Bowsite.com

RMEF: 406 523-4500

Mark

They said the same thing about the ranch in NM that was bought and it was totally false.

I have heard a version of this story a few times over the last 30 years. No idea if it has ever happened or if its just speculation/gossip, but I know there was zero question about the rules with the property in my case.

I ended up taking myself out of the running (may not have gotten it anyway) due to family and my wife's career situation.

BUT I’m sure they get to hunt some pretty exclusive places based on networking and contacts in the industry

this would be a good bowsite interview specifically asking the questions, "Have RMEF insiders used properties for their own use to hunt? " Of course phrase it 5 different ways so they can't spin it.

Anyone with actual details of such, please post here or send me a private message, as being a member of the Board Executive and Governance Committees, I would want to know those details.

Happy Hunting to all.

Can you definitively put these rumors to rest?

Can you say that no insider in the RMEF org. has ever hunted the ranches RMEF purchased, leased or wrote a conservation easement on?

Well there you go, we have some hearsay of "fairly" credible stories.

And since you said you know it for sure, please name at least 2 ranches that were bought and then closed to hunting. Inquiring minds want to know.

I too would like to thank you for your dedication to serve the RMEF.

I've been a life member for a long time and ran my local chapter for a few years.

It's a great organization , with great people , working for a great cause.

I hope your seasons are going well! :)

Colorado recently did a hunter survey. The top 3 things hunters identified they cared about were habitat, access, and species management. RMEF is doing habitat work on the ground and conserving land in conservation easements lasting in perpetuity, and providing public access leading to long term sustainable populations of not only elk, but every other species on the landscape.

They also testify before our wildlife commission for the everyday DIY hunter.

Shame on you guys for caring more about rumors, and who gets to hunt where - rather than habitat, access, and conservation both of huntable species, and your hunting brothers. Sounds like my 11 year old who came home school today whining about so and so said. Worry about yourself.

God Bless men

All you guys whining about money not spent wisely need to volunteer for your state bowhunting organization, and start looking at the budgets of your game and fish for waste.

If you hunt Colorado, you must buy a habitat stamp, right now ~20% of that money is buying toilet paper for restrooms instead of conserving habitat or improving public access. Where is the outrage for a mandatory fee? The RMEF fee is optional.

I'll say it again, bunch of 11 year olds - worry about your own self, not where the CEO of RMEF hunts. He can come hunt my place anytime he wants for free

What the heck is there to discuss ? You need facts to hold someone accountable. Not just something you heard but don't know to be a fact. Why don't you tell us what you KNOW about the Borman ranch Jeff? All you did is get the other he said/ she said haters riled up without presenting anything actionable.

i have nothing but respect for Randy and the RMEF. I have supported RMEF for many years. This isnt a private company but a registered charity. I believe the donors are entitled to unequivocable answers not “ To my knowledge” semantics. We hear enough of that from our politicians.

I along with many others would like a simple answer once and for all.

So let me get this straight, RMEF needs to personally answer your question related to an unsubstantiated rumor on a Bowsite thread or you are going to keep spreading rumors? c'mon man!

If any of this stuff turns out to be true I'll be the first to apologize, and to beat the drum to run any execs involved out of the organization,but currently all I see happening is a Bowsite bashing with none of the bashers offering anything that would convince me that anything wrong is going on.

Can you say that no insider in the RMEF org. has ever hunted the ranches RMEF purchased, leased or wrote a conservation easement on?"

Just off a plane after three weeks on the road, so I'll give this my best shot before going to bed. Glad to answer any other questions tomorrow.

Since I've not been on the Board all 33 years of RMEF, only for five years, I cannot vouch for my time before being on the Board. I can tell you that one of the earliest resolutions adopted by RMEF is a prohibition against Board members accepting any special privileges as a result of their Board service.

I know I take that very seriously, as to my fellow Board members. I would be very surprised if any RMEF Board members have ever done as is being suggested. If I knew of it during my service on the Board, the matter would be dealt with very quickly, which is why I have asked here if people would provide the details. So far, no details, just a lot of "barstool" rumor. As probably the most visible and accessible Board member, I get this call/email regularly, more than any of my fellow Board members. Every time I ask for details. In five years of these discussions not a single person has provided a detail to support what they called or emailed about. Lots of accusations, but when asked for details, the line goes dead.

