SFW and USO in bed together??

AZ402

Active Member
Messages
929
Quote:
Conservation Force: has also formalized a Board of Advisors with other iconic leaders of hunting today. The members of this new board include Dr. James Swan, Ron Thompson, Don McMillan, Lance Phillips, Don Peay, Raul Valdez, Ph.D., Mike Friscina, Dr. Randall Eaton, Ph.D., and Yves Lecocq.




You know, I thought the SFW was pretty tight lipped about the whole USO deal. Come to find out that ole Don Peay is tied up with Conservation Force (CF). CF is the outfit that financed and championed George Taulman's attempt to take resident tags. CF has long been a loud voice in NR hunting issues especially the fight to tag opportunity from resident hunters in the western states.


Quote:
Fourteen (14%) percent of licensed hunters hunt out-of-state each year and twenty-six (26%) percent of anglers fish out-of-state. [National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife Recreation] The states with the most hunters and anglers are not complaining such as Texas, Pennsylvania, and Michigan. The states with nominal resident populations and the most extensive federal lands are the very ones that want the unconditional right to hoard hunting and fishing resources for themselves. Some states will raise the license prices so high that only the very wealthy can hunt when and if they can get a license at all. The guiding industry will become more volatile as well as those nationwide organizations that depend upon outfitter hunt donations for all their conservation work. It will not return to the way it was. The discrimination had been growing worse and was partially held in check by litigation and the threat of litigation.

This is an undesirable fight between hunters that will test the metal of those that represent hunters that travel. Most if not all hunting and fishing organizations represent both resident and nonresident hunters and/or anglers. Locked in division and indecision they may be unable to oppose the legislation because of their resident hunter constituency. Even Conservation Force that has been a leader in advancing the interstate and international hunting industry will have to take special steps to defend nonresident hunting and fishing interests that have become so very important to the conservation paradigm in America. Conservation Force expects fallout from its defense of nonresident sportsmen and women, but we must be responsible. If we do not represent nonresident hunters and anglers, who will?

More than half of the land in the West is United States land. This bill will terminate any and all nonresident rights of hunting and fishing access on those public lands as well as state and private lands ? all lands! Many of the species such as saltwater fish and waterfowl are migratory. Many elk and deer populations move from state to state. The passage of the bill would be a tragic mistake. It must be stopped.

Conservation Force has created the Non-Residents Rights Defense Fund (NR Rights Defense Fund) to oppose the legislation. It is to be separately administered from all other Conservation Force programs and must be wholly self-sustaining. We will take pains to ensure that other Conservation Force revenue is not commingled or utilized to oppose the legislation else there will be objections from our general donors that are so very important for all the other important things we do. Somebody has to save nonresident hunting and fishing, but we cannot do anything without direct support from nonresident hunting and fishing interests. This has to be separately funded and administered. The Defense Fund officially started January 1, 2005. Dedicate your tax deductible donation to oppose this legislation to ?Conservation Force?s NR Rights Defense Fund?.
 
Stan, I am concerned about SFW. It seems AZ is now signing up with Don and we will have an Arizona Sportsmen for Wildlife in the very near future.......now that I read what you posted, it really feels like our state will move towards landowner vouchers, additional governor tags etc.....and further change our hunting into "Highest Bidder"......Hopefully somebody can change my attitude with some concrete facts on how SFW will help AZ........ Allen Taylor......
 
If Arizona decides to put together an SFW organization, it will be their organization not Don's. AZ will form their own board of directors, set their own goals and objectives. Don Peay has developed the SFW model. Don is too busy representing Utah and working on National issues to worry about running things in AZ.

SFW AZ will find their own Executive Director and set their own agenda. If AZ's Sportsmen want to enter the political arena SFW has the model for success.

Quit worrying about Don Peay. Get organized and make a difference.
 
