ADA statement

[archerycrazy]

Smack,

 

I see that you are a newbie. Today was your first post but you indicated that you've been lurking for years.

While I try to remain positive and civil on this site as do most of us. I take exception to your initial cheap shot.

When you said that you have been lurking for years, I envisioned criminals, villians, the fishy star of jaws and the creature form the black lagoon.

Suggestion. Go back to your lagoon and don't comeback. You instantly lost all credibility with your post.

I will ask the moderator of this site to block all future posts by your sorry. I'm sure that you understand what I mean.

Amanda, please take the appropriate action.

[krp]

The issue of a fee paid from the sale like the Utah tags is important because. In HB2072, this was to be legislated in, overriding previous statute.

 

H. The qualified organization shall first apply the proceeds from the resale by auction and raffle of the rights to tags to cover all costs associated with the annual sportsmen exposition in this state and any county chapter banquets at which rights to tags are auctioned or raffled. The qualified organization shall apply the remaining proceeds from the resale by auction and raffle of the rights to tags in this state for programs to achieve any of the following purposes, including the qualified organization's costs of administration:

 

just a thought...

 

Kent

[krp]

Conspiracy theorists love this stuff...

 

 

 

KGAINES & DesertBull,

 

It is solely an Arizona organization. It does not owe anything to anyone outside Arizona. 10% of the money this organization raises is set aside incase there is ever a need to lobby for a certain issue. This could be a national issue in which they may join forces with other organizations to accomplish. A decision to do this would have to be made by the Board of Directors. They have picked some of the finest and most trusted sportsmen in this state to be on the Board of Directors. I know and respect all of them. I don?t believe anything kinky can come out of this group of people.

 

There are many things that can be learned from what happened with SFW in Utah, some good, some bad. I don?t believe this group wants to make the same mistakes that SFW did in Utah. It is too bad they chose a similar name and have had to deal with the fallout created by Utah?s mistakes.

 

There is nothing wrong with being skeptical and putting things to the test. There is everything right about also recognizing good things that are done and seeing the positive direction this group has taken.

 

Some of the Board members are good friends of mine. They are totally opposed to landowner tags, as in ?over their dead bodys?. This group couldn?t go that direction as long as these folks are involved. The key to having a good organization that is on the right track and doing the right things is to have people involved in that organization that are good people on the right track doing the right things.

 

This is why KGAINES & DesertBull should join the group.

 

Dave, I respect your dedication. I have concerns about SFW only because of the past track record in Utah, Colorado & Wyoming. It appears that super tags, landowner tags etc. for auction are a big part of Don Peay/SFW's method of raising money. In addition to this, SFW was aligned with Conservation force during the USO fiasco and it appeared that SFW supported the non-resident issue which sat wrong with alot of us AZ residents. I would be totally comfortable with AZ-SFW if there is a legal position statement that assures me there will be no landowner tags nor additional auction tags to raise money for their lobbying efforts. I am pretty sure that any money necessary for ongoing lobbying/operational costs can be covered by the 10% fee SFW charges to all member conservation partners like ADA, antelope foundation, sheep group, yuma groups etc...........I havent went to SFW's website in a couple months, but until today, I have not been able to find any written information about AZ-sfw. Thanks Amanda for posting the above brochure..........Allen............

 

Allen

 

AZSFW has a position statement that says we are not in support of landowner tags for any species in AZ period. Though I am sure that there are some landowners in the state that are talking about this type of plan there is no formal support or program being talkied about.

 

I am trying to remember all of the questions...

 

Regarding the Conservation Force and SFW. As I am aware of there was not formal affiliation between the two. Don Peay did sit on the Conservation Force BOD but he voted against their position. SFW was the largest and Don lobbyed congress heavily in support of the Reid bill which is why we have 10% again.

 

Allen I thought you knew that any organization that sells any AZ special tag must return 100% of the money raised to habitat work. Even the interest that may be generated from the time of the sale to the time the money is spent must be accounted for and returned to the ground. We cannot deduct and cost of the managing a raffle and must absorb the cost of printing, postage and bank fees. Also, AZSFW does not control a single tag in AZ to begin with.

 

AZSFW does not charge 10% of any number in order for a club to be a voting member. I honestly can't remember what the number is! I will look it up but wanted to post here first.

 

Chris Denham

 

Allen

 

No problem, I know where you are coming from and if you have questions then there are other people who have the same question but did not ask. It gives us a chance to talk about it.

 

I know what you are saying regarding the special tags. Just look at Utah, it is ridiculous. I would fight against any system that approaches that one.

