Grand Slam/FNAWS verdict
- Thread starter BUCKSPY
- Start date
I also am confused at the path this has taken. These groups, if working together, can get so much done for wildlife. Yet egos and money always seem rule the day.
-------------------------
www.sagebasin.com
-------------------------
-------------------------
www.sagebasin.com
-------------------------
S
scree
Guest
Too bad about the law suit. Hopefully GSCO dose A whole lot good with that money.
H
HuntAddiction
Guest
What a tragedy. Ego and money ends up screwing all of us that truly love sheep. I guess the next target for Gland Slam club to sue will be the estate of Jack O'Conner because he was the first to use the phrase and after all even he should have known 40+ years ago that the phrase belongs to the GS Club. What a joke. I know who I support now.
I
isayNUNYA
Guest
To bad problems are not solved with violence. Some a these GSC/Ovis guys need a good ass kicking. Its all about the # a kills to them.
Its hard to understand why they would take money away from an org. that is furthering what they supposedly stand for.
---------------------------------------
"I needed a cheesy signature saying like everyone else"
Its hard to understand why they would take money away from an org. that is furthering what they supposedly stand for.
---------------------------------------
"I needed a cheesy signature saying like everyone else"
D
DeepColor
Guest
I'm a GSC/O life member and I don't think I deserve a "good ass kicking".
The jury found FNAWS liable for the civil law violations of trademark infringement (unfair competition), copyright infringement, breach of contract, interference with business relations, and malice.
Yes, I said MALICE. Do you know what that means? I had to look it up: "a deep-seated often unexplainable desire to see another suffer". FNAWS was found liable for this! If you are a FNAWS member, why don't you go ask your Board of Directors what they did to cause a jury to find them liable for malice?
Did you notice that FNAWS also counter-sued GSC/O? Well, the jury found that GSC/O did NOTHING wrong and had abided by their contracts.
But this is all old news. The jury found out the truth and the case is over. Read the verdict again.
GSC/O is great organization, with great magazines, and is funding more and more dollars of conservation projects each year. Here is GSC/O's funding history chart:
The jury found FNAWS liable for the civil law violations of trademark infringement (unfair competition), copyright infringement, breach of contract, interference with business relations, and malice.
Yes, I said MALICE. Do you know what that means? I had to look it up: "a deep-seated often unexplainable desire to see another suffer". FNAWS was found liable for this! If you are a FNAWS member, why don't you go ask your Board of Directors what they did to cause a jury to find them liable for malice?
Did you notice that FNAWS also counter-sued GSC/O? Well, the jury found that GSC/O did NOTHING wrong and had abided by their contracts.
But this is all old news. The jury found out the truth and the case is over. Read the verdict again.
GSC/O is great organization, with great magazines, and is funding more and more dollars of conservation projects each year. Here is GSC/O's funding history chart:
S
shpsgr
Guest
LAST EDITED ON Feb-04-08 AT 06:52AM (MST)[p]Well the GSCO should have an extra 2 million or so to put into their pockets or maybe use for funding some goat study in bum f#*k Egypt or one of the 'stan countries so another Ovis trophy may be imported.
I am a member of both organizations and I agree with DeepColor, I don't think my ass should be kicked, but I don't think it would hurt to kick a few of the board members!! I think it was MALICE to bring this suit on.
I really don't understand what the problem is (other than ego) with the common use of the terms grand slam, 3/4 slam and the other terms in the suit. Many other organizations seem to use a few of the terms or derivitives of them also. It was a sad day for sheep hunters and the people that fund these two organizations to see it come to this.
It was tried in an Alabama court, wonder how it would've faired in a Wyoming one?
Why don't we look at a little funding history of FNAWS, they do seem to put the sheep on the mountain, so the GSCO can take them off!!
YEAR FNAWS GIA FUNDING PERMIT $ OTHER TOTAL
1984 $330,834 $228,150 $0 $558,984
1985 $455,733 $191,400 $0 $647,133
1986 $0 $285,000 $0 $285,000
1987 $277,250 $370,000 $0 $647,250
1988 $277,006 $444,250 $0 $721,256
1989 $299,263 $393,748 $0 $693,011
1990 $261,323 $342,500 $0 $603,823
1991 $303,781 $333,000 $0 $636,781
1992 $235,407 $518,500 $0 $753,907
1993 $417,026 $1,056,500 $0 $1,473,526
1994 $335,730 $1,413,500 $0 $1,749,230
1995 $341,160 $1,391,250 $0 $1,732,410
1996 $422,538 $1,517,500 $33,545 $1,973,583
1997 $104,500 $1,468,250 $31,100 $1,603,850
1998 $241,570 $1,872,200 $40,794 $2,154,564
1999 $ 76,090 $1,694,250 $49,446 $1,770,340
2000 $124,200 $1,484,250 $51,086 $1,659,536
2001 $152,720 $1,629,500 $152,406 $1,782,220
2002 $223,481 $1,767,750 $71,391 $2,062,622
2003 $304,301 $1,859,600 $81,723 $2,245,624
2004 $293,625 $1,708,000 $45,738 $2,047,363
2005 $260,662 $2,236,500 $17,250 $2,514,412
TOTALS: $5,738,200 $24,205,598 $574,479 $30,316,425
Funding provided by the Foundation for North American Wild Sheep
The following table shows the states and provinces where FNAWS has funded conservation projects.
