Summit Treestands
BGF/SFW and our hunting future
Elk
Contributors to this thread:
WapitiBob 12-Feb-12
SDHNTR(home) 12-Feb-12
SDHNTR(home) 12-Feb-12
Zim1 12-Feb-12
Zim1 12-Feb-12
JLS 12-Feb-12
Zim1 12-Feb-12
Zim1 12-Feb-12
Bigdan 12-Feb-12
Z Barebow 12-Feb-12
trevore 12-Feb-12
SDHNTR(home) 12-Feb-12
WapitiBob 12-Feb-12
SDHNTR(home) 12-Feb-12
trophyhill 12-Feb-12
mrelite 12-Feb-12
hntn4elk 12-Feb-12
arctichill 12-Feb-12
pav 13-Feb-12
YZF-88 13-Feb-12
BULELK1 13-Feb-12
Amoebus 13-Feb-12
The Old Sarge 13-Feb-12
BB 13-Feb-12
elkslaya 13-Feb-12
MNHunter 13-Feb-12
NvaGvUp 13-Feb-12
Zim1 13-Feb-12
Beendare 13-Feb-12
Zim1 13-Feb-12
Bigdan 13-Feb-12
WapitiBob 13-Feb-12
WapitiBob 13-Feb-12
Bullhound 13-Feb-12
Zim1 13-Feb-12
trophyhill 13-Feb-12
arctichill 13-Feb-12
trophyhill 14-Feb-12
BUGLELK 14-Feb-12
Mt. man 14-Feb-12
Bigdan 14-Feb-12
arctichill 15-Feb-12
WapitiBob 16-Feb-12
arctichill 16-Feb-12
30inchbuck 16-Feb-12
JLS 16-Feb-12
arctichill 16-Feb-12
ACB 16-Feb-12
arctichill 16-Feb-12
ACB 16-Feb-12
Zim1 16-Feb-12
Big Fin 16-Feb-12
[email protected] 16-Feb-12
Norseman 16-Feb-12
Bullhound 16-Feb-12
Z Barebow 16-Feb-12
Norseman 16-Feb-12
TreeWalker 16-Feb-12
Don K 16-Feb-12
BB 17-Feb-12
huntingbob 17-Feb-12
30inchbuck 17-Feb-12
arctichill 17-Feb-12
trophyhill 17-Feb-12
MNHunter 17-Feb-12
T43 17-Feb-12
The Old Sarge 17-Feb-12
D-How 17-Feb-12
trophyhill 17-Feb-12
Shoots-Straight 17-Feb-12
trevore 17-Feb-12
30inchbuck 17-Feb-12
stringgunner 17-Feb-12
Big Fin 17-Feb-12
30inchbuck 18-Feb-12
Big Fin 18-Feb-12
trophyhill 18-Feb-12
30inchbuck 18-Feb-12
elkslaya 18-Feb-12
Don K 18-Feb-12
Norseman 18-Feb-12
knothead 18-Feb-12
hunt 18-Feb-12
YZF-88 18-Feb-12
The Old Sarge 18-Feb-12
Z Barebow 18-Feb-12
BULELK1 18-Feb-12
Watts 18-Feb-12
Big Fin 18-Feb-12
jimmyt 18-Feb-12
Watts 18-Feb-12
jimmyt 18-Feb-12
Bigdan 18-Feb-12
stringgunner 19-Feb-12
arctichill 20-Feb-12
Norseman 20-Feb-12
T43 20-Feb-12
The Old Sarge 20-Feb-12
Bullhound 20-Feb-12
KY EyeBow 20-Feb-12
Hot Rod 20-Feb-12
Fulldraw1972 20-Feb-12
mrelite 20-Feb-12
arctichill 21-Feb-12
Norseman 21-Feb-12
WapitiBob 21-Feb-12
jimmyt 23-Feb-12
arctichill 24-Feb-12
Lon M 25-Feb-12
30inchbuck 27-Feb-12
arctichill 27-Feb-12
WapitiBob 27-Feb-12
The Old Sarge 27-Feb-12
From: WapitiBob
12-Feb-12
As I get older (56 in a few days) I'm starting to see things differently. My interest in "all things hunting" and how I now perceive them and how they affect us, is the result of watching and listening to Randy Newberg of On Your Own Adventures. He is an advocate for all hunters and is well versed on the inner workings of the Wolf Issue. He is also a strong advocate for RMEF and has done some PR work for them.

He is currently at the sports show In SLC. The "money maker" for SFW. The following are his comments. I don't think he will mind my posting them here. I doubt he would do it himself unless there was a topic already in place, he doesn't seek publicity.

It's a very good read, well written and since I'm posting it here, obviously made an impact on me.

A link to the thread:

http://onyourownadventures.com/hunttalk/showthread.php?t=249798

============

Quote: Originally Posted by Dinkshooter View Post

Anyone else thinking Lawnboy, Fin and SFW are having dinner tonight?

////

Well, Fin was there. Was kindly treated to the dinner by the MDF folks. Left once the music started.

Wonder if I was the only person laughing at the irony of Shane Mahoney making one of his finest presentations. In that presentation, he bragged about the US, our history and how the principles that made our country so admired by others (Mahoney being Canadian) was achieved by keeping true to the ideals of the commoner. Then bringing that forward to how conservation in this country was founded by involving all citizens as equal participants and equal beneficiaries.

Following his long, but very eloquent speech was an auction where Denny Austad paid $150K+ for the Antelope Island mule deer tag, along with many other tags selling for over $40K. The usual suspects bidding on behalf of their clients who have found a way to not have to wait in the line, and by continuing to buy these tags, finance the operations that continue to provide them a path to the front of the line, any time they want to buy it.

Just seemed weird to see the commoners cheering as their wildlife bounty was once again, sold time and again, to the same people, year after year, all under the guise of conservation. I wondered how many, among the hundreds in that room, noticed the irony of that.

Maybe I have become too jaded in my views. Following the auction, I thanked my hosts and walked across the street, on up to my room. On my way, I wondered what the state of hunting will look like if those of us who have a platform to speak out about what we are seeing happen in this western states, fail to do so. If we sit on our hands, worried about pressure placed on our sponsors by those who we might challenge in their actions and motives.

Tomorrow night will be more of the same. If anything, they save the best of the best for the Saturday night auction. They will sell another Henry's rifle deer tag. One sold tonight. I am not sure how many total rifle tags are issued for the Henrys, but a good percentage of them were sold today.

Yesterday I watched the former Director of AK Fish and Game, an SFW plant who resigned when accused of 12 hunting violations, walk the show floor. Then watch the AK Bison Governors tag get sold this weekend, along with the AK Governors Koyokuk moose tag. I wonder how much of that money will do any good for AK bison or moose, or if the funds will get siphoned off in selling commissions of 10% and allowed administrative fees of who knows how much? Yet, we can rest well, knowing that another "savior of conservation" broke out his check book to make sure he would not be taking up any space in the waiting line with the rest of us.

Went and brushed my teeth an extra time tonight, but still have a strange taste in my mouth. Probably best that I declined my invitation to a private cocktail party where all winning bidders and other VIPs from this evening would be invited to attend and socialize. Decided to save my socializing for those folks who stop by the booth tomorrow to will tell me how many years they have applied in UT, and have yet to draw their resident elk tag.

/////

I am at the awards dinner. The food is great, but I think I will puke if this continues. I just learned that BGF/SFW introduced legislation that resulted in wolf delisting. Thankfully, most are not clapping as many know the truth.

/////

Following dinner, I left. I left disappointed by so many who sat silent while this ridiculous circus act transpired. Who went on stage and participated in a partisan pile of deceit beyond what most minds could even conjure.

I spent the last hour and a half writing my thoughts on the debacle, but figured I better sleep on this one before I post it. Too disgusted right now to post something so critical of those who were accomplices to this assault on conservation.

/////

As I stated previously, following dinner, I left. Not sure if I was more disappointed or disgusted. Disappointed in those who did nothing when the opportunity was presented, or disgusted by the counterfeit statements provided by Ryan Benson of Big Game Forever.

Benson's mash was a frontal assault on the history of what hunting and conservation have always been. A craft of partisanship that drags hunting and conservation even further into the ugly abyss of politics. Truly disgusting for anyone who separates their politics from the more important topics of hunting and conservation.

He carefully selected words to give everyone the impression that it was H.R 509, a bill sponsored by the handpicked pals of BGF/SFW, as being the reason for MT and ID getting delisting. That bill, the SFW/BGF silver bullet, was "Dead on Arrival." It was introduced in January 2011 and has not even had a committee vote, let alone a floor vote or a full Congressional vote. A bill that was dead before the ink dried on the first draft. A bill that is dead in a committee was provided as the reason we have delisting. Laughable by any standard.

He thanked all 60 sponsors of that empty piece of legislation. Then Benson went on to say that without these brave members of Congress who sponsored their bill, the delisting in MT and ID could not have happened. And that the recent delisting in MN, WI, and MI would not have been possible.

What? Someone please tell me I heard him incorrectly. Nope, he connected the dots in that manner.

All of this, while he failed to tell the audience that Big Game Forever and Sportsman For Wildlife were doing everything in their power to kill the real bill that got delisting in Montana and Idaho - the Simpson-Tester rider attached to the budget bill of April, 2011. He never used the words Simpson or Tester.

The groups Benson is associated with worked to kill that rider from the budget bill. They got caught red handed and have been in defense mode ever since. If they had succeeded in killing that bill, we would not be hunting wolves in MT and ID. We would not have delisting in MN, WI, and MI.

BGF/SFW claimed Simpson-Tester would sabotage the delisting possibility in MN. WI, MI. Yet, even though they worked to kill MT and ID delisting, and they were 100% wrong about the outcome in the Great Lakes states, Benson rambled on that BGF/SFW and their friends were the reason we have this delisted status.

He used his Harvard pedigree wordsmithing to make a mockery of the real work that got delisting in all of these states. And as always is the case with SFW/BGF, he took credit for things they did not do, and in this case, took credit for the results of a delisting bill they tried to stop.

He thanked a long list of people who have done nothing for the average hunter or for conservation. And he purposefully omitted those who did the heavy lifting. No big surprise there.

Benson did not mention the two people who stuck their necks out and actually got us delisting and started the momentum for the Great Lakes states. Representative Mike Simpson, a Republican from Idaho, who is the "Simpson" part of the Simpson-Tester bill that gave us delisting. Benson made no mention of Senator Jon Tester, a Democrat from Montana, the other sponsor of that rider.

It was that rider that ticked off all the wolf wingnuts, putting them at each other’s throat. It was that rider that gave MT and ID our wolf seasons, and set the path where the enviros would fold up the tent in MN, WI, MI.

