Big Game Forever & Sportsman For Wildlife

[dotman]

I'll leave it at this, I can't back an org that is purely in conservation to line their pockets and I'm not convinced SFW really is in it for conservation, hope you prove us wrong.

http://www.hcn.org/blogs/range/sportsmen-stab-theodore-roosevelt-in-the-back

http://m.billingsgazette.com/mobile...040da9-af35-54c3-8cc6-44cedc466bfd.html#index

http://www.utahoutdoors.com/utah-convention-tags-proposal.html

 

[wapitibob]

Bob you never answered my question on where/how SFW put their support in for the wolf management bills?

Read post #36

HR509 didn't have a chance in hell of passing and has never made it out of committee.

 

[ScottR_EHJ]

Read post #36

HR509 didn't have a chance in hell of passing and has never made it out of committee.

wapitibob,
Yeah, I knew that but was being a little sarcastic. You and I both know that SFW pulled their support from any bill that wasn't their own.

I was looking for an answer from Wyobob on that one, essentially to hear the justification for why support was not posted for the bill that eventually passed.

 

[WyoBob]

Sorry guys, I had to get some work done.

For those that asked about what role SFW & BGF played in the wolf war II, I will tell you what I believe happened.

These two groups began working on obtaining Congressional action that would remove protection of wolves throughout the entire U.S. This effort was started long before any other offer or suggestion was on the table.

This is only my opinion, but I was involved with this effort from the beginning, representing Wyoming.

I believe, when the effort first began, most of the established "sportsmen groups" in Washington, D.C. thought SFW & BGF were aiming for something that was beyond our reach. I know that some individuals actually said that the Endangered Species Act (ESA) was a sacred cow in D.C. and that it could not be touched. Since neither SFW or BGF were established in D.C., I believe the established D.C. insiders thought we should take their advise and go home. When we did not pander to their request, some set back and watched us. When we started to build momentum, they started to get nervous. As things started to look more promising, they decided to jump into the fray but rather than support these two outside organizations which failed to do as instructed, the insiders came up with a quick solution that singled out 2 states for removal of ESA protections for wolves. SFW & BGF tried to get the inside organizations to throw their support behind our efforts and the refused. An internal document was leaked by one of the Washington, D.C. insiders and accusations started to fly about BGF as they were heading up the D.C. campaign. As soon as an easy fix was offered, some of the Congressional Cowards saw the cover they were eagerly provided and support for our effort to remove unnecessary protections from a species that never warranted protection quickly began to slip backwards. I even personally called and spoke with US Rep. Mike Simpson (R-ID) about his actions and the impact it was having on our attempt to delist wolves. He told me that Wyoming needed to be punished because of our failure to comply with federal demands. I explained that Wyoming had only fought to obtain a plan that should have been accepted from the onset and that it was our states right to manage anyway that we saw fit, so long as our management did not cause the recovery effort to fail. It was sickening to me, to see that one state felt compelled to assist the federal government in punishing another state to comply to an illegal order. When our efforts began to weaken and the 2 state rider looked like it would pass, I started to wonder about the impact it would cause Wyoming. For those that might not remember, Wyoming had just obtained a significant victory which validated our dual status management plan as being acceptable and that the USF&WS had acted with out cause when they rejected Wyoming's Wolf Management Plan. I will not deny that I worked tirelessly to ensure that our gains where not lost simply because of Washington, D.C. insiders felt threatened by an new and unknown organization. It was not until we were able to insert an amendment which ensured that Wyoming's gains would not be lost that I supported the 2 state solution.

Some will now get on here and say that our efforts had no chance of passage. All I can say is that something caused D.C. insiders to all of a sudden insert themselves into a debate that they had not been involved. It is easy to predict that it would have failed as it was undermined.

As those which will now excoriate me, just remember that I stated this was my opinion of what occurred. I did attend a meeting in Washington, D.C. where we in fact met with several key Congressional supports of our efforts. They also indicated that things were progressing well. Some of the D.C. insiders were also in attendance but they were not there to help our efforts as I later learned.

 

[ScottR_EHJ]

Which groups do you consider to be the established groups? Or insiders? Does insider mean they carry weight, or don't have your "predator" agenda?

