Convention Tags Proposal Comments

Below are some of the flood of e-mails I have received from listeners of our radio show and people who I personally e-mail concerning this issue. If you would like to post your comments here, send them to radio@utahoutdoors.com. This issue is scheduled to go in front of the Utah Wildlife Board of Directors Meeting on Thursday, 9 AM at the Dept. of Natural Resources Auditorium, 1594 W. N. Temple, SLC, Utah.
THIS MEETING IS OPEN TO PUBLIC COMMENT!! PLEASE ATTEND!

We will also be joined by Alan Clark, Assistant Director of the Division of Wildlife, on this Saturday's show for details on the outcome of the proposal. Tune in Saturday, April 2nd at 7:00 AM!

MY ORIGINAL LETTER
Sent to Miles Moretti and all of the RAC Board Chairman, dated 3-28-2005

Dear Miles and RAC Board Members,

Below is one of about 50 e-mails I have received since we talked about the Convention Tags on our weekly syndicated radio show on KSL Newsradio, last Saturday. We have talked about a few things controversial on the show, but none have seemed to get the response this has in 6 years of co hosting the show. I would like to ask for the straight scoop here on this issue. I am not into bashing on the DWR or the RAC in fact have been a big supporter of both, but this is WRONG! Don Peay and the (for profit) SFW have done a lot to help this State, but as often as Don introduces something good, he also has back burner agendas that do NOT represent the people of Utah or their desires and to often these issues go unchecked through the RAC Meetings, with their support and blessing. For instance, the issue of allowing hunting of other big game animals on Antelope Island. I personally went head to head with this issue speaking out in public and in print against this a few years ago and AGAIN….. recently and will every time it surfaces. I truly thought the Utah public had made their opinion clear about hunting on the Island last time and it surfaces again this year….. LISTEN to the people.

This issue of allotting Convention tags to lure people to support these groups, while taking them out of the pool, for tax paying citizen not belonging to these groups, is totally against what the Utah public has already voiced their opinion against. They have spoken and overwhelmingly stated they do not want this to go through.

I would invite any of the addressee’s of this e-mail to contact me back via e-mail radio@utahoutdoors.com or phone 801 381-1706 and set up an interview for our show this Saturday, April 2, 2005 to get the views of the DWR and RAC out for people to clearly understand. Our show airs from 6-8 AM each Saturday and telephone interviews are no problem, just schedule a time to join us and I will confirm back to each of you that respond if the time will work out for us. I would like to see this get aired out and your view points heard on this issue as often, people make assumptions about the DWR and RAC without actually knowing their side. Let’s change that on this issue….. This is YOUR chance to set the record straight.

Please respond as soon as possible to ensure we get time scheduled for you to join us.

Respectfully,
Cris Draper
The Trail Master
Utah Outdoors on KSL Newsradio 1160 AM
www.utahoutdoors.com

3, 30, 2005 - I sent off this e-mail to the RMEF, SFW, MDF, NWTF, and FNAWS, asking for an offical statement on their position.
UPDATE - Read the Responses!, I have heard back from Don Peay - SFW, Tony Abbott - Mule Deer Foundation, Bill Christensen - RMEF

Dear Sirs,

My name is Cris Draper, co host of the Utah Outdoors Radio Show on KSL Newsradio 1160 AM here in Salt Lake City, Utah. I would request an official statement from your Organization of the Proposed Utah Convention Tags Issue. We will be airing a show dealing with this topic on Saturday April 2nd, 2005, and I would request that you provide for public record your Organizations Official position on this issue before the show. There is wide speculation on if your group will be involved with this proposed allotment of the hunting permits to draw the Mega Convention to Utah.

Will your Organization support this Mega Convention?

Have you been provided with a finalized document, as it will be presented to the Utah Wildlife Board, of this proposal?

If any funds are received through this program to your Organization, will this money be used in Utah to protect or enhance wildlife opportunities?

Are there any concerns or comments you would like to share on your Organizations view point on this item?

Thank you in advance,
Cris Draper
UtahOutdoors.com

THE E-MAILS I HAVE RECEIVED

3-30-2005
(NOTE - Cris Draper - Finally a "draft" of the Proposal) still not the final public record document to be presented to the Wildlife Board. See below to download the document.
From Ernie Perkins...

Attached is the draft rule as it existed before going to the RACs. I would expect that there have been some (minor) changes as it went thru that process.

I think your review will quickly and absolutely identify that there is no "highest bidder" methodology allowed. Also that the cost to the individual to apply for a hunt is identical to that of the regular drawing.

Re: The statement that "... several of these groups have stated they want nothing to do with this proposal or convention", suggest you call - and talk to:

FNAWS - Ryan Foutz
NWTF - Jon Leonard
MDF - Tony Abbott
RMEF - Bill Christensen
SFW - Don Peay

All but Tony Abbott were at our RAC meeting last Wed. I personally heard Tony Abbott speak in support of the convention a couple of months ago. He has not spoken out or emailed that he has changed his mind.

So, I would suggest that you watch your sources (and vetting them better) before sending out such seriously flawed emails to state politicians, senior policy makers, commissioners, and inciting the general public with false info.

An interesting twist to your show would be investigating how & why this kind of misinformation and falsehoods gets developed and distributed in our society.

