Utah Expo Contract Decision

I

Igottabigone

Active Member
Messages
203
The Utah Wildlife Board has scheduled a special meeting for this Friday (12/18/2015) at 10 am, to review the recommendation from the evaluation committee and make a decision regarding which group(s) will receive the next Expo Tag contract. See http://wildlife.utah.gov/public_meetings/board/2015-12-18_board_agenda.pdf If you cannot make it to the meeting, you can view the proceedings via the following link: https://youtu.be/iSE0MM9dRSo

Please come out and participate in the process. Show your support for RMEF or whatever group you choose to support. According to the Wildlife Board?s agenda, the Wildlife Board will not be taking public comment on the issue. As a result, a 5 to 10 year contract will be awarded under this new formal RFP process, which was never presented to the RACs or the Wildlife Board for public input.

Let's hope the Wildlife Board gets it right and a huge thank you to RMEF for its commitment to conservation.
 
You are right that no public comments will be taken. The only decision the board will make is yea or nay. They will be presented one name for which to say yes or no.
 
You don't think it's a problem for the public to not have any input at any time for the expo tags which are public assets? Why wouldn't the public be involved?
 
It has been vetted through the State of Utah purchasing dept. via an RFP process. There was a panel that "scored" each proposal. It will now be presented to the WB for a yea or no vote. They will not be making any decision between different proposals. They are basically bound by the recommendation.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-14-15 AT 04:46PM (MST)[p]If the RMEF doesn't get the bid after all this BS that was pulled after they presented their bid the last afternoon before bidding closed, IMHO it will show what all the SFW detractors have been saying for the last few years! That's all I will say on the subject the way the DWR and Utah does business with their wildlife.
 
Man you guys crack me up. The decision has basically been taken out of the hands of the DWR or WB and yet Topgun still says if it doesn't go the way he believes it should go then it's the SFW fault and currupt. TOO FUNNY!!!!! All this without having any real info or data or knowledge other than INTERWEB banter.
 
Go read the criteria the committee was required to use in scoring the bids and tell me the decision was taken out of the hand of DWR or WB. I can guarantee a win in any contest when I get to write the rules after watching the game (or see RMEF's bid, in this case).

I'm not going to comment until after Fridays hearing, but to say it was taken out of their hands is not correct, IMHO.

Grizzly
 
>Man you guys crack me up.
> The decision has basically
>been taken out of the
>hands of the DWR or
>WB and yet Topgun still
>says if it doesn't go
>the way he believes it
>should go then it's the
>SFW fault and currupt.
>TOO FUNNY!!!!! All
>this without having any real
>info or data or knowledge
>other than INTERWEB banter.


You and your Papa that love SFW seem to feel you're the guys in the know. Tell us why after the RMEF made that bid in good faith for the next contract the last afternoon right before closing time that things weren't followed through, rather than the way everything was thrown out and other bids were allowed with a new closing date. Tell me SFW and MDF had nothing to do with what happened after that initial closing date. It doesn't take much info or data even from afar for people who have been following this whole debacle to see how corrupt everything involving wildlife in Utah is. Just the fact alone that the public has had no input in any of this reeks and shows how business is done in your state and it sucks. There is no way that any other organization other than RMEF with that fantastic bid they made should get that contract. You know that, as do all the rest of us. It's funny how quiet Birdman and the rest of you SFW followers have been since all this started! The huge difference in money we're talking about that would be raised with RMEF holding their national convention in SLC compared to that being made at the present time by SFW/MDF would greatly benefit wildlife, as well as the state and city of Salt Lake.
 
Top,
I'm not at all in the know in this or most things. I'm vocal with my support when it's something I agree with. But I'm by no means "in the know" . That being said..... I do know that you know nothing about the state I live in. Whether it sucks or doesn't suck, whether it's currupt or squeaky clean. You're an Interweb expert and that's about it. You happen to enjoy hunting like myself so we on occasion cross paths on this site. The fact that you and the other haters have already stated that if it doesn't go you're way it's currupt. Well maybe just maybe you and your small handful of interweb mob are wrong. I'll wait and see how it all turns out and either way I'll enjoy my hunting in years to come.
 
TOPGUN

I have always enjoyed your comments over the years on many topics on MM. You are always pretty much spot on, on what you have to say. I think many of us have noticed how quiet the SFW FOLKS have been since all this hit the fan. It will be an absolute tragedy if RMEF does not get the new bid. I think all hell will break loose if they don't get the expo bid.
 
>TOPGUN
>
>I have always enjoyed your comments
>over the years on many
>topics on MM. You are
>always pretty much spot on,
>on what you have to
>say. I think many of
>us have noticed how quiet
>the SFW FOLKS have been
>since all this hit the
>fan. It will be an
>absolute tragedy if RMEF does
>not get the new bid.
>I think all hell will
>break loose if they don't
>get the expo bid.


I don't know that all hell will break loose, although it should, but IMHO it would certainly show that a few select people starting with a guy with the initials of DP have Utah in the palm of their hand and it certainly isn't for the betterment of wildlife and the people of Utah as a whole! As far as the comments made by the SFW supporter on this thread, I'll just let others read his posts and they can form their own opinion since there was no real substance in either post to contradict anything I have mentioned and saying I don't know anything just because of where I live is far from correct.
 
I am going to withhold my comments about the process employed by the DWR until the dust settles on Friday. However, for those of you who take the time to participate in the Board Meeting on Friday, play close attention to which board members vote on the decision and which members recuse themselves from vote. Each member of the evaluation committee and each Wildlife Board Member is required to certify in writing that they do not have any conflict of interest prior to participating in the process. There are many statutes, rules and cases that define what constitutes a conflict of interest but R33-24-106 is particularly helpful:

"Executive branch employees are prohibited from participating in any and all discussions or decisions relating to the procurement, contracting or administration process if they have any type of personal relationship, favoritism, or bias that would appear to a reasonable person to influence their independence in performing their assigned duties and responsibilities relating to the procurement process, contracting or contract administration or prevent them from fairly and objectively evaluating a proposal in response to a bid, RFP or other solicitation. This provision shall not be construed to prevent an employee from having a bias based on the employee's review of a response to the solicitation in regard to the criteria in the solicitation."

