I asked about the UWC expo tag petition (wow)

"you may know a thing or 2 about a thing or 2 but by that statement right there you have no idea what you're talking about. Thanks for verifying that. It's just your oppinion, not at all based on fact."

EXACTLY. Just as everything you have said is nothing more than opinion. Thats pretty much everything that is written on these threads, OPINION! You have to learn how to deal with the fact that those people in the SFW have OPINIONS too, and when it comes to the public trust and votes their OPINIONS are just as qualified and important as yours. No more no less.
 
Sorry Tristate, SFW/MDF are classified as private entities a far cry from either the state or defined citizen. Both are businesses ran under the 501 class. That does not make them public in ant sense of the word. I refuse to argue with those who want to simply base premise on feelings. When you have something that is actually researched and true get back with me until then continue to drivel.
 
Tristate, you are officially beyond help. You are correct that everyone is entitled to their own opinion. However, when you keep spewing mistatements even after people have provided you with the actual facts, it is clear that you are either incompetent or simply stirring the pot. I vote for the latter.

Hawkeye

Browning A-Bolt 300 Win Mag
Winchester Apex .50 Cal
Mathews Drenalin LD
 
awholelottabull,

I commend you on your opinion and your willingness to address this consern in a civil manner, I have done what Hawkeye suggested and read previous posts ect. I have seen several posts that just irritated the heck out of me. One was the director or the DWR who posted that this expo was originally intended to bring in people from out of state and in state to an event to bring a large economic boost for our state, he said he has seen accounting for the groups and was good with that. The only responses he recieved were demeaning and challenged his integrity. I for one am a avid elk hunter and really like was he has done for the herds and wildlife in Ut. our deer herds like other states are failing and definately need help. I see it as a predator issue and when I saw the language that funds could not be used for predator controll that set me off. I would agree with you on several points and think transparency is important.
I just see this $5.00 tag issue as a stepping stone for a group trying to make a name for itself based on the callous responsed to just about anything with any reason . I look at it like this.
1.State officials want to generate income for the state and down town.
2. We have some of the best hunting in the country lets market it with an expo in the off season.
3. Lets find some groups that can do this. Give them some tags (not sure who decided 200.)
4. What is a resonable amount to pay these guys for doing it. $5.00 bucks per entry, the dwr charges $10.00.
5. I saw that 7 million was raised, did that include the economic value to the city or state. Not sure it does not say I would guess not after reading the post.
The state gives away millions all the time to bring companies into the area how long does it take them to generate 7 million or 30 million in economic value. should we ask those companies what they are doing with the money the state gave them or they did not have to pay in taxes?
I just see this from a simple economic stand point, would I like to draw one of my tags I have waited for a over a decade to draw. You bet but I still understand simple economics and can take the emotional B.S out of it.
 
Hawkeye, you really don't know the difference between opinion and fact, do you. Thats why you have finally broke down to nothing else but slinging mud. Show me one fact you gave me that I disagreed with on this thread. Give me one FACT.
 
Wholelottabull,

I also looked at the posts by bigfin last night, he seems to have all the answers and said his record proves he could sell all the tags and make more money for a mere 5%. yet posters pointed out he had been fired by most of the conservation groups in utah. sounds like he has an axe to grind, I am assuming he is in a leadership position at UWC or a major influencer based on the individuals that respond to his posts. I still think that this is a petty issue in the big scheme of things and that individuals have a much bigger agenda. I would guess that this is just a stepping stone subject for the following reasons.
1.A group that needs to make a name for itself which they are entitled to do. its a great subject to garner a great deal of emotion on before moving on to something else.
2. individuals with vendetta's against the other groups in Utah - Posssibly Bigfin as it seems like he is on the outside looking in.
3.Its a great subject to raise money off of from its suppoters.
 
Tristate I can't wait to see you at the convention to give you some smelling salt. By the way why don't you see if if sfw or mdf will exchange a Kamas tag for a Henrys? I want to hear their answer. LOL
 
Hawkeye,

I stand corrected the predator/supplemental feeding is included in the conservation tag lanquage.

I am very suprised to see this language.

Thanks for the clarification.

I am done posting on this subject.
 
Your in luck I don't have either of those tags. Maybe I will be lucky and be at the expo. Doubt I will have the money to by anything though. But I ain't gonna cry about it. Maybe I will have five bucks to put towards a drawing or something. I guess I am one of the last hunters out there that isn't rabid about inches of horns. By the way one time at an auction I watched a man give an $82k bighorn tag to one of his employees. And his employee didn't have a OC tag for a deer to give back to him.
 
ELK 30 do you support the North American Model for Wildlife Conservation??

Serious question




2010 TOTALS
P.E.T.A. = 0 HUNTERS GONE
UTAH WILDLIFE BOARD = 13,000 HUNTERS GONE
 
Obviously I am getting pulled in but here goes.

I do not know the whole model so I cannot say I do or do not.
obviously you do or you would not ask this question.
please enlighten me as to the direction you are leading me..
 
