UWC PROPOSAL TO CAP EXPO TAGS AT 10%

K

klbzdad

Guest
LAST EDITED ON Jun-19-12 AT 04:01PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Jun-19-12 AT 04:00?PM (MST)

Today the United Wildlife Cooperative delivered a proposal to the Division of Wildlife Resources requesting a change in the distribution and accounting of funds raised and associated with publicly owned expo tags and the organizations that participate in their use. This would require the same transparency called on and displayed by RMEF and its president, David Allen, last week. This proposal would be a slight modification of R657-55 Division of Wildlife Resources and could be handled through the RAC?s and the Wildlife Board. The change would require complete disclosure of the funds as well as limit the amount each participating group could retain to no more than 10% which ultimately would mean more money for those approved projects that are so important for the wildlife of Utah. The proposal would require the funds from the convention tag application fees to be distributed in the same fashion as conservation permits. i.e.. 60/30/10


Here is the most important requested change:

R657-55-6. Convention Permit Funds and Reporting.
(1) Within 30 days of the last day of the wildlife convention, the conservation organization must submit to the division:
(a) a final report on the distribution of permits;
(b) the total number of applications for each permit;
(c) the total funds raised through the handling fees assessed by the conservation organization to process applications;
(d) the funds due to the division; and
(e) a report on the status of each project funded in whole or in part with retained convention permit revenue.
(2) Permits shall not be issued until the permit fees are paid to the division.
(3)(a) Conservation organizations shall remit to the division by September 1 of each year 30% of the total revenue generated through the handling fees assessed by the conservation organization to process applications.
(b) The permit revenue payable to the division under Subsection (3)(a), excluding accrued interest, is the property of the division and may not be used by conservation organizations for projects or any other purpose.
(c) The permit revenue must be placed in a federally insured account promptly upon receipt and remain in the account until remitted to the division on or before September 1 of each year.
(d) The permit revenue payable to the division under this subsection shall not be used by the conservation organization as collateral or commingled in the same account with the organization's operation and administration funds, so that the separate identity of the permit revenue is not lost.
(e) Failure to remit 30% of the total permit revenue to the division by the September 1 deadline may result in criminal prosecution under Title 76, Chapter 6, Part 4 of the Utah Code, and may further disqualify the conservation organization from obtaining any future convention permits.
(4) A conservation organization may retain 70% of the revenue generated through the handling fees assessed by the conservation organization as follows:
(a) 10% of the revenue may be withheld and used by the conservation organization for administrative expenses.
(b) 60% of the revenue may be retained and used by the conservation organization only for eligible projects as provided in subsections (i) through (ix).
(i) eligible projects include habitat improvement, habitat acquisition, transplants, targeted education efforts and other projects providing a substantial benefit to species of wildlife for which convention permits are issued.
(ii) retained revenue shall not be committed to or expended on any eligible project without first obtaining the division director's written concurrence.
(iii) retained revenue shall not be used on any project that does not provide a substantial and direct benefit to convention permit species located in Utah.
(iv) cash donations to the Wildlife Habitat Account created under Section 23-19-43, Division Species Enhancement Funds, or the Conservation Permit Fund shall be considered an eligible project and do not require the division director's approval, provided the donation is made with instructions that it be used for species of wildlife for which convention permits are issued.
(v) retained revenue shall not be used on any project that is inconsistent with division policy, including feeding programs, depredation management, or predator control.
(vi) retained revenue under this subsection must be placed in a federally insured account. All interest revenue earned thereon may be retained and used by the conservation organization for administrative expenses.
(vii) retained revenue shall not be used by the conservation organization as collateral or commingled in the same account with the organization's operation and administration funds, so that the separate identity of the retained revenue is not lost.
(viii) retained revenue must be completely expended on or committed to approved eligible projects by September 1, two years following the year in which the relevant convention permits are awarded to the conservation organization by the Wildlife Board. Failure to commit or expend the retained revenue by the September 1 deadline will disqualify the conservation organization from obtaining any future convention permits until the unspent retained revenue is committed to an approved eligible project.
(ix) all records and receipts for projects under this subsection must be retained by the conservation organization for a period not less than five years, and shall be produced to the division for inspection upon request.
(5)(a) Conservation organizations accepting permits shall be subject to annual audits on project expenditures and convention permit accounts.
(b) The division shall perform annual audits on project expenditures and convention permit accounts.


Contact the DWR, Wildlife Board and RAC members to show your support to have this as an action item in the August board meeting

Wildlife Board Members
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]


RAC members:
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]


Time for accountability and time to put our public resources back to where they came from and back to work for wildlife.
 
