Big Game Forever & Sportsman For Wildlife

[dotman]

I would like to see SFW reduce the number of auction tags or give 90% of the proceeds like the other groups have back to the state. SFW & BGF are a joke pure and simple, only care is money otherwise show us where the profits have gone?

 

[bearguide]

what group gives 90% back to the state

 

[dotman]

Most states i believe that have not been told sweet little lies from Peay have it in their regs i believe. RMEF i would say is one, how much have they given back to purchasing habitat etc, maybe not always directly to the state but morw than their far share. I also believe SFW has put more funds to gaining office seats then back into habitat. They tried hard to get in bed in AZ.

We can all see where Pheasents forever, RMEF, RMBS etc put their money into conservation, but nothing big from SFW or BGF. I bet the NRA has put more into the wolf debate and legal fund then SFW & BGF but that is just an asumption.

 

[ScottR_EHJ]

Utah has two types of permits Convention Permits(used at the Expo), and the Conservation Permits(auction tags).

The biggest problem is that SFW gets 100% of the revenue from the convention permits. They sold 167,000 raffle tickets in 2011, for $835,000!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Break it down for me show me where that went?

I have more, will put that up later.

 

[bearguide]

if they do not use auction tags to generate that type of revenue, how do you suggest we generate revenue for wildlife, what is a better way

 

[ScottR_EHJ]

In response to the 90% question:

March 28, 2012 To all Arizona RMEF Members The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation (RMEF) became aware of House Bill 2072, an act related to Big Game Tags and Permits introduced to the Arizona Legislature, earlier this month. The RMEF, representing over 5,500 members in Arizona and over 185,000 in the US, went on record opposing the bill in a letter to Arizona Governor Janice K. Brewer.

RMEF is now appealing to you, our members in Arizona, to make your voice heard on this poorly crafted legislation. HB 2072 would allocate a significant number of Arizona’s most prestigious and already limited permits to a “conservation” organization, most likely, Arizona Sportsmen for Wildlife, the primary advocates of this legislation. This action would undermine one of the most basic tenants of the North American Wildlife Conservation Model…that hunting is an opportunity for all. The allocation of 330 special permits for auction and raffle in a state with already limited public opportunity would be nothing short of a travesty and it will take away tags from those who participate in the public draw system.

The absurdity of HB 2072 does not stop there. This bill allows the “conservation” group selling these permits to exclusively retain an unreasonable percentage of the gross proceeds from the sale of these permits to cover administrative and operating expenses. The RMEF is proud to report that an average of only 8% of all Governor’s and Commissioner’s permits RMEF offers nationwide is retained for administrative purposes. 92% of the gross proceeds have been returned to the states and conservation projects to be invested only in benefiting wildlife and their habitat.

In Arizona specifically, RMEF currently returns 100% of the sale proceeds from the one special elk permit we sell. RMEF actually loses approximately $3,500 annually through direct expenses associated with handling the AZ elk permit. While RMEF believes it is appropriate for organizations to recover direct expenses associated with selling special permits, we firmly believe that private, non-profit entities should not take public assets to support their operational expenses. We operate RMEF the old fashion way, we work for what we get. We are not guaranteed any tags or licenses to create operational revenue.

As a member of RMEF and resident of Arizona it is time to contact your legislator and make your position known on HB 2072, or any similar legislative attempts to take public wildlife from the public. Please act today as this legislation would significantly impact your opportunity to hunt your prized big game species in your home state.

Sincerely,
M. David Allen
President and CEO
Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation

This e-mail advertisement was sent to [email protected]. You received this e-mail as a valued supporter of the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation. If you prefer not to receive e-mail offers like this one from the RMEF in the future, you may Click Here now. The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation is located at 5705 Grant Creek Rd, Missoula, MT 59808.

I had to pull this from a PDF as it was too big to directly place it in the thread.

