My thoughts regarding the Expo Tag decision

>TOPGUN I would like my question
>answered please!
>If you don't want too someone
>else answer please? I want
>to understand the inside jokes
>as I'm sure others do
>too!
>
>Thanks Joe
>
>"Sometimes you do things wrong for
>so long you
>think their right" - 2001
>"I can't argue with honesty" -
>2005
>-Joe E Sikora

Just read my post #181 and it will answer your question.
 
CAT you goofy Bastard!!

Always gassing up a forest fire.

stay tuned my feline friend. The next few months should be interesting.




"The State of Utah has not given BGF anything.
They have invested in BGF to protect their
interests."
Birdman 4/15/15
 
Only if we are the eviction crew.



"The State of Utah has not given BGF anything.
They have invested in BGF to protect their
interests."
Birdman 4/15/15
 
>http://www.huntexpo.com/rfp.php


The thing that is so funny to me is this:

For how many years did these groups have ZERO accounting for wildlife money raised by the Expo? How much money was raised? HMMM, Still not sure. Then they "Graciously" gave an outstanding 30% back from the tags.

How much money would they have had without the Expo?
Would they still be flaunting those #'s?

How much could that be if they were held accountable by the DWR in the 1st 7 years of the expo?

How much would that be with 100% of expo tags given back?

How much would that be in the next fiver years if the Expo was given to RMEF?

Just a few thoughts of mine.

Landon
 
I have a deal for you. Let me take your home, sell it, and then I will keep 70% (to spend on whatever I want) but I will give you back 30%. But best of all, I will stand up and pat myself on the back for giving you back 30% of what was already yours. Sound familiar?

-Hawkeye-
 
>I have a deal for you.
> Let me take your
>home, sell it, and then
>I will keep 70% (to
>spend on whatever I want)
>but I will give you
>back 30%. But best
>of all, I will stand
>up and pat myself on
>the back for giving you
>back 30% of what was
>already yours. Sound familiar?
>
>
>-Hawkeye-

Hawkeye forgot about the part where he doesn't give ANYTHING back for the first 9 years until you finally complain about it. And then it takes several public and private meetings with the authorities, and others who are also taking, in order to "persuade" Hawkeye to reluctantly give back the 30%! And even then, he brags about giving it back! Does that sound even more familiar?
 
>>>http://www.huntexpo.com/rfp.php
>>
>>
>>Ha that is the most hilarious
>>press release I have ever
>>seen
>
>Are you trying to say it
>was a crock of crap
>because that's exactly what it
>was?!


Exactly what I was saying the bad thing is it might fool some people. It looks like something a 1st grade class came up with. Koolade at its finest
 
First of all let me tell you this-- I am a member of RMEF. I don't belong to any other conservation group at this time.
1- I don't know if the money you are talking about, will or has been leveraged as much as it could be. Originally the DWR was not in the business of running wildlife conventions or internally conducting permit draws etc. this has all morphed into what it is over the past 20 -30 years.
Who knows if another group could have gotten more money for the auction tags or if their marketing creates more raffle tag money? There are certainly some unknowns. I think that what is the issue here is the process that occurred as Hawkeye has laid out.
2- The RAC's are Regional Advisory Committees. We discuss, take public comment, make proposals, amend proposals, and vote, then its sent off to the WB for their final determination. Even though 2 RACs represent a majority of hunters in the state, don't expect (and I wouldn't want it any other way) for the more rural RACs to be totally dictated to by the 2 RACs. There has to be a balance that gives the more rural regions just as big a voice-- after all-- it may be a playground to some of us-- but its where they live and work. Most of them used to be able to go hunting out their back door but that's been taken away for the most part. They absolutely need to have just as loud of voice in the decisions.
You are right that the WB has the final say on any and all proposals that come from the RACs. In my experience there have only been 4 proposals that come to mind,that have come from the Central RAC that the WB has approved-- one was to put into place the handicap hunter rules, another one was to reduce DH hours from 40 to 32. There are a couple others and there have been a number of amendments concerning tag numbers etc that affected the Central region that the WB approved. One thing you need to understand about these things I have cited-- Every one of these items came as a result because of individual sportsmen that expressed and made proposals to change or amend the DWR's original proposals. These things may or may not have been presented by the various conservation groups, but it was the individual sportsman that I feel were the most impressive.If you think for one moment that an individuals perspective on issues doesn't matter you are wrong. There have been hundreds of folks that have been listened to and their opinions and proposals haven't gotten past the RAC, but many of them are things that, even though they seem like good ideas, may negatively affect the majority of hunters. I believe that on a RAC level,how it affects wildlife and the majority of hunters, is the bottom line. Remember also, that the RACs have reps from agriculture, public land agencies, non-consumptive, sportsmans groups, at-large folks, Hogle zoo and Native Americans. It may not be a perfect but unless you can figure out a better system its the best we have for now. Hope you keep involved and trying to make a difference. The politics in all this is rough but ultimately it still comes down to ensuring that our wildlife flourishes and our opportunity grows with it. Except for deer hunting, the opportunities for hunters in this state have never been better.
 
>>>>http://www.huntexpo.com/rfp.php
>>>
>>>
>>>Ha that is the most hilarious
>>>press release I have ever
>>>seen
>>
>>Are you trying to say it
>>was a crock of crap
>>because that's exactly what it
>>was?!
>
>
>Exactly what I was saying the
>bad thing is it might
>fool some people. It looks
>like something a 1st grade
>class came up with. Koolade
>at its finest

It obviously did fool some people. It's too bad some those were the only people who have the votes.

Per my picky personality (and insomnia), I'm really analyzing (maybe over-analyzing) the SFW/MDF/UFNAWS RFP and I find that there are some glaring red flags that turn me off, beginning with the cover page showing two kids, one who is glaring at the Spyder Bull. I once was a door to door cookware salesman. The set was a great set for the average home, (we still have ours after 40 years) but I wasn't very good at it because I had to sell the set using as much emotional appeal as I could by conjuring up scenerios of possible events and/or repercussions that could happen if they didn't buy it. I hated that approach and I still do. We were also taught that there is a time to ask for the sale and then SHUT UP and wait for an answer 'cause if you keep going it soon begins to look like you're getting desperate and are trying to hide something and you OVERSELL the product.

IMO, the SFW/MDF/UFNAWS RFP is blatantly oversold, emotion targeted and, on top of that, it's confusing per the many references to other pages. It's 133 pages long and contains: 1)125 emotionally charged pictures of politicians, celebrities, children and hunters with trophies, covering 28% of page space, 2)the vast majority of the animal pictures are trophies, 3)the phrase "world class" is used 65 times, 4)the $22 million in direct funding by the Expo partners since 2007 is mentioned 9 times, 5)the $2.4 billion outdoor industry is mentioned 15 times, 6)the 1.2 million acres restored by Conservation Permit funds is mentioned 4 times, 7)there are several comparisons in text and chart form, to the Expo partners Utah contributions vs RMEF's Utah contributions where they attempt to throw RMEF under the bus, 8)the text is loaded with self-grandizing statements about their supposed accomplishments, even some they had nothing or little to do with, plus there are other obvious sales tactics used to keep the reader reading as long as possible. And it's all designed to convey their self-conceived earned right to keep the Expo tags. The sad thing about their entitlement mentality is that their Utah wildlife conservation funding future with these tags is grossly lacking compared to that same future with RMEF.

I'm afraid this mistake will cost the evaluation committee, the DWR executives and the Wildlife Board a lot more in terms of public relations and confidence that they ever thought possible. I know they've dropped several notches in my view.
 
Nebo, you say "In my experience there have only been 4 proposals that come to mind, that have come from the Central RAC that the WB has approved". That is the problem. Your rac represents a large part of the hunting community, but in your years of service very few central rac recommendations have passed the Board. That sad statement shows why people feel their opinions do not matter at the the wildlife board unless they are from a select few groups.
 
Remember-- the WB has the final say and vote after all the RACs have had their say and then anyone else who steps up to the mic at the WB meeting. If you have been to very many RAC meetings I think we could agree that about most times, 80%-90% of the proposals from the DWR, at the time are a no brainer to accept. Its the other 10%-20% that the public needs to step up and have their say. Just remember-- its about a majority of the hunters-- not just one individuals preference and how it might be best for them. If you don't make a proposal, its for sure it probably will never happen, but if you do, it might make sense and the RAC may get on board with you and champion your cause with the WB. You don't vote for someone just because you know they will win do you-- hopefully you vote for them because you believe they will promote your values and sentiments.No different in this venue. Don't be afraid or think your voice doesn't matter because it does. Thanks
 
Nebo " Except for deer hunting, the opportunities for hunters in this state have never been better." Just think of what it could be without leaving all that $ on the table. err sfw pocketboots.
 
Hi TOPGUN, I hope it didn't come off as I was being a smart butt when I asked about the koolaid thing again? If so I'm sorry

Thanks Joe

"Sometimes you do things wrong for so long you
think their right" - 2001
"I can't argue with honesty" - 2005
-Joe E Sikora
 
I have been to too many RAC's and WB Meetings, and they are going to do what they are going to do. I have seen very well thought out proposals from our paid wildlife biologists, demonstrating why we need more or less harvest on a particular unit, only to be swayed by a special interest group, (or a Conservation Group)and the vote go that way. Why do we pay biologists if we are not going to follow their recommendations about herd numbers and range conditions?