The time-tested North American Wildlife Conservation Model is the only one of its kind in the world. In the mid-1800s, hunters and anglers realized they needed to set limits in order to protect rapidly disappearing wildlife, and assume responsibility for managing wild habitats. Hunters and anglers were among the first to crusade for wildlife protection and remain some of today?s most important conservation leaders.
The model?s two basic principles?that our fish and wildlife belong to all North American citizens, and are to be managed in such a way that their populations will be sustained forever?are explained through a set of guidelines known as the ?Seven Sisters for Conservation.? The ?Seven Sisters? hold the key to wildlife conservation as we know it today.


Sister #1: The Public Trust
In North America, natural resources on public lands are managed by government agencies to ensure that we always have wildlife and wild places to enjoy.
In the United States and Canada, wildlife is not owned by individuals. Instead, federal, state and provincial governments are responsible for managing all wildlife, as well as their habitat on public lands. This public trust gives you and all citizens the opportunity to view, hunt, fish and otherwise enjoy these natural resources.
Two hundred years ago, American colonists appreciated this unfettered access to the continent's abundant wildlife. Back in Europe in many cases, only nobility and the very wealthy were allowed to hunt. In 1842, the U.S. Supreme Court set a legal precedent by supporting the American ideal that wildlife belongs to everyone.


Sister #2: Prohibition on Commerce of Dead Wildlife
Conservation laws and their strong enforcement in the United States and Canada saved wildlife from slaughter.
Because we all own wildlife, it is illegal in North America to sell the meat of any wild animal. In some cases the hides, teeth, antlers and horns of game animals and the hides of a select few furbearers may be sold.
However, buying and selling meat, hides, feathers and other wild animal parts was a huge business in the latter half of the 1800s. Excessive hunting severely depleted bison, egrets and elk, and drove other species, such as the passenger pigeon, to extinction. Strong laws written at the turn of the 20th century restricted market hunting and the buying and selling of some wild animals, which allowed many threatened wildlife species to rebound and thrive.


Sister #3: Democratic Rule of Law
You can help make laws to regulate hunting and fishing and conserve wildlife.
Every citizen of the United States and Canadian has the right to help create laws to conserve and manage wild animals and their habitats. Government agencies that manage our natural resources provide citizens with public forums to share ideas and opinions about wildlife and habitat. Citizens can also vote for or against ballot measures that impact wildlife.
Although early 20th-century conservationists wanted to protect wildlife, many still wanted to hunt, fish and enjoy wild places. They established laws that regulated those activities. Today, federal, state and provincial game wardens check hunting licenses and tags to make sure people are hunting in permitted areas and only taking the quarry allowed by law.


Sister #4: Hunting Opportunity for All
Every citizen has an opportunity, under the law, to hunt and fish in the United States and Canada.
Regardless of your social status, race, creed, religion or gender, you have the right to legally hunt and fish on most public lands in North America.
Hunters and anglers led the crusade for wildlife protection a century ago. For instance, before Theodore Roosevelt became president, he helped found the Boone and Crockett Club. The club?s Fair Chase Statement was the first document outlining a code of conduct and ethics for hunters and anglers. It became a cornerstone of our game laws.


Sister #5: Non-frivolous Use
In North America, we can legally kill certain wild animals under strict guidelines for food and fur, self-defense and property protection.
Laws restrict us from casually killing wildlife. We cannot kill wildlife merely for antlers, horns or feathers or to use only a small portion of the meat. Laws also help ensure that we show respect for and avoid mistreating wildlife and the land, and when hunting, make maximum use of every animal for food and other purposes.
Most hunters make good use of an elk. Besides feasting on the meat, hunters often keep the antlers as a memento of the hunt. Hides also make sturdy buckskin coats, chaps and gloves. Many hunters also enjoy sharing wild meat with family and friends. In this way, hunting?s rewards benefit everyone?not just the hunters themselves.


Sister #6: International Resources
Wildlife and fish migrate freely across boundaries between states, provinces and countries.
Working together, the United States and Canada jointly manage land and wildlife to make sure that wildlife can safely cross borders and that no country, state or province will take more than its share of a common resource.
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 demonstrates this cooperation between countries to protect wildlife. The Act made it illegal to capture or kill migratory birds, except as allowed by specific hunting regulations. Treaties now exist between the United States, Canada, Mexico and Russia to protect birds migrating between these countries. The Act has restored our waterfowl, including ducks, geese and cranes, which travel great distances and cross several countries between their wintering and nesting areas.


Sister #7: Scientific Management
The right information helps us make good decisions and become better stewards of wildlife.
Scientific research?and applying that research--is essential to managing and sustaining North America?s wildlife and habitats. For example, researchers put radio collars on elk to track the animals? movements. They use the data to answer questions such as: Where do elk cows calve? How will bulls react to motor vehicles driving on forest roads?
Throughout human history, we've been fascinated by nature. From Sir Francis Drake to Lewis and Clark, early explorers enthusiastically observed North America?s wildlife, carefully recording their behavior and habits. Today, many hunters and anglers are just as interested in observing our natural world?and protecting those resources for future generations.


So ELK 30 can you buy off on the above??