Not sure who you consider an "insider," but I'll make the assumption you are talking about Board members or CEO. A bit of background to that.

RMEF does not own any hunting property. They haven't since they received the Double HH Ranch in New Mexico as a restricted bequest from Mr. Torstenson. That property was sold in 2011 and all proceeds were put in an endowment where RMEF can only use 5% of the principal per year, restricted to only use on mission work and no overhead allocation is allowed. All other property RMEF buys are lands where an agreement is in place to turn it over to a State or Federal agency immediately upon RMEF taking title. Not sure where people get the idea that RMEF buys property for hunting by "insiders." It doesn't happen. It is against the by-laws and it would cause a serious hit to credibility.

RMEF does not write conservation easements. RMEF accepts conservation easements from private landowners. Some think conservation easements somehow convey title to the land. It does not. A CE transfers a property right, usually the development rights to a qualified charity, of which RMEF is a qualified charity. RMEF holds those rights in perpetuity and cannot exercise them. As such, the landowner can no longer develop their property, as they no longer hold the development rights, RMEF holds that right.

A property owner who donates a conservation easement can do as they please with the underlying land. RMEF has no right to access or otherwise tell the landowner what to do with the remaining property rights attached to the land. Some think conservation easements allow RMEF, or the public, to have hunting access. Not the case.

RMEF does operate the TV show, Team Elk. The topic that started this thread is about a property in Montana where Team Elk bought six archery elk hunts that were filmed for the Team Elk TV show. What the landowner wants to do with the remaining hunts, the rifle hunts, the deer hunts, the (insert hunt here), is up to him.

The Board requires Team Elk to break even, and hopefully turn a profit. Every cost of Team Elk is covered by sponsorship revenue, not a single dollar of member donations goes to Team Elk operations. Team Elk is in high demand from corporate sponsors, so it makes a profit; a profit that is used to help fund operations that go toward mission accomplishment. In addition to adding more dollars to mission revenue, Team Elk provides a level of exposure and awareness to the organization and its mission that would a fortune to go and pay for. I understand some still do not like certain aspects of the show. Point is, the folks running the RMEF Team Elk show have exceeded all expectations the Board has of them.

On Team Elk there are two main hosts paid for their work as would be any other media talent, Brandon Bates and Kristi Titus. Not sure if you consider them insiders. I don't and neither do our by-laws. They are paid talent to host a show. They do most the hunting on the episodes, or host the other hunters.

The CEO is asked to appear on episodes. His job description as provided by the Board is to be the face and voice of the organization. As such, we expect him to be on some of the Team Elk episodes. It is part of his job. Him doing what we ask him to do as the face and voice of the organization is not what I consider "insider" activity, nor do our bylaws.

I take my role as a Board member very seriously, as do all my fellow Board members. If something was going on that was in violation of bylaws, policies, or governance, I would want to know about it. To the dedicated volunteers, generous donors, corporate sponsors, and all level of RMEF members, we on the Board have a fiduciary duty to see that the organization does the greatest good with the assets and resources available.

In case some are wondering, being on the RMEF Board is a volunteer position. You pay all your expenses out of pocket; travel motels, meals, etc. You must make at least a $10,000 donation by the end of your first three-year term. You must attend many events in your area, national meetings, serve on three Board Committees, and you are prohibited from accepting any of the things rumored in this thread.

Not a single Board member I know, either current or past Board member, does this volunteer work for anything other than the passion for elk, other wildlife, hunting, and conservation. The same as all of you who volunteer for your organizations, rod and gun clubs, hunter ed instructors, scout group leaders, school events, etc.

RMEF has a pretty good track record to benefit elk, other wildlife, their habitat, and our hunting heritage. RMEF, and project partners, have conserved almost 8 million acres of elk habitat, opened/improved public access to almost 1 million acres that all people can now use, is in the best financial position it has ever been in and is getting better each year, has set new membership records for the last six years, now has over 220,000 members, with over 11,000 volunteers.