NATIONAL FNAWS FUNDING TO DATE
ALASKA $955,234
ALBERTA $1,952,669
ARIZONA $3,476,253
BRITISH COLUMBIA $1,554,842
CALIFORNIA $1,743,534
COLORADO $1,524,303
IDAHO $1,562,923
MEXICO $3,878,849
MONTANA $3,337,631
NEBRASKA $86,500
NEVADA $1,236,053
NEW MEXICO $1,752,800
NORTH DAKOTA $374,603
NORTHWEST TERRITORY $114,500
OREGON $1,278,439
SOUTH DAKOTA $15,500
TEXAS $699,762
UTAH $1,804,755
WASHINGTON $193,103
WYOMING $911,311
YUKON $287,103
MULTI STATE OR NATIONWIDE $975,758
TOTAL $30,316,425
CHAPTER & AFFILIATE FUNDING
FNAWS CHAPTER FUNDING TO DATE
ALASKA $168,885
ALBERTA $70,000
CALIFORNIA $6,000
EASTERN $1,217,671
IDAHO $139,084
IOWA $136,370
MINNESOTA - WISCONSIN $1,286,850
MONTANA $113,013
NEW MEXICO $33,846
OREGON $60,451
UTAH $1,800,000
WASHINGTON $34,351
WYOMING $240,729
TOTAL $5,307,250
FNAWS AFFILIATE FUNDING
ARIZONA DESERT BIGHORN SHEEP SOCIETY $4,312,707
FRATERNITY OF THE DESERT BIGHORN $632,484
NEVADA BIGHORNS UNLIMITED, ELKO $114,898
NEVADA BIGHORNS UNLIMITED, FALLON $248,000
NEVADA BIGHORNS UNLIMITED, RENO $650,000
ROCKY MOUNTAIN BIGHORN SOCIETY $2,100,000
SOCIETY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BIGHORN SHEEP $274,637
TEXAS BIGHORN SHEEP SOCIETY $841,456
WILD SHEEP SOCIETY OF BC $69,587
TOTAL $10,438,583
Applying for funding from FNAWS:
The Foundation is actively involved in the conservation, propagation and intensive management of wild sheep and their habitats. The Foundation annually funds a wide variety of meaningful and essential projects from a variety of grant applicants.
I am a member of both organizations and I agree with DeepColor, I don't think my ass should be kicked, but I don't think it would hurt to kick a few of the board members!! I think it was MALICE to bring this suit on.
I really don't understand what the problem is (other than ego) with the common use of the terms grand slam, 3/4 slam and the other terms in the suit. Many other organizations seem to use a few of the terms or derivitives of them also. It was a sad day for sheep hunters and the people that fund these two organizations to see it come to this.
It was tried in an Alabama court, wonder how it would've faired in a Wyoming one?
Why don't we look at a little funding history of FNAWS, they do seem to put the sheep on the mountain, so the GSCO can take them off!!
YEAR FNAWS GIA FUNDING PERMIT $ OTHER TOTAL
1984 $330,834 $228,150 $0 $558,984
1985 $455,733 $191,400 $0 $647,133
1986 $0 $285,000 $0 $285,000
1987 $277,250 $370,000 $0 $647,250
1988 $277,006 $444,250 $0 $721,256
1989 $299,263 $393,748 $0 $693,011
1990 $261,323 $342,500 $0 $603,823
1991 $303,781 $333,000 $0 $636,781
1992 $235,407 $518,500 $0 $753,907
1993 $417,026 $1,056,500 $0 $1,473,526
1994 $335,730 $1,413,500 $0 $1,749,230
1995 $341,160 $1,391,250 $0 $1,732,410
1996 $422,538 $1,517,500 $33,545 $1,973,583
1997 $104,500 $1,468,250 $31,100 $1,603,850
1998 $241,570 $1,872,200 $40,794 $2,154,564
1999 $ 76,090 $1,694,250 $49,446 $1,770,340
2000 $124,200 $1,484,250 $51,086 $1,659,536
2001 $152,720 $1,629,500 $152,406 $1,782,220
2002 $223,481 $1,767,750 $71,391 $2,062,622
2003 $304,301 $1,859,600 $81,723 $2,245,624
2004 $293,625 $1,708,000 $45,738 $2,047,363
2005 $260,662 $2,236,500 $17,250 $2,514,412
TOTALS: $5,738,200 $24,205,598 $574,479 $30,316,425
Funding provided by the Foundation for North American Wild Sheep
The following table shows the states and provinces where FNAWS has funded conservation projects.