During the last Wildlife Board Meeting, the attorney for the DWR was asked if merely being a member of one of the conservation groups would constitute a conflict of interest. In response, he answered "probably not" but if you were a past board member or officer that probably would be a conflict. At that point, a different Board Member asked for clarification if that applied to past officers and directors or just current officers and directors. Another Board Member then asked how many Board Members were needed to make a decision to which the attorney stated that they needed to have at least a quorum (4 out of 7) in order to vote. When it was all said and done, the attorney stated that he would work with each Board Member to answer their questions regarding potential conflicts. Pay attention to how this plays out.

-Hawkeye-

P.S. These are just my personal views as an interested and concerned sportsman.
 
So tell me Hawkeye, isn't it the boards decision to say yea or nay to the one name that is presented to them by the committee. I would suspect what ever name or groups name that is presented to the group will be confirmed. With it being a 5 year agreement I would guess that if the a organization could not do what the agreement called for that the permit process will be redone. That being having a successful expo of their own wh I checked I am sure all involved could do. Good luck to all the groups involved in this process. Friday will be an interesting day. Excitement for some, depression for others.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-15-15 AT 10:00AM (MST)[p]The point is Birdman is that the DWR hid behind the state procurement laws as the whole reason the RFP was put in place. The state procurement laws include rules that exclude board members from participating in awarding contracts due to conflicts of interest, regardless if its just a yes or no vote. Clearly, with four former past officers of SFW on the Wildlife Board there is a conflict of interest for each one. So if SFW/MDF are awarded the contract through the RFP the four board members with ties to SFW/MDF should abstain from voting. Then it brings in the question if the Wildlife Board can form a quorum (at least four members) to award the contract. The answer should be no.
 
So I guess what your saying is no matter what, the tags go no where. No quorum no expo tags. So if RMEF gets the bid, it can not be awarded.
 
If RMEF gets the bid there should be no conflict of interest as none of the Wildlife Board members are former officers of RMEF. The issue would only arise if SFW/MDF is awarded the contract.
 
>Man you guys crack me up.
> The decision has basically
>been taken out of the
>hands of the DWR or
>WB and yet Topgun still
>says if it doesn't go
>the way he believes it
>should go then it's the
>SFW fault and currupt.
>TOO FUNNY!!!!! All
>this without having any real
>info or data or knowledge
>other than INTERWEB banter.

Taken out of the hands of DWR and WB? Really? One of the members of that 5 member committee represents the DWR, another member represents the DNR and a 3rd represents the Governor who just appointed the 2 new members of the Wildlife Board, both of them prominent SFW members. Hmmm!
 
Birdman-

Just to be clear, I am not sure how the potential conflict issues will be resolved. Based upon the discussion at the prior Wildlife Board Meeting, the attorney for the DWR and the Wildlife Board are aware of the issues and are working through them. It will be interesting to see what happens.

-Hawkeye-
 
>I am going to withhold my
>comments about the process employed
>by the DWR until the
>dust settles on Friday.
>However, for those of you
>who take the time to
>participate in the Board Meeting
>on Friday, play close attention
>to which board members vote
>on the decision and which
>members recuse themselves from vote.
> Each member of the
>evaluation committee and each Wildlife
>Board Member is required to
>certify in writing that they
>do not have any conflict
>of interest prior to participating
>in the process. There
>are many statutes, rules and
>cases that define what constitutes
>a conflict of interest but
>R33-24-106 is particularly helpful:
>
>"Executive branch employees are prohibited from
>participating in any and all
>discussions or decisions relating to
>the procurement, contracting or administration
>process if they have any
>type of personal relationship, favoritism,
>or bias that would appear
>to a reasonable person to
>influence their independence in performing
>their assigned duties and responsibilities
>relating to the procurement process,
>contracting or contract administration or
>prevent them from fairly and
>objectively evaluating a proposal in
>response to a bid, RFP
>or other solicitation. This provision
>shall not be construed to
>prevent an employee from having
>a bias based on the
>employee's review of a response
>to the solicitation in regard
>to the criteria in the
>solicitation."
>
>During the last Wildlife Board Meeting,
>the attorney for the DWR
>was asked if merely being
>a member of one of
>the conservation groups would constitute
>a conflict of interest.
>In response, he answered "probably
>not" but if you were
>a past board member or
>officer that probably would be
>a conflict. At that
>point, a different Board Member
>asked for clarification if that
>applied to past officers and
>directors or just current officers
>and directors. Another Board
>Member then asked how many
>Board Members were needed to
>make a decision to which
>the attorney stated that they
>needed to have at least
>a quorum (4 out of
>7) in order to vote.
> When it was all
>said and done, the attorney
>stated that he would work
>with each Board Member to
>answer their questions regarding potential
>conflicts. Pay attention to
>how this plays out.
>
>-Hawkeye-
>
>P.S. These are just my personal
>views as an interested and
>concerned sportsman.

Hawkeye,
Per your quote of the code, anyone having a conflict of interest isn't even allowed to DISCUSS the issue in question. If so, that, in and of itself, could make this meeting interesting (and short?) if MDF/SFW gets the contract.

Other possible scenarios that haven't been mentioned are if MDF and SFW split up and submitted their own bids. Or a 4th undisclosed party submitted a viable bid. At this point, nothing would surprise me, though some things would disappoint me!
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-15-15 AT 01:58PM (MST)[p]In this or ANY scenario, having one board member in the position of a potential conflict of interest is a concern but understandable...but to have a MAJORITY of the board in conflict limbo is appalling!!! And If nothing else, very telling of how broken the appointment and governance system is.
 
We're about to witness corruption that will make Swallow and Schutrlef look like petty criminals. I'm givin odds that SFW gets the nod. They've spent years and a ton of money stacking the deck for just this occasion.
Wes
 
Your are right that SFW has been stacking the deck in the fact that no other organization has put as much money on the ground in Utah than SFW has. They have been closely followed by Mule deer fooundation. Behind them has been Utah FNAWs. Not sure that makes a difference.
 
WOW Birdman, you walked right into this one.

Just imagine how much MORE could have been put on the ground. IN the 1st several years, none of the $$$ (that we know of or is accounted for) was put on the ground. NOW after many people have said enough is enough, did the generosity of these groups give back a whopping and unprecedented amount of money, 30%, (LMFAO) of the expo money.

You know Birdman, I can only imagine how much could have been put on the ground, and how much really could have been done if this had been done the right way from the beginning.
 
Not going to argue with you. Obviously you have no idea about the money that goes on the ground. With the rules that go with the expo tags, the money has been accounted for by the rules. The $5 permit,the expo tags is only part of the issue. It's the whole big picture that is being looked at.
 