Not sure if that is a complete enough answer. And if anyone has details, rather than "stories" (term used above), please let me know. If there is any substance to the claim and evidence was provided to me, the matter would be taken care of quickly.

Good luck this season.

I listened to the 2 hr meateater podcast featuring David Allen and came away more impressed with RMEF than ever. David Allen mentions at 40 min he turns down great hunt offers so there is no chance of impropriety. He does a good job of detailing the RMEF mission at about the 1:20 mark... especially their emphasis on hunter access.

I came away from that podcast and your post above Randy feeling better about RMEF than ever. 89% of money donated goes to mission- an incredible %. The bulk of property is either habitat easements or public managed.

Its good to know RMEF is of the highest integrity.

Do you work for CNN?

If you are involved with RMEF , The Wild Sheep Foundation , or some other conservation organization you are well aware of the good they are doing. If you are not involved , I encourage everyone to contribute. If you hunt elk , at least join RMEF. If you're a sheep hunter at least be a member of WSF.

These organizations are protecting our hunting and hunting resources for future generations. If you are a passionate bow hunter and you have time , contribute your time. You will get a first hand view of what other passionate , energetic people are doing on your behalf. And it is it's own reward.

And what is wrong with the board members getting together and buying a Ranch to hunt on with THEIR OWN money?????? I could see an issue with using RMEF funds to do so, but who the hell cares if they use their own money and do the same thing? I just don't understand some of the attitudes on Bowsite!

She wrote down a very short story about two people and an event. She gave the story to the first person in the row to read. That person had to quietly relay the story to the person behind them. And so on. The last person in the row had to write down the story and hand it to the teacher. She then read aloud the original, followed by the returned stories. The story had usually changed dramatically. With enough people the original tale was not even recognizable.

Seems people just cannot keep themselves from adding just a bit to make their story a bit more interesting.

And it gets way better if there is beer, fishing or hunting involved!

Or is it more reasonable to expect that you be considered innocent until proven guilty? Or at least until enough evidence is provided to substantiate charges.

Corruption and abuse of power may be prevalent in government and high-paying private-sector jobs, but these people that are running conservation organizations are often times volunteers or receiving pay well below what they could receive in the private sector.

I imagine corruption can occur anywhere. , Let the accused defend themselves, at least, after the accuser has shown substantial proof of corruption. None of that exists in this thread

I am very happy to report that in my investigations.....RMEF passes muster with flying colors. I'm proud to be a supporter. BTW, after my research, even if it popped up that someone somewhere slid in and hunted a property....i would consider it an outlier [crap happens] RMEF has strict mechanisms in place with people of integrity in management. I wouldn't judge the 'Whole' over an isolated case.

Now is this thread title "fake news"...you bet. Quite possibly there is a mechanism here to revise that thread title to something more appropriate reflecting a question...rather than an outright accusation....say, "RMEF....rumors or fake news?"

Speaking of valid questions, I'm wondering is someone (BIG FIN....?) can answer one sincere one from me:

Who were the six hunters who got to hunt the Montana elk property for the Team Elk TV Show.....?

Thank you guys for your selfless service!

Not sure, but it wouldn't bother me if someone who had done a lot of work in the organization was allowed to hunt to produce a TV show that promotes the values that RMEF does.

"I like a lot of the work that RMEF does, but asking valid questions should not be considered a bad thing - it works as kind of a "checks and balances" mechanism and should be welcomed"

Valid QUESTIONS are welcomed. Rumored accusations about wrongdoing are counterproductive unless you have some proof they occurred

I heard a rumor that "A Bowsite Poster" beats his wife! If that accusation was made about you, how do you prove it is false? Even if your wife testifies that you never beat her, we know that beaten women lie so that is not really proof. Proving that something that didn't happen REALLY didn't happen is not that easy. So unless you have some real proof (documents, emails, photos) that wrongdoing actually happened, you are just a gossip.