Thank your smokestick. You are exactly right, SFW will be its own boss, period. The wealth tag system that Utah has cannot be done in AZ because 100% of all funds raised must go back to the G&F Department, even all interest earned! SFW AZ will be about political clout at the legislature, right now sportsmen have very little influence on state politics. Just look at the last two commissioners, neither one was endorsed by sportsmen and now both of them are making decisions about our future. Is anyone happy about that?

Come on Stan, you are digging deep with this one.
 
Idaho also bought the do your own SFW thing. Maybe you ought to check legislation being pushed in Idaho by SFW concerning tags and wealth hunting. SFW is a business they will and are trying to icrease business just like every other business. Make your own decisions but check the facts and don't buy into a dog and pony show. One last thought when Don Peay organized the sportsman on the steps of the Capitol his dog and pony show did not even hint to what SFW Utah has become.

The old saying buyer beware never applied so much as today.
 
A rebuttal directly from Don Peay:

An e-mail regarding this topic and here is his reply.



I have never been, nor EVER would serve on the Conservation Force Board. I personally wrote John Jackson and told him he was way wrong on this issue. Also, call Congressman Matheson, Senator Hatch or the key lobbyist for all the Fish and Game Agencies and ask them what side SFW was on for the Legislation reversing the suit. SFW was full support of the Reid bill changing the law against USO. SFW has been on record from day one opposing USO lawsuit. Don
 
LAST EDITED ON May-20-05 AT 03:41PM (MST)[p]Muley 62:

If you notice I'm posting quotes, didn't do my own digging here.

I'm posing a question here. I'm not saying I'm for or against anyone (Actually I'm against USO). I just want to get answers as to how SFW will benefit the outdoorsman of Arizona.
 
You and I already discussed this on the phone so I am posting my opinion for the benefit of others.

Most of the really important hunting related decisions are being made in the political arena these days. AZ sportsmen need to have an ear and voice at this level. The best way to do that is to hire a strong lobbyist to track issues at the legislature that impact sportsmen. This lobbyist would already be at the battle grounds to fight any anti hunting issues or support pro hunting issues. One of the most powerful lobbyist at the AZ State capital is Sandy Bahr and she represents the Sierra Club. Sandy is at the State Capital every single day making friends and pushing the Sierra Clubs agenda. We have nobody. Doesn't that scare the crap out of anybody?
 
Chris, didn't realize you were muley62, my bad. Yes we had a good discussion and thank you for that.............Stan Durkalec
 
Who currently represents AZ'z Sportsmen in the political arena?

How well does your State Agency listen to you as Sportsmen?

Do AZ Sportsmen currently speak with one voice or is it fragmented into several, much smaller voices?

Can Az's Sportsmen currently get things done on all three fronts; local, statewide, and national?

SFW is what you choose to make of it. Sportsmen can make it the strongest lobbying group in your state or you can all continue to piss and moan about your problems in local coffee shops and see what happens. The bottom line is SFW will allow Sportsmen to have a voice. Will Az's Sportsmen always agree on their issues? I doubt it very much; however, if you start building it now, you can start seeing things change in a short order. SFW WY is just starting into our third year. Our membership is getting bigger and is growing rapidly. We are the largest sportsmen's group in Wyoming but we need more members throughout the state. Hopefully, we can reach our goal of 15,000 members in another year or two. I will not claim to represent all of Wyoming's hunters and anglers but I will fight for the issues SFW WY's Board decides are important for our hunting heritage.

I can assure you that Don Peay is not supportive of the USO and never was. I can also assure you that SFW worked very hard to assist the passage of Sen. Reids bill. As other posts have stated, SFW stands for states rights of wildlife management. Why would SFW have supported USO's position.

I am sure George is laughing right now knowing that you are all taking pot shots at one of the groups that helped to defeated his efforts. Good move.
 
Hunters do need strength in numbers and a good political lobby. Not necessarilly SFW.

Good luck to you AZ. Soon maybe you too can have to drive 300 miles, on a weekday, miss work and arrange for child care so that you can put in for tags that then are only available at the "show". Tags that you have always entered for from HOME. If you want that, more power to ya.

