can say at all. I believe they are making a big mistake.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-06-12 AT 06:52AM (MST)[p]I believe this is a big mistake as well.

Even if it is not for the reasons most are assuming, this is not a wise decision.
 
Just so the record is clear, Don did not back out of the debate. Rather, Randy postponed the debate until he obtains access to SFW's financial records.

Hawkeye

Browning A-Bolt 300 Win Mag
Winchester Apex .50 Cal
Mathews Drenalin LD
 
A classic tactic of non-profits is to load costs in administration so there is zero pofit thus a non-profit. Unless you see the actual books no one will ever know the administrative costs or if purchases are made for the benefit of the board members. "Trust me" doesn't really stack up as credible when a public resource is involved. A class action lawsuit is what is needed to settle this mess.
 
If everything is on the "up-n-up", than I would think the SFW support/memberships would go through the roof. Heck I would even join. Until then, I will think of the SFW in this fashion. (this quote from the movie Tommy boy) "I can take a chit in a box and mark it guaranteed......It just means it's a guaranteed piece of chit!
 
SFW won't open their books but another stipulation (per Don) to the debate was that they not debate/discuss what happened with wolf delisting. Really? If SFW/BGF is so proud of all the ?work? they did and their version of what went down?why not discuss it? Could it be that Randy was more involved with the real players and has the real story of how SFW/BGF tried to torpedo wolf delisting??? A lot of us know the real story (from people that were there, helped craft the language, etc) and everyone paying attention to the debate would?ve witnessed SFW/BGF being exposed over wolf delisting.

I'm not sure what's more disappointing?a non-profit ?sportsmen?s? group that won't open their books or the fact that said group actively worked against the first real chance at wolf delisting.


"Whatever you are, be a good one."
- Abraham Lincoln
 
>Just so the record is clear,
>Don did not back out
>of the debate. Rather,
>Randy postponed the debate until
>he obtains access to SFW's
>financial records.
>
>Hawkeye
>
>Browning A-Bolt 300 Win Mag
>Winchester Apex .50 Cal
>Mathews Drenalin LD
________________________________________

Thanks for the "clarity".

I don't see how that is at all relevant because there is nothing to debate since Don/SFW would not allow discussion on the wolf delisting nor open their books for Randy.
 
Amen Buckriser! Never could a more funnier quote be so true!

EG

campfire2.gif
"A man can be hard to find in the mountains, but you're welcome at my fire anytime."
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-06-12 AT 09:49AM (MST)[p]I'm with MNhunter, I would like a response from an SFW member, as to why the wolf issue would be off the table in a debate. I believe that is crucial in showing how underhanded the leadership (DON) with SFW has been.

Why would anyone that wants to promote their organization and show how they stand with sportsman, put limits on, what many feel is the #1 topic in the west?

Unless of course you don't want your membership to know how you threw them under the bus for political reasons.

Don, and Ryan Benson both know the truth to this, are hoping for it to disappear.




I wanted to take a scalp,but the kill was not mine.
 
How can they not produce financials?

SFW website clearly says, "Headquartered in North Salt Lake, Utah, SFW is a charitable, non-profit 501(c)(3) organization"...

---http://www.sfw.net/2011/07/14/sfw-headquarters/


The IRS clearly says, "Section 501(c)(3) organizations must make their application (Form 1023) and the annual returns (Form 990 or Form 990-EZ) available to the public for inspection, upon request and without charge (except for a reasonable charge for copying). Each annual return must be made available for a three-year period starting with the filing date of the return."

"These documents must be made available at the organization?s principal office during regular business hours."

"For tax years beginning after August 17, 2006, section 501(c)(3) organizations that file unrelated business income tax returns (Forms 990-T) must make them available for public inspection, and the IRS must make those returns publicly available."

---http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p4220.pdf

How do they get away with this?

Grizzly

PS. I truly feel SFW's days are numbered.
 
Where theres smoke theres fire.

If their books looked good/clean they would be flaunting their #s in our face like they do everything else. SFW never misses an opportunity to brag about how great they are.

Since they do not want to produce their books it can only mean one thing: it would be bad for business.

That simple.

"You sure you know how to skin grizz,
pilgrim?"
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-06-12 AT 12:25PM (MST)[p]
page 2 of this thread:
http://onyourownadventures.com/hunttalk/showthread.php?t=250394


Randy's post on the matter over at his web site:

"A formal announcement on the status of the debate between me and Don Peay. Here is a link to the MM thread where Hawkeye, an attorney from the SLC area who was serving as the facilitator, explains how things have transpired and where we are at this point.

(MM link removed)

I know many of you visit that site in addition to our Hunt Talk site, so I thought I would provide an explanation of what Hawkeye posted. I had hoped we could have a true debate about the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation and the Utah Model. Pretty hard to have that debate and discussion when the group holding all the info relevant to a major debate topic will not release the info.

Sorry, guys. I promise you, I did everything possible to make this work out. I agreed to all of the following, with my only request being the right to see the financial information.

I agreed to the 3-hour tour, which I later found out would be a 9-hour tour.

As much as I did not want to give up on the wolf topic, Don required that for a debate to occur, we must agree to NOT talk about the details of wolf delisting.

To have a moderator who knows the North American Model better than anyone, I obligated myself to cover the $8,000 cost of that persons, travel, lodging, meals, and appearance fee.

I agreed to have any of the Utah examples be a major part of the discussion, though I am more interested in the biggest scope of what is best for outside of Utah.

I offered to sign a non-disclosure agreement, with respect to the financial statements I was requesting. When you think about a non-disclosure agreement in that context, it is rather funny, given I was asking for the financial statements of a publicly supported non-profit charitable organization.

I agreed to every demand that was made.


My one requirement is that for the Utah examples to be used, I be allowed to have access to the books and records of the organization who is the primary beneficiary of the Utah Model; Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife, Sportsment for Habitat, and the Western Hunting and Conservation Expo.

Some are under the assumption that the publicly issued tax returns of SFW, which I downloaded myself from the IRS website, are adequate financial informaiton. Not the case. Here is why.

Being a CPA of 23 years I know what information will support or refute assertions made. That is what I do for a living. Tax returns are a sad substitute for financial statements, as multiple accounts get lumped into large categories on tax returns, making it hard to decipher what is in those tax returns categories, or omitted from those categories. Tax returns use vague categories and lack any detail to support the cash inflow and outflows of an organization.