Regards..........

Click Here to download the Draft sent by Ernie Perkins with this e-mail. NOTE - As admitted by Ernie, this is NOT the finalized document that will be presented to the Wildlife Board on Thursday and I have still not been able to track down the said document.

MY RESPONSE TO ERNIE...

Ernie,

The misinformation comes from issues just like this.... NO ONE has still to this point provided the finalized document that will be presented to the Wildlife Board to me and I have asked everyone that has stated they have been involved in the process. Your attached document, you admit, is not totally accurate....???? Where the heck can a public citizen get this information?

This is one of the issues that you should be focusing on. Making these choices without a full disclosure to the public, causes misinformation and total confusion and no one still has been willing to provide me with the details of this proposal in one final and approved format for review of the FACTS. This is why I got involved, and why I feel that I am and still do feel the same, bring this out before it shamelessly passes the Wildlife Board and NO ONE is head accountable to the public. It is time the public found out what goes on behind closed doors at SFW and the RAC and I will do what I can to share this information with anyone I can.

The citizens of Utah, especially the hunters and outdoorsmen, need to know their voices are heard and from my personal experience at RAC meeting and talking to the public.... the RAC's DO NO listen and are over powered by the members involved yet also are Board Members of organizations who a direction conflict of interest is apparent. It is time the RAC where cleaned out of conflicting interest Members holding Board of Director positions and I definitely will not stop in my pursuit of this happening with the support of the Sportsmen of Utah. I hear DAILY, about how wrong this is and how sick and tired the public is of trying to speak to the deaf ears of the RAC Committee Members. This is OUR State, OUR Wildlife and WE pay the salaries of the people governing the DWR and therefore overseeing the RAC Committee. It is TIME YOU LISTEN!

You criticized me for sending out a request for help on this matter and for misinforming the public, well I send the ball back in your Court.

WHERE IS THE FINALIZED PROPOAL FOR PUBLIC RECORD?

Then there will be NO MISINFORMATION.

Respectfully,
Cris Draper

UPDATE! - ERNIE's REPLY. I will also state, I am not reply to this e-mail as my intent is not to argue with any one on these issues in the short time left, but spend the little time I have trying to get the facts from all sources I can, while also looking the the "general hunting populations" viewpoint and perception of this issue.

Cris:

I started this dialogue in hopes of correcting "news" misinformation that had been provided to the public as facts. Thought you had been misled, and would do some research. I even thought the misleading subject of the email was a simple mistake.

However, you've avoided squarely responding and fixing the problems - and dredged up a host of other topics, innuendo and conspiracies.

As a last response to this latest email:

1. It is healthy that proposals are amended and adjusted as they go thru the public process.

2. No group or groups own our RAC. We have only one "big organization" board member sitting on our RAC - he clearly does not control or exert undue influence on the other members. We have a history of independence - i.e. our RAC voted against hunting on Antelope Island several years ago.

Please find another patsy to build sensationalism on your web site - and pursue your personal agenda.

I need to spend my time and efforts productively with the many, many, good people who are working hard for our citizenry, and our wildlife (including some of those who oppose this specific proposal).

Convention tag issue:

Chris ... I'm a former member of the Northern Region Rac:

Resigned last year to address funding issues for the DWR (matter of record). This is a tuffy: I know there are more than 500 odd Utah hunters who have applied, year after year, for limited entry permits ... never have drawn out. Now to reduce those opportunities by the number indicated in the proposal is a "not so good" thing. However, at the same time, the Division is so woefully short of funds that any time they can go to an "Organization" and say "we need money for this Habitat Project" ... and for that group to say O.K. , here's the money ... that's an "Oh, so good thing".

It all goes back to the 1992-93 year when the new political regime (in my opinion through the use of retaliatory measures) ... extirpated entire "sections" of each DWR Region, that being the Habitat Manager and some ( I believe) 24 career bilologists were eliminated & went down the tube forever. Other Regional Managers had to pick up the slack ... it's never been the same since.

Although I hate to say it, if I were still a RAC member I'd still likely have voted in favor of the convention tags issue ... simply because it's just about the only way the folks at the Division can raise a little extra money for many necessary Wildlife Habitat Projects in this State .. the Legislature is certainly not going to address any acceptable funding solution. In spite of the fact that the General Fund receives more than $57.00 from Wildlife related retail sales and income taxes ... for every $1.00 they return to Wildlife ... and the fact that Wildlife related activities support more than 20,000 jobs in this State and their Economic Impact is more than $1.4 Billions annually (from the National Association of Fishing and Hunting and Wildlife related Recreation 1992 by Dept. of Interior, Census Bureau, Dept. of Commerce, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) ... our wonderful elected officials are killing one of the greatest revenue cash cows in our State. Hunting and Fishing licenses buyers, in spite of the fact that our population has increased by 1/3 in the past dacade or so, our "going away" by the tens of thousands.

Have a good day and thanks for what you do.

!Damn!
Jim

Cris,

Despite what anyone says, your still initialed to your opinion. I know what your going through because I own this website too. Hang in there and Thanks for the e-mail.

Randall L. Black
RanUtah/Randy
PredatorMasters.com

Chris,

Thanks for your response to my email and for letting me read what others both for and opposed have written.

There are a few items I noticed while reading the other emails that should be brought to everyone’s attention.

