Utah Wildlife Forum banner

21 - 40 of 51 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,739 Posts
Oh I have no misgivings about my chances for this, but I’m still going to do it. Packout on the other hand, might have some connections. And he’d be fantastic!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,584 Posts
Whoever applies, (sure wont be me) I hope they have good head on their shoulder and represent the wildlife and not be swayed by any "groups".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
195 Posts
Discussion Starter · #23 ·
I think it is great that Vanilla is planning on applying. The whole reason I posted this in the first place is I think it is important for us to learn and know about the process, so we know how to make our voices heard and where to direct our input. Does anyone have any connections to anyone on the nominating committee? Can we email the nominating committee with our input and thoughts? How do we ramp up the input to the Governor to let him know our thoughts and frustrations with the current board? I know many will believe there is no way to influence the decision makers and maybe that is true. But if we don’t try, there is a 100% chance we won’t succeed. I am interested to hear from anyone that knows more about this than I do to share their thoughts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,739 Posts
Historically, an association and recommendation from one organization has been sufficient to get you at least to the governor from the nomination committee. I'm guessing if the committee and the governor received 100 emails expressing displeasure with the perceived bias involved (including the current number of Board members from that one organization) it would have an impact.

And think about if they got 500 emails? And what about 1,000? That sounds like a lot, but think how small of the hunting (let alone fishing that this board makes rules for as well) population that includes.

This really isn't about me. I'm applying for my own desire to be involved in issues in my community that I care about. I'm not interesting in running for public office, but being more involved in wildlife issues and regulation is something I could be very excited about. So, go big or go home, right? The message I'm trying to send here is this: Get involved! Posting on this forum is fun, and it can help us influence those on here and get organized, but posting on this forum is not "being involved." We need to all get involved, whatever it is we care about, get involved.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
184 Posts
Pretty sure I know Vanilla personally (pretty sure I know the man behind "Vanilla", but I could be wrong). I'd be willing to send emails, sign petitions, etc. to see if we could get him some"real" consideration. Anyone with me?

Side note, Vanilla, pretty sure you were a little league football coach of mine. But I could be wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
307 Posts
I have a degree in Forestry and an MBA. I applied some years ago. Crickets. It's my observation that an affiliation with SFW is gold. If someone petitions the governor that we already have enough SFW representation, I'll be more than happy to sign it. The overt SFW hijack of the UDWR needs to stop.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
For almost 15 years posters have complained about the DWR and its ties to SFW. But still fail to realize how the system works. Maybe you all should put your money where your mouth is and hire a lobbyist to help get you the “connections” you need to have a chance at having your voice heard. It won’t cost as much as you think it won’t be “back door” it just the way the system works.

Now having said that. You’re chances of being successful are next to none since 90% of folks here are/were predation deniers and would advocate for a statewide OTC 3 season deer hunt with no cap. And then when we had no deer say it was habitat and weather that did it. Ignoring common sense and deferring to the biologist to manage game. You might also give as much consideration to a skunk or raccoon as you do for a species that hunters pay to hunt. This is idealistic and commendable for a wildlife lover but it’s actually an anti hunter mentality. You might advocate for a different allocation of tags in the CWMU program because you think those are your animals or push for stream access on private lands even though there are 100s of miles of stream one can access already. You may also advocate for only cutthroat trout in Utah’s waters except for lakes deemed warm water. Maybe you think wolves have there place here in Utah. I can go on but you all know what your Utopia looks like.

The 6 of you are in a bubble and mentalities here are contrary to what the 200,000 hunters want in Utah. But yet you believe you are fighting for the average joe.

What happens to the UWC anyway? Weren’t they supposed to be the voice of the UWN click?

Carry on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
307 Posts
Cody,

Yes, that is how the system has been working in Utah, but other states have rejected SFW when they have seen the result in Utah - thanks in part to social media like this. Lobbyists were not needed. The lobbyist idea is a good one, but they'd need to be really good at getting operatives on the wildlife board and be able to displace SFW from the expo contract. RMEF couldn't do it working for free. Good luck with that.