Compared to a lot of organizations (Don Peavy's SFW for example), RMEF is very transparent. Watchdog reviews show 89 cents out of every dollar go to projects and only 11 cents to administration (salaries, buildings, etc). Pretty hard to beat that

I think Randy explained the situation very thoroughly. I wish I could go back and rename the thread but I don't think that's possible. I don't regret starting dialogue about this topic. I will continue to be a member of the RMEF and I will continue to ask questions about concerns that arise. I will be more careful not to do so in an accusatory manner. The one thing I love about bowsite is the passion from hunters. Good luck to everyone the rest of the season.

I wish people would just read clearly and welcome dialog, instead of being so defensive. Then again, to each their own - however misguided.

I think Randy explained the situation very thoroughly. I wish I could go back and rename the thread but I don't think that's possible. I don't regret starting dialogue about this topic. I will continue to be a member of the RMEF and I will continue to ask questions about concerns that arise. I will be more careful not to do so in an accusatory manner. The one thing I love about bowsite is the passion from hunters. Good luck to everyone the rest of the season.

The public. From Randy's response above: "RMEF does not own any hunting property. They haven't since they received the Double HH Ranch in New Mexico as a restricted bequest from Mr. Torstenson. That property was sold in 2011 and all proceeds were put in an endowment where RMEF can only use 5% of the principal per year, restricted to only use on mission work and no overhead allocation is allowed. All other property RMEF buys are lands where an agreement is in place to turn it over to a State or Federal agency immediately upon RMEF taking title. Not sure where people get the idea that RMEF buys property for hunting by "insiders." It doesn't happen. It is against the by-laws and it would cause a serious hit to credibility. "

Come on guys, read Randy's post. ALL of the questions were answered clearly and succinctly.

How many of you would like to be accused of rape or child molestation and then have to PROVE it never happened? (And have to endure everything that goes along with that for the rest of your life)

Kind of what just happened here! ;-)

In reading these comments since my post last night, I've seen two questions asked. Here are the answers I can provide.

Q1 - wild 1 asked "I'm wondering is someone (BIG FIN....?) can answer one sincere one from me: Who were the six hunters who got to hunt the Montana elk property for the Team Elk TV Show.....?"

A: I do not have that answer of specific names, but I know the way it works for the Team Elk TV show, similar to how it works for my TV show . Sponsors of the show request that one of their representatives have a chance to be on the TV show during the year to further communicate the company's support for conservation and build the partnership between the company and RMEF. I suspect these hunters were people who represent companies that are very large supporters of RMEF. That is how Team Elk is able to be profitable and get the large amount of exposure to the RMEF mission and accomplishments.

The area is a limited entry draw, so applications would have to be sent in early in the year and the people on that hunt would be those successful in drawing the tag.

I understand that some may not agree with how Team Elk guests are selected. Those guests are drawn from a pool of folks who can communicate the RMEF message, mostly long-time volunteers, corporate partners, and others who will bring more attention to the RMEF message.

Q2 - Elkman asked "It's not true, but what they do actually do is roughly the same thing in a different package. Think all the millions of acres of land our dollars have "saved"... How many are "you" aloud to hunt? Because I see that David tool bag hunting pretty much all of it... JS (I am and have been a member since the year the RMEF was created)"

A2: Every single acre of those lands secured under the RMEF access initiative is open to you, me, and anyone else. That is 1 million new acres of new/improved public access.

Of the 8 million acres conserved or on which habitat improvements have been done, almost every acre is public land open to hunters. A very small part of that 8 million includes the acres from conservation easements where private landowners transfer their development rights to RMEF and thereby agree to never develop their lands, which is very good for elk.

The largest partners of RMEF are the US Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, and the state wildlife agencies. Every acre of lands that are enhanced and conserved through those projects are open to hunters who have the appropriate tag.

Q3 - (kind of a question) PECO commented, "When the CEO "appears" on the Team Elk show, is he hunting? If he is it does look like like a serious conflict of interest. If he is just being a spokes person for the organization that is great."

A3: That is part of the job as CEO, as required by the Board. He is hunting on some of those episodes. It is not a conflict of interest. Rather, it is him doing what the Board has instructed him to do as part of his job description. Conflict of interest would be if he was doing something that is outside his job description and did so for self-enrichment. That is not the case. Glad you continue to support RMEF.

