My thoughts regarding the Expo Tag decision

>Trammer,
>And why exactly would the SFW
>not need the venue???
>The Expo would still take
>place and run by the
>SFW and MDF. This
>was all about the tags
>not the actual event.

Was there any reason for DWR to believe there wasn't an available venue and thus reduce RMEF's score?

Between Salt Palace and South Town Expo Center, in the months of Jan/Feb/Mar, I think we can all agree that RMEF could've gotten a venue... unless of course you desire to assume they wouldn't.

I wonder what type of Expo SFW would be able to put on when the exhibitors would clearly choose to exhibit at a much larger National Convention of the 200,000 RMEF over the local/regional convention of 13,000 member SFW. How many exhibitors would choose to come to both? Probably not many, especially when the tags were at the larger RMEF Convention.

So now you would have competing Conventions, during similar months, in similar locations, but one has 15 times the membership and the 200 public tags to raffle... hmmm, I wonder what would happen?

Sure, SFW could technically still have the Expo... but really? C'mon.

Grizzly
 
>Trammer,
>And why exactly would the SFW
>not need the venue???
>The Expo would still take
>place and run by the
>SFW and MDF. This
>was all about the tags
>not the actual event.

Of course it was about the actual event! At least, that's what we were told. At EVERY meeting I went to where this subject was discussed, SFW and MDF insisted that they needed the application fees to help finance the EXPO. That's why they balked even at the 30% return to wildlife. So, which is it? Will they hold an Expo without the tags or not? And if they are willing to hold the Expo without the application fees later, why aren't they willing to do it now?

You and they separate the tags and the event when it suits you, but combine them when it doesn't.
 
Elk,
Sure, why not.

As far as a venue, well I'm only guessing here but it looks to me that they ask for detail and they got none from the RMEF. The devils in details or so they say.
 
>Elk,
>Sure, why not.
>
>As far as a venue, well
>I'm only guessing here but
>it looks to me that
>they ask for detail and
>they got none from the
>RMEF. The devils in details
>or so they say.


You can't really be that dumb to make a statement like that if you read the RMEF proposal! Well, maybe you are based on some of the other statements you've made about the selection committee being composed of neutral parties and the decision was taken away from the DWR, LOL!
 
Topgun,
You remind me of Ike Clanton. but honestly you're right I'm a pretty challenged person. Challenged enough to support a group that keeps winning. When that group fades I'll support another group that gives me the best chance to push agenda that I support. I'm dumb enough to utilize the tools available to make changes in the state that I live and love to hunt in. I'm dumb enough to work within the system that exists. Tell me Topgun, Do you feel like you're winning????
 
73, Why is it that when ever i read your posts, i feel like i'm getting slime on me? You make no bones about it, you are doing what is good for YOU. You don't care about the masses out there, all the guys that have been hunting public land for generations. You just want what will be good for you and yours and couldn't give a darn about the rest.

You have stated here before that you don't care for this site but return you do and now that your corrupt leadership has managed to rig the game and stolen public assets for their own gain, here you are to gloat and spread even more slime. I for one would like for you to crawl back your hole.

Joey



"It's all about knowing what your firearms practical limitations are and combining that with your own personal limitations!"
 
Joey
You have no how idea who I am or the reality of any of this situation. I support what pushes my agenda. My agenda is taking care of the wildlife I love in hopes that me and my kids have to best opportuntiy to enjoy it for many years to come. Along with others that love wildlife. My view on how to accomplish that just varies from yours. Mine is based on the REALITY of the situation I have been involved in for over 30 years. Seriously you know very very little about the real situation, you know the interweb, that's it. You can call me a slime or an assholeee or anything you want. I have thick skin I know the reality and history. I honestly don't care what you think of me, It literally matters zero in the big picture. I'd sit down and drink whiskey with the devil himself to save the wildlife I love and to secure a hunting passion for my future generations. I'm involved first hand and come from a family that all has been for over 5 decades. You my friend have not contributed anything to that passion nor will you before you fade to dust. So feel free to call me anything you like or call me out on my view but I won't back down and I won't hesitate for split second to continue to push forward.
 
Yeah, i've heard all that self ego inflation speech from you before. Whatever gets you through the night. Bottom line, you would step on others backs to get you and yours to be the first through the gate and once in, you'd lock that gate so nobody else could hunt.

That's where we stand. I think you are a slime and you think i'm a nobody. I'd rather be a nobody!

Joey


"It's all about knowing what your firearms practical limitations are and combining that with your own personal limitations!"
 
Joey,
Again you assume. I'm truly a nobody that just chooses to speak my views just like yourself. Here's fun fact for you, I've hunted private property a grand total is one time in my life. It was a CO landowner tag that was a gift, I believe it was 150.00. My dad bought it for me after I helped him on his once in a lifetime moose hunt. Other than that it's all DIY public land. You try and demonize me because you disagree with my views. I'm not stepping on backs I'm mearly refusing to step down from Internet banter and name calling from an individual or individuals that disagree with me. I'm all no gates, not locking them. The stronger our public land herds are the less leverage the private land has, that's the way I see it anyway. What you don't get is I don't take any of this personal. This is Internet banter and not where the really fights take place. I don't think you're a nobody I just think you're uniformed in reality.
 
73---Your posts, and especially these last two to me and Joey on this thread, tell us more than we would ever want to know about you and your type that will do whatever it takes to get what they want, including supporting a system that you know damn well is corrupt. People like you that close their eyes to do what you mention and say it's for your and your kid's good when it's easy to see the corruption going on makes many of us sick. I hope this latest BS that DP and his SFW cronies were able to perpetrate on the good citizens of Utah finally brings it to a head and the head is cut off the snake once and for all. If you can say with any conscience at all that this whole debacle isn't just that, then you have proved that you would drink with the devil himself, as you so eloquently put it, to get your way. That is sad, very very sad!
 
OK, most of that sounds fair enough...if i were to believe you. I think you said something about drinking with the Devil, that's nothing compared to a few white lies, bending, and stretching the truth. I've read too much of your stuff, you don't give a hoot about others right to access, you want the power that goes with controlling the Lands and if others no longer get to hunt, it was their own doing!

I hate it when you talk about your Family because i have nothing but the utmost respect for your Father. As a comment in jest, Jackie Gleason had reason to tell Jr that when he got home, that he was going to punch Jr's Momma in the mouth because Jr couldn't possibly come from his loins. It's none of my business but sometimes i wonder...

Joey


"It's all about knowing what your firearms practical limitations are and combining that with your own personal limitations!"
 
Top,
Call it what you want. If the "snake" topples I'm continue to fight for what I beleive is right. I'll win some and I'll lose some but my passion is strong enough I won't ever worry about what a few people think on the interweb.
 
>Top,
>Call it what you want.
>If the "snake" topples I'm
>continue to fight for what
>I beleive is right.
>I'll win some and I'll
>lose some but my passion
>is strong enough I won't
> ever worry about what
>a few people think on
>the interweb.

What "a few on the internet think", LOL! Try thousands of people that are on the net every day on some big websites and that are disgusted with the whole travesty that you seem to wholeheartedly support. How people like you can support the Don and his cronies knowing what is going on makes many of us wonder how people like you can sleep at night!
 
Joey,
I honestly don't like to argue with you on the forums. I think you're a throw back to a generation and type of person I like. But if you want to jump in when I'm engaged with someone like Topgun I just want back down. It's just the way I'm wired.
 
>Joey,
>I honestly don't like to argue
>with you on the forums.
> I think you're a
>throw back to a generation
>and type of person I
>like. But if you
>want to jump in when
>I'm engaged with someone like
>Topgun I just want back
>down. It's just the
>way I'm wired.

LOL, someone like Topgun! That's about the biggest bunch of BS I've seen you post yet. I'm 68 years old, fought for what was right for over 30 years during my career before I retired in 2002, and am exactly the generation you're talking about. It's a generation that knows right from wrong and will call a spade a spade. Like it or not, but there are a lot of us out there that know right from wrong and will not sell our soul to the devil like it appears you've done with your love affair with DP and SFW.
 