Tax returns do not give you the detail of who is paid what, what liabilities exist, what assets are held, and a host of other information normally provided by financial statements, especially financial statements that have been subject to a "Yellow Book" audit by an external CPA firm.

In the event these records are made available, I will debate all of these topics, any time that fits my schedule, at any place that is requested. But, I do not know if under a future scenario that I would be so accommodating as to take the wolf topic off the table or go on a tour as was required.

Anyhow, that is where it stands right now. It is in the hands of SFW/SFH to determine if the debate goes forward, or if it is postponed indefinitely.

I was really looking forward to this debate. Hopefully Don will agree to lean on SFW for release of the information and we can go forward. "
 
Don will simply say he has no control over what SFW allows to be shared so therefore it is out of his hands as well.

Not his fault we couldn't do the debate!!!


"The problem with quotes on Internet Forums is that it is often difficult to verify their authenticity." - Abraham Lincoln
 
Don knows nothing will change if he doesn't show his books. Nothing will change if he does the debate either.

Most of us have been to a S.F.W banquet. Think about what you see going on there. I see a bunch of sportsman having a good time. They buy a few tickets and hope to get lucky. Most of them bring their wives who don't allow them to spend too much. S.F.W likes to have guys like that to fill seats and that's it. for the most part they couldn't care less about you. Then you have the rich hunters. These are the guys who buy the auction items, especially the hunts. They have no problem dumping one to three thousand into tickets. Most of these guys are there to strut their stuff and feel important. S.F.W people do their best to make them feel important. They would rather we not go to the banquets so they can win more crap. Besides, heaven forbid we think we can be in the same crowd as they are. Don knows these people will continue to come, even if they find out what is happening with their money. They don't care about all the hoopla we care about. It's all a tax write off anyway.

All of us regular guys who really care about wildlife won't have a prayer in heaven's chance of changing what don is doing. He is sitting back laughing at all this crap anyway. He's got a few puppets on the wildlife board so he's good to go.

If we want to change what the D.W.R does with S.F.W a Law suit is the the only way. Sorry, I can't afford it. Neither can most of you. If you could you would be on don's side.
 
>Just so the record is clear,
>Don did not back out
>of the debate. Rather,
>Randy postponed the debate until
>he obtains access to SFW's
>financial records.
>
>Hawkeye
>
>Browning A-Bolt 300 Win Mag
>Winchester Apex .50 Cal
>Mathews Drenalin LD

Just to be clear, the South is still waiting for the North to surrender. To be even more clear, the North is no longer fighting. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.
 
>Don knows nothing will change if
>he doesn't show his books.
>Nothing will change if he
>does the debate either.
>
>Most of us have been to
>a S.F.W banquet. Think about
>what you see going on
>there. I see a bunch
>of sportsman having a good
>time. They buy a few
>tickets and hope to get
>lucky. Most of them bring
>their wives who don't allow
>them to spend too much.
>S.F.W likes to have guys
>like that to fill seats
>and that's it. for the
>most part they couldn't care
>less about you. Then you
>have the rich hunters. These
>are the guys who buy
>the auction items, especially the
>hunts. They have no problem
>dumping one to three thousand
>into tickets. Most of these
>guys are there to strut
>their stuff and feel important.
>S.F.W people do their best
>to make them feel important.
>They would rather we not
>go to the banquets so
>they can win more crap.
>Besides, heaven forbid we think
>we can be in the
>same crowd as they are.
>Don knows these people will
>continue to come, even if
>they find out what is
>happening with their money. They
>don't care about all the
>hoopla we care about. It's
>all a tax write off
>anyway.
>
>All of us regular guys who
>really care about wildlife won't
>have a prayer in heaven's
>chance of changing what don
>is doing. He is sitting
>back laughing at all this
>crap anyway. He's got a
>few puppets on the wildlife
>board so he's good to
>go.
>
>If we want to change what
>the D.W.R does with S.F.W
>a Law suit is the
>the only way. Sorry, I
>can't afford it. Neither can
>most of you. If you
>could you would be on
>don's side.

One of the smartest posts I have EVER seen here on MM!!!! I agree!
 
SFW Koolaid drinkers right there. Gentlemen keep ignoring the facts and looking like fools.
 
What kind of credibility does an ORG like SFW have if they have to demand that two things happen before the debate will take place. No opening the books to show how much money was paid to things like "consultants" and who they were, and refusal to talk about the wolf issue and the claims they made on the fight to delist them. I think these are big things to anyone who donates time or money to them.

These are even bigger things for those who live in a state that SFW is trying to spread into.
It is a simple question, what are they afraid of?
 
TheElitehornhunter
Jun-06-12, 03:36 PM (MST)
37. "RE: Don Peay - Randy Newberg Debate - Postponed"
SFW Koolaid drinkers right there. Gentlemen keep ignoring the facts and looking like fools.

TEh:
Who may I ask was that post intended for, as I see not one person/post that has said anything positive about SFW on this entire thread?
 
I hate SFW.

Does anyone know the exact dates of next years Expo? I'll go stand in line to pay the money for a chance at a tag.

Man, I hate SFW.
 
Eeel if peta was selling those tags at a expo people would still buy them. Dont confuse people applying for the tags as sfw supporters. jmio
 
I think I understand what you are saying, but really every time someone plunks down a 5 spot at the EXPO for a ticket they are actually supporting SFW, even if it's not openly like some do on this website.
 
Eel fits in with the rest of the SFW/BGF groups. He doesn't post his name on his profile. Wondering what he's afraid of.

Being transparent isn't something that SFW, or it's supporters are inclined to do.

eel, doesn't it bother you that SFW tried to kill the wolf rider?

Doesn't it bother you that SFW won't show their books to Randy?

Doesn't it bother you that after 20+ years of SFW, helping mule deer in Utah, those numbers are less than before?





I wanted to take a scalp,but the kill was not mine.
 
This TOOL wants you to sign an NDA, and keep some of the no-brainer telling subjects "off limits" in order for him to agree to a debate? Ha! That's frikkin hilarious. Nope.. he doesn't have anything to hide or be ashamed of.