Example last year at WB board meeting, the ranchers show up and flex their muscle, and pound their chest about the elk numbers on the SW desert, and Monroe mountain, and the Wildlife board ignored the RAC proposals, and their paid biologists and agreed to slaughter the elk and pronghorn herds.

Other times we have sound wildlife management proposals, and the WB board choses to sway with the pressure, and cut the number of tags proposed, because some conservation group would rather hunt older class animals, and limit access.

So why do we pay biologists, and have RAC meetings, and Board meetings? Same reason, we say we will have a bid proposal, and go with a lesser proposal.........
 
How Bout the SmokePole Scope Proposal Voted Down 3 to 2?

Then it's Over-Rode!

You'll see 400-500 Yard SmokePoles with Scopes with Turrets on them now!

Even though it was Voted Down!

JFP!

You Guys know how much Money I've wasted on JUNK 1X Scopes over the Years?




"I'm Living & Dieing with the Choices
I've made!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=N8i5NLyXZdc
 
Nebo, there is a difference between being a plick and holding people accountable to their charge. Please don't take my questions as a personal attack on you. I certainly don't intend to take personal shots.

As aa fiduciary it is their responsibility to ensure maximum return on investment, not like a stockbroker looking to make commission via transactions. I don't believe you personally are in this because of a want for personal gain in any way.

That being said the DWR was guaranteed 100% of these funds from the app fees and a 50/50 split of profits of the expo proceeds vs the 30% SFW is going to guarantee. It's a no brainer.

Figure $1 mill vs $300K over a 5 year period. Now figure in PR and DJ match on these funds over that same period. Net loss is well over 10 million dollars. Without the 50/50 match even figured in. There is no spin, no what if's, it's a multimillion dollar loss to our wildlife, habitat and fisheries. There is no fiduciary that could stay out of prison if this happened to a client.
What burns asses, especially mine is the reluctance of anybody involved to stand up and say it ain't right. Yet most are quick to defend the org and the system that makes this possible.

The RAC's, there will always be the urban vs rural war when it comes to hunting, I get it, rural guys don't dig us city guys killing their deer in their back yards. What they do dig is that 84% of the people that don't live there still fund their deer in their backyards. They love our money and funding they just don't like seeing us out in the field. Yet the same defense is presented and it burns my ass as bad as the Convention Permit collusion. It ain't right that 4% of the hunters in Vernal, 4% from Blanding and 4% from Cedar City tell the 84% how things are going to be in this system. Basically send money but stay home.

Thanks for your willingness to reply.





"The State of Utah has not given BGF anything.
They have invested in BGF to protect their
interests."
Birdman 4/15/15
 
>Hi TOPGUN, I hope it didn't
>come off as I was
>being a smart butt when
>I asked about the koolaid
>thing again? If so I'm
>sorry
>
>Thanks Joe
>
>"Sometimes you do things wrong for
>so long you
>think their right" - 2001
>"I can't argue with honesty" -
>2005
>-Joe E Sikora


No problem at all Joe!
 
Focus CAT, one cluster at a time.






"The State of Utah has not given BGF anything.
They have invested in BGF to protect their
interests."
Birdman 4/15/15
 
Ha Ha!! They don't want to meet the guys I hunt ducks with.





"The State of Utah has not given BGF anything.
They have invested in BGF to protect their
interests."
Birdman 4/15/15
 
the leader and 1/2 of his followers have been arrested. Looks like the good folks in Oregon are gonna be able to go in and sweep the floors tomorrow.
 
Damn it BESS, looks like the Roady ain't gonna be necessary.

I was gonna whip you up a nice pate.







"The State of Utah has not given BGF anything.
They have invested in BGF to protect their
interests."
Birdman 4/15/15
 
>Damn it BESS, looks like the
>Roady ain't gonna be necessary.
>
>
>I was gonna whip you up
>a nice pate.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>"The State of Utah has not
>given BGF anything.
>They have invested in BGF to
>protect their
>interests."
>Birdman 4/15/15

pate?

SPLAIN It?

I knew if We Screwed around something was gonna happen!








"I'm Living & Dieing with the Choices
I've made!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=N8i5NLyXZdc
 
Think goose liver sushi CAT.




"The State of Utah has not given BGF anything.
They have invested in BGF to protect their
interests."
Birdman 4/15/15
 
>>>>>http://www.huntexpo.com/rfp.php
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Ha that is the most hilarious
>>>>press release I have ever
>>>>seen
>>>
>>>Are you trying to say it
>>>was a crock of crap
>>>because that's exactly what it
>>>was?!
>>
>>
>>Exactly what I was saying the
>>bad thing is it might
>>fool some people. It looks
>>like something a 1st grade
>>class came up with. Koolade
>>at its finest
>
>It obviously did fool some people.
>It's too bad some those
>were the only people who
>have the votes.
>
>Per my picky personality (and insomnia),
>I'm really analyzing (maybe over-analyzing)
>the SFW/MDF/UFNAWS RFP and I
>find that there are some
>glaring red flags that turn
>me off, beginning with the
>cover page showing two kids,
>one who is glaring at
>the Spyder Bull. I once
>was a door to door
>cookware salesman. The set was
>a great set for the
>average home, (we still have
>ours after 40 years) but
>I wasn't very good at
>it because I had to
>sell the set using as
>much emotional appeal as I
>could by conjuring up scenerios
>of possible events and/or repercussions
>that could happen if they
>didn't buy it. I hated
>that approach and I still
>do. We were also taught
>that there is a time
>to ask for the sale
>and then SHUT UP and
>wait for an answer 'cause
>if you keep going it
>soon begins to look like
>you're getting desperate and are
>trying to hide something and
>you OVERSELL the product.
>
>IMO, the SFW/MDF/UFNAWS RFP is blatantly
>oversold, emotion targeted and, on
>top of that, it's confusing
>per the many references to
>other pages. It's 133 pages
>long and contains: 1)125 emotionally
>charged pictures of politicians, celebrities,
>children and hunters with trophies,
>covering 28% of page space,
>2)the vast majority of the
>animal pictures are trophies, 3)the
>phrase "world class" is used
>65 times, 4)the $22 million
>in direct funding by the
>Expo partners since 2007 is
>mentioned 9 times, 5)the $2.4
>billion outdoor industry is mentioned
>15 times, 6)the 1.2 million
>acres restored by Conservation Permit
>funds is mentioned 4 times,
>7)there are several comparisons in
>text and chart form, to
>the Expo partners Utah contributions
>vs RMEF's Utah contributions where
>they attempt to throw RMEF
>under the bus, 8)the text
>is loaded with self-grandizing
>statements about their supposed
>accomplishments, even some they had
>nothing or little to do
>with, plus there are other
>obvious sales tactics used to
>keep the reader reading as
>long as possible. And it's
>all designed to convey their
>self-conceived earned right to keep
>the Expo tags. The sad
>thing about their entitlement mentality
>is that their Utah wildlife
>conservation funding future with these
>tags is grossly lacking compared
>to that same future with
>RMEF.
>
>I'm afraid this mistake will cost
>the evaluation committee, the DWR
>executives and the Wildlife Board
>a lot more in terms
>of public relations and confidence
>that they ever thought possible.
>I know they've dropped several
>notches in my view.


My Thought is that the RFP was for the 200 tags... not the expo as a whole... So who cares about all the Political pics and TOTAL REV from the expo when all this was for is the 200 tags... I think SFW did a great job of pulling all the bs of all the stuff that they have done since 07 to again pull the wool over peoples eyes...
 
Hey Bessy, why don't the people want varible scopes on muzzle loader's? I'm just curious. I have one but I don't think I've ever shot it (I bought it used on here I think), the Mule deer I killed with a muzzle loader was loaned to me by a friend.

Thanks Joe

"Sometimes you do things wrong for so long you
think their right" - 2001
"I can't argue with honesty" - 2005
-Joe E Sikora
 
>Hey Bessy, why don't the people
>want varible scopes on muzzle
>loader's? I'm just curious. I
>have one but I don't
>think I've ever shot it
>(I bought it used on
>here I think), the Mule
>deer I killed with a
>muzzle loader was loaned to
>me by a friend.
>
>Thanks Joe
>
>"Sometimes you do things wrong for
>so long you
>think their right" - 2001
>"I can't argue with honesty" -
>2005
>-Joe E Sikora

Well Joe!

Here in TARDville!

The Deer Herd has been Hurtin for over 40 Years!

When I first started SmokePolein 100 Yard Shots were Long!

300-400 Yard Shots with Rifles were Long Shots!

Then came the Inlines!

Then Better Bullets!

Then Better Powders!

Then better Ignition!

Now Unlimited on the Scopes!

They're Basically a Damn Rifle!

Nothin Primitive about them!

Just More Technology that Our Deer Herd can't stand!

It Ain't Just SmokePoles!

Most People do want Bigger Scopes!

But the Few Real Sportsmen that are Concerned about Our Deer Herd Voted it Down at the RAC's 3 to 2 but was Over Ruled by the WB!