The proposed 200 convention tags are NOT auctioned or sold to the highest bidder. In fact there will be no bidding for these tags. It is my understanding that these tags will include multiple tags for the same species in a number of different units. For example, there may be 10 bull elk tags given in the Wastach unit, but a person can only purchase one raffle ticket for the elk in that unit. Many units will have more than one tag, so everyone present can not bid on all 200 tags. At least that was my understanding.

From a few of the email’s you received, it makes it sound that the resident hunters have a much better chance than do the non residents. That most likely is not true and the following example will show why.

Most of the people coming to such a convention from out of town are “pretty high rollers” and will be able to purchase one ticket for every tag possible. If everyone can theocratically purchase a ticket to all 200 tags, it would cost everyone $1,000.00. But most Utahns, raising a family, can probably only afford to apply for 5 or 10 tags, where as a wealthy non resident who comes to the convention can drop a $1,000.00 bill and think little of it. To most of those it would be a tax right off. Therefore I believe the majority of the tags will go to people from out of state or the high rollers with in the state.

Not only is that discriminatory in that means, but let’s take a look at the people of our own state. Those residents living in Salt Lake City and the surrounding areas may go to the convention doors and purchase a few tickets, but what about all the other people in the state that can’t afford to come to SLC , or are excluded because of work, family, etc. They can’t even purchase one ticket, as you are required to go to the (not attend) convention grounds to get your tickets. Not one else can purchase a ticket for you. (How will that be enforced?) Is that fair to people of this state who can not attend, but would still like to participate?

And it should be known that anyone who has already drawn a once in a lifetime tag can still enter the drawing and get a second or third if that be the case. Why even call these tags one in a lifetime, if there not? No one who has ever had a once in a lifetime tag should be able to apply for that species. Let’s have someone who has never drawn that tag have a chance to hunt that species. That would assure it’s a once in a lifetime tag.

Although several conservation organizations have thrown support to this concept, it was explained at the Central RAC meeting, that only ONE organization will end up with all of the proceeds as the Division does not want the hassle of dolling out the moneys to the different organizations. That was the way Mr. Clark explained it to those attending that meeting. What organization do you think will end up with the proceeds from this raffle?

The public should know, before this happens, that not ONE cent of the funds raised will be deposited with the STATE or our DWR, but rather will go to the single ORGANIZATION and be spent in or out of state at THEIR discretion. Only a promise to deliver is what the people of Utah can expect from these 1,000 tags. (That’s 200 per year times 5 years.)

During in depth questioning at the Central RAC meeting, there were many pertinent questions that could not be answered by Mr. Clark. He basically said that the plan was so hurried, that there was not enough time to work and iron out all the EXACT details, and that would have to come later. And yet without many answers of the important details, it was voted upon and passed 4-1 as I recall.

It should also be noted that if these tags go through, Utah will be giving out more that 4 times the number of conservation-convention tags, than are being allotted by all other western states combined. Even if this proposal is denied by the Wildlife Board, Utah will still allow more than 3 times the number of conservation tags than do all the other western states.

I think the public deserves to know why? Call these tags what you may, but they are UTAH HUNTER TAGS, taken away from those who for years have stood line waiting there turn.

There is no doubt that wildlife and habitat need additional funding in mist of our growing population. It is my belief that Utah has some great minds and with those, certainty, we can come up with far better ideas, that are much fairer and that will be readily accepted by the public and the regular hunter.

If the convention can not stand on its own merits and draw those needed to be successful, and tags are needed to guarantee its success, then for the next 5 years, lets pull those 200 tags from the already commissioned 330 tags that Utah now sell to the high bidders.

Utah’s game management is moving hunting to into an area where only the rich will be allowed to hunt. In fact with the CWMU’s and all the Conservation tags, the rich guys can hunt every year, while my son will be very lucky to every draw one good permit in his lifetime as will you or you children.

Thanks again,
Bill Allard

This was a post sent to me from Monster Muley's web site by Gary Wilson

I was disgusted by the political puppetry displayed at the RAC meeting in Springville.

The argument I heard from the puppets on stage with the puppet master, was; "WHY NOT REWARD THOSE WHO MAKE GOOD FOR THE WILDLIFE HABITAT, THEY DESERVE IT BECAUSE OF WHAT THEY DO...LOOK AT OUR TRACK RECORD. THESE TAGS WILL RAISE MONEY.

For all the conservation group members out there... Thank you for your efforts to improve your area of emphasis. I do not doubt you serve a great purpose to the community for our wildlife habitat. YET, with this Convention Tag I ask you, "Are you still serving the community or being rewarded for your service. You will now have opportunity to hunt what I won't if I don't attend your convention.

I may not be the guy that goes to every meeting like you do... I may not be the guy that plants seed in a barren critical winter range....

I many not be the guy that takes my time off to go build a water trough in the desert... I may not spend 5% on my earning or whatever amount I'm sure you do to go to the wildlife conservation effort all for my benefit of hunting.

HERE IS THE MISSION STATEMENT FOR SFW:

SFW Mission

Sportsmen for Fish & Wildlife and Sportsmen for Habitat, Inc. were organized to promote the protection and enhancement of wildlife habitat, the quality of wildlife management programs, and protect America’s family heritage of hunting and fishing.