Sad truth into DBLung's post.. SFW is all about the ultra-rich guys who want to shoot big animals at the expense of everybody else.

I won't eat a Jimmy John's sandwich.


"YOU'RE NOT WORTHY"
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-06-12 AT 11:16PM (MST)[p]Ol don sure talked big when the offer to debate was made,
Where ya at now don???
Randy sure has you on the run...HA!!!!
 
Been on the fence for quite awhile now, always appreciated the good they have done, believed it out weighed the bad. I am off the fence now! Was looking forward to the debate. If they cant come forward and be honest I am done with them.
 
>SFW Koolaid drinkers right there. Gentlemen
>keep ignoring the facts and
>looking like fools.

Elite...you are douche.....NO ONE said anything good about SFW!
 
Well you have been drunk off the SFW koolaid for a long time. Maybe you didn't say anything because you can't defend SFW anymore. Don't make me come down there to Richfield and wash your mouth out by sticking your head in a toliet AGAIN.
 
>Well you have been drunk off
>the SFW koolaid for a
>long time. Maybe you didn't
>say anything because you can't
>defend SFW anymore. Don't make
>me come down there to
>Richfield and wash your mouth
>out by sticking your head
>in a toliet AGAIN.

I dont know you...but you really are an idiot! I have never been an SFW member..I have never been to one of their banquets....I have never tried to defend them. I have said a few times that they have done good things (which they have) but I agree they are shady as can be! And I stick with my Douche comment! Come on down....
 
Hahahahahaha..... You all are finally starting to see what I have known for years. Now are you ready to do something about it?
Tony Abbott
The next buck to have a fawn will be the
1st.
 
Sounds like this is about par for the course of the SFW. I figured something like this whould happen. Folks you will never get the answers you are looking for out of Dun Pay!!!
 
for the record, I don't belong to SFW and have never been to the Expo. I was just pointing out that peoples greed for a tag will keep funding the organization. They have an ace in the hole.

Eel
 
>
>
>Hahahahahaha..... You all are finally starting
>to see what I have
>known for years. Now are
>you ready to do something
>about it?
>Tony Abbott
>The next buck to have a
>fawn will be the
>1st.


i think alot of people are ready to do something about it
 
I was just pointing out that
>peoples greed for a tag
>will keep funding the organization.
>They have an ace in
>the hole.
>
>Eel

That's liable to change!
 
>I was just pointing out that
>
>>peoples greed for a tag
>>will keep funding the organization.
>>They have an ace in
>>the hole.
>>
>>Eel
>
>That's liable to change!

Good! It never should have started to begin with.
 
Why on earth would Don, or SFW refuse to show their books, knowing that will be a big backlash if they don't?

It's pretty simple and calculated. They have far more to loose if they show their hand, than if they don't. They are betting that no will take the initiative, to force their hand. They are betting in time, the dust will settle and business will go on, as it has in the past.

I hope they are wrong. I hope the sportsman of Utah will say enough is enough. I hope we will all protest to the DWR and tell them to stop the Expo until the total tale of finances are made public.

I hope someone will get the news stations involved and have them do an good investigative report. And its time the IRS take a deep look and conduct an indent audit at what is happening.

And its time that all sportsman donate some money, to get a law suit started, to end this robbery of our public resources.

Shame on all us Utah sportsman if we just let the dust settle!!!!

Don is sure he can just let things slide, as its always worked in the past.

I will the first to donate to a well planned lawsuit!!! What about you?

And thanks Randy for forcing his hand. And thanks for your time Hawkeye!

Have a good one. BB
 
Although I've no dog in this fight (as I live out of state and am not a donor to or member of the SFW), I've read with interest all of the posts clamoring for an audit, a debate or an opening of the SFW books for public scrutiny.

On their current website, the SFW states that 17% of their donations have been spent on fund raising and admin ($697,000) and 83% of their donations have been spent on mission accomplishment ($3,522,000). They further state that they there were audited by the IRS and in November, 2010 received a closing letter without adjustments and confirming their status as a valid and lawful 501 c3 charitable organization.

What am I missing here? Do some believe this information is untrue or inaccurate? If the IRS was satisfied with the audit and expense allocations, then what more could come from the demand for a public scrutiny of its books? While I'm not sure how the 17% allocation for fundraising and admin matches up to other charitable organizations, does it appear to be so unreasonable to get all that worked up about?

It seems to me that if you don't like the way the SFW organization is spending its/your money, accomplishing its charitable purposes or allocating its/your donations (which are and remain fully tax deductible), then simply STOP GIVING THEM ANY MONEY!

And to me, the notion that the so-called "debate" was going to change anyone's mind who's posted on this or other related threads appears highly unlikely. Looks to me like virtually everyone who has commented on here is very opinionated and has their mind pretty well made up and scheduling the "debate" was simply a ruse to vent and criticize the SFW for its activities. Consequently, why have it?
 
The key word there:"Donations" SFW's biggest money makers by far come from the Auction tags they get. Check out their 990 form that's been floating around. 25% of what they take in off of those tags, goes to projects on ground.


I wanted to take a scalp,but the kill was not mine.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-15-12 AT 08:29AM (MST)[p]
doodah---Your reasoning may be similar to a lot of the SFW lovers that think everything is on the up and up. However, here is a fairly simple answer to your question as to why the books need to be opened. Basically I believe that the IRS looks at what the organization took in and that they did not make a profit. As long as the incoming money is made legally, the IRS just looks at the money situation itself to see if a profit was made. To the best of my knowledge, that is the only criteria they have to meet to remain in good standing as a 501C(3) organization. The IRS doesn't give a damn how much is spent on administrative fees, attorney fees, consultant fees, travel and associated costs, etc., as long as some of the total incoming money spent goes to their mission statement and they show no profit. I don't believe there is any minimum amount or percentage they have to give back and therein lies the big problem! We have absolutely no idea what that might be with the books not being open for scrutiny. Why do you think the SFW statement you alluded to only speaks of "donation monies" when the majority of money they make is on tag auctions and raffles? It shouldn't take a PHD to figure out that they would be more than embarrassed if they put up the same type of statement if they included what amounts to be the bulk of the money they take in! The RMEF, for instance, is completely transparent and has open books that show they usually put back on the ground over 90% of total incoming money to accomplish their mission statement. Conjecture is that the SFW figure may be below 25% and that is why they will not open the books. If you haven't already done so, read the other ongoing thread in this General Forum regarding the RMEF calling out all organizations to open their books and be accountable. This especially applies to the SFW, which gets almost all operating money from tag auctions and raffles. That is money coming in from selling a public resource and an IRS audit does not begin to show what went where to satisfy most of us that all the money is going where it should be.
 
usually when you click on a thread with over 50 posts there are several members going back and forth taking shots at eachother....not on this thread, seems to be a common theme here
 
Doodah- The "mission accomplished" is a crock. It includes just about anything SFW wants to spend money on including the hefty "consulting fees" paid to Mr. Peay. The numbers they produce are very deceiving and that is why everyone wants transparency on how they get money and where the money goes.
 