>Not going to argue with you.
> Obviously you have no
>idea about the money that
>goes on the ground.
>With the rules that go
>with the expo tags, the
>money has been accounted for
>by the rules. The $5
>permit,the expo tags is only
>part of the issue.
>It's the whole big picture
>that is being looked at.
>

Birdman the total amount of $5 application fees kept by SFW/MDF over the years is in the MILLIONS of dollars. Fact!
 
Obviously Birdman, you don't understand simple english. How much MORE of the "EXPO" tag money could have been put on the ground had the rules of use been written to state 100% will go back to Utah wildlife. That is the big picture. Go back and re-read the above statement and try to understand what he said .
The only reason we are waiting to see how much coruption is involved, is because RMEF put in a bid to host the "EXPO" that will return 100% of the revenue generated by the "EXPO" tags.
We don't need to go over how the Wildlife board so abruptly changed the rules after the deadline for the bids to be submitted.
We know how much money has been put back into Utah wildlife conservation and that is a good thing. That is not the issue here. Just think, how much MORE could have gone back to wildlife.
 
Buttshot. Shows how little you know. No where did the wildlife board change anything. Not their power. Now read all that goes into the decision. Not just the expo tag $5, but the overall picture of how much money will be generated for the state by an expo with those $5 tags. That is why the State purchasing group is making the decision. Yes it's all about money, both $5 fee plus money raised for the economy by the expo who has those tags. RMEF put in their bid as have others. We have all been told the system how it will work etc. What happens, happens. I am just as worried over what the results could be as the next person. It has all been above board. Hawkeye knows that as well as the next person. He has been very much involved.
 
And I have still yet to see a conservation project conducted by sfw on any of my old stomping grounds with those millions of dollers! yes I have a lot of them that need help! So does millions of other sportsmen that ain't seen $hit done in there neck of the woods. I really hope Don and all his "BEST BUDDIES" don't get the bid! all his private tags what will he ever do?
hornkiller.jpg
 
Let's be honest here Birdman. Everyone knows that there is no way on earth that any organization could come close to the money that RMEF can generate and donate if they get the contract and bring their convention to SLC. That is well known, as is the other fact that there are at least 4 of the 7 Board members that have a conflict of interest due to their SFW affiliation. That means they should recuse themselves from voting if SFW is picked by the committee. Therefore, if this is done on the up and up and even if the committee has picked SFW, there is no way that SFW should get a quorum of yea votes. Furthermore, it will be interesting to see the criteria used if the committee did pick SFW because of what I have already stated when money is the sole reason for their decision or should be.
 
When did the RFP process go in to effect? Thats right, only after RMEF put in their bid for the contract. Do not tell us that it was mentioned at a past meeting, it can't be found in the minutes.
But you are correct, shows how much I know.....
 
And the convention tags go to...(wait for it)...SFW. Just my opinion, but Birdman has just given the spin. The $5 is only part because they are looking at the whole picture now. The years of SFW conservation tag money is now going to help them to continue to rape the public tags with little to no accounting. I am guessing all the money they have been required (conservation tags) to give back will be cited as an example of how they would like to use the convention tags. Again, just a guess, but I think there will be little actual language promising to give a higher amount back but very long winded on promises to benefit wildlife. Sprinkle in the tag sales from conservation tags, the other states. and AI into the talk and it will look like the only reason there are deer and elk in Utah is because of SFW. I hope I am wrong but I lived in Utah far to long to believe anything else will happen. The whole process has been anything but open and honest. Changing the rules after the deadline, the majority of the members on the wildlife board being former SFW, and the Utah politics decided this little charade before it started. I would be surprised if SFW/MDF even submitted an bid originally. It would not be too much of a stretch to see that they only submitted a bid after RMEF entered their proposal on the last day of he deadline. They were always going to win and as I have said...this was simply a charade for the little people.
 
Thank God I live in Arizona so I do not have to listen to all the BS going on in Utah. I do believe your system is corrupt
 
It will be interesting to see how it all plays out. I wonder before the Internet came around how many of you sat in an empty basement under a bare lightbulb writing angry letters to the government. Always slow down winter fun.

Birdman,
I get what you're saying and you are correct. There's been one group stacking the deck for years. It's how you win the game. It's how you get things accomplished and win the battles that benefit all of us.
 
Does not matter what any of you think or say. RMEF is just as corrupt as all of them. Just because they are in MT and not a part of your day to day you think they are the wildlife gods of conservation. Each group submitted their best of the best and one will win. Fact is the show will go on and money will be raised for conservation. 30,000 people will go to expo and have a great time. Guess what. Don't go, stay home, be you! Funny how you guys ##### and complain but all go to expo- why? Because it's fun! Show will happen. Projects will be done and odds are most of you will not be there to work. Fact is most of you have done nothing to help wildlife. If your mad, Welcome to corporate America. If you think this system is any different than any other then your an Internet idiot. Cry, whine, ##### and moan. At the end of the day that's all you do! Whatever. RMEF will not win. They have no business in Utah. SFW/MDF will win the bid, it's their show. But do this--Take the 200 tags away. That will not stop the show. They will continue to put on a hunt expo we all can enjoy it and hang out together. Why? Because it's a fun show, and we get to get together as a group and have fun and still raise money for wildlife. Those tags do not define the show. We as hunters define it.
All you haters, go hate. You focus on the unfairness of your life and in the meantime well go find big ole bucks and Bulls- most of you haters are an embarrassment to hunters. Focus on tearing everyone down because life's not fair. While we stand together and shoot the #####. Bunch of whiners----
 
>Does not matter what any of
>you think or say. RMEF
>is just as corrupt as
>all of them. Just because
>they are in MT and
>not a part of your
>day to day you think
>they are the wildlife gods
>of conservation. Each group submitted
>their best of the best
>and one will win.
>Fact is the show will
>go on and money will
>be raised for conservation. 30,000
>people will go to expo
>and have a great time.
>Guess what. Don't go, stay
>home, be you! Funny how
>you guys ##### and complain
>but all go to expo-
>why? Because it's fun! Show
>will happen. Projects will be
>done and odds are most
>of you will not be
>there to work. Fact is
>most of you have done
>nothing to help wildlife. If
>your mad, Welcome to
>corporate America. If you think
>this system is any different
>than any other then your
>an Internet idiot. Cry, whine,
>##### and moan. At the
>end of the day that's
>all you do! Whatever. RMEF
>will not win. They have
>no business in Utah. SFW/MDF
>will win the bid, it's
>their show. But do this--Take
>the 200 tags away. That
>will not stop the show.
>They will continue to put
>on a hunt expo we
>all can enjoy it and
>hang out together. Why? Because
>it's a fun show, and
>we get to get together
>as a group and have
>fun and still raise money
>for wildlife. Those tags do
>not define the show. We
>as hunters define it.
>All you haters, go hate. You
>focus on the unfairness of
>your life and in the
>meantime well go find big
>ole bucks and Bulls- most
>of you haters are an
>embarrassment to hunters. Focus on
>tearing everyone down because life's
>not fair. While we stand
>together and shoot the #####.
>Bunch of whiners----