2010 TOTALS
P.E.T.A. = 0 HUNTERS GONE
UTAH WILDLIFE BOARD = 13,000 HUNTERS GONE
 
Wiley
you cant possibly think he can answer that do you. Hes probably just smilling starring at the sun while filling his shorts screaming rahhaa a ahh.

avatar_2528.jpg
 
DING DING DING!!!!!

NOW WE ALL AGREE ON THE SAME THING. NOBODY ASKED TO GET RID OF THE TAGS, because we know they wont, but just show us who and where the money goes. I even drew 1 of these tags about 3 years ago for archery elk on the manti. I still put about 300$ into tags each year. I jsut want to see where its going, thats all.
 
I can agree with most of this, I do understand where you are coming from with #3, We must also understand with progress and expansion there are many people that chosse not to love wild places and wild things like we do, there are social impacts and unfortunately business reasons such as the state basically paying these groups to run an expo.
why this may not fully pertain to todays day and age.
Do I agree with most of this? yes, am I practical in believing times have changes? yes.

Thank you for the education,

I appreciate your help.
 
Buttmaster thanks for the entertainment. I am not sure if your truly a simpleton or just a board 40 year old still living at home with mom and your little monkey.
Best wishes in the future.
 
elk your the one who gets on here making false statements and using alter egos to argue your own points.

I just caught you in the act and decided to stoop to your level for a day.

I apologize to the rest who found my humor distasteful.



avatar_2528.jpg
 
"The low bar was set when someone started crying for fairness."

Funny that those that don't agree with the NAWCM go right to that card.. I'm done wasting time on TRI.

30, Sister one pretty much says that the Kings Deer philosophy
shouldn't fly in the America's. Now we have two private businesses that have been handed a commodity ( TAGS ) to earn income with. Should it be reasonable to ask that since they are using Utah's wildlife to pimp their show that the bulk of the money goes back to Utah's wildlife?? Not to fight wolves in Wyoming Idaho or Montana??

Sister 3 means that we all have a say in how our wildlife is managed, EXACTLY WHAT WE ARE ASKING FOR NOW

Sister 4, and this is good old D-Bag TRISTATES favorite, means we all have equal access to hunt regardless of race sex or financial status. Pretty much is set up to do away with Kings and Serfs.

Sister 5 which happens to be my personal fave.. Non Frivolous use. You give these idiots in Division Leadership and the Utah Legislature a way to make money and them sumbitches will do it every time. I've asked before if it is the responsibility of Utah's herds to fill hotel rooms in downtown Salt Lake City??
Is it our herds responsibility to pay for a poaching gutless scumbag like Troy Gentry to put on a concert?? Should a mule deer permit be used to pay expenses for Antelope Island State Park??

NOBODY IS ASKING TO TAKE THESE PERMITS AWAY... NOBODY!!

We are simply asking that 90% of the money generated by this drawing go back on the ground in approved projects that will directly impact Utah's herds.






2010 TOTALS
P.E.T.A. = 0 HUNTERS GONE
UTAH WILDLIFE BOARD = 13,000 HUNTERS GONE
 
Good old' sissy one. First of all a tag is not a commodity it is a permit. Second fighting wolves in Wyoming, Idaho, and Montana actually plays into the basis of your precious NACM. Wasn't your post showing how NACM has shown that wildlife does not recognize borders and therefore there have been treaties and laws between states, and nations, to work together to protect wildlife. So now if Utah spends money to help a wildlife problem in another state before the problem is on your doorstep you think it violates NACM????? Once again you have been blinded by shortsighted greed.

Good old sissy 3 says everybody has a say in wildlife. Sounds like that is what's happening. Privat organizations have a say in politics too because they are made up of people. Just because they have a different opinion than you and they get their way sometimes doesn't mean that you are not being represented.

Good old' sissy 4. SFW hasn't taken away a single hunting opportunity. Utah did not issue them tags and then they threw them in the trash for no one to access. Plus you can still go hunting with an over the counter tag. But the truth is you feel like its about the antlers and that's what you feel you are being cheated out of. It has nothing to do with hunting, just greed.

Good old' sissy 5. Doesn't have doodle squat to do with your complaint. How is a deer any different than any other property that the state can seize and utilize with imminent domain for the greater good of the government and people. And yes they can do that if the projected outcome is as simple as enriching a financial district. These are issues that the supreme court of the US has upheld and like I said before when it comes down to the real nut cutting the lawmakers won't give a flying flip about NACM.

As for your last statement about what you want why don't you just cut the crap and say what it is, CONTROL. Because when you take %90 of a revenue stream from someone and then tell them what is in your words "an approved project", you are pretty much cutting them off at the knees.

I hope y'all have enjoyed this little lesson in greed and control, Brought to you by the UWC
 
It ain't their revenue stream you freaking idiot!!!
It's the freaking public trust, not their little checking account
paid for with the peoples herds!!!!

C'mon man you have got to be messing with me!! No one is that damn stupid!!





2010 TOTALS
P.E.T.A. = 0 HUNTERS GONE
UTAH WILDLIFE BOARD = 13,000 HUNTERS GONE
 
ww,

It's best to just walk away. It's clear what they're doing. It's not worth arguing with them.....they're not looking for answers. They're just community agitators, nothing more, nothing less.