73, just started reading this thread. Could you please explain in very simple terms how your organization's proposal will be more benifecial to the people of Utah than RMEF's?
 
>73, just started reading this thread.
> Could you please explain
>in very simple terms how
>your organization's proposal will be
>more benifecial to the people
>of Utah than RMEF's?


Good luck with any kind of a meaningful response from him answering that question! Reading between the lines in his posts he's basically admitted that the Don holds all the trump cards in Utah right now, even gloating about it. Rather than helping others take the Don down he will sell his soul to the devil (basically his words, not mine) until others do it for him.
 
cross,
In my opinion that's an easier answer. Over the past 20 years SFW has done far more for the wildlife in Utah than RMEF. I feel they will continue to do this, thus I was happy to see them get the bid.

Top,
Just because you were born during that time does not qualify you. I'm sorry but there much more to being great than just being there.
 
>Terrible answer


Sure was and why it's no use trying to discuss this subject with 73 or Birdman that have such closed minds. His statement about RMEF in Utah is also far from the truth. He darn well knows the RMEF would have put much more money on the ground in the future with that bid than SFW would do in a lifetime based on previous contracts. Just offering to put back 100% of each $5 application compared to $1.50 that SFW was almost forced into when they were not giving anything back before would mean well over a million dollars. Then put in the other two biggies they had in the bid and you probably at least double if not triple or quadruple that figure. So much for these guys saying SFW is the best to help Utah out, LOL!
 
It would be nice to get some non arrogant answers from the SFW folks. But the only kind of answers are things like "stack the deck"

It would be nice to see an intelligent well thought out answer to the question canyon crosser asked.
 
Big,
It's been answered over and over again. I've typed it so many times I'm done doing it. Birdman has more times than he should have to. Multiple audits have been preformed. Honesty the stupidest thing I do is continue to even acknowledge posts on the Internet. I'm not arrogant at all, I'm just sick of answering questions of people that won't look beyond the Internet to educate themselves on the entire history and situation. It's easier to cry and play the role of a victim. I've said this in previous posts, I know I come off as a pawn in this issue, it least I know it and why. Others are blind pawns and have not idea what they are even supporting in the big picture.
 
Been enjoying the almost discussion. Am I blind to the truth, I don't think so. Do I think others are blind to the truth, yep. Does it matter, nope. I will say as to the awarding of the expo contract that looking at what has been done in the past and comparing it to the future, SFW has had the expo 10 years and proven what they can do in Utah. REEF use to have their convention in Salt Lake for some years but left because it was not as successful as they wanted. I think their words were, hard to drink in Utah and there is nothing to draw people to Salt Lake so if we move to Reno we not only have the show, but gambling and lots of partying. Draws a better crowd. Now would the tags have brought more people to their expo? Maybe. My guess yes but enough to override what SFW has done, no one knows. Problem with reef is past experience they could not bring the people to Utah they wanted. So all there is would be speculation. Not facts.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-10-16 AT 05:40PM (MST)[p]BS Birdman and you know it! The only reason it's "an almost discussion" is because nobody from SFW, including yourself, can keep up any kind of a real discussion. Even if the crowds stayed the same as they've been you damn well know that with what RMEF offered in it's bid the state of Utah would have made millions more right off the top compared to that shitty bid by SFW. By the way, did that post earn your pay for the upcoming week? And it's RMEF, not REEF!
 
Will top. Why did rmef leave Utah in the first place then if they had good attendance. Fact is they left to please their membership. You have no idea about SFW. I know they don't need you. Even if, and they are not, pocketing all that money they are still way beyond rmef in contributions to the state wildlife. In fact, did you know that rmef voted to remove all the elk on the Monroe in order to save the aspens? What thinking was that. But then if you read the records for the meetings you will find that one group, and only one group fought to keep the elk on the Monroe. SFW. You can only speculate what rmef could have brought to Utah for an expo. They knew what SFW could do. The situation is the contract has been awarded and in most people's opinion to the deserving group that can make the most out of it. Oh and you the way, I wish I did get payed for posting. I would do it a lot more.
 
Bird,
Not only fought to keep the elk but worked hard for solutions with Forrest Service to still accomplish the aspen restoration.
 
Birdman, with all due respect that makes no damn sense!
You are saying "would the tags have brought in more money, and people if they would of had the tags" (referring to the RMEF's banquet's before)? Let me ask this HAS THE SFW ALWAYS HAD THE TAGS FOR THEIR EXPO? THIS IS AN IMPORTANT POINT SO PLEASE ANSWER!
And then you say that RMEF's proposal is just that a proposal and that SFW have already proven themselves! Proven themselves against who or what other organization? I will say this again for some that don't know I live in IL and I don't have a horse in this race. I have a simple mind and a simple way of looking at things and usually the simplest answer is correct. There are way to many people raising to much HELL on this site and others FOR all of this to be just accusations.

I have been a carpenter, contractor, general contractor, landlord for over 30 years now and I have hear it all!

So let's get past all the name calling, he said she said SH$T and get done to it

So the problem as I see it is,

1) From what I have read is that the SFW only gives $1.50 per $5.00 fee back to the state.
I DONT WANT TO HEAR THAT RMEF WOULDNT HAVE SUCCEEDED BECAUSE AGAIN YOU CANT PROVE IT IN A COURT OF LAW.
I DONT WANT TO HEAR THAT, "I DONT KNOW ALL THE THINGS THAT SFW HAS DONE IN THE PAST TWENTY YEARS" BECAUSE YOUR RIGHT I DONT AND I DONT CARE! BECAUSE IN A COURT OF LAW IT DOESNT MATTER THER EITHER
SO IS THIS A FACT?

2) RMEF was going to give all the $5.00 fee back
SO IS THIS A FACT?

3) Did DWR or whoever when they received all the proposals the first time around stopped the process (first time in history) to change something's because RMEF proposal was better then SFW's proposal.
SO IS THIS A FACT?

4)After the stoppage their come back and awarded the Expo to SFW citing some technicality
knowing good and well RMEF deal was better
SO IS THIS AFACT?

SO IF THESE SIMPLE QUESTIONS CAN BE ANSWERED WITH A YES THEN THIS
IS A MATTER THAT SHOULD GO BEFORE THE COURTS AND HAVE IT FINALLY SETTLED.

AS I POSTED BEFORE IF YOU ALL DONT CALL THE NEWS PEOPLE AND THE STATES ATTORNEY OFFICE AND DEMAND THEIR CHECK INTO THIS, ITS YOUR OWN DAMN FAULT, AND YOU HAVE NOTHING TO WHINE ABOUT.

Because at the end of the day the rest of this stuff is just lip service

As always thanks for letting me express my thoughts
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
 
>Will top. Why did rmef
>leave Utah in the first
>place then if they had
>good attendance. Fact is
>they left to please their
>membership.

***BS! RMEF is a national organization and can go wherever they want and you have no friggin idea why they left. However, we dang sure know why they wanted to come back and it's because of people throughout the country seeing the flat out corruption involving wildlife in your state!

You have no
>idea about SFW. I
>know they don't need you.

***No more than I and most others don't need them!


>Even if, and they are
>not, pocketing all that money
>they are still way beyond
>rmef in contributions to the
>state wildlife.

***That's not saying much with the corruption that is ongoing in Utah, including not allowing another organization with a lot better bid to run the show!

In fact,
>did you know that rmef
>voted to remove all the
>elk on the Monroe in
>order to save the aspens?
> What thinking was that.

***Possibly a good one with the excellent biologist that are either on staff or that they have access to. They all sure would have a better knowledge of the subject that you or I!


> But then if you
>read the records for the
>meetings you will find that
>one group, and only one
>group fought to keep the
>elk on the Monroe. SFW.