1st. Repeat after me, "Dear Tony Abbott, because of some internal private reason I doubted you. I AM SORRY. You have been spot on regarding SFW, and while I may or may not like you, you have been right all along.

2nd. I am married to an accountant, THEY ARE EVIL!!! Plus, the reason they are accountants and DON'T work for the IRS is because they make more by outsmarting the IRS.

3rd. I have been audited by the IRS.(See #2 and see if you can figure out why I got a "random" audit). They do have rules and regs, but they are fairly general in nature and there is a ton of GRAY area.

4th. It was touched on earlier, but donations and revenue from the expo are different.

5th. I believe I am the worlds greatest keyboard expert. I am willing to debate that with anyone, and I DON'T HAVE ANY CONDITIONS ON THIS DEBATE. If you think THE DON is just like the rest of us, get real. He has been in the political world so long he has become one. Pretty sure old uncle Orrin has the same rules about debates. IF you know your subject, you don't need rules, because facts always prevail. At some point even the kool aiders have got to notice that for some reason there are a lot of internal secrets, most of all financials.


When they came for the road hunters I was not one so I said nothing. When they came for the oppurtunists I was not one so I said nothing. When they came for the public land hunters I was not one so I said nothing. When they came for me there was no one left to say anything!
 
So the bottom line is SFW and Don cut and ran because of the facts that would show up in the books. Did I get it right.

"I have found if you go the extra mile it's Never crowded".
>[Font][Font color = "green"]Life member of
>the MM green signature club.[font/]
 
>doodah---Your reasoning may be similar to
>a lot of the SFW
>lovers that think everything is
>on the up and up.
> However, here is a
>fairly simple answer to your
>question as to why the
>books need to be opened.
> Basically I believe that
>the IRS looks at what
>the organization took in and
>that they did not make
>a profit. As long
>as the incoming money is
>made legally, the IRS just
>looks at the money situation
>itself to see if a
>profit was made. To
>the best of my knowledge,
>that is the only criteria
>they have to meet to
>remain in good standing as
>a 501C(3) organization. The
>IRS doesn't give a damn
>how much is spent on
>administrative fees, attorney fees, consultant
>fees, travel and associated costs,
>etc., as long as some
>of the total incoming money
>spent goes to their mission
>statement and they show no
>profit. I don't believe
>there is any minimum amount
>or percentage they have to
>give back and therein lies
>the big problem! We
>have absolutely no idea what
>that might be with the
>books not being open for
>scrutiny. Why do you
>think the SFW statement you
>alluded to only speaks of
>"donation monies" when the majority
>of money they make is
>on tag auctions and raffles?
> It shouldn't take a
>PHD to figure out that
>they would be more than
>embarrassed if they put up
>the same type of statement
>if they included what amounts
>to be the bulk of
>the money they take in!
>The RMEF, for instance, is
>completely transparent and has open
>books that show they usually
>put back on the ground
>over 90% of total incoming
>money to accomplish their mission
>statement. Conjecture is that
>the SFW figure may be
>below 25% and that is
>why they will not open
>the books. If you
>haven't already done so, read
>the other ongoing thread in
>this General Forum regarding the
>RMEF calling out all organizations
>to open their books and
>be accountable. This especially
>applies to the SFW, which
>gets almost all operating money
>from tag auctions and raffles.
>That is money coming in
>from selling a public resource
>and an IRS audit does
>not begin to show what
>went where to satisfy most
>of us that all the
>money is going where it
>should be.

Very well explained Topgun, I wish I would have realized that years ago.... It took that backdoor Bull$hit down in AZ last Jan. for me to open my eyes and realize what they are all about.
 
Nick,

No need for an apology. I have always preached the same tune and have always said I would take a lie detector test or testify of the things I have said in a court of law.

When Utah SPortsman want to fix things and right all the wrong that is being done to them then need to get a meeting together and plan a march on capitol hill much like the evil empire did years ago.

Utah can be saved from the whoring of its wildlife and the mis-informed wildlife board and legislature. But it will take the masses.

When you guys are ready to do this let me know,Im pretty sure I have a couple ideas that you all would agree with that would help get things righted. I would be glad to join the ride to save Utah from the Dictators.

Tony Abbott
The next buck to have a fawn will be the
1st.
 
"It seems to me that if you don't like the way the SFW organization is spending its/your money, accomplishing its charitable purposes or allocating its/your donations (which are and remain fully tax deductible), then simply STOP GIVING THEM ANY MONEY! "

Not as easy as it sounds when a big share of their money comes from gifted tag sales. There will always be someone rich enough out there to buy their tags who don't care about the politics.

The thing you should have said is: It seems to me that if you don't like the way the SFW organization is spending its/your money, accomplishing its charitable purposes or allocating its/your donations (which are and remain fully tax deductible), then simply STOP GIVING THEM ANY........ TAGS!

txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)
 
Ditto TX! That's the only way to send that outfit and DP packing! Now please all you Utah guys, get together and get it done. There are people behind you like myself from other states that will help out as much as possible, but it's up to you guys to basically straighten out YOUR state!
 