NATIONAL FNAWS FUNDING TO DATE
ALASKA $955,234
ALBERTA $1,952,669
ARIZONA $3,476,253
BRITISH COLUMBIA $1,554,842
CALIFORNIA $1,743,534
COLORADO $1,524,303
IDAHO $1,562,923
MEXICO $3,878,849
MONTANA $3,337,631
NEBRASKA $86,500
NEVADA $1,236,053
NEW MEXICO $1,752,800
NORTH DAKOTA $374,603
NORTHWEST TERRITORY $114,500
OREGON $1,278,439
SOUTH DAKOTA $15,500
TEXAS $699,762
UTAH $1,804,755
WASHINGTON $193,103
WYOMING $911,311
YUKON $287,103
MULTI STATE OR NATIONWIDE $975,758
TOTAL $30,316,425
CHAPTER & AFFILIATE FUNDING
FNAWS CHAPTER FUNDING TO DATE
ALASKA $168,885
ALBERTA $70,000
CALIFORNIA $6,000
EASTERN $1,217,671
IDAHO $139,084
IOWA $136,370
MINNESOTA - WISCONSIN $1,286,850
MONTANA $113,013
NEW MEXICO $33,846
OREGON $60,451
UTAH $1,800,000
WASHINGTON $34,351
WYOMING $240,729
TOTAL $5,307,250
FNAWS AFFILIATE FUNDING
ARIZONA DESERT BIGHORN SHEEP SOCIETY $4,312,707
FRATERNITY OF THE DESERT BIGHORN $632,484
NEVADA BIGHORNS UNLIMITED, ELKO $114,898
NEVADA BIGHORNS UNLIMITED, FALLON $248,000
NEVADA BIGHORNS UNLIMITED, RENO $650,000
ROCKY MOUNTAIN BIGHORN SOCIETY $2,100,000
SOCIETY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BIGHORN SHEEP $274,637
TEXAS BIGHORN SHEEP SOCIETY $841,456
WILD SHEEP SOCIETY OF BC $69,587
TOTAL $10,438,583
Applying for funding from FNAWS:
The Foundation is actively involved in the conservation, propagation and intensive management of wild sheep and their habitats. The Foundation annually funds a wide variety of meaningful and essential projects from a variety of grant applicants.
W
Warren
Guest
The FNAWS cry was that they put sheep on the mountain. Fair enough. So why was it important to them to get into a fight about rewarding sheep being killed. Also, why was it important to get into the international sheep business? It seemed like Grand Slam had all this covered. It appears that someone was trying to make the Grand Slam club go away. It didn't work. I am a member of both. Get together and work this out before any more money is wasted for legal fees.
S
shpsgr
Guest
When I started out being a member in the Grand Slam Club, that is what it was, not GSC/O. I liked it better when GSC was just concerned with our North Amrican sheep. The Ovis part, the membership didn't have a say in when that part was added or the name was changed. I would've rather seen two seperate organizations and let the international sheep hunters support and be recognized by their own organization. I feel like some of my dues are helping international causes and I'd rather help one's closer to home, maybe someday I might be able to draw there.
To participate in the 3/4 draws before, you had to be a member of both GSC and FNAWS, The people were listed in both publications, on who was eligible for that drawing. FNAWS is about putting sheep on the mountain and us members like to see some recognition for hunting accomplishments. So why shouldn't a member be recognized in the FNAWS magazine or by the organization for his Grand Slam or hunting accomplishment or have a chance at a 3/4 or 1/2 slam draw? The GSC/O is a record keeping organization, so what is the problem with being recognized by FNAWS for one's accomplishments? FNAWS was not handing out numbers, GSC/O does that. So how was FNAWS trying to make the GSC go away?
When the GSC started attending the FNAWS conventions, the GSC didn't have that many members. FNAWS helped GSC out a lot with their membership numbers and on going from that little paper newsletter we used to receive, to the great magazine that is put out now. If GSC/O would tear the magazine in half and leave the Ovis part out, I wouldn't feel like I was missing anything. The people on the GSC side are my kind of people and I do relate to them, not much in common with the Ovis side.
I do like both organizations, supporting them both. I do feel a bit like GSCO rode on the FNAWS shirt tail to get to where they are today and I feel sorry about the way they repay FNAWS for the help received on the way. Being a member of both organizations, it almost feels like you have to choose one over the other. I don't see how that benefits the wild sheep we are trying to help.
I don't know why FNAWS is concerned with international hunting, I like to see my contributions go closer to home, where I might have a chance to hunt someday and that isn't international or after some goats.