***That doesn't mean squat if it was incorrect thinking!


> You can only speculate
>what rmef could have brought
>to Utah for an expo.

***That alone right there is why everyone is outraged with the decision because of the way the whole thing was set up to not give any other organization a chance at the contract and only the one that has had it was the only one that had a chance the way things were rigged!


> They knew what SFW
>could do. The situation is
>the contract has been awarded
>and in most people's opinion
>to the deserving group that
>can make the most out
>of it.

***Again that is more BS because very few, if any, outside your tiny organization thinks the SFW was the deserving organization. For every one of us posting about this on this and several other websites there are many more that think SFW sucks and that the citizens of Utah are getting hung out to dry. That is not just the way the Expo tags are being handled, but also all the citizen taxpayers are getting bilked out of a ton of money from the general funds for wolf and sage grouse lobbying. Your own state auditors shook their heads and stated that not only was the money given inappropriately ahead of time, but also that nothing has been done to show how any of that money was spent to benefit the state of Utah. Nope, just more "consulting fees" in the hundreds of thousands of dollars that went into the pockets of the top couple people that started SFW and BGF!

Oh and
>you the way, I wish
>I did get payed for
>posting. I would do
>it a lot more.

***Please don't avail yourself of any more posts that you already put out making an ass of yourself!
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-10-16 AT 07:48PM (MST)[p]Joe, this is my last response on this issue. True rmef said they would donate all that you said. Would it been more than SFW offer? Speculation. Why did rmef leave Utah in the first place. Because numbers were not their to make it worth while.
Now for the past few years, I have read and lisened to people say they can sink SFW. Fish on had enough info to sink SFW. When the guy from SFW said bring it on, that was it. Several people got together and started UWC. What happened there. Free membership. Most founders are now gone. They started a membership fee trying to keep what is left afloat. Someone had a state elected official who was going to look into all this and sink SFW. After looking, he joined. All of this has been investigated over and over and I would expect down the road it will continue. SFW stays afloat because of their integrity, honesty. That will continue. The fact that SFW refuses to allow their books to you guys,the public for you guys to look at, who allows that. RMEF will not allow my CPA into their books. Will uwc allow me to look at their books? Their a non profit organization. Probably not. Do SFW keep things legal. In my opinion and many others, they sure do. Now there are others that think otherwise who will ##### and complain what is going on as will always be the case. As long as SFW keeps things above board according to the laws of the land they will continue to prosper and grow as they are now. Now let it fly.
One question, why did rmef decide to not fight for the Elk on the Monroe, one of the top units in the state. I would like to know that one. Must have been in the best interest of hunting for the future sportsmen. Please explain.
 
Joe,
I'm being serious when I ask this. Do you find it strange that the most vocal and hatefully angry about this are guys that don't even live in Utah. Yes there are some from Utah that don't agree but if you actually lived in Utah and understood the Big Picture and actual history it would make a lot more sense.

SFW holds 17 banquets across the state in different cities and towns every year along with the Expo. They sell out almost ever single banquet. The attendance exceeds that of the RMEF banquets, the Mule Deer Foundation banquets, the Ducks Unlimited banquets, all of them they are number #1 in overall attendance. Why is that if everyone hates them??? It's an Internet thing with a group of upset Soortsman that disagree on some issues and ironically the usuall ring leaders are from outside of Utah. I find that a little strange, but who knows maybe it's just me.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-10-16 AT 08:25PM (MST)[p]Give PETA some some tags and you will see banquets sell out. That logic is silly. If I have deep pockets or like to guide guys will with deep pockets I'm loving sfw. Oh by the way in live here.
 
LMAO! AGAIN WITH ALL DUE RESPECT BIRDMAN!

I HAVE ALWAYS BEEN GOOD AT READING BETWEEM THE LINES, YOU SAID SOMETHING TO THE EFFECT OF A POLICTICAL MEMBER WENT TO TALK TO SFW AND LEFT BECOMING A MEMBER? SOUND FISHING? NOT SAYING IT IS, BUT ITS THE FIRST THING THAT WENT THRU MY MIND!

PLEASE DONT POST ANYMORE LIKE YOU SAID, BECAUSE I ASKED A FEW SIMPLE QUESTIONS AND SAID THAT I DIDNT WANT TO HEAR EXCUSES JUST YES OR NO AND YOU COULDNT OR WOULDN'T DO THIS!

AND AS FAR AS YOUR CONCERNED 73

YOU SAID THAT ITS CURIOS THAT THE ONLY ONES COMPLAINING ABOUT THIS ARE THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE OUT OF STATE AND DONT KNOW THE REAL PROBLEM BECAUSE THEY DONT KNOW WHATS REALLY GOING ON. I DONT NEED TO LIVE SOMEWHERE TO ASK THESE QUESTIONS (THAT DONT GET ANSWERED BY THE WAY) AND THEN TO TELL THE OTHER SIDE TO STAND UP OR SHUT UP!

PLEASE GO BACK AND READ MY POST, HOW AM I COMPLAINING? IVE BEEN READING EVERYONE'S POSTS AND I JUST CUT TO THE QUIT AND SAID THAT "IF THESE THINGS ARE TRUE. YOU THEN NEED TO TAKE ACTION INSTEAD OF THE NAME CALLING AND IF YOU DONT THEN ITS YOU OWN DAMN FAULT" ! NO ONE ELSE ON THE OTHER SIDE COMPLAINED WHEN I TOLD THEM TO MAN UP!

HERES ANOTHER THING I NOTICED ABOUT YOU TWO. AS I HAVE READ LOTS OF YOUR POSTS IN THE PAST AND IM NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT THIS POST, BUT LOOK AT YOUR WRITINGS. TO ME YOUR BOTH OF YOU WERE STAMMERING IN YOUR WRITING AS IF TRYING TO WIN A LOSING ARGUMENT.

PLEASE REMEMBER THIS IS MY WEBSITE TOO, AND I WOULD LOVE TO HUNT UTAH ONE DAY BEFORE I DIE!

Always thanks for your time
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
 
>Joe,
>I'm being serious when I ask
>this. Do you find
>it strange that the most
>vocal and hatefully angry about
>this are guys that don't
>even live in Utah.
>Yes there are some from
>Utah that don't agree but
>if you actually lived in
>Utah and understood the Big
>Picture and actual history it
>would make a lot more
>sense.
>
>SFW holds 17 banquets across the
>state in different cities and
>towns every year along with
>the Expo. They
>sell out almost ever single
>banquet. The attendance exceeds
>that of the RMEF banquets,
>the Mule Deer Foundation banquets,
>the Ducks Unlimited banquets, all
>of them they are number
>#1 in overall attendance.
>Why is that if everyone
>hates them??? It's an Internet
>thing with a group of
>upset Soortsman that disagree on
>some issues and ironically the
>usuall ring leaders are from
>outside of Utah. I
>find that a little strange,
>but who knows maybe it's
>just me.


Give me a break and yea it's just you! The ring leaders are not from outside Utah and very few on this site that are predominately residents of this Utah based website seem to be in favor of SFW. However, it does appear that a lot of NRs, including myself, do have the balls to join in with them and challenge a corrupt system. Living in areas where this doesn't happen makes it very easy to see that your system is broken while those that live there continue to have their heads up their wazoos and allow themselves to be raped of their natural resources! I hope this latest boondoggle gets enough people in Utah upset such that they get together and finally do something about it.
 
AMEN TOPGUN!

Joe


"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 reason the yell. I'd love to set down and have a chat sometime. When we are done I don't think you'd wonder about my stammering. I'll finish up with this post by saying as I always do....... You fellas do your thing and I'll do mine. If you all are bored come on out the Expo next month. I'll buy a few rounds for the crew.

Birdman, I'm sure I'll see you there too and I'll buy lunch. We can discuss reality and be happy. Hunting is my passion and thank you all for everything you do to help insure that future is strong.
 
