Utah Wildlife Forum banner

1 - 20 of 31 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,756 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I don't want this to be a bash SFW, Utah, or the DWR thread. If you feel the less beneficial decision for Utah wildlife, businesses, sportsmen, and the 200 public permits was made today, here is some contact info and links of who we can contact and at least voice our opinion on the issue. Be respectful and informative with your emails or phone calls on why this was a bad decision and whether you will support it or those involved with it anymore. If you have any extra contact info you think would be beneficial add it to the thread.

DWR contact information:
Email: [email protected]
Phone:801-538-4700

DWR Director:
[email protected]
(801) 538-4702

Title sponsor:Ammo&More
[email protected]
406-777-2822

Wildlife board:
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]

Link to list of sponsors:
http://huntexpo.com/sponsors.php

Map of exhibitors: (zoom in for names)
http://s15.a2zinc.net/clients/WHCE/WHCE2016/public/EventMap.aspx?shMode=E

Now, I actually feel bad to some extent because this money is beneficial in some ways. If you want change and less corruption eventually there are points you have to stand up and say no more. I think the issue of SFW and our DWR has gotten to that point. If you don't agree with the way this process took place and believe our state lost out on a lot of benefits it's time to put some pressure on this issue. I personally will not attend the expo, pay application fees, and try to not support those involved in sponsoring it either, including Cabelas which should just leave my pockets fuller. If you're a nonresident and you question Utahs legitimacy I would stop applying. The best way to make a point is to hit someone's pocket books, then maybe they'll start listening.
 

·
Senior Goof
Joined
·
3,605 Posts
You know, we may not always have the same views 1-eye but I appreciate that you do care about wildlife and obviously put time into it. At least complaining on a forum ;) Kidding, thank you for wanting to make a difference and compiling this list for us..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,435 Posts
Thanks for posting this I encourage any one who cares about the future of our wildlife rather it be for them or their young kids to make your voice heard.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,861 Posts
So when do we see the results of the bid? Is the swf/mdf bid status quo? Or did they up the ante ?
Granted I thought. The other bid was better but did sfw/mdf step up?

Sent from my LG-H810 using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,756 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
So when do we see the results of the bid? Is the swf/mdf bid status quo? Or did they up the ante ?
Granted I thought. The other bid was better but did sfw/mdf step up?

Sent from my LG-H810 using Tapatalk
I don't know if you've seen this yet, it's an explanation of why they scored each point the way they did:

http://wildlife.utah.gov/pdf/2015-12-18_justification_statement.pdf

The full proposal documents aren't yet available I don't think. From the way I read into it they critiqued how RMEF wrote their bid, and it will pretty much be the exact same plate of **** we are already being offered. $3.50 still goes back to SFW and I didn't really see anything that changed in that document.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,861 Posts
On the other forum Hawkeye indicted that whom ever won the bid it would be better than it was. It will be interesting to see any improvement. Hopefully sfw had to step up big time.

Sent from my LG-H810 using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,756 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
On the other forum Hawkeye indicted that whom ever won the bid it would be better than it was. It will be interesting to see any improvement. Hopefully sfw had to step up big time.

Sent from my LG-H810 using Tapatalk
I think we all thought that because of how good RMEFs was, but I didn't see any indication of it in that document. RMEFs proposals were pretty much laid out in it, I saw nothing new on SFWs side.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,992 Posts
Appears to be the status quo for sfw. They knew they had it in the bag when the rfp was written and don't appear to have changed a thing from last year.

Sent from my SM-N900T using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
285 Posts
Well,
I just subitted tips and/or requests for investigation or to:
KUTV
KSL
Salt Lake Tribune
Deseret News
State Attorneys Office
Field and Stream
NRA

I figured these may draw some additional attention to the issue. Who knows if anything will come of it, but it can't hurt right?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,102 Posts
Appears to be the status quo for sfw. They knew they had it in the bag when the rfp was written and don't appear to have changed a thing from last year.
I agree. Almost looks as though the RFP was written in a manner to give SFW the upper hand. How can any other outside organization compete when specifics needed to be cited on running an event, past and future, in Utah when only one has been allowed to do so for the past few years?

My take is that the whole evaluation process was a farce. Very convenient to award extra points in certain categories to give a boost to ensure victory for SFW.

Simply put, RMEF has and does run expos at a much larger scale than SFW ever dreamed of with the Elk Camp and Rendezvous events they do.

I can't blame some outdoor product and gear suppliers to sponsor this event - I would in order to generate revenue. Although my dollars will never be spent again going to the expo or buying chances to win a hunt, I will continue to shoot Hoyt bows and occasionally buy something from Cabela's. As far as being a non-resident and not supporting hunting in Utah by not spending my dollars on permits, gas, etc. - that wouldn't be fair to the good residents of Utah and your overall economic well-being.