What a bunch of BS!!! Most in the know are aware that the tags are what is up for bid in the contract, not the present Expo. Sure the current Expo can continue and if RMEF wins the contract bid and brings their national convention to SLC the money made just from the $5 given back from each ticket sold will be huge, not to mention the large amount of money the city and state will make from many more motel rooms being taken, restaurants used, etc. It will be a win win for wildlife and for the city/state. To think anything else like you are is pure balderdash and to say that RMEF is remotely run like SFW is a real crock!
 
MDF has repeatedly stated they would NOT hold an Expo without the auction and raffle tags. They have claimed for years that they need the proceeds from these tag sales to offset the "cost" of the Expo.
Now RMEF comes in and says they can hold an even bigger and better Expo, AND return 100% of the money generated from tag sales to the state. A clearly superior proposition to the state of Utah.

Of course many of us like attending the Expo, whoever runs it. It is a great time to meet outfitters and suppliers and talk about hunting. The simple reality is the tags ensure a large enough attendance to attract all of the outfitters and vendors. RMEF already gets most of these vendors to their national convention, so they arguably don't need the tag revenue. MDF /SFW can only put on a successful Expo by using some of the tag revenue to line their own pockets.

Trying to insulate themselves from criticism by using the state purchasing department to select the winning bidder only shows how desperate the DWR is to keep funneling money to their crony's at SFW.
It is disappointing to have such little regard for state government, but not exactly surprising, either.
Bill
 
The one thing that may be very interesting on Friday is whether MDF or SFW put in a bid. If MDF did the bidding like they have in the past with SFW as a sort of "silent partner", that would probably allow the 4 Board members that are former SFW officials to vote on a MDF bid if it was picked since they haven't been officials of MDF. A reliable source says that the RMEF bid submitted under the new RFP has been changed with even more incentives than the initial bid, so it would appear that no other organization should be able to touch what they are offering.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-16-15 AT 00:00AM (MST)[p]Lpacker said, "Trying to insulate themselves from criticism by using the state purchasing department to select the winning bidder only shows how desperate the DWR is to keep funneling money to their crony's at SFW."

I admire the way Lpacker puts it down and often value his opinions but i don't usually agree with them. This time, i think he said it pretty good! +1

You guys out there that read these pages to keep a tab on what's going on in our hunting World, many of you rely on, maybe even take for granted that we now have a interest in all this land, so many places to take out the family, a friend, or just get out on your own. SFW has proven to me to cater to those who can afford to pay or those that own big, not to us guys that need to go without and save just to pay the gas money and stock up the rig.

I said in another thread that no doubt is connected to this one, we are at a important cross roads here, right now, right this week. I hope SFW does not get the bid. Not only do they not deserve it from what i view as corruption, IMO, they care little of the regular guy and those who just get by. IMO, they have been stealing you blind and they now want more. They will continue to tell you it's raining while pissing on your pant leg, want to take what is now free, make it theirs, and sell it on the backs of your shoulders. Right now, that all can be changed. That's what's going on!

Joey


"It's all about knowing what your firearms practical limitations are and combining that with your own personal limitations!"
 
+ 1 Joey !
You are spot on, You cant argue with the folks in "Dons pocket". as they know how corrupt the system has became. They were very quiet for a long time,. After the sham they pulled when they screwed us and RMEF. I wonder if the "noise" now is for any other reason, than a defense of a known outcome????? To bad sfw had to import Chicago politics into Utah the way they have.
 
+ 1 Joey!

Stonefly...why do you have to insult Chicago politics and put them into the same arena as Utah. I believe Utah has far surpassed Chicago and this Friday will serve to validate my beliefs.
 
RMEF= "Hope and Change"
SFW/MDF= "Chicago Style Politics"

LMAO. This is better than a soap opera. Actually, I've never watched a soap opera.
 
The breakdown and scoring is as follows:

1. Viability of Business Plan and potential to put on high quality wildlife exposition.
a. Expo Operations - 20% of total score
b. Economic Considerations - 10% of total score
c. Promotion of hunting, fishing, and trapping in Utah - 10% of total score

2. Ability to organize and conduct a secure and fair permit drawing - 20% of total score

3. Conservation organization's commitment to use revenue generated through the wildlife expo for wildlife conservation in Utah, including the use of the remaining $3.50 of the Expo permit application fee - 30% of total score

4. Historical contribution and previous performance of organization in wildlife conservation in Utah - 10% of total score.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-16-15 AT 10:10AM (MST)[p]>The breakdown and scoring is as
>follows:
>
>1. Viability of Business Plan and
>potential to put on high
>quality wildlife exposition.
>a. Expo Operations - 20% of
>total score
>b. Economic Considerations - 10% of
>total score
>c. Promotion of hunting, fishing, and
>trapping in Utah - 10%
>of total score
>
>2. Ability to organize and conduct
>a secure and fair permit
>drawing - 20% of total
>score
>
>3. Conservation organization's commitment to use
>revenue generated through the wildlife
>expo for wildlife conservation in
>Utah, including the use of
>the remaining $3.50 of the
>Expo permit application fee -
>30% of total score
>
>4. Historical contribution and previous performance
>of organization in wildlife conservation
>in Utah - 10% of
>total score.