I fail to see the connection between lobbying and pimping high demand tags. But that's just me.
 
LAST EDITED ON May-20-05 AT 04:37PM (MST)[p]I would like to know then why Don Peay serves on CF's advisory board? If he is so opposed to what George Taulman and CF are doing, why even get tangled up with them?

At best, it appears to be questionable on one hand to say you oppose something and on the other sit on their advisory board.

That is all I would like answered. I don't buy that SFW is the only way for a state to defend their hunting. After watching what SFW did with the Utah lottery and wealth tags it should make everyone leery of what their intentions are.

Nemont
 
Like Nemont, I question why Don sits on the Advisory Board of Conservation Force. That was confirmed by me calling them a couple hours ago. Call for yourself....I just have an uncomfortable feeling that we may be going down a path that creates a financial monster out of Arizona's big game tags.......I am concerned the number of Governor's Muley tags will suddenly rise by 2, 3, or 4 more without a sound biological reason........that all conservation groups will remain fragmented and somewhat compete with each other like MDF does currently for the Muley tags.......maybe a position statement from SFW to AZ sportsmen specific to their respective goals for our state would clear all this up. It just feels as if something sneaky is going on with SFW and the pricey tags of AZ..........Do we as the sportsmen/women of AZ have a say in whether SFW has paid positions or not, where does the ADA fit in with SFW? Maybe we send monthly newsletters or emails to all ADA members with information about whats going on, how the membership can help etc......and where this state is going forward after the Reid's bill.....I know the pat answer is go to meetings, but with todays day of electronics, maybe we as sportsmen agree to spend a few bucks on improved communication within membership groups throughout the state kinda like Arizona Sportsmen Who Care does on Unit specific trash clean up days. They have a email system and they send out information ......maybe all AZ sportsmen agree to raise a few dollars to support a paid communication department that compiles and emails out weekly/monthly/quarterly newsletters with information just like we are discussing. It sure would help pull all of the fragmented groups together from a knowledge standpoint or awareness standpoint. There are tons of people who have daily computer access that can really generate the support much easier via electronically than physical meetings. Just some thoughts.... Allen Taylor......
 
The only thing SFW did for me was take hundreds of tags out of my lottery pool and put them in the pockets of rich people. That is it. Oh yea.......and I forgot.......they also singlehandedly increase game numbers (but only when there's a lot of rainfall).

They need to go away.
 
Man I don't think this is going to help the NR tag limits much, and the cost of a NR tag will be just what USO needs and wants,their cleints will be willing to pay those high prices.
How will this Help AZ big Game:
Why do you need SFW you already have Az. deer Assoc.
Why is SFW moving it group to AZ,Wyo,ID = MONEY AND TAGS
Will those States be willing to give up enought tags to keep SFW happy.
Why not put more into your own ADA and not spilt resource between the two, Why have two sets of people doing the same job, splitting up the money and manpower will only get half of the job done. I guess we all will find out in a few years if this was good or bad.
 
Gator, I am wondering many of the same things and if someone (whoever it should be) would just put up some sort of flow chart showing the logic of what is happening in Arizona (right now) and how SFW either partnering or working with ADA will benefit and not confuse the average sportsman like me.........I think it would be easy to electronically put this up and help us understand where to throw our collective hats in for support. Right now I dont know what is happening and dont know what is the purpose of SFW (other than political clout which we need, but not at the expense of increased big money tags) working in Arizona. It is my understanding that ADA is THE group for Arizona and we have partnership relationships with SFI - Tucson who should have substantial Political support already. Anyway I think clarification is in order from someone who understands what is happening in Arizona............. Thanks, Allen Taylor......
 
I am in agreement that AZ needs a broad, unifying politically focused group. I joined WCC because I thought that's what they did. I understand that the individual groups do some of this on a smaller level, but is too piecemeal and species-specific to be effective on a broad level.