I DO NOT DOUBT YOUR INTENTIONS... I belive they are TRUE AND JUST.

YET THE SAME CONSERVATIONIST OR YOUR LEADERS and our beloved DWR OR RAC LEADERSHIP is asking that WE INCENT you for your volunteer service. FRANKLY, isn't this what the dedicated hunter program is suppose to be. Aren't you tainting the service you are so willing to give? I don't read anything about if you give and if we help improve the habitat we will gain more opportunity to partake of the limited resource in tag allotment.

SFW: HELP ME protect my hunting heritage before I have less and less... I am the average joe... I can't attend your convention. I can't even get involved with the state's dedicated hunter program... but I can help in other ways... let me explain.

Let me ask you a questions:

While... your out planting seed and making that happen for my benefit...

Who is making the burger that your going to eat at McDonalds in Nephi?
Who is patroling the freeways for your safety?
Who is working gas station as you fill your Big rig to go plant seed?
Who is running the grader plowing the dirt roads so you can access the remote country your heading to?
Who is coaching your son's little league game for your future hall of famer?
Who is watching your sick grandmother in the hospital?
Who is teaching your son or daughter in school?
Who is attending insurance conventions on the same weekend your event is going on so when you die... you family has a plan?

Who is doing all the other areas of life so you can go CHOOSE TO BE A CONSERVATIONALIST or SFW or SPORTSMAN?

THE ANSWER?

HUNTERS JUST LIKE YOU.

WE are no different. We share the same desire you do. We would love to be in your shoes... Be supportive of the efforts your involved in. Yet, we have other roles in life. The common ground we share comes down to same passion we have to hunt. Just because I am not able to go plan seed on saturday doesn't mean I don't contribute to your consevation efforts. We live in community. We benefit each other... I benefit you.... you benefit me... We all need equal representation to the allotment of tags. Find a better solution to divide up the new tags being offered without mandating me to go to your support groups convention.

WHY ARE YOU USING TAGS AS INCENTIVE TO ATTRACT CONVENTIONS ANYWAY?

My feelings are this will help drive attendance or membership... you are making and striking deals with government officials on conventions and the likes... all so you can grow membership.. IS IT NOT AN INCENTIVE.... Ironically, you got my interest... if I can have a crack at the opportunity to go to your convention and thrown down five bucks for any animal and hope for a better shot at a tags... Why Won't I... BUT what if I can't attend. What if I have so much else going on that I can't possible get involved in another group such as yours. THE tags cannot be a dangling carrot to attract conservation groups to the state... WE have several other attractive incentives to do that... such as free skiing on public leased land by the forest service.... WHy not offer those... because they don't offer what your tags do. Why not give them free useage of all the camping in our state parks for a huge rally? The reason, because you want the average joe... your thinking is increase membership for your support groups. Drive some incentive to attract membership... clever, very clever. YES, their are other ways... Don, you know many ways to raise money... but none would drive membership to support groups unless they hit the hunters most prized possesion. The Animal. Give hunters a way to take a lifetime hunt only while they are members of your organization and they can have it... You do more for the state.... but for you to grow. You've got have a plan to grow. Most will come and join... I may even in the long run. But what about the patrolman, what about someone else who doesn't belong to the group... They are left out. Tags are in control by this committee, not the state.

Give us a voice..... A Real voice and we can come up with solutions that will impact all of UTAH not just your own agenda.

Your volunteer group should seek out things that do benefit all of the citizens in this state. Take a vote at the RAC... Make it public opinion. Take a public vote. We understand that the RAC members are appointed. File a motion to include public opinion... Don't hide behind your self-centered agenda. Seek out the true intentions of the hunters in UTAH... if any lobbying needs to be done.... perhaps they can start with us.

For future reference, why should I go to a meeting and have no say... Do I need to watch the muppet show? Is that a new requirement for the dedicated hunter to find out how DWR politics is run? I think am only wasting my time. I'd bet money no one would be there if you didn't have it a requirement to attend. Record number of attendance is only to sign your name on the form... No wonder you make them stay until the end. If we voice our opionion, you even threaten to throw us out. The public opinion was against Rule to pass regarding the Convention Tags... yet for the exception of one.... (Good strategy, Don) The panel had one vote against. He was the only non-bias, puppet on the stage.

THIS CONVENTIONAL TAG IS UNFAIR and DISCRIMINATING.

IN FAIRNESS: THESE conservation groups do tons more than I do or ever will do for wildlife habitat. Yet, they speak of our community... They are helping our future generation do what others can't do for themselves. GREAT.... WAY TO GO... GIVE YOUSELF A PLAQUE ON THE WALL. ELECT THE GREATEST GIVER AND CONTRIBUTOR to be yourPRESIDENT..... HELL, GIVE HIM ALL YOU FUNDS TO BE YOUR LOBBYIST. DO WHAT EVER THE HELL YOU WANT...EXCEPT, Take more from the general pool, the average joe.

YOUR OBJECTIVES stood out that these tages will 1)raise more funds for habitat and 2)give back to those that give and help in the conservation arena.

OTHER SOLUTIONS TO MEET SAME OBJECTIVE:

1) RAISE MORE MONEY.... offer every hunter in the state an opportunity to bid on these.... You'll have more money raised by average hunter than you will the convention goers.