Talk about a bunch of things designed to favor the existing contract holder, especially #4, for Gods sake! With Economic consideration only being 10% of the score when the RMEF convention would bring millions of dollars to the area it sure tells you that the tables have been stacked against RMEF on this one! Surprised---nope, not the way Utah does business!
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-16-15 AT 10:44AM (MST)[p]>LAST EDITED ON Dec-16-15
>AT 10:10?AM (MST)
>
>>The breakdown and scoring is as
>>follows:
>>
>>1. Viability of Business Plan and
>>potential to put on high
>>quality wildlife exposition.
>>a. Expo Operations - 20% of
>>total score
>>b. Economic Considerations - 10% of
>>total score
>>c. Promotion of hunting, fishing, and
>>trapping in Utah - 10%
>>of total score
>>
>>2. Ability to organize and conduct
>>a secure and fair permit
>>drawing - 20% of total
>>score
>>
>>3. Conservation organization's commitment to use
>>revenue generated through the wildlife
>>expo for wildlife conservation in
>>Utah, including the use of
>>the remaining $3.50 of the
>>Expo permit application fee -
>>30% of total score
>>
>>4. Historical contribution and previous performance
>>of organization in wildlife conservation
>>in Utah - 10% of
>>total score.
>
>Talk about a bunch of things
>designed to favor the existing
>contract holder, especially #4, for
>Gods sake! With Economic
>consideration only being 10% of
>the score when the RMEF
>convention would bring millions of
>dollars to the area it
>sure tells you that the
>tables have been stacked against
>RMEF on this one!
>Surprised---nope, not the way Utah
>does business!

The 3 "in Utah"'s (50% of the score) may make all the difference. Ironically, RMEF may be TOO BIG to win the prize.
 
I understand the concern of some concerning how this has all went down, but-- I do believe that it is a good faith effort to make this decision as fair as possible by having the State Office run this under the procurement rules. I believe it was in response to circumstances that without doubt has come as a result of the growth and success of the Expo itself over the years. It has put $100,'s into wildlife. We can banter back and forth about how much could have or should have been directed into wildlife programs but the fact is that it has been extremely beneficial in putting real $ onto the ground. There are some aspects that I have continuing questions about where some of the money went and what it was ultimately used for, but, all in all it has been a very good thing. It is na?ve to think that any organization would want to or be able to manage this event if it somehow didn't benefit the organization in some financial way. If the organization doesn't receive some monetary gain to help that organization continue on, there is no way they will continue to exist. I just hope that whatever is decided will help get more $ and effort into helping wildlife do better in our state. Sometimes it seems that there are individuals that are more concerned with only what they want or think than what would be overall the best for the majority or Utah sportsmen. Its a tricky balance at times-- opportunity vs quality-- because what is quality or opportunity to one may be totally different to someone else. Its important to be involved and voice your opinions-- even if we don't get just exactly what we want.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-16-15 AT 11:04AM (MST)[p]The interweb haters buzz and buzz. Yet in Utah where this is actually taking place the Expo grows and banquet attendance continues to increase. Reality is often the hardest pill to swallow.

If you don't believe that RMEF doesn't have its own hidden agenda with this move you're completely out of the touch. This is nothing more than a political game for big dollars for both sides. Choose the side you support, over the past 20 years SFW has done more good for Utah than any other group including RMEF that is just a fact. Whether you like or dislike how they've done it or whether you like or dislike them personally it does not change the facts.

The same group of us fight back and forth on here and its in reality nothing more than entertainment. In the big picture both machines keep moving forward with their agendas. In my opinion SFW has done more for the state of Utah than RMEF, so I choose to support them getting the bid. If they don't I won't lose much sleep. I'll keep fighting the fights that I am passionate about and that I hope better the hunting heritage and opportunity for me and my family going forward. I fought and was vocal before SFW and I will continue to going forward. They have been a powerful and useful vehicle over the past 20 years. I haven't always agreed with them but they still proved to be the best game in town over and over.

Guys like Topgun are interested in toppling an organization not making the place I hunt and live any better. They do not understand the history or the everyday ins and outs of the reality I live in. If you look at many of the biggest most vocal SFW haters they do not even live in Utah. Yet they claim to know better. Like I stated to begin with, the Expo grows and banquet attendance increase, projects are completed and wildlife benefits, the people living in the reality that support the SFW continue to out number the individuals that disagree with the SFW (if that last statement is not true then why is there not a stronger organization in the state, remember the UWC.....yeah that worked well). Those things are all just reality. If SFW loses the bid and in the end all of its backing and fades away I can guarantee one thing, my family and myself will continue to fight to make improvements for Utah's wildlife and sportsmen. Topgun, how about you? Are you going to.....

Funny place the interweb.....
 
I made a choice to not support sfw in anyway and have never attended the expo. Every year I am invted by friends who go and have on occasion pulled tags but I refused to go I refuse to let sfw manipulate my selfishness into $$$$.
I'm excited to possibly be heading south with a gamblers mentality soon.

Sincerely yours - Cautiously optimistic in Idaho
 
Keep posting your drivel because that's all it is muley73! You have no idea how many people disagree with the way SFW does things and how it operates, but I can tell you that it's a lot more than the 13,000 members the SFW website says it has as members. The reason most are from outside Utah is because we know how an honest, legal organization works and keep them that way. The first thing is that they have open books to look at in order to see where the money they take in is going. Your SFW wouldn't and won't do that and all they keep saying is they file legal tax returns every year. Wow! If you look at those returns, there are many loopholes where they say the money went that can't be traced. SFW finally agreed to give 30% of that $5 tag application fee back for on the ground actions, but only after they literally had their arm twisted off when the fact was exposed that they made a million bucks a year on average just from that fee alone and were keeping it all with no open books to show where it went! Now the website has a simple little pie chart that supposedly shows 89% of income going back out on the ground. Do you or any of the other working members of SFW really believe that to be true? If you do, please back it up with some black and white stats showing that to be true. IMHO the reason SFW exists above all other organizations in your state appears to be pure apathy on the part of it's citizens that let the founder and his cronies get such a stranglehold on the DWR and Legislature that they don't feel there is any way to break that hold. Just "go with the flow" so to speak! That may well be true and if RMEF doesn't get the new contract with the way the rules were changed in the middle of the game and new rules put in place that obviously were done to favor the existing contract holders it will definitely expose Utah SFW for what it is---corrupt to the core!
 
Top,
Drival? No my I'm talking about reality and real time and dollars put toward a cause. Not just Internet bantering. I totally understand this is the only arena that you play in and call reality. I'm talking about the world away from the Internet. How much time and money do you personally spend in Utah? Are you a reality expert or an interweb expert? The interweb has the crazy knack of making individuals feel knowledgeable and relevant.
 
"SFW has done more good than any other group in Utah."
Not fact your opinion. And in my opinion you couldn't be more inaccurate.
SFW along with an overstepping Wildlife Board is worse than PETA
HSUS and ALF combined when it comes to taking hunters out of the field.

