Removing Doug Sayer from Wild Sheep Foundation for Idaho political strong-arming

[MTGomer]

One thing you forgot to mention that hasn't changed much since I started hunting Montana in 1979 is the cost of a resident hunting license in Montana.

You know what else hasn't changed? The management of elk, deer, sheep, goats, moose, and pronghorn. Same seasons, (additional day for elk and deer).

Maybe instead of Montana hunters being subsidized by governors tags and NR's, they start paying their freight on the luxury tags, like sheep, moose and goat. Gee, there's a thought.

You can try to justify the gov. tags all you want, but they have done harm to conservation as well. Don't believe me? Ask yourself how SFW fast tracked itself into the "conservation" front. What was the catalyst they used to become relevant?

Governors and Raffle tags are not that significant in the over-all budget of GF agencies and are not "saving" conservation...far from it. Just look at the FWP budget and what % of the budget the gov. tags provide. Hunters and Anglers did fine without them, and still could, easily. Having residents pay $2 more for common licenses would trump the revenue of all the auction and raffle permits combined.

Maybe its time for MT residents to jump into 2016 with the fees they pay? Yes?

If the state kept an additional 2$ per every sheep tag applicant, you'd have about another $40,000 ( I think, isn't there about 20k applicants?)
I would be fine paying more for a sheep tag. I'd pay 5x as much. Others probably wouldn't. $125 to do what I've done for 19 days this season so far, and am about to do for another 4 in a few hours is a bargain, no doubt.

I just don't see the parrallel between SFW (what has SFW accomplished on the conservation front?) and WSF. One governors tag isn't taking opportunity away from you or me. Problems arise when you get into the Utah type situation of dozens and dozens of auction tags. Which is exactly what should be avoided, and is exactly why Josh above, is correct in his letter.

Most sheep auction tags in Reno (dall, stone, Sonora MX deserts, etc..) aren't draw tags anyway. They are purchase tags that if weren't donated or partially donated to be auctioned, outfitters would sell.
Sometimes they go for less than the hunt sells for.

 

[Irrelevant]

maybe MT residents paid a bit more there'd be a few more dollars to go around...

 

[MTGomer]

maybe MT residents paid a bit more there'd be a few more dollars to go around...

At $1250, our NR bighorn tags are a bargain too.

 

[huntid73]

It's important to understand that while WSF has many chapters and affiliates throughout the country and in Canada, those organizations are autonomous of WSF national. The ID raffle is run by ID WSF, not national.

I understand that, what bothers me is the fact that he is a chair of WSF national, and he is still doing this. I was just saying I wonder how much he has influenced here in Idaho that hasn't come to light yet. I know all organizations have their bad apples, and I believe after listening to Gray on Randy's podcasts that most of the other members are stand-up conservationists. I absolutely love that this organization is trying to put more sheep on the mountains, especially since I am going to start applying for hunts next year.

 

[BuzzH]

If the state kept an additional 2$ per every sheep tag applicant, you'd have about another $40,000 ( I think, isn't there about 20k applicants?)
I would be fine paying more for a sheep tag. I'd pay 5x as much. Others probably wouldn't. $125 to do what I've done for 19 days this season so far, and am about to do for another 4 in a few hours is a bargain, no doubt.

I just don't see the parrallel between SFW (what has SFW accomplished on the conservation front?) and WSF. One governors tag isn't taking opportunity away from you or me. Problems arise when you get into the Utah type situation of dozens and dozens of auction tags. Which is exactly what should be avoided, and is exactly why Josh above, is correct in his letter.

Most sheep auction tags in Reno (dall, stone, Sonora MX deserts, etc..) aren't draw tags anyway. They are purchase tags that if weren't donated or partially donated to be auctioned, outfitters would sell.
Sometimes they go for less than the hunt sells for.

This could go on forever, I didn't say keep another $2 for just sheep applications...I said "common licenses" I guess I should have specified, deer, elk, bear, pronghorn, deer b tags, fishing, etc. and also sheep, goat, and moose...way more than 40K there.

Point is, the amount of money raised for the over-all budget with gov. and raffle tags is not that significant, surely not a deal breaker in "conservation".

I also disagree with you that gov. and raffle tags don't take opportunity away. Seems to me that if the sheep in the breaks can afford to have a gov. and raffle tag holder shoot 2 more sheep...the FWP could be issuing those 2 more tags to the draw just as easily (and maybe would be if they didn't have to account for 2 more sheep being killed there).

If you cant see the parallel between SFW and what Sayers was trying to do...then you have the blinders on, friend. SFW pushes for more and more auction, governors, and raffle tags every chance they get in every state they have members in. SFW also has bullied their way into the politics of the Western States to get their way on the auction tags, etc. Exactly the same, and I mean EXACTLY, the same thing that Sayers has done.