Why did SFW choose to go after Simpson-Tester rather than support it? To me if all this talk about being supportive is real, then why wasn't SFW on board with the bill that actually would pass? SFW hasn't been able to shake or positive spin their way out that one, and I don't believe that they ever will.

http://m.billingsgazette.com/mobile...bfd.html#e8040da9-af35-54c3-8cc6-44cedc466bfd

The above link is in relation to AZ HB2072. Can you explain why these other organizations would want to distance themselves so far? Especially in relation to the last paragraph. That is some pretty tough language and if I were in a local chapter I would be asking a LOT of questions.

I haven't heard a solid explanation from anyone on the SFW side. Most of the SFW defenders usually start pulling the line we are just being picked on. Or as you have stated the "we are willing fight battles others won't." That doesn't add up with me, legitimacy can stand for itself and pulling the "we are being picked on" card doesn't do much for me.

My next question is this, how can all of these other organizations be the bad guys? Are they all bad, or are they distancing themselves for good reason? I think there is some very good reasons that they are. In fact I would be willing to put money on the RMEF walking away from Auction Tags all together if they continue to be such a hot button issue. Thats ok though, I am sure SFW will be there to do their best to gobble it up and spin how much good they will do with it.

In relation to what you said about Simpson, did he say in exactly those words we must be punished? Or did he say that because we weren't willing to budge on our trophy status they wouldn't be included? My take is that because it wasn't Don's bill, or one that would give SFW something to put out in their PR to the faithful they didn't want it. Stinks to not be the Org to get a legitimate bill passed on the issue that they have championed, and used to build a following.

 

[WyoBob]

sreekers:
The Washington, D.C. insiders are the groups which are established in Washington, D.C. which have held themselves out as representatives of sportsmen; Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation, NRA, SCI, and B&C. Please explain what you assume to be my "predator" agenda?

I am not trying to shake or spin anything, simply expressing my opinion. The reason I could not support the Tester-Simpson action was already explained but may be I was not specific enough for you to understand. The Tester-Simpson action protected 2 states, one of which was not mine. Furthermore, their action could have potentially cost Wyoming the significant gains we had obtained via Judge Johnson's ruling. I could not support something that could have potentially lost Wyoming our dual classification Wolf Management Plan (WMP). It was not until Rep. Cynthis Lummis (R-WY) was able to place an amendment which protected Wyoming on the rider that I supported the Tester-Simpson action.

Why would anyone want a 2 state delisting as opposed to the entire lower 48 states is beyond me? Care to explain why you supported the Tester-Simpson action when it was clear their intent was to punish another western state specifically, as well as throw all other states to the wolves?

You then asked about an Arizona bill which I know little to nothing about. If the citizens of Arizona support it, then it is probably a good bill. If they oppose it, it is probably a bad bill. I will not pretend to understand the issue(s) in AZ that led for some to propose this action nor will I condemn it as I am ignorant to their needs/desires.

I can tell you that WY found another way to get significant money set aside for Conservation efforts when we established the Wyoming Wildlife and Natural Resource Trust. I am very proud of our accomplishment and believe it is the crown jewel of WY SFW's efforts in my state.

Simpson said and I quote: "Wyoming needs to be punished" because of its failure to comply with federal demands.

No, what stinks is to have sportsmen vilifying a group which has done a lot of good. Sportsmen are being played and divided by our own rank and file. Why do you suppose this is happening? I can only guess that it is because the established (National) groups see a state based organization as a legitimate threat to their established kingdoms. In fact, it is my belief that these (National) groups have been slowly swinging towards to middle. I am guessing that you do not see predators as a threat to the North American Model of Wildlife Management. Am I correct?

 

[ScottR_EHJ]

Which is a bigger threat to the North American Model, the erosion of the principle that wild game belongs to all American citizens or foggy numbers at best on the impact that predators are having on OUR game?

Note I said our game, not game that can be sold to the highest bidder. When is there every going to be enough money? When can you say that you ever have enough money? When all projects are done? Oh wait, we will have a new threat that we must urgently act upon to keep the money flowing in.

Predators are one part of an ecological system that is always in play. Effecting one portion simply will not do the job, its a clear understanding of all of the pieces involved, and working for the betterment of wildlife through those means. Look back over the course of time at the numbers of big game animals in any state and you will see that there have and always will be multiple factors.