From wading through all these posts and opinions, it seems that if our current groups can't change their focus to handle the task, then maybe a new one is in order. I would like to see perhaps a group loosely modeled on the SFW, and any other lobbying groups that have demonstrated success in hunting issues. Take our lead from what has worked in all these other groups, and form our own group here in AZ. I would caution it appears that any affiliation with Mr. Peay will cause angst and suspicion amongst some people. If a new group can prove within reason that its ONLY tie to the Utah group is looking at their way of doing things - then I think it may have a chance. I would be interested in supporting such a group. I think the crystal clear disconnect from the Utah group is critical however. I'd be interested in helping out with a new group, provided my concerns are alleviated. We all seem to agree that there seems to be a need for a unified political force in AZ, to defend all hunters' issues. I see a lot of slamming, but not many alternate suggestions...

Regarding volunteering - people who know me know why I can't participate much in hands on projects, attending meetings, etc. That being said, I'm told I can write, and will offer my services to almost any group that needs media exposure, press releases, articles written, newsletter help, etc. For example, I mention the AZ Hunters Who Care project in my column this month. Since I can't make the trash pick-ups, I like to think I'm helping by getting the word out about his group.

Anyone wants a hand with anything, shoot me an e-mail at [email protected]

www.parchedmuskrat.com
 
Bura Nut,

Please feel free to contact me. I sent you a pm

I can not tell you a lot about how SFW AZ is organizing but I can tell you how SFW WY organized, etc.
 
Keep in mind that 501 3C (Nonprofit Charitable Organization) is prohibited by law to be politically active. This limits many of our "conservation groups" in the political arena and they have chosen other methods of being effective i.e. habitat and land conservation. Because SFW is not a 501 3C they do not fall under this regulation, as far as I can figure SFW is simply a business that at the least has a contract with Don Peay to be a paid lobbyist for their organization. I do not believe this to be a written contract but a verbal agreement. I also believe Don Peay to have controlling interest in the business of SFW. I have asked and been told I could see the written SFW documents, however when I have tried to schedule a time to review these records my requests go unanswered. There seems to be little accountability from Don Peay to the SFW organization and this is what has caused much of the discontent in Utah. Many believe Don Peay is abusing his position within SFW if he is just a lobbyist and consultant. Many times SFW Utah follows a Don Peay personal agenda. The second organization in Utah affiliated with SFW is SFH "Sportsman for Habitat" this is the 501 3C arm and the conservation group. This organztion was set up to be accountable for the habitat monies raised through the sale of the Conservation Tags, and provide a charitable deduction to the supporters. Most of the donations for banquets go through SFH the receipts etc. used at the SFW banquets. All documents reference support of SFH to allow for tax deductions, However it appears then all monies not related to conservation tags goes to SFW. I am skeptical as to the legalities of this arrangement, maybe SFW charges SFH a management fee for running the banquets and this makes it legal. Any way as you can see the SFW waters are muddied and knowing exactly the wheres, whats and hows are impossible. Maybe checking SFW Wyo or Ida would be a good way to find out if the SFW model works. However my guess would be most monies raised in these organizations simply goes to pay a staff including a significant portion which comes back to Utah and ultimately to Don Peay. I will say Don Peay is very good and driven in his beliefs and this has helped become very succesful. Don is also extremely personable and very likeable, although he and I have a hard time seeing eye to eye. I was there when Don Peay rallied sportsman on the steps of the Capitol. I have served as a committee member for SFW and been opposed to SFW. 3 close friends have served on their board of directors, each friend convinced me to give them another chance. Each friend has since severed ties and is anti SFW. My belief is 3 strikes and you're out. SFW will not get my support any longer. I have based this on personal experience and research along with giving them a chance. I believe each of you should thoroughly check out any organiztion you join and support. Don't jump on a band waqon, most often they are not playing music you enjoy dancing to. These are simply my opinions formed through a long association with SFW. Someday I hope to see the facts.