Just walk away..... ;)
 
Tristate- Do you even know the meaning of the word "commodity?" You said that "a tag is not a commodity it is a permit." HAHAHAHA!!
So then what is it called when a tag is marketed and sold by a private organization for their own personal gain?
 
>Good old' sissy one. First
>of all a tag is
>not a commodity it is
>a permit. Second fighting
>wolves in Wyoming, Idaho, and
>Montana actually plays into the
>basis of your precious NACM.
> Wasn't your post showing
>how NACM has shown that
>wildlife does not recognize borders
>and therefore there have been
>treaties and laws between states,
>and nations, to work together
>to protect wildlife. So
>now if Utah spends money
>to help a wildlife problem
>in another state before the
>problem is on your doorstep
>you think it violates NACM?????
> Once again you have
>been blinded by shortsighted greed.
>
>
>Good old sissy 3 says everybody
>has a say in wildlife.
> Sounds like that is
>what's happening. Privat organizations
>have a say in politics
>too because they are made
>up of people. Just
>because they have a different
>opinion than you and they
>get their way sometimes doesn't
>mean that you are not
>being represented.
>
>Good old' sissy 4. SFW
>hasn't taken away a single
>hunting opportunity. Utah did
>not issue them tags and
>then they threw them in
>the trash for no one
>to access. Plus you
>can still go hunting with
>an over the counter tag.
> But the truth is
>you feel like its about
>the antlers and that's what
>you feel you are being
>cheated out of. It
>has nothing to do with
>hunting, just greed.
>
>Good old' sissy 5. Doesn't
>have doodle squat to do
>with your complaint. How
>is a deer any different
>than any other property that
>the state can seize and
>utilize with imminent domain for
>the greater good of the
>government and people. And
>yes they can do that
>if the projected outcome is
>as simple as enriching a
>financial district. These are
>issues that the supreme court
>of the US has upheld
>and like I said before
>when it comes down to
>the real nut cutting the
>lawmakers won't give a flying
>flip about NACM.
>
>As for your last statement about
>what you want why don't
>you just cut the crap
>and say what it is,
>CONTROL. Because when you
>take %90 of a revenue
>stream from someone and then
>tell them what is in
>your words "an approved project",
>you are pretty much cutting
>them off at the knees.
>
>
>I hope y'all have enjoyed this
>little lesson in greed and
>control, Brought to
>you by the UWC


? Many trolls find it amusing to pose as new members of forums or chat rooms -- also known as newbies -- and ask clueless questions until the discussion collapses as a result. These trolls often attempt to present themselves in a sympathetic light. The goal here is to encourage others to start flinging insults. The troll can then point to the other person and accuse him or her of being unfair or mean while maintaining the role of innocent victim.

? Some trolls don't use subtlety at all and go straight for insults. These trolls are easy to spot, as they come right out of the gate with inflammatory language. For example, a troll visiting a message board about Star Wars might create a thread that says "Star Trek Rocks! Star Wars Bites!" The goal isn't to actually start a debate or conversation -- instead the troll just wants to encourage Star Wars fans to lose their tempers and post angry messages.

? Sneaky trolls will sometimes pose as people who are genuinely interested in the topic before posting a message that undermines the discussion. This is common in political forums -- a person with opposing views might pretend to be sympathetic to other members in the community while simultaneously posting messages and threads that criticize their point of view. For example, the troll might say, "I really like Politician X, but do you think she's really strong on domestic policy?" The goal of this troll is to foment doubt within the community at large. Trolls who pose under a false identity are also known as sock puppets.

? Colluding trolls are people who work together to create chaos. One member might use classic trolling tactics while the others pose as normal members of the online community. These trolls in disguise can publicly defend the obvious troll and claim that the troll is really trying to add to the discussion. Another tactic is to pit one online community against another. Trolls do this by posting messages within one community while posing as members of the other one and vice versa. The goal here is to cause an all-out online war between two victimized communities.
 
Elk30,

I'm not going to read much past your first post. You are really late in the game and need to read what has already been written. Someone already told you to take a few days and catch up. Obviously, you haven't done this.

Is UWC trying to be SFW? Maybe, what is wrong with that? If SFW represented sportsmen across the board, UWC would never have started. SFW represents trophy hunting opportunity. UWC represents general hunting opportunity. If you think it is good to increase trophy hunting at the expense of general hunting, you should join SFW. They will represent you well. SFW does not represent me. They fight against hunters like me. I'm tired of them pretending they represent all hunters. They do this with money generated by public funds.

We'll you just squoze water from a stone. Thanks for the waste of time. I will be avoiding your posts from now on - & welcome to the site!!!
 
I have been reading this website for many years and never have been compelled to join the arguing until now. I figured it best left to the younger generation and people who communicate well on the internet. Tristate, if your writings truely reflect your beliefs and comprehension, than you are nothing more than a bad person. I've watched for years as sentiment has changed towards the various groups and it seems that lately, people have been doing some serious research and uncovered many things that people have been uninterested in or kept in the dark about.