Does this include the Expo tags?

***********************************
Member RMEF, Pope & Young Club, UBNM, UWC & the SFW Hate Club
 
Nice job guys. I would absolutely support an initiative like this. Well thought out and stated. I will shoot any email off to these guys tonight in support of this proposal. I suggest all do the same.


It's always an adventure!!!
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-19-12 AT 09:47PM (MST)[p]sent an email to every single person on the list. it took a whole 3 minutes with a little copy and paste
 
Don't forget to include the DWR in your emails. It needs to be and Agenda Item and the only people that can place this on the agenda at the RAC meetings is the DWR. The only way they will do this is if they have enough public support or if it goes along with their own agenda. I'm guessing this will not go along with their agenda. We need to force their hand on this so include the DWR on your email list.


It's always an adventure!!!
 
>Don't forget to include the DWR
>in your emails. It
>needs to be and Agenda
>Item and the only people
>that can place this on
>the agenda at the RAC
>meetings is the DWR.
>The only way they will
>do this is if they
>have enough public support or
>if it goes along with
>their own agenda. I'm
>guessing this will not go
>along with their agenda.
>We need to force their
>hand on this so include
>the DWR on your email
>list.
>
>
>It's always an adventure!!!


Great point Bull, and spot on. Here is the email for the DWR and the Main Office info:

Email: [email protected]

Main office
Salt Lake City office
1594 W North Temple, Suite 2110, Box 146301, Salt Lake City, UT 84114-6301
Phone: 801-538-4700
Fax: 801-538-4745

Salt Lake City office mailing address:
Utah Division of Wildlife Resources
Box 146301
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-6301

www.unitedwildlifecooperative.org
 
>>Don't forget to include the DWR
>>in your emails. It
>>needs to be and Agenda
>>Item and the only people
>>that can place this on
>>the agenda at the RAC
>>meetings is the DWR.
>>The only way they will
>>do this is if they
>>have enough public support or
>>if it goes along with
>>their own agenda. I'm
>>guessing this will not go
>>along with their agenda.
>>We need to force their
>>hand on this so include
>>the DWR on your email
>>list.
>>
>>
>>It's always an adventure!!!
>
>
>Great point Bull, and spot on.
> Here is the email
>for the DWR and the
>Main Office info:
>
>Email: [email protected]
>
>Main office
>Salt Lake City office
>1594 W North Temple, Suite 2110,
>Box 146301, Salt Lake City,
>UT 84114-6301
>Phone: 801-538-4700
>Fax: 801-538-4745
>
>Salt Lake City office mailing address:
>
>Utah Division of Wildlife Resources
>Box 146301
>Salt Lake City, UT 84114-6301
>
>www.unitedwildlifecooperative.org


the link above is missing the d in front of dwr. sent mine off though
 
I e-mailed my support to all the parties listed above. I would encourage everyone to do the same ASAP.

***********************************
Member RMEF, Pope & Young Club, UBNM, UWC & the SFW Hate Club
 
Great job klbzdad. You have made this very easy for all of us and there should be no excuse for anyone to pass this opportunity to fill their email boxes full of support from us, "the common hunting man". We need to get their attention and let them know we are tired of being swept under the rug. UWC is on the right track. Thanks guys.
 
Good job on getting the proposal written. The Board needs changed as I understand it since the majority are SFW loyalists. Until the Board changes it is uphill battle for good to drive out the bad.
 
Well done gentlemen. This is a long time coming. Count me in at the Rac and Wildlife board to support this and tell them the intent of the permits in the 1st place.

Tony Abbott
The next buck to have a fawn will be the
1st.
 
I would like to personally thank the UWC and RMEF for having the guts and integrity to take a stand on this issue. The administrative rule creating the convention permits expressly states that one of the statutory purposes for the convention permits is to ?generate revenue to fund wildlife conservation activities.? Utah Administrative Code R657-55. Given this language, it is absolutely mind boggling that the State of Utah and the DWR have given SFW and MDF 200 premium hunting permits without requiring that one red cent of the revenue generated therefrom be spent on actual conservation projects. As I have met with the leaders of the groups and representatives from the DWR, I am shocked that they don't even see the problem. As a result, we cannot count on the state, the DWR, the Wildlife Board or the conservation groups to step up and address this problem.