"I'm Living & Dieing with the Choices
I've made!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=N8i5NLyXZdc
 
Thanks Bessy
Great explanation
Also your saying they voted it down then it was changed after the fact?
That sucks

Thanks for your time
Joe



"Sometimes you do things wrong for so long you
think their right" - 2001
"I can't argue with honesty" - 2005
-Joe E Sikora
 
CAT, When you are in camp helping with my big sticky / stinky bull hunt this fall you will eat like a king.

Mallard Steak, Gadwall Cheese cake, teal burgers, honker pate and all the Shoveler jerky your heart desires.



"The State of Utah has not given BGF anything.
They have invested in BGF to protect their
interests."
Birdman 4/15/15
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-27-16 AT 08:34PM (MST)[p]>Heyy ww!
>
>I'm cuttin a Fresh Back Strap!
>
>
>Or I'm gettin some Camp Meat!
>
>
>Even a Warden would see My
>side!
>
>
>
>
>"I'm Living & Dieing with the
>Choices
>I've made!"
>
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?
>v=N8i5NLyXZdc
>
>

You guys need to get a room
I am sure there are still plenty left for the expo weekend. Razzin
 
Igottabigone said:
>As an attorney myself and being
>somewhat involved with this process,
>I have inquired and discussed
>this issue at length with
>Marty Bushman, the DWR attorney
>from the AG's office.
>Marty is a good guy
>and will talk with you
>about these issues. That
>said, if I were to
>take the same actions the
>DWR has done over the
>past several years with these
>tags and contracts, I would
>be fired from my firm.
> There are really only
>two options in regards to
>what's happened with the expo,
>administrative rule change, applications, rfp,
>contracts, etc. Those two
>options are (1) collusion between
>the DWR and SFW, meaning
>the two are a little
>too cozy and potentially criminal
>implications or (2) complete incompetence.
> What's occurred with the
>rule change, followed by the
>"mentioning" of an RFP, the
>subsequent process that was invoked,
>and then a member of
>the DWR who was a
>member of the awarding committee(Mike
>Canning) openly stating that the
>two application were not even
>close is complete joke.
>I want to give the
>DWR the benefit of doubt
>in this situation. Which
>means I don't want to
>infer that anything illegal transpired,
>but that leaves me with
>only one other option, complete
>incompetence by the DWR.
>The part that frustrates me
>the most in this situation
>is there is no accountability!
>No accountability at ANY level
>and I am not just
>referring to an audit or
>seeing where the money goes.
>As stated before, if I
>had a client and treated
>them like the DWR treated
>the public, the process, and
>the groups I'd be looking
>for a new job.
>It's quite embarrassing.

That was a VERY good post!
It definitely has the outward appearance of potential Collusion and criminal Antitrust violations. Federal Antitrust investigations in Utah are handled by DOJ?s antitrust division in San Francisco. I sat in a briefing by one of their lawyers this week and they are always looking for tips on stuff to investigate. It might be a good approach to use their reporting tool or even just call and bounce it off them. If they felt like it warranted an investigation it would be the perfect impartial 3 party look into it. They are great investigators. In order for them to look into it there may have to be some kind of interstate connection to it, but there are many divers ways that that connection can be made.

If someone has the info together they may want to send in a tip. Give them the info and let them decide if they should look into it or not.
http://www.justice.gov/atr/report-violations

Or the first, and only the first, guilty person to turn themselves in and bring it to their attention, can usually get a get out of jail free card.
 
He11 of a suggestion heartshot. Call them or e-mail them yourself. Forward all the materials that other attorneys have posted right from this thread. It's all been spelled out for them. Ample information for them to evaluate the problem. Make sure you refer them directly to Hawkeye's law firm, they've got all they need right there to get started. I'd suggest you send them right to the Senior partner there.

You have the ambition, what's holding you back? Why ask someone else to stick their neck out?

If the San Franciso Office gets corrupted by Utah's crooked politicians and conservation groups, send the request to the Feds in Chicago, then New Jersey, then get the Russians and Chinese to investigate. Surely you can find someone these guys can't corrupt!
 
"You have the ambition, what's holding you back?"

Simple. What's holding me back is I don't have everything put together like I believe some people have. I am great at absorbing information but articulating that information out is not my talent. I know that I would do a lousy job of presenting the info. When going the suggested route it would better to have a more talented person do it. Always better to have a good submission than poor one.

"Why ask someone else to stick their neck out?"

A tip line isn't exactly sticking your neck out. They welcome tips even if they do not lead to anything.

I attended that DOJ briefing this week and then today when I read Igottabigone's post. They match up really well and leave me with the same opinion, either collusion or complete incompetence.

If that kind of collusion is happening it can be pretty serious with some stiff consequences.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-28-16 AT 04:40PM (MST)[p]No need to articulate. It's already been articulated, like you said, easily absorbed by someone such as yourself. Clearly, those folks in San Fran. can read the same stuff your reading and determine if it justified further investigation. At that point, your out of it, your tip will send them directly to the guys that have all the answers at Hawkeye's office, specifically his Boss.

Cut and paste the information you've absorbed, or call them and read it to them. If they are interested or already corrupted (which I doubt) then you should call another investigative agency, somewhere, anywhere. Cuba, Syria, you pick. Keep looking........if it's so obvious to you, there's got to be somebody that will round up all the guys and lock'em up!

DC
 
DeLoss-

Welcome back. Glad to see you posting again instead of just sending pm's. If anyone wants to dig into this issue, there is no need to contact me or "my boss." All you have to do is look at the DWR's own documents. The historical documents relating to the expo tag program speak for themselves and show a lack of accountability and transparency, and a series of mistakes by the DWR, going back for over a decade. That being said, I am happy to talk to anyone who has questions about this issue, including sportsmen, politicians and the media. During those conversations, I do not accuse anyone of fraud or intentional wrongdoing Rather, I simply walk them through the documents and let them draw their own conclusions. Time will tell if anyone in our state government is willing to roll up their sleeves and fix this problem.

Thanks for posting.

-Hawkeye-
 
Yep, Deerlove, I went pretty quiet back in June. A few PM's now and again, few thread comments, but not often. I expect I'll go quiet again, sooner than later.

Read the posts most days, just don't have any reason to engage at the present. Didn't kill anything this fall, fishing stories aren't a big item here, enjoying the free movement associated with not having to work for a pay check, spending my savings now days. Do a little traveling with my kids, and build a few "home made things" for the little ones. Have stopped attending the public meetings and the projects, time came to leave it up to those that will be living with the outcomes of the decisions they make. To the next generation goes the wildlife fights, for better or worse.

Regarding my comments today, I keep reading here, and from many of the same folks, on other forums. how "you all" have the information to bring what "you all" are calling corruption and prosecutable behaviors to the light of day.

All I'm saying today, and been saying for the last five years is, "put the trigger then. Get the indictments made, serve the warrants, make the arrests.

With all the hundreds, and many thousand of accusations that "you all" are making, and have been making for the last, ten years or longer, what's keeping you from proving "all your claims", and "getting rid of the bad guys", you so despise.

heartshot just shared a new, "uncorrupted" Federal agency, that SFW and the Utah politicians and State employees haven't got to yet. Here's another chance for you guys, including you Deerlove. heastshot has the solution, he won't pull the trigger, so why don't you? Go for it.

I'd think, if you were so Gal-darn sure some law has been broken, recently or in the past, why wouldn't you be making the call and giving the tip.

Here's why.

There hasn't been any illegal activity. Your just pissed off at individuals and/or those individual's procedures, because you disagree with their philosophy and how they run their organization, so you obsessively continue to make accusations but you never prove a damm thing. Year, after year, after year, accuse, accuse, accuse. Same song, same dance.

CALL THE FEDS IN SAN FRANCISCO Deerlove!

I've said what I have to say for now, my friend. You get the point, huh! See you at the Expo.

DC
 
Actually, what has prevented us from fixing this problem for the last ten years is the fact that the DWR has no desire to fix the problem. In fact, they don't even see the problem. They are perfectly content to turn 200 public tags over to a couple of private groups and "trust in good faith" the the million dollars a year generated from those assets are put to good use.

And by the way, I am fairly "gal-darn sure" that at least one law was broken since the DWR openly admits that the formal RFP process it used conflicts with the procedure set forth in R657-55-4. Read the application process set forth in that rule and you will see one law that was broken. Let me know if you want me to send the link.

The crazy thing is that is the DWR's own administrative rule. Therefore, they could have modified it to say almost anything they wanted. But they didn't want to be bothered by taking the time to go through the amendment process.

Enjoy your retirement and good luck fishing!

-Hawkeye-
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-28-16 AT 07:57PM (MST)[p]Have you folks ever watched the little shiny faced kid with freckles, at the back of the school bus, get two or three guys in the seat in front of him to get into a big ole fist fight, and then tell the bus driver, I never did anything? "They were the wachos throwing all the punches and causing all the damage." Then chuckled to himself when the parents of the three other kids, that came to blows, got into a law suit and laughed out loud when the bus driver got fired for not being able to get the children to the school and back home safely.

See YOU at the Expo!

DC
 
Sure was.

Same kid, different day, with twinkle in his eye, tells a senior girl he thinks he over heard a freshman chick talking about the senior's boy friend. Big ole brawl in the hall. Six girls expelled for fighting.

The kid can't help it, it's just what he does, beside those dumb broads were jerks anyway.