These UWC folks seem to be spearheading a noble effort that has plenty of merit and you seem to be doing your best to undercut these efforts. If I was a betting man, I'd say that the two gentlemen causing a ruckus on this topic are a part of, or have been compelled to do what they are doing by one of the groups that stand to be effected by this proposed change, which is down right deplorable.

Don't let them distract you boys. You are doing what is right and there will always be obstacles to overcome.

I haven't been much interested in wildlife politics and the parade of egos that seems to follow, but this elk30 fella and his partner have lit a fire with their abhorrent behavior. I'll see you fellas on the 16th and be talking to all of my relations and letting them know they should do the same.

I am sincerely disgusted by it all.
 
"So then what is it called when a tag is marketed and sold by a private organization for their own personal gain?"

A PERMIT! hahahahahahaha
 
They are the public trust you "freaking idiot"! That means it is their heards too.

That truth just eats you up. You are so self centered you can't imagine other people have a voice in this.
 
"I'm tired of them pretending they represent all hunters."

No organization represents "all hunters". We differ as people that much.

"UWC represents general hunting opportunity. If you think it is good to increase trophy hunting at the expense of general hunting, you should join SFW."

No they don't. There is plenty of general hunting opportunity. They are fighting for tags where there are big horns and antlers. Its about inches of horns. Its about trophy pictures, and silly greed.
 
The beauty of living in a democratic republic is even though the game animals are owned by all people in a state the majority rules. If we can focus on political pressure to open the minority's books and force public transparency of all funds generated by the sale of tags we will beat them into submission. The rest is political theater by a group that sees the fat hog being taken away from them.
 
I'm pretty new to all of this and have tried to keep an open mind. I'll be the first to admit there's a lot I don't know in regards to wildlife management, particularly the financial piece (ie, what it takes to keep our state agencies running and what it takes to support wildlife conservation). I can certainly see how raising money from auction permits can have a huge impact on the ability to manage wildlife. And I won't get into the North American Wildlife Conservation Model as I would say that I have better chance of drawing a tag at the Expo than I do drawing a tag that requires 20 preference points in Colorado.

As mentioned, my experience regarding wildlife conservation is minimal. But, I do have an engineering degree and an MBA, so I'm pretty comfortable with numbers as well as with accounting and general business principles. This is where I struggle with the rhetoric used by the SFW and some of its supporters.

A quick look at the Hunt Expo website reveals that 196,300 convention tags were sold in 2011. If I multiply that by $5, that brings the total to $981,500. The link provided in the earlier posts to the SFW website shows that in 2011, $299,404 was spent on "conservation efforts." I put that in parentheses as $206,000 of that $299,404 was spent on "Wolf delisting and legal fees." Not sure you can get much more vague than that. So, in my mind there's either $682,000 or $888,096 out of $981,500 that is unaccounted for.

Well, I understand there are expenses associated with the Exposition, but I also know there are other revenue streams. And all I see is the public asking for transparency around the money generated from a public resource. So can somebody show me how the $682,000 was used to cover expenses or what was done with that money or how the $206,000 for "wolf delisting" was spent (they might as well called that "miscellaneous" if you ask me)? It really leaves me scratching my head when all people are asking for is more transparency to ensure that public resources get put to use in a way that is seen fit by the public, and there is opposition from the group that they are asking it from.
 
"the majority rules."

You realy believe thats how government works don't you? Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!
 
LAST EDITED ON Aug-02-12 AT 09:21AM (MST)[p]bigeasygator---First off, I believe you meant to say raffle tickets sold, rather than tags! As you stated, at $5 a crack that brought in close to one million dollars. Th other thing is that the money you mentioned in the SFW link has little, if anything, to do with the money made from those tags. The SFW/MDF, according to the investigations made by Hawkeye, do not appear keep a separate tally of that money like they should, but evidently just comingle it into their main account. Therefore, that is why the petition was created to require that those monies be accounted for and 90% be used and monitored for conservation projects, just like 90% of the money generated by the auction tags. The organizations obviously have come out against it and don't want to give up that cash cow that was asked for in the initial contract and taken out at their request. Now it needs to be rectified so it mirrors the auction tags. If they want to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on wolves and other stuff that isn't allowed in the contract, it would have to be generated by something other than the sale of the public tags. Tags aren't how the vast majority of money is made in all the other sportsman organizations around the country, so why should it be allowed by those two groups? It's a very simple and easy situation to comprehend if you have half a brain, which a couple detractors/pot stirrers don't appear to have that are ruining the thread on purpose!
 
"Well, I understand there are expenses associated with the Exposition, but I also know there are other revenue streams. And all I see is the public asking for transparency around the money generated from a public resource. So can somebody show me how the $682,000 was used to cover expenses or what was done with that money or how the $206,000 for "wolf delisting" was spent (they might as well called that "miscellaneous" if you ask me)? It really leaves me scratching my head when all people are asking for is more transparency to ensure that public resources get put to use in a way that is seen fit by the public, and there is opposition from the group that they are asking it from."