To participate in the 3/4 draws before, you had to be a member of both GSC and FNAWS, The people were listed in both publications, on who was eligible for that drawing. FNAWS is about putting sheep on the mountain and us members like to see some recognition for hunting accomplishments. So why shouldn't a member be recognized in the FNAWS magazine or by the organization for his Grand Slam or hunting accomplishment or have a chance at a 3/4 or 1/2 slam draw? The GSC/O is a record keeping organization, so what is the problem with being recognized by FNAWS for one's accomplishments? FNAWS was not handing out numbers, GSC/O does that. So how was FNAWS trying to make the GSC go away?
When the GSC started attending the FNAWS conventions, the GSC didn't have that many members. FNAWS helped GSC out a lot with their membership numbers and on going from that little paper newsletter we used to receive, to the great magazine that is put out now. If GSC/O would tear the magazine in half and leave the Ovis part out, I wouldn't feel like I was missing anything. The people on the GSC side are my kind of people and I do relate to them, not much in common with the Ovis side.
I do like both organizations, supporting them both. I do feel a bit like GSCO rode on the FNAWS shirt tail to get to where they are today and I feel sorry about the way they repay FNAWS for the help received on the way. Being a member of both organizations, it almost feels like you have to choose one over the other. I don't see how that benefits the wild sheep we are trying to help.
I don't know why FNAWS is concerned with international hunting, I like to see my contributions go closer to home, where I might have a chance to hunt someday and that isn't international or after some goats.
D
DeepColor
Guest
Hi Shpsgr,
Sorry to hear that Ovis magazine isn't of a lot of interest to you. I used to feel the same way, but now I really like Ovis. When I was priced out of the North American sheep market, I went on a much cheaper international hunt. This helped open my eyes to all hunting opportunities, especially new ones that I could afford. Also, Ovis contains all the mountain goat hunting reports, which I like.
Regarding the 3/4 Slammer draws, GSC/O and FNAWS drafted a legal contract ("Agreement of Goodwill") to enable everyone to still participate in the draw. It was a win-win-win agreement for both orgs and hunters. Unfortunately, FNAWS broke its promises. The jury found FNAWS liable for this breach of contract and this cost FNAWS $100,000. Read the verdict again--it is all right there.
As a hunter, I wish FNAWS would have kept its promises, but they didn't and it caused this thing to get worse. But is over now, thank god.
One last word about the international scope: FNAWS merged with ISHA in 2004. ISHA is international in nature. So both of the major sheep conservation orgs are international. So there is no difference there.
If you really want to support some things close to home, I would get involved, with Rocky Mtn Bighorns Society (CO), ADBSS (AZ), Washington FNAWS, or any of the state orgs.
I am a life member of GSC/O, so my support is there forever. I love the magazines--there is nothing like them out there AND they fund a lot of conservation projects with the money.
Sorry to hear that Ovis magazine isn't of a lot of interest to you. I used to feel the same way, but now I really like Ovis. When I was priced out of the North American sheep market, I went on a much cheaper international hunt. This helped open my eyes to all hunting opportunities, especially new ones that I could afford. Also, Ovis contains all the mountain goat hunting reports, which I like.
Regarding the 3/4 Slammer draws, GSC/O and FNAWS drafted a legal contract ("Agreement of Goodwill") to enable everyone to still participate in the draw. It was a win-win-win agreement for both orgs and hunters. Unfortunately, FNAWS broke its promises. The jury found FNAWS liable for this breach of contract and this cost FNAWS $100,000. Read the verdict again--it is all right there.
As a hunter, I wish FNAWS would have kept its promises, but they didn't and it caused this thing to get worse. But is over now, thank god.
One last word about the international scope: FNAWS merged with ISHA in 2004. ISHA is international in nature. So both of the major sheep conservation orgs are international. So there is no difference there.
If you really want to support some things close to home, I would get involved, with Rocky Mtn Bighorns Society (CO), ADBSS (AZ), Washington FNAWS, or any of the state orgs.
I am a life member of GSC/O, so my support is there forever. I love the magazines--there is nothing like them out there AND they fund a lot of conservation projects with the money.
HornedToad
Active Member
- Messages
- 415
LAST EDITED ON Feb-05-08 AT 08:52AM (MST)[p]I am a life member of FNAWS, and a life member of GSC. I support both organizations. But I do not believe the "sheep hunting and conservation world" is big enough to support two conventions.
If Dennis Campbell had been unhappy with the FNAWS conventions, he should have worked harder to improve FNAWS. He should not have pretended to embrase FNAWS, while "going to school" on FNAWS and its convention, before separating and setting up his competing GSC convention.
There is much that FNAWS can do to improve its convention, its connection with its membership, and its relationships with the sheep outfitting community. Hopefully, this lawsuit will force much needed change.
For my part, I will continue to enjoy my GSC magazine and utilize the GSC website. But I will honor my commitment to sheep conservation by attending the FNAWS convention, and not attending the competing GSC convention.