My hope for this fiasco.

RMEF wins the bid and the Board tries their corrupt Opt 2 like bullchit
And the RMEF sues the State.

Let's see if it's corrupt or not, let's get an Independent audit of
Where these funds have gone since 2007.



"The State of Utah has not given BGF anything.
They have invested in BGF to protect their
interests."
Birdman 4/15/15
 
Muley, if RMEF hadn't up the stakes SFW or MDF would have not stepped up to the plate like they were forced to do. RMEF has raised the stakes even higher and if they aren't awarded this contract there is an issue within this system. Utahs wildlife and the expo will benefit because of RMEF stepping to the plate, and IMO they would be a much better partner for our wildlife.
 
Here is what I see happening on Friday.

RMEF will be the group that is presented to the Wildlife Board on Friday to run the Tags and Convention.

This way all on the Board can Vote "Yea or Nay"

The Board will vote a majority of "Nay" and therefore the selection process will be forced to go another direction.

JMO
 
Lee, you also know that any of the funds derived from the Expo tags has to be spent on projects in Utah. It think every organization understands that going in. I'm sure they are all committed to that whether or not they have in the past. I for one would like to see RMEF put more into this state anyway.
 
Muley_73 said, "If you don't believe that RMEF doesn't have its own hidden agenda with this move you're completely out of the touch."

Care to expand on that statement, Muley?

As someone who has been involved in the RMEF decision to submit a bid, a project we've been working on for over a year, I would like to know what that hidden agenda is. It seems to be the party line among some, which is confusing, given I thought all parties were interested in what is best for wildlife, hunters, and hunting.

I had thought about not replying, but I've heard this same story from many who feel threatened by the RMEF bid, that I thought someone close to the source of these rumors might be able to give a better explanation of this supposed hidden agenda than what I've received so far.

Is wanting more money invested on the ground in Utah a hidden agenda? That is exactly what RMEF put in their proposal as the incentive for submitting a bid. As someone involved in that process, I can tell you, that is the only reason RMEF would consider this bid.

The mission of RMEF is to to ensure the future of elk, other wildlife, their habitat and our hunting heritage. If an activity does not fall within that mission, it is not something RMEF will invest time and money in. That mission is too important to be convoluted with what you call "hidden agendas."

I suspect whatever decision is made, Utah wildlife and Utah hunters will get a better shake than they were getting. If that is the outcome, then it was worthwhile to submit a bid, no matter who ends up with the contract. Competition is a good thing, raising the bar for all and resulting in better outcomes.

I received a few emails, phone calls, and read things like you stated; that RMEF has some hidden agenda. When I ask what that hidden agenda is, most do not reply. And those who do reply tell me some sort of second-grade "daughter of their brother's boss' secretary who heard it at the volleyball game so it must be true" conspiracy theory.

It's not that complicated - If SFW, MDF, ABC, XYZ, or whoever submit the proposal that is best for Utah wildlife and Utah hunters, then they should be awarded the contract. If RMEF has not submitted an offer that is the best for Utah wildlife and hunters, then RMEF should not get the contract. The decision gets made based on the best proposal and we all move on to the next piece of important work ahead of us.

Anyhow, care to expand on the RMEF hidden agenda?

"Hunt when you can - You're gonna' run out of health before you run out of money!"
 
"There's been one group stacking the deck for years. It's how you win the game. It's how you get things accomplished and win the battles"
-Muley73


"It's not that complicated, whoever submits the proposal that is best for Utah wildlife and Utah hunters, should be awarded the contract...whatever decision is made, Utah wildlife and Utah hunters will get a better shake than they were getting."
-BigFin


Open and honest. How refreshing. Thanks BigFin. Take note SFW!

All this angst is about far more than an expo and 200 tags. It's about crony politics taking the front seat and Utah wildlife and hunters taking the back.

It's about a group who's putting their efforts into Utah wildlife versus a group who's efforts go into "stacking the deck".
 
BigFin,

First of all thank you for your hard work and dedication to making the RMEF better. You are appreciated.

I exhibited at the Expo back in 2010 so got somewhat of a first hand look at the workings of the MDF and SFW and what they were doing, and have read with interest this forum since the RMEF made a bid for the Expo.

I'm with you in that the RMEF doesn't have a hidden agenda. What I think is the primary purpose of the RMEF's involvement is to find a more lucrative and permanent home with higher attendance and a chance to break even on the annual RMEF Convention. I think the RMEF has struggled for many years to make the annual convention a profit maker rather than a loser. I've never seen the books but that is what I have surmised over the last several years with many of those being an exhibitor, bugling contest judge and or spectator at many of the RMEF annual elk camps.

I truly hope for the sake of the RMEF they win this bid and find a more stable and successful home for the annual RMEF Convention. I think it will be a win win for all, including Utah. The 200 tags are a huge factor in drawing a large crowd, no matter what anybody says.
 
>Lee, you also know that any
>of the funds derived from
>the Expo tags has to
>be spent on projects in
>Utah. It think every organization
>understands that going in. I'm
>sure they are all committed
>to that whether or not
>they have in the past.
>I for one would like
>to see RMEF put more
>into this state anyway.

Yes, I DO know that all projects have to be in Utah and that all bidding organizations understand that going in. What concerns me is how the evaluating committee views the amount RMEF has specifically spent in Utah vs the amount SFW has spent in Utah and how that view may spill over into other criteria, especially the proposed use of the $3.50. RMEF has surely put more money on the ground overall, but not specifically in Utah and SFW has put it in projects benefiting a wider variety of species and outdoor activities including fishing and trapping as well as hunting. I believe SFW has the advantage in these areas and it would be impossible for RMEF to change the past. I'm just hoping RMEF scores high enough in the other criteria to get the highest overall score because I, too, would like to see them do more in Utah!
 
What fools came up with the criteria? May as well be:

1) who has done this before - 90%
2) who can bring the most money to the State of Utah for the benefit of wildlife and ALL of its citizens - 10%

Did anyone with a conflict of interest have input on the criteria?
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-17-15 AT 01:45PM (MST)[p]Sorry for the delay all, had to work.

Randy,
I should know better than to even banter with a professional like yourself but I'm a gluten for punishment and am strong in my views.