DC
 
Hello 2lumpy

After reading your posts, PM's and finally understanding the pronunciation of your name I googled the origin of the name and this is want I found. Pretty cool I think! I hope you understand I'm posting this as a complement?

Your name of deloss gives you the ability to understand people and to merge conflicting viewpoints to create harmony in association.

You could do well working with the public giving advice, where you can use your skills in diplomacy in handling people.

Thanks Joe


"Sometimes you do things wrong for so long you
think their right" - 2001
"I can't argue with honesty" - 2005
-Joe E Sikora
 
If someone said this, in discussions on Jan-28-16,?at 06:59?PM?(MST):
"During those conversations, I do not accuse anyone of fraud or intentional wrongdoing Rather, I simply walk them through the documents and let them draw their own conclusions."

Then followed it up with the following comment within one hour, on Jan-28-16,?at 07:56?PM?(MST)
"And by the way, I am fairly "gal-darn sure" that at least one law was broken since the DWR openly admits that the formal RFP process it used conflicts with the procedure set forth in R657-55-4."

What are we to assume? Does he or doesn't he believe a law was broken? If he does, why doesn't he want heartshot or DeerLlove to call the San Francisco Feds. and send them to his Boss, for full disclosure? If he isn't accusing anyone of wrongdoing or fraud, why does he say he's fairly sure one law was broken? How can a law be broken, if no "one" did it.

Thanks for your kind remarks Joe, like I said, you seem like a pretty bright guy. I believe you understand what's going on here.

Truthful, I very much dislike these kinds of conversations. My skin is far too thin, but there comes a time when a guy has to ask some question too, if he's going to look himself in the mirror in the morning. I'm not a hell of a lot different than the rest of you folks, I don't want a bunch of crooks running my State, or using my time and taking my limited resources, anymore than anyone else does. If these guys are law breakers, as they have inferred, if not out-right accused, then lets get'tem. If they are just conducting their conservation org. differently than some folks like, I have no problem with that, but to use words that cause people to believe they are corrupt or criminals, eventually starts to wear thin. So all I'm saying is, fish or cut bait gentlemen. Of course, I've said much the same before, to no avail. THIS QUARREL AND "SQUIRREL" HUNT STARTED WAY, WAY BEFORE THE DWR PUT THE 200 TAGS OUT TO BID. IT'S JUST THE MOST RECENT EVENT IN A LONG, LONG LIST OF EVENTS, OVER PHILOSOPHY AND PROCEDURE, THAT SOME FOLKS ARE PISSED OFF OVER. In my opinion.
DC
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-28-16 AT 10:23PM (MST)[p]
DeLoss-

Slow down and read my comments one more time. Yes, I believe that the DWR violated the law. However, that does not necessarily equate to fraud or collusion. In my conversations with third parties, I am careful to stick to the facts and not make half-cocked accusations.

I stand by my statement that the DWR has made numerous mistakes and violated its own administrative rules. Did you bother to read the application process set forth in R657-55-4? What do you think, did the DWR follow that process? You don't have to be a lawyer to see what happened here. Do you believe the DWR should be permitted to ignore and violate its own rules?

And in response to your fish or cut bait comment, there a plenty of folks who are working to right this wrong. Time will tell if we get any traction. Let's just say it is an uphill battle given the relationships SFW has developed within the DWR, the Wildlife Board, the legislature, etc.

That is why we should be asking for a legislative audit of the Expo Tag program. The public deserves to know what has happened to the millions of dollars generated from those public permits over the last 9 years and whether the DWR awarded the contract in a fair manner. If everything is on the up and up, then the DWR and the conservation groups have nothing to hide. If mistakes have been made, then let's identify them, fix them and move forward.

-Hawkeye-
 
"Let's just say it is an uphill battle given the relationships SFW has developed within the DWR, the Wildlife Board, the legislature, etc."

It he really believes that, why isn't the kid at the back of the bus the one sending the tip to the Federal Office in San Francisco? If ON ONE in the entire State of Utah, not a single one, from either political party, why won't he help heartshot, why isn't he encouraging heartshot to call in the tip and offering to help the Feds investigate?

There he goes again, "inferring" DWR and the conservation groups have something to hide. INFERRING. How clever. If you can't find something, infer there is something, so people thing there is.

Here's what the kid in the hall way is doing right now folks. He's trying keep you at a fever pitch, screaming, hollering, inferring, call e-mails, phone calls, demands and now STILL ANOTHER audit, how many has that been. One done, how many more asked for?

Why?

Does he think the audit will find anything he hasn't already seen, read or heard. No.

He wants this to become as divisive, nasty, and a constant pain the a44 for the DWR, the Legislature, the DOJ, the Governor so they will ALL decide say, "to hell with the 200 tags" , they're not worth hearing about, non-stop, year in and year out.

That's the goal.

If he can't get them on a legality, he'll "get them" by causing the decision makers endless misery until such time that they just want it to "go away", regardless of the effectiveness of the conservations/economic effort and effect.

So, if we're going to "wait and see". That's what he's waiting to see happen. That's the "new strategy", since the last one's he's tried haven't worked. There have been numerous trys.

Metaphorically, the girls have not started fighting amongst themselves yet, so the whispering in the ears continues.

Watch for the chuckle!

That my opinion, might be entirely my imagination. I'm a pretty dumb old country boy, after all.

DC
 
Lumpy-

You made my night -- I nearly fell out of my bed laughing. You have quite the imagination. Rather than retiring and spending your twilight years in the wood shop making toys for your grandkids, you should consider a career as a writer -- perhaps for daytime dramas. Your imagination and use of metaphors is far too vivid for a "dumb old country boy." Thanks for posting.

By the way, has anyone (including the DWR) ever audited where all of the application fees have gone? I must have missed it. Please send a copy my way. Does the public have a right to ask how the group's spent the $8.6 million in application fees that were supposed to be used for "wildlife conservation activities?"

-Hawkeye-
 
Damn it Jason, don't you know that only DC is allowed to divide hunters and supposedly hold the Wildlife Board accountable??





"The State of Utah has not given BGF anything.
They have invested in BGF to protect their
interests."
Birdman 4/15/15
 
Some people, including DeLoss, have wondered what I am referring to when I say that SFW and MDF have developed close relationships with the DWR, the Wildlife Board, the legislature, etc., which make it more difficult to address the lack of accountability and transparency that have plagued the Expo Tag program from the beginning. Rather than INFERRING, let me give you three simple examples with documentation to support it:

1. MDF and the DWR-Wildlife Board - Miles Moretti is currently the President/CEO of the MDF. See https://muledeer.org/about-us/people-of-mdf/ Prior to taking that position, he worked for the DWR and even served as Acting Director of the DWR at the time the Expo tags were created. That mean he was the #1 guy at the DWR. In fact, he was Acting Director at the 3/31/2005 Wildlife Board Meeting when the initial Expo Tag rule was adopted and the Wildlife Board specifically instructed the DWR "in their contract negotiations with teh representing organizations that annual audits be accomplished in a similar way that is done for conservation tags." See 3/31/2005 Minutes at 24 (https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BwhBsR2dj01GYzBUYlVvS3RCTXM). Had the DWR followed the Board directive, we likely would not be dealing with this problem today. In any event, Mr. Moretti was the former boss of most of the current DWR employees, including Greg Sheehan the current director at the DWR. Therefore, MDF has a very close relationship with the DWR and Wildlife Board.

2. SFW and the DWR-Wildlife Board - The Wildlife Board, which governs the DWR is made up of the following individuals:

-John Bair
-Byron Bateman
-Steve Dalton
-Kirk Woodward
-Calvin Crandall
-Mike King
-Donnie Hunter

4 out of those 7 individuals have significant ties to SFW. Bair and Bateman are former Presidents of SFW. As you all know, 3 out of the 7 (Bair, Bateman and Dalton) recused themselves from the recent Expo Tag decision due to close relationships with SFW. See 12/18/2015 Board Minutes at 3 (http://wildlife.utah.gov/public_meetings/board_minutes/15-12-18.pdf) One more Board member probably should have recused due to his involvement with SFW. According to SFW?s own materials, Donnie Hunter is or has been a member of ?SFW?s Mission Fulfillment Board? (http://www.huntexpo.com/pdfs/Expo_Auction_Catalog_Final.pdf) and he is also listed repeatedly as an ?Iron County Chapter volunteer and long-time SFW supporter? (http://sfw.net/2014/05/20/sfw-plants-bitterbrush-on-parowan-front/). Under Utah law, a government employee should recuse himself ?if they have any type of personal relationship, favoritism, or bias that would appear to a reasonable person to influence their independence in performing their assigned duties and responsibilities.? (R33-24-106). You be the judge of whether Mr. Hunter should be voting on matters that involve or benefit SFW. Therefore, SFW has very close ties with the DWR and the Wildlife Board and due to those relationships the Wildlife Board struggles to even maintain a voting quorum on issues that involve SFW.