Yet, he thanked Representative Denny Rehberg, a Montana Republican opposing Senator Tester in the November election. Benson failed to mention that Rehberg did nothing, absolutely nothing, to help the process of wolf delisting in Montana. A guy they look to as their plant in the Senate, if they can get him elected, the same way they viewed Corey Rossi as their plant in Alaska hunting politics. Rossi is now the FORMER AK G&F director, currently facing at last count, 12 hunting violations.

Rehberg is a Congressional member with a track record that is not very kind to resident Montana hunters. A guy who only now in an election year is trying to look the part of a hunter by hanging out with MT SFW and Montana Shooting Sport Association extremists.

Yesterday, SFW had a big fund raiser down here in Utah for Denny. Ryan Benson invited me to join him and the Congressman. I was busy. Rehberg was then walked around the building, being introduced to “Friends of SFW and BGF.”

And we wonder why hunting and conservation has become so politicized. Spiels such as Benson provided is why.

Benson's work last night was amateur hour when compared to the stirring appeal by Shane Mahoney the previous evening; a dissertation on the history of that got us to this point in conservation history. A true reflection on history, honesty, and commitment to what is right. The two presentations and their presenters seemed in stark contrast in terms of knowledge, sincerity, and expertise on the topic at hand. And, it showed.

We expect as much from SFW and BGF. They are without a doubt the most self-congratulatory group to ever hit the landscape of the west, disguised as hunting and conservation groups. Willing to use all tactics and deceit to spin the truth or to shower credit away from those deserving of accolades

To have others stand silent, paraded up on that stage, participating in the theatrics, all the while knowing this kind of fairy tale would be presented tonight, is my greatest source of disappointment. Those who let their good names be drawn through the mud by some backhanded political rant, is beyond disappointing. At least to those of us who had hope for the potential and promise that could have been. Silence while this kind of fable is pawned off as truth, results in accomplice that is unbecoming of the voice and platform some have.

Some were on that stage, blissfully ignorant of the facts. So removed from the battlefield, that they know not what team wears which uniform. Happy to be there and thinking they were helping the cause.

Others are fully aware of the facts. They were involved in many of the same discussions. They were included on emails, phone calls, and were asked to lobby on the issue.

It is the behavior of those knowledgeable of the truth that is so disappointing. Those who were aware of the deceit being spewed, yet stood on the stage, looking almost to be in pain, knowing in their hearts and minds, what was unfolding while they posed there.

Truth is truth. It cannot be changed. It can be spun, and such is the manner by which politics handles the truth. Some being far more talented at spinning the truth than telling the truth.

And as much as truth is truth; leaders lead, and lemmings follow. It became very clear today that some would prefer to be lemmings while following those who will lead them to them further away from the historical values that got us here.

Anyone; politician, conservation group, or business, that is tying their boat to the SFW/BGF ship, might want to take a look around at the wreckage now drifting up on the beach. Wreckage sanctioned and sponsored by BGF/SFW. And hopefully, followed by even more wreckage than can be salvaged by the leaders of that crew.

From: SDHNTR(home)
12-Feb-12
You know, I have always avoided SFW threads because they are always just long pissing matches. I tried to read this thread but it lost me half way through. Please pardon my ignorance... Can someone summarize for me? Why are so many western hunters against an organization that is supposed to be for western hunting? In simple, unbiased terms please.

From: SDHNTR(home)
12-Feb-12
double post

From: Zim1
12-Feb-12
SDHTR,

SUMMARY:

Rod Blagojavich : Politics

Don Peay-to-Play/SFW : Hunting

Simple Enough?

From: Zim1
12-Feb-12
SDHTR,

In case that did not work for you, try this one.

SUMMARY:

John Wayne Gacy : Your kids

Don Peay-to-Play/SFW : Hunting

Any questions?

From: JLS
12-Feb-12
To think that Denny Rehberg supports the cause of the average unwashed American hunter is completely laughable.

From: Zim1
12-Feb-12
When this all washes out, if ever, I think you'll find a lot of influential people were bought out by Don Peay, such as Rossi in Alaska and Weiers in Arizona. If Weiers in particular could be bought and paid for, Peay can buy anyone.

From: Zim1
12-Feb-12
SDHTR,

If you consider me "biased" in any way, here's a news article that summarizes SFW. This might work for you:

http://www.hcn.org/blogs/range/alaska-wildlife-woes-raise-red-flags-outside

From: Bigdan
12-Feb-12
Thats why I don't support BGF or SFW I think most of the real hunters see what pigs they are.

From: Z Barebow
12-Feb-12
I began following Randy's posts several months back. I have also looked at BGF and SFW from other sources/angles.

Big Game Forever= Big Game for themselves 1st.

SFW= Big Game Tags for themselves first, the unwashed commoners can have the remaining peasant tags.

1st- These organizations get there minions/followers within teh G&F political/decision making process.

Once in place and position to affect policy, they push for auction tags under the auspices of benefitting sportman. (What they don't tell you is these tags come at the expense of the general pool)

Lastly, banquet attendees, (Including membership and us "commoners") can buy these auction tags.

Of course when they write the rules, they get a cut from the auction.

All of this is in the interest of "Big Game" and "Sportsman" everywhere! HA!

BigDan- It isn't guys like you I worry about. You have enough experience to see these guys for what they really are.

What I worry about are the hunters who hear about these organizations and think "With names like Sportsman for Wildlife or Big Game Forever, they have to be good!"

From: trevore
12-Feb-12
It's hard to think that they're not any good when they spew the kinda crap Randy blogged about. It's hard to fully vet an organization, who really has the time to, before they make a donation or sign up for membership.

It's really come down to politicians. And unfortunately so many of them are looking out for #1. Obviously not all are that way, but too many sure seem to be.

From: SDHNTR(home)
12-Feb-12
Ok so in summary... these guys lobby for auction tags so rich guys can shoot trophy game, over and over -- at the expense of draw tags available to average Joes?

OK that pretty much sucks. So what actually happens to the money?

From: WapitiBob
12-Feb-12
SFW pulled tags from the Utah draw to sell at auction under the guise of "conservation". They would sell the tags at auction, because that method would generate the greatest amount of money. That money would then go to conservation projects, spearheaded by SFW themselves.

The problem, besides the huge quantity of tags, is that there is no accounting of those auction tag funds. SFW can siphon off any and all expenses and related costs before using any monies for "conservation".

That same method of generating funds for SFW is the exact same method they attempted recently in AZ. The money goes to SFW, SFW siphons off all they can, then what's left goes to conservation. Other states auction tags but the selling organization gets a cut (10% in WY and OR) with the rest going to the Game Dept.

In addition to the tag grab to benefit SFW, SFW/BGF have worked directly against Legislation that has enabled ID and MT to hunt Wolves. After their legislation was tabled and the Bill they lobbied against was passed, they claimed their efforts were at the crux of the delisting.

From: SDHNTR(home)
12-Feb-12
thanks WB. Clean and informative summary there. I get it, and it don't smell right.

From: trophyhill
12-Feb-12
i wonder why i dont see any SFW members defending their actions on this thread. this would be a good time for them to clear the air and defend these dastardly deeds. my guess is that they cannot defend a lie with another lie. and the truth would hurt their cause and is hurting their cause

From: mrelite
12-Feb-12
That was a good read thanks for posting.

We have an ever growing issue with the SFW in NM, they have successfully got their president placed on the NM Game Commission. This issue is huge as the SFW is in bed with some powerful NM groups that are also into selling our public wildlife to the highest bidders at the expense of the general public. Apples never fall far from the tree and the NM SFW is just a rotten apple and just as self serving as the groups listed above.

From: hntn4elk
12-Feb-12
I smell a turd in the punch bowl...it is spelled SFW/BGF

From: arctichill
12-Feb-12
I want to say a great big THANK YOU to Randy [BigFin] for writing this. Although I've never met him personally, Randy has helped me wrap my mind around a few situations in hunting policies that needed adjustment. I think he is a top notch spokesman for our sport.

I am also very, very glad to see that the RMEF has been taking note of the value his perpective provides. As many of you probably noticed, Randy has had some terrific articles published in Bugle as of late. True to his style, his stories highlight the DIY/public land access approach to hunting. More encouraging news can be found on page 17 of the Jan/Feb'12 Bugle magazine which announces that Randy accepted "a volunteer position on the conservation issues/government relations committee, an ad hoc committee of the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation's board of directors."

I don't think they could have found a better person to fill this position. As long as the RMEF listens carefully and intently, with an open mind when Randy speaks he will be a tremendous asset to the organization.

From: pav
13-Feb-12
Interesting read WB. Thanks for posting.

From: YZF-88
13-Feb-12
I agree. It is a very, very good read from Randy. It does stink and until recently, I did not realize just how many tags they took. At first, I didn't think I had a dog in this fight because I'm a non-resident. However, the guys over on MM cleared it up for me when the listed every tag...JUST FROM UTAH. They are really in bed there. It was disheartening to see them all in black and white.

I had to read his paragraph about Rossi walking around twice. I can't believe a guy like that would even show his face at any wildlife "event". Him being there speaks volumes of the mindset these individuals have. I can visualize his grin as they auctioned the AK tags.

I won't begrudge anybody being successful and being able to purchase these tags. I do take exception to them being taken from the overall quota at the expense of everybody wishing to utilize the resource. A well managed state wildlife department should be able to finance itself...like any company that has a responsibility to make it's share holders happy.

From: BULELK1
13-Feb-12
MDF goes under the radar but they are just as bad as SFW/BGF....

They have had their hand in the cookie jar for many years too and they are hand-n-hand with SFW on this big Scam Expo tag grab.....and the pathetic amount of Conservation tags......

Thank Goodness my beloved FNAWS/WSF bailed out a couple years ago.......and my RMEF told 'em NO from the get-go.

Good read W-Bob.

Good luck, Robb

From: Amoebus
13-Feb-12
"I spent the last hour and a half writing my thoughts on the debacle, but figured I better sleep on this one before I post it."

I wonder what the 'night before' post looked like, he should tell us what he really thinks... 8^)

13-Feb-12
Some of us saw this coming decades ago and have been speaking out against it from the beginning. Good to see more folks waking up/getting on board.

When money controls hunting, those with the most of it will be the only ones hunting. The rest of us will be on the sidelines ... some of us wondering what happened.

From: BB
13-Feb-12
At one time I was quite involved in Utah's wildlife politics. I went to all the important meetings for over 25 years. I was one of the thousands to stand on the Utah State Capital steps way back when SFW first spread its roots in Utah.