 

[dotman]

if they do not use auction tags to generate that type of revenue, how do you suggest we generate revenue for wildlife, what is a better way

It seems like RMEF has i guess, i don't think auction tags have been the finacial backbone they have used or are even needed period, maybe fold up these smaller groups that only rely on auction tags and a few memebers and put the money into groups that have done great things overall, maybe take those auction tags and have the state raffle these tags themselves if they are not going to be in a lottery. Then the state can retain all funds and allocate them to more resources, these groups like SFW & BGF are purely in the game for profit and that is not what conservation is about in my eyes. I do like that ID atleast put the 10% cap on what a group can keep from an auction tag.

 

[ScottR_EHJ]

It appears Mr. Peay has accepted the debate.

 

[dotman]

Well i will be very interested to hear this. In the end I just like to know where my money is going.

 

[WV Hunter]

It appears Mr. Peay has accepted the debate.

Can't wait!

 

[keep]

I do like that ID atleast put the 10% cap on what a group can keep from an auction tag.

Since ID puts a 10% cap on what can be kept, I be very interested to know if SFW & BGF still trys to secure tags for auctions from them or does the cap drive groups that "tag grab" to other more profit friendly states?

 

[WyoBob]

sreekers:
I read this on another site and thought I would share it with you as it is obvious you do not understand how the process works in Utah. Troy does a lot of the fundraising for SFW in Utah.

Utah Conservation Permit Program

1- The program was ran through the RAC process to gather Public Opinion

2- All Conservation Groups were able to participate

3- 90% of the funds were returned to the DWR for Projects

The list goes on. As it was written SFW Utah would not have supported AZ's bill either.
If states want to model a program simular to Utah's Conservation Permit Program and go through the proper channels to get it passed more power to them.

SFW Utah does not dictate to those states what they need to do. It is up to them and they can decide for themselves!

I will try and clear up a few other inaccurate and false statements

1- Conservation Permits
90% of moneys raised through this program go on the ground. Each group is audited on a regular basis and 100% of the money can be accounted for.
This program just went through a legislative Audit as well.

The way the splits work is a 60%-30%-10%.

1- (60%) Each group is allowed to keep 60% of the money and spend it on approved projects provided by the DWR. If the group does not spend all of the money in a given time frame the money has to be returned to the DWR. Remember the group has to spend the money on approved projects from the DWR. They cannot go spend it on anything they want and they have to account to the DWR for all of the proceeds.

2- (30%) This portion is returned to the DWR to fund projects from the same list other than the DWR picks the projects

3- (10%) The groups are allowed to keep this money as a form of marketing fee. It can be spent for anything the group chooses.

To date 800,000 acres have been treated in Utah. This is more than all of the other states combined! Has it brought our deer back? No! Is it an important step in getting our deer back? Yes

The problem with habitat is it takes along time. In some cases 10 to 15 years.

At our local banquets the program usually contains a list of projects funded by SFW through the conservation permit program. To my knowledge no one has ever requested a spread sheet showing which projects SFW has funded.

If asked I would be surprised if most groups involved could not provide a list of projects showing where the money was spent.

Convention Tags

Unlike the Conservation Permits the permits are given away through a drawing. The $5 dollar application fee is kept by the groups that participate in the Expo.

License fee's are keep by the DWR. This is no different than the application fee that is charged by Fallon Nevada. Once again this was ran through the public rac process and it has passed twice.

The application fee's can be spent at the discretion of the group that recieves them. No different than Fallon Nevada!
Hawkeye is incorrect in his statement that this provides SFW with a Multi Million Dollar Slush Fund Yearly!

The fact of the matter is it generates under $500,000 (each) a year for both groups still involved!

Even though it is not mandated by rule tens of thousands of these dollars are spent on improving Utah's wildlife ie Coyote Bounty, Winter Feed, Water Projects, Fencing etc.