>Nick,
>
>No need for an apology. I
>have always preached the same
>tune and have always said
>I would take a lie
>detector test or testify of
>the things I have said
>in a court of law.
>
>
>When Utah SPortsman want to fix
>things and right all the
>wrong that is being done
>to them then need to
>get a meeting together and
>plan a march on capitol
>hill much like the evil
>empire did years ago.
>
>Utah can be saved from the
>whoring of its wildlife and
>the mis-informed wildlife board and
>legislature. But it will take
>the masses.
>
>When you guys are ready to
>do this let me know,Im
>pretty sure I have a
>couple ideas that you all
>would agree with that would
>help get things righted. I
>would be glad to join
>the ride to save Utah
>from the Dictators.
>
>Tony Abbott
>The next buck to have a
>fawn will be the
>1st.


How about a run on capitol hill like we did to protest road issues. All of us, camoed up, atv, horse, truck rolling to the capitol, if nothing else it would be fun!


When they came for the road hunters I was not one so I said nothing. When they came for the oppurtunists I was not one so I said nothing. When they came for the public land hunters I was not one so I said nothing. When they came for me there was no one left to say anything!
 
Man, all these threads makes your head spin.....

Didn't someone already post some tax returns on here a while ago and the complaint was they wanted the organizations internal books for more detail?

As a 501(c)3, Not for Profit corporation, they are required to provide copies of the last three years worth of tax returns. Here is a link to the form for ordering those copies: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f4506a.pdf

PS, A non-profit does not mean they can't make a profit, in the sense that they have to spend every penny they bring in. They can have, in the non-profit vernacular, a surplus to be used. TO be a Not for profit, they have to have a purpose that is "charitable" or Not-for-profit, like conservation. Officers can earn salaris, etc.

I'm not defending SFW, but I see a lot of accusations that are off base.

There is no law requiring them to provide additional info, though they clearly should be transparent with the money and salaries to gain trust in the public that funds them.

There is a lot of easy to find info on IRS website, just google in all.

Funny though that they seem to rely on the IRS Audit, as some sort of badge of ethical absolution, but all it did was confirm their purpose meets the IRS definition, so they can continue to allow donations to be deducted.

Good luck Utah, hopefully Idaho can learn from what's happened down south. Of course we have plenty problems without, as you all call him, The Don.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-16-12 AT 08:31AM (MST)[p]BPKH stated: "Funny though that they seem to rely on the IRS Audit, as some sort of badge of ethical absolution, but all it did was confirm their purpose meets the IRS definition, so they can continue to allow donations to be deducted."

That is exactly right and if you look at those IRS records it's immediately obvious that they are not breaking down expenses any more than they absolutely have to in order to meet the nonprofit IRS status. I'm wondering why you say there are a lot of accusations that are off base. I think most are aware that they can have a surplus, that they can pay salaries, consultant fees, etc. However, it is how much and to who all that money goes that is one big unanswered question. Various websites I googled, including IRS.GOV, stated that the organization needs to keep good records such that everything is transparent, with that exact word used on most of them. If the books are transparent they can easily absolve an organization of any alleged wrongdoing. To not do so obviously lends itself to the thought or theory that something is rotten in Denmark! It was great to read Mr. Allen's letter in behalf of the RMEF challenging all conservation organizations to be transparent and open their books to scrutiny. Any that don't obviously are hiding things that could remove them from their status at the worst, or put egg on the faces of the board members such that they lose support and the organization goes under. This transparency is especially important for an organization like SFW that derives most of it's income from the sale of a public resource (big game tags).
 
There is no law that don't shoot ducks on water. There is no law that I don't ground pound pheasants. No law that I don't shoot elk over hay bails. BUT I don't because I am an ethical sportsman. Much like golf, hunting has ethics and morals which go above and beyond law, and as sportsmen we expect our groups to do the same, pretty simple.


When they came for the road hunters I was not one so I said nothing. When they came for the oppurtunists I was not one so I said nothing. When they came for the public land hunters I was not one so I said nothing. When they came for me there was no one left to say anything!
 
Let's get a march on capital hill going. We need to direct this at the DWR and the board. They are the ones giving "OUR" tags with no CLEAR reporting required of where the funds are being used. The rich guys need to wait for tags in our state just like they do in all the other surrounding western states.

Myself along with hundreds more will be there to march. This will have a bigger impact than most of us can see setting here behind our computers. I've seen it work with other situations as mentioned above.

I just have one question that has been asked of the SFW and their supporters before: HOW IS IT THAT OTHER STATES HAVE BETTER HERDS AND HUNTING HERE IN THE WEST THAN UT, THAT SELL LITTLE TO NO RICH MAN TAGS, I.E. AZ, NV, MT, ECT...?
 
BPKHunter,

I'm going to wager you are a young guy. Too young to remember the United Way non-profit scandal. Do us all a favor and Google that scam and read ALL the details. That will answer a lot of your questions. Tax returns are a very thin veil for credibility.

***********************************
Member RMEF, Pope & Young Club, UBNM, UWC & the SFW Hate Club
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-19-12 AT 05:32PM (MST)[p]Mr. Hawkins & Friends,

With all due respect it is hard for me to respond because I know what is coming. With that said here goes. I am appalled at the bias and negative attacks on SFW, it's members, Board Members, and yes Don Peay.

There must be more to it that Conservation Tag Sales, The Expo, Financials, and so on. Maybe it's how much SFW has accomplished within Utah, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, and now all of America. While SFW is fighting for each of you with the Wolf War, Predator Management, and Habitat Projects you are attacking SFW because you don't agree with a small percentage of what SFW does. SFW isn't attacking RMEF but SFW's Model is different and the SFW Model is helping each of the States to accomplish amazing results.

It would be impossible to find anyone you agree 100% with including your best friend, spouse, business partner,etc. I am very involved with SFW. I receive no compensation but spend a great deal of time working on many of the issues affecting all sportsmen not just SFW Members. I look forward to when we can all realize that although we differ and often disagree we aren't enemies.

I don't agree with your model but I thank you for your willingness to be involved. Just think that maybe if we all spent this valuable time building rather than attacking we might get more done.

Todd Abelhouzen
SFW, Dixie Chapter
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-19-12 AT 05:50PM (MST)[p]Hey ABE...........the United Way got a lot done too. But I'm going to guess you're another one of those young guys Don targets, ignorant to the NAMWC like X-Treme, and you think that's OK to simply sweep under a rug too.

Market poaching is unacceptable.