2)YES, there were other solutions presented that night... WIll the be taken in consideration? Not a chance. Their decision is so bias, What a shame. What a joke... The crowd was outraged and their was only one vote that was against the entire event.

PROBLEM #1 WAS THE PURPOSE.

Geez,

Now I'm all fired up... enough of endless chit, chat. Someone forward this to Don. Nevermind... I'll send it myself.

Gary Wilson

You are leaving out a huge topic!! as hunters we are all in this together, Even nonresidents. Did you ever do the math on the percentage breakdown that the nonresidents are losing in their normal drawing for this?? Since the nonresidents only get 10% of the tags in the first place and they are giving up the same number of tags for this convention that makes them giving 25% at the LEAST or their total normal drawing tags!!

This is just asking nonresidents to side with USO on issues like this. Although I do not want to, this kind of disregard for our tags in any fairness is disgusting and may push me that far if no one has any respect for the nonresidents either. We get only 10% of the tags and do not complain but this is a royal screwing to those like me who have applied for 10 years, banked up bonus points, and now a rich nonresident and resident also will walk in, plop down as many 5$ bills that act just like bonus points and skip in front of me? Think about it, each chance is $5, so that's like buying 5$ bonus points isn't it?

As a average middle class hunter I cannot afford to spend over $800 dollars alone on Airfare, food, motel, rental cars and THEN lottery tickets. I have waited 10 years with bonus points and now SFW wants to take 25% or better of the tags and give them to someone who has not waited, or who drove 5 miles to get there??

When is it enough? If this convention was such a great idea then the thing should stand on its own and they should use the existing tags they already have. This Tag prostitution will never end now that the door has been cracked open.

Many of the hunting internet forums are buzzing with this topic. There have been many ideas proposed on how to raise more money but the problem is that SFW will not consider them because it will not benefit them. It was said that a former chairperson of SFW got fed up and left, and revealed that he was paid 72k for a salary. That seems mighty high for a group that asks everyone else to volunteer time and money.

Thanks, Patrick

I'm hearing things such as: there will be a lot of turkey tags, a lot of cougar tags, they won't all be deer and elk tags...I haven't confirmed any of this.

It makes me feel a little better to think that the hunts won't completely consist of big game animals. I still wouldn't be surprised to find out that the majority of the tags come from deer elk and OIL hunts. I've also been told that the money that was designated for wildlife issues this year was more than what was set aside in the last ten years combined. Once again un-confirmed.

My biggest complaint is how the decision was obviously made before hand, and the RAC was just for show! And I wish that the DWR, Wildlife board listen to the Hunters of the state, and not so much the big conservation groups. And to not insult our intelligence in the process! The SFW has WAY too much pull! We seriously need to have some REAL checks and balances in the decision making process.

Just out of curiosity, have you done any math concerning what Don said about the projected financial gain of the convention?

Here is what I have, real quick figures mind you:

If the convention is to generate just $1,875,000 in tax revenue that will be designated as wildlife money, here is what has to take place.

20,000 people spending $1500 each in the community over the course of a four day convention. That doesn't include the money generated by the permit fees. It also doesn't include any money collected from the application fees...Cause we were assured that the app. money will not be guaranteed to stay in Utah. That means that $30 million dollars will have to be spent in the community. Now you tell me that Utah sportsman are going to spend that kind of money. That money will have to come form deep pocketed non-residents looking for the chance to draw a tag. And if you remember what Alan Clarke said, he told as all at the RAC meeting that the non-resident tag quota will not increase. And that the odds for residents to draw one of the perspective tags will not decrease. Now, I don't claim to be an economist or an accountant but the way I see it, the convention rule needs to get it's facts straight. I assure you the numbers I used are just speculative, but that's all we can do is speculate!

Keep in touch
Josh Glazier

Thanks for the alert, Chris. I will attend and will spread the word, but would like more information concerning the details of the proposal. Do you know where I can get them?

Kirk Robinson, Ph.D.
Executive Director, Western Wildlife Conservancy

Greetings,

Last year I attend the annual Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation Banquet in Provo. I experienced the crooked acts of this organization. The silent auction is fixed. I had the highest bid on a shotgun, and when the bids were lifted, an individual placed his name on the bid with $1 higher than mine. I latter found out he was an organizer of the event.

I wrote a letter to the RMEF which I have been an member for over 10 years, and expressed my concerns. I will never again attend their banquet and I will never give a dime to this organization.

Duck Unlimited Banquet in Ogden, is a drunken party for overweight business owners. Then they bring in your women to model their latest wears, and then the participants pay for them to take it off. This is not a family event.

No, I do not support these organizations, and I have stopped all my donations.

Best Regards,
Rick Scott

Hi Chris,

My name is Bill Allard of Murray, Utah. I've meant you several times at the range at BWB at the top of Parley's.

I just wanted to say thanks for inviting the members or the RAC and Wildlife Boards to explain their position regarding the new convention tags.

I feel this issue would be mute, if Don Peay was not chair for the committee that recommends these individuals to the Governor for his approval.

In the past years the RAC's and Wildlife Board members who were appointed and approved to those boards have basically been chosen and hand picked by Mr. Peay to carry out his back burner agenda I know no place in Utah government where a conflict of interest is more obvious. I really believe that had a neutral panel chosen the board members, the vote would have been way different and we probably would not even be discussing the abuses of conservation and convention tags.