Sincerely,
Travis Sparks
 
Mule Packer,

Maybe since your very involved with the elk foundation you can clear some questions I have about RMEF up for me.
How come in Wyoming RMEF raises just a little over a million dollars a year at RMEF banquets, and about 250,000 stays in the state of Wyoming? As a member of RMEF can I view written contracts, and the daily business of RMEF? Who would I call to obtain copies of those documents? FYI I just scanned the RMEF website and couldn't find any of these Items
How many people do RMEF have paid on the books? Just wondering how many people it takes to run that musem in Montana.
How come RMEF takes political positions only when it appeases them and denounces the process the rest of the time usually with a quote that goes something like this: "we are not a political org so we won't take a political position**" When it should say: "We only take a political position when we know damn we'll it is middle of the road and won't offend our non-sportsmen base*" (*case in point Habitat trust fund in Wyoming this year) (**case in point,wolves, the biggest threat to elk in the west and still no legitimate stance)
What does RMEF do with the conservation tags in Utah they recieve. (15 or more a year) I heard they donated them to poor hunters that didn't have a chance to draw them, is that still RMEF policy? What about the 6 or 8 commissioner tags they nab in Wyoming? Ordinary guys still recieving those tags.
Obviously some of my questions are a little rethorical and I don't expect answers. I think RMEF is a good organization but if anyone thinks there any diffrent in fundraising, and hired guns than SFW there right. They spend about twenty times the amount Overhead as SFW. If RMEF had 23 banquets in Utah they'd probably have 3 full time fundraisers instead of one. Is that wrong no, there a bigger organization, and with size comes more overhead.
I don't focus on the things that RMEF is doing wrong, and I commend them for the things they are doing right but I couldn't sit and read the B.S you are spreading about SFW with out setting the record straight. I only have time to volunteer for one org and I support the one that I believe will make the biggest diffrence. Is SFW as always as organzied as they should be, No. Is SFW perfect, No. Is Don Peay perfect, No.
The indisputable fact is SFW has got major results even, with the naysayers, and Anti SFW Talk forumns. This is evident by another record setting fundraising year. If you don't get results volunteers quit helping, and ordinary citizens quit attending. Did SFW ever support the USO lawsuit, thats ludicris as they were the leaders in supporting legislation to change it.
Anyway I've thrown in my Two cents, didn't mean to step on anyones toes but it had to be said,
Thanks
Eric Adams,
 
I understand you getting fired up Eric. I get fired up over some of what I read too. But, the bottom line is, I think the real support behind SFW is by those who don't buy into all the rumors that are spread.
It's simple for me, I look at the headway SFW is making in Utah and I like it. I've been involved with other groups also and right now, I feel that SFW gives me a better bang for the buck---that is the bucks that I spend at banquets and on membership.

I feel that a group needs to fight the battle in the political arena as well as on the ground. SFW does both. Don Peay is connected and has friends in high places. Those friends are going to do more good than planting a few bushes every now and then.
SFW does both.
The guys who don't like him, don't like him because he has been successful. Unfortunately, many like to see successful people, businesses, and groups, go down. It's sad, but true.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, it sickens me to see how hard a few sportsmen work to try and bring down a group that IS doing a good thing for ALL sportsmen. Without SFW, I believe the Utah deer herd would be in much worse shape. I think the UDWR would sell every tag they possibly could if someone wasn't watching their every move.
Anti's would also get their way on many issues, including wolves in Utah.

It's wasted breathe on some, I know. What I don't get is, why do some sit behind a computer and complain about Don and the way SFW does its business? Why not stop complaining and get your own group going. Show us your way by doing it, not by trying to bring down and group who IS doing it.

Again, those of you who support SFW, good for you!! Support all the groups you can, they all do good in one way or another. Pat yourself on the back for not being one who only sits and complains. Do what you can and feel proud that you're doing something.