***********************************
Member RMEF, Pope & Young Club, UBNM, UWC & the SFW Hate Club
 
Hey Ken,

If you are going to ask who I am we should do the same with you.
As a Police Officer you should understand that making accusations and attacks against someone without proof can cause big problems legally for the accuser. How many people have you arrested with as little proof as you have against Don & SFW.

What's even scarier is that you are from Illinois. Sir, we have had just about enough of Illinois over the past 4 years. The US Constitution allows each State to manage their State individual from other States and the Federal Government. SFW's Model does the exact same thing. Each State handles their own issues, concerns, and finances within the State. Utah doesn't run like Illinois and SFW doesn't run like other Conservation Groups. Each acts like a laboratory trying things individually and copying one another if they work. I don't think Utah is going to run like Illinois and certainly SFW won't run like other groups.

I strongly suggest you learn the SFW Model as well as you know the North American Model before you call us "market poachers". A cop calling me a poacher, wow. I have spent thousands of hours and watched others spend even more time than I. You are calling them Poachers also. Shame on you.
 
Abe, I am a NM resident who grew up in St. George which I assume is where you are from with the "dixie" chapter in your signature.

You seem like a great person who has been giving your own personal time and sweat into trying to make a positive impact on habitat projects. Kudos to you brother!

There are LOTS of other truly great people who are members of SFW that I know personally. None of this is an attack on you or people like you.

It is easy to see how you & the rest of the "good ones" are offended by the anti-sfw croud.

You are fighting for what you beleive in and as long as a person's intentions are just and honorable, your actions & efforts should be respected.

Please, for the sake of your reputation I ask you to take a step back and learn the truth. The truth about your comments on the SFW & Wolves. The truth about your comment on the "North American Model". The truth about Don Peay's stipulations put on the topics of the debate. The truth about the SFW's resistance to share their financials.

If you honestly look at the documneted facts regarding these topics and still choose to stick up for the SFW then so be it.

You seem to be intelligent enough to see thru all the smoke they've been blowing up everyone's rear ends.

If you are against the "North American Model" then you are a part of the problem.

Cheers.
 
>LAST EDITED ON Jun-19-12
>AT 05:32?PM (MST)
>
>Mr. Hawkins & Friends,
>
>With all due respect it is
>hard for me to respond
>because I know what is
>coming. With that
>said here goes. I am
>appalled at the bias and
>negative attacks on SFW, it's
>members, Board Members, and yes
>Don Peay.
>
>There must be more to it
>that Conservation Tag Sales, The
>Expo, Financials, and so on.
> Maybe it's how much
>SFW has accomplished within Utah,
>Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, and
>now all of America.
>While SFW is fighting for
>each of you with the
>Wolf War, Predator Management, and
>Habitat Projects you are attacking
>SFW because you don't agree
>with a small percentage of
>what SFW does. SFW
>isn't attacking RMEF but SFW's
>Model is different and the
>SFW Model is helping each
>of the States to accomplish
>amazing results.
>
>It would be impossible to find
>anyone you agree 100% with
>including your best friend, spouse,
>business partner,etc. I am very
>involved with SFW. I
>receive no compensation but spend
>a great deal of time
>working on many of the
>issues affecting all sportsmen not
>just SFW Members. I
>look forward to when we
>can all realize that although
>we differ and often disagree
>we aren't enemies.
>
>I don't agree with your model
>but I thank you for
>your willingness to be involved.
> Just think that maybe
>if we all spent this
>valuable time building rather than
>attacking we might get more
>done.
>
>Todd Abelhouzen
>SFW, Dixie Chapter


i dont want to bash the average sfw member.heck i was one 3 years ago untill i realized there was some fishy stuff going on. and the vibe i got was the high archey could give a crap less what the average sportsmen had to say. now it is blantenly obvious that they are hiding their books for a reason
 
A big thank you Randy and Hawkeye for doing such a great job here. SFW can only hide behind stipulations, power point presentations and 3 hour tours for so long. Hopefully this thing is about to reach critical mass. Momentum is building.

This is a simple issue, folks. Let's not make it harder than it is.

An organization (SFW) is taking our assets (tags) worth millions of dollars and selling them. Once the dust settles, they've got a stack of money without any strings attached. Utah and the DWR was stupid enough to let these convention tags go without the same requirements as other tags pulled from the public pool. They can then do whatever they want with this money, as long as they can throw it under one of the vague, umbrella-like categories like "mission achievement" or whatever it is. The only docs they are required to show are tax docs which show none of the details that we should know as citizens and sportsmen.

We've been battling with these guys for years now trying to get them to show us what they're doing with the money. They've selectively chosen to show us what they want us to see. Not surprising. Why would they show us? They don't have to. The only way they'll show us what they've got is if they are forced to.

Here's the big question: why would you want to hide how you were spending that money if you were proud of it? You would want to parade it in front of everyone to show how efficient you could be and how much good you've done. (see RMEF)

The solution here is clear. Nothing will happen until we make it happen. The expo tags never should have slipped through the cracks with no strings attached in the first place. If we care about how our assets are handled, we need to get behind the initiative that requires 90%+ of ALL public tags, including expo tags, to go directly back into the resource.

The post here by klbzdad is a great place to start. We need to start putting pressure on these folks to make the change. Let's do it.








Vi Et Armis Invictus Maneo
 
>BPKHunter,
>
>I'm going to wager you are
>a young guy. Too
>young to remember the United
>Way non-profit scandal. Do
>us all a favor and
>Google that scam and read
>ALL the details. That will
>answer a lot of your
>questions. Tax returns are
>a very thin veil for
> credibility.
>
>***********************************
>Member RMEF, Pope & Young Club,
>UBNM, UWC & the SFW
>Hate Club

I don't know what you consider "young" but I doubt I would qualify. The fact is I have been a banker for 20+ years, so I collect "financials" and "taxes" from about a hundred businesses a year to analyze and see exactly what is going on financially in them, so I understand pretty well the purpose, and the proper use of each to SEE into an organization and how they are using their funds.

My point was that, there are tax returns available, per their legal requirement of disclosure AND that taxes are a very thin form of financial disclosure.

The fact is if you want reasonable accounting you will need AUDITED financials statements.

I'm not supporting SFW.