I think that Mr. Peay needs to resign his position on the selection committee as should all board members that have been appointed due to his recommendation, to any boards that vote on any agenda in which he has an interest.

I have written a number of recommendations to help raise money for Utah's wildlife but as long as Don Peay runs the show, and the conflict of interest remains, they have no chance of ever getting discussed.

If there were an investigative report done on this issue, by any of the major new channels, and it findings were exposed to the public, believe me, it would result in a major overhaul of the system. The people of Utah are not being protected, and in essence the check and balances system we use in government has been successfully derailed in this arena.

Again thanks for your good work and any help you may be in insuring the protection of the interests of the Utah citizenry.

Sincerely,

Bill Allard
Murray Utah

Bill here are the conservation tag numbers from the DWR Look how many sold below the cost of the initial purchase price From the division

Good luck and don't let anyone tell you that the amount of tags Available isn't watering down the value for them sell less tags make them more rare and get a higher value thus putting most back in the hands of the Utah hunter

Chris thanks for taking the time to hopefully make a difference

Click Here to download the PDF file.

Wow, talk about a back door sneak attack on the legislature, county commission, CVB, residents who oppose this, etc. I will plan on being there this Thursday, protesting this action. I am wondering, can our representatives do anything to remind the wildlife board that this is an issue the legislature needs to deal with? Has a copy of this letter been sent to all senate members and legislative members? This is not something that the wildlife board should be doing, period. I will help get the word out.

Alan Hansen
Davis County Commissioner

Chris:

My name is Ernie Perkins - Chair of the Northern Region Advisory Council. I urge you to do some more research on this topic, & then correct your email to all of these recipients.

It is hard enough to make good decisions when we have the facts right. It is near impossible when we are working with un-truths and half-truths.

Two facts:

One - these tags will not go to the "highest bidder" at the convention - the application price will be $5 (the same as in the regular draw) and each person will only be allowed to apply once for a hunt.

Second - all five of the conservation organizations have consistently indicated their support. Four of them were at our RAC meeting last Wednesday.

Also, reference the topic of your email. There is no relationship between this wildlife convention permit proposal and the (legislative) proposal for hunting on Antelope Island.

From that point forward, there are some real advantages and disadvantages for specific individuals in this proposal - just like almost every proposal the RACs and Wildlife Board considers. There are also some advantages for wildlife and habitat (more $$ going into conservation projects). These are the considerations our 5 dozen or so RAC members (on 5 separate RACs around the State) wrestled with during the last two weeks - & the considerations that the Wildlife Board will weigh this Thursday.

Again - please get the facts right, and then sort thru the proposal's benefits and downsides.......

In regards to the recent e-mail issue – The Legislative Affairs Committee is tasked from the Chamber board to explore issues and concerns from the members of the Chamber. After one of our members sent the call for help this morning – an e-mail went out to the members of Legislative Affairs asking for their help in finding out what the real story was.

The committee worked exactly as it was designed to work and our CVB director reported back a conversation that she had with Don Peay. I later talked with Don about the issue, after which I reported back to our concerned member that the concern was unwarranted.

The system worked after we asked our Legislative Affairs Committee to check in to the issue. Notice that there was only a question to study, there was no statement, there was no press release, there was no issue stating that the e-mail that was sent to us was fact. There was, however, only a question to find out what the facts were based upon a concern from one of our members.

With that said, I sent out to all of the people that I sent the original message to the answer to the question that was posed this morning. Question answered. It appeared that you inferred that we sent out a false statement or half truths, when in fact we were investigating a concern.

I believe that the committee acted as it should have.

Thanks for your help in finding out the facts that we originally intended to find.

Chris Dallin
President/ CEO
Davis Chamber of Commerce

Dear Mr. Draper,

Having read your email I believe some of your facts were incorrect. My understanding is that the 200 permits will be NOT auctioned to the highest bidders. Rather, they will be handled much the same as the sportsmen's permits are handled. Anyone wanting to apply for any of the 200 permits can do so by paying the $5.00 application fee. These applications must be made in person thereby giving Utahns a relative advantage. An out of state person, who is determined to get one of these permits, will be welcome to come and visit our great state and apply also. In the meantime, it appears to me, that all of this could be the frosting on the cake for a great economic benefit for the State.

Please help me see what I am missing.
Mike Styler

Please make it known that I do not favor giving out the percentage increase in tags for convention attendees that are being proposed. I feel the current 500 plus tags they are given are more than adequate.

Furthermore, from what I understand the dollars generated don't have to be committed back to any specific use within the State, but rather can be used at the groups discretion. This is wrong in itself and the monies should be committed to actual approved needs, and not at the groups' lone interests.

I understand and acknowledge these groups all do great things within the State, but the 500 tags is more than enough to sustain them and still draw the out of State contituents and their deep pockets the convention groups are trying to lure.

Craig Haskell

morning Chris,

Thanks for your time on this issue.

This Convention tag proposal is for 5 years sssoooooo if the current Conservation tags stay at the same numbers, that equals 738 tags a YEAR gone from the hunt draw pool per species specific.