Merry Christmas to all and Happy New Year!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,974 Posts
What good is emailing people now? Kindof like yelling at your kids AFTER the horse got out of the barn.

IT WAS A UNANIMOUS DECISION, a few emails they will just delete wont change anything. They dont care, none of them. They unanimously chose money for the SWF over wildlife. They voted unanimously to only get $1.50 vs $5 that RMEF offered.


-DallanC
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,756 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
What good is emailing people now? Kindof like yelling at your kids AFTER the horse got out of the barn.

IT WAS A UNANIMOUS DECISION, a few emails they will just delete wont change anything. They dont care, none of them. They unanimously chose money for the SWF over wildlife.

-DallanC
Emails to sponsors might help.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
249 Posts
What good is emailing people now? Kindof like yelling at your kids AFTER the horse got out of the barn.

IT WAS A UNANIMOUS DECISION, a few emails they will just delete wont change anything. They dont care, none of them. They unanimously chose money for the SWF over wildlife. They voted unanimously to only get $1.50 vs $5 that RMEF offered.

-DallanC
As an ignorant here: why? What do they gain from the decision? I guess I just don't understand what's going on.

Sent from my MotoG3 using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,326 Posts
What good is emailing people now? Kindof like yelling at your kids AFTER the horse got out of the barn.

IT WAS A UNANIMOUS DECISION, a few emails they will just delete wont change anything. They dont care, none of them. They unanimously chose money for the SWF over wildlife. They voted unanimously to only get $1.50 vs $5 that RMEF offered.

-DallanC
As an ignorant here: why? What do they gain from the decision? I guess I just don't understand what's going on.

Sent from my MotoG3 using Tapatalk
Well on one hand we can go with plan A and make bank and get a coveted tag to hunt a unit most people wait 20-30 years for then end up dead before they get the chance or we can go with plan B and be like the Jedi and only think of others including wildlife. Anybody see the new star wars movie tonight?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,608 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
325 Posts
One other thought that has been mentioned in prior posts but should be highlighted is that SFW did not increase the amount it is contributing to actual conservation above the minimum $1.50 required by the rule. By the time they submitted their response to the RFP, SFW knew that RMEF had already submitted a proposal that voluntarily committed 100% of the application fees to actual conservation,which would result in millions of dollars over the life of the contract. Why didn't SFW up the ante and offer more toward conservation? My guess is they did not feel threatened and we're confident they would retain the contract. If SFW was truly worried it might actually lose the contract, they likely would have increased that amount -- kind if like when SFW/MDF "voluntarily" agreed to commit $1.50 toward conservation after sportsman threw a fit in 2012. The fact that SFW's proposal allows them to pocket $3.50 out of every $5 application fee and still won by a wide margin is a travesty. It is a testament to the fact that they RFP favored the current contract holders. RMEF submitted a detailed proposal but it was based upon projections and commitments stating what RMEF would do IF awarded the contract. The DWR and the selection committee were apparently more impressed with what SFW is currently doing even if the return will be less. Some might say the DWR chose a bird in the hand over two in the bush. Others may argue that the RFP was drafted in this manner to favor the current contract holders. You be the judge. But at the end of the day, RMEF's proposal not not even motivate SFW/MDF to take a step in the right direction and commit a larger portion of the $5 application fees toward actual conservation, and that is disappointing,

-Hawkeye-
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,745 Posts
http://www.utah.gov/government/contactgov.html

Take the fight to the legislature. Having the news agencies pick this up could be big, because the only way the legislature is going to care is if the news exposes that there is corruption involved.

Use the link above. It will lead you to your legislator in both the House and Senate. Educate yourself on this issue as much as you can. Ask them for a face to face meeting. Educate them on the concerns of hunters and what that means to them. Maybe, just maybe, we can get someone to care.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,435 Posts
Well,
I just subitted tips and/or requests for investigation or to:
KUTV
KSL
Salt Lake Tribune
Deseret News
State Attorneys Office
Field and Stream
NRA

I figured these may draw some additional attention to the issue. Who knows if anything will come of it, but it can't hurt right?
well done bigpapacow that is probably one of the smartest moves we could make. I would love to see this on a get Gephardt addition
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,756 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
Over 20 MILLION $$$ from SFW/MDF into the DWR .....

http://wildlife.utah.gov/pdf/conservation_permit_revenue.pdf
Yeah, it's a lot easier to make money when the state gives you hundreds upon hundreds of public tags to auction off and raffle with. So what? 100% of that money was raised by public wildlife tags, any group could have those figures if they got as many public resources as they do. Correction a group with 205,000 members, national power, better return policy, and open books would have much larger figures. If they can do that, can you imagine what an actual conservation organization could do?
 
1 - 20 of 31 Posts
Top