Utah Wildlife Forum banner

41 - 51 of 51 Posts

·
Senior Goof
Joined
·
3,584 Posts
I will email the governor on behalf of my UWN brethren, just let me know who and when.


I openly dissaprove our board.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
Probably true. My alternative is to do nothing, and then whine about it on the internet.

So, I guess I'll apply.
Good for you! It never hurts to apply. Being a bit of an insider, I can honestly say that I've never heard that anyone was pre-selected for the job.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Getting on the Wildlife Board

My observation over the years has been that typically the folks selected for the Wildlife Board have already been involved in the process and served on a regional RAC. Also, because these positions are usually supposed to represent a constituency of some kind it really helps if you are affiliated with and nominated by a group of one of those constituencies. That might be why some folks make the connection to folks who are actively affiliated with large sportsman groups getting RAC and Board positions more so than just random sportsmen. The same is true for the other groups - for example when they select someone to represent agriculture it is usually someone that is nominated by or supported by the Utah Farm Bureau or Cattleman's Association.

My suggestions to those interested in serving in these capacities would be to-

1. Get actively involved in an existing sportsman's organization (or start your own if you see a need or if you can't live with the principles and practices of an existing one).
2. Start attending RAC meetings and participating and then speak with the DWR regional supervisor of the regional office where you live and let them know you are interested in serving on the Regional Advisory Council.
3. Serve on the RAC, attend the meetings, volunteer to serve on committees or working groups that come up, get to know the players locally and on the statewide scene.
4. After doing 1-3 go ahead and apply to be on the Wildlife Board.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
303 Posts
Book,

"That might be why some folks make the connection to folks who are actively affiliated with large sportsman groups."

I think you accidentally added an "s" to "group". What other sportsmen group besides SFW has multiple affiliates in the RAC's? It seems at least half of the Southern RAC is affiliated with SFW. I walk away thinking they should just give SFW a seat specifically and not allow their members in any other capacity - especially non-consumptive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,526 Posts
I think provider illustrates the current issue with the system, and it’s the lack of trust that comes along with not only someone’s affiliation with “groups,” but the perception that one group controls everything. Fair or not, that is the perception, and it’s not good for anyone. I’d venture to say it’s not even good for that group.

It’s time for them to do things a little differently. What do they say about the definition of doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting different results?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
9,415 Posts
The way that i see it with SWF is that they are the group the DOES show up at the RAC's in numbers along with other venues where the future is discussed.

I'm not saying that they are better than any of the others or worse but when you have the majority in the room it is your voice that is going to be heard.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,762 Posts
I surprised anyone thinks this decision is not weighted by politics. How many sportsmen's groups are there in Utah that are not in bed with SFW?

The only one I can think of is RMEF and we have all seen how much the state was willing to work with them.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
9,415 Posts
The only one I can think of is RMEF and we have all seen how much the state was willing to work with them.
Perhaps if the members of RMEF in Utah would band together like SWF has then perhaps their voices will be heard.

It does no good when there are 5 members of SWF who show up at the RAC meetings and only a couple of others that are not affiliated with any.

I have never been to a RAC meeting since I live in Colorado but from what I have heard they are only attended by a few that are concerned with what is going on in the state with wildlife and then there are the others that only attend when they want to gripe about something.

I have been a member of enough groups to see just how SWF gets it's way when it comes right down to it.

And I do hope that Vanilla gets onto the board but it will be a long road for him to get there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,526 Posts
It does no good when there are 5 members of SWF who show up at the RAC meetings and only a couple of others that are not affiliated with any.

I have never been to a RAC meeting since I live in Colorado but from what I have heard they are only attended by a few that are concerned with what is going on in the state with wildlife and then there are the others that only attend when they want to gripe about something.

I have been a member of enough groups to see just how SWF gets it's way when it comes right down to it.
It's a bit of the "chicken vs the egg" argument, though. I know of many that went to a RAC meeting only to see how very little the public input was actually valued, and have vowed to never waste their time and return. Trust me, I do not believe that is the way to get anything done, but it isn't just about only one set of people connected to one organization showing up. Like I've repeated multiple times, fair or not, there is a perception in our state that is not healthy for anything or anyone in the system. We need to institute some change into that if for no other reason than to increase the public trust in what is SUPPOSED to be a public process. That wildlife board meeting when they discussed the elk plan was the absolute biggest train wreck and spit in the face to a public process that I've ever witnessed in a public meeting.

And I do hope that Vanilla gets onto the board but it will be a long road for him to get there.
I've got a better chance of drawing a Sportsman Permit tag at the end of the year. I'd be okay with either happening.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
303 Posts
The way that i see it with SWF is that they are the group the DOES show up at the RAC's in numbers along with other venues where the future is discussed.

I'm not saying that they are better than any of the others or worse but when you have the majority in the room it is your voice that is going to be heard.
They certainly know how to work the system and pack a meeting, but we'd hope that elected officials wouldn't indirectly fund SFW (or any special interest group for that matter) with limited entry tags so they can turn around and squash other interests. The state should just auction those tags off directly and spend it how they see fit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,322 Posts
I'll finally weigh in, I suppose I have a philosophical disagreement with those who think the primary function of state wildlife departments is to raise up game animals for human harvest, I'd rather see them focus on promoting a natural balance of native species and figuring out a way we can all get along. I think this mindset is severely underrepresented on the wildlife board as it sits with those without a SFW membership card, a CWMU, or sheep **** on their boots. :(
 
41 - 51 of 51 Posts
Top