I remember being in HS and being a mad Wy. resident about all these stupid wolves. I got that first mailout on SFW and boy was I impressed, but I never joined. I had my other areas of support and kept that, but over time I have been watching SFW develop and doing my homework on what it actually stands for. Its all about money in the name of Sportsmen. I will never support an expo in this state, and I will never support an organization that capitalizes on people's fears about what predators are doing to OUR herds.

Lets have an honest discussion where we look at the large impact of Natural Gas drilling on Deer winter ranges instead of quoting some "Death Spiral" article in Eastman's. Lets have an honest discussion about new subdivisions that are popping up on the corners of ranch-lands have made it harder for Deer and Elk to winter there. Not to mention subdivisions on winter range corridors.

Can you have an honest discussion with me about the impact that long periods of drought have had in Western Wyoming, and the effects that have played out on our deer herds because of that? How about the impact of steady increases in tag numbers in limited quota units such as 102 during times of drought?

I will give you that Wolves have a negative impact on herds of elk that in feed-grounds. Kind of a no brainer there, if we put several hundred elk in one place they are bound to attract the attention predators. They are also much more likely to cater to diseases etc. I've seen wolf kills and I know they don't only take the weak and the sick, but in this setting the sick might be the easiest targets.

I am in support of predator management as a single portion to be evaluated in light of the whole set of factors that are steadily impacting our game herds. I believe Wolves and other predators should receive constant and major consideration when WyGFD sets quotas and evaluates how many elk need to be taken by hunters every year.

To push them as the major single factor effecting game numbers is absurd. To use people's fears and lack of understanding on these issues to make money is even worse.

 

[WyoBob]

sreekers:
Who has pushed "predators" as the "major single factor effecting game numbers"?

 

[ScottR_EHJ]

SFW has used Predators as their selling point, you will be tough pressed to find anyone who has had contact with organization and not been sold that.

Predators have been used as recruitment for SFW for years, and quite frankly it takes advantages of peoples fears or for that matter lack of understanding. Ask a hunter in the west if they are against wolves and you have their attention. Ask for x number of small dollars for a year and they will be willing to do it.

 

[WyoBob]

sreekers:
You are either ignorant of SFW or have allowed others to define who we are. SFW has helped ensure that Wyoming's WMP was a containment plan that did not obligate the state to pay for depredation of livestock throughout our state. SFW is more about ensuring that sportsmen have a voice in political matters, regarding hunting, fishing & trapping. I am beginning to wonder if you have even read any of my posts.

Some, and it appears as though you are one, people think SFW is anti-predator. This is not true true, we are pro-sportsmen. Rather than maximize our predators, we would prefer that sportsmen remain the primary management tool used by state wildlife agencies. The NAM model depends on sportsmen for funding and was not developed based upon some National balance that exists only in the minds of people which do not understand the dynamics of wildlife management.

You assume you know SFW and you know nothing about us. Where has SFW ever used fear of predators to take advantage of peoples fears? This whole anti-SFW/BGF thing is about predators, just as I thought it was! Do you want to see wildlife managed by natural systems in place of sportsmen? I know I do not want to see that happen. Those that are attempting to assert that the NAM Model of wildlife management gives them equal rights under the public trust doctrine to protect "predators" at the expense of hunting will be fought by SFW/BGF all the way. The NAM model should not give preference to those which seek to undermine the NAM by supplanting and/or replacing sportsmen with predators.

We have seen that sport hunting of wolves is not sufficient to reduce wolf numbers. We all know that poison will not be used again so that leaves trapping as the only other viable tool we will have to manage wolves. How hard do you think it will be to allow trapping?

Who do you think will put pressure on the USFWS to remove continued protections of grizzly bear populations, even though they have surpassed recovery goals and are expanding their range & distribution?

Say what ever you want, I believe someone needs to push for responsible management of predators and I believe that it will continue to be SFW/BGF that fight the hard fights when no one else will do it.

Just to show that I am not all about predators, I will ask you if you think mule deer are in trouble, throughout their entire range or just within Wyoming? What are your plans to see mule deer recover? How do you plan on getting our mule deer herds back throughout their entire range or just within Wyoming? I am hoping to convince WY SFW that our next focus needs to be 110% on fixing whatever is broken with mule deer populations throughout their entire range as well as within Wyoming.

 

[dotman]

Ok, then why did you covince county commissioners in MT that they could setup their own hunting season outside of what the state has set? How did you do that, I mean they were breaking state laws following SFW. Now they must be idiots to think they can overrule state regs but that is another topic.