3. SFW-BGF and the Legislature - In addition to close relationship with the DWR and Wildlife Board, SFW and its leaders have developed close ties with several state legislators and have contributed to their campaigns. Several news articles have documented the close relationship between Peay and Benson and Senate Majority Leader Ralph Okerlund, who has been a vocal supporter of the state providing millions of dollars to BGF to lobby on various issues. See http://westernvaluesproject.org/tax...hunting-energy-industry-over-hunters-anglers/ ("Records inspections show that a major proponent of the contract, State Sen. Ralph Okerlund (R-Monroe), received $6,500 in campaign contributions from the consulting firms of Don Peay and Ryan Benson, co-founders of Big Game Forever."). In 2015, the Rep. Mike McKell moved to give BGF an additional $500,000 in wolf lobbying money. According to the Tribune, McKell proposed this line item just two hours before the session closed even though it had not been discussed publicly during the normal state budgeting process, and even though it has been the source of past controversy. See http://www.sltrib.com/home/2298978-155/utah-sends-500k-more-to-unexplained. According to followthemoney.org, Rep. McKell received a $1,350 political donation from Peay's Consulting Co Inc., which is owned and operated by Don Peay. See http://www.followthemoney.org/entity-details?eid=10886452&default=lawmaker. Therefore, SFW and BGF have documented relationships with several state legislators who are outspoken supporters of those same groups.

These are three simple examples of the close relationships that SFW and MDF have with the DWR, the Wildlife Board and the state legislature. There are also other examples that I won't take the time to lay out in this post. This is not a surprise to most sportsmen who live in this state and have been paying attention, and I doubt that it is a surprise to DeLoss. This is what one SFW supporter was referring to when he recently stated that SFW has been "stacking the deck" in its favor for years. These close relationships are what I was referring to when I said that "it will be an uphill battle" to address the accountability and transparency problems relating to the Expo Tag program. It is the reason the DWR has been willing to "trust in good faith" that the millions of dollars generated from the Expo Tags has been put to good use by the groups. It is also the reason why the RMEF was concerned about whether it would be treated fairly in the application process. It this illegal? Not necessarily, but it certainly raises questions as to who is looking out for the interests of sportsmen, wildlife and taxpayers. The "good ol' boy system" is alive and well in Utah.

-Hawkeye-
 
There is no doubt about it SFW is entrenched with all of Utah's "Wildlife Secret SocietY", but being a desperate Mule Deer lover I look at anything with ELK as the adversary. Elk are here to stay and they really don't need much help from us. Many years ago a friend of mine who lived in Idaho told me as soon as the elk herds increase, the deer herds decreased. No truer words were spoken for Utah whose elk herd increased a few years after Idaho's elk increase. We cannot poison predators. The DWR and hounders manage predators so you know what that means - - no control. I would not like to see the 200 permits go to the RMEF, I would not like to see more grass planted for elk, just browse for deer.

Bouncing around and a little off point - - just a bit
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-29-16 AT 09:59AM (MST)[p]Interesting comment. In my mind, this is not necessarily a question of which group should have the contract. Rather, it is a question about the use of public funds generated from public assets. What if the 200 permits stayed with SFW and MDF but the DWR required an increased level of accountability and transparency? Let's say a 90/10 split with 90% earmarked for approved projects -- similar to what currently exists with the Conservation Permit program. That's esentially what we as sportsmen asked for back in 2012 but SFW, MDF and the DWR (and DeLoss) said no.

-Hawkeye-
 
Hawkeye,

That would be the ideal scenario in my opinion. I personally would prefer the money goes to a local group. Over the past few years SFW has done alot of things I like. I like option 2, coyote bounties, deer transplants,etc. I dont think RMEF would have done any of those things. I think the money is better used go to a local group that knows the local issues. I think the accountability and transparency is the key.
 
Never the less, the unspoken word would be as the wind blows, so the word elk is still associated with them and the DWR or the distribution individuals of the money would have a major obligation or as least feel some responsibility to the organization having the bid to put the money where they(RMEF) would want it spent.

I don't think SFW spend enough on Mule Deer and I think they are for the large land owners and I guess that is a pretty simple statement. I certainly don't have the Lumpy gift, but I do save a lot of paper.

That being said, I guess they are the best we have right now and they do spread the money around. Best of all they go beyond just improving habitat (except of course on those things I disagree with) :) .
 
To quite one my favorite HBO movies, because of the great message it teaches regarding the dangers of obsessional personal interpretation of "principles",

"Well, ain't you a Huckleberry Bubba Persimmon!"

Transparency, according to who?

They've been transparent enough for me, and apparently they've been transparent enough for a lot of other folks as well.

They'll never, ever, be transparent enough for the guys that want them gone!

Yes, they have "stacked the deck"! They've stacked it to make sure you and my grand kids can hunt and fish long after I'm dead and long forgotten!

DC
 
Hi Big
I totally agree that a local group will do better things for your own area other than a National Organization such as RMEF. But I think Hawkeyes and others point is that 100% of the 200 expo tag money would go to DWR or whoever and they could earmark all that money for the exact same projects, with the one exception is there would have to be transparency, and accountability.

Being someone who's looking from the outside in I think both sides have great points. They just need to sit down with all parties and work it out over a cold one. Hell come to IL I'll personally take Haweye and Deloss out to Andreas Steak House for my favorite Prime Rib , and dinners on me.

Thanks Joe

"Sometimes you do things wrong for so long you
think their right" - 2001
"I can't argue with honesty" - 2005
-Joe E Sikora
 
DeLoss posted: "Transparency, according to who? They've been transparent enough for me, and apparently they've been transparent enough for a lot of other folks as well."

I don't doubt that SFW and MDF have been plenty transparent for you. Just for the record, however, both you and the DWR are frankly okay with absolutely no accountability. That's right, in 2012 when sportsmen took this issue to the Wildlife Board, both you and the DWR defended the groups even though at that time not one red cent was required to be spent on actual conservation activities. The only reason a 30% requirement was eventually imposed was because sportsmen were gathering pitch forks. It certainly was not due to the generosity of the groups or their members or the DWR's desire to increase transparency. I guess we finally found something that we agree upon.

Joe, let's grab dinner next time you are in Utah. Bring DeLoss with you unless he is too thin-skinned after this discussion.

-Hawkeye-
 
Well Joe, there you go, being all practical again. :)

Truth is, the parties have done just what you've suggested. At those meetings, the parties determined their differences of philosophy couldn't be resolved. One party capitulated, as far as they could see fit to, but, as you can see, all it did was embolden the other party to demand for more.

Oh, make no mistake, the efforts they have made has had what I consider to be an unsatisfactory altering effect on the conservation org. they are attempting to dismantle. I've been equally critical of their "caving to pressure" as well.

Truth is, a large part of the SFW and MDF higharchy dislike me as much or more than Hawkeye and his merry band of minstrels.

See, I've never been a diplomat nor am I ever politically correct. Too much diplomacy and political correctness is the reason we are getting our a44 kicked by the whispers. I've never done it and I'm old and too lumpy to start now.

DC
 
DeLoss-

This is the last time I post today. Unfortunately, I am not retired and have to get back to work.

I am sorry that you are dissappointed with SFW and MDF's decision to finally earmark and account for a mere 30% of the revenues generated from these public tags six years after they started hosting the expo? I apologize for having the audicity to ask what have the groups been doing with the roughly $1 million a year raised from these tags? I am sorry that you see the decision to provide some partial accountabilty for public assets as "capitulating" and "caving in to pressure." I am sorry that you view this small step in the right direction as having an "unsatisfactory altering effect on the conservation orgs." I am sorry that you equate sportsmen asking for accountability and transparency as "attempting to dismantle" your favorite group.

Your rhetoric is really over the tip. If that is how you view this issue, then you are probably right that there are differences of philosophy cannot be resolved.

-Hawkeye-
 
He's sorry?

There the kid in the back of the bus goes again. He's sorry alright.

Not!

He apologies, with a tongue shoved so far into his check, he's going to swallow it.

He whispers he wants accountability and transparency when what he really wants is SFW gone. He orchestrated a competitive bid because he wanted more for Utah's wildlife and hunters and fisherman!

If you buy that, you'll believe he's sorry and apologetic today.

The kid in the back of the bus is as transparent as a busted out window in a empty house, with lights on, at midnight!

DC
 
So I guess the bus driver would be the DWR, The bully on the bus who steals $5 dollars of everyone lunch money would be SFW. The bully gives 30% of that stolen milk money back to the bus driver. The bully and the bus driver tell everyone to be happy they get a ride because in other states like Wyoming and Nevada their future generations wouldn't be able to have bus rides in the future.
 
Come on DC.... You know those sorrys weren't apologies. They were expressions that we feel bad for you because of your take on those things.
 
Your damn right there not apologies!

You called San Francisco heartshot? Come on buttercup, it's Friday, there's someone there, hop'en you'll call!
 
Not exactly, I want SFW gone.

At this point there aren't enough redeeming qualities to cover their stench.

Hawkeye wants answers.



"The State of Utah has not given BGF anything.
They have invested in BGF to protect their
interests."
Birdman 4/15/15
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-29-16 AT 02:56PM (MST)[p]Talk about a Father and Son in an "SFW family" that can't see the forest for the trees or is just plain dumb! Looks to me like the true 2lumpy has finally come out of the closet with as much BS as got the SFW where it is in the eyes of most that can see what is going on with millions of dollars of money owned by the public trust. SFW would be gone, for better or worse, if they didn't hijack all the money they are from the taxpayers of Utah. At least all of us out in other states can see what has been going on since the Don founded his "self interest" organizations because that's exactly what they are. Hey, Birdman, isn't it about time for you to chime in and tell everybody how you know everything that is going on and we don't, LOL! I sure hope this bidding debacle has been the final thing that will be the undoing of higher ups that are only in this for the big money they're making, and for sure it's in the millions with absolutely nothing to show for where it should have been going.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-29-16 AT 03:57PM (MST)[p]Hey, hey, hey, don't be distracting Birdman right now, he's busy getting SFW's stuff set up to host the Perch Tournament/Conservation family activity at Fish Lake tomorrow. He's got to get the $4,000 dollars in prizes, that SFW raised at the Expo and the Richfield Banquet to help Utah fisherman get a over populated yellow perch infestation out of the Lake, at the request of the UDWR Fisheries Biologists.

