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

brymoore said:
Two updates:

1) WSF board found no issue with Sayer's action.

2) The IDWSF VP has requested a hearing for my expulsion from the board for the FB post at the January 9th meeting.

Oh the irony.
Click to expand...

Man that's a bunch of crap. Where did this respect for the 1st amendment go as it pertains to your rights?
I'm a member and as someone who was/is considering life member status and is excited about the Reno show next month it's disappointing to see this. WSF does great work and the opportunities to win hunts through them are awesome for their members, but trying to remove you is a load of bs.
 
The way that WSF decides to handle Bryan Moore and Doug Sayer will tell every common hunter whether or not he should be a member. Looking the other way and supporting an organization in order to have chances at tags would be as bad as casting a vote to remove Bryan for asking questions publicly.
 
Its always best to get a flunky to do the dirtywork. Then there is at least a bit of plausible deniability. Wonder what the deal is? Perhaps cocktails with the "Massa". IMO. GJ
 
Last edited:
Though quite ironic I do not find it very surprising, specifically from a sheep org.
 
Last edited:
I hate to hear that brymoore, I am planning on spending some time this Friday night or Saturday to sit down and write a few letters to the editor to the Post Register and to the Idaho State Journal to challenge the letter that Doug Sayer wrote. It seems like the WSF and IDWSF figure that sweeping this under the rug and ignoring the outrage from the voting sportsmen in Idaho is their MO. The only way to maybe make the point about how upset the average hunter is is to no longer give money to these groups?
 
Speaking from similar experiences on the other side of the mountains here in MT, this seems very much like a "I have money and want more tags" vs "common man speaking up for what is fair". I will be contacting the WSF here in Bozeman and removing my membership. In much of the same line as Shane Mahoney trying to ally very diverse conservation groups for the betterment of the species, I would like to be able to partner with WSF. However, it seems that one's position is being used and possibly under the cloak of "doing good for the species" to further their own ambitions and access to an animal. I would encourage others to follow suit and contact WSF and tell them why they are leaving.
 
Its been apparent to me for a long, long time that for many involved with these sheep orgs...its a whole lot more about justifying the means to the end of "putting another sheep on my wall" VS. "putting more sheep on the mountain".

Priorities need to be readjusted within the sheep conservation community.
 
BuzzH said:
Its been apparent to me for a long, long time that for many involved with these sheep orgs...its a whole lot more about justifying the means to the end of "putting another sheep on my wall" VS. "putting more sheep on the mountain".

Priorities need to be readjusted within the sheep conservation community.
Click to expand...

Absolutely!!! I know a few people listed on the ID WSF board; they really couldn't give a crap about wildlife conservation unless it is monetized, gives them some type of status, and/or puts a head on the wall.
 
It's always easy to pick out the true "conservationists." They lead into a conversation with their Grandslam number, similar to a vegan...

The funniest are the outfitters who donate hunts. Not only are they a writeoff, but it's purely for advertising. That sheep is owned by the people, but sold as a privatly owned object.
 
The Idaho WSF was formed in 1982. In 1990 the bighorn sheep population in Idaho was estimated at nearly 5000. In 2010 it was estimated at 2900. Tell me again what the WSF has done to improve sheep populations in Idaho.
 
brymoore said:
Two updates:

1) WSF board found no issue with Sayer's action.

2) The IDWSF VP has requested a hearing for my expulsion from the board for the FB post at the January 9th meeting.

Oh the irony.
Click to expand...

Too bad WSF and IDWSF were not paying attention when the Dem Party rigged the game so the 1%er got the nomination rather than the guy that might have won the General Election. The backlash as Dems voted 3rd Party or GOP or sat at home on Election Day was a strong message to the Dems who with deaf ears promptly elected the same Congressional Leadership for 2017 as was in place during all the dirty tricks.

WSF is sending a clear message that $$$ exempt a donor from rebuke. Not the sort of organization I want to be a part of and thank goodness there are other options for donating small $ and time. Arrogance at WSF is a bad look but one that is there for all of us to see.
 
Its to bad that some of the vast funds being spent by Sayer and his gang isn't used to buy up some of the domestic sheep grazing permits. Then, maybe the Idaho population totals would be growing. Of course that couldn't be put on the trophy room wall. IMO. GJ
 
Press coverage would certainly help to light up the proceedings, as well as an expert in parliamentary procedure. GJ
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

perma
From the Wyoming WSF, "SF-118 Becomes Law"
Replies
0
Views
662
perma
perma
cheeser
House of Representatives votes to remove gray wolves from endangered species list
2
Replies
35
Views
3K
ismith
ismith
elkduds
CPW Roundtable official summary for 7/22/23 meeting
Replies
9
Views
1K
CptCasual
C
M
Recovering America's Wildlife Act passes House
Replies
6
Views
2K
Joseph Peterson
Joseph Peterson
Big Fin
Montana - Time to Shake it Up?
52 53 54
Replies
1K
Views
68K
antlerradar
antlerradar
Advertisement

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
114,085
Messages
2,043,788
Members
36,448
Latest member
Sss512

Share this page

Back
Top