The proposed revision to the convention permit rule that the UWC is promoting merely imposes that same basic requirements that already apply to conservation permits to convention permits. In other words, 90% of the revenue generated from the $5 application fees would have to be spent on actual conservation projects and the groups would have to account for those funds. These proposed changes are fair and equitable, and are frankly long overdue. I would hope that SFW and MDF would listen to the masses and do the right thing by supporting this amendment to the existing rule. Please take the time to send an email to the DWR, the RACs, the Wildlife Board, the leadership of SFW and MDF and anyone else you know supporting this rule change. Please encourage your friends to do the same. Together we can make a difference!


Hawkeye

Browning A-Bolt 300 Win Mag
Winchester Apex .50 Cal
Mathews Drenalin LD
 
E-mail sent, I too would like to thank Hawkeye for all his hard work. It was a shame the debate didn't happen
 
Sent mine off today. Good job guys and thanks to the guys writing and doing all this work. Keep it up!!!
 
This is the basic language of the email that I sent last night to the DWR and the members of the Wildlife Board and RACs. If you feel strongly about this issue, please get involved and send a message in your own words that you support accountability and transparency with regard to the Convention Permits. Your message does not need to be long or complicated. Just tell them who you are and that you support the proposed amendment. The email addresses are included in a prior post and can be copied and pasted into your email. Thank you for getting involved.

____________________________________________________________

Good evening. My name is Jason Hawkins and I am a life-long sportsman and resident of the State of Utah. I am sending this email to express my support for the proposal that the United Wildlife Cooperative (UWC) delivered to the Division of Wildlife Resources (DWR) requesting a change in the distribution and accounting of funds raised from Convention Permits. The proposed amendment would require the same accountability and transparency that is already in place with respect to Conservation Permits, and is consistent with the recent public statement issued by the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation (RMEF. The UWC?s proposal would mandate a complete accounting of the funds generated from the Convention Permits as well as limit the amount the participating groups could retain to no more than 10%, which ultimately would mean more money would be available for approved projects that are so important for Utah?s wildlife.

I would like to personally thank the UWC and RMEF for taking a stand on this issue. The administrative rule creating the Convention Permits expressly states that one of the two statutory purposes for the Convention Permits is to ?generate revenue to fund wildlife conservation activities.? Utah Administrative Code R657-55-1(2). Given this language, I am shocked that year after year we turn 200 premium hunting permits over to the participating organizations without requiring that one red cent of the revenue generated therefrom be spent on actual conservation projects. Convention Permits are public assets and monies generated from those permits should be accounted for and carefully spent in an open and transparent manner. The proposal circulated by the UWC will not jeopardize the Hunting and Conservation Expo. Rather, it would improve what is already a wonderful event and ensure that the money generated from the Convention Permits is spent in such a way as to fulfill the very purpose for which those permits were created.

I ask you to please support the UWC?s proposed amendment to the Convention Permit rule and place the issue of the proposed amendment on the agenda for upcoming RAC and Wildlife Board meetings so that the public has an opportunity to express their opinions on the issue.

Thank you for your time and please feel free to contact me if you have any questions regarding my email.

Sincerely,

Jason Hawkins
 
Good luck guys.

How will SFW ever fund itself without raiding the public coffers of their big game tags? Looks like a few "consultants" will have to look for work elsewhere.


"Whatever you are, be a good one."
- Abraham Lincoln
 
I think we need to copy this to all our friends who feel this way and ask them to also participate. I know I have many that will participate but do not frequent MM.
 
Here is a link to the entire proposal so that those who wish to view it in its entirety can do so.

http://uwcnewsletter.wordpress.com/uwc-convention-tag-proposal/

Again, we graciously ask for your support to make this an agenda item for August so that the public can voice its opinion for the record at the RACs and the WB can hear first hand how the public at large feels concerning this sensitive subject.
 
Great job guys and good luck! Not sure if it will matter, being from Arizona, but I sent an email also.

I'm proud of my neighbors to the north!! It appears our fight with SFW down here in Arizona has lit a fire among a large proportion of hunters and outdoorsmen/women to finally speak up and fight!

Good luck!
 
I think this is a great proposal for SFW employees and workers like X-Treme, ABE & Birdman to support too! How could they argue with the principals here. They confirm in their posts only a small % of SFW is bad. Now is their chance to fix that "small %" !

What say you, guys?


***********************************
Member RMEF, Pope & Young Club, UBNM, UWC & the SFW Hate Club
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-20-12 AT 05:46PM (MST)[p]Zim, I don't see where any of us said that SFW was bad in anyway. I know that they are not perfect but bad, don't think so. I guess living out there in Illinois makes you an expert on what is going on in Utah. You have plenty of hear say, too bad you do not get all the truth. I am glad that you say only a small portion of SFW is bad. What you are saying is that a large portion of SFW is good. Thanks for the help and backing. Good luck with your hunting this fall.
 