 

Chris

[CouesWhitetail]

Hey Guys,

 

I really would appreciate it if everyone would just focus on the facts and the questions regarding this issue. I don't think personal attacks get us anywhere....and please make sure you have correct facts before posting information or allegations against anyone.

 

I also challenge you all to think more about the solutions to this problem. It seems to me we are spending too much time looking backwards. If AZSFW is not the group that will represent all the sportsmens groups, then we need another solution. Personally I supported AZSFW and I felt for a long time they were working for the good of sportsmen in the state. I take extreme offense at this bill and the way it was created and pushed forward. I think AZSFW has crippled itself beyond repair. But I think we need to have representation/lobbying power to push a pro-hunting agenda.

[CouesWhitetail]

I learned of this thread earlier today, and I wanted to clarify a few points that have been brought up regarding the sale of Special Big Game License Tags (Commissioner's Tags) and the organizations that market them. While I realize that this thread has touched on many topics, this one seems to resurface.

 

Current Arizona statute allows the Arizona Game and Fish Commission to award up to 3 Special Big Game License Tags for each big game species. The Commission does so annually in June, and a number of wildlife conservation organizations request the ability to market those tags. Statute requires that 100% of the proceeds are returned to the Commission, and those tag funds are allocated to projects in coordination with those groups and the Habitat Partnership Committee, currently chaired by Commissioner J. W. Harris.

 

About a year and a half ago, the Commission worked with the various groups to develop a sales agreement that would ensure greater transparency and accountability for these sales, be they raffle or auction. Commissioner Harris chaired that committee, many wildlife conservation organizations participated, and the Commission approved the new agreement.

 

This year at the Wild Sheep Foundation auction, the auctioneer noted on the slides that a 5% buyers premium would be added to the sale of any state tag that was being sold IF ALLOWED BY STATE LAWS OR RULES. When I returned from the convention, I consulted our attorneys to determine if a buyer's premium was lawful, and I was assured that it was NOT. I immediately contacted WSF and they assured me that NO buyer's premium would be levied on the Arizona tag sales.

 

At no time am I aware of any buyer's premium being levied on an Arizona tag. The Commission has tried very hard to ensure that this program could not be misused. Tags have been sold by national groups and by local groups, to include the Arizona Deer Association, the Mule Deer Foundation, and many others. So far as the tags are concerned, I am unaware of any of these groups being anything other than truly great fundraising partners. Yes, Commissioner's tags helps these organizations by bringing clients to their banquets, but they have always bore the administrative costs of these sales. Both the Department and the wildlife conservation organizations benefits. And the benefits get passed on to the wildlife resources of Arizona.

 

Arizona has a great program because of the partnership among the Commission, the great wildlife conservation organizations that sponsor the tags (both national and local), and the sportsmen that have interest in participating in the raffles and auctions for these tags.

 

Brian Wakeling

Game Branch Chief

Arizona Game and Fish Department

 

 

Thank you Brian for clarifying that!

[audsley]

Amanda, thanks for your call for facts and a focus on going forward instead of ruminating over what has already happened.

 

I agree that AZSFW has had its Chappaquidick moment - that event that forever tarnishes and can't be washed away. But I also agree that Arizona sportsmen and wildlife badly need a voice at the legislature, with our U.S. Congressmen, federal land agencies and with the public. We also need that voice to accountable to, and acting in the best interests of, the state's sportsmen and the future of hunting and wildlife. How do we get that?

 

Part of it requires that sportsmen pay into the organization. I believe there are mechanisms to accomplish this. In fact, my first thought involves the various Arizona sportsmen's websites including this one, but more on that later if we can get that far.

 

What Arizona sportsmen have had up to now is a group that claims to speak for the state's sportsmen but is not organized to be accountable or transparent (AZSFW), and the NRA, which seems to believe our greatest needs are the right to hunt with AR-15s with bannana clips (HB 2640) and to put sound suppressors on our rifles (HB 2728).

 

Can we improve on that?

[BuzzH]

Thought I'd add my couple cents worth to this issue as I've taken the time to contact Mr. Jerry Weiers (twice) and I've had dealings with SFW for the last 8-10 years in multiple states. At the request of the site owner, I will not provide anything but facts, or what I believe are facts with my dealings with SFW.