We needed a good leader, as our once, world famous deer herd ,was in a downward, tailspin and our fish and game department seemed clueless as what to do.

So it was with open arms, that many of us embraced Don Peay. He was a go getter with some great ideas. He was a natural born leader and had many talents. And the guy knew how to get the job done.

I don't care what anyone says, the guy, to this day, is a rare talent! I will argue that point with anyone.

But sadly, along the way, the vision he saw, for Utah's wildlife, changed to a vision of using wildlife, as a way for him to make his fame, fortune and the greedy power he so deeply exhibts

He basically forgot about Utah's mule deer herd and shifted his focus to elk and sheep (he always was big time into sheep). Why? Because those critters are much easier to manage and that is where he could make the most money.

Now, under the disguise BGF, he is onto the hot wolf issue, as he knows, that is the cash cow, at this time in time.

Since Don started all of this, he basically owes the Utah Division of Wildlife. He owns and controls most everyone, that is deeply involved, in any of the major policy positions, having to do with Utah's wildlife.

And he was able to get the expo tags passed without so much as having to put one dime of the funds raised, back into Utah's wildlife. And his organziation will give no honest accounting of where all the funds raised at the expo, end up.

Many of us in Utah, see him as a puppet master. He places people in the positions he needs them, and then all he has to do, is pull the stings. And man is great at doing that. By the mid nineties, I saw the writing on the wall and bailed out. At the time I must have felt like people who get pulled into a CULT and wonder what the heck am I doning.

And to this day I can't see how he is allowed to continue down this deadened path.

His own doings, will be the the thing that sinks his ship and as far as I am concerned, it can't sink fast enough.

Have a great bow hunt. BB

From: elkslaya
13-Feb-12
Sounds like he took a page right out of "Spooky Dudes" playbook on how to be a puppetmaster. Btw spooky dudes real name is George Soros

From: MNHunter
13-Feb-12
Randy (Big Fin) is well versed in what has happened, is happening, and what lies ahead if SFW/BGF continues their assault on the North American Conservation model. I applaud Randy for speaking up and I can only hope more and more hunters heed his message. SFW/BGF’s behind the scenes ploy to torpedo the Simpson-Tester language should make any MT resident think twice about supporting the SFW candidate (Rehberg). The fact that they try and take credit for any wolf delisting is laughable and yet also offensive. IMO, SFW/BGF is as dangerous to the future of hunting in this country as any anti organization out there.

From: NvaGvUp
13-Feb-12
Heaven forbid states should raise money for wildlife projects that are used to improve habitat, manage disease and increase populations so that more tags are available for the common man. No, we wouldn't want to do that!

From: Zim1
13-Feb-12
Hahahahahahahaha. Tell that to my 15 freakin Utah mule deer points!

Hahahahahahahaha.

http://www.monstermuleys.info/dcforum/DCForumID33/1820.html

Over the last 10 years SFW did nothing but steal Paunsagunt tags that added at least 6 years to my wait. Absolutely nothing has improved there. The last theft included 2 of the last 4 NR archery tags there to be raffled to residents. Now at least 85% (11/13) of the Pauns tags that are available to nonresidents are auction (or the 2 raffle). Where is this expanding multitude of nonresident tags you speak of???!!!

I'm sorry I can't stop laughing.

From: Beendare
13-Feb-12
Bob, Great heads up on this and thanks to Big Fin.

I don't think anyone would disagree with tags being auctioned for wildlife- its how they do it and the degree. I can understand Nva's comment because from his perspective the bulk of the money raised gets plowed right back into sheep herds- even creating herds where there were none before.

This is not the case with SFW. The evidence points to an exclusive club designed in every way to take advantage of the average sportsman for the few.

From: Zim1
13-Feb-12
Oh but hey, it's all good. Just read this exerpt from a letter written by SFW cronnie Chris Denham in reference to the last Arizona midnight gang rape bill:

"3. These tags are being taken away from the average hunter. True, in the short run. OF COURSE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT 0.2 OF 1 PERCENT OF THE TAGS, the change in drawing odds is so small that it cannot be calculated. Besides, how difficult will it be to increase our big game herds by 0.2 of one percent with a serious cash infusion? These tags will improve the average hunter’s odds of drawing a tag within a very short period of time."

Who ya crappin, Chris??? Talk about grossly twisting the truth! You folks skim the cream of the crop tags but then compare them to ALL the tags in your calculation, including 100% of the crap tags. You don't touch any dogs, just leave those for Joe Lunchbox and tell us to shut up and be happy as we count our raped & devalued bonus points.

Slight difference between .2 of 1% and 85% !!!

Pound sand, SFW.

From: Bigdan
13-Feb-12
Kyle you have not been drinking there cool aid have you? I know you support many wildlife groups.

From: WapitiBob
13-Feb-12
darn phones

From: WapitiBob
13-Feb-12
Nva,l and many others respect your opinion and what you have done for Sheep and all of us out of shape hunters.

As has been mentioned, auctioning some tags with those funds specifically earmarked for habitat is applauded by most if us. As I mentioned in the first post, Oregon does just that, with 10% going to the host organization, the remainder going to the Dept. What SFW has done is turn the funding 180 degrees, where the host siphons off most of the money for "expenses" and the remainder is used for their own habitat projects. What they say in their defense is they do the habitat work themselves. Unfortunately they have yet to provide any detailed accounting of the funds raised and the projects funded. A dramatic difference between the workings of SFW and FNAWS when it comes to auction tags.

From: Bullhound
13-Feb-12
SFW is nothing more than a parasite that will suck every penny they can out of our Wildlife. We, here in Idaho, are so happy we saw them coming and have, for the time being, stopped their thievery. What they did to the fine folks of Utah is total BS.

Benson and Big Game Forever are nothing more than glory hounds and have been from the start. I'd rather visit a piss stain than associate with either of these organizations.

From: Zim1
13-Feb-12
SFW's laundry bag includes a hell of a lot more than just he unaccountability of the funds, albeit that is a biggie.

1. Totally unethical "emergency" midnight rape attempt in Arizona via a bought and paid for legislator Weiers.

2. Slimey political debt payback by high school educated AK Wildlife Director Corey Rossi of 4 of the 11 Alaska governor tags to SFW.

3. Attempting to stop the recent wolf rider and lying about other organizations supposedly supporting that opinion in an attempt to preserve their wolf donation income stream.

4. Plenty of lies down through the years and unkept promises.

.............The list goes on.

From: trophyhill
13-Feb-12
"Heaven forbid states should raise money for wildlife projects that are used to improve habitat, manage disease and increase populations so that more tags are available for the common man. No, we wouldn't want to do that!"

who's talking about the states here? i thought we were talking about all the corruption that the SFW brings to the table. if you think its a good thing that some states are in bed with groups like the SFW/BGF, thats like saying it would be a good and moral thing to build a church with drug money or money from a bank robbery. as has been said their is absolutely no accountability on where the siphoned money goes. none whatsoever. NM'icans should be very concerned that a SFW chapter head has now snaked his way in and become a game commisioner.

From: arctichill
13-Feb-12
"NM'icans should be very concerned that a SFW chapter head has now snaked his way in and become a game commisioner."

He didn't snake his way in...he paid his way in. Some of the payment was in dollars and some of it was in highly leveraged relationships with the likes of ex-commissioner Leo Simms. In fact, Leo Simms was the one who recommeded Mr. Espinoza for the position.

NvaGvUp, You certainly know more about sheep than most on this site. Do you know about Leo Simms involvement [thievery] with NM Sheep? If so, I would love to hear your opinion about it. If not, please let me know as I would love the invitation to spell it out very clearly and COMPLETELY FACTUALLY in this thread.

From: trophyhill
14-Feb-12
i thought "Pay to Play" went out with the Richardson administration. guess not.

From: BUGLELK
14-Feb-12

BUGLELK's Link
I usually find myself pretty well-aligned with Randy's thoughts on most issues across the board. On this one though, there is an exception. The exception is that instead of being pretty well-aligned, I am in EXACT alignment with what he said! I wish I could as eloquently say what he said, but with his post, I'll just say, "What he said!"

Thanks Randy! I'm surprised I didn't bump into you at the exit sign...I seemed to lose my appetite as soon as they started talking, and we got up and left also...

Corey Jacobsen Elk101.com - "Extreme Elk" Magazine

From: Mt. man
14-Feb-12
"WHAT HE SAID!" as well from me!

From: Bigdan
14-Feb-12
Yea its kind of like Robin Hood except they take from the poor and sell to the rich.

From: arctichill
15-Feb-12

arctichill's Link
So I guess nobody wants to talk about Leo Simms and the 60+ Bighorn Sheep he STOLE from the general public??

If anybody is lurking and curious, the attached link will give you a miniscule glimpse onto the very tip of the iceberg.

From: WapitiBob
16-Feb-12
start another thread

From: arctichill
16-Feb-12
I wasn't trying to hijack your thread Bob. I thought this was relevent seeing as how the leader of SFW New Mexico has been appointed to the NM Game Commission by way of recommendation from Leo Simms. Sorry about the detour.

From: 30inchbuck
16-Feb-12
Boy do we have a BigFin Following here.

Get a room!

Perhaps the MM clubhouse will do. I am sure Bob Zim and chill would feel right at home there.

From: JLS
16-Feb-12
I tried to open the link and couldn't. Can you cut/paste it? I'm interested.

From: arctichill
16-Feb-12
Thanks Dusty, but I'm generally not very well received on MM. It's good to hear that BigFin's following is far and wide though. It sounds like his support transcends a wide array of demographic profiles. I'm not sure the same can be said for SFW.

From: ACB
16-Feb-12
this is why there should not be any "auction tags"i felt years ago when the west started auctioning tags it was bad idea because if wildlife belongs to the people then they should have equal access to it .in the long run this is more dangers to north American hunting than the anti groups. being from the east i did not know it had gotten this far down the road.

From: arctichill
16-Feb-12
I disagree. Auction tags are not the enemy. In fact, they can be the savior. Here is a copy of a post I wrote on the NM forum:

I think this is an example of excellent management of both sheep and money to benefit sheep in NM!

"All the money will go toward state conservation efforts to increase bighorn sheep populations....

The Department of Game and Fish this year will issue 16 licenses for public hunts of desert bighorns. That is an increase from one public license last year....

Drawings will determine which hunters get the licenses."

Here are the key points of importance in my mind's eye:

1) All the money goes towards conservation. This means it must not be laundered and filtered through organizations like SFW or the like.

2) Public licenses increased from 1 to 16. This is exciting news and indicates that the efforts to increase the herd are paying off.

3) Drawings determine which hunters get the licenses. I praise and commend the very wealthy few who choose to pay huge money to increase opportunity for the masses. If 16 tags were auctioned and 3 were issued by draw we would have a serious problem...[or new state initials..UT].