Ya, thats $4,000 plus up to another $1,000 in fire arms, if the right perch are caught. It's a free tournament. Why free. Because it for conservation, and the public already paid for it buy applying for 200 tags at the Expo and donating extra, beyond that, at the local Banquet.

According to the DWR over 2,000 people, mostly families with young children, learning how to ice fish have pre-registered and will show up at 8:00 in the morning for a great day on the ice. 2,000 seems like a lot, but then 1,732 showed up last year and caught over 40,000 perch in hours. Not a bad investment in the health of the Lake, especially when the public had so much fun doing it.

The lake is five miles long, this is photo if about a three quarters of a mile of it.

6638perc10.jpg


One groups catch.

77628perch.jpg


Letting folks know SFW is the one raising and releasing all those pheasants the folks in Sevier Valley are shooting now days. We need more volunteers and donors, if we going to keep doing this kinds of things for you folks.

2675lunchatfl.jpg


Oh ya, Cabelas caught and cooked the perch for everybody, along with a ton of other things they gave away to the kids while they were teaching them how to catch the little buggers. All free, of course.

Just one of many conservation activities SFW hosts throughout the State. Maybe your State should consider offering some tags and an Expo in your big city. Works here in Utah. You could do it TopGun, no need to involve SFW at all. Wouldn't hurt a thing to help your State increase hunting and fishing, would it?

Course, I wasn't going to mention any of that, until ya called out my bud, Birdman.

He'll be back, for ya to beat up, after the tournament is over and all the stuff has been cleaned up and put away until next year.

DC
 
LOL! We don't need your type of an organization with bigshot leaders taking big chunks of money from the public trust to line their pockets! We're doing fine with all the "upfront" conservation organizations that have open books and can show where all the money that comes in goes. You sure can't say that about SFW when they take in millions a year and can't show where even half of it went. Show us the money honey and we'll let your fine group alone. Until then the Don and his organizations are under the gun!
 
Well, it's start'en to echo in here again. I'm headed back to the grand kids toy shop!

See you at the Expo, tag application tables, Mr. McCoy.
 
What amazes me is that there was hardly any discussion after Trammer said he was on a hunt with 3 DWR employees. A Dall sheep hunt runs around 20K. Their bosses at DNR award a multi-million dollar contract to SFW, then 3 DNR employees are on a free hunt? I thought that would have aleast raised an eye brow. I don't know time frame of all this or if it's even related but should give us something to think about.
 
Brings up a good point. Nearly every reputable national or international corporation stops any gifts from vendors beyond say a hat. They have found if payola of any form is involved it is counterproductive for their organizations. The way I understand the tax laws, a gift is nontaxable, but if you have to do anything for that item it no longer is a gift and is therefore taxable. I wonder if the person receiving the hunt paid their taxes on $20,000+? With the award of the permits it could be suspect.

Could be wrong, but that is the way it was explained to me.
 
Well Joe, there you go, being all practical again. ?
Thanks Deloss

I spoke with Cody for almost 2 hrs yesterday .
We had a great conversation. You raised a good man there

Your friend
Joe

"Sometimes you do things wrong for so long you
think their right" - 2001
"I can't argue with honesty" - 2005
-Joe E Sikora
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-30-16 AT 09:11PM (MST)[p]Thank you Joe, I'm proud of all five of my children, but I have to confess, they are independent people, and have been since they were old enough to walk. Cody is his own man, and I can promise you, he's going to do what he does, whether I like it or not.

Having been raised under the same roof, where their individual experiences were similar, because I took then with me, regardless of where it was I was going, they each have formed their own opinions and their own way of interacting with their world. As "interesting/or not", as some folks have found Cody to be, I'm not at all sure how they might handle the other four. Cody has a more mild disposition than some of my children, but no less passionate about the lifestyle. His brothers think Cody's nuts for posting on Internet forums. They don't dare tell me what they think of me ;-).

Have a nice Sunday Joe, good luck in your tag draws this year. Hope a good one lands on you!

DC
 
Hi Deloss,
"They don't dare tell me what they think of me?." Not if they want to see the sunrise!

I will say that after talking with Hawkeye, Justin, Cody, and yourself, not one person has said anything disrespectful of the other, other than a few jabs on here as you can see for your selves. LOL! So I think there's hope!
We all have a common thread,we all very passionate about what we believe in and we all stubborn as Hell! LOL!

And if things can be worked out with Hawkeye and his group your Organization will grow by 10 fold!

Thanks Joe



"Sometimes you do things wrong for so long you
think their right" - 2001
"I can't argue with honesty" - 2005
-Joe E Sikora
 
Again, thanks Joe. I too respect you, in as much as it seems as if you've gone beyond the norm by contacting individuals directly, rather than forming your opinions from the "shallow depth discussions" that takes place on these social media formats. Shallow depth discussions have their place but, as you have learned, they don't allow one to know the big picture, if that's what he's looking for. They are however, entertaining, if you like the thrills associated with watching or participating in "drive-by shootng/lynchings".

While it is not likely that "everyone", from any group, here or on Mars, can ever, "always" agree, on every issue.

Sometimes, as we've discussed, Ad nauseam, here on MM, over the years, there are times, when every organization finds it's self backed into a corner, and believes it must take a position, that it knows it will be unpopular, in fact, in some cases, devastating, to half of it's membership. Let me give you a example of what I mean, no names, no intent to criticize, but never the less, one of those can't win situations, that an organization "could" and if they are around very long, "will" come up against.

Lets say that your with an org. that believes domestic cats need help, lets say that domestic cats have declined in numbers, for a lot of different reasons, and your group believe that's not in the best interest of the public. Cats are great house pets, in there opinion, they control house/yard rodents, they keep vermin like mice and rats from bringing diseases into rural locations but they are especially valuable to humans in urban centers where they keep the city free of all kinds of nasty critters. They are cute, they purr, they cuddle, they snuggle and they are mysterious, fascinating, and independent. This group thinks cats are just about the most important animal in the animal system. They make a compelling argument to "save the cats".

People agree. The organization starts raising millions, people donate hundreds and even thousands. There are even elderly ladies, who upon their deaths, donate huge estates, homes, worth millions, to the Save the Cats organization. Many huge donors. Their membership grows exponentially for 10 or 15 years and all is going great. Then one day, someone discovers that dogs are the biggest threat to domestic cats. Dog numbers are huge and growing. Somebody that loves cats comes to the Save the Cats organization, and say's, "we need to regulate the number of dogs or soon or later, most every cat in the country is going to be dead".

This presents a real problem for the Save the Cats organization. Without the tremendous and generous donations they receive from their membership, they believe they will have a difficult time protecting cats, even though they know that, in fact, dogs are killing too many cats. The problem the Save the Cats organization has, the corner they are now in, is, some of their most generous donors and dedicated members also love dogs. While they really like cats, they like dogs better. Because dogs are more loyal, they are not neurotic, they lick your face, they are teachable, they hunt birds, bring you your slippers, guard your house, etc.

The pure cat members are screaming, killed those damn dogs, and the other half of you membership is saying, I like cats but you damn well better not touch my dogs.

Your the founder of the Save the Cats organization. Your Board of Directors is wishy-washy, afraid to decide what the org. needs to do. The founder and the Board are backed in the pervertible corner.

"If only that jerk that came in here and demanded that we support killing dogs hadn't been so stupid, the Save the Cats organization would not be in this mess. He's the SOB that caused us to be in the mess."

The Save the Cats organization founder looks at it's membership and his mission statement, that say's "we save cats". 70% of his member are pure cat lovers, the other 30% like cats but like dogs better, if their pressured, they'll protect their dogs.

The Save the Cats organization receives around 10 million dollars a year, and needs every cent. It knows, if it takes a public position, that supports the killing of dogs, it will loose 30% of it's membership and more importantly it will loose about 3 to 3.5 million dollars of badly needed donations.

Backed in a corner that it didn't choice to be in, it has to decide to support the killing of dogs. The dog lovers that belong to the Save the Cats organization go bat $hit crazy. They threaten to leave the org. immediately if the decision isn't reversed, "right fricking now"! The Save the Cats organization can't go back, if they do they loose 70%. Can't win!

Son of a B!tch!

The dog lover leaves, in a huff, bad press, nasty calls from the news media, that loves controversy, budgets dive, projects need to be cancelled, all a huge mess at the Save the Cats headquarters.

Who does Save the Cats founder and Board of Directors hold responsible? They are not only very angry with inconsiderate dog owners and but they are most angry with their own member, that forced them to choice between their membership.

NOW. Here is the only part of the story that doesn't happen, because human nature doesn't generally work that way.