Howdy, bigeasy. I am pretty sure every single person in these arguements has agreed that we all want total transparency of the accounting. That has not been the issue. Maybe all the other funds are getting spent paying employees or buying printers and paper. Maybe all the money is being spent on hookers and blow. No one knows. The problem comes in that this petition doesn't just want transparency they are making both a money grab and control over "approved" spending projects at the same time they want the transparency. I believe you that you understand money and therefore you would understand no one can produce a specific dollar figure to grab at until you know the books. In any financial situation you risk complete disaster. They know that and therefore that is why they do it. They want the SFW to fall appart.
 
"It's a very simple and easy situation to comprehend if you have half a brain, which a couple detractors/pot stirrers don't appear to have!"

This statement was made by a person who believed 96+6=100 on another thread.
 
Tri, I want to personally thank you for your comments, and I promise you I will give them due consideration.
 
BINGO!! Give that man a corndog. Hit the nail on the head. I want SFW to be completely gone because they have proven they can't be trusted with our resources. You do a complete public audit of every nickel since the inception and prove that no one took the money for personal gain and I will publicly apologize and join SFW.
 
Tri, you just don't get it do you? The permit is what you receive once the commodity is sold. Why do you continue to argue for the sake of arguing?
 
gleninaz--Gee, I wonder why Don set up BGF as an LLC subsidiary of SFW, instead of as a 501c(3) organization. Sure is a great place if you wanted to funnel extra monies somewhere for consulting, etc., if he can't get enough through the SFW itself. Funny how the few records we can find show so much money spent on "Misc.", etc.
 
When you see that much public money every year dissapear and it also involves politics you can assume the worst and probably be correct.

My guess is it will make quite a few people throwup in their mouth when it comes out. This is why they want to fight the secrecy so much.



avatar_2528.jpg
 
Tristate, go back and re-read post #61, then read it again.

You have been told by UWC many times over on this thread that all they want is transparency. Nothing more. Not access to tags. nor to the money generated. It is understandable that you do not trust UWC.
How you cannot understand that is laughable to say the least. Give it a break. Hope to see you at the meeting on the 16th.
At the meeting you can voice your opinion on your support or non-support to the proposed amendment, then let DWR know that you don't want UWC to gain access to those tags or money generated. I'm sure Mr Kaparowitz(?) will understand that and Mr. Peay will appreciate that as well.
 
Sure it is and as BuzzH always says, it doesn't take but one firing brain cell to figure it out! That doesn't say much for a few of the followers does it, LOL!
 
>"the majority rules."
>
>You realy believe thats how government
>works don't you? Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!
>

Apparently this is funny to you? To myself, our veterans, and Americans that stand for our constitution and the values that we built this great country upon, it is not funny. This is part of the problem we are currently having in this country, rather than try to fix the problem it is easier for many to choose to be a part of it.
 
>>"the majority rules."
>>
>>You realy believe thats how government
>>works don't you? Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!
>>
>
>Apparently this is funny to you?
>To myself, our veterans, and
>Americans that stand for our
>constitution and the values that
>we built this great country
>upon, it is not funny.
>This is part of the
>problem we are currently having
>in this country, rather than
>try to fix the problem
>it is easier for many
>to choose to be a
>part of it.
 
"The permit is what you receive once the commodity is sold."


Really I can re-sell that permit to someone else at a profit or maybe I can use the permit to manufacture something else that I can sell once I get the permit??????? You don't get it. Its a permit. It can't be both.
 
Buttshot, you are saying that UWC does not want %90 of the $5 for each of the expo lottery entries??????? It isn't on that petition yall are pushing???????
 
"When you see that much public money every year dissapear"

THAT MUCH! THAT MUCH! Hahahahahahahahahaha
 
LAST EDITED ON Aug-02-12 AT 10:51AM (MST)[p]Tristate said: "Buttshot, you are saying that UWC does not want %90 of the $5 for each of the expo lottery entries??????? It isn't on that petition yall are pushing???????"

NO. UWC does not want that money for themselves. What they want, along with the rest of us, is to ensure that the money is being used for "conservation activities" as it was originally contemplated. It is really pretty simple. We want transparency (to see where the money is going) and accountability (to ensure that the money is being used for actual conservation activities). This is not about taking money out of SFW's pockets and putting it in UWC's pockets. UWC is not asking for one red cent.

Comprende?

Hawkeye

Browning A-Bolt 300 Win Mag
Winchester Apex .50 Cal
Mathews Drenalin LD
 
Main Entry: 2per?mit
Pronunciation: \ˈpər-ˌmit, pər-ˈ\
Function: noun
Date: 1682
1 : a written warrant or license granted by one having authority <a gun permit>
2 : permission

Main Entry: com?mod?i?ty
something useful or valued
one that is subject to ready exchange or exploitation within a market


Here's your sign Tristate
 
"NO. UWC does not want that money for themselves. What they want, along with the rest of us, is to ensure that the money is being used for "conservation activities" as it was originally contemplated. It is really pretty simple. We want transparency (to see where the money is going) and accountability (to ensure that the money is being used for actual conservation activities). This is not about taking money out of SFW's pockets and putting it in UWC's pockets. UWC is not asking for one red cent."