From what I can tell this situation has benefit written all over it.

Auctions have become super-effective conservation fund-raisers as far as I can tell. Auctions are not the problem. Motivations for the auctions become an area of concern for me. When tags become currency, and animals become leverage for personal financial gain I have a real problem. When wealthy people pay for the privelege to access a public resource thus resulting in greater public utilization of that resource, everyone wins! People with land and people with money are not the enemy here...in fact they are our greatest allies!

The enemy are those groups who strive to alienate the "common" hunter by way of eliminating opportunity via financial capabilities.

If a wealthy individual can have preferred treatment, while concurrently contributing to increased public opportunity then everybody wins!

Auctions are great! Auctions that fund non-transparent, non-productive, lavish individual lifestyles at the detriment of the general public are simply criminal.

From: ACB
16-Feb-12
i agree rich people are not the enemy here the enemy is allowing rich people special access to our wildlife because they are rich.That money could be raised by raffling the "goveners"tag and we all could have a chance to hold that tag.the problem is when you start selling wildlife to highest bidder where do you stop .sounds like we are getting far down the road to the way Europe does things.

From: Zim1
16-Feb-12
arctichill, That link looks like a pay site. Do you know if there's any archived threads on this Simms incident? Thanks.

From: Big Fin
16-Feb-12
30inchbuck, funny to watch you go around to hunting sites and defend Big Game Forever (BGF) and Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife (SFW) where anyone might post a link to my blogs or my posts. Was not going to post on this thread, but given you opened the door, I figure I may as well accept your offer to join in.

Seems you have a problem with anyone, or any site, where people speak out about what they see happening to hunting by the actions of SFW/BGF; where people don't blindly follow the propaganda promoted and posted by the organization for which you are an officer of a state chapter. Same seems to apply if some contradicts the stories published by SFW’s partner organization, Big Game Forever (BGF).

I would love to see you start posting the SFW/BGF fables here. The folks on Bowsite are some of the most informed in the hunting world.

You can whine all you want that the world is picking on SFW/BGF. These guys are intelligent hunters who form their opinions with facts.

Facts are not a currency that SFW/BGF deals with very well. In fact, some would say that if facts were currency, SFW/BGF would be filing bankruptcy.

Maybe you could try to convince the owner of this site, Pat, that BGF was the group that was solely responsible for the USFWS dropping wolves from the Baca management options. Seems like a week ago BGF sent out an email claiming credit for such, same as they tried to claim credit for delisting wolves in MT and ID, when they actually tried to kill that effort.

Pat went through great efforts to inform people on this site of the issue in CO. I suspect he engaged more hunters on the topic than BGF even has on their mailing list. But, Pat is too humble to take credit for the work he did. His humbleness is pretty much the antithesis of how BGF operates.

So, please, let’s hear it. You have posted the drivel on other sites and got your teeth handed to you, so maybe you and your SFW/BGF pals can do a better job over here.

You being a board member of a state SFW chapter gives you little choice but to follow the party line. I understand that. I admire that you are a volunteer for a cause that you think is good. They send you out to defend their honor. You are a good soldier, probably well-intended to the same degree that you are misinformed by your leaders.

All that aside, your efforts toward progress are being weighed down by the fact that the organizations you represent have been caught time and again on the wrong side of issues important to rank and file hunters. That is too bad for you, but does not change the facts of what has transpired, and the fact that people have tired of SFW/BGF operations.

Your comments on another site implied that the North American Model of Wildlife Management is a bad idea. Really, it is in print. I suggest that you should repost that over here, so people can see the positions held by many in the leadership positions of SFW. Rebuking the NA Model would probably not go over too well with the high caliber of minds that post here.

So, I say have at it. I will sit back and watch you get schooled the same way you, and other SFW board/leaders, have been schooled on other websites where you have tried to defend the actions of SFW/BGF. It is the actions of your beloved leaders that bring this heat, not the people who post the facts of those actions.

It is BGF/SFW that continues to plant their shills in western F&G agencies and commissions, asking for political repayment by sending Governor’s tags to SFW for auction. Just as Corey Rossi, the founding member of AK SFW, did when he was director of AK F&G. He sent 4 of the 11 AK Governor's tags to UT for SFW to auction last week.

Rossi was a hand-picked plant by SFW, even though he is now the FORMER Director, after resigning in the face of double digit hunting and outfitting violations. That was SFW and their leadership who did that, not the guys posting the facts.

SFW openly brags of also planting their own operatives in NM & WY. Now they are openly trying to get one of their own planted in the US Senate, via the Montana election this fall. The AK issue with Rossi is not the only place where SFW actions will bring heat.

It was SFW-MT who tried to gut the MT wolf plan at the state level after SFW/BGF lost the MT wolf issue in Congress, a bill which if successful would have stopped our wolf hunt. It was SFW-MT who supported the legislation that would have taken $24 million from MT hunters to pay for requests made by the wool industry.

It was SFW-AZ who tried to grab 350 of AZ premier tags to replicate the UT model. It was SFW-WY that tried to get a preferential pool of non-resident tags for the guides and outfitters.

I could go on and on, but will spare the good folks here the time and space.

All the things that your leaders find as “baggage in the diaper” are things SFW/BGF has done. Feel free to blame the guys who are pointing it out. I doubt people are going to quiet down. If anything, the voices are getting louder. If you have a problem with that, not much I can do to help.

Hunters are smart. All they need are facts and they will make the proper decision. The crowd here is smarter than most in the hunting world, so if you want to have a debate on this forum, many would love to see that happen.

Please, bring your entire SFW/BGF posse and post your “facts.” The doldrums of winter could use some good entertainment and fact vetting.

16-Feb-12
Well Said Brother Fin Jason www.TheNewMexicoSportsman.com

From: Norseman
16-Feb-12
...and don't forget that the treasurer of NM SFW gets appointed to the NM Game & Fish Commission last year. Nothing to see here...move along.

From: Bullhound
16-Feb-12
Absolutely in agreement Randy. I have loathed the day that SFW came into Idaho and have seen BGF attempt to pass themselves off as saviors in many ways.

piranha is a word that comes to mind, or possibly blow fly................

From: Z Barebow
16-Feb-12
I noticed 30" chimed in with nothing constructive, so I made a choice to not stoop to his level in response.

All I will say is, Randy nicely stated. The educated hunter is the enemy of these groups. When these groups were in there infancy, they did not have a track record. Now that they have been established for a while, they cannot run away from their record/actions.

Actions speak louder than words. Don't hand me a pig and call it bacon.

From: Norseman
16-Feb-12
"Some of our members recently expressed concern with some proposed legislation, HB 2072. However, AZSFWC did not sponsor HB 2072, nor introduce HB 2072. We did hear an overview of the bill at our December Board meeting, and the Board voted to support the concept. We viewed the benefits as presented for sportsmen and women, youth, access and wildlife, not to mention Arizona's economy, as very positive. "

fresh from the AZ SFW February E newsletter. very detailed assessment.

From: TreeWalker
16-Feb-12
Also, SFW was in action when 1000s of tags were taken from the NR unguided pool. Publicly they claim they really, really tried but somehow it just turned out the unguided pool was the one hammered.

SFW needs tags to auction for the wealthy to buy. They need landowners to have lots of transferrable tags. All the auction and landowner tags means the outfitters get lots of clients.

Face it, SFW needs tags like Dracula needs blood. More, more, more.

And I am sick of all the SFW chapters trying to say they barely know Peay. Quacks like a duck. Walks like a duck. Steals our tags like a duck. That is a duck, by golly.

From: Don K
16-Feb-12
Stir up a hornets nest and they will come and get you!!!!!

Great informed information Fin

From: BB
17-Feb-12
I was talking to one of DP's cronies just today. I ask if he got to spend much time with Don at the expo, but he said Don was way too busy this year with the expo, his new sheep foundation and that he's campaigning hard and donating big $$$'s for Mitt Romney. He went on to say that if Mitt wins the Presidency, that he is sure that he (DP) will get a high position in Mitt's administration.

Think about that for a minute. I wonder what position that might be? I wonder where the big money he and his wife donate, comes from?

What position do feel he might have his eye on? I can assure you it would not be good for hunters or wildlife!!!!

But that is typical Don, he knows how to play the political game to a tee. So be aware, that if you cast a vote for for Mitt, you may also be casting a vote for DP.

Have a great bow hunt. BB

From: huntingbob
17-Feb-12
Way too much Bull going on with these orgs. I fell for it on the wolves in Colorado deal and joined the butt heads organization hoping to stop wolves from being dropped into Colorado. I will not renew!

From: 30inchbuck
17-Feb-12
Yes, most guys on Bowsite are well informed, however there is a lot of drivel out there.

The Wolf Issue in CO, Baca really was not even off the starting blocks, when lots of people called foul. People like Pat here. It was killed before it was more than a thought. Did BGF assist in this? I am sure there emails did not hurt matters. Did BGF stop it by themselves absolutely not.

As you have seen over and over,(however somehow not believe) each state is its own. No one in UT has any say in anything that we do or try to do in NM. I do the best to represent NM to best I can. I leave UT to UT, AK to AK, WY to WY. You get the picture. So even though some people go down some roads we in NM have no say in what they do in MT,AK,UT, ID and WY. Only thing I can do is represent my fellow members and sportsman here in NM. I do know that Robert got the position for Roberts actions. Not because SFW-UT put him there.

You mention the state governor’s tags; I do know any tag given by UT or NM that 90% of the auction money for the tags goes back to the state for on the ground projects, often those moneys are matched with Sikes money(at least in NM they are). I think that this model is similar across other states as well. There is no refuting this; it is in the regulations of each state. UT was posted, NM regulations are posted. I can post them here as well. State G&F do rely on those funds to do great on the ground projects. I think anyone that has been in the bookcliffs has seen first hand of some of those funds hitting the ground. I also remember that the NM Elk governor’s tag was installed by RMEF, Sheep was FNAWS, deer was MDF. I have not seen anyone attack those organizations for the “tag grab” you so hate.