 

First off, this latest tag grab should come as no surprise to anyone that has followed SFW's agenda in other states. Its the same thing everywhere they set up an affiliate branch (WY, MT, ID, AZ, CO, etc.). Don Peay and the founders of SFW all claim that each states SFW and associated groups (BGF, AZSFWC) are their own seperate entities. Don states over and over again that each SFW group can make their own decisions on how they raise funds, what issues they want to pursue, etc. I dont buy it, I've seen time and time again as any SFW group, no matter the state, repeatedly have thrown the average DIY hunters under the bus. The facts are that in my home state of Wyoming, WYSFW has lobbied for transferable landowner tags and also outfitter sponsored tags. Its only through the diligence of sportsmen in Wyoming that the idea of these tag give-aways, was soundly defeated. There is also no question that Don Peay has...and is...actively trying to take full control of the various Game and Fish Agencies in every Western State by loading commissions, unseating G&F directors, and taking control of citizen working groups involved with the decision making process regarding wildlife. Classic examples are the RAC's in Utah being piled with SFW drones, the ousting of a sitting AK F&G Director and appointing of AKSFW founder Corey Rossi (who had ZERO wildlife management experience), and I'll spare you all the details of the deciding board in Arizona in regard to appointments of Commissioners. Its the same story repeating itself over and over and over again everywhere SFW attempts to stake a claim. Further, SFW has now asked other groups, like the case in Arizona, to step up and donate large sums of money to "lobby" for the interests of all sportsmen.

 

I find that to be an out right lie, they dont lobby for the interests of all sportsmen, rather their own agenda. This point became very apparent just a few months ago when Don Peay and Ryan Benson asked sportsmen to derail and stop the Simpson/Tester rider in the CR that has successfully delisted wolves in ID and MT. Both states are now enjoying full state control of wolves along with hunting and/or trapping seasons in both states. Further, the Great Lakes regions now seem poised to adopt wolf seasons there. The question I have asked SFW and never gotten a reply on, why did you oppose this? I wont get an answer, because the answer is very obvious...SFW/BGF have used the wolf issue as a cash cow for years.

 

As to the issue of Arizona, this was nothing more than classic SFW operating procedures...grab as much money as you can, scare the hunters in Arizona that their interests wont be represented at the national level. Show a "need" for the $$$$ to justify the tags, but only do so if you're caught with your hand in the cookie jar trying to rob them. Under-handed behavior is nothing new to this group.

 

One last thing, I guess that Jerry Weiers is not that interested in what NR hunters have to say in regard to this issue as I've asked him now TWICE to call me to discuss this issue. Apparently spending several thousand dollars in just tag sales in Arizona the last 10 years is no big deal to him. Since I dont live in Arizona...and cant vote him out...I'm to be treated as chopped liver. I'm just one of those pesky NR's who help fund Wildlife in Arizona he claims to be such a champion of.

 

Finally, to end with a positive note. I would highly recommend that the hunters in Arizona take a good and honest look what has happened here and take into consideration the above things I posted. From my past experiences with dealing with legislative issues, I think you'd be better served to work with LOCAL groups like the ADA, etc. SFW has sold you all a bill of goods, claiming the individuals outdoorsmen/women and local groups cant effectively lobby on their own behalf. Thats a bunch of bunk, you can, and I've seen it happen successfully. Most recently in Montana where average DIY hunters packed the house in Helena over an entire crop of bad bills that would have had very damaging impacts on hunters and wildlife. What turned the tide is Montana, and will in any State, is hunters/anglers filling state Capitals during hearings. The average sportsmen have way, way, way more clout than they realize.

 

The only way to ensure that YOUR views of these kinds of issues are represented is for all of us to voice our opinions...and I say work through KNOWN local groups that will fairly represent your views. Also, make sure that the local groups are ASKING for your views on the issues and that you also let them know. You have to be active, you have to be informed. Its bad enough that outdoorsmen have to worry about anti's...now we have to also worry about our supposed "own" as well. Thats sad, but a reality we now have to deal with, in no small part because of SFW.

 

Good luck with all this and I hope that Arizona can successfully keep the Publics wildlife in the Publics hands.

[Ringer]

Smack-is that you Don?

[Chef]

I have made a few contacts.

 

In fact not all the orgs that are on the board were given the spiel.

 

Very interesting news. So not all the orgs on the AZSFWC board even knew this was even a consideration as a proposed bill?

 

 

I should also note that most of the groups or people that responded to my question where very professional and understanding. I think all in all most of our groups are organized by people who really care and are not self serving. This is my impression from the limited contact I had this weekend.

 

Runningbird, I have been informed that this is not entirely true. AZSFW made a presentation to the AZSFWC board. All the representatives of the orgs that sit on the AZSFWC board and were present knew of the idea of this bill.

[runningbird]

I have made a few contacts.

 

In fact not all the orgs that are on the board were given the spiel.

