Hawkeye
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 3,021
There are several threads that contain posts regarding the upcoming question and answer meetings with Don Peay. I thought it would be helpful have one thread where we can post information regarding the meetings.
I noticed in Don's latest post in the "Support Instead of Complaining" thread he states that he assigned me to "schedule the meetings on April 6 and 7 to avoid conflicting with RAC meetings. I am not sure why I was tasked with this--I guess that is what I get for opening my mouth. Fair enough, I am happy to help publicize the time and place of the meetings if Don truly show up and answer tough questions from the general public.
We need some help pinning down locations for the two meetings. Don would like to meet in SLC on April 6th and then somehwere in Utah County on April 7th. I personally don't have any connections to a location that could accomodate a large crowd. Grizzmoose previously volunteered to find suitable locations. Grizz, how is that coming along? If anyone has any ideas as to where to hold the meetings, please foward them along to grizzmoose.
As far as format, Don would like to present a 45 minute power point presentation with the remainder of the time left open for questions from the public. I would hope that both sides will be respectful, professional and truthful.
On a personal note, I would hope that Don would answer/address the following four issues:
First, why won't SFW provide a detailed and transparent accounting to the public? The RMEF posts its tax returns and audited financial statements on its website: (http://www.rmef.org/Footer/Financial/Financial.htm). I believe all non-profit, conservation organizations have an ethical obligation to provide this information. After all, these are non-profit, tax-free entities that seek donations from sportsmen like me, and more importantly, have been entrusted with a permits taken from the public draw to raise money on behalf Utah?s wildlife. As such, I believe that conservation groups are stewards of a public resource and have an ethical obligation to disclose exactly how those funds are being used. I would hope that the State of Utah is performing regular, in-depth audits of those funds. But I have little faith that there is any real oversight. If everything is on the up and up, then why not open up the books? This would resolve the cloud of uncertainty that has been hanging over SFW and would lead to additional participation from concerned sportsmen like me. The reason I believe this information is not released is because the average sportsman would be disappointed if they knew the amount of money that is spent on salaries, consulting fees, administrative costs, etc., and never actually hits the ground. I hope I am wrong but we will never know until this information is released.
Second, on a related note, what percent of money raised by SFW is actually spent on conservation? According to SFH?s 2007 tax return (which is not posted on SFW?s website), only 13.5% of total revenue went directly to conservation projects. In fact, more money was spent on ?consulting fees? than actual conservation projects. The numbers are summarized below:
Total Revenue - $3,363,380
Expenditures:
ADVERTISING - $109,079
ARTISTS PRINT - $4,500
BANK CHARGE - $20,379
BIG GAME CONVENTION - $449,605
BIG GAME HABITAT IMPROV - $83,687
CONSERVATION PERMITS - $64,991
CONSULTING FEE - $485,242
GRAZING PERMITS - $3,738
GROUSE STUDY - $30,000
HABITAT PROJECTS - $334,365
INSURANCE - $2,827
MISC - $148,968
PROGRAM EXPENSES (fund-raising?) - $885,870
PROPERTY TAX - $2,937
RENT - $9,720
SECURITY - $432
SUBSCRIPTIONS - $50
SUPPLIES - $16
TAGS - $429,955
TURKEY FEEDING - $1,914
UTILITIES - $338
Total - $3,068,613
(http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/870/870575540/870575540_200712_990.pdf)
Now, I am not an accountant but I certainly hope that more than 13.5% of total revenue raised by SFW actually goes toward wildlife. No doubt, there is more to the story than what is shown on a tax return. However, nobody from SFW is willing to step forward and explain these numbers.
Third, why won't SFW release the numbers relating to the Hunting Expo? People have been asking for some time to know how many people applied for each specific hunt. If we had these numbers, we could easily calculate what the drawing odds were in prior years for a given tag. We could also figure out exactly how much money each tag is actually generating for ?conservation.? The convention tags are public resources that have been entrusted to SFW and MDF. Plus, in the beginning, SFW promised these numbers would be made public. I guess what I am saying is a little transparency would go a long way toward restoring people?s faith in SFW.
Finally, what happens to the money raised from Convention Permits? When I read through the relevant Utah Administrative Code provisions (http://wildlife.utah.gov/rules/R657-55.php), I did not see ANY requirement that ANY portion of funds raised from the sale of Convention Permits actually be used to benefit wildlife. Remember, I am talking about Convention Permits, not Conservation Permits, which have a statutory requirement that a certain percentage of the revenue actually be used for conservation. I certainly hope there is a statutory requirement located somewhere else that a certain percent of all funds raised by the sale of Convention Permits be used directly to benefit wildlife. However, I don't know why it would not be included in this section of the code. Once again, Convention Permits are a public resource and the funds derived from the sale of those permits should be carefully accounted for and used for actual conservation projects.
If you have any questions or suggestions for the upcoming meetings, please post them here. I certainly am not in charge of the meetings, as Don will be leading the discussion. However, we all have an interest in making sure that these meetings occur and that they are productive. There was talk of a similar meeting last April that never occurred. It would be a shame not to take advantage of this opportunity.