If Dennis Campbell had been unhappy with the FNAWS conventions, he should have worked harder to improve FNAWS. He should not have pretended to embrase FNAWS, while "going to school" on FNAWS and its convention, before separating and setting up his competing GSC convention.
There is much that FNAWS can do to improve its convention, its connection with its membership, and its relationships with the sheep outfitting community. Hopefully, this lawsuit will force much needed change.
For my part, I will continue to enjoy my GSC magazine and utilize the GSC website. But I will honor my commitment to sheep conservation by attending the FNAWS convention, and not attending the competing GSC convention.
In my humble opinion, there looms a far greater threat than this pizzin match between the entitities. Its the aging of the sheep hunting fraternity and the fact that working class individuals have been somewhat priced out of sheep hunting.
I have no idea what the real numbers are but it seems as though much of the membership of the organizations are on the other side of 60 years of age and there really aren't many sheep hunting "30 somethings" out there. Its hard to embrace the idea of being involved in either organizations when you can't draw a tag and the cheapest dall hunt out there is 25% of your annual income.
I'm not scraping the poverty bucket but its a sacrifice for the family for me to pursue my sheep hunting dreams. I'm fortunate enough to have a work schedule that allows me to work a second job but the situation isn't for everyone. I'm not complaining about it in a sour grapes sort of way but feel I'm pointing out the obvious.
A lack of affordable sheep hunting opportunities = a decrease in those interested in being a part of these organizations and in turn less folks to carry the torch for wild sheep in the future.
I have no idea what the real numbers are but it seems as though much of the membership of the organizations are on the other side of 60 years of age and there really aren't many sheep hunting "30 somethings" out there. Its hard to embrace the idea of being involved in either organizations when you can't draw a tag and the cheapest dall hunt out there is 25% of your annual income.
I'm not scraping the poverty bucket but its a sacrifice for the family for me to pursue my sheep hunting dreams. I'm fortunate enough to have a work schedule that allows me to work a second job but the situation isn't for everyone. I'm not complaining about it in a sour grapes sort of way but feel I'm pointing out the obvious.
A lack of affordable sheep hunting opportunities = a decrease in those interested in being a part of these organizations and in turn less folks to carry the torch for wild sheep in the future.
fullcurl74
Active Member
- Messages
- 368
I hope Campbell and his cronies can sleep well at night knowing how much money they took out of sheep conservation. Here's who lost in the suit:
1. Wild sheep
2. Wild sheep hunters
3. All hunters - what would the anti-hunters like more than dividing us on such a lame issue as this?
Here's who won in the suit:
1. Lawyers
Maybe RMEF should sue ranchers for using the term "bull". Maybe MDF should sue rodeo for using the term "buck".
This is ridiculous.
1. Wild sheep
2. Wild sheep hunters
3. All hunters - what would the anti-hunters like more than dividing us on such a lame issue as this?
Here's who won in the suit:
1. Lawyers
Maybe RMEF should sue ranchers for using the term "bull". Maybe MDF should sue rodeo for using the term "buck".
This is ridiculous.
fullcurl74
Active Member
- Messages
- 368
Imagine how many hunts the GSCO executive director can afford to go on now.
Didn't GSCO agree years back to not have their convention on the same weekend as FNAWS? I would like to see sheep hunters show as much support for the FNAWS convention as possible. Maybe if nobody showed up at the GCSO convention, it would let them know our feelings. Obviously, that won't happen since GCSO/OVIS has their following, but look at how much this is dividing the sheep hunting community.
Didn't GSCO agree years back to not have their convention on the same weekend as FNAWS? I would like to see sheep hunters show as much support for the FNAWS convention as possible. Maybe if nobody showed up at the GCSO convention, it would let them know our feelings. Obviously, that won't happen since GCSO/OVIS has their following, but look at how much this is dividing the sheep hunting community.
MNHunter
Active Member
- Messages
- 938
>Imagine how many hunts the GSCO
>executive director can afford to
>go on now.
>
>Didn't GSCO agree years back to
>not have their convention on
>the same weekend as FNAWS?
Actually, it was FNAWS that changed their dates to overlap with the already scheduled GSCO convention.
For the record, I have no dog in this fight. I was a member of both, but no more. I don't have time or money to waste arguing over terms such as Grand Slam. I'm one of those younger folks talked about above that looks at the future of sheep hunting and is not impressed. I make very good money for my age and maybe someday I'll be able to convince the family that instead of buying a car, I'm going to go on a vacation to hunt sheep. Yes, it is my dream but I fear sheep hunting is getting out of reach for most people. Once that happens, support dries up.
"Whatever you are, be a good one."
- Abraham Lincoln
>executive director can afford to
>go on now.
>
>Didn't GSCO agree years back to
>not have their convention on
>the same weekend as FNAWS?
Actually, it was FNAWS that changed their dates to overlap with the already scheduled GSCO convention.