Some things that are in the works as we speak is Signage to help the deer slaughter between Monticello and Blanding. Over 1150 documented kills in two years on a 20 mile stretch, SFW is working on a long term solution but until then several signs are being erected in an effort to get motorist to slow down.

Also a proposed Mule deer translocation in Southern Utah versus just shooting them. SFW has offered to foot the bill to move them.
An Upland Game project that hopefully will be announced soon.

I can safely say that more of the application fee's charged at the expo are going on the ground in Utah than the ones collected in Fallon Nevada!!!!

It does not bother me when people post question and even disagree on issue's. We are all pasionate about what we do its a freedom we enjoy because of where we live America!
What does bother me is when personal shots are taken based on hearsy and false truth's.
You will not find 3 more stand up guys who run SFW than Byron Bateman, Ryan Foutz and Bryce Pilling. To imply,accuse or insinuate that these guys are dishonest or cheats does not sit well with me!

All of these guys are well respected through out the state from Government officails, Business Owners and Avergage Joe's

These guys are the ones that run SFW. Don Peay is a Consultant, He cannot sign a check and does not have the authority to make any decisions without the permission of the board.
He is good at what he does and we appreciate what he has helped us accomplish!

SFW really has no staff to speak of compared to other non-profits. The only time really any of us get on here is when it is brought to our attention by our members. We are imperfect and make mistakes and durring banquet season time is short. So dont expect a daily presence.

The conception that SFW is for the rich could not be any further from the truth. One only needs to attend one of our banquets to see the type of people that make up SFW!
It's average guys that are committed to making a difference. Not only in Utah's Wildlife but in peoples lives as well!

X-treme
Troy Justensen

 

[WyoBob]

sreekers:
That may be true for Arizona but it is not true in Wyoming. While attending a WY G&F Commission meeting, I saw a power point presentation where the RMEF clearly stated they raised over $1 in my state. Later on, the stated how much money was spent in Wyoming; it amounted to 20-30%. It was so glaring that even a WY Commissioner asked for clarification. When the RMEF guy was asked where the rest of the money went he replied: "well, it goes back to Missoula where they have a lot of staff and an office to maintain. It takes a lot of coordination to run RMEF". The Commissioner that asked the question was Michael Healy if you want to fact check. MDF just lost two significant chapters in Wyoming. One Chapter located in Rock Springs had raised over $500,000 in a three year period. They left because they only got $100,000 back to the state.

dotman:
How much value do you place on lobbying? It is not all about the "habitat". Sometimes it takes years to get results but without a presence. What would have been lost as the political process ground through any particular topic had no one been attending all of the various meetings held throughout the state(s) and of in Washington, D.C.? SFW & BGF have expended significant amounts of time, money and effort just on wolves alone. It has taken much longer than it should have but we are starting to see the results. What is next for SFW & BGF? Should it be getting grizzly bears off of the list? How much longer should Wyoming be forced to managed a recovered species which remains still under federal protection? Do you think the ESA will magically fix itself? I do not!

What about getting mule deer populations recovered and addressing the impacts predators are having on them? The Billings Gazette just ran a story on a new cougar study which has demonstrated that mountain lions are killing significantly more deer, elk and moose than anyone thought. Who is going to have the political will to fight the extreme environmentalists when they attempt to highjack the North American Model of Wildlife Management by applying Public Trust Doctrine to force state agencies to allocate more of our available surplus populations to predators? No other group has taken on these threats because they are not set up to fight them. It is not simply about "habitat, no matter what you are hearing. Wildlife management is much more complicated than that!