Now that's The 73 I'm use to hearing!
If I ever venture your way I'd love to sit and chat with you and have a cold one.
Thanks again
Joe

"Sometimes you do things wrong for so long you
think their right" - 2001
"I can't argue with honesty" - 2005
-Joe E Sikora
 
Now I'm all riled up and can't sleep.
Before anyone rants that I don't know the whole story, true I know that I don't, never said I did, I would love to get to the bottom of this to finally see if there is any merit to the complaints.

HELL I'LL DONATE A C-NOTE TO GET TO THE BOTTOM OF THIS IF SOMEONE WANTS TO START A FUNDRAISER.

I have a question for Hawkeye.
Does The States Attorney's office have any jurisdiction in this matter?
And if so why hasn't anyone contacted them?

With you being a Lawyer I know you could bring a suit, and before answering I'm sure it would take deeeeeppp pockets considering the wealth of the SFW, so why not team up with someone like a RMEF or start a fundraiser for funding the suit. We would all want transparency though! I'm in for a C-Note! I also wouldn't be surprise if it did get to court that it would be settled out of court with a gag order though. If these things are true, (as I've said in the past I don't know these things to be true). But it would be nice to know once and for all.

Thanks so much for your time Hawkeye
Your friend
Joe

PS you can PM me if you want also


"Sometimes you do things wrong for so long you
think their right" - 2001
"I can't argue with honesty" - 2005
-Joe E Sikora
 
Sorry it's me again
I have a question for both sides of this issue.

First, when is this Expo?

Second, if I could make it to Utah (which I think chances would be slim) how many of you guys and gals would like to meet up and have a cold one?
Not just to talk about this issue but to talk hunting, family, cooking, etc. I'm sure I could learn a lot from you all.

I really want to meet ELKASSASIN!
Nobody can rile people up better than you Bessy your my Hero!

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 for information-- every Conservation Org in the state that I know of (MDF, RMEF, DU, SFW,UBA,NWTF etc.) except UWC( does not apply for any Conservation Permits at this time)is awarded Conservation permits to auction at their various banquets and fundraisers. They all use these tag monies to help fund their organizations. They are able to keep 10% of the proceeds from those tags, the rest must be used for DWR approved wildlife projects.
 
Just as a reminder, the issue is the EXPO Permit REVENUE. The Conservation permit should not be confused with the Expo permit.
Personally, IMO the Conservation permit should be discontinued altogether.
 
Exactly why I mentioned the auction of tags at their various banquets / fundraisers. Most of the Conservation Groups derive funding from the use of tags they apply for from the DWR. The Expo isn't the only place a Conservation Group makes money off of auctioned/raffled hunting tags.
 
>Exactly why I mentioned the auction
>of tags at their various
>banquets / fundraisers. Most of
>the Conservation Groups derive funding
>from the use of tags
>they apply for from the
>DWR. The Expo isn't the
>only place a Conservation Group
>makes money off of auctioned/raffled
>hunting tags.


BUT, this is where SFW makes LOTS of money off the tags and keeps 70%.

Its funny, somebody showed a list of the tags that every group gets. HOLY FREAKING COW. There were over 500 tags given to ALL these groups. Its out of control.
 
RMEF has not come back to Utah because of many reasons. It has absolutely nothing to do with SFW, or profitability. RMEF is a National Organization who has interests all across the Country. They may return with their national convention to Utah, but I can assure you that it has nothing to do with the conservation permits. RMEF has never relied on the permit money to keep them afloat. Thus the reason to donate all the expo permit funds back to the state.
 
I am not from Utah but have followed the conservation permit/SFW issue for a couple years now.

It is absolutely stunning to me that this is allowed to go on. Clearly, corruption runs rampant in this state. There are just too many FACTS to deny it.

I honestly can't believe the sportsman of Utah don't get out the pitch forks and start a real protest. It really is that bad. This type of sht should flat out not be tolerated in Utah or any state.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-12-16 AT 03:48AM (MST)[p]http://www.monstermuleys.info/photos/user_photos3/7325dahmer.jpg

..................along with calling SFW honest and possessing integrity.


"SFW stays afloat because of their integrity, honesty."
Birdman - 1/10/2016
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-12-16 AT 12:01PM (MST)[p]Hi Nebo12000
Just as a reminder, my complaint and I think others is too, is that SFW was awarded the Expo with the control of the 200 tags under suspicious circumstances, border line illegal as some have said. As far as "well all organizations get free tags to raffle or auction off" is not the problem.

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
 
>Just for information-- every Conservation Org
>in the state that I
>know of (MDF, RMEF, DU,
>SFW,UBA,NWTF etc.) except UWC( does
>not apply for any Conservation
>Permits at this time)is awarded
>Conservation permits to auction at
>their various banquets and fundraisers.
>They all use these tag
>monies to help fund their
>organizations. They are able to
>keep 10% of the proceeds
>from those tags, the rest
>must be used for DWR
>approved wildlife projects.


DU pulled out of the Utah Conservation Tag program this year (2016). They said that selling of Big Game tags isn't what they are about and it doesn't help the Birds they raise money for.



Tallbuck1
 
So let's hear what all have been up too?

What steps have been taken to stand against the unfairness dealt to the RMEF and the SPORTSMAN of UTAH against the DWR and SFW, that have been talked about here on MM?

How many have called the media?
How many have contacted The States Attorney's Office to see if this is something they can look into?
Or any other ideas?

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
 
Joe-

A lot of people are putting a lot of effort into this issue. Shoot me a pm or call me and we can discuss it in further detail.

-Hawkeye-
 
Hawkeye Send me your number in a PM. I would love to talk about this issue with you

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
 
>So let's hear what all have
>been up too?
>
>What steps have been taken to
>stand against the unfairness dealt
>to the RMEF and the
>SPORTSMAN of UTAH against the
>DWR and SFW, that have
>been talked about here on
>MM?
>
>How many have called the media?
>
>How many have contacted The States
>Attorney's Office to see if
>this is something they can
>look into?
>Or any other ideas?
>
>Thanks for your time
>Joe
>
>
I, along with most others here in the state agree. We all need to do something. The tricky part is SFW has paid off most of these politicians, so sending letters and making phones calls are not as effective as one would think. The Media was involved with the BGF scandal of steeling hundreds of thousands of tax dollars and still nothing come of it.

Trust me, we will keep trying though so we can rid ourselves of this plague.
 
Birdman talks alot about how RMEF pulled out of Utah in the past but, fails to mention that SFW would have failed, with out the conservation and expo permits long ago.Then, Birdman talks alot about how the RMEF proposal was just speculation.

Birdman, I would dare speculate or project that the RMEF proposal would have brought many millions of additional dollars to Utahs wildlife. Because the primary differences between the two proposals was the 100% return by RMEF, This, combined with the truth that when RMEF coupled the expo with their annual convention, attendance would soar and many times more $5 application fees would have been paid....everything else was just details.

Because I understand this is a 10 year deal I speculate that the DWR just screwed the pooch to the tune of 50-100 million dollars for wildlife.
 
obviously an SFW supporter. I'm not here to argue or fight. But I can voice my opinion to say there is a lot of bull ##### going on. But I have a question maybe you could help answer? I posted this question before with no answers.

If your SFW is allowed to keep 70% revenue from tag sales, plus what other revenue you guys have coming in to your organization, why does the SFW apply for State Grant money from the tourism board (specifically for funding the expo)?

This is taxpayer money going to a non profit org. that's already getting profit from the sale of tags that's a publicly owned animal.
 
Trammer, you're exactly right. Birdman likes to talk about how RMEF left Utah but fails to mention how only after a few years SFW tried to take the expo tags and move their dog and pony show to Reno. It was even announced in print in MDFs magazine.
 
Herewego

That a question alot of people have asked and still no answer after many years. If you can get an answer, Herewego, then by all means, share it away. There has been alot of questions asked, but never any clear answers for MANY MANY YEARS!!!
 