OK Birdman, if you want to change your story to "not perfect", that is fine. But here's your chance to fix that part. Are you going to send e-mails & sign the petition now?

Also please don't put words in my mouth. So you are caiming I am saying only a small % of SFW is bad? Where is that??? Put down the pipe, son.

***********************************
Member RMEF, Pope & Young Club, UBNM, UWC & the SFW Hate Club
 
zim

did you get your paunsy tag or did don and the boys screw you out of it ? i'm dying to know so don't leave me hanging!
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-21-12 AT 07:46AM (MST)[p]>zim
>
>did you get your paunsy tag
>or did don and the
>boys screw you out of
>it ? i'm dying to
>know so don't leave me
>hanging!

I've posted in multiple threads about it. Yes, most definitely DP's dozen plus line cutting auction tag hunters will be there, while this unwanted DIYer was screwed out of the tag I've been paying for for 16 years. It seems a lot of folks are getting disgusted with the Utah model, trading down and getting out.

However, relief came in the form of an OIL tag from across the country! Look up my name if you like. Not too many Z's! :)

http://www.outdoornews.com/June-2012/Lucky-Day-for-2012-New-Hampshire-moose-hunt-permit-winners/

I beat 1% draw odds and hit the jackpot in the fair & ethical New Hampshire moose lottery! Trophy bull unit C2! So I would have had to turn back in the Pauns tag anyway. Could not do both and odds were way, way tougher in NH.

No surprise the good people of New Hampshire made things right. During my 18 years of applying, the only 2 states I've observed that didn't devalue the points they sold were AZ & NH. Kuddos to them. NH also only has a whopping total of 3 auction tags! (OMG, what old world thinking!)

The Utah screw job did serve to motivate me to further battle the SFW market poaching ring, so I am getting active in the UWC proposal to remedy the privitization of a public resource there.

For dessert I drew a zone 5 Iowa archery deer tag! Found some slammer spots during a 4 day scouting trip in February. Never seen so many 6"-10" rubs in my life.

Thanks for asking! :)

***********************************
Member RMEF, Pope & Young Club, UBNM, UWC & the SFW Hate Club
 
To those emailing, I recommend omitting your location if you are a nonresident, but including any credentials you may have such as:
Member RMEF, Pope & Young Club, UBNM, UWC
One RAC member wrote me back mentioning it was good to see a P and Y member writing him. It got his attention and he agreed with the proposal.
 
AS A SIDE NOTE:

As this proposal gains momentum, it occurred to me that many might want to know more about UWC, maybe contact the leadership, and even receive the newsletter. I would suggest that you do this now as membership in this organization doesn't cost anything and UWC will NEVER, despite its growing rolls, participate in either the Convention or Conservation tag programs! Rather we will seek other methods of support from our sponsors or members. This group is beyond transparent with great leadership and its FREE to join. I highly recommend it and that is why I started this post and support the UWC and this initiative.

http://www.unitedwildlifecooperative.org/_MEMBERSHIP.html


Shawn Spring
United Wildlife Cooperative
Southern Region Co-Chair
 
>LAST EDITED ON Jun-21-12
>AT 07:46?AM (MST)
>
>>zim
>>
>>did you get your paunsy tag
>>or did don and the
>>boys screw you out of
>>it ? i'm dying to
>>know so don't leave me
>>hanging!
>
>I've posted in multiple threads about
>it. Yes, most definitely
>DP's dozen plus line cutting
>auction tag hunters will be
>there, while this unwanted DIYer
>was screwed out of the
>tag I've been paying for
>for 16 years. It
>seems a lot of folks
>are getting disgusted with the
>Utah model, trading down and
>getting out.
>
>However, relief came in the form
>of an OIL tag from
>across the country! Look
>up my name if you
>like. Not too many
>Z's! :)
>
>http://www.outdoornews.com/June-2012/Lucky-Day-for-2012-New-Hampshire-moose-hunt-permit-winners/
>
>I beat 1% draw odds and
>hit the jackpot in the
>fair & ethical New Hampshire
>moose lottery! Trophy bull
>unit C2! So I
>would have had to turn
>back in the Pauns tag
>anyway. Could not do
>both and odds were way,
>way tougher in NH.
>
>No surprise the good people of
>New Hampshire made things right.
> During my 18 years
>of applying, the only 2
>states I've observed that didn't
>devalue the points they sold
>were AZ & NH.
>Kuddos to them. NH
>also only has a whopping
>total of 3 auction tags!
>(OMG, what old world thinking!)
>
>
>The Utah screw job did serve
>to motivate me to further
>battle the SFW market poaching
>ring, so I am getting
>active in the UWC proposal
>to remedy the privitization of
>a public resource there.
>
>For dessert I drew a zone
>5 Iowa archery deer tag!
> Found some slammer spots
>during a 4 day scouting
>trip in February. Never
>seen so many 6"-10" rubs
>in my life.
>
>Thanks for asking! :)
>
>***********************************
>Member RMEF, Pope & Young Club,
>UBNM, UWC & the SFW
>Hate Club