AFTER A COUPLE OF YEARS THE PARTIES GET TOGETHER, OVER LUNCH AND DECIDE THEY CAN WORK TOGETHER AGAIN.

Joe some times orgs get backed in a corner, by individuals, by other organizations, by State agencies, by politicians, or whom ever. NOBODY, AT THE BEGINNING, WANTED TO HAVE TO PISS ANYBODY OFF, OR TAKE ANYBODIES MONEY OR PRIDE, OR GIRL FRIEND AWAY, BUT , IN EVERY ORGANIZATION, "IT WILL ALWAYS HAPPEN", SOONER OR LATER.

And the more species, the issues, the more avenues of human conflict the organization is involved in, the more frequent it gets backed in a corner.

Some org. are committed to just ducks, some to just turkeys, some to just trout, some to just walleye, some to just sheep, some to just deer, some to just mt. goats, some to just fly fishing, some to just pheasants, some to just elk, some to just chukkars, etc.

Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife (SFW) has, because it is a "hunting and fishing" org and is NOT a single species org. found it's self backed in a corner more often than most single species orgs. and it's members. Its founder, its Executive staff, and its Board of Directors are constantly backed in a corner, by a % of it's own membership, as well as some of the individual species orgs, because, there are many, many times, when SFW has had to, (NOT BECAUSE THEY WANT TOO), but it is, by someone, being forced to pick AB or BA.

Not fun, not easy, but never the less the path they have chosen and one that I'm grateful for, even though, every member of SFW, including it's Executives, it's Board Members and its members all need to "get over it and get back to work or............. step away" when their toes get run over. If SFW is going to defend long term hunting and fishing, for all big game, all upland species, all water fowl, and all fish, it's going to be in endless disagreements, with some of the biggest orgs and most powerful politicians in the country.

Many cannot cope with that much "gut wretch" and leave with frustrated and even hostile feelings, and some stay hostile, some drift away, and a few understand the reality of SFW's mission and roll with it. For me, I roll, and get rolled, but as of right now, they are getting more done, of what I believe needs to be done, so I get back up, pick up the tools and go back to work, and nurse my smashed toes.

Our Richfield SFW Banquet is this Saturday, I'm asking my friends and neighbors to donate $110 for two great prime-rib dinners and a new SWF, one year membership, so we can keep growing and releasing pheasants, funding fishing activities, building guzzlers in the desert for chukkars, providing funding for predator bounties (coyote, skunk, raccoons, and red fox), transplanting sheep, mt. goats, deer, turkeys, building fences on migration routes that cross highways, pay for various big games scientific research through Utah State and Brigham Universities, and various water, soil and plant restoration projects, etc. etc.

So Joe..............if the folks want to "get over it", what ever "it" is, (like some of us do) and pick up the SFW tools, the door is always open, wide open. If they want to look at every check book, at every transaction, and every strategy, to protect and preserve recreational hunting and fishing, with ever individual or organization, from Washington DC to Beaver, Utah, it's not likely going to happen. At least it won't likely happen until they have worked their way up to an Executive staff position. As it should be, or so it seems to me, and I don't care if some of the revenue is generated by public resources.

Standard Oil pumps oil out of State and Federal land leases everyday, good luck getting a look at their check book and their exploration strategies, public land lease or not.

DC
 
At the risk of being cast by Lumpy as ?the boy in the back of the bus? again, I am going to try to respond to another one of his posts. Rather than trying to decipher the metaphorical masterpiece of savethecats.org, let's focus on some real life facts.

The DWR is giving SFW and MDF 200 premium hunting permits each year to supposedly ?generate revenues for wildlife conservation activities.? Over the last 9 years, these groups have generated over $8.6 million just from those $5 application fees. Sportsmen want to know what has happened to that money and whether it has truly been used for ?wildlife conservation activities.? For me, it is really that simple. I don't care what SFW is doing with admission fees from the expo, booth rental fees, banquet revenues, ?donations from old ladies?, etc. But I do believe that sportsmen (and any other citizen or taxpayer) have a right to see what these groups are doing with the $5 application fees raised from these tags.

In 2010, I along with a number of other sportsmen met with the leaders of SFW (Don, John, Troy, Byron, Ryan, etc.). DeLoss was not present at that meeting. I also had a similar meeting around that same time with the leaders of MDF (Miles and Eric). We asked the groups what they were doing with the application fees generated from the Expo Tags. Rather than addressing our questions, the groups wanted to focus on all of the good things they were accomplishing. They also stated in very plain terms that they did not have to account for those monies because they were not required to do so by the DWR?s rules or their contract with the DWR. They were correct in that regard. The DWR had dropped the ball when these tags were created and had failed to include a requirement in the rule or the contract that any of the application revenues be accounted for or earmarked for actual conservation. The funny thing is when you ask the DWR why they did not impose such a requirement the response is that the groups never proposed such a requirement.

During those meetings, I made it very clear to both groups that I was not an SFW hater looking to dismantle the organization. I just wanted to make sure that the monies generated from those public tags were being used as represented to sportsmen. I acknowledged that the DWR had dropped the ball and failed to impose an express requirement to this effect but I asked the groups to voluntarily commit to spending the vast majority of the application fee revenue on actual conservation projects and to account for those expenditures. I also explained to them that regardless of whether the DWR was doing its job and requiring accountability, the time would come when sportsmen would rise up and they would be forced to provide this information. Therefore, it would be much better for the groups if they would do so voluntarily. I also told them that if they voluntarily did the right thing then I would rejoin the organizations (along with many other concerned sportsmen) but if they continued to refuse to account for the monies generated from those public tags then I would continue to fight for as long as necessary to fix this problem. Well, the short version of the story is the groups dug in their heels, told us to pound sand, and stuck to their story that they were not required to account for the money under the DWR?s rules or their contract with the DWR.

Flash forward six years and we are still fighting about this same issue ? the accountability and transparency of private groups handling public assets in the alleged name of conservation. SFW, MDF and the DWR continue to push back against sportsmen who simply want to know where the money is going. In late 2012, the groups and the DWR ?voluntarily agreed? to account for 30% of the proceeds in an effort to get sportsmen off of their backs. Just to be clear, at that time sportsmen were asking the groups earmark 90% of the application fees for actual conservation projects and to account for those expenditures, similar to what SFW and MDF were already doing with the Conservation Permits that they auction off at their banquets.

So Joe, I and many other sportsmen are not likely to ?get over it? any time soon. And contrary to what Lumpy and his merry band would have you believe, this is not about a few whackos wanting to scrutinize every expenditure, transaction and decision made by SFW or MDF. It boils down to the simple fact that if a private conservation organization is going to take 200 permits from the public draw and generate millions of dollars ?for wildlife conservation activities,? then it better be willing to account for those monies even if the DWR is too incompetent or complicit with the groups to require that transparency.

Hence, Lumpy?s Standard Oil analogy is comparing apples and oranges, or perhaps apples and horse crap.

-Hawkeye-
 
Hi Hawkeye, LMAO!
Remember when we talked and I asked what was your impression of me was? Reason being is I said because a lot of times I thinking the same thing but it gets lost in translation!

When you said. "Hi Joe, we aren't just going to get over it". So I went on a hunt to all my past posts to see if that's what I said, and mind you I was taking notes along the way of each post of what I said, to find out. When I got to the end of the posts, I found that it wasn't directed at me! AGAIN LMAO!

Ain't it funny how you can miss read one little thing and causes you to think quite the opposite of what was really being said. Ha Ha!

Although after reading all my posts and all the answers to my posts, I have to admit something struck me hard about my POST #139! ALL I HEARD WAS CRICKETS, AND I HAVE TO ADMIT GUYS IT WAS A BLOW TO MY SELF-ESTEEM! ?

Still your friend
Poor, lonely, nobody loves, have to put a Porkshop around my neck just to get the dog to play with me!

JOE
Now thanks funny right there I don't care who you are!





"Sometimes you do things wrong for so long you
think their right" - 2001
"I can't argue with honesty" - 2005
-Joe E Sikora
 
Joe-

No problem. Your confusion was a direct result of me responding to Lumpy's comments to you in post #280.

In response to your invitation in post #139, let's get together when you are in town. I won't be attending the expo but I would be happy to meet you for dinner or otherwise.

-Hawkeye-
 
Well..............I've had the misfortune or the good fortune, depending on how you look at, to work for myself, for other businesses and for a State/local bureaucracy over the last fifty years.

Twelve years with my own business.

Eighteen years for a State/local bureaucracy.

Sixteen years for other people's business.

Nearly four years, spending my savings, in voluntary retirement.

So.............I've been on both sides of the government vs private enterprise work place.

Regardless, be it private or governmental, if a very nice individual, be it an employee, a family member, a wacko, or a man from the Moon walks through the door and asks, in a very polite way to see the check book, for what ever reason he gives, he will be politely told, "that is not going to happen, unless I want too, and I don't."

If this very nice individual persists, those in charge, resist as politely as they can, without accommodating the request.

If this very polite individual, still, in a very polite but persistent way continues to ask for more, the frustration of those in control of the business or bureaucracy begins to build, until as some point in time they begin to say things like, "you're not getting one damn thing from us, that the law of the land does not require that I give you. File every claim, make very demand, make every argument you want, you'll get what I'm "required" to give you and not a single morsel more! If you back me in a corner, you'll get what I'm forced to give you according to the courts definition of the law, and beyond that, my nice polite friend, "you can pound sand", as long as I'm running this business/bureaucracy."