 

[dotman]

sreekers:
That may be true for Arizona but it is not true in Wyoming. While attending a WY G&F Commission meeting, I saw a power point presentation where the RMEF clearly stated they raised over $1 in my state. Later on, the stated how much money was spent in Wyoming; it amounted to 20-30%. It was so glaring that even a WY Commissioner asked for clarification. When the RMEF guy was asked where the rest of the money went he replied: "well, it goes back to Missoula where they have a lot of staff and an office to maintain. It takes a lot of coordination to run RMEF". The Commissioner that asked the question was Michael Healy if you want to fact check. MDF just lost two significant chapters in Wyoming. One Chapter located in Rock Springs had raised over $500,000 in a three year period. They left because they only got $100,000 back to the state.

dotman:
How much value do you place on lobbying? It is not all about the "habitat". Sometimes it takes years to get results but without a presence. What would have been lost as the political process ground through any particular topic had no one been attending all of the various meetings held throughout the state(s) and of in Washington, D.C.? SFW & BGF have expended significant amounts of time, money and effort just on wolves alone. It has taken much longer than it should have but we are starting to see the results. What is next for SFW & BGF? Should it be getting grizzly bears off of the list? How much longer should Wyoming be forced to managed a recovered species which remains still under federal protection? Do you think the ESA will magically fix itself? I do not!

What about getting mule deer populations recovered and addressing the impacts predators are having on them? The Billings Gazette just ran a story on a new cougar study which has demonstrated that mountain lions are killing significantly more deer, elk and moose than anyone thought. Who is going to have the political will to fight the extreme environmentalists when they attempt to highjack the North American Model of Wildlife Management by applying Public Trust Doctrine to force state agencies to allocate more of our available surplus populations to predators? No other group has taken on these threats because they are not set up to fight them. It is not simply about "habitat, no matter what you are hearing. Wildlife management is much more complicated than that!

PETA does pure lobbying also and what good does it do for the wildlife or conservation, SFW in my eyes is a way for rich guys to play around and slowly turn the North American conservation model into what we currently see in Europe. Maybe the idea behind SFW when it started was good but what good has it done? What single thing has it done for Utah? All i see is rich guys now have a better chance at a great tag because they have money plain and simple.

I feel that ALL auction tags should be removed and that if there are raffle tags 90% of the funds returned. Auction tags that SFW uses as it's bread and butter for survival only make hunting look like a joke. Rich guys should have to put in just like everyone else and wait. If they want to help conservation give a donation.

 

[dotman]

I would really like to know just how you helped with the wolves since you opposed the two senators whos plan that passed is why we can hunt them now. You backed their rivals plans and then jimped ship when you knew it had no tracktion.

 

[wapitibob]

Fortunately, a lot of us have researched SFW/BGF and know better than to send them money.

The cash windfall generated by SFW wasn't lost on Peay and Benson, but how to get more??
What better business model than to use the big bad Wolf to generate another income stream. These guys are pretty smart and BGF was born.

Benson asking his minions to help defeat the Wolf Rider, which by the way, it's passage is why MT and ID are now hunting Wolves:

"Yesterday’s development in wolf delisting:

Some of you may of heard that wolf delisting language was included in the House C.R. to keep the government funded. Unfortunately, the language in the C.R. is not the good development it appears to be. See Rehberg press release below.

Unfortunately the language that is included is the administration’s language that is being pushed by Tester and Baucus. The language leaves most of the country squarely in the cross hairs of unmanaged wolves’. It leaves the door open to relisting in Idaho and Montana. Does nothing to stop the wave of spreading destruction anywhere else. Doesn’t delist most wolf states. Does nothing to restore state management. Doesn’t end the endless cycle of wasteful litigation. Keeps the spigot of EAJA funding for enviro litigants alive diverting millions of dollars from our children’s and grandchildren’s future into lawyers and environmental endowment funds. For all these reasons, the C.R. Approach could never be “The American Big Game and Livestock Protection Act” as H.R. 509 and S. 249 are so appropriately named.

Dan Ashe convinced Simpson from Idaho to break ranks with the 48 Senators and Congressmen that are working on the right solution. 2 Senators recognize the need for a fix, but are pushing a watered down non-solution that has no support. Why are we such a nation of ambulance chasers sometimes? Why are some officials afraid of obvious solutions to stop the hemorrhaging once and for all? This is a $100 Million a year problem that is only getting worse, bigger, deeper and more widespread.

