Wildlife Board nominee comment period now live

Utahlefty

Active Member
Messages
272
As you know, Byron and Donnie are leaving the WB (termed out) this year and the nominating committee recently met to review replacement applications.

The committee is allowed / required to submit the names of 3 candidates per position and the governor has sole discretion to pick (in this case) 2 names of the 6 submitted.

The governor chose Gary Nielsen and Bryce Thurgood from that list of 6.

There are a few new wrinkles in the process this year in an attempt to increase transparency and public input:

1) All WB & RAC members have to post on the DWR website a statement of potential conflicts of interest by August and

2) There is a 30 day public comment period on the above named 2 candidates prior to Senate confirmation in mid June. Here is that link:

https://governor.utah.gov/2021/05/14/gov-cox-appoints-boards-and-commissions-members-2/



A little background:

There were roughly 235 applications submitted online.
Of those 115 were deemed complete and were open for consideration.
Of those only about 35-40 consisted of more information than a name and an email address and these were logically where the majority of the discussion took place.

There are a few kinks in the regulation that affect getting the list down to the final 6:

1) These areas have to by law be represented on the WB:
  • Wildlife management or biology;
  • Habitat management, including range or aquatic;
  • Business, including knowledge of private land issues; (and)
  • Economics, including knowledge of recreational wildlife uses.
and as the latter three are arguably well represented on the current board, wildlife management/ biology experience was a major criteria this cycle

2) There can only be two WB members from each region and this does have a way of sometimes eliminating otherwise qualified candidates (It does no good to list 5 of 6 candidates from the Central region as only one can be selected and the other selection has to be by default #6 , i.e., NOT one of the other 4 from the Central region)

There are a number of candidates that make a short list in repeated cycles but get tripped up by the vagaries of which regions have seats open.

And, in the end, the governor does have a fair bit of discretion amongst the 6 submitted.

The new public comment period should be interesting!
 
Is there any place to learn a bit more about the 2 selections? I would like to understand their background, affiliations, etc. before making any comments.
A very valid point and I Have inquired. I'm not authorized to release their CVs directly. It would certainly make sense to make their applications available if there's to be a comment period.

Both are 8 year RAC members, both former chairs.

Both submitted recommendation letters from 10+ sportsmans and/or conservation groups.

Gary has taught wildlife biology at the HS and College level for 35 years.

I served 4 years on the northern RAC with Bryce and (not that it means much here) he's solid. Both have been on the short list before as I understand.
 
A very valid point and I Have inquired. I'm not authorized to release their CVs directly. It would certainly make sense to make their applications available if there's to be a comment period.

Both are 8 year RAC members, both former chairs.

Both submitted recommendation letters from 10+ sportsmans and/or conservation groups.

Gary has taught wildlife biology at the HS and College level for 35 years.

I served 4 years on the northern RAC with Bryce and (not that it means much here) he's solid. Both have been on the short list before as I understand.
Thanks Utahlefty! I really appreciate the state opening this for public comment, but it is tough to comment intelligently without any background or info on the candidates.

My main question is this - what specific ties, if any, do these 2 have to SFW or other special interest groups?
 
Thanks Utahlefty! I really appreciate the state opening this for public comment, but it is tough to comment intelligently without any background or info on the candidates.

My main question is this - what specific ties, if any, do these 2 have to SFW or other special interest groups?
Word came back that the governor' office does not intend to release further information on the candidates, which is unfortunate.

And I'm not sure how far I can go without crossing some line.

It's my recollection that neither are currently active within an organized group but both have prior affiliation with the usual ones -- RMEF, MDF, SFW, etc -- but are 5-10 years out from those roles.
 
Thanks for checking Utahlefty! Seems very strange and a bit disingenuous to allow for public comment without sharing some info on the candidates, but pretty typical I guess.

My biggest concern is that these folks are not pawns to special interest groups, especially SFW. Sounds like from your perspective and experience with both, they are not, which is encouraging. I also really like that one of the selections has a strong biology background. Social issues and pressures have to be considered with wildlife management, but it is important to have someone on the board that can provide a fact based biological perspective that is not driven by special interests. I hope Gary can provide that.
 
Word came back that the governor' office does not intend to release further information on the candidates, which is unfortunate.

And I'm not sure how far I can go without crossing some line.

It's my recollection that neither are currently active within an organized group but both have prior affiliation with the usual ones -- RMEF, MDF, SFW, etc -- but are 5-10 years out from those roles.
Since it seems as a prerequisite to either own a CWMU or Guide Service to be on the Wildlife Board which ones are these two nominees affiliated with?
 