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
 
Brian-Arizona is a little different in that our legislature will have to approve any extra tags given out and we are a state that has the ballot initiative to keep the heat on the politicians. We were also the state that got sued first and as for me I think that was a "no win" for Game & Fish as CF and USO would have kept the heat up for more even if we had voluntarily raised the NR tag limits. The end solution may have cost us legal fees but it is IMO a lasting one and worth the fight. As for SFW I have little knowledge of them but do see the same people involved that helped to organize meetings for RFW and landowners for private tags. So, if SFW can't get free tags to auction then how will they raise money any different than all the other groups we have? Why is Peay on the CF board? I don't buy his rhetoric that it was all a mistake. No organization prints that someone is on their board without proper clearance.

Guess that my question would be why we need them regardless of what Don has done in other states. If they can't raise money for lobbyists then how will they make a difference? I would rather see the groups we have get more focused and organized with a view to the political side of the equation. JMO.
 
Eric,

You seem to know a lot about me for someone that I don't even recognize your name.
In short because the RMEF is a 501 3C and independently audited on a yearly basis many of the items you want to know are public record. They do not have to deliver it to your door but it is there for the asking. I believe each year at the national convention a business meeting is held for public to assess the records. So yes you can find out much of the info if you are so inclined. Second the visitor center is being built through private donations and fundraising not banquet monies. Third if you feel not enough money comes back to the state it is raised in then learn the system. There are committees made up state, regionally and nationally that review project expenditures and request, prioritize them and then make application to complete the project. These committtees are made up of volunteers not employees although an employee will attend and facilitate the meeting.
I have thoroughly researched the RMEF found their agenda, mission policies and procedures to my liking. Therefore I spend my time and money supporting them. I have also been one of many to form the BOC and will support it along with a key interest in Back Country Horseman. In my previous post I stated I had also volunteered for SFW, many of the Northern Utah accomplishments they take credit for I was an initiator on. I have not been able to get the answers when I have asked, many items I have found to be misrepresented through the SFW pipeline. Therefore I no longer choose to support them. Because I believe people deserve to be informed I am not afraid to speak of what I know. I'm sure you know I spent twenty years in the newspaper business and aspired to be a teacher. America and the constitution are great "freedom of speech". I guess that is why I feel people need to know. I will not hide behind an alias or a "peer" as many SFW members and former members choose to do. I am confident in where I stand and why I believe SFW does more harm than good. Someday I hope we get back to the SFW ideal.
But as for now I will again say "BUYER BEWARE".

Travis Sparks

PS Eric, if you ever want to sit down at lunch or go on a mule ride I am sure you know how to contact me.

PSS Brian, I appreciate you cautioning folks to investigate all organizations and aligning with those they agree with. That was the main focus of my message and one that will make every organization succeeed or fail. Thanks for the forum.
 
"as far as I can figure SFW is simply a business that at the least has a contract with Don Peay to be a paid lobbyist for their organization. I do not believe this to be a written contract but a verbal agreement. I also believe Don Peay to have controlling interest in the business of SFW."

I love this. If this is true, Peay is brilliant! Start a tax exempt "company", become your own lobbyist, and make a living off of donations, tags, whatever. Would one be able to write off taxes on cool things like hunting/fishing trips? Airfare? Dinners?

With all his political savvy, I wonder what kind of coin he could get from CF as an "advisor." CF has much more money than SFW does. They are also rife with lawyers. More fearsome than Taulman if you ask me.

Sorry Brian, this marriage of CF and SFW, however tenuous you may think it is, is a bit disconcerning.
 
LAST EDITED ON May-25-05 AT 05:24PM (MST)[p]My issue is not whether or not SFW has improved the Mule Deer population in Utah. Just about everyone I have visited with regarding SFW has said the same thing, "SFW has done some good things but you need to look a little deeper and see what it has cost sportsman".

They are not a transparent organization. I have yet to see an audited financial statement. They have taken possession of many, many tags and sold them to the highest bidder. I know the money goes to habitat but what kind of overhead does this organization have. Why won't they publish it? Why doesn't SFW answer questions that people have?