>obviously an SFW supporter. I'm not
>here to argue or fight.
>But I can voice my
>opinion to say there is
>a lot of bull #####
>going on. But I have
>a question maybe you could
>help answer? I posted this
>question before with no answers.
>
>
>If your SFW is allowed to
>keep 70% revenue from tag
>sales, plus what other revenue
>you guys have coming in
>to your organization, why does
>the SFW apply for State
>Grant money from the tourism
>board (specifically for funding the
>expo)?
>
>This is taxpayer money going to
>a non profit org. that's
>already getting profit from the
>sale of tags that's a
>publicly owned animal.

Why is the ski industry allowed to use the same funds ? It's there to promote tourism. The expo was created for that reason to increase tourism while promoting conservation. I'm pretty sure the almighty RMEF would have done the same if awarded the contract. It's just smart business.

If you want honest answers regarding SFW you can call their office or email them. Their contact info is on their web page. Sfw.net. To ask a question on this site and expect a answer from SFW is ridiculous. That's like going to a Isis recruiting site and asking them what stance of the USA is on a topic. That is exactly what MM has become a anti-SFW recruiting site. The constant bitching and moaning, the never-ending arguing on this site does nothing but promote anger, and cause one to want to quit trying to make a difference and give up hunting all together.

Against my better judgement I got on this site after some time away. My wife asked me not to come on here because it always makes me irritable, and puts me in a bad mood. She was right I felt much better when I stayed off this site. I offer the same challenge to everyone else. You'll be amazed how much better you will feel about life when you stay away.

No I'm not a employee of SFW only a volunteer who donates his time to make hunting better for all.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-21-16 AT 06:56PM (MST)[p]JMO---First off, the ski industry consists of "for profit" businesses that depend on tourism to stay in business. SFW is a nonprofit organization and should not be asking for those type of funds when it's already getting 200 state tags and making all the profit they are from them, which is in the millions every year and that is not going back to the habitat. Second, this isn't the only website that has the vast majority of it's members that have very negative feelings for the higher ups in SFW and BGF. It would probably be best for you and the rest of the people like Birdman and muley_73 not to post on anything relative to the SFW when it comes up because there isn't one thing that is ever posted that helps your cause. Third, your comment saying the RMEF would do the same thing is absolute baloney, but not unexpected from someone with SFW ties, when it's so large that they can do an Expo and offer almost everything back to Utah while all SFW/MDF does is take, take, take, and it's also pretty obvious that the EXPO doesn't increase tourism to any real extent!
 
Hi JMO, don't give up on this site there's a bunch of great guys on here.
You being a supporter of SFW is great if that's the organization you want to commit your time, talent and money too.

The way I see it, there's so much animosity against the SFW for so many things that happen in the past that the current issue is being lost.

As you can read in my many posts on here. It looks as if there was illegal activities that went on in the awarding of the Expo. And everytime myself or anyone else brings up this point a supporter of SFW deflects the conversation to something else. Hell if it walks like a duck, sounds like a duck, hell it's probally a duck.

If you look at the bottom of my post you'll see the quote "I can't argue with honesty" and thats what causes all the arguments on here, is that supporters of SFW keep deflecting the questions asked. Can you really say after reading the documentation posted by Haweye that your organization is playing fair? Or are you all just looking at this as "Well I know this to be true but they're still making my hunting better in Utah" If that's the case fine. That's all the SFW supporters have to say and no one will argue with you at all. You just difussed the situation.

You know I came up with that quote when I was talking to my great nephew (who my wife and I helped raise when he was 5 or 6 at the time) about him doing something wrong, so I had to explain it to him but he never lied about anything to me ever again. I think it's a great lesson.

If I know someone is lying to me I'll argue till Hell freezes over but if you tell me the truth I might hate the answer I'm getting but I can focus on how to fix the problem or what ever the situation calls for

As I've said many times before I don't have a horse in this race but I hate it when BIG MONEY WINS. People like Hawkeye have posted what I believe are facts about this case because no one has ever disputed his posts. Are you saying these things to be untrue?

As always thanks for letting me voice my opinion
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
 
+=NEWS FLASH=+ JMO admits to similarities between MUSLIM EXTREMISTS (ISIS) AND.... sfw. Reveals ISIS..er sfw plans to defraud Utahans of Hard earned Tourism monies. JMO also admits to donating time to the( in his own comparison) ISIS like, sfw organisation. It is assumed that other sfw members will donate time as well, While the uppity ups of the organisation will reap the rewards.
An (imaginary and nonexistent) source has been reported to have said,." It would be a wonderful, and very special thing to have the tourism monies awarded to us". "The cost of Alaska Sheep Hunts, Very Special Lobbyists, Salaries, And Many Many other perks and Peay offs really are annoying".
+=COMING SOON=+ Will Corrupt Utah officials Allow the Tourism Monies to fund further Terrorist activities. Will sfw Help Mexico fund the Wall,. Will sfw have Sara, as a guest huntress with the next group of Alaska Sheep Hunt Greasing s.. Will the State find more and more money for Grants to be Peayd to Very Special Lobbyists for wonderful,wonderful things.
 
> +=NEWS FLASH=+ JMO
>admits to similarities between MUSLIM
>EXTREMISTS (ISIS) AND.... sfw. Reveals
>ISIS..er sfw plans to defraud
>Utahans of Hard earned Tourism
>monies. JMO also admits to
>donating time to the( in
>his own comparison) ISIS like,
>sfw organisation. It is assumed
>that other sfw members will
>donate time as well, While
>the uppity ups of the
>organisation will reap the rewards.
>
> An (imaginary
>and nonexistent) source has been
>reported to have said,." It
>would be a wonderful, and
>very special thing to have
>the tourism monies awarded to
>us". "The cost of Alaska
>Sheep Hunts, Very Special Lobbyists,
>Salaries, And Many Many other
>perks and Peay offs really
>are annoying".
> +=COMING SOON=+ Will
>Corrupt Utah officials Allow the
>Tourism Monies to fund further
>Terrorist activities. Will sfw Help
>Mexico fund the Wall,. Will
>sfw have Sara, as a
>guest huntress with the next
>group of Alaska Sheep Hunt
>Greasing s.. Will the State
>find more and more money
>for Grants to be Peayd
>to Very Special Lobbyists for
>wonderful,wonderful things.


No actually it's more like the MM hate club represents Isis constantly posting bull ##### trying to Recruit more uninformed haters. If you truly wanted to make a difference or know the truth to your questions you would go to the source. Have you ever had a conversation with the current SFW leadership?
 
>LAST EDITED ON Jan-21-16
>AT 06:56?PM (MST)
>
>JMO---First off, the ski industry consists
>of "for profit" businesses that
>depend on tourism to stay
>in business. SFW is
>a nonprofit organization and should
>not be asking for those
>type of funds when it's
>already getting 200 state tags
>and making all the profit
>they are from them, which
>is in the millions every
>year and that is not
>going back to the habitat.
> Second, this isn't the
>only website that has the
>vast majority of it's members
>that have very negative feelings
>for the higher ups in
>SFW and BGF. It
>would probably be best for
>you and the rest of
>the people like Birdman and
>muley_73 not to post on
>anything relative to the SFW
>when it comes up because
>there isn't one thing that
>is ever posted that helps
>your cause. Third, your
>comment saying the RMEF would
>do the same thing is
>absolute baloney, but not unexpected
>from someone with SFW ties,
>when it's so large that
>they can do an Expo
>and offer almost everything back
>to Utah while all SFW/MDF
>does is take, take, take,
>and it's also pretty obvious
>that the EXPO doesn't increase
>tourism to any real extent!
>


So what you're saying is that it's ok that a "for profit" business uses tax dollars to promote themselves. It's not ok for a non profit to use those monies to promote an event that will returns money back to the state. That makes sense ???? Ask the local hotels and restaurants how business is during the expo.
I really wish you would do your own homework. Again find out the facts for yourself go to the source for answers. Mm is not the source.
 