How is that different? Its only different because in your mind, you've justified the existence of the WSF but not SFW. But, the only thing that has changed is the player/name in each case, Sayers (WSF) and Peay (SFW), not what either are trying to achieve and how they're going about it. Corruption is corruption.

Also, SFW has made nearly all its money, directly, or indirectly, through the auction/raffle/governors tags. Without the tags, SFW wouldn't exist.

 

[MTGomer]

If you cant see the parallel between SFW and what Sayers was trying to do...

I was comparing organizations. You've changed it to comparing an organization to one single member of another organization. False equivalency.

Its like debating between the party platforms of republicans and democrats, and in rebuttal comparing the republican platform to the track record of Nancy Pelosi.
The actions of Sayers (probably behind the backs of most brass in WSF) speaks for the agenda, motives and philosophy of the entire organization in the same manner that Anthony Weiner represents the Democratic party.

Anyway, I have a backpack sheep hunt to go get ready for, and I'll be hunting a herd who's thriving largely due to work done by WSF, which I'll be forever thankful for.

Enjoy your deer or elk or bear or antelope or whatever you pursue, hunt this weekend. Best of luck to you.

 

[grandejuan]

What's happened in Idaho is much worse than the DU shenanigans last year. DU fired a prominent back page columnist over a big donor/board member closing public access to a stream. Mr Sayer has had enough influence to have members of commission removed/ unappointed by the Idaho governor. This is a great example of the "golden rule" in politics running rampant. "Them's with the gold makes the rules." His position as WSF chair is much to prominent to allow his further tenure. Maybe a new rule about the WSF members having real influence should happen and quickly. GJ

 

[406LIFE]

Are there any links to the primary documents to support any of this? I'd like them before I start shooting. haha. As for the DU Cluster, I am still fuming over that since the Ruby River access affects me and I WAS a DU member for a long time. Thanks for reigniting that in me,

 

[huntid73]

406LIFE, the link is is the first post of this thread. There you can get the main press release along with all associated emails, but here is the link again: http://www.idahowildlife.org/e-mails-reveal-back-room-arm-twisting-at-idaho-fish-game-commission/

 

[BigHornRam]

Anyway, I have a backpack sheep hunt to go get ready for, and I'll be hunting a herd who's thriving largely due to work done by WSF, which I'll be forever thankful for.

The sheep rancher with the allotment was ready to be bought out, as evidenced by this clip from the documentary "Sweetgrass".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAj3rkqZN54

Since then, the Bighorn herd has improved considerably.

Good work by WSF.

Good luck on your sheep hunt Gomer!

 

[Bambistew]

https://www.wildsheepfoundation.org/mission-and-programs/conservation-programs

Carmen Island would be a good thing to start with.

A "private" high fence, er island, sheep hunting preserve for the super rich in MX is your best case for WSF? Holy Kool-Aid. I think I would have chose a bit different success story.

Could you imagine what those sheep tags would sell for if they couldn't shoot a B&C sheep? All those "conservationists" would scatter like cockroaches with their wallets. Thats a fact.

How's sheep population doing in MT with those millions upon millions raised by auction tags? They must have about half as many sheep as they did 20 years ago? Maybe less? Seems like a good case to give them even more money, its going to such a noble cause. Soon there won't be any sheep left, who will you blame? When I was a kid there was nearly 600 sheep tags issued in MT. There is about 250 tags issued statewide today. Those auction tag funds and sheep conservation groups have really improved sheep numbers...

What about NV? Hows the sheep population there? Last I heard the population was in a free fall decline in many areas? Better sell some more tags!

I'm definitely cherry picking here, but justifying the existence of auction tags with results is not something I would consider a success.

Sure there is 1000 reasons why the populations suck, but giving the WSF, or any group, more auction tags because it will "fix" the problem(s) is a fallacy.

Here is some background on Alaska.

Before the Chugach went to a draw in the mid 2000's, the WSF couldn't give away the governors tag at auction. They routinely sold for $15-35,000, depending on what could be spotted from the air prior to the season. Basically they sold for the same price or slightly above the cost of a guided hunt because a trophy wasn't a guarantee. Those true conservationist, are only willing to part with their money if the $/inch is right. Once it went to a draw, trophy potential increased dramatically, and unsurprisingly the auction tags rose to the mid $150,000+... Best part is they now can shoot a tame sheep it within sight of the highway. Awesome! True essence of a wild sheep hunt right there.

I have zero love for any group pushing auction tags. If they can't raise money though dedicated programs, donations, memberships, etc that are available to all members and the general public they have no business "putting more sheep on the mountain" by way of selling our wildlife. Which they fail miserably at anyway. They're having trouble keeping the sheep they have from dying off.