Last year a very similar approach was used by the anti-wolf management folks. They make it appear to be a compromise, but ultimately they divide the ranks and then kill the watered down solution as well. The folks who are pushing this want no wolf management, not even under the watered down scenario.

We all need to call Simpson today and tell him he is falling for politics of divide and conquer. Tell him you do not support the CR that the ONLY solution is H.R. 509.

DC office 202-225-5531
Boise office 208-334-1953
Email: simpson.house.gov

Ryan Benson, {Doctor of Jurist Prudence. , Harvard University}
"

 

[wapitibob]

Another cut n paste, this from ScoutDog who is heavily involved up here in Oregon.

" Getting back to Don's post, these seem to me to be the relevant points that should be discussed.

1. Since 2002, Utah has spent 80 million dollars on habitat improvement projects.

2. Since 2002, Utah has spent 45,000,000 dollars on road improvements designed to reduce deer by mortality by autos.

Those are huge number numbers in todays world. As a comparison, 80,000,000 equals four years funding for Oregon's Wildlife Division, salaries, benefits, exenses, trend counts, research, overhead, management, everything.

So, the only question that really matters, from what I can see as a non-resident who has not yet hunted in Utah, what did you get for the money?

Here are the mule deer population stats since 2002:

2002.........280,350 deer
2003.........267,780 deer
2004.........287,905 deer
2005.........297,425 deer
2006.........318,451 deer
2007.........302,430 deer
2008.........273,700 deer
2009.........301,700 deer
2010.........293,700 deer
2011.........286,100 deer

Utah's management objective used to be 425,000, but I see it has been lowered to 411,000.

So, after 9 years and 125 million dollars, population is about the same as when this all started, and is on a downward trend.

Don also stated that he expected they would spend another 10 million, I assume on habitat improvement projects in 2012. Given the numbers above, WHY? Isn't this a prime example of continuing to do the same thing, and expecting a different result?"

 

[wapitibob]

Then, regarding AZSFW and AZSFWC being different organizations, well, yes they have a different name, and different tax id's but they share the same building, office and furniture as well as the same board members. They are essentially one and the same. The tag grab legislation was copied from UT, no surprise there. It certainly would have been supported by UTSFW a few years ago. They're smart enough now to keep a little distance.
The supporting Legislator has publicly pulled all support yet Gillstrap and her cronies have gone directly to the Governor to backdoor the legislation. It shows just how powerful the allure of your money can be.

 

[wapitibob]

"The conception that SFW is for the rich could not be any further from the truth. One only needs to attend one of our banquets to see the type of people that make up SFW!"

The "average Joe" is the guy applying every year for the last 10, hoping he'll finally get a LE tag. The average Conservation Elk tag in 2010 was well North of $5000. $5000 for the tag that was pulled from the draw, that "average Joe" had been applying for, now gone to the highest bidder. And SFW was trying to do the same with 350 tags in AZ.

 

[wapitibob]

Most don't mind Auction tags coupled with raffle tags. The difference is, several states allocate 10% of the proceeds back to the hosting Organization, the remaining 90% goes to the Dept. When people like Don Peay believe they can do a better job, then purposely leave out the accountability and make it a business, things go sideways.

another cut n paste:

"FYI.

There were 2 people who traveled the state several times to get the expo tags allocated to the expo and at those meetings it was promised that a significant amount of the money raised from the expo tags would go on the ground in Utah for wildlife;

I was one of those 2 people, care to guess who the other was?

1 of the 2 people who were the driving forces behind the expo tags did not want any specific percentage amount of the money raised from the expo tags earmarked for specific projects, that way the money could be spent on anything the groups wanted, That person was not me. Any guess who it was?

The answers are there if you guys just want to look for them.


Tony Abbott "