>Hi JMO, don't give up
>on this site there's a
>bunch of great guys on
>here.
>You being a supporter of SFW
>is great if that's the
>organization you want to commit
>your time, talent and money
>too.
>
>The way I see it, there's
>so much animosity against the
>SFW for so many things
>that happen in the past
>that the current issue is
>being lost.
>
>As you can read in my
>many posts on here. It
>looks as if there was
>illegal activities that went on
>in the awarding of the
>Expo. And everytime myself or
>anyone else brings up this
>point a supporter of SFW
>deflects the conversation to something
>else. Hell if it walks
>like a duck, sounds like
>a duck, hell it's probally
>a duck.
>
>If you look at the bottom
>of my post you'll see
>the quote "I can't argue
>with honesty" and thats what
>causes all the arguments on
>here, is that supporters of
>SFW keep deflecting the questions
>asked. Can you really say
>after reading the documentation posted
>by Haweye that your organization
>is playing fair? Or are
>you all just looking at
>this as "Well I know
>this to be true but
>they're still making my hunting
>better in Utah" If that's
>the case fine. That's all
>the SFW supporters have to
>say and no one will
>argue with you at all.
>You just difussed the situation.
>
>
>You know I came up with
>that quote when I was
>talking to my great nephew
>(who my wife and I
>helped raise when he was
>5 or 6 at the
>time) about him doing something
>wrong, so I had to
>explain it to him but
>he never lied about anything
>to me ever again. I
>think it's a great lesson.
>
>
>If I know someone is lying
>to me I'll argue till
>Hell freezes over but if
>you tell me the truth
>I might hate the answer
>I'm getting but I can
>focus on how to fix
>the problem or what ever
>the situation calls for
>
>As I've said many times before
>I don't have a horse
>in this race but I
>hate it when BIG MONEY
>WINS. People like Hawkeye have
>posted what I believe are
>facts about this case because
>no one has ever disputed
>his posts. Are you saying
>these things to be untrue?
>
>
>As always thanks for letting me
>voice my opinion
>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

Joe I will send you a pm with my info. I would love to talk with you. It's too hard to have a productive conversation on any forum. I have had many conversations with Hawkeye via phone calls and over lunch. Let's talk
 
Sure thing JMO, that sounds like a wonderful idea, can't wait to chat.
Again as I've said over and over that's what I love about the guys on MM. We can always agree to disagree.

Thanks again
Joe

P.S. I have a call into Hawkeye as of this morning to chat with him also.

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

Welcome back to monstermuley's. It has been a while. I hope all is well for you and your family. I saw Kurt at the recent wildlife board meeting. I was hoping to see you there but I guess you had to work. Not all of us get paid to attend those meetings scheduled right in the middle of a work day.

I appreciate your offer "to go to the source" and chat with SFW leadership. The reality is many of us have done just that. Over the years I have discussed these issues with SFW leadership, MDF leadership, and DWR leadership. In fact, I spent 2 hours with Greg Sheehan and Marty Bushman just yesterday. I was looking forward to having lunch with John Larsen last summer but as you will recall he canceled. Anytime you and him want to chat, lunch is on me. That is a standing offer.

Don't assume that everyone who disagrees with SFW is an uninformed hater. That is not accurate or fair. Yes, some crazy comments and accusations get posted from time to time. But there are many of us who have done our homework and fundamentally disagree with many of the tenets and practices of SFW. That being said there are many grass roots volunteers within SFW who are great guys -- you being one of them. You and I have had this chat several times.

In short, folks on this website have raised a number of legitimate questions and concerns. Rather than try to minimize, sidestep or ignore those questions, why not answer them? The reality is SFW, MDF and the DWR do not have good answers or a very good track record when it comes to the $8.5 million generated from the expo tags. As a result, it is easier to avoid public forums and pretend that the folks asking questions are all wackos. You should know that is not true.

Let's catch up for lunch again soon.

Jason
-Hawkeye-
 
JMO, You can call me all the names you want. Have you ever heard the expression water off a Ducks back? As for your assumption, I haven't talked with sfw leadership, Dont know them,am uniformed. Well... Guess what buttercup, YOUR WRONG, I First met Donny Boy right around 89, We didnt hit it off, all i'll say is that my opinion of him hasnt changed one bit over the years. I consider Jon Larson a friend, even though I Strongly disagree with sfw. I have worked with Mike Pritchett in the passed and would work with him again. You dont seem to understand that even though there are Good people within the group, People who guys like myself might like and even befriend, Its the Group, the entity, the idea, ect.. of what the overall monster is. Its the idea that No one should benefit from a public asset, in the way sfw does, all the while claiming to do it for the good of the public. Buying what they need with bribes, bribes like "free hunts". Free because they are paid for with sfw money. And where and how did sfw get the money? If sfw is such a wonderful thing then why the endless issues, why all the secrecy, Why do people like you fall on your talking point, guys like me are " just being a haters" INSTEAD OF ADDRESSING THE QUESTIONS OR THE ISSUES? All you "defenders" sound the same, you act just like Hillary, When you cant give honest answers, cant hide the issue, You puke out what Haters others are, Downplay the issues, Smoke and mirrors over and over again, It is sad, even sadder that you cant see it. sfw is in no way a Robin Hood for the sportsmen of Utah, more of a ROBBING HOOD. You'll never change my opinion, hiding from issues, misdirection,or even calling me a hater. So keep the kool aid cold buttercup, Stay with your Hillary playbook, Smoke and mirrors my friend, Smoke and mirrors
 
You want facts?

Please review the odds of the draws for the expo tags, pay close attention to the non resident only permits. Here is the link http://www.huntexpo.com/odds.php Now you will see that there are only around 1,000 people that applied for these permits. I would say that a good percentage of those people are exhibitors. So I can not see this event as a good bang for the buck, bringing in out of state attendees. I know from working the show that a good majority of the people that come from out of state are people that drive in from bordering states, and apply, walk through the show and drive home. They do not stay in a hotel, eat a meal, or provide any return to the local economy. (other than the donation to the cause)

Hard to believe that the state accepted the bid from SFW.

RMEF has 30 years of successful NATIONAL conventions Vs 10 years of regional convention,

210,000+ Members vs 15,000 members

Offer of 100% of application fees given to the state for conservation vs 30% (not to mention the applications would be much larger from a true National convention)

Offer to give 50% of net funds from the whole show, to go to conservation vs nothing, nada zip zilch from the winner.

and a whole lot more hotel rooms, meals, and other purchases into the local economy, from a NATIONAL convention.

Those are a few facts.

So please tell me again how the SFW bid was better, and the explanation given as to why they were awarded the contract even makes sense.

RMEF has a lot more experience running events, more members, and a whole lot bigger National draw.

So we passed on MILLIONS of additional funds for conservation WHY?

Sure hope DWR does not ask for a raise in the cost hunting permits or any additional funds, as they must not need it.
 
Hi all, I just wanted to thank Hawkeye and JMO for taking time out of their busy day to chat about the issues going on with SFW and the permits. It was a pleasure and I sincerely mean that.

I also want to thank 2lumpy for the very informative PM. It means a lot to me that you did that.
Muley_73 can you pm me your number I'd love to chat with you and also your father if I can get his number as well.

Thanks again
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
 
I wanted to take some time today to debunk another myth put forth by the DWR. As a lawyer, the thing that bothers me most about the DWR's recent move to a formal RFP is the fact that they are violating their own administrative rule, which sets forth a process for awarding the five-year Expo Tag contracts. See R-657-55-4 (http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/code/r657/r657-055.htm). Those of you who have taken the time to ask the DWR why they are not following their own rule have likley been told that the DWR recently realized that the process set forth in its own administrative rule was somehow inconsistent with a separate state procurement statute. As a lawyer, this makes little sense to me for the following reasons:

First, I don't believe there is any real conflict between the DWR's administrative rule and the procurement code. The fact is the DWR has relied upon the process set forth in its rule (which is already an informal RFP process) to award to two prior five-year contracts. If what they are saying is true then the DWR violated the state procurement code for 10 years. Why the sudden change now? What is the conflict? It makes no sense.