For the record, I have no dog in this fight. I was a member of both, but no more. I don't have time or money to waste arguing over terms such as Grand Slam. I'm one of those younger folks talked about above that looks at the future of sheep hunting and is not impressed. I make very good money for my age and maybe someday I'll be able to convince the family that instead of buying a car, I'm going to go on a vacation to hunt sheep. Yes, it is my dream but I fear sheep hunting is getting out of reach for most people. Once that happens, support dries up.
"Whatever you are, be a good one."
- Abraham Lincoln
dwalton
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,526
Buckspy and MNHunter can clearly see the bigger picture. At 42, I'm one of the "young guys" of the two groups. Take a look at the photos of the conventions of FNAWS and GSCO. It's probably safe to say that in 10 years almost half of the membership will have moved on to the Happy Hunting Grounds.
I'm glad I got my slam when I did because there's no way in hell I'm forking over $100K+ to go on 4 hunts. I do love to hunt sheep, but I'm afraid I'll have to get my sheep fix vicariously through the magazines of FNAWS and GSCO. With a family of 3 kids, I have other priorities.
I'm not sure what the solution is, but we won't see a change until membership drops off. Right now there is too much $$$$ involved.
I know that the almighty dollar drives things, but the "Sheep Show" sure was a lot more fun when everyone got along and the gathering was a smaller one in Reno.
I'm glad I got my slam when I did because there's no way in hell I'm forking over $100K+ to go on 4 hunts. I do love to hunt sheep, but I'm afraid I'll have to get my sheep fix vicariously through the magazines of FNAWS and GSCO. With a family of 3 kids, I have other priorities.
I'm not sure what the solution is, but we won't see a change until membership drops off. Right now there is too much $$$$ involved.
I know that the almighty dollar drives things, but the "Sheep Show" sure was a lot more fun when everyone got along and the gathering was a smaller one in Reno.
fullcurl74
Active Member
- Messages
- 368
>Buckspy and MNHunter can clearly see
>the bigger picture. At 42,
>I'm one of the "young
>guys" of the two groups.
> Take a look at
>the photos of the conventions
>of FNAWS and GSCO.
>It's probably safe to say
>that in 10 years almost
>half of the membership will
>have moved on to the
>Happy Hunting Grounds.
>>
>I'm not sure what the solution
>is, but we won't see
>a change until membership drops
>off. Right now there
>is too much $$$$ involved.
>>
>I know that the almighty dollar
>drives things, but the "Sheep
>Show" sure was a lot
>more fun when everyone got
>along and the gathering was
>a smaller one in Reno.
>
While I agree that the average Joe has been priced out of sheep hunting by supply & demand, I don't see how that is a "bigger picture" view of what GCSO has done with this frivolous lawsuit.
I'm one of the younger, poorer wannabe sheep hunters that have been priced out. I would like to agree with you on the aging sheep hunter theory, but I just don't see the price of a Stone hunt coming down because sheep hunters are getting old & dying. Look at the hunt reports from Canada & Alaska. Lots of 30-40 year olds, especially on the backpack hunts. Anyway, the cost of sheep hunting is not an issue we can solve here or anywhere else.
This thread started out discussing the lawsuit. I can't believe it wasn't thrown out of the courtroom, and GCSO needs to be thanked for taking money away from the sheep.
>the bigger picture. At 42,
>I'm one of the "young
>guys" of the two groups.
> Take a look at
>the photos of the conventions
>of FNAWS and GSCO.
>It's probably safe to say
>that in 10 years almost
>half of the membership will
>have moved on to the
>Happy Hunting Grounds.
>>
>I'm not sure what the solution
>is, but we won't see
>a change until membership drops
>off. Right now there
>is too much $$$$ involved.
>>
>I know that the almighty dollar
>drives things, but the "Sheep
>Show" sure was a lot
>more fun when everyone got
>along and the gathering was
>a smaller one in Reno.
>
While I agree that the average Joe has been priced out of sheep hunting by supply & demand, I don't see how that is a "bigger picture" view of what GCSO has done with this frivolous lawsuit.
I'm one of the younger, poorer wannabe sheep hunters that have been priced out. I would like to agree with you on the aging sheep hunter theory, but I just don't see the price of a Stone hunt coming down because sheep hunters are getting old & dying. Look at the hunt reports from Canada & Alaska. Lots of 30-40 year olds, especially on the backpack hunts. Anyway, the cost of sheep hunting is not an issue we can solve here or anywhere else.
This thread started out discussing the lawsuit. I can't believe it wasn't thrown out of the courtroom, and GCSO needs to be thanked for taking money away from the sheep.
I find it somewhat disturbing that FNAWS has not come out with a statement to its members on the website. This decision was handed down by an American courtroom by a justice system that I think, we all have a pretty good amount of trust in. That in itself should be somewhat of a statement. This was an overwhelming victory for the GSC and it makes me wonder what sort of legal advice FNAWS was getting in this whole deal. Plain and simple, they got it handed to them in court. Did egos get in the way of better discretionary decision making here? The FNAWS president announced his resignation effective in April.