Since you are splitting hairs then let me restate the question. You are telling me UWC doesn't want to decide, or in yalls words "approve", where %90 of the five dollars goes???

Or let me restate again. You are telling me you aren't supporting a petition that will take %90 of the $5 away from SFW????????

That isn't just about transperancy. That is CONTROL.

Comprende??
 
LAST EDITED ON Aug-02-12 AT 12:04PM (MST)[p]"one that is subject to ready exchange or exploitation within a market"

Excellent. You proved my point for me. If you recieve one of the tags can you exchange it to someone else for a profit? Is there an aftermarket for LE or Convention tags where they can be sold and resold for profit???????

Maybe if they were a comodity we could lump the undesirable ones with a couple of good ones and sell them to other nations as "Deer backed Securities"??????? Right??????? Maybe someone is shortselling their bonus points right now. :7


You can have your sign back.
 
Gentlemen,

As hunters and fishermen, we face many obstacles that threaten our heritage. Those obstacles that come at us from the outside I can face head on, with fortitude and purpose, knowing my enemy has an agenda and a plan to execute it. What I perceive as an equal if not greater threat is the dissention and dissonance within our own family that is driving a wedge of division deep and hard. That's a tough threat to combat, but it must be done before the division is so great that we will be chewed up and spat out by the outsiders.

When I first came on to this site and others to introduce the United Wildlife Cooperative, I knew we would be facing distrust in our motives. That's perfectly understandable given the dissatisfaction permeating the hunting and fishing realm for both Conservation Organizations and State Wildlife Agencies. So many of us had simply given up, not having a say so in the direction our heritage was going. Our hope in founding the UWC was to help organize these blue-collar hunters and fishermen, giving them an outlet to voice their concerns and have those concerns forwarded to those who are at the forefront of steering our heritage. Not an easy undertaking to say the least, but we founding members resolved NOT to follow the norm in Conservation Organizations, and formed a cooperative. It was HOPE that was based in that decision, not greed, not envy, not collusion. We vowed NOT to use our wildlife as a means of funding our efforts, no conservation tags, no convention tags; we would find other ways to accomplish that, as many organizations are currently doing. It was HOPE that somehow we might find a way to work with other organizations to make great strides in unity within both our industry and in the direction our heritage needed to go. We all knew it would take a loud and consolidated voice of hunters and fishermen to accomplish that, and it is happening.

I know there are some who don't care for the direction the UWC is heading, and that's all fine and good. Voicing opinions and concerns is much, much better than complacency and inaction. The UWC will continue to listen to those who want to be heard and forward those concerns where they need to go, and the sun will still rise tomorrow. But lets all do what we can to stop driving the wedge of dissention. There is room for all of us, trophy hunters, blue collar hunters, deer hunters, elk hunters, fly fishermen, bait fishermen, youth hunters, women hunters, old hunters, bird hunters, et al. If we don't, I fear the consequences just may be our demise.

Perry Hanks



www.unitedwildlifecooperative.org
 
Good letter stillhunterman. But how do you pledge for Unity while attacking another conservation organization?
 
"Apparently this is funny to you? To myself, our veterans, and Americans that stand for our constitution and the values that we built this great country upon, it is not funny."

Yes this is very funny to me. No where in the Constitution does it state "the majority rules". Nowhere in history did our soldiers attack under the battlecry "the majority rules". Why don't you just make up any old first grade story while you are at it.

If you would go back and read my posts I have stated things to help fix the problems. Just because I don't agree with your solutions doesn't mean I am doing nothing.
 
LAST EDITED ON Aug-02-12 AT 01:01PM (MST)[p]Trollstate wrote:

"Good letter stillhunterman. But how do you pledge for Unity while attacking another conservation organization?"

Trollstate what about poachers?? They hunt and kill game, should we as legal hunters unite with them??

Another question for ya Trollstate, Would you report a poacher if he brought you an animal you knew and could prove was poached??





2010 TOTALS
P.E.T.A. = 0 HUNTERS GONE
UTAH WILDLIFE BOARD = 13,000 HUNTERS GONE
 
How bout it Trollstate would you turn in the poacher??


2010 TOTALS
P.E.T.A. = 0 HUNTERS GONE
UTAH WILDLIFE BOARD = 13,000 HUNTERS GONE
 
>LAST EDITED ON Aug-02-12
>AT 12:04?PM (MST)

>
>"one that is subject to ready
>exchange or exploitation within a
>market"
>
>Excellent. You proved my point
>for me. If you
>recieve one of the tags
>can you exchange it to
>someone else for a profit?
> Is there an aftermarket
>for LE or Convention tags
>where they can be sold
>and resold for profit???????
>
>Maybe if they were a comodity
>we could lump the undesirable
>ones with a couple of
>good ones and sell them
>to other nations as "Deer
>backed Securities"??????? Right???????
>Maybe someone is shortselling their
>bonus points right now. :7
>
>
>
>


SFW and MDF receive the tags and sell them for profit. Hence the commodity. Your so called logic is so laughable. I believe you proved my point that the permit is received atter the tags are given by the state to the private orgs who then sell them for profit. Please read then re read then re read again.
 