Second, assuming what the DWR is saying is true, there did not need to be any conflict between the DWR's administrative rule and the state procurement code. As you will recall, the DWR just amended its rule in January 2015. If the DWR wanted to change the process then it had a perfect opportunity to do so in the January 2015 rule amendment. All it had to do was remove the prior application process from the rule and spell out that the DWR would be issuing a formal RFP through the Division of Purchasing. If the DWR truly discussed all of this with several conservation groups in an informal meeting in October 2014, then there is no reason why they could not have incorporated the formal RFP process into the proposed rule amendment that went out to the RACs in December 2014 and the Wildlife Board in January 2015. In summary, there was absolutely no reason to have any conflict between the DWR's rule and some other supposed state statute. In essence, what the DWR is saying is "we created a conflict between our rule and another statute and now we are relying on that alleged conflict to violate our own rule."

Third, the DWR is ignoring the binding effect of their own administrative rules. The Utah Department of Administrative Services Division of Administrative Rules is the state agency that is responsible for publishing the administrative rules for every Utah state agency, including the DWR. On their website (http://www.rules.utah.gov/abtrules.htm), they include a brief explanation as to the purpose of administrative rules. Take a minute and read it when you have a chance. It states the following:

"DUAL PURPOSE OF ADMINISTRATIVE RULES

An administrative rule serves at least two purposes. First, a properly enacted administrative rule has the binding effect of law. Therefore, a rule affects our lives as much as a statute passed by the legislature, restricting individuals AND the agency that issues it.

Second, an administrative rule is a messenger of sorts. It informs citizens of actions a state government agency will take or how a state agency will conduct its business. It provides citizens the opportunity to respond -- whether by providing public comment, or becoming involved in some other way."

That is the summary/explanation provided by the State of Utah. Those are their own words. That means that the application process set forth by the DWR in R657-55 has the "binding effect of law" just as much as some other statute passed by the legislature and it binds "the agency that issue[d] it." So much for the DWR's explanation that they suddenly became aware of some statute that requires them to violate their rule.

The second point is also critical. The DWR communicates with the public (and conservation groups) through its administrative rules. That is how the DWR informs the public (and conservation groups) as to how actions it "will take or how [it] will conduct its business." As I explained to the DWR, RMEF had no obligation to attend the DWR's private meeting in October 2014 and what may or may not have been "mentioned" at the meeting is completely irrelevant. RMEF also had no duty to inform the DWR that they might be interested in applying for the next Expo tag contract. The DWR was bound by the process set forth in its administrative rule and that is how the DWR is supposed to communicate with the public.

RMEF (and every other group) was perfectly entitled to rely on the process set forth by the DWR in its rule and it is ridiculous for the DWR to try to blame its repeated blunders on an alleged lack of communication within the RMEF. If the DWR wanted to change the process and move to a formal RFP process then they should have put it in their rule. The fact of the matter is the RMEF wanted to keep its interest in the expo tag contract a secret until the last possible minute because it was concerned about being treated fairly. Was that a valid concern? You tell me.

One other note, even after the DWR received RMEF's proposal on 9/1/2015 and realized that they had failed to properly spell out the process that they supposedly intended to use in their adminstrative rule, they chose to move forward and continue to violate their rule. The DWR could have stopped the preparation of the RFP and amended their rule to reflect what they were going to do. However, they were concerned that the public would have gone crazy and said that the DWR was merely changing its rule to authorize what it wanted to do -- which is true. But now the situation is even worse. Now, the DWR will have to go back and amend its rule to authorize what they have already done in violation of their rule. Once again, another major mistake by the DWR.

In summary, I still do not understand why the DWR thinks that it can simply ignore and violate its own administrative rule. Can you imagine of we all chose to ignore and violate the DWR's rules? Can the DWR expect us to respect and follow their rules when they don't?

If you have not contacted your legislative reps yet, please do so. The 2016 legislative session opens tomorrow. I would like to see the Utah Legislative Auditor take a look at the Expo Tag program and monies generated from those tags like he did with the wolf lobbying money provided to BGF back in 2013. See http://le.utah.gov/audit/13_11rpt.pdf.

I will continue to address additional issues in subsequent posts.

-Hawkeye-
 
As I stated above, I sure hope the DWR does not ask for any increases in permit fees, or in increases in the cost of licenses. As they must not need any additional revenue to run the DWR or do Habitat projects!
 
Thanks Hawkeye for the reminder. This was brought to light last fall when DWR decided they would change their own rules.
I have been in contact with my rep and probably will be contacting you again in the near future. Your time is invaluable to the sportsman and women who hunt and apply for permits in Utah. Please, keep up on the progress of our plight through the legislature.
Buttshot
 
Not taking sides on this issue-- however-- I understand Hawkeye is an attorney and his thoughts and view of the situation is his own. I believe this whole scenario of changing to a "formal RFP" was vetted by those attorneys that represent the DWR folks. In my experience, I have seen the criteria changed in RFP's "after the fact" or after bids have been received and then republished for those interested in bidding on the "new" guidelines in the new RFP. There certainly are some strange maneuverings that occur in regards to these things. Its highly probable that the DWR was possibly counseled to move the informal RFP process to a more strictly controlled RFP process to keep it more inline with some legal standards. I don't know this for sure but it seems very plausible to me. I for one do not believe that it was done merely to keep a particular group in place. Just my opinion.
 
>Not taking sides on this issue--
>however-- I understand Hawkeye is
>an attorney and his thoughts
>and view of the situation
>is his own. I believe
>this whole scenario of changing
>to a "formal RFP" was
>vetted by those attorneys that
>represent the DWR folks. In
>my experience, I have seen
>the criteria changed in RFP's
>"after the fact" or after
>bids have been received and
>then republished for those interested
>in bidding on the "new"
>guidelines in the new RFP.
>There certainly are some strange
>maneuverings that occur in regards
>to these things. Its highly
>probable that the DWR was
>possibly counseled to move the
>informal RFP process to a
>more strictly controlled RFP process
>to keep it more inline
>with some legal standards. I
>don't know this for sure
>but it seems very plausible
>to me. I for one
>do not believe that it
>was done merely to keep
>a particular group in place.
>Just my opinion.

Yea right, and the one that probably counseled them to do it was the Don himself, LOL! If you can't see it was done the way it was to allow only SFW to get the bid then, Sir, you are a Kool Aid drinker!
 
Hey TOPGUN, when you say kool-aid drinker are you referring to 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
 
TP--Too bad you can't give and opinion here without being denigrated or branded. I guess I could think of few labels that could fit your style of discussion. Certainly not appropriate here. Hope to see you soon at a RAC meeting where you can have 3 minutes to say your peace in a venue that is designed to help folks do the best they can to make good decisions for the future of wildlife in this state.
 
Richard-

Your comment is a valid one. If you take the time to discuss this issue with the DWR they will likely tell you that they made this move after consulting with the Utah Attorney General's Office and the Utah Division of Purchasing. As you I and both know, however, the DWR has a lawyer from the attorney general's office who works full time in their building. This same lawyer has been involved in drafting the initial rule, amending the rule, drafting the contracts with the conservation groups, amending those contracts, etc. since this program was created in 2005.

Let's give the DWR the benefit of the doubt and assume that they truly needed to move to a formal RFP to improve the process and minimize the criticism leveled at the DWR and the Wildlife Board. Even if that is true, you still have to stand back and ask why did the DWR make such a mess out of what could have been a simple amendment to the process set forth in their rule? If the DWR would have simply stated in their rule that they would be issuing a formal RFP there would have been no alleged conflict between the rule and some other statute and the entire world would have known what they planned to do. Assuming what they are saying is true, how did they drop the ball on this issue?