 

Very interesting news. So not all the orgs on the AZSFWC board even knew this was even a consideration as a proposed bill?

 

 

I should also note that most of the groups or people that responded to my question where very professional and understanding. I think all in all most of our groups are organized by people who really care and are not self serving. This is my impression from the limited contact I had this weekend.

 

Runningbird, I have been informed that this is not entirely true. AZSFW made a presentation to the AZSFWC board. All the representatives of the orgs that sit on the AZSFWC board and were present knew of the idea of this bill.

 

Chef, I am not doubting what you are stating or what you have been told. But I will again state that I have been told differently. I also will say that I also heard they were all present. But when they responded to my question after your prompt I was told differently.

 

This whole thing is a shame in that it has brought up a lack of trust. Don't know what else to say. I'm not sure if we will ever find out the real truth, but we will all need to move on. Hopefully in a positive direction.

[krp]

Well, the facts are, questions were asked by concerned sportsmen over the SFW gameplan being implemented here, including tags and money being payed to the orgs from the sale... they were assured no such thing would ever happen.

 

Quote...

 

2006... I know what you are saying regarding the special tags. Just look at Utah, it is ridiculous. I would fight against any system that approaches that one.

 

Chris

 

 

 

2012... I encourage you to read the bill for yourself. I am confident that once you have done that, you will join me in support of this bill.

 

 

 

--

Chris Denham

 

 

 

Personal trust credits are hard to build and easy to lose... I know. The irony of Chris's statements 5 years apart with the steps taken by AZSFW between those times should polarize 99% of folks, org or independent... that there is no doubt in whether azsfw will not continue to represent sportsmen groups.

 

No question first, move forward second.

 

Kent

[javihammer]

Great input from Buzz, his history with SFW seems to align pretty well with our experience with AZSFW. Same tactics, similar name...if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it is probably a duck. Here is a link to an opinion poll that was posted on bowsite.....there was some really good balanced feedback on the history of the SFW and its impacts on Utah. It was a pretty good educational read.

 

Here is the link http://forums.bowsite.com/tf/bgforums/thread-print.cfm?threadid=382931&forum=36

 

Kent, I would be open to a meeting with you and John and Amanda (and anyone else you see fit). I would be a little leaguer among big leaguers but I will provide whatever support I can. Amanda asked the fair question about what could be done to replace the AZSFW, I think it is a good question and I would encourage Audsley to expound on his internet idea. I am asking for constructive reasons, not to shoot holes in it. With Arizona hunters on high alert for the time being, the timing could not be any better to wash away the AZSFW and replace them with people that can be trusted.

 

One more thing. I came across the prepared written statement that Commissioner Freeman read when HB 2072 was presented to the Commission in early January. Most people may have read it already, I hadnt read it until yesterday. His statement was nice and concise and shows he really gets it. I sure hope the other Commissioners are as good as he is. I suspect he may be the person the Gowen bill may be trying to target. I pulled this link from another site, thanks cmc.

 

http://www.cmccotter.org/azuho/Freeman2072.pdf

 

Ryan

Starve the SFW tag monster, keep tags in Arizona

[krp]

No one's breaking down my door on my suggestion... I can read tealeaves... and tuesdays are one of the days I can often get away fishing, went to San Carlos today and the weather was beautiful, the fishing slow, though we did boat 9 crappie. If it's a good looking day on the 21st and the choice is fishing or some private orgs meeting... I'm going fishing.

 

Anyway, for a suggestion. In a political sense, the orgs are in a tight spot, they either continue with SFW because of the Super PAC and legislative power it influences in this election year... or go grass roots, LARGE internet voice directly to the legislature on every important issue same as what happened with 2072. At least for this election/legislative cycle... it'll take a year or two to reorganize and build a lobby.

 

Kent

[coueshunter]

krp. I have put alot of thought into the response I got back in 2006. and now in 2012. I know that I will have a very hard time backing/supporting any other lobbying group after what has happened. I have read and re read hb2072 and do not see how it is the right method to help wildlife, my kids, or me. I fully understand money is needed to fund lobbying efforts, but the next group must have an oversight group that ensures Backdoor moves don't occur. I. volunteer to sit on the oversight committee.........allen taylor

[krp]

Allen, it's eerie how you brought up the exact content of HB2072 5 years ago and that you asked the questions that are so relevant today. I just stumbled on the thread through googleing something different, not searching this site... when the tag fee issue came up it was relevant and bell went off so I found it again.

 

You've got a good foresight that is needed, I'd support your candidacy...

 

I know of you from a mutual friend, Vince... he always say's we should meet and maybe we will someday, look forward to it.

 

Kent