Since it seems as a prerequisite to either own a CWMU or Guide Service to be on the Wildlife Board which ones are these two nominees affiliated with?
they are no at all, which, as I said, was a focus of nominating discussion.

to my knowledge, they have not even been in a leadership position in the aforementioned conservation groups for many years now.
 
to my knowledge, they have not even been in a leadership position in the aforementioned conservation groups for many years now.
But they were at one time. That’s the scary part. We need to get away from people who have held high positions in these special interest groups. That’s where our problems start. They might not be in now, but it’s hard to teach an old dog new tricks.
 
I went to Jr high and high school with Bryce. He's a local kid. He WAS a member of $fw. My understanding from an old member JMO is that Bryce and THE DON didn't see eye to eye. I haven't seen him in years, so current gossip I don't have.
 
But they were at one time. That’s the scary part. We need to get away from people who have held high positions in these special interest groups. That’s where our problems start. They might not be in now, but it’s hard to teach an old dog new tricks.
I've had personal conversations all the way up to Brian Steed as head of the DNR about how to both diversify the WB/RACs and encourage wildlife biology experienced candidates to apply.

A couple challenges keep rearing up:

1) the regional limits on members can nix otherwise qualified candidates

2) truly independent folks with biology experience aren't exactly coming out of the woodwork - doing this isn't fun, you're going to be hated and called names by one side or the other on every single issue you vote on

3) nearly all applicants that submit full resumes are attached to one group or another in some capacity (it's actually a requirement to be nominated by an organized group for the RACs)

4) in the end, the nominating committee doesn't get the final say - the governor does and he gets to make his own choice with the current system


I've been on a RAC for awhile now and this was my first go on the nominating committee. Overall I was pleased with the rigor of the discussion and satisfied with the final six given the overall pool. I'm comfortable they were selected on the merits and not politically, at least for our part.
 
I appreciate both your efforts and the people who submitted applications. I'm sure it is difficult for people to step up for these positions.

But how anyone can expect a public comment period to be anything but a joke without a good idea of the qualifications, past positions (if previously members of a RAC) and any and all past and present affiliations with any of the "groups" is a slap in the face.

And really? They don't have to divulge conflicts of interest until 2 months after they are confirmed by the senate? Such a convoluted process our political process is sometimes.
 
I've had personal conversations all the way up to Brian Steed as head of the DNR about how to both diversify the WB/RACs and encourage wildlife biology experienced candidates to apply.

A couple challenges keep rearing up:

1) the regional limits on members can nix otherwise qualified candidates

2) truly independent folks with biology experience aren't exactly coming out of the woodwork - doing this isn't fun, you're going to be hated and called names by one side or the other on every single issue you vote on

3) nearly all applicants that submit full resumes are attached to one group or another in some capacity (it's actually a requirement to be nominated by an organized group for the RACs)

4) in the end, the nominating committee doesn't get the final say - the governor does and he gets to make his own choice with the current system


I've been on a RAC for awhile now and this was my first go on the nominating committee. Overall I was pleased with the rigor of the discussion and satisfied with the final six given the overall pool. I'm comfortable they were selected on the merits and not politically, at least for our part.
That’s all fine and dandy, but the issues the public are having with these members is they are all tied to these special interest groups and are essentially puppets for them, even years down the road from when they left their position with that organization. $FW is a plague. It’s plagued public and private hunting. It’s ruined far more opportunities for the public hunter than it’s given back. In the 20+ years they’ve been around, they’ve showed time and time again that they aren’t in it for the wildlife. Or the public. They are in it for the private and the money. Go watch the last WB meeting on the governor’s deer tag issue. That speaks volumes and is a prime example of what’s going on. Yeah in the end the right call was made. But there were 2 guys who both felt like money was more important than the wildlife and the public. One of them is the head of the WB.
 
Guys, I don't know how much more transparent I can possibly be.

I came on here a month ago (maybe?). My real name and my real contact info is plastered all over the DWR website.

I've posted here everything I'm legally allowed to do as soon as I was legally allowed to do so.

I didn't get into this for the glory (lol).

I applied to be a RAC member and a wildlife nominating committee member because I thought I had an opportunity to make the whole process better than it is now (and yes, the WB has some issues, full stop).

I didn't see any of your names on the app list for either the WB (maybe one) or the RAC positions. The RAC in-person interviews will be in a week or two, will I see you there?

I'm really disappointed the .gov is not releasing the apps of the two chosen candidates, I think that is chicken ****.

However, you need to make a choice:

do you want to work to make it better ? -or-

do you want to ***** on the internets about whether or not other people's efforts are making a difference?

I'll leave if that's what you want, and be fine with it if t.

But I'll continue to do my best to make this process better, with or without your help.

Show up to the meetings. Period. Show up. Post your comments on the candidates. Comment in official channels everywhere you can.

Show up. Posting here doesn't count. Show up and speak.

This won't change without effort and it's not going to be because 2-3 people spoke up.

It'll take more than that.
 
Utahlefty, Don't take it personal. I don't think anyone has attacked you. You have been upfront and transparent as far as you are allowed to be.