Now onto the Wolf issue. “SFW/Big Game Forever repeatedly asked other national organizations to join the wolf delisting effort beginning in early 2010. These groups and many other "experts" repeatedly said it couldn't be done; some even were worried "that we would upset the environmentalists" and that "the wrong party controlled the White House and the Senate." SFW/BGF set about getting support from Congress; in 2010 HR 6028 and S 3919 were introduced to provide for delisting of the gray wolf. Working with Western and Midwestern state organizations, an incredible amount of pressure was brought to bear. Congress responded by making this a hotly debated issue, particularly among western Senators and Congressmen. As a result, wolves were debated on the very last days of Congress in 2010. It appeared that an initial delisting would occur in Congress in 2010, however wolf-delisting negotiations broke down in the final hours of the last two days in which Congress was in session. SFW/BGF built on the 2010 momentum in Congress with HR 509 and S 249 in 2011 once again calling for National Delisting. The bills, co-sponsored by more than 60 Representatives and Senators and representing 32 states, continued to increase the momentum necessary for action on wolf delisting. Wolf Delisting was hitting a high pitch in DC when SFW/BGF convened a meeting in Washington in February 16, 2011, bringing together representatives from a cross-section of wildlife and sportsmen groups, the Farm Bureau, Cattlemen. It appeared that a multi-state deal was very close and efforts were commenced to include Arizona in the deal as well. These efforts were largely halted when Idaho Representative Mike Simpson, amended the first Continuing Resolution Bill to obtain delisting in Idaho and Montana. While portions of Oregon, Washington and a sliver of Utah were included as part of the delisted Distinct Population Segment, the Simpson language amounted to a deal for Idaho and Montana. In particular, the bill required "approved management plans" to manage wolf populations to protect other wildlife which clearly was targeted to just Idaho and Montana. National wildlife organizations endorsed Congressman Simpson's amendment (which later became known as the Simpson/Tester amendment) in addition to S 249 and HR 509. This action immediately switched the focus from national delisting as Congress turned it's attention to the bill which is now included as part of the continuing resolution to fund the government. SFW/BGF worked for the last several weeks to improve upon the two state delisting and was able to provide some safe harbor language for Wyoming due primarily to perceived inequities of reversing a favorable court ruling for Wyoming's plan. No additional improvements were provided. End Result: The Simpson amendment prevailed - not because of the work done by national organizations- rather because of the extensive support for Congressional delisting built over the last year. It is apparent that key Senators in the Democratic majority passed the Simpson/Tester amendment in response to the groundwork that had been laid for national wolf delisting by SFW/BGF. When well known national organizations capitulated to political pressure and supported all options, these members of Congress felt they had sufficient political support from the sportsmen community to pass a watered-down bill. While Congressional intervention to provide for lasting wolf delisting is an important symbolic step in the right direction, it is clear that the bill did not solve the issue for 48 states. We are grateful SFW/BGF was not afraid to take on the fight and build the firestorm to ensure some level of wolf delisting. I am proud to have been a part of their effort and know from where I speak because I was in the belly of the beast as things were unfolding and witnessed this incredible happening."

This is the nuts of what occurred, and yes when the “other orgs” threw out the hard work BFG did, there were some hurt feelings, an email was sent. Then the “other orgs” took that email and turned out a press release. I am sure no one here ever sent an email that was regretted later.

North American Model of Wildlife Management, First there are some organizations that have hid behind this model to stay out of the wolf battle. Once the numbers reached the target breeding pair numbers, the state game management should have been let to manage the population. However, those same orgs stayed out of the battle quoting the North American Model of Wildlife Management and let the environmentalist win battle after battle. Yet the wolf numbers keep increasing until the point we are today. It is a sad state of affairs when the elk herds in ID, MT and WY was decimated to the point we have today. Instead of catching this problem back when, it would have not become an epidemic. So I have no issue with the model, I have an issue with orgs taking the back stage hiding behind this and for not taking a stance long ago.

From: arctichill
17-Feb-12
"No one in UT has any say in anything that we do or try to do in NM." I was actually told in a face-to-face converstaion that SFW NM had no affiliation with SFW Utah. According to an SFW Chair, Robert actually returned 100% of their marketing material etc. and paid $25,000 from his own pocket to fund SFW NM...so there would be no ties to UT. Of course I asked, "Why keep the SFW name then? That would be like opening a McDonald's, paying the franchise fees and not using the Golden Arches???"

Anyway, I went to the Utah website and inquired about becoming a member in NM. As expected, Robert Espinoza personally contacted me within hours. I didn't answer, but saved the voicemail. "I'm following up on an inquiry you made on OUR Utah website."...it's always worth a nice chuckle around the campfire.

Last legislative session the UBNM lobbied for SB196 which Robert Espinoza [SFW] and the coalition they belong to was strongly against. The coalition is made up of a wide array of mostly agricultural interests like the cattle growers, wool growers and council of guides and outfitters to name just a few. The legislative session was very divided, and often the exchanges were heated.

As we know, in the end SB196 was passed, but only after some unjust amendments [NR, non-guided cut to 6%]. In any case, after it passed Robert Espinoza and the SFW couldn't begin claiming full credit to NM residents for the positive changes it made for average NM residents. How could he oppose the thing the whole way through and then claim credit when the bill passed?

Let's face it, the NM Council of Guides and Outfitters, the Cattle Growers, the Wool Growers and a handful of other organizations fought this bill hard. While I was on the isle opposite from them, I respect them for being honest and consistent with their position after the bill passed. Robert couldn't jump that isle fast enough...at least regarding the message he conveyed throughout NM. I can only imagine the tone of the conversation he had had with the NR's. LOL....I'll bet he's wearing a NY Giants shirt right now.

Regardless of the issue or an organization's position about the issue, I think having at least a little integrity is important.

From: trophyhill
17-Feb-12
"Yes, most guys on Bowsite are well informed, however there is a lot of drivel out there".

the only drivel i hear is what you are spewing out of both sides of your mouth Dusty. the SFW has been exposed for what it is and what it stands for.

From: MNHunter
17-Feb-12
30inchbuck, That was a nice spin on the wolf delisting but I would like to make 1 thing clear:

The S 249 and HR 509 might be great fodder for collecting dues from unsuspecting sportsmen but they had absolutely 0 (read zero) chance of over EVER passing. They never even made it out of committee (nor will they ever). The Simpson/Tester rider was the only legislation that stood a chance but rather than get behind it, SFW/BGF tried to kill it. This is indisputable and you’ve admitted as much. For SFW/BGF to now claim credit for the Simpson/Tester rider (and thank Simpson but ignore Tester because SFW is trying to get their plant in his Senate seat) is truly a slap in the face to all those people (like Big Fin and others) and organizations that have been fighting for wolf delisting for a long time. Not 2010 like Johnny come lately BGF but over a decade longer!

From: T43
17-Feb-12
That drivel about the wolf delisting is so full of crap it makes me gag. The only thing worse than trying to stop Simpson Tester is now they are lying about it. It must be working last night at our RMEF committee meeting I was told there was word going around that they may have a local chapter here in Idaho .

17-Feb-12
MNH, beat me to it. Fighting for wolf delisting since 2010 hardly qualifies ... except the Johnny-come-lately award. Some of us have been fighting since before the critters even hit the ground. That's nearly 20 years!

From: D-How
17-Feb-12
SFW Idaho is trying to get their hands on more Govenor tags and by making landowner tags legal to sell.None of this is good for Idaho,were headed down a bad path if this legislation passes as written. If it does I wonder how many of these tags will be at the next Convention in Utah?

17-Feb-12
Guys, being from KS I was not even aware of the magnitude of all of this. Very informative thread. Good luck, keep up the good fight!

From: trophyhill
17-Feb-12
D-How

that seems to be their MO. to get entrenched in the local governments or Game depts and manipulate the system. i think they prey on clueless politicians and then sell them a bill of goods and before anyone realizes, it's too late. AZ did a great job of sniffing these crooks out. unfortunately the NM Gov did not and appointed one of them to our game commission.

17-Feb-12
I know 30" wasn't responsible for this, but we don't know his intentions in his home state. He does belong to this group, and the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.

This was posted on the MM form by Sagebrush. Wow. Look at where they allocate their money. This info is unreal.

Quote: 400elk You touched on the problem I have with SFW in UT and AZ. Everyone here has been commenting on what should be done for the wildlife and habitat, and whether quality or quantity should be the issue as if SFW would ever do anything to improve the situation. SFW exists to generate revenue for SFW. SFW spends as little as possible on wildlife, but just enough to keep sucking in the uneducated and fleecing them for dollars.

According to the 2007 tax returns for SFW, which is the latest year I've benn able to find, SFW took in $3,348,790. They spent $3,068,613 and of the total money spent, $83,687 went to big game habitat improvement, $30,000 went to a grouse study, $334,365 went to habitat projects and $1,914 went to turkey feeding for a total of $449,966 spent in a manner somewhat related to wildlife. The other $2.6 million was spent on management fees, consulting fees, Expo costs and tag purchases. If you want to understand the priorities of a company or an individual, you need only to look where they spend their money. SFW spends 14% of their revenues on wildlife and 86% on funding raising and paying their cronies. In AZ, its even worse. 95% of the funds raised by SFW in AZ went to one individual to prepare their monthly e-newsletter and maintain the website. Zero went to wildlife. I haven't loked into MT, WY,ID and AK, but I'm sure its much the same.

Anyone that thinks SFW exists for the benefit of wildlife is just refusing to face the facts or is the recipient of their dirty money. How much good could've been done if $3 million in donations were given to an organization that actually spent the money on projects? In my opinion, SFW, and any other similar organization, sucks the vast majority of discretionary funds available to benefit wildlife out of the market and squanders it on their own greed. Guys like this need to be exposed and drummed out of the wildlife community

From: trevore
17-Feb-12
SS:

Thats nuts. What happened to the 90% goes back to the states for projects?? Can you post a link to where you found the info, or what you google to find that kind of info, I'd be interested in finding the latest! Maybe that will open some eyes!

From: 30inchbuck
17-Feb-12
How soon do you forget, Several years ago RMEF members where writing letters begging the brass to take a hard stance on the growing wolf situation. Look in the back issues of Bugle. They stood right on the fence quoting the North American Wildlife model. Thus ignoring the growing problem. I remember this, I am sure more do as well.

I then became a member in 2002 of SFW because from day one they have been fighting the wolf issue and each state is separate(actions and money). SFW-UT could not fight the federal battle because of structure, thus BGF was started for one reason, and one reason alone. Take the wolf battle head on. Put the mangement in the states hands, not dictated down by the pro-wolf federal agencies.

From: stringgunner
17-Feb-12
Go to this link:

http://www2.guidestar.org/

Register for an account. Its free. This site is a national clearing house for all non-profits. You can get on and look at their 990 tax forms and see these chapters and their affiliates' bankrolls. They are throwing some serious cash around!