Thanks again,
Robb-in Roy

Mr. Draper,

Please allow me to give you a little background that will lend credence to my thoughts.

During the last 15 years I have been as involved with wildlife issues as anyone in the state. And I might add that it has all been done on a voluntary platform. Because of my involvement, I was asked to take a position on the So. Rac representing sportsmen. That nomination was done through Dixie Wildlife Federation. I served for a couple of years in that capacity and was then elected chair of that Council. I will not attempt to water down my involvement -- I also sit on the Board of Directors for SFW. I might also add that I am the only one on the So. Rac that has any in-depth involvement with SFW. Dixie Wildlife has proudly become the Dixie Chapter of SFW. We held our annual fund raising banquet several weeks ago -- almost a 1000 people showed up in support of SFW is doing. I have recieved most of the emails that you make reference to. There are a handfull. At our RAC meeting a week ago there was not a single individual that stood and voiced opposition to the proposed convention tags.

It has been documented that only 1 in 10 sportsmen get involved in any type of conservation organization. The other 9 choose to sit back and dine off of the good works of those that cooked the meal. Occasionally they get fed something that they don't like, or that they are afraid to try -- and they complain about what they are being fed. Take away the efforts of those that are involved and at what condition would Utah's wildlife be in today? I would dare say that there would be a lot more whining than we are hearing about this convention.

The real key to this whole discussion is education and understanding. SFW and the other conservation groups have long term goals and vision for Utah's wildlife and habitat. Most of the sportsmen out there worry only about where they will hunt this year or for the next couple of years -- short term gratification. The potential benefit from a convention such as the one in question will last far into the future and will more than compensate for the perceived loss of short term opportunity.

Chris, I could go on and on-- but I won't. I do understand that different eyes see different objects. And that it is necessary that there be different points of view. I would like to send you some of my thoughts from our RAC meeting. Many are thoughts that I would like to convey to you. The minutes are in written form so I would like to fax them to you.

Fax # ????

I appreciate the fact that you are involved with some of these issues and that you've taken the time to consider my stance.

Sincerely,
Gregg McGregor
Santa Clara, Ut.

My Reply

Gregg,

I have asked Tim Hughes, the other co host to send you his fax number if possible to get the minute up here for us to review. My biggest concern is that RAC attendance by hunter has been and continues to be a sore spot with the States hunters. I hear it everyday that Utahan’s are feed up with the RAC comities and feel that no matter if they go to the RAC meetings or not, that the committee members don’t listen to the public anyway, but rather make their own decisions based on “who” is backing them or padding their pockets. I have seen this personally at RAC meetings here in SLC that I have attended. And I really feel the public has no idea what is going on as I only heard about this issue surfacing again after a caller alerted us about it last weekend and I get all the DWR press releases and RAC Schedules and was blindsided on this one. I am mailing out to about 25,000 hunters in the next few days to rally support against this proposal and then plan on getting the total story out on this weeks show once the determination has been made at Thursday’s meeting of the Wildlife Board. It is time that accountability for this action be understood by the general public and what better time than right after the decision has been made.

I myself was involved with Don Peay in the early formation years of SFW, until I heard so many mainstream outdoorsman state they wanted nothing to do with the high priced, only for the select attitude that Don Peay promotes with his proposed 6 and 7 figure estimates on raising funds for Utah wildlife by selling off tags to the elite that have the big bucks to spend for choice tags. I decided at that time that I WOULD NEVER promote an organization that dealt with issue at the price tag of a permit instead of for the good of the everyday hunter/tax payer. Don’t get me wrong, I am appreciative of the efforts SWF and many of the projects they have funded for Utah, but the elite ideas overweigh the projects to often when SWF is involved. I have seen it with my own eyes, been involved with conversations where Don and Karl Malone headed up efforts with their own agenda in mind several times and I have not been involved with SWF for many years now because of it.

The second concern I have is that there is NO guarantee that the allotment of these tags will guarantee that the “Mega-Convention” will be brought to Utah, in fact I am hearing that several of the target organizations have stated they want nothing to do with this idea and will not attend even if the permits are allotted. Can you provide me with any documentation or proof that if these permits are allotted it will bring the mega convention to Utah? I am drafting a letter this morning to each of the major agencies targeted for the convention and asking for an official statement as to their view of this proposal.

Alan Clark has been appointed as the person to call into the show this weekend and I do hope that the choice that is made on Thursday meets the public’s desires or it is going to be a hot conversation for sure. I was very pleased to receive notice that Alan, being the main man behind the scenes at the DWR, was appointed as the contact for the show. It is time the public got a chance to ask right to the horse’s mouth why a person they pay his salary, for is doing for them and hold them accountable. I am definitely not into bashing of any group on the radio and if you have ever tuned into the show, you know I am one of the first to jump on the band wagon for the RAC and DWR, but this is WRONG……. Take away tags from the tax paying public citizens to entice business to come to Utah? Is that really how we want to be seen by other States and our own citizens? Raffling off or auctioning our wildlife for business reasons while taking away opportunities from the people who live here…..

I would welcome you to call into the show or share other views you may have.
Cris

Chris: as a member of the southern RAC I spoke out about this issue when it first surfaced in the RAC. In fact made a motion to table the item until more information was forthcoming. We were told by a representative from SFW that the five agencies SFW, Mule Deer foundation etc. had all bought into the concept and voted to join the "mega-convention". We found out later that was not the fact.