I would say BGF has done a good job playing on fears for $$$$.

 

[WyoBob]

dotman:
I don't have anything to do with the MT SFW group so you will need to ask someone from there. Not sure if you are talking about predators in general or something specifically; however, in Wyoming predators have no season or license required. I don't know that your County Commissioner's can operate outside the law so something doesn't add it. May be you can provide more explanation?

BGF is more about enabling sportsmen to engage in a sometimes very complex process. May be it is just me, but I don't see either of these groups playing to anyone Else's fears here. Do you have some specific examples of where these groups have played on someones fears?

 

[ScottR_EHJ]

So wait Bob, you don't have connections to anyone outside of Wyoming but you are friends with Peay? You don't have connections to people outside but have been in communication with Alaska SFW to assure me that Rossi isn't guilty? Which is it?

 

[dotman]

The thing is, in the end it can boil down to perception. What we may feel is playing with fears you may feel is just educating a group therefore the disconnect. My main beef with SFW is that it has really been the one org pushing auction tags, yes I know all use them but not all push them. To me auction tags are just not the way to go when thinking conservation and hunters rights. I know we will not all agree on this but that is why my $$$ is spent else where, I just do not agree with the means to the end used in the name of conservation. Auction tags are for the greedy, instead of just donating to a cause they believe in they want a return on their investment or they will not show their support.

Auction tags are just a way to buy a quality animal that otherwise could take a lifetime to draw. Therefore monetizing our game animals which is not the NA conservation model.

 

[WyoBob]

sreekers:
Don't put words in my mouth. I never once said I have connections to anyone, nor have I said that I have been to Alaska or that Rossi isn't guilty. You really need to spend a little bit more time reading my posts. I do know Don Peay. Sometimes we disagree, just as I would assume you and I will sometimes disagree. Do you know everyone involved with RMEF, DU, or any other group? I did know Bill Merrill but I have not had the chance to get to know other MT SFW people.

dotman:
So you are mad about auction tags. That makes SFW/BGF bad organizations? Did they break any laws? If you think the process is unfair, attack that! I see a lot of groups benefiting from auction tags but only see SFW/BGF getting bashed for using them. Doesn't that see a bit selective to you? The interesting thing is that BGF doesn't really compete for any of these tags yet they get lumped in with SFW. Seems odd, especially when you see the Mule Deer Foundation as a partner with SFW but they don't seem to get any flack about their participation. Once again, it seems selective to me. So, I have to ask, why is SFW/BGF being singled out? The North American Wild Sheep Foundation was a partner in the Expo as well and they use auction tags for a lot of their fundraising efforts. I don't see them being criticized, nor is that what I am seeking to see more of. Auction tags are a tool, just like grazing is a tool to manage plant communities. I think if a state wants to offer auction tags, within reason, they should be allowed to auction them. If the numbers are too high for those individuals living within that state than they should do something to change the process that allows auction tags to exist. Using your argument, if it takes a lifetime to obtain any tag than does the fact that several states charge money for preference points which are designed to increase one persons odds over that of another person also violate the NAM? Is it the amount of licenses or simply the fact that someone can purchase them? What about the Sportsman tags in Utah? Do you even know about them? Some guys actually get to hunt with a Governors license but they obtain it through a drawing ran by the state; however, a fee is also paid for the opportunity to obtain that license. Does that violate the NAM?

Neither of you provided a specific instance where either SFW or BGF has played upon the fears of someone. It appears as though I am the only one answering any questions. I hope you guys really want to know about SFW/BGF but I get the feeling you have already condemned these groups, just as you have condemned Cory Rossi, before he has even been to court.

 

[dotman]

I guess it is because they put themselves in the spot light when it vomes to lobbying for auction tags, I also think other orgs have seen how the majoritu do not agree with this plateform and have pulled further away from supporting further tags being pulled from the general pool and auctioned. Currently the support and political manuvering in AZ and previously UT is why so many single out SFW, BGF is just the little brother that because of who he is related to no one will trust.

You have to see this, even though you do not pay attention or know much on the AZ issue if you want to you can see why so many of us are fed up and speaking out against SFW. You may be a seperate legal entity from AZSFW but that more then like has to do with tax law then conservation.