Interesting to also note, the names they are registered under vs. the names they actually use. I looked at one 990 for one of the Utah clubs that simply brings in the money and then transfers it out to another....seems like they are transferring funds from one to another which seems odd...almost like they are trying to cover something up? Fortunately for those with the knowledge to follow the rabbit trail, with this site you can track down their income and expenses. The amount spent on travel, advertising, conventions, expos, etc. far surpasses the amount spent on conservation projects. Check it out and see for yourself, for someone with time enough and know how this is could be the way to take these organizations to the cleaners or at least make public their spending habits.

This is all legal, 990 tax forms are open to the public!

Happy researching!

From: Big Fin
17-Feb-12
30inch - Gotta ask, you getting spoon fed this stuff? Do you actually believe it, or are you getting paid to post stuff here in a manner that makes you look so uninformed?

Many have been involved in the MT wolf issue since 1995, both in MT and in the DC politics.

You were not here for the MT issue. I bet if I called some ID buddies, you were not in ID, either. You were not in DC on this issue.

SFW was not there until the heavy lifting was over.

BGF was not there until the money train showed up.

The MT state chapter of your beloved SFW did not get formed until the winter of 2010/11.

BGF did not get formed until 2010.

And you claim your guys were involved from the beginning.

Some struggle to read a calendar? 1995 to 2010 is 15 (FIFTEEN) years. 2010 to 2011 is 1 (ONE) year. One year is "Donny Come Lately" in the minds of most.

And when the SFW/BGF heroes did get involved, they did everything in their power to keep management from the states, rather than letting the states get management power. Just the opposite as your claim.

A couple quetions. Not a test, so don't fret.

Q-1. Do you know what bill provided delisting and gave wolf seasons to MT and ID?

A-1. Real slow - it was the S I M P S O N - T E S T E R rider to the 2011 budget bill.

Q-2. Do your know the status of the beloved SFW/BGF bill, H.R. 509, the silver bullet we were all supposed to jump behind?

A-2. It is still stuck in a House Committee, having not even moved far enough along to have a committee vote, let alone a House vote or a full Congressional vote.

Q-3. Do you know where H.R. 509 is today, a year after the SFW/BGF guy, Denny Rehberg, introduced it in Congress?

A-3. IT IS DEAD. It was dead on arrival. It was dead the day it was outlined on a bar napkin.

Your BGF/SFW dudes did not take the wolf battle head on. They took it to the back rooms where the money was being counted.

You were not there. You were not in Helena. You were not in DC. BGF/SFW fairy tales don't fly among those who know the truth.

Not RMEF, SCI, B&C, nor any other group could stop a Federal reintroduction. The three states, WY, ID, MT signed the reintroduction agreement in 1994 agreeing to a deal with the USFWS.

Whether you know it or not, over 70% of Montanans weighed in supporting the wolf reintroduction as was written in those agreements signed with the USFWS. When it got beyond what was agreed to, MT people got fired up and did something about it, as did ID folks, as did RMEF, NRA B&C, ......

And what MT guys did was to go to Senator Tester, the same as the PO'd Idaho guys did when they went to Representative Simpson. They did something about it by getting that rider attached to the budget bill in April 2011. The result is that MT and ID got wolf seasons.

As is often the BGF/SFW tact, when stepping on your own droppings, try throw a few of those droppings on other organizations; organizations who actually supported the Simpson-Tester bill that got us our seasons and organizations that actually worked toward progress.

Next your guys will tell you to blame NRA, B&C, SCI, CSF, et al, the same way your leaders did when they got caught red handed, taking money from MT and ID hunters, then using it in DC to screw over those same MT and ID hunters.

Your people already tried blaming every other group, so I guess RMEF may as well be the target today. Sure have made a lot of friends in that process.

The SFW/BGF folks have been sporting size 3XL asshats since they tried to defend their efforts to screw MT and ID hunters last April. To avoid the same outcome, you would be well served to rethink the recitation of unfounded party propaganda, on topics to which you come across as being misinformed.

I previously gave you credit for being well-intended. I change my mind.

From: 30inchbuck
18-Feb-12
So, BigFin you must be a politician, Spin-Spin.

As stated yes the Simpson - Tester, delisted in 2 states MT & ID. What did that gain WY, MN or any other state. Fact is the original Simpson Rider eliminated the court battle that WY had won.

Never said BGF was there from the start, they where formed for this issue, to get the wolf delisted - IN ALL STATES! I said SFW UT took the stance before and then formed BGF.

As far as RMEF, back in the day I remember being astounded in there position. This is not handed down, this is what I remember reading in Bugle. At the time I was only in RMEF and NRA. NRA I never seem any thing about the wolfs, it was always about gun laws.

Back in the committee is when the other orgs made the deal. So yes it killed HR509, in committee. If the other orgs would have backed it, it could have made it.

So, it looks like that you are all over the Simpson Tester for MT and ID, so basically your saying that screw the other states, we are getting ours and hanging the others states out to dry? This is not a poke I just want to see your stance for all the other states?

From: Big Fin
18-Feb-12
30inch - How did the Simpson-Tester rider screw all the other states? Don't bother to answer. I will provide the history since Simpson-Tester passed, and will provide it in black and white below.

Your comment is exactly what BGF/SFW said would happen, but exactly what did NOT happen. They claimed the Great Lakes States would be screwed; that WY was now sunk. Let's examine how accurate that claim is.

Q: Who got their delisting in December of 2011?

A: The Great Lakes states - MN, WI, and MI. They are making plans for hunts this fall.

So, doesn't look like the prophecy of the SFW/BGF prognosticators came to fruition. They were completely wrong on that one.

When Simpson-Tester passed, the wolf nuts were at each other's throat. Right there should have been a sign it was progress. They knew if S-T passed and was upheld in court, the path was laid for how it would happen in other states if the wolf nuts overplayed their hand.

When the pro-wolfers lost their appeal that Simpson-Tester was unconstitutional related to the language of "without judicial review," the wolf wingnuts folded their tents in MN, WI, and MI.

Unfortunately I live in the town where most those wolf wingnuts have their offices. They were ready to kill each other when S-T passed. They knew what S-T meant for their future plans.

I couldn't have been happier. S-T gave us wolf seasons in MT and ID; proved SFW/BGF to be completely wrong in their forecasts, and in the process, swept the serial plantiff wolf lovers off the playing field in MN/WI/MI. A trifecta if ever there was one.

All of that, in spite of the people you are defending saying just the opposite.

If you had read the Simpson-Tester rider, you not have made your comment about the S-T rider screwing WY. That comment is completely false. If you had read it, you would know the rider was expanded to accommodate WY.

The rider was specifically changed to protect the decisions WY had won with Judge Johnson in November 2010. I provide a copy of that rider below. The last part, specific to the WY cases you say were messed up by this rider, was added for the sole purpose of protecting WY.

Given how bad the WY Wolf Coaltion (under much influence from SFW/BGF) made life for Simpson and Tester, they could have easily told WY to go pound sand. But, they, and the hunters of MT and ID wanted to give WY all the options possible to go forward with their strategy. So, the rider protected the cases WY had won.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

"SEC. 1713. Before the end of the 60-day period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall reissue the final rule published on April 2, 2009 (74 Fed. Reg. 15123 et seq.) without regard to any other provision of statute or regulation that applies to issuance of such rule. Such reissuance (including this section) shall not be subject to judicial review and shall not abrogate or otherwise have any effect on the order and judgment issued by the United States District Court for the District of Wyoming in Case Numbers 09-CV-118J and 09-CV-138J on November 18, 2010."

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

I hope you follow that - the rider specifically protected WY. I know that is not the story spun by BGF/SFW, but there it is in black and white. As a matter of Congressional record. Maybe Don and Ryan will try to convince you, and other SFW state leaders, that the Congressional record is incorrect.

With that, we now see the WY legislature likely to pass the deal struck by Governor Meade and the USFWS. If so, WY should have a wolf season this year.

I know that is the exact opposite of what SFW/BGF tells their loyalist. It is the opposite of what they told the public when Simpson-Tester was passed, and what they have since used to continue raising money for their pilferage.

You say H.R 509 would have passed. You either ignore recent Congressional history of anything messing with the ESA, or you failed fifth grade civics. Everyone laughed at that bill. It had all of 60 people in Congress supporting it. 60 out of 535. It takes 51 in the Senate and 218 in the House. That is a total of 269. Your boys were only 208 votes short.

The stupid wording of the bill is what killed it. Along with BGF/SFW and their bush league politics. It was never going to pass. That is why it is still in a committee. No one killed it in committee. The committee couldn't get enough votes to move it along.

I must be really bored to spend an hour with this history lesson. Must be my sympathies toward people getting taken advantage of.

How long do we have to continue disproving the falsehoods these groups promote? Your leaders lied about their involvement in the MT/ID wolf deal. They have been wrong on every projection of what would happen to other states.

So, do you still believe what they are telling you? What you just posted in that last reply is almost verbatim of what Don and Ryan put out on the websites to try convince others to kill Simpson-Tester.

Not sure how much more obvious I can make it for you or others inclined to believe the stuff BGF/SFW tries to pawn off. I suspect most following this thread see it pretty well.

If not for the huge problems those two groups have created, and what they are doing in AK, AZ, WY, ID, MT, UT, I would not waste your time, or my time, on this exercise. But, these groups are a pox like no other. Many have tired of their tactics and will go through these exercises to show what is going on.

To answer your questions

Q: Am I a politician.

A: No. I am usually despised by most politicians. In my real life I am a CPA. I work to disinherit the Federal Treasury by keeping money in the pockets of my clients.

Q: "What did S-T do for other states?"

A. It got them delisting. It got them wolf seasons. Something the SFW/BGF bill, H.R. 509 could have never done.

Q: What is my stance for all the other states?

A: The same as it has always been. Do all we can to maintain state rights and where we can help them with wolves in their states, do what we can. Simpson-Tester pretty much followed that path.

I hope that answers all of your questions. Not sure why I felt compelled to answer them, given you have never answered any asked of you.

It is late and I am tired. A discussion where you continue to regurgitate the same patented falsehoods of SFW/BGF makes it hard to maintain calm and courtesy, so I am stepping away from this thread.

I appreciate you wanting to continue this debate, but you have been taken advantage of by your group to such a degree, that I am probably going to let these last few exchanges stand as the proof of who is jerking your change and how bad it is getting jerked. If you cannot see that, nothing more I can provide will change your mind.

Best of luck in the volunteer work you do. I wish your efforts were employed toward a group that was more honest and forthright with their members and the hunting segment as a whole.

Thanks for pitching us such homerun balls, allowing us to explain what happened in the wolf issue. Without you setting things up so well, I am not sure the facts could have been made so clear.

Happy Hunting!

From: trophyhill
18-Feb-12
that was very educational Big Fin. thanks for taking the time to enlighten us and to expose the true facts of the topic of discussion brought on by WapitiBob. and thank you Bob!