When I say stack the deck I mean work hard within the set system to give yourself the best possible chance for success. I believe SFW has done this. I believe RMEF has done this, I believe DU and SCI have done this. It's about creating contacts, connections, working with people and positioning. It's about gaining a voice and power to go with that voice to get agendas accomplished. Pretty simple, I know you are wanting to twist that into something underhanded or corrupt but its not. Its how the system works and those involved know it.

As far as hidden agenda, well if The Western Hunting Expo had not been as successful as it has I do not see RMEF riding in on a white horse to save the good people of Utah. Its about money and power. RMEF sees the number of people that those tags draw in and they see the money that comes with that. It's a win win for them, they make the money and they claim to be a Robin Hood in the process. This is not to mention that they get the opportunity to "one up" an organization that they have had bad blood with for the last few years. Everybody is quick to point out that the powers that be scrambled when the RMEF turned in their proposal. What no one points out is that RMEF turned it in at the last possible second, was this just consequence? Or was is all part of the "game"? It's a game of money and power for groups make not mistake about it.

As for those that hope this will cripple the SFW here's some thoughts.

What if SFW looses the bid? Some believe that SFW will loose it's revenue, the SFW Expo will decline, and ultimately it's ability to contribute to wildlife conservation significantly and influence then it's influence in hunting and fishing regulations. This because some, as a rule, are looking at things that take place in the world from rather narrow perspective, They don't often think beyond the issue that is immediately in from of them. They aren't gifted chess player, for the most part. What gets posted on the interweb is mostly wishful thinking.

Consider the following. When you think the gentlemen that wrote and enforced the zoning regulations for the city of Palm Beach, Florida were most likely not all fools, maybe some, but certainly not all of them. (of course, some people will say they were all fools, even though they've never met, conversed, or looked in the back grounds and previous complishmnets of any of the zoning commissioner, they'll claim they were fools, just because......................... the people here on MM are smarter than every body.

This is exactly how determined, committed people think and behave:

It has been said, according to www.snopes.com:

A very bright and determined businessman purchased and rebuilt Mar-A-Lago the Grand mansion and estate in Palm Beach, Florida. he got into a dispute with the city, who are well known for being strict on zoning regulations. The businessman put up a 50 foot flag pole, even though 30 foot is the maximum allowed.

The city imposed a 1,000 dollar fine per day.

The businessman and the city argued back and forth. Finally, when the fine had reached 120,000 dollars "the businessman" proposed a solution. He would donate that amount to Veterans organizations, would move the flag and pole to a different location, in front of the mansion and would only use a 30 foot flag pole.

The city agreed.

The businessman brought in the company who does golf course construction. He had them build a 20 foot high grassy hill and put a 30 foot flag pole on top of it.

If you believe SFW is going way, or it's leadership will fold up their tent and simply take there "flag pole" down, if the State awards the 200 tags to some other group, you simply don't understand bright, committed, and dedicated conservation for hunting and fishing minded people.

We'll take a look back at this place in time in five or six years and we'll see if there is still a 50 footer up there are a small hill with a 30 footer flying the SFW flag.
 
I don't know that it is a "hidden agenda" but the agenda of RMEF and SFW is to make money. Yall all laughed and Bigfin didn't want to admit it a year ago when I said it but these are companies that are in direct competition with each other. Now that RMEF has thrown their hat in on this bid they can't argue that fact anymore.

For whatever reason Randy, who represents one of the competing businesses, has chosen the business model of RMEF is more righteous than the rest. That's great. I am not upset at watching businessmen compete and try and do business. But all you little sheep out here dying to get your turn at the cool-aid fountain need to realize this is business.
 
Muley, we all know what you meant when you said "stack the deck". You know, lie, cheat, steal, bribe, like good Utarded politicians, or as you put it "thats how the system works.

Really Muley? The number of people that those tags bring in? Have you ever been to RMEF's National Convention? It's like yours and Donny Boys goat rodeo times 10 even without welfare tags. RMEF has over 200,000 members. How many members does $FW have? oh thats right, no one knows it's a secret.

You say "What no one points out is that RMEF turned it in at the last possible second" Are you kidding!!, everyone points that out. Of coarse they turned it in at the last second, it's part of the "game" as you put it. They're not stupid. They just under estimated how slimly and corrupt Utards really are. After all the rules for submitting a proposal were in a state statute and a deadline was clearly written in that statute, Were it not?

Only in Utardia does this kind of stupid chit happen, it's embarrassing.

Another crappy day in the big city huh Pig? Thanks for your insight Pig, you're so much smarter than everyone else.
 
Thought for fodder. Playing devils advocate. All the money/proceeds that the state of Kalifornicated nimrods have generated for RMEF, I wonder how much $$ has been put back into this pathetic state???
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-17-15 AT 05:35PM (MST)[p]Ahhhh shotgun finally chimes in. Man almost the whole gang has come out to play.

All around the mulberry bush! Good times
 
Tri
Are you saying that he is stacking the odds in his favor by posting under two different names???? Hahahahaha
 
"It's about creating contacts, connections, working with people and positioning. It's about gaining a voice and power to go with that voice to get agendas accomplished"

Exactly!!!

Now the problem is that the SFW agenda has run it's course. People don't dig it, many like myself can't balance the supposed good the group does vs the damage they have done.

So it comes down to a matter of trust. Do you trust SFW/MDF to do the right thing?? They had their chance when they were asked to put the application earnings on the ground, they said no. Point blank no. Finally they conceded 30%. Apparently their agenda don't fit with the majority that want funds generated from a public resource to wholly benefit that public resource, not line the pockets of greasy ass politicians.

I think a world without SFW would be a better place. This ain't to say that if the RMEF wins this bid that they won't be watched like a hawk.








"The State of Utah has not given BGF anything.
They have invested in BGF to protect their
interests."
Birdman 4/15/15
 
With all of the good sfw has done only using 30% of the earnings imagine how much good can be done with the other 70% thrown in. I can't fathom why the board would be against this happening???

Justin
 
Yea Muley we've all come to play including you, so get off your high horse you're no different or better then anyone else on here. You like to pook jabs at people posting on the "interwebs" yet here you are posting on the interwebs.

Hey Pig so what's my original name?
 