I have emailed Don himself and have gotten a response but not to any of these questions. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck then it is a duck. That is why I am leery of seeing any affiliation with CF.

I think Don Peay and SFW came to do good and ended up doing well.

Nemont
 
MulePacker,

The only thing I know about you is your heavily involved in RMEF and you've been involved in MDF, and other conservation organizations. I commend you for taking the time to be involved. Irregarless of how you feel about SFW I still respect people who are involved as heavily as I believe you are. I sit on the state board of SFW in Wyoming and know the time it takes to support these conservation organizations as a volunteer.
I'm not going to argue with you on how I go about retrieving records of RMEF, like I said most of my questions were retorical. RMEF is a good org, like any other there are inherient problems. I believe when RMEF outgrew its Grass roots core it lost a lot of effectivness that it once possesed.
I will say that the best thing about SFW is that 90% of monies raised in the state stays in the state that it was raised, except 10% which goes to Utah (national) to pay insurance (for banquets, and projects) expenses for lobbying.
The fact is until RMEF spends about 900,000 dollars a year in Wyoming all arguements about their effectivness is a mute point for me (thats 90% of what RMEF recieves annually from fundraisers in Wyoming) I don't care about elk in Kentucky, big musems in Montana, or daily operating expenses for the other 20 or so states that don't even have a viable population of elk.
Like I said last post when RMEF takes a stand to protect elk feedgrounds, wolves, and other battles that directly benefit the elk, and elk hunters in wyoming I'll be more apt to support them.
I care about huntable populations of wildlife in Wyoming, and I'll tell you RMEF is off the mark when it comes to problems that face these populations.
To say that SFW does more harm than good is reckless. I remember growing up in Utah, B.D., (before don) when huntable populations of wildlife were struggling because of over hunting, unchecked predator populations, and a myriad of other reasons. Bring yourself to 2005 when elk are flourishing, moose, goats, and sheep are at record levels, and deer are at the very least stabling out a little. All this in ten years, and the #1 reason for the change is political pressure on local, state, and national levels, including fish & game departmental politics, to change wildlife managment to focus on those who pay the bills, the sportsmen.
Could SFW have done things diffrent? Could SFW have been more organized? Did SFW make mistakes? Will SFW make more mistakes? The answer to all the questions are yes but remember hindsight is 20/20. I'm not one to dwell on mistakes made, rather focus on goals and future battles to come.
As far as Utah's conservation tags go all the money goes to promote the restoration of huntable populations of wildlife. All organizations benefit from the conservation tag program. SFW may have been the leader in initating conservation tag programs (I don't know this to be fact) but RMEF, MDF, WTF, DU, and the gang utilize, and promote the program just as much as SFW. As long as the vast % of money goes to restore Utah's big game I'll continue to support the program.
Thanks
ERIC ADAMS
SFW of Wyoming State board
SFW Sweetwater chairmen
 
WELL SAID BRIAN, (POST 25).... THAN IS ABOUT AS HEALTHY OF AN OVERALL OUTLOOK AS A HUNTER/ CONSERVATIONIST CAN HAVE. WISH WE HAD STRONGER GROUPS IN MY NECK OF THE WOODS. WELL STATED.. YD.
 
Maybe I don't understand this whole issue, but it seems to me if I join your organization and support it I should see benefits. If they auction one tag they should raffle another so that all hunters not just the financially succesfull win. I guess it would sound like a safer bet except that the requested wealth tag numbers seem to continually go up. At what point in time does SFW just become the broker for selling all of the tags? Why would they not be able to accomplish that? Hunting will be protected by legislation your dollars supported, and the states have control of their tags. If SFW is the political force in hunting, who will help you then? If they can sell tags for big dollars then your membership money might not look to impressive. Hunters need a political voice, but not at the loss of hunting for the average guy.
 
Ya got to hand it to him...he has created the "Ultimate Pyrimid Scheme"...... why not branch out to other states and dupe them like he did those of us here in Utah...."Buyer Beware"....
 

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