Hawkeye
Browning A-Bolt 300 Win Mag
Winchester Apex .50 Cal
Mathews Drenalin LD
I noticed in Don's latest post in the "Support Instead of Complaining" thread he states that he assigned me to "schedule the meetings on April 6 and 7 to avoid conflicting with RAC meetings. I am not sure why I was tasked with this--I guess that is what I get for opening my mouth. Fair enough, I am happy to help publicize the time and place of the meetings if Don truly show up and answer tough questions from the general public.
We need some help pinning down locations for the two meetings. Don would like to meet in SLC on April 6th and then somehwere in Utah County on April 7th. I personally don't have any connections to a location that could accomodate a large crowd. Grizzmoose previously volunteered to find suitable locations. Grizz, how is that coming along? If anyone has any ideas as to where to hold the meetings, please foward them along to grizzmoose.
As far as format, Don would like to present a 45 minute power point presentation with the remainder of the time left open for questions from the public. I would hope that both sides will be respectful, professional and truthful.
On a personal note, I would hope that Don would answer/address the following four issues:
First, why won't SFW provide a detailed and transparent accounting to the public? The RMEF posts its tax returns and audited financial statements on its website: (http://www.rmef.org/Footer/Financial/Financial.htm). I believe all non-profit, conservation organizations have an ethical obligation to provide this information. After all, these are non-profit, tax-free entities that seek donations from sportsmen like me, and more importantly, have been entrusted with a permits taken from the public draw to raise money on behalf Utah?s wildlife. As such, I believe that conservation groups are stewards of a public resource and have an ethical obligation to disclose exactly how those funds are being used. I would hope that the State of Utah is performing regular, in-depth audits of those funds. But I have little faith that there is any real oversight. If everything is on the up and up, then why not open up the books? This would resolve the cloud of uncertainty that has been hanging over SFW and would lead to additional participation from concerned sportsmen like me. The reason I believe this information is not released is because the average sportsman would be disappointed if they knew the amount of money that is spent on salaries, consulting fees, administrative costs, etc., and never actually hits the ground. I hope I am wrong but we will never know until this information is released.
Second, on a related note, what percent of money raised by SFW is actually spent on conservation? According to SFH?s 2007 tax return (which is not posted on SFW?s website), only 13.5% of total revenue went directly to conservation projects. In fact, more money was spent on ?consulting fees? than actual conservation projects. The numbers are summarized below:
Total Revenue - $3,363,380
Expenditures:
ADVERTISING - $109,079
ARTISTS PRINT - $4,500
BANK CHARGE - $20,379
BIG GAME CONVENTION - $449,605
BIG GAME HABITAT IMPROV - $83,687
CONSERVATION PERMITS - $64,991
CONSULTING FEE - $485,242
GRAZING PERMITS - $3,738
GROUSE STUDY - $30,000
HABITAT PROJECTS - $334,365
INSURANCE - $2,827
MISC - $148,968
PROGRAM EXPENSES (fund-raising?) - $885,870
PROPERTY TAX - $2,937
RENT - $9,720
SECURITY - $432
SUBSCRIPTIONS - $50
SUPPLIES - $16
TAGS - $429,955
TURKEY FEEDING - $1,914
UTILITIES - $338
Total - $3,068,613
(http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/870/870575540/870575540_200712_990.pdf)
Now, I am not an accountant but I certainly hope that more than 13.5% of total revenue raised by SFW actually goes toward wildlife. No doubt, there is more to the story than what is shown on a tax return. However, nobody from SFW is willing to step forward and explain these numbers.
Third, why won't SFW release the numbers relating to the Hunting Expo? People have been asking for some time to know how many people applied for each specific hunt. If we had these numbers, we could easily calculate what the drawing odds were in prior years for a given tag. We could also figure out exactly how much money each tag is actually generating for ?conservation.? The convention tags are public resources that have been entrusted to SFW and MDF. Plus, in the beginning, SFW promised these numbers would be made public. I guess what I am saying is a little transparency would go a long way toward restoring people?s faith in SFW.
Finally, what happens to the money raised from Convention Permits? When I read through the relevant Utah Administrative Code provisions (http://wildlife.utah.gov/rules/R657-55.php), I did not see ANY requirement that ANY portion of funds raised from the sale of Convention Permits actually be used to benefit wildlife. Remember, I am talking about Convention Permits, not Conservation Permits, which have a statutory requirement that a certain percentage of the revenue actually be used for conservation. I certainly hope there is a statutory requirement located somewhere else that a certain percent of all funds raised by the sale of Convention Permits be used directly to benefit wildlife. However, I don't know why it would not be included in this section of the code. Once again, Convention Permits are a public resource and the funds derived from the sale of those permits should be carefully accounted for and used for actual conservation projects.
If you have any questions or suggestions for the upcoming meetings, please post them here. I certainly am not in charge of the meetings, as Don will be leading the discussion. However, we all have an interest in making sure that these meetings occur and that they are productive. There was talk of a similar meeting last April that never occurred. It would be a shame not to take advantage of this opportunity.
Hawkeye
Browning A-Bolt 300 Win Mag
Winchester Apex .50 Cal
Mathews Drenalin LD