So I used an example before, RMEF is an org that can accomplish conservation goals without the need for auction tags, why can't SFW or other similar orgs that rely on these to prop them up? You said earlier I must have an agenda, well I do, but don't you also? My agenda I guess is to point out two things: 1) SFW has to rely on auction tags because it's member donations would not keep it afloat and 2) you keep saying your group was a main player in the delisting of the solvrs but yet you did not support or put your lobbying $$$ towards the actual nill that passed, thetefore your support and money spent lobbying were for a bill that never had a chance to pass.

In the end those two things have put b oi th SFW &BGF in the spot light, now you say stoppicking on us MDF is also a big auction supporter, to this I say thank you because they are now also on my list of not giving my support.

 

[dotman]

Sorry for the typos, fat fingers and smartphones do not play well.

 

[dotman]

Never said you did anything illegal, but just because you convice the ignorant and get the laws in your favor doesn't make it right. Also look at our economy, all kinds of crap done legally that that screwed the common guy and now all taxpayers are left with the tab. So just becaise it is legal doesn't make it right.

In the end SFW is a nonprofit that pays big consulting fees to certain people, in return SFW provides its members a way to bypass the lottery for lots of $$$$. Do you not see how Americans are coming down on all thw special perks created and legalized for the rich?

I predict 10 years from now the auction tags will not be around or the middle class hunter will not be around. It will be one or the other and it is sad that many of the avg people are blind to what is happening. Hunting should not be made into a rich mans sport and everything SFW has lobbied for is one more step in that direction. Of course you will say this is BS because well you can't admit it or you might as well fold up your org now.

 

[WyoBob]

dotman:
SFW started around 1993. I don't know when auction tags first came into existence but I know it was prior to 1993. Once again, you never answered my questions about other processes in which licenses are allocated based upon a fee. You keep stating that RMEF doesn't use auction tags and that is flat out not true. I know in Wyoming they get Governor's licenses as well as Commissioner Licenses. If you just want to talk about Utah, than I also know the RMEF receives tags from Utah as well. Do you think that all wildlife problems can be fixed with conservation of habitat alone? Some of the problems wildlife face today have little to do with habitat. In fact, Utah has found they have an abundance of forage available; more than wildlife can currently utilize. It isn't just about habitat, in my opinion. What other groups are ensuring that as policy decision are formulated & made that sportsmen have a voice in how that policy is created & implemented? You act like sportsmen have no business lobbying to protect our hunting, fishing & trapping heritage. Who is looking out for sportsmen in your opinion?

I guess I have an agenda too; 1) Not all SFW state organizations rely solely on auction tags, 2) Inform people that SFW/BGF had a solution that would have delisted ALL 48 of the lower states from unwarranted protection of wolves. It is easy now to say that it had no chance to pass but what did you do to help it pass? Sounds like to me that you knuckled under and went with a 2 state solution rather than going for a real victory against the anti-hunting movement. I was involved in the process and we were gaining ground, so much in fact, that we made others nervous that we might even succeed. Rather than allowing a victory for all, Tester/Simpson made it a victory for some at the expense of all. Had a weaker solution not been put forward SFW/BGF would have accomplished the impossible. Speaking of accomplishing the impossible, Wyoming will be able to manage wolves based on our plan; a containment plan that will be the envy of Idaho & Montana because SFW fought to ensure that states determine how wildlife are managed within their respective borders. The question you should really be asking is who came up with the 2 state solution and what is their plan to help the remaining states once delisting is foisted upon them?

I believe that auction tags are here to stay. They may fluctuate from time to time, and as you point out, some reductions are likely to occur; however, a lot of good comes from these auction tags as well.

 

[dotman]

Haha, where did I say RMEF doesn't have auction tags, I said they are an org that doesn't survive onthe proceeds of auction tags.

Here is what I see on SFW, a few people saw an oportunity to make money, they created a nonprofit, setup some large consulting fees for themselves, lobbied for more auctiontags, promotedtheir org to the rich.

With this setup the consultants make a ton of money, rich get tags that really the cost doesn't really matter on to them but now they do not have to wait to draw a tag.

If I'm so wrong then disclose how much SFW spends on it's consultants and lobbying vs conservation. All SFW has done is found a legal way to make money for certain people thru a so called conservation org. Pretty much you found a way to sell a product to a certain market, most are priced out of this market.

You say you want answers from me, well I'm not the one posting up who apparently is a significant memeber of SFW that has ignored many questions with vague answers.