It should be interesting to see where the proceeds from the lawsuit go with GSC and how much of it ends up on the ground in the form of sheep-related projects. I hope every penny.
When there are almost triple the available desert sheep hunting opportunites in relation to non-Canadian resident stone sheep hunting opportunites, one can see the writing on the wall for a stone hunt. It will continue to escalate.
The future of wild sheep advocacy lies with sheep hunters and without hunting opportunity and recruitment, thing don't look to rosy. Of course thats just my opinion. I could be wrong.
It should be interesting to see where the proceeds from the lawsuit go with GSC and how much of it ends up on the ground in the form of sheep-related projects. I hope every penny.
When there are almost triple the available desert sheep hunting opportunites in relation to non-Canadian resident stone sheep hunting opportunites, one can see the writing on the wall for a stone hunt. It will continue to escalate.
The future of wild sheep advocacy lies with sheep hunters and without hunting opportunity and recruitment, thing don't look to rosy. Of course thats just my opinion. I could be wrong.
dwalton
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,526
I'd be willing to bet that the $2 million settlement will go mostly to pay the legal bills of GSCO.
It is probably safe to say most of this lawsuit was ego driven. Lots of feelings were hurt when Campbell left the FNAWS board. The people on both boards usually are extremely successful and wealthy with egos as large as the rams they hunt. Can't figure what the board of FNAWS was thinking, though. They simply had their azzes handed to them with the decision. Too bad about Ray Lee resigning. Actually, both he and Dennis Campbell are decent men who are good at what they do.
Fullcurl, it's not all GSCO's fault. I'm sure if we were all privy to everything behind the scenes, there would be enough dirty laundry to make us all wonder why we support these organizations. Re-read the court decision. FNAWS struck out on everything, including going against the good will agreement that they signed.
It is probably safe to say most of this lawsuit was ego driven. Lots of feelings were hurt when Campbell left the FNAWS board. The people on both boards usually are extremely successful and wealthy with egos as large as the rams they hunt. Can't figure what the board of FNAWS was thinking, though. They simply had their azzes handed to them with the decision. Too bad about Ray Lee resigning. Actually, both he and Dennis Campbell are decent men who are good at what they do.
Fullcurl, it's not all GSCO's fault. I'm sure if we were all privy to everything behind the scenes, there would be enough dirty laundry to make us all wonder why we support these organizations. Re-read the court decision. FNAWS struck out on everything, including going against the good will agreement that they signed.
1
1010Jake
Guest
I am will the MNhunter on this one. I think both organizations are going to look not so good in the end, which will turn people away from both of them as MNhunter has already done.
Fullcurl is also right that:
Wild Sheep are the losers
Lawyers are the winners
Sad
Fullcurl is also right that:
Wild Sheep are the losers
Lawyers are the winners
Sad
ColoradoRam
Active Member
- Messages
- 402
Unfortunatly this is the exact reason I don't belong to any organazation other than the NWTF. I curently have two Bighorns on the wall from Colorado. It is these ego's that have made it so my son will never get to go to Canada or Mexico one day for a sheep hunt, or myself for that matter. Another thing that upsets me and concerns me for our younger genertaion that is a few years away from hunting, by the time they are old enough to apply it will be virtually impossible with the way bonus and preference points are adding up each year. As Buckspy said its sadly a rich mans club.
fullcurl74
Active Member
- Messages
- 368
I agree with most all the points made in the above three or four posts. It's just frustrating.
I'm sure there are a lot of issues surrounding the lawsuit that I know nothing about. That being said, it's a giant waste of time and money that would otherwise be spent on sheep improvements, and instead was spent on a petty, childish issue of who can use certain words. The last thing we need is fighting amongst ourselves.
I'm sure there are a lot of issues surrounding the lawsuit that I know nothing about. That being said, it's a giant waste of time and money that would otherwise be spent on sheep improvements, and instead was spent on a petty, childish issue of who can use certain words. The last thing we need is fighting amongst ourselves.
P
PopeShawnPaul
Guest
I'm not sure I would hammer the lawyers on this one. The lawyers were merely doing what their client asked of them. You don't blame the gun when someone uses it to shoot another person do you?
I'm a Grand Slam member and have been a member of FNAWS. In reading the decision, it looks like FNAWS kind of asked for what was coming. If you make a deal you live by it. I can't blame Grand Slam for enforcing their deal.
I also can't imagine that Grand Slam's lawyers can bill more than 1/3rd of the judgment...
Shawn
I'm a Grand Slam member and have been a member of FNAWS. In reading the decision, it looks like FNAWS kind of asked for what was coming. If you make a deal you live by it. I can't blame Grand Slam for enforcing their deal.
I also can't imagine that Grand Slam's lawyers can bill more than 1/3rd of the judgment...