So....the only alternative the nice polite person has left to leverage, is to "build public" mistrust and public hostility (which isn't very hard to do, during this age of "competitive insanity".)

As I said before and as the nice polite man alluded to when he warned the folks that the public frustration is growing, (what he meant was, I'm growing public frustration, (in my opinion) to get what I'm after).

The current campaign, since the last effort failed, is to create (build) such a mess, the folks in control decide to put a top to it by eliminating what he claims is the source of the public's hostility.

It's the same tactic the other "competitive insanity" players are using, be it: ..... Lives Matter, Occupy Wall Street, The Bundy Movement", etc. When they can't get what they want politely or legally, they resort to "organizing anarchy".

Lead on Son.

DC
 
Oh, I maybe asked to work at the application tables location this year. I'll keep my iphone handy so I can get another picture of me and ole BobCat, if he decides to wander into town again this year.

DC
 
Could someone send me a big ole glossy of the Bocat to hang on my wall? I'm dying to see what he looks like!

Thanks Joe

"Sometimes you do things wrong for so long you
think their right" - 2001
"I can't argue with honesty" - 2005
-Joe E Sikora
 
How "glossy" does it need to be Joe? He's not exactly a "the shiny freckled face kid from the back of the bus". There's not much left to BC that's glossy!.

DC
 
Well, I've sat back since yesterday and now have read the latest BS that DC has posted several times. He may be the nicest guy on the block from all accounts on here, but those posts are about as idiotic as if my dead DD Pointer had typed them! Putting up an oil company and now himself to make comparisons and reasons for SFW not doing what should be done when they take valued tags from the public trust and don't return the bulk of the profits for the public benefit is absolutely ludicrous. It just shows how people like Jim Jones and the DON can get so far into people's heads that they can't see the forest for the trees and just keep drinking the kool aide! Hawkeye, on the other hand, has posted a number of times the exact reasons that the monies involved in a big part of the Expo should be transparent as to where they are going. All we get back is more BS and gibberish to the point where it's sickening. I hope you people in Utah can get this obviously corrupt system straightened out after this latest big boondoggle has really brought it to a head in a most visible way to show how deep that corruption goes!
 
Oh that's a good one Lumpy, my wife and I are still laughing!

I would love to just have a picture of the one and only BOBCAT BESS that I will proudly display on the mantle above my fireplace.

When I asked my wife "should I say on my mantle or on my fireplace" she laughs and says "how about saying hanging it in the garage"! Got to love a lady with a good sense of humor.

A side story, some of you know I was carpenter/builder, with that being said.
It was my wife's turn to host the neighborhood Bonko party at our home, and we had a floor plan called The Chelsea plan (our top seller) which we built about a dozen of them in the subdivision and a few of our neighbors had the same plan (though ours had tons of upgrades). One of our customer/neighbor after looking at our kitchen lay out, said to my wife "Hey how is it you have a trasher compactor, Kohler sink, etc, etc, my wife, without batting an eye said, "I SLEPT WITH MY BUILDER". In Turn this neighbor (who we love) says without batting an eye "I DIDNT KNOW I HAD THE OPTION!
Now that's funny right there I don't care who you are!

Joe





"Sometimes you do things wrong for so long you
think their right" - 2001
"I can't argue with honesty" - 2005
-Joe E Sikora
 
Topgun, I knew it koolaid is Jim Jones jungle juice.

Thanks Joe




"Sometimes you do things wrong for so long you
think their right" - 2001
"I can't argue with honesty" - 2005
-Joe E Sikora
 
How about we do this?
Let's not let our emotions get away with us to the point where we attack people for their beliefs and opinons. This is want makes America Great!

Thanks Joe

"Sometimes you do things wrong for so long you
think their right" - 2001
"I can't argue with honesty" - 2005
-Joe E Sikora
 
Topgun, that is so wrong on so many levels! But funny as hell!

Joe

"Sometimes you do things wrong for so long you
think their right" - 2001
"I can't argue with honesty" - 2005
-Joe E Sikora
 
>Topgun, that is so wrong on
>so many levels! But funny
>as hell!
>
>Joe
>
>"Sometimes you do things wrong for
>so long you
>think their right" - 2001
>"I can't argue with honesty" -
>2005
>-Joe E Sikora


Funny alright, but I didn't put it up!
 
My bad!

Joe

"Sometimes you do things wrong for so long you
think their right" - 2001
"I can't argue with honesty" - 2005
-Joe E Sikora
 
DeLoss-

Before you post again, take a minute and read this post slowly. Nobody is asking to see a copy of SFW's entire checkbook. Nobody gives a crap how SFW spend's its membership fees and private donations from little old ladies. What we are asking for is for SFW and MDF to account for the $8.6 million in application fees generated from our 200 public tags. It is really that simple. All of your stories, metaphors and analogies have missed the point entirely. If you are going to take 200 premium tags out of the public draw in the name of "generating revenues for wildlife conservation activties" (R-657-55-1), then you better be willing to account for those funds.

In post 253, you stated that these monies have been audited many times and yet we are calling for "STILL ANOTHER audit." Where are these audits that you are referring to? If you have one, please post a copy here. We both know that no such audit has ever been conducted. The public has a right to ask how the group's spent the $8.6 million in application fees that were supposed to be used for "wildlife conservation activities." So rather than wasting our time with another side-story story about savethecats.org, Standard Oil, Black Lives Matter, Occupy Wallstreet or my personal favorite -- the "bright faced kid on the back of the bus," just post a link to one of the many audits that you have been referring to. And if you do, please pick an "audit" that actually tracks how money was spent. Thanks.

-Hawkeye-
 
Jason, we all know Delusional Deloss wont post a link of an audit because their is not one. I love how he tries to deflect the questions. He wont answer any questions, just only tries to tell stories to his grandkids about his experiences on the bus growing up in Sevier County.

So DD, here is an IDEA!!! Why not give me full control of your checkbook, bank account, stocks and retirement plan and let me take control of it. Its all in the name of "retirement" and I will do whats best for you (in my mind). But dont ask to get a monthly statement to see where and what is happening with your money. Thats not fair, and I dont need to, so stop asking to see it. Just trust me! I am doing the right thing. You will see, and if you dont like it, guess what, too bad. Nothing you can do about it. As has been said before, "GO POUND SAND."

This is an example of whats been going on Deloss, you might think its ok, but there are ALOT more of us than you think that are not OK with whats going on or that dont like SFW for what they have done.
 
Robi,
He didn't grow up in Sevier Valley. LOL

BTW when you gonna fire that silver bullet? I keep waiting....and waiting......and waiting......... Those things must only be chambered for guns with unbelievably heavy triggers. I hear that about them from time to time but I never seem to see them come out the barrel. Weird
 
Hawkeye's post #281 sums it up so simple. Thank you. You're a good man Hawkeye!

Now, I better do an analogy scenario for DC.
A high up member of SFW uses the $5 application fees for public tags to pay himself his SFW salary of $700K a year. The majority of sportsman would think this is a crazy amount of administration fees in order to help wildlife. However, some regular SFW members think that one person?s $700K salary is just fine. Mind you that these regular SFW members actually do a lot for wildlife by voluntarily putting their boots and resources on the ground. They see enough good being done that they don't care about all the money being held back in administrative salaries. It does?t matter to them because they feel that it is no body?s business to know. After all, it takes a lot of administrative work to make sure that $5% of an organization?s monies make it to actual wildlife conservation projects.

Meanwhile those heroes that question SFW?s use of public resources are told to pound sand for questioning where the money goes that is generated from the resource of 200 public tag. Mind you that these heroes don't care what SFW is doing with ?admission fees from the expo, booth rental fees, banquet revenues, donations from old ladies, etc?. They are fine pounding sand when it comes to this info. However, these heroes want some accountability for the moneys directly generated from the public tags. They are not OK with one person?s $700K administrative overhead for public resources that are to ?generate revenues for wildlife conservation activities?.

The regular SFW members tell the heroes to pound sand on both accounts and then offer up a soothing save the cats scenario to help distract the heroes from the real issue.

heartshot

P.S. Is $700K for one person a little exaggerated?.....Prove the contrary.
 

Similar threads

hossblur
Where's all the conservation money?
Replies
10
Views
793
eelgrass
eelgrass
hossblur
$fw where's the money?
Replies
88
Views
3k
hossblur
hossblur
C
Wasatch thoughts
2
Replies
193
Views
6k
elkassassin
elkassassin

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

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

IMG_4655.jpg
D61D5D4F-7BBD-4DA5-9365-05F9047BE80A.jpeg
2021 Muley Scouting for ridgetops
74B99962-5062-4925-B247-745985AAC459.jpeg
BE66EC18-02CE-44CB-9E4C-0C8E52C124CC.jpeg
IMG_5449.jpg
Screenshot_20220704-181222_Gallery.jpg
20200513_194741.jpg
4D008927-CC2F-4D97-8F7D-EDF8C1F0A3FC.jpeg
Screenshot_20211219-073646_Gallery.jpg
20210819_063138.jpg
IMG_0093.jpeg
Back
Top Bottom