zim

i still wish you would have drew your paunsy tag
sorry i missed your multiple posts!!
you have got to be the whinyest be-otch on MM
maybe the founder bought a high dollar tag and
you will be the winner for being the biggest D-bag you have my vote !
 
coondog,

I don't have time to banter with you. This week I am too busy working hard actually doing something to stop the gross tag abuse in Utah. Instead of sitting on my couch doing nothing, or running to the SLC Expo putting dollars in DP's hand for chances at stolen tags, then claiming I don't support SFW.

I would appreciate it if you and your toadies would at least make the minimal effort to sign the UWC online petition and e-mail the RAC & wildlife commissioners. That would only take 10 minutes. I'll do the rest.

Only after I'm done with my UTAH work will begin planning for my 2 fall hunts.

***********************************
Member RMEF, Pope & Young Club, UBNM, UWC & the SFW Hate Club
 
dryboot, you too. Take a min from your whinning to sign the petition & e-mail. Then you may resume if you must.

***********************************
Member RMEF, Pope & Young Club, UBNM, UWC & the SFW Hate Club
 
>dryboot, you too. Take a
>min from your whinning to
>sign the petition & e-mail.
> Then you may resume
>if you must.
>
>***********************************
>Member RMEF, Pope & Young Club,
>UBNM, UWC & the SFW
>Hate Club


zim

keep it up and you'll win a tag for sure! you have dryboot beat by alot! deer tags for d-bags is sure to catch on!
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-27-12 AT 04:26PM (MST)[p]>AS A SIDE NOTE:
>
>As this proposal gains momentum, it
>occurred to me that many
>might want to know more
>about UWC, maybe contact the
>leadership, and even receive the
>newsletter. I would suggest
>that you do this now
>as membership in this organization
>doesn't cost anything and UWC
>will NEVER, despite its growing
>rolls, participate in either the
>Convention or Conservation tag programs!
> Rather we will seek
>other methods of support from
>our sponsors or members.
>This group is beyond transparent
>with great leadership and its
>FREE to join. I
>highly recommend it and that
>is why I started this
>post and support the UWC
>and this initiative.
>
>http://www.unitedwildlifecooperative.org/_MEMBERSHIP.html
>
>
>Shawn Spring
>United Wildlife Cooperative
>Southern Region Co-Chair

Thanks Shawn!

Most of the time I prefer to coach from the sidelines and let Shawn do the front stage things because he's much better at that sort of thing, but I guess it's time to get out of my comfort zone and more openly support this proposal. In spite of what I said on another forum, I'll be sending emails and/or phoning all the UWC members in the Southern Region as well as some of my hunting friends. This proposal is the right thing to do and has the potential of bringing together a wide variety of people and groups that have the desire to do what's best for Utah's game animals and those that hunt them. And, after all, we are a cooperative!

Lee Tracy
United Wildlife Cooperative
Southern Region Chair (or Advisor, we're not sure yet because we haven't formally organized. Besides, it's just a dumb title and may be subject to a 1 or 2 year position.)
 

Similar threads

Simpleton
Mule Deer Proposal
2 3
Replies
218
Views
5k
Vanilla
Vanilla
Bluehair
A special wolf job opportunity
Replies
16
Views
959
Bluehair
Bluehair

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

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

ADED22BE-883B-47A1-A355-CA31A3DE4C66.jpeg
A8178A5E-A97B-441C-8F82-48887C1FA3FD.jpeg
IMG_0517.jpeg
IMG_7742 copy copy.jpg
Cheater Buck I Wanted
Forkie1.png
B3659141-B47B-4276-B2D7-BA0AF0E371E6.png
IMG_3678.jpeg
Big Velvet!
IMG_1043.jpg
IMG_5111 copy.jpg
FF20C102-612A-49EA-B61A-EDE27AEB8A76.jpeg
Back
Top Bottom