Shawn
B
bighornbob
Guest
Obviously FNAWS broke some rules to get their but handed to them in a sling. But GSC comes out the bigger loser for starting this thing. I could see a lawsuit if FNAWS deliberately caused finanical hardhship or something similar but over using a name , come on give your head a shake.
To me this is the same as if a new baseball league tried forming and was not allowed to use the term Home Run or Fly Ball. I doubt you would see the MLB suing anyone.
Like others have said I think a lot of egos got in the way. I personally lost a lot of respect of Dennis Cambell when (I was going to say something but I dont want to get sued).
What's the GSC going to do when Stones numbers crash even more and only residents are allowed to hunt them. They will probably add the California Bighorn or pick a sub-speices as they do right now for their World Slam.
BHB
To me this is the same as if a new baseball league tried forming and was not allowed to use the term Home Run or Fly Ball. I doubt you would see the MLB suing anyone.
Like others have said I think a lot of egos got in the way. I personally lost a lot of respect of Dennis Cambell when (I was going to say something but I dont want to get sued).
What's the GSC going to do when Stones numbers crash even more and only residents are allowed to hunt them. They will probably add the California Bighorn or pick a sub-speices as they do right now for their World Slam.
BHB
littlebighorn
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 5,331
I disagree with those who say it's a waste of time and money to belong to an organization that helped to fund the transplant of 120 new sheep to my home state of Utah last year. I am talking about FNAWS/UFNAWS of course. I don't think GSC has spent a dime here in recent years. The biggest losers are those of us who want to eventually hunt sheep including our kids.
I was a member of both organizations last year, and I read the entire law suit when GSC/OVIS sent it out to it's members. It sounded like petty bickering then, and I told Dennis Campbell that on the phone(along with withdrawing my membership). Now it just feels like pure greed as they take money out of my pocket and away from helping sheep.
I am sure FNAWS is not innocent in all this, but the whole thing is nuts! Who knows, maybe next year the B&C Club will sue RMEF or MDF for publishing B&C scores. They certainly own that intellectual property.
I was a member of both organizations last year, and I read the entire law suit when GSC/OVIS sent it out to it's members. It sounded like petty bickering then, and I told Dennis Campbell that on the phone(along with withdrawing my membership). Now it just feels like pure greed as they take money out of my pocket and away from helping sheep.
I am sure FNAWS is not innocent in all this, but the whole thing is nuts! Who knows, maybe next year the B&C Club will sue RMEF or MDF for publishing B&C scores. They certainly own that intellectual property.
M
Muley62
Guest
Keep in mind that this was a jury trial in Mississippi or Alabama (can't remember which). How many sheep hunters were on the "jury of our peers"? Anyone who read the lawsuit before the judgement can see that this was just a big pissing match by GSC. In hind site FNAWS should have relented early on but I would never have dreamed that they would loose this.
I bet Jack is wishing that he never coined the phrase "Grand Slam of Sheep." How many guys are out there driving the prices of sheep hunts up so they can complete thier slam? It is all about bragging rights and competition, not their love of sheep hunting. Now killing a "collection of four North American Wild Sheep" is not good enough, now we have to rank them by total inches! The crazy thing is that i am in to all this stuff but at times like these it all seems so silly.
I bet Jack is wishing that he never coined the phrase "Grand Slam of Sheep." How many guys are out there driving the prices of sheep hunts up so they can complete thier slam? It is all about bragging rights and competition, not their love of sheep hunting. Now killing a "collection of four North American Wild Sheep" is not good enough, now we have to rank them by total inches! The crazy thing is that i am in to all this stuff but at times like these it all seems so silly.
Cozmo8
Active Member
- Messages
- 638
I am a member of both organizations. It was a pissing match by grown men with egos as big as the Chadwick ram at the sacrifice of Wild Sheep.
I do not care what FNAWS did or did not do. One conservation organization does not sue another. Dennis Campbell in his last magazine criticized heavily the Humane Society of the US for being the biggest threat to the future of hunting. All it is going to take is a few more lawsuits amongst conservation groups and none of us will want to join any of them. If this settlement money does not go on the mountain in North America then we know who the big loser is. North America wild sheep.
I do not care what FNAWS did or did not do. One conservation organization does not sue another. Dennis Campbell in his last magazine criticized heavily the Humane Society of the US for being the biggest threat to the future of hunting. All it is going to take is a few more lawsuits amongst conservation groups and none of us will want to join any of them. If this settlement money does not go on the mountain in North America then we know who the big loser is. North America wild sheep.
1
1010Jake
Guest
Fellas,
I do not care who is right or wrong. Name the people, roast them, it doesn't matter, EGOS ARE THE ROOT OF THIS. Very sad. I hope someone is happy. Not me!
I do not care who is right or wrong. Name the people, roast them, it doesn't matter, EGOS ARE THE ROOT OF THIS. Very sad. I hope someone is happy. Not me!