From: 30inchbuck
18-Feb-12
So who got he WY rule inserted? Details not drival, Please

From: elkslaya
18-Feb-12
Cmon 30". Big Fin has done everything he could to educate you. Here is a famous quote maybe you've heard that may apply here. "You can lead a horse to water"

I think its time for you to either do your homework for yourself. I mean really do it for yourself. Look this stuff up. You are doing yourself a diservice by not independently looking up the facts objectively for yourself. Its almost like you don't mind being the puppet. You are not the puppet master. Cut the strings and think for your self

From: Don K
18-Feb-12
School is in session!!!!!!!!

From: Norseman
18-Feb-12
~ below is a copied email blast from AZSFW. Why I am getting these all of sudden is anyone's guess.~ Anyone else suddenly getting these?~

In our effort to improve things that we see as very problematic for sportsmen and wildlife, we made a significant error in not providing information to the Sportsmen community on HB 2072 before introducing it at the Legislature. We apologize for our mistake. Below is an explanation of HB 2072 and the issues we were attempting to address. We ask that you have an open mind as you review the issues we see as being critically important to protecting our hunting and fishing heritage for future generations.

For the record, AZSFW is not a chapter nor an affiliate of Utah SFW. Having said that, we do believe they have had very positive impacts on improving wildlife habitat and increasing tags for hunters.

What We See as the Big Problems Facing Sportsmen

Problem #1. Loss of Wildlife: Our wildlife herds have been slowly declining or have at best remained status quo over the past 16 years despite significant increases in the Arizona Game and Fish Department's (AZGFD) annual budget and the efforts of the species conservation organizations to improve their habitat by spending millions over this same period. The tables below show game and fish budget increases and the number of permits issued and harvests for 1994-2010. We think you will agree that "Rebuilding our wildlife herds is Priority #1".

On average, except for elk, we are losing about 2,000 permits per year and have been doing so over the past sixteen years. We can't explain why the AZGFD is issuing more elk tags while harvests are declining nor can we explain the continuing reduction in harvests (other than herd size) despite the wide use of game cameras, long range rifles, wide spread use of ATVs and other technical improvements in binoculars, range finders and bow hunting equipment.

Problem # 2. Recruitment & Retention of Hunters and Anglers to Maintain the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation (AZGFD):

The AZGFD wildlife management concept is built on the NAMWC which relies primarily on Sportsmen to underwrite the cost of the AZGFD budget for its management of wildlife. In Arizona's case Sportsmen are responsible for providing about 70% of the AZGFD's budget.

It is imperative for the AZGFD that in future years we have at least as many Sportsmen replacing us when we are too old to carry on yet the data shows Sportsmen numbers are declining. Species organization memberships are also declining and generally for the same reason - failure to attract the youth and others to replace the old guard. From 1996-2006 the number of licensed Sportsmen declined by 8,000 hunters and 90,000 anglers and we are told by AZGFD that there were between 14-17% decreases in 2008, 2009 and 2010. We believe this decline is, in part, the result of the decline in wildlife numbers which reduce opportunities for harvest.

While recruitment and retention of hunters and anglers will be an on-going effort, it will become a bigger priority after our wildlife herds are on the increase.

Failure to recruit youth and others to replace sportsmen will force AZGFD to seek other options which the sportsmen will not like such as increasing license and tag fees.

Problem # 3. Access to Public Lands: Access to public land is becoming more, not less, difficult. Several factors contribute to this problem including landowners closing access across private lands, increased forest road closures and increased wilderness designations.

Arizona is home to more than 4.5 million acres of wilderness, one of five states with the most wilderness areas and acres. Another 800,000 plus acres is currently being evaluated for wilderness designation. More wilderness designation will mean fewer access points and more challenges for AZGFD to manage our wildlife unimpeded by wilderness use restrictions.

Pressure is being continuously applied to the U. S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management by extreme environmental groups to close more roads. The most recent proposed travel management plans for forests in Arizona call for more restrictions on camping and closure of more roads.

Southeastern Arizona is one of the more challenging areas when it comes to access as private land closures are preventing access to adjacent public lands. Checkerboard patterns of land ownership create their own problem and preclude sportsmen from accessing thousands of acres of public land in other parts of the state.

AZGFD has identified access as a growing problem in its strategic plan and just last year was forced to close thousands of acres to antelope hunting in Unit 19B (resulting in a loss of 65 tags) because a landowner would not allow access across their private land to adjacent public lands with no other access.

Problem # 4. Environmental Activists: These groups have been chipping away at the Sportsmen since we can remember (and that's a long time). When they passed the anti-trapping initiative in 1994 after failing the first time in 1992, Sportsmen did not have the political support, organization or the money to counter it. As a result of its passage we are now suffering the consequences as there does not appear to be an effective substitute or plan to make up for the control of predators that trapping was able to provide.

We were unable to win Prop 102 in 2000 to prohibit management of wildlife at the ballot box or prop 109 (the right to hunt and fish) in 2010, in large part, due to lack of sufficient financial support from the Sportsmen's community. History has shown that it takes a minimum of $1-3 Million to run an effective yes campaign and similar amounts to counter initiatives by environmentalists.

The next referendum to ban mountain lion hunting is coming.  The Center for Biological Diversity is holding a seminar on the ecological role of bears, wolves and lions and "how their indiscriminate killing by humans - whether hunters or government agencies-disrupts predator's social relationships, sparking more conflicts with people". The AZGFD's inability to manage mountain lions will be just another and possible final nail in the coffin. Do you know how many deer a lion eats a year? We must be ready to respond when the next issue presents itself.  

This Trend is not Good for Wildlife, AZGFD or Sportsmen

Declining wildlife = fewer permits Decrease in Access = inability to reach prime hunting areas in the state Decrease in Sportsmen = more challenges for AZGFD to manage our wildlife Unchecked Environmentalist Activities = fewer hunting & fishing opportunities in the future

This is why HB 2072 is important and why AZSFW is trying to help solve the problem

How do we Solve the Problem?

The legislation, HB 2072, is meant to create a 3-4 day Sportsmen Expo annually in Arizona. The Expo would generate significant revenues that would be invested in programs specially designed to start bending the trend lines discussed above in a positive direction.   It is a big deal - Bigger than anything contemplated so far in Arizona. It would generate about $25 million in new economic activity for our State and her economy. It would also generate significant dollars for Sportsmen. This would empower them to directly and at their choice come up with their own solutions to augment those of AZGFD.

1. Special Draw Tags (Defined as Sportsmen Tags): Most of the tags described in the legislation (about 276) are existing draw tags and would remain as draw tags but would have special rules beneficial to sportsmen and would only be available at the Expo. Each application for the draw would only cost $5 (compared to the Department's cost of $7.50) and applicants could apply for any or all of the hunts for which they have an interest. If you are successful, the tag costs you nothing. Special rules for draw tags include the following:

All tags would be exempt from the bag limits. In other words, you could get drawn for one of these tags and also get drawn for a draw tag in the AZGFD's annual draw. Mule deer and Coues deer would be treated as separate species. This means you could (if you are lucky) buy a raffle tag for both Mule Deer and Coues Deer hunts and if you are drawn for both, you get both tags. The AZGFD would be precluded from not letting you participate in the Department's annual draw if you were successful at the Expo. No preference would be given. All $5 applications would be treated equally. You would still need to prioritize your hunts (1st, 2nd, choice and so forth).

The special draw program was designed to provide the Sportsmen with a "stand alone" broad-based draw independent from and with fewer restrictions than the AZGFD's annual draw. While the special draw tags are not designed to be the big money maker we believe they will generate a lot of interest and thus increase the number of attendees at the Expo. These draw tags are comprised of the following:    

Mule Deer and Coues Deer: There are about 156 tags available to draw which includes one tag for each hunt number for archery, muzzle loader and rifle hunts. Youth and HAM hunts are excluded. Elk: There are 50 cow elk tags, 21 bull elk tags (for early elk hunts to include archery, muzzle loader and rifle hunts) and 10 late rifle bull tags Javelina: 25 Javelina tags; Turkey: 14 turkey tags; Antelope: 2 antelope tags

Remember these are not new permits. They are existing tags allocated to a special drawing.

2. Auction Tags: The legislation contains two separate and distinct types of auction tags, each type meant to appeal to different kinds of buyers or buyer profiles. Auction tags are necessary to generate the bulk of money needed to accomplish the goals of the legislation. They are an investment to grow more wildlife in the future. Remember we are currently loosing 2,000 tags a year on average so these 54 tags should be looked at as a means to generate more tags over time. The two types of Auction tags are described as follows:

Governor Tags: There are 16 Governor tags including 2 sheep (one Desert and one Rocky), 2 Elk, 2 Mule Deer, 2 Coues Deer, 2 buffalo, 1 Antelope, 2 Bear and 3 Turkey. These tags are 360 day tags. Legislator Tags: There are 38 Legislator tags of which 21 are Coues Deer, 7 Mule Deer, 10 Elk and 2 Antelope. These tags are for seasons only. For example, if you hunt the archery hunt and are unsuccessful you can continue to hunt in that unit during the following season using the current allowed weapon.   3. Use of Funds:   While the legislation is silent on the structure a qualifying organization would use to best allocate the funds, it was our intent that committees would be formed comprised of organization member representatives to determine the most effective, efficient and beneficial use of tag proceeds in each of the three primary areas : #1 Increasing Wildlife Herds; #2 Improving Access; and #3 Hunter and Angler Recruitment and Retention.

Example: If Arizona Sportsmen for Wildlife Conservation (AZSFWC) were to be selected as the qualifying organization to create and manage the EXPO, it is not just a single organization, rather it is an organization of its parts (there are 17 member organizations that comprise AZSFWC). Regarding the Increasing Wildlife Herds Committee, we would expect to see members of the various species groups sitting on this committee and making the decisions on use of these funds. We would expect predator management to play heavily in this. The Access committee would most likely be comprised of individuals from areas where we have the biggest problems with access like the southeastern part of the state and so on. The Hunter and Angler Recruitment and Retention Committee would be comprised of organization member representatives interested in and best equipped to deal with this issue. Each committee would be expected to define metrics to measure its success. Ten percent would be allocated for administrative costs.

Then, if we are threatened by enviro-litigants or their initiatives that have a detrimental impact on wildlife herds, then we would react by allocating the money to deal with it at the time. What is important here is that we would have a stable source of funding so we could plan accordingly. As we see it no one issue is more important than another except our primary goal is to increase our wildlife herds and do everything we can to further our hunting and angling heritage for future generations to enjoy.