When Mr Peay starts his comments and uses six or seven figure numbers to discribe the return then the matter is generally closed. There are a lot of shortsighted people involved in this process.

Jack Hill

morning Tim and Chris,

I caught your Saturday radio show and there seems to be some confusion about the New 200 convention tags being requested mainly by Don Peay and For Profit--SFW.

Yes there are other REAL non-profit conservation groups involved in this tag grab but Don Peay is the major Voice at the RAC meetings.

These groups already have 538 Conservation tags for 2005. They want another 200 tags under the title of Convention tags. Residents and Non-residents will each give 2.5% out of the draw tag pool, equalling 5% total. All Limited Entry and Once in a Lifetime species/units will be involved. So it is not a res. vs non-res. tag issue at all.

The pubilc voice at all the RAC meetings was totally against these tags being given out. The RAC committees are full of SFW Board of Directors. This is very unfair to the public in Utah. John Bair is president of SFW and sits on a RAC committee, James Gilson is the SE-RAC Chairman and is also the SFW Chapter Chairman for the Emery/Carbon county Banquet. The list of SFW members on RAC just continues. This is a very wieghted system for Don Peay and his little SFW org. and certainly is tainted against the public.

No other Convention that comes to Utah needs hunting tags or gets hunting tags. If this Convention is such a bigtime deal then why don't the conservation groups (SFW is NOT a non-profit org.) simply use some of the existing tags they already have for this Convention.

RMEF and FNAWs already have said they will not perticipate on a National level for this Convention in 2006.

There is NO required accountability of where the moneys raised at this Convention needs to be spent at or on, in our state of Utah. It is basically a 'free check' for Don Peay and the rest.

There is no fair and equitable 'RAffle draw company' doing the tag raffle draw results.... this very easily could become a 'buddy raffle' with the Utah public getting absolutely nothing to show for yet another major sacrifice.

If SFW needs major $$$ to do it's expantion into Oregon and Washington, finalize the Wyoming and Idaho take over, let them bankroll it without Utah hunters paying for it.

Initiative 1 was voted down by our Utah voters and this is just a 'backdoor' attempt to get some of Initiative 1 back into the system. Let the vote of the people stand.

Thank you for your time,
Robb in Roy Utah

I would like to commend Chris Draper of the Utahoutdoors show for forwarding a very well written letter regarding "Utah Convention Taqs" to all RAC chairs and asking for their input on this subject.

It would be great if a few of these RAC chairs decide to call in to your show and tell their side ( as they understand it ) of this proposed "Fleecing of Utah Public Tags".

The public continues to speak at these RAC meetings and it is very apparent that Big Money ( SFW...Not for Profit Org. ) runs the RAC process and most of the DWR.

A letter very similiar to the one you forwarded to the RAC's was sent to Dick Gephardt of Channel 2 news. It would be great if you could contact Dick Gephardt and see if he will be using this Topic on his show.

Thanks again for your help in supporting the community and the "Public's" concerns.

Sincerely,
Alan S. Pringle

I e-mailed out a second letter once I found out about the Wildlife Board Meeting on Thursday. This e-mail was dated, 3, 29, 2005

Dear Friends,

The decision to allot 200 once in a lifetime, and limited entry permits to try and draw the Mega-Convention to Utah is to be made at the Wildlife Board Committee meeting on March 31 at 9 AM in the Dept. of Natural Resources Auditorium, 1594 W. N. Temple, SLC, Utah.

I would encourage you all to help get the word out to the public through any means possible to stop this proposal from coming full circle. This 5 year plan would take these 200 permits out of the hands of the general public and into the hand of the highest bidder. Is this really the way we want our State's wildlife to be handled? Taking away opportunities from the general tax paying public and enticing big money players to bid on these tags to raise money for several organizations, which several of these groups have stated they want nothing to do with this proposal or convention.

We will be hosting Alan Clark, Assistant Director of the DWR, on this weeks show, but the decision will already be made as of the Wildlife Board meeting on Thursday. If this is an issue you do not want to see go through, I would ask that you assist in anyway possible to rally support and boost attendance at the Wildlife Board meeting on Thursday. We need to stop this proposal before precedence is set for our State and these tags are lost for the next 5 years... If you have means to proliferate this information to the public, I ask you to please help get the word out. We need to table this effort until it has been thoroughly investigated and approved, and a guarantee that the mega convention would even be held here if the permits where allotted which is TOTALLY in question at this point.

I welcome any view points on this and ask that anyone with pertinent information, both for or against, please send them over to me.

Thank you humbly for your help and support,
Cris Draper
Trail Master

I am a little confused about when this is happening. You say to tune in this week. You talk about March 31st at 9 AM. You say make sure you tune in Saturday. WHEN IS IT. GIVE A DATE AND TIME TO TUNE IN!! Thanks, Danny W. Washburn

Danny W. Washburn PE
Traffic Engineer

NOTE: The Wildlife Board Meeting is March 31st at 9 AM. The Radio Show will air the topic live at 7:00 AM MT on Saturday April 2nd, 2005. It is also available on the web at www.kslradio.com

If you would like to post your comments here, send them to radio@utahoutdoors.com.