What I do know about SFW and being a resident of Idaho I do take exception to what ABE said about doing good here and helping in the Wolf War. They were Johnny come Lately to the wolf war trying to take credit that was not due and I for one do not want to see them in Idaho in large part because of this legacy. I understand they may have done some good but they have hung themselves by now in my eyes.

I do support Randy......100%. So if you want to make some points, bring him into your organization and let him AUDIT your financials. He is a CPA, I believe.
 
Abe, first off thanks for serving as an officerbof the law. But I do think you are up to date with all the crap that has gone on with sfw. The last few years, Hawkeye and others has met personally with Don and the boys and heard bs story after story and promise after promise about financial $ and books and so on. Still to his date, they make up lies and excuses whybthey can't show certain things and all of them have "looser elbow". Pointing at someone else why they can't show or do. It is finally starting to cat h up with them.

I was a member about 12 years ago foe several years when Tony Abbott and John Bair came to me and my store and picked up donations. I did that field a few years. Enjoyed it quite a bit. Unti I stated to see it was not for the average joe, but for the rich and famous. I quit them after my eyes were opened. I am now sober for 6+ years.
 
Todd-

I have no bone to pick with you or the other good men and women who donate their time, effort and money to support SFW and other conservation groups. During the last couple of years as I have been pursuing this issue, I have met many good people who have asked me why I am attacking their organization. The honest truth is I agree with much of what SFW does. However, SFW?s absolute refusal to open its books and demonstrate that it is spending the money generated from the Expo tags on actual conservation projects has been a watershed issue for me. I have personally met with both Don Peay and Miles Moretti regarding this issue and I have come to the conclusion that neither SFW nor MDF will ever provide the public with accountability and transparency regarding these public assets unless they are required to do so. Unfortunately, neither the State nor the DWR are going to take the lead in ensuring that this occurs. As a result, it is up to us as sportsmen to step up and demand accountability.

In summary, I have no interest in attacking or destroying SFW. However, I refuse to silently stand by and turn a blind eye to the issue of the convention permits. I used to be a member of SFW but I will not support a group that takes public assets and refuses to provide any accounting as to how those assets are used. I would ask you and other SFW members to reach out to SFW?s leadership urge them to reconsider their position and provide the transparency that the public deserves. As I previously told Don, it would be much for SFW to voluntarily do the right thing than to be compelled to do so. While I respect you for supporting a cause that you believe in, I too supporting a cause that I believe in.


Hawkeye

Browning A-Bolt 300 Win Mag
Winchester Apex .50 Cal
Mathews Drenalin LD
 
>LAST EDITED ON Jun-19-12
>AT 05:32?PM (MST)
>
>Mr. Hawkins & Friends,
>
>With all due respect it is
>hard for me to respond
>because I know what is
>coming. With that
>said here goes. I am
>appalled at the bias and
>negative attacks on SFW, it's
>members, Board Members, and yes
>Don Peay.
>
>There must be more to it
>that Conservation Tag Sales, The
>Expo, Financials, and so on.
> Maybe it's how much
>SFW has accomplished within Utah,
>Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, and
>now all of America.
>While SFW is fighting for
>each of you with the
>Wolf War, Predator Management, and
>Habitat Projects you are attacking
>SFW because you don't agree
>with a small percentage of
>what SFW does. SFW
>isn't attacking RMEF but SFW's
>Model is different and the
>SFW Model is helping each
>of the States to accomplish
>amazing results.
>
>It would be impossible to find
>anyone you agree 100% with
>including your best friend, spouse,
>business partner,etc. I am very
>involved with SFW. I
>receive no compensation but spend
>a great deal of time
>working on many of the
>issues affecting all sportsmen not
>just SFW Members. I
>look forward to when we
>can all realize that although
>we differ and often disagree
>we aren't enemies.
>
>I don't agree with your model
>but I thank you for
>your willingness to be involved.
> Just think that maybe
>if we all spent this
>valuable time building rather than
>attacking we might get more
>done.
>
>Todd Abelhouzen
>SFW, Dixie Chapter


Is this a joke? SFW's wolf policy strategy was incredibly destructive. Facts make things messy, of course. Ignor facts at your own peril, as they say.
 
"I am now sober for 6+ years." Robiland hahaha.

***********************************
Member RMEF, Pope & Young Club, UBNM, UWC & the SFW Hate Club
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-19-12 AT 11:34PM (MST)[p]Todd,

1. I never asked who you are. I simply guessed you are too young to remember the United Way scandal, and stated such.

2. I am not a police officer.

3. I have made zero arrests. Although DP would be my first if I could, under market poaching charges.

4. Sorry if you don't like folks from the other 49 states attacking DP's model, but SFW is violating a national model, not a state model. And they are doing so on federal property.

5. I spent thousands of hours as a board of director on the largest wildlife org in my previous state. An org that defended the NAMWC for 100+ years without once selling public resources for unaccountable gain. Shame on you.

6. You should also know enough to refrain from addressing a police officer as a "cop". Despite the fact I am neither. :)

7. I must congratulate you if at least you really know what the NAMWC is. SFW employee X-Treme openly admitted he didn't.


***********************************
Member RMEF, Pope & Young Club, UBNM, UWC & the SFW Hate Club
 
>LAST EDITED ON Jun-19-12
>AT 05:32?PM (MST)
>

>While SFW is fighting for
>each of you with the
>Wolf War, Predator Management, and
>Habitat Projects you are attacking
>SFW because you don't agree
>with a small percentage of
>what SFW does. SFW
>isn't attacking RMEF but SFW's
>Model is different and the
>SFW Model is helping each
>of the States to accomplish
>amazing results.
>
>>
>Todd Abelhouzen
>SFW, Dixie Chapter

ABE, Im glad you are passionate about conservation but I suggest you find a new org to contribute through.

The fact is SFW almost torpedoed wolf delisting and was embarrased publicly for misrepresenting the position of other more reputable organizations. Furthermore, wolf delisting happened in spite of SFW/BGF's efforts. The fact that this topic was off limits to the debate Don weaseled out of should speak volumes to the truth regarding wolf delisting.

Why support an organization that takes public tags in the name of conservation yet refuses to account for where those funds are sent? The fact they will not (likely ever) allow an audit should tell you something is fishy. Because the primary funding source of SFW is tags from the public (you, me, everybody) I believe we are entitled to a full accounting of those funds generated.