4.Summary Most of the tags (about 276 of the total) are existing draw tags with special rules giving sportsmen a second opportunity to get drawn separate and apart from the AZGFD draw. Only 54 tags would be reserved for auction, without which we could not raise the money necessary to accomplish the objectives specified in the legislation. In other words, we would be investing in 54 tags a year to help increase our wildlife herd numbers by several thousand. Or we can keep the status quo and continue to reduce the number of permits for sportsmen by approximately 2,000 a year. We respectfully ask for your support in this endeavor.

  Suzanne Gilstrap

Executive Director/Government Affairs Consultant for AZSFW

From: knothead
18-Feb-12
Seems to me they would have garnered more support from sportsman had they presented this information ahead of trying to sneak HB2072 through. AZSFW needs to rebuild public trust.

I'm interested to see how the member groups support this idea. Will they buy into the recommendation? I see Yuma Valley had already withdrawn its membership from AZSFW.

I know one thing. What we are currently doing is not working very well.

I have not made up my mind and until I do, I am keeping an open mind to all suggestions.

From: hunt
18-Feb-12
We only want 54 tags to sell to the rich guys. So they don't have to play by the rules.

It might have to be 74 next year & a few more the year after.

No I don't want my non resident tags going up for auction.

From: YZF-88
18-Feb-12
Only 54 tags? What a great deal.----->sarcasm. Don't give'em an inch.

Thanks for the info BigFin.

Anybody in the t-shirt and hat business? "I blindly supported BGF/SFW and all I got was the XXL asshat I'm wearing"

18-Feb-12
Seems the shill for SFW is contradicting himself. First it's from 2010, then it's from the beginning (2002) then it's since reintroduction ('94-'95).

From: Z Barebow
18-Feb-12
Lesson #1 30"- When you are in a deep hole, first step to getting out that hole is put the shovel down and quit digging.

If you keep commenting, the @sshat may need to be resized to 4XL.

From: BULELK1
18-Feb-12
The big LIE is that these 'Franchise-states of SFW-Utah' HAVE not been an active Franchise since 1994.

Those type statements are TOTAL--normal SFW LIE's.

SFW barely got started with the suck-up to then Gov. Leavit in Utah.....1994.

SFW did appsolutely NOTHING until the invent of the Conservation--for sale--highest bidder!!! NOTHING until those tags became available at a mandated 90/10% split.

30-wanna-be Inches.....you gotta get a clue on your huff -an- blowhard chit....We are a very educated hunter/sportman now-a-days.

Won't be long until someone post the SFW-New Mexico tax returns.....non-Profit my azzzz.

Good luck, Robb

From: Watts
18-Feb-12
I've never been one to believe that hunting is only noble if it a "poor man's hobby" and that the "evil-rich"(define rich)are somehow destroying the institution of hunting.

I have no problem with "Auction" tags or how much they go for when the majority, and I do mean SUBSTANTIAL majority of that money goes to real-world conservation.

Where I do have a problem is when an organization or person maneuvers to get sportsmans tags, auctions them off to someone voluntarily giving their wealth for it in the name of conservation, and then flipping a small token toward a respected group while dumping a sizable chunk towards their "administrative" costs, and then the majority of the money into their own projects that don't amouunt to a hill of beans!

If that is the case here, then suffice to say I do not support SFW/BGF.

I challenge any SFW supporter out there to please prove this wrong. Because in the event this is all false and a great organization is being lynched, then it is terrible wrong that needs to be righted.

If this is true, which I'm beginning to believe, then to h$ll with you!

Watts

From: Big Fin
18-Feb-12

Big Fin's embedded Photo
Big Fin's embedded Photo
Watts - Since 30inch buck isn't going to answer your question, here is the detail to the Form 990 for Sportsman for Habitat, an affiliate of SFW, sharing common officers, board members, mailing addresses, etc., as posted on another site by someone formerly close to the organization. No one seems to be able to find the difference between SFW from SFH. Form 990 is the tax form non-profits file with the IRS. This is from 2007.

One look at the total expenditures shows well over $3MM. The amount that went to habitat projects is less than 10% of that.

Who knows what is buried in all those other line items, but I suspect it is not habitat work or it would show up in the habitat line. Again, just providing facts for others to make up their minds.

From: jimmyt
18-Feb-12
Stringgunner:

Unfortunately the 990 form for SFW-NM is not available on the website you provided. To be fair I could not find the 990 form for RMEF either.

From: Watts
18-Feb-12
Thanks Fin.

One question:

1)$485,242 consultaion fee. I know Don is listed as the founder and consultant on their web site. So is this Don's cut we're looking at?

From: jimmyt
18-Feb-12

jimmyt's embedded Photo
jimmyt's embedded Photo
FYI 2010

From: Bigdan
18-Feb-12
One of the things I heard from one of there guys was they were going to get a black powder season in Montana. During the Archery season.Then I started to here more and more about negative stuff about them. Then I went to a local wildlife groups meeting and they were there trying to get all the locals signed up. After hearing there sale pitch I don't think they fooled anyone in the room

From: stringgunner
19-Feb-12
jimmyt- I just went to the page and was easily able to pull up RMEF with no problem, at least their 2008 990. I could not bring up NM SFW but am not sure what year they formed, if it was post 2008 it may not be on this website yet.

But according to the RMEF in 2008 alone, they gave more than 4 million in conservation projects among other projects. I have looked up sfw in other states and such and have yet to see where they have contributed more than that in any one year when their net earnings were far more than 4 mil.

But again, their rabbit trails (through other names and such) makes it hard to track. Just sayin'

From: arctichill
20-Feb-12
Norseman,

If AZSFW has no affiliation with SFW Utah (that claim has VERY falsely been made about NM SFW of which 30 inch is a BOD) then why doesn't the AZ group omit the SFW from their name entirely? To operate as AZ SFW with no supposed affiliation would be about as smart a move as if I were to open an investment firm by the name of "Madoff/NM Investments"!?!?

I think Big Fin has done as clear a job as anyone could do educating the public about the fraudulent behaviors of this group. Why share their name?????

I'm not sure how much Suzanne Gilstrap (who is credited for most of your post) makes as one of your consultants (It sure seems like all chapters of SFW sure like to employ those consultants), but I would suggest taking a real hard look at what you pay your marketing consultant. If I handled the marketing for AZ SFW, it would be called AZ "anything but SFW" faster than Don Peay can say the word...... "SOLD".

From: Norseman
20-Feb-12
Chill Arctichill,

I was just posting the email I got. Copied and Pasted verbatim, and why I am suddenly getting these emails is anyone's guess. Maybe they are getting addresses fromt he G&F? Sending out mass emails to cover their arse!

Just posting to let all now what they are up to. As for the rest or you last post about consultants...? I have no idea what you are talking about.

From: T43
20-Feb-12
Looks like Idaho also has a listing for Sportsmen for Habitat but there is no other data available.

20-Feb-12
Idaho does not require financial disclosure from non-profit orgs. I've tired for years to get the financial reports of more than a few rip-off sportsman's groups ... all of whom hide behind the non-profit curtain. The best you can do in Idaho is the filings with the Sec. of State's office that show ownership, company officers, and/or board members along with dates of filings and annual meeting dates.

If you want to know where they get and spend their money, good luck. Very many exist primarily to pay themselves a huge salery for running the non-profit to raise money to pay themselves for running the non-profit, to raise money ...

You get the idea.

The Old Sarge

From: Bullhound
20-Feb-12
I put SFW and BGF on my "banned list" for emails...........

Somehow I feel cleaner because of it............

From: KY EyeBow
20-Feb-12
This whole thread reminds me of one of my favorite "lines" from an old Clint Eastwood "spaghetti western", "Don't piss down my back and tell me it's rainin'......". Thank goodness we have guys like Randy who are astute enough to see thru all the "smoke and mirrors" and then willing to let the rest of us know about it. Hats off to ya!!

From: Hot Rod
20-Feb-12
Thanks for all the great info Big Fin.

From: Fulldraw1972
20-Feb-12
Just wanted everyone to know I am on the i dont like SFW/BGF side of things:-D

From: mrelite
20-Feb-12
That's good to know Norseman, I was kind of scratching my head on your post until I re-read the opening sentence. I just knew it wasn't so! LOL

From: arctichill
21-Feb-12
Norseman,

Like mrelite, I guess I conveniently skipped over the first sentence of your post. My apologies for that oversight. With that said, are you a member/supporter of AZSFW or are these e-mails just mass-blasts"

"As for the rest or you last post about consultants...? I have no idea what you are talking about."

I'm talking about the SFW's track record of hiring consultants for all kinds of things and paying them huge dollars that they classify as "operating expenses". I think I saw somewhere in this thread where Don Peay had been paid in excess of $400,000 for a consulting fee. That's some serious dough for a "non-profit" organization to be paying out. LOL

From: Norseman
21-Feb-12
Achilles, I don't know why I am suddenly getting these. I just got 2 I the last week. No, I am not a member, or have ever contacted them.

From: WapitiBob
21-Feb-12
I got one also, I believe they bought the AZ Game dept mailing list.

From: jimmyt
23-Feb-12
Arctichill:

Is this the thread you were talking about?

From: arctichill
24-Feb-12
This was one of them. Thanks Jimmy!

From: Lon M
25-Feb-12
What a shocker, people with agendas using our traditions to make money. Been sayin it for years, they all jockey for who gets to broker the money tags. I think the sheep guys say their convention is to titillate and dazzle, yea right.

From: 30inchbuck
27-Feb-12
again addressing big fin since he is the "expert"

So who got he WY rule inserted? Details not drival, Please!

So post the RMEF tax info so we can compare the on the ground money vs money incoming? From SFH I see 1.6/5.

So Randy before you became on the board of RMEF, what was RMEF position on the wolf issue, lets say in 1998 or perhaps in 2000? What year did they changed there stance on the wolf?

From: arctichill
27-Feb-12
I don't recall anyone referring to big fin as the expert. I think many accept the fact that he is very well educated and well versed in the topics being discussed.

From my observations, Bigfin has not always supported the position of the RMEF. This is even more proving of his credentials seeing as they recruited him as a board member anyway, knowing he will never be a conformist!!

For this reason, I have increased respect for both the RMEF and Bigfin!

30inch, it's decision time brother. Do you want to support the "idea" of the SFW or do you want to support an honorable cause like the one the RMEF fights for. I appreciate your tenacity and can't help but believe that it would be put to so much better use if not affiliated with the SFW.

From: WapitiBob
27-Feb-12
You would probably do better with this audience if you spoke to the strengths of SFW rather than try to drum up negativity towards RMEF.

27-Feb-12
Besides, what if RMEF is doing a terrible job?

How does that make SFW do a good one?

  • Sitka Gear