Or maybe we can just get a good governor/wildlife board who can see that the exclusive trophy hunting management approach instilled by SFW isn't the only interest that should be addressed. Maybe the governor can just see some benefit from not having SFW operatives in every corner including "non consumptive."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,799 Posts
I've known educated guys with long lists of volunteering, RAC service, degrees in biology, letters from multiple organizations- including SFW- who never made it to the Governor for consideration. They get 50-100 applications each time a position opens up and send 2-3 names on to the Governor's office. (I do wonder where those people who don't make it go during the rest of the public process.....? )

It is a Governor appointed position and as such a person needs some political connections and relationships. That may be good and it may be bad, which in the end is like most things in life. If someone wants to get somewhere then they'd better have worn down the boot leather in the right places.

And I'd lean to agree with Fedup's advice. Seems like he gave some thoughts that some should think about.
..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,328 Posts
mentalities here are contrary to what the 200,000 hunters want in Utah. But yet you believe you are fighting for the average joe.
Does SFW represent what the 200,000 Utah hunters want or do they rep their biggest patrons and their own economic self interest?

Not sure if there is a consensus mentality here. We disagree quite a bit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,328 Posts
No we don't!
We don't? You mean all those 20 page threads about big game management is just our way of singing kumbaya? Not to mention the ones about Bears ears and covid. I'm just out of touch, I guess. :oops:

It is true we don't argue much about fishing issues anymore. Maybe the DWR is just doing a good job and Cliff and his pals have moved on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,739 Posts
I think PBH was be facetious.

And I think we all agree way more than we disagree. I do think that all the basic arguments whittle down to two competing ideas: 1) trophy mindset vs 2) opportunity mindset. I don’t think there is a way to bridge this gap in 2021, particularly for mule deer. We simply don’t have the carrying capacity in Utah to fully appease both crowds, which is why there needs to be biologically sound compromise.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,002 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,328 Posts
I do think that all the basic arguments whittle down to two competing ideas: 1) trophy mindset vs 2) opportunity mindset.
Putting on serious face again, I would submit that there is an even more basic "argument". That is of power or who ultimately calls the shots. The competing camps of whether biologists, DWR brass, outside entities like SFW, the Wildlife Board, the legislature, or the masses (or some combinations) should ultimately wield the most power in making wildlife management decisions is the most basic argument IMO in Utah's wildlife management today.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,739 Posts
Putting on serious face again, I would submit that there is an even more basic "argument". That is of power or who ultimately calls the shots. The competing camps of whether biologists, DWR brass, outside entities like SFW, the Wildlife Board, the legislature, or the masses (or some combinations) should ultimately wield the most power in making wildlife management decisions is the most basic argument IMO in Utah's wildlife management today.
Agreed. That said, I don't think anyone cares who holds the power so long as the decisions fall into the camp you believe in on opportunity vs trophy. Well, even as type this I think that maybe the opportunity crowd cares far less about that than the trophy crowd. I don't think John Q public hunter that just wants a tag in his pocket every year would spend 1 second thinking about the power dynamic if he was able to have a tag every year.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
307 Posts
Agreed. That said, I don't think anyone cares who holds the power so long as the decisions fall into the camp you believe in on opportunity vs trophy. Well, even as type this I think that maybe the opportunity crowd cares far less about that than the trophy crowd. I don't think John Q public hunter that just wants a tag in his pocket every year would spend 1 second thinking about the power dynamic if he was able to have a tag every year.
If I read that right, I tend to agree. I'd likely be categorized into the opportunity camp, but I'm not anti trophy at all. I think they should have a place. Large mature bucks are very exciting, but that shouldn't be what hunting is all about. To me its pretty simple, its like when SFW pitched more hunting units and said "when a unit is under objective, cut tags; when its over, increase them." That's what they said until units were over objective for multiple years, then it was "lets not be so hasty" or "the counts can't be right." SFW should have 1 seat on the board, not 5.
 
21 - 40 of 51 Posts
Top