Interesting that a while back the change states the monies front the expo tags go into a separate account and used under the direction of the dwr.
Wiley, even though as you put it SFW has run its course, people don't dig it. It does more damage than good, it still seams to grow every year at the expo, and the banquets. Membership continues to grow as do donations. Seems to be the trust in SFW continues to grow. I do agree there are a few on mm that hate SFW but if you add up the names, it is still a small amount of people.
What is interesting is that all those who talk trash on mm about the dwr,and board, then they turn around and ask for favors from the dwr and the board. If you think they don't read this stuff, your wrong.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-18-15 AT 00:18AM (MST)[p]
>it still seams to grow
>every year at the expo,
>and the banquets. Membership
>continues to grow as do
>donations. Seems to be
>the trust in SFW continues
>to grow.


You want to judge popularity and effectiveness by banquet and expo attendance? I guess you think people really like welfare, food stamps, permanent disability, illegal immigration, drug use, global warming funding, etc... because all those metrics are growing too. Hell, people even voted for Obama over Romney. Do you think that proves he's better?

Just because something has increasing participation doesn't mean it is good for society. Often the opposite is true. And to equate expo attendance to SFW support is asinine. There are plenty of us that think SFW's control of Utah hunting should be reeled in but still attend the Expo because we love hunting and the ability to apply for tags that are public property to begin with.

Not to mention RMEF has tens of thousands more members than SFW, just set a record for their Convention attendance, and has donated 1 Billion dollars to wildlife in the last 30 years. So I guess if you think people like SFW, then you must agree they love RMEF. It's time for the JV team to get off the field and let the varsity team show us how it's really done.

Grizzly
 
Your right griz, rmef is bigger. Don't know if that makes it better but. She statement made was people are fed up with sfw. If that was the case they wouldn't be growing. They are. We know dollar wise which organization has put more money on the ground for Utah. Today we will see what organization Utah thinks is best for them. If they pick rmef, will good for them.
 
" Today we will see what organization Utah thinks is best for them."
Birdy,.. with the deck "stacked" with sfw bozo's like it is, how would any of the Board drivel be representative of anything other than a small portion of Utah. Once again I say, Why were all the sfw bozo's..like you Birdy, so quiet for so long, and now are drumming your feathers, is it because you have re- found your confidence by somehow knowing what the "good ol boys" have in mind today??? you can at least say sfw has accomplished 1 thing for sure, they have turned the entire process for the expo into a sham,and have corrupted the wildlife board. GREAT JOB sfw. this is representative of the wonderful work you do. This needs to happen every year just to shut up the clowns like you birdy, even if it is only for a sort time.
 
Since we all know how large and generous RMEF is, just how much has RMEF put back into UT the last few years? Any? Just curious since I dunno anything abou RMEF and UT. I do know some about RMEF and Kali.
 
"Seems to be the trust in SFW continues to grow."

Bird, if this was fact, would we be having this discourse??




"The State of Utah has not given BGF anything.
They have invested in BGF to protect their
interests."
Birdman 4/15/15
 
So didn't grizzly advocate for a public vote on this and now in his latest post try and convince us popularity doesn't matter?????????

Does anyone actually have beliefs they stand with or are they flexible just to keep your argument going?
 
Probably would wiley. Seems to be a fact the rmef wants what sfw has. This morning when the board confirms what ever organization is chosen by the state, not picks, life will go on for everyone.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-18-15 AT 08:07AM (MST)[p]As I mentioned a few days ago, I am going to withhold my comments until I see what actually happens today. That being said, this issue is not going to go away after this morning's meeting. The selection committee's recommendation will be revealed today and the Wildlife Board will take some form of action based upon that recommendation (assuming they resolve the potential conflict issue). Once that occurs and an agreement is signed, however, all of the poposals and related documentation will become a matter of public record. At that point, the public will have an opportunity to peer behind the curtain and see what has really been going on behind the scenes. It will be very interesting to compare the proposals that were submitted in response to the RFP and also the proposals that were submitted before the DWR changed the rules and moved to a formal RFP process. It should be interesting.

-Hawkeye-
 
One other thought, if you choose to attend the meeting today, please be respectful. Nothing positive comes from being rude, unprofessional or disruptive.

-Hawkeye-
 
Only 3 Board members have recused themselves from the process, rather than the 4 that were assumed to have conflicts. That means the process has a quorum of 4 that can make the decision today, so we'll see what that is and what organization came up with the top score that is to be voted on to get the contract.
 
SFW was just picked as #1 of the two bids by a wide margin by the "impartial" committeee----surprise, surprise., surprise and what a crock of crap!!! If the folks in Utah don't get up in arms and let this stand without a fight they deserve whatever they get from now on!
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-18-15 AT 11:20AM (MST)[p]
Thoroughly entrenched corruption. I'm typing from Chicago. Mayor Emanuel just officially relinquished the city's status as Corruption Capital of United States to.................Salt Lake City. Obama concurs, and has approved formal documentation. Congratulations.

*********************************

Member RMEF, Pope & Young Club, NRA, UWC & DP Hate Club
 
Whew....RMEF dodged a bullet on that one. It's been long said by RMEF that they didn't want their convention in Utah.
 
Well as Muley73 put it, The cards were stacked against RMEF and it showed the corruption of the process and the government. I cant wait until Hawkeye gets the Grama request and really proves this point. I know he has been quiet through this whole process, but I am SURE the FLOOD GATES will be opened and I hope everyone sees all the crap that has gone on. I do wonder if the RFP would have been done if RMEF did not submit a proposal?
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-18-15 AT 11:25AM (MST)[p]>TG,
>
>Do you even know what SFW's
>proposal was?

No, do you, LOL?! I'm sure SFW "did their thing" behind the scenes to even get the state to go the way of the RFP after they were made aware of what RMEF had offered. When the entirety of the two bids becomes public knowledge it will be more than interesting to see how the "impartial" committee voted the way it did. One thing that should be in there IMHO is an identical offer to give all the money involved with the $5 application fee back just as a starter and we'll go from there to compare the two bids and see how the "impartial" committee picked who they did! What a stacked deck other organizations were handed the way this was done!!!
 

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

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

C257688D-404A-444C-B880-A93D351447FE.png
20220608_220013.jpg
Screenshot_20211002-221031_Video Player.jpg
20210727_112237.jpg
5AFFB1D7-F2DE-43B1-9A16-1F7E6C3E5796.jpeg
Fine Bull for eshunt!
browbuckdoe.jpg
Cactus 2.jpg
5B8BD0BA-C333-4BDE-B6ED-DB2C565E1A70.jpeg
20200719_101917.jpg
2010 buck2.JPG
CFFFD8A1-E382-424A-BDF3-18BF77101A11.png
Back
Top Bottom