And I'll admit I'm nowhere in the know when it comes to the "movers and shakers" involved in the process. However I don't seem to find your contact info on the DWR website. Perhaps it's because it is not under your user name. So be it. I'm not asking to have coffee with you or any other person on the RAC's or WB. But pertinent information is absolutely required to make meaningful comments when when discussing appoints to a board that make all the ultimate decisions regarding wildlife.

It has been apparent in the last couple of WB meetings that members are more than a little irritated with having to deal with direct comments to proposed items from the general public..
 
Thanks Utahlefty! I, for one, appreciate your info. Some people on this forum just can't understand that some processes take time to legally and practically work through. I don't personally know either candidate, but I did find some info on Bryce. (There are too many Gary Nielsons in Utah to sort them out, but I'll keep trying.)

Apparently he's a real estate developer out of Brigham City. 46 years old. He was on the Northern RAC And he's a trophy hunter. https:www.monstermuleys.com/photos/PhotosID13/142.html
Whether that's good for the wildlife or non-trophy hunters or not, we'll have to see.
 
Last edited:
I haven't given up on getting more information made available to the public -- I really do think it's chicken **** to just post a name with no context. It defeats the whole purpose of the comment period.

There are several other avenues I will pursue next week. Stay tuned.

Bryce Thurgood is from the northern region and most of the current RAC members have worked with him. All of our contact information is here: https://wildlife.utah.gov/rac-members.html

(I'm Matt)

Gary Nielsen is from the central region. He's about 5-6 years past his RAC tour but I'd still reach out to the Central RAC. He teaches wildlife biology at both the HS & College level and is very involved with RMEF. Anyone from the Utah RMEF structure would know him.
 
I've had personal conversations all the way up to Brian Steed as head of the DNR about how to both diversify the WB/RACs and encourage wildlife biology experienced candidates to apply.

A couple challenges keep rearing up:

1) the regional limits on members can nix otherwise qualified candidates

2) truly independent folks with biology experience aren't exactly coming out of the woodwork - doing this isn't fun, you're going to be hated and called names by one side or the other on every single issue you vote on

3) nearly all applicants that submit full resumes are attached to one group or another in some capacity (it's actually a requirement to be nominated by an organized group for the RACs)

4) in the end, the nominating committee doesn't get the final say - the governor does and he gets to make his own choice with the current system


I've been on a RAC for awhile now and this was my first go on the nominating committee. Overall I was pleased with the rigor of the discussion and satisfied with the final six given the overall pool. I'm comfortable they were selected on the merits and not politically, at least for our part.


The "biology" component should be scrapped. Randy Newberg is an accountant. Ryan Callahan sold clothes. Steve Rinella writes books. All 3 are far more qualified on wildlife issues than Bateman.

Hawkeye is a lawyer, and he'd be 100x better than Bateman.

If you want representation, you can't draw only from a small pool of applicants by screening them to be sure they are from a small pool
 
If Hawkeye Gets in There I'll Take My Scope off of My SmokePole!





The "biology" component should be scrapped. Randy Newberg is an accountant. Ryan Callahan sold clothes. Steve Rinella writes books. All 3 are far more qualified on wildlife issues than Bateman.

Hawkeye is a lawyer, and he'd be 100x better than Bateman.

If you want representation, you can't draw only from a small pool of applicants by screening them to be sure they are from a small pool
 
How is getting a big buck a trophy hunter? Are you going to not shoot a 203 incher?
Sure, I would gladly shoot a 203 incher if it came in close enough where I was hunting for a decent bow shot! But, what I wouldn't do is what he did to get his, ie; spend the time, money, and energy to apply for and buy an expensive out-of-state tag, take a long trip, find a place to stay, arrange to legally and safely bring a carcass, antlers and cape across state lines. Maybe I misjudged him on that aspect, but what he did sounds like trophy hunting to me.

In any case, I'm just not that anxious to replace the two terming Wildlife Board members with two new ones who have the same mindset.

BTW, while I'm not much into trophy hunting, I'm certainly not an anti-trophy hunter. I just enjoy the time I spend trying to outsmart those cagey critters in the field and I find that hunting General Units gives me more time to do that. I'd like to see those units continue being managed for opportunity and the LE units continue being managed for trophies.

Now, FWIW, for more information on the cadidates, I'm going to listen to some of the DWR recorded archived RAC meetings the two candidates participated in. (2007-2015 Central for Neilson and 2011-2017 Northern for Thurgood).
 