"Whatever you are, be a good one."
- Abraham Lincoln
 
Randy and Jason,

below is the undedited terms of the debate, as written by Jason on April 10, 2012.

I am surprised the debate has been cancelled by Randy, this is what we agreed to, and now he wants to change the rules.

We agreed this was never about SFW and RMEF, it is Don and Randy, per simple agreements below.

So, why was the debate cancelled when the agreed upon topics could be fulled discussed and debated ?

Don Peay


From: Jason Hawkins [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 2:29 PM
To: [email protected]; Randy Newberg
Cc: Jason Hawkins
Subject: Conference Call

Don and Randy-

Thank you for participating in our conference call today. During our call, we discussed the following with regard to the upcoming debate:

1. The debate will be held on the evening of 6/27/2012. I mentioned that I had some leads on potential locations for the debate but Don suggested that we look into one of the Larry Miller theatres. Don agreed to reach out to Greg Miller to see if this would be possible.

2. Prior to the debate, Randy and I will accompany Don on a tour of SFW projects in the Beaver, Utah. The moderator will also be invited to participate in the tour but will not be required to do so.

3. The parties discussed the following potential mediators: Shane Mahoney, Val Geist, Ron Reagan, Chris Madsen, Brett Prettyman and Adam Eackle. The parties agreed that Shane Mahoney would be the most logical candidate. Don agreed to reach out to Mr. Mahoney to see if he would be willing to act as the moderator.

4. Don agreed to produce documents showing SFW expenditures of conservation permit monies for the last 5 years. Don stated that he cannot agree to produce financial records for the convention since that is a joint venture between SFW and MDF. Randy agreed to reach out to Byron Bateman and Miles Moretti to see if SFW and MDF would be willing to produce those records.

5. The parties agreed to the following general topics for the debate:

a. States Rights/10th Amendment.

b. The Public Trust Doctrine ? How do the trustees responsibilities to the corpus of the trust (the animals) related to their responsibilities to the beneficiaries of the trust (the people).

c. Scientific Management ? Science v. Politics.

d. Wolf Delisting ? The parties agreed that it would be better not to get bogged down with what happened in the past but to focus on current issues and what lies ahead with regarding to wolf delisting and management.

e. Future Funding of Wildlife Management and Conservation.

f. Landowners ? The different approaches used by different states with regard to landowners. How to balance the public v. private interests.

6. The parties agreed to the following general format for the debate:

a. Opening statements.

b. Questions from the moderator covering the topics set forth above.

c. Pre-screened questions from the audience.

7. The parties agreed to refrain from debating the issues online in advance of the debate. I will post a general message on monstermuleys.com stating the following:

a. The parties had a productive conference call today regarding the format for the upcoming debate that lasted over an hour. This was a very helpful and positive discussion.

b. Don and Randy will be appearing in the personal capacities ? not as representatives for SFW, RMEF or any other group.

c. The debate will take place on the evening of 6/27/2012. Details regarding the start time and location are forthcoming.

d. Anybody who is interested and is willing to be respectful and civil is invited to attend.

e. Time permitting, Don and Randy will take some questions from the audience regarding these issues. We are still exploring how best to solicit and screen those questions.

f. Don and Randy have agreed to refrain from debating these issues online in advance of the June 27th debate. However, this will not preclude them from responding to select questions or statements that relate to these general issues.

g. In the meantime, please keep the discussion civil and we look forward to seeing you at the debate.

If either of you have anything to add or clarify, please feel free to do so. Otherwise, thank you for your time and please reply directly to this email thread regarding any updates as to the moderator, location, etc.

Thanks.

Jason Hawkins
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-20-12 AT 02:05PM (MST)[p]Don,

On you re-post under # 4 it says you will provide financial documents for SFW. It has been reported that you backed away from that agreement. I would guess that Randy and Hawkeye will have to answer who backed out. I won't bring up the wolf issue as you don't want to wade into that. What's you thoughts on conservation organizations being more open with their financials? What about your thoughts on public ownership of animals? If you don't think SFW should open their financials why?
 
Appears to me that statement number 4 has not been satisfactorily met in Randy's opinion. Therefore he has postponed the debate until it has. I have never read about a cancellation only a postponement have I missed something?

I would like to see expenditures of all conservation monies (vs. 5 yrs) addressed and see how much of that money has involved purchasing SFW Assets. Is that a possibilty?
 
Seems to me Randy agreed to A LOT of stipulations yet the one thing requested of Don was for Randy to look at the SFW financials. For an org like SFW always ready at the trough for more PUBLIC tags, showing your benefactors where the money goes shouldn't be that big of a request...

"Whatever you are, be a good one."
- Abraham Lincoln
 
Never was about Don and Randy. I think I might have even mentioned that early on.

LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
I can not take SFW seriously anymore as an organization. First, Don proposes Gilligan Island tours and restricts the topics for a public debate.

Oh, and the man behind the SFW curtain pulling the strings and getting consulting fees directly or through affiliated parties suddenly has no influence over whether SFW produces transparent financials. None. Zilch. Nada.

If Don is suddenly so powerless over at SFW then why did every single member of the "real" SFW leadership get laryngitis on the transparency issue?

Hmmmmm.....

RMEF is quickly rising to be the "go to" wildlife organization willing to roll up its sleeves and make sure there is no fox in the chicken house. Thank you RMEF!
 

Similar threads

Founder
  • Poll
You hunting Turkey's this year? (Poll)
Replies
67
Views
3k
BigChiefJ
BigChiefJ
D
Mule deer decline in Utah
Replies
37
Views
1k
ridgetops
ridgetops
elks96
Last one for the wall?
Replies
13
Views
1k
elks96
elks96

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

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

IMG_7703.jpeg
brianlatturner92618-11.jpg
897ED863-2952-4482-8ABC-6FA5B43A5CA5.jpeg
Screenshot_20230122_165420_Gallery.jpg
20220819_072041.jpg
Big Buck Down
IMG_5100 copy.jpg
7B7B10D5-E477-4A31-88D9-32020643FCDC.jpeg
IMG_2414.JPG
Screenshot_20200127-155929_Gallery.jpg
Hook Cheater.jpg
PXL_20240308_224716626.jpg
Back
Top Bottom