You are missing the point. A commodity can be sold, and resold. It can even be bet against. If you sell something to someone that can never be resold, ITS NOT A COMMODITY. I tel you what. Go buy yourself one of those tags this year and then go try and sell it to someone else. Come back and tell me how you do.
 
"Trollstate what about poachers?? They hunt and kill game, should we as legal hunters unite with them??"

So now you think poachers are the equivelant of the SFW?????? Apples and oranges brother.

"Another question for ya Trollstate, Would you report a poacher if he brought you an animal you knew and could prove was poached??"

Talk about hijacking a thread. This is the most extreme version I have seen. I don't see how I can prove someone is a poacher from my workbench but anytime the Gamewardens have or do want assistance with information for an investigation I comply completely. It is not in my best interest to stand in the way of the criminal justice system.
 
>You are missing the point.
>A commodity can be sold,
>and resold. It can
>even be bet against.
>If you sell something to
>someone that can never be
>resold, ITS NOT A COMMODITY.
> I tel you what.
> Go buy yourself one
>of those tags this year
>and then go try and
>sell it to someone else.
> Come back and tell
>me how you do.

Please show me anywhere that a good needs to be able to be sold and resold again in order to be a commodity.
 
So you wouldn't turn in a poacher if you could prove he was a poacher. Pretty much explains your philosophy.


2010 TOTALS
P.E.T.A. = 0 HUNTERS GONE
UTAH WILDLIFE BOARD = 13,000 HUNTERS GONE
 
Dang it Trollster, if I'd have know you were a seasoned Cape Buffalo hunter I'd have been more engaging with you. You're an interesting fellow, that's for sure.

"To stop a charge you have to hit a bobbing apple or the thin stick holding it up. I have seen clients pooch a brain shot on one standing still and they had a rest at more than reasonable distances. I shoot a .458 lott. I have killed a lot of buffalo with it. I have killed a couple with .375 and one with a .470. When a buffalo gets really mad, all of them firing at the same time are worthless sticks until someone puts one in his brain."

~Trollstate~

http://www.monstermuleys.info/dcforum/DCForumID11/17055.html


2751the_most_interesting_man_in_the_world_640_08.jpg
 
I'll use your own words.

"something useful or valued
one that is subject to ready exchange or exploitation within a market"

Once someone has paid for the permit it is no longer up for "ready exchange".

Your drivers license and building permit isn't a commodity either.
 
"So you wouldn't turn in a poacher if you could prove he was a poacher. Pretty much explains your philosophy"

Your words not mine.

You are asking a hypothetical that is an impossiblity. There is no hunting or fishing that goes on in my shop. I do not run a crime lab in my shop so I can not collect scientific evidence that the courts would accept and everything people say in here is hearsay. But if you want to live in imagination land I will answer your very stupid hi-jacking question. If a deer lived in my office and someone broke in one night and shot him under a spotlight, and I walked in right as he was cutting the deers head off on my office floor I think I would call the authorities.
 
Battleborn, Buffalo hunting is probably my favorite animal to hunt. If you ever want to talk about it I certianly welcome the conversation. I always like looking at others buff pics and exchanging stories no matter how deep the bull gets.
 
"Another question for ya Trollstate, Would you report a poacher if he brought you an animal you knew and could prove was poached??

Very simple question Trollstate. The correct
Answer would be " you bet your ass I would"
No sidestepping or qualifying double talk.

That's why you don't understand people trying
To do the right thing.




2010 TOTALS
P.E.T.A. = 0 HUNTERS GONE
UTAH WILDLIFE BOARD = 13,000 HUNTERS GONE
 
>I'll use your own words.
>
>"something useful or valued
>one that is subject to ready
>exchange or exploitation within a
>market"
>
>Once someone has paid for the
>permit it is no longer
>up for "ready exchange".
>
>Your drivers license and building permit
>isn't a commodity either.

In your words, it's apples and oranges. One cannot purchase a drivers license or building permit from a private organization.
 
Stillhunterman,

In one post you have answered the remaining questions that I had on UWC.You are committed to not making your money off future game tags of any kind.
I hope you are in a leadership position in this organization as you actually convey your message with class. Unfortunately many of the others do not and have none, somehow they feel like mocking and sarcasm is the way to get things resolved if you don't blindly fall in line.
Yes I have came into this on the 11th hour and decided to read and research rather than just follow a logic emotional path as most have done. I felt repulsed by the messages (implied payoffs ect) that were sent by UWC members after the Director of the DWR tried to give his expalnation of this expo. It is no wonder why these groups don't want to cooperate, would you? its a no win scenario which made me think they have a completely different agenda. now I understand its just over zealous individuals with no professional sense.
Good luck in your future paths.
 
It is now clear to me that there is NO TAXIDERMY WORK BEING DONE IN TRISTATES OFFICE RIGHT NOW. I WONDER WHY?
 
LAST EDITED ON Aug-02-12 AT 06:45PM (MST)[p]Why do you douchebags continue to argue with that other douchebag??
Fishing.... Bait????
 

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