You think ID is unique in this effort? WSF successfully lobbied the state of Alaska (along with SCI, Ruff Grouse, and others) to allow more $$$ retention of auction tag funds (along with with increasing the auction tags issued). We actually ended up with almost 3x as many tags, none of which have any value above a guided hunt (many sell for much less). Most aren't even subscribed for because the admin costs are more than the money they raise. The only ones of any value are for true trophy hunts... the Chugach Sheep, and an Umiak bear tag. That "coveted" Tok sheep tag still sells for $20k, because its not a sure bet you can kill trophy, so raising money is not really a high priority for the real conservationist. Proceeds from the auction tags were originally 10% kept by the org and 90% back to the state, now its 30/70% plus admin costs. They are required to spend the money on an ADFG administratively approved program, but we all know how programs get approved.

Why are special interest groups dictating how game is managed in our state? FYI, any group can get the same 30%, including SFW, SCI, RMEF, Etc, as long as they are incorporated in the state and meet other various requirements. One such is the stipulation of up to 3 tags may be awarded to each conservation group.

Want to know how slimy WSF is? Alaska has 2 WSF chapters... The Alaska and the CALIFORNIA chapter. CALIFORNIA formed a chapter in Alaska (got a mail box and an business license) so they could apply for 2 Alaska tags last year, that was on top of the 2 the Alaska recieved. So one org (although "separate") received 4 tags. Every other group receiving tags is based in Alaska with all members in ALASKA. Whats keeping other groups from doing the same thing? Nothing. Please tell me why the CALIFORNIA WSF should be involved with Alaska wildlife management?

I asked the CA president what their intent was, he stated that all the money would go back to Alaska. I haven't checked to see if s check for 100% of the auction as come through yet or not, I'll put $100 down that says its 70%.

Keep drinking that Kool-Aid and tossing money to a group that panders to the rich and lobbies to get more tags.

Strange that, arguably the best conservation group in the world, doesn't need to sell auction tags to remain solvent... nor keep elk on the mountain.

 

[tjones]

The sheep rancher with the allotment was ready to be bought out, as evidenced by this clip from the documentary "Sweetgrass".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAj3rkqZN54

Since then, the Bighorn herd has improved considerably.

Good work by WSF.

Good luck on your sheep hunt Gomer!

Paul, not long ago you were ready to burn Helena Hunters and Anglers for the words and actions of one member, are you now giving the WSF a pass for the actions of one of theirs?

 

[Bambistew]

Also, SFW has made nearly all its money, directly, or indirectly, through the auction/raffle/governors tags. Without the tags, SFW wouldn't exist.

Do you know what the percentage of funds WSF raises by auction tags? I dug it up but it was a while ago. I want to say it was about half the money they raised per year, may have been more? I don't remember.

 

[BigHornRam]

Paul, not long ago you were ready to burn Helena Hunters and Anglers for the words and actions of one member, are you now giving the WSF a pass for the actions of one of theirs?

Tony,

HHSS is a partisan group couched as a wildlife organization, similar to SFW, just rooting for the other team. That fact that the president is in support of I-177 is just one more reason not to be a member of their organization. I won't give Sayer a pass if this is true.

 

[tjones]

Tony,

HHSS is a partisan group couched as a wildlife organization, similar to SFW, just rooting for the other team. That fact that the president is in support of I-177 is just one more reason not to be a member of their organization. I won't give Sayer a pass if this is true.

.

If Sayer stays on with the WSF will you continue to support them?

 

[Steelhead]

Is it his (Sayer's) fault for trying or the politicians fault for being influenced?
I write letters to WDFW, governors, board members, etc all the time about stuff but they don't change things...who's fault is it?

 

[grandejuan]

Mr. Sayer has had no response that I know off. Probably hopes it will all go away. I received a first mailing for the "Sheep Show" in Reno today. Really don't want to see Sayer there as an officer. As Abraham Lincoln once said, "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt." GJ

 

[Bambistew]

Do you know what the percentage of funds WSF raises by auction tags? I dug it up but it was a while ago. I want to say it was about half the money they raised per year, may have been more? I don't remember.

Looks like its about 75% of their funding come from auction sales if I'm reading this right?

How high is SFW? Bet its not far off.

http://www.wildsheepfoundation.org/mission-and-programs/mission-funding

 

[brymoore]

Looks like its about 75% of their funding come from auction sales if I'm reading this right?

How high is SFW? Bet its not far off.

http://www.wildsheepfoundation.org/mission-and-programs/mission-funding

I think your number is wrong. Typical auction tags pay 5% to the seller and 95% to the state. If they sold $3M in tags, WSF would receive ~$150,000.

 

[BuzzH]

I think your number is wrong. Typical auction tags pay 5% to the seller and 95% to the state. If they sold $3M in tags, WSF would receive ~$150,000.

Depends on the tag, and depends on the State where they tags come from.

In Wyoming, its 10% to the seller for Gov. tags (except bison which are 30% to seller). In the case of commissioners tags (deer, elk, or antelope), 100% goes to the group that sells the tag.