As for transparency, I am happy to answer any questions folks have. RMEF's transparency can be supported by going to the website Charity Navigator. It not only grades non-profits according to their financial results, but analyzes their governance documents, Board policies, transparency, etc. RMEF is ranked very high by Charity Navigator.

Additionally, RMEF has internal auditors and outside auditors who are continually evaluating the processes and internal controls of the organization. As a CPA myself, I am impressed with the audit reports that we get from outside auditors, which is a reflection on the RMEF staff and the work they do. The level of transparency is very high.

For those wondering about the $10,000 donation requirement, that can be waived for those who are considered top Board candidates and for whom the donation would be a hardship. Most of the volunteers that have risen through the ranks and become Board members have long since passed that threshold in their many years of volunteerism.

I hope people understand that RMEF is an organization with over $90 million in assets. To accomplish that, it requires some amazing talent on the staff level. RMEF has the best staff I know of in the conservation world. They take their jobs seriously and they do one heck of a good job.

Thanks for all who support RMEF. No organization is perfect. No staff or Board are perfect. I accept that an organization, company, person, will never please every critic. I can tell you that having volunteered for many of the national organizations over the years, the RMEF staff and volunteers are top notch. Everyone of those staff and tireless volunteers have my respect.

Happy hunting!

Can you tell us if any of RMEF's executive staff were on that hunt.....?

Nobody is perfect, certainly not me - but faith the size of a mustard seed, and grace is available to all.

I'd agree that answering questions is reasonable. But some are suggesting that RMEF show "proof," when there's not even an evidence-based accusation made... Give me a break. If you ask and the answer is no, then the answer is no. If you have some evidence to the contrary, then proof would be warranted.

Many have asked questions and the questions were answered. A few made baseless "Things are not on the up-and-up at RMEF...I heard from someone this, this, or that..." without a shred of evidence to back it up or even any details. Shame on you for smearing an upstanding organization with gossip and hearsay in such a childish manner. You have zero credibility.

And as far as Bowriter's BS link - RMEF is frantically trying to save what's left of elk habitat. Many of you easterners are used to your surroundings being cut and parceled up into tiny pieces of private property and it was like that your whole lives so that's your culture, but elk need vast wild spaces to thrive. They're not white tail. And the West is being lost by large ranches being sold one-at-a-time and being cut up into 40 acre ranchettes that squeeze elk out of what little bit of their range that they have left.

It is true that there are leftist folks that want to turn the bulk of the US back into what it was several hundred years ago, but that is not RMEF's mission or modus.

I can tell you that NONE of the RMEF executive staff were the hunters on the hunts you are asking about.

I am not trying to be vague. Do you have evidence to show that any RMEF executive staff were the hunters on those hunts?

Those hunts were filmed for Team Elk. Team Elk is a communications tool; a communications platform that is fortunate to have very high demand from industry partners, thus making it profitable and contributing to the money available for mission accomplishment. No membership money is used for anything that Team Elk does. Some might wish the manner for selecting guests was different. I get that. But when the average cost per episode is $20-30K to produce, edit, deliver, and buy airtime, it is something that must be done with significant planning and consideration.

I have produced outdoor TV for ten years. I am impressed with how RMEF is able to make Team Elk work the way it does. I wish I could create the sponsor demand, and therefore sponsor revenue, RMEF can obtain. In the process of producing the show, RMEF advocates for conservation and public access in a manner that raises awareness of our mission, and the Team Elk staff does that without incurring the hundreds of thousands of dollars to otherwise to purchase that level of exposure and awareness.

Good luck to all!

Thanks for the answer. By the way, if I had any "evidence" I wouldn't be asking the question now, would I. Again, I appreciate your time and effort, no need to get defensive, it was just a sincere question, nothing more.