-Hawkeye-
 
>TP--Too bad you can't give and
>opinion here without being denigrated
>or branded. I guess I
>could think of few labels
>that could fit your style
>of discussion. Certainly not appropriate
>here. Hope to see you
>soon at a RAC meeting
>where you can have 3
>minutes to say your peace
>in a venue that is
>designed to help folks do
>the best they can to
>make good decisions for the
>future of wildlife in this
>state.

I'm old enough and have seen enough in my time that I just call a spade a spade when it fits, or in this case when we're talking people that can't see the forest for the trees when they talk about the way SFW is run calling them Kool Aid drinkers. Sorry if that fits you, but you were the one who came on and made the statements you don't think the system was redone to favor one organization, that being SFW. It really doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what happened and most figured that as soon as that new procedure was instituted that it was more than tainted and it certainly proved to be. Maybe if enough guys take the bull by the horns this time they can change the way things have been done where one outfit has become so powerful with absolutely no transparency whatsoever.
 
Good points. I agree that the whole switch to a "formal" RFP and when and how it happened is a bit puzzling to me. I have seen other government entities do similar things in regards to contracting and it doesn't always seem legit to me. I just hope that in the end it will be a positive decision that will help ensure the best for our Utah wildlife. Thanks for your valuable discussion on this.
 
I guess what I have found most troubling about this whole chitty deal is those charged with the well being of Utah's wildlife, the stewards, either RAC, WB or Division Leadership are great stewards of SFW.

Say what you will about the bids. The fact is Utah and its wildlife have lost millions in this clusterf$&@.

Damn, is it too much to ask for anyone in these positions to defend wildlife and not Peay??

Grow some balls, have some damn guts and speak up for Utah's wildlife.






"The State of Utah has not given BGF anything.
They have invested in BGF to protect their
interests."
Birdman 4/15/15
 
Nebo "I just hope that in the end it will be a positive decision that will help ensure the best for our Utah wildlife. Thanks for your valuable discussion on this." The state of Ut just lost millions of $ and you hope it's a POSITIVE decision??
 
Wiley and Deer-- looking forward to seeing you and hearing from you at the next round of RAC and WB meetings. You each have 3 minutes-- but please don't waste your time name calling and criticizing-- that won't promote your agenda. In fact you should apply for the next vacant openings on the RACs where you live.
 
Wiley and Deer, perhaps you can express those concerns during a future RAC and Wildlife Board Meeting when the DWR amends its rule to spell out the formal RFP process that it is now following. Unfortunately, the DWR did not bother to amend its rule prior to changing the process. Rather, they have chosen to violate their rule and then amend the rule at a future date to reflect what they have already done. That decision alone shows how much they care about public input regarding changes to the system. And folks wonder why sportsmen rarely show up to RAC and Wildlife Board Meetings and why they believe that the system is broken?

-Hawkeye-
 
Hawkeye, what would you do to change the system so that it is not broken ? I'm all for any change that would help conservation and improve wildlife management in this state. Any suggestions that we could get put on the agenda? I'm sure I am older than you so I know what it was like many years ago and except for the deer herds, the hunting opportunities here are better than I've ever seen. The access for sportsmen to voice their opinions and proposals in a open public meeting was a huge step forward in allowing public input in the decision making process. Maybe it needs to be fixed-- do you have some proposals?
 
Richard, thanks for asking. Here are a few simple suggestions: (1) The DWR should follow the rules that have gone through the public process and are properly enacted; (2) If the DWR wants to make a change, it should take the change through the public process before it is acted upon by the DWR; (3) Issues that may have been "mentioned" in a public meeting do not change the laws or rules governing the DWR; (4) No single group should have too of loud of a voice; (5) When 3 or 4 members of a 7-member Wildlife Board have significant ties to any one conservation group it is a problem; (6) Don't schedule wildlife board meeting during the middle of the day when working folks are tied up with their real jobs; (7) If you are going to discuss a significant change or issue make sure it is on the agenda so folks with the real jobs can take time off work to participate; (8) If the Wildlife Board takes formal action at a meeting and directs the DWR to take some formal action, the DWR should follow that directive; (9) If the DWR does not understand a directive from the Wildlife Board then it should follow up and seek clarification in a public meeting; (10) When mistakes are made own them and fix them.

I am grateful for folks like you who are willing to serve on RACs and other committees. However, the DWR should not be surprised that folks are frustrated with the process and a number of actions by the DWR.

-Hawkeye-
 
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.
 
wiley gonna Fix it in 3 Damned Minutes?

That 3 Minute Rule Has always been BullSshhitt!

wiley couldn't even Express the Swear Words He wants to say in 3 GAWD-DAMNED Minutes!








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

https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=N8i5NLyXZdc
 
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
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-25-16 AT 04:20PM (MST)[p]Is this true?
I heard that The DON was going to be a cabinet member for Mitt Romney if he won the Presidency?

IF THIS IS THE CASE. THEN YOU ALL NEED TO QUIT WASTING YOUR TIME BECAUSE YOU
WILL NEVER WIN!
You are messy with THE PEOPLE WHO CANT BE MESSED WITH.

Now before any one starts to bust my chops on this, Stop gather your thoughts and FOCUS on what I just said!
I NOT SAYING THIS IS TRUE I'M SAYING IF THIS IS TRUE!

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
 
Nebo, been there and done every bit of that... It's a waste of time.

Let me ask you a couple direct YES or NO straightforward simple questions.

1. As part of a the fiduciary system for Utah's wildlife, do you think the investment of a Utah public resource ( the 200 expo tags ) was leveraged as much as possible by awarding SFW these tags??

2. My personal favorite. Do you believe a RAC / WB system where appx 84% of the states hunters are represented by two seats vs the 16% having three seats?? IE the Northern and Central RAC's which represent 84% of all hunters in the state vote a certain way, it gets to the Board and those Reps are outvoted. Is this representative of Utah's hunters??

Thanks For your time.





"The State of Utah has not given BGF anything.
They have invested in BGF to protect their
interests."
Birdman 4/15/15
 
Read Post # 191 ww!

>Nebo, been there and done every
>bit of that... It's a
>waste of time.
>
>Let me ask you a couple
>direct YES or NO straightforward
>simple questions.
>
>1. As part of a the
>fiduciary system for Utah's wildlife,
>do you think the investment
>of a Utah public resource
>( the 200 expo tags
>) was leveraged as much
>as possible by awarding SFW
>these tags??
>
>2. My personal favorite. Do you
>believe a RAC / WB
>system where appx 84% of
>the states hunters are
>represented by two seats vs
>the 16% having three seats??
>IE the Northern and Central
>RAC's which represent 84% of
>all hunters in the state
>vote a certain way, it
>gets to the Board and
>those Reps are outvoted. Is
>this representative of Utah's hunters??
>
>
>Thanks For your time.
>
>
>
>
>
>"The State of Utah has not
>given BGF anything.
>They have invested in BGF to
>protect their
>interests."
>Birdman 4/15/15








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

https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=N8i5NLyXZdc
 
Damn it BESS you know I could go for days on this chit!!




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

Similar threads

hossblur
Where's all the conservation money?
Replies
10
Views
748
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!

Mid-Season Utah Trophy Bull
1595378566082.jpeg
0857F088-7F57-44B7-A79C-6E8FE2EF64BA.jpeg
6E0380A6-7D6D-4730-836C-1371B20F6671.jpeg
A59F556A-159C-4E0C-BB74-4A731115E250.jpeg
IMG_8740.jpeg
2023unit44govtag.jpg
06190700.JPG
IMG_2638[1].JPG
42119A91-5B0B-4F66-806E-288B0EE59B80.jpeg
IMG_20171030_143356_322.jpg
Great Looking Bull!
Back
Top Bottom