Last edited:
Sure, I would gladly shoot a 203 incher if it came in close enough where I was hunting for a decent bow shot! But, what I wouldn't do is what he did to get his, ie; spend the time, money, and energy to apply for and buy an expensive out-of-state tag, take a long trip, find a place to stay, arrange to legally and safely bring a carcass, antlers and cape across state lines. Maybe I misjudged him on that aspect, but what he did sounds like trophy hunting to me.
You have a very miss guided mindset on what trophy hunting is..... i find it amazing you think that because a guy spent a little more money and traveled out of state to do exactly what you just said you love doing, that is somehow a bad thing that should disqualify him for a spot on the WB.

I really find it amazing seeing it on a site called "monster" muleys.com.

I know nothing about the guy, but nothing you have posted would even remotely disqualify him from the position.

But maybe my opinion doesn't matter me being one of those despicable out of state "trophy" hunters. ? because god forbid someone let a milk in its lips 2 point walk away. That is the vibe I'm getting from your posts.
 
Sure, I would gladly shoot a 203 incher if it came in close enough where I was hunting for a decent bow shot! But, what I wouldn't do is what he did to get his, ie; spend the time, money, and energy to apply for and buy an expensive out-of-state tag, take a long trip, find a place to stay, arrange to legally and safely bring a carcass, antlers and cape across state lines. Maybe I misjudged him on that aspect, but what he did sounds like trophy hunting to me.

In any case, I'm just not that anxious to replace the two terming Wildlife Board members with two new ones who have the same mindset.

BTW, while I'm not much into trophy hunting, I'm certainly not an anti-trophy hunter. I just enjoy the time I spend trying to outsmart those cagey critters in the field and I find that hunting General Units gives me more time to do that. I'd like to see those units continue being managed for opportunity and the LE units continue being managed for trophies.

Now, FWIW, for more information on the cadidates, I'm going to listen to some of the DWR recorded archived RAC meetings the two candidates participated in. (2007-2015 Central for Neilson and 2011-2017 Northern for Thurgood).
I paid fora gator hunt, and all that jazz. I wouldn't call myself a trophy hunter, granted I killed a trophy gator. I also plan on doing the same again. Still not a trophy hunter by any means. But if a 203 walks out in front of me its dead.

With that being said. Utah's draw is being screwy lately had 10 points for bear and didn't draw my tag which was guaranteed based on last year's draw for that hunt. So if I could find an affordable bear hunt you can bet your bacon id go and if a true monster arrived id drop him.
 
I'd prefer a blue collar dude/chick with a few kids, that exists on general units and OTC elk tags. The kind that don't have "friends" with CWMU. Or that make $$ in the "industry". Our issues in wildlife aren't how can we get more CWMUs, banquet tags, or how many client booking we have. Our issues are affecting the average 9-5 types. Who don't have politician friends to push them along.
 
EFA might wanna look in the mirror about how you perceive fellow hunters.

I appreciate your measured input, and for the first time this is a clear instance of personal bias getting in the way of objectivity.

Bryce hunting out of state and killing a mature buck in no way means he’s a ‘trophy hunter’ whatever that actually means anyways.

My family habitually hunts out of state for several reasons.

1. Opportunity. Several states offer more frequent chances to get out and hunt.

2. Timing, Utah’s GS hunts don’t really work for us timing wise, they happen when we are busy, November/December is when we can get out together and have fun.

3. Quality, we’ve found better hunting out of state. Utah is not bad by any stretch, but in some instances we’ve been able to hunt regularly in areas that offer us a higher chance at a mature animal, which is important to most of my family group at this point in our hunting progression.

4. Experience, hunting new areas, in different places is fun, challenging and rewarding. Highly recommend, we live in a small part of the world and there’s a bunch of it out there to see if a person has the means and desire to do so.

If that’s what trophy hunting is well, label me. However, I’ll disagree with you on it pretty clearly. Excited for new views on the WB it’s long past time
 
Bearpaw Outfitters

Experience world class hunting for mule deer, elk, cougar, bear, turkey, moose, sheep and more.

Wild West Outfitters

Hunt the big bulls, bucks, bear and cats in southern Utah. Your hunt of a lifetime awaits.

J & J Outfitters

Offering quality fair-chase hunts for trophy mule deer, elk, shiras moose and mountain lions.

Shane Scott Outfitting

Quality trophy hunting in Utah. Offering FREE Utah drawing consultation. Great local guides.

Utah Big Game Outfitters

Specializing in bighorn sheep, mule deer, elk, mountain goat, lions, bears & antelope.

Apex Outfitters

We offer experienced guides who hunt Elk, Mule Deer, Antelope, Sheep, Bison, Goats, Cougar, and Bear.

Urge 2 Hunt

We offer high quality hunts on large private ranches around the state, with landowner vouchers.

Allout Guiding & Outfitting

Offering high quality mule deer, elk, bear, cougar and bison hunts in the Book Cliffs and Henry Mtns.

Lickity Split Outfitters

General season and LE fully guided hunts for mule deer, elk, moose, antelope, lion, turkey, bear and coyotes.

Back
Top Bottom