Most of those folks are sadly misguided. Their ideals are somewhat right (let wild lands exist), but they have a strange desire for everyone to live in a dense urban environment or an upscale ski lodge just at the edge of "nature" where they can safely and easily visit and watch "the wild" while enjoying every modern amenity. Think like whale watching or Antarctic tours. So its a wild place where no one lives but everyone visits and hangs out to watch it (with appropriately informed guides of course). Just so long as people aren't "using" the land, plants, and animals. It's an unfortunate condition of too many people isolated from the outdoors while constantly dripped a stream of half truths about the world.

Buyse, 3rd hand rumor mill is not the same as "starting a dialogue about this topic." That's bush league man. Maybe " I heard an unsubstantiated rumor and called the RMEF board first, before slinging mud on the internet, here's what I found..." would be a more appropriate way to start a thread!

+2- Randy must be a fast typist. (And have WAY more patience than I) I would not have given the comment one more second of time that it took me to read the comment. "Throwing sh!t against the wall and see what sticks" is not a discussion. A barstool comment is the definition of hearsay.

If you don't believe the answers when you get them straight from the elk's mouth as it were then why even ask the questions at all? Your mind is apparently already made up. You can choose to take the word of someone who has given us no reason not to trust him and the word of an organization that has been transparent, above board, and received incredibly good ratings from actual third party auditors or you can take the word of a ranch hand who heard from a guy who knew a dude that worked with the sister of a guy that once overheard a conversation about the RMEF. Checks and balances indeed.

As for RMEF as well as Randy they get nothing but respect from me.

That reminds me I need to pay my dues again.

From my keyboard, when someone titles a thread "RMEF SCAM?" and then repeats/publishes something he heard from someone, without one bit of documentation or corroboration,,,, well it looks like cr@p to me.

Per ohiohunter earlier post- "Agreed LB, apparently some guys don't know what a question mark is and a lot of guys here like to ride coat tails. If you heard your wife was sneaking over to the neighbors house from a reliable source wouldn't it raise some questions? But then again some guys let others think for them... I guess they'd wait until someone else initiated so they could interject.

Transparency is key. "

So if someone said a wife was sneaking around, your first step is to publicly look for corroboration on the internet? If my wife has never done anything to question her character and I post on the PUBLIC internet what one person said, wouldn't I be lower than low?

When you have a board member who comes on to thread and directly addresses the post author (And much more), the CEO takes a phone call and directly addresses the commentary, I guess I would describe this as being transparent.

RMEF undergoes annual audits. BigFin is an accountant in his day job. (Hell- Being accountable is his in his DNA!) vs a comment from one individual. Keep beating that horse if you think there is still any life left in it. For me, I will keep sending in my membership fees and reading Bugle. I am done.

I agree with that 100% but am another 100% sure you statement has 0% to do with what the gist of this inquiry was.

RMEF has put this to bed and took a unfair thread title and stepped up and made the org stronger in everyone's eyes.Kudos

And I’m so glad we have so many self-appointed experts here to keep us all informed as to what is a valid OPINION and what is not!! If this wasn’t so SAD, it would be HILARIOUS!!! ;-)

LB shootist said: "You don't have to prove that you dont beat your wife because people don't donate monies for you not to beat her"

You missed my point entirely. Has nothing to do with beating your wife or getting donations. Was just an example of how something that isn't true is hard to prove to people that it isn't true. It is hard for any organization to disprove something that never happened. Just like it would be hard for you give me proof that you never beat your wife.

Now give me some facts of wrongdoing to go on and there is a trail to follow. But just "They bought a ranch and someone told me the execs were hunting it" is not easy to prove it didn't happen even though it didn't

So in reality RMEF is probably above 90% when it comes to putting money toward habitat and hunter access- IMPRESSIVE.

I've been supporting RMEF for several years and I don't even elk hunt. I do not care who hunts on their tv show, it's not important to me. What is important is the work that they do for elk. Even though I don't elk hunt, I believe that work is the right thing to do and RMEF is the right org to do it.

So true. Too bad some folks believe making accusatory comments on the internet somehow changes that equation.

I all these years of membership, some real dummies have tried to say some negative Bullchit and of course it never played out to be accurate or truthful.

Thanks for your responses Randy

Good luck, Robb