RMEF MEMBERS?

[Craig]

Sure I would like all to donated land to be open to hunting, but if a person will donates 5,000 acres of important winter range range to the RMEF if they don't allow any hunting in it that's fine with me. I would rather not be able to hunt on it then see the land owner sell the land for millions of dollars and see houses all over that winter range.

[jsteplee]

First year member.  I don't figure everything is great and perfect, but what is?  Overall, I think they're doing what they say they're doing...

[mtndew]

Been a member for over 15 years. Life member for the past five.

[passing-thru]

Got membership for birthday 20 yrs ago and still enrolled today. As stated things have changed but they still do some outstanding things for elk herds and habitat. Should become life member but $1500 bucks is hard to shell out.

[gunnarnewt]

I've been a member since 1984. Not a bad group, if you look at all they've done over those 25 years for conservation. Which is why we do what we do right? To conserve this heritage for our kids?

[edmondshunter]

I am a member, but have developed reservations about the group.  Seems they are catering to the rich and money crowd, not the every day working stiff hunters.  Just like Safari Club.  If you have enough money, it seems you are welcome to meet them, go on hunts with them, etc.... if you are a working stiff, tough luck chuck!  They are helping to bring in that elitist attitude about hunting, that we all fear.  Only the rich will be able to hunt.

These are very valid concerns.  All nonprofit orgs. run in this same manner.  How many of us are Boeing credit union members?  The point is, they have to cater to the all mighty dollar in order to produce funding for any endeavor.  Its a double edge sword and I know that sucks but take the good with the bad.

If and I mean if the RMEF  tyred to close the Cle Elum area, they would be met with all sorts of opposition. The mining industry in that area, ATV public area national forrest etc.  Public lands are just that Public.  Part of these land sale contracts from the State and public sector involve access rights to folks just like us here on this site.  For example. If a housing development builds along a river, stream etc.  they have to allow public rods access to the water way Via Private Prop. or easements. Having said that I don't need a bunch of crap about Grandfather Clauses and so on.

A lot of people think that Greenpeace is a bad org., maybe it is, but the good that is spurn from it is undeniably positive.  People wouldn't know squat about the issues at stake if it wasn't for Orgs. like the RMEF.....

[RUTNBULL1]

Got membership for birthday 20 yrs ago and still enrolled today. As stated things have changed but they still do some outstanding things for elk herds and habitat. Should become life member but $1500 bucks is hard to shell out.

Hey Pass you can always sign up for a life memebership and do the payment plan.

[droptine]

yes  life member since 1998

[WonkyWapiti]

I joined last year and I can't wait for February for the next banquet.

[halflife65]

So, to make sure that I have this straight, the main arguments AGAINST the RMEF are:
1.   From Huntbear - They are beginning to have an elitist attitude
2.   From Killbilly - All lands are under RMEF control - this could potentially mean that they could close lands to some/all hunters and/or charge fees to hunt on them or deed them (or turn over management) to some other organization that may or may not be pro-hunting
3.   From HoofsandWings - They have accepted some deeded land that cannot be hunted because it was a condition of accepting the deed to the land.  Please see Point X below – this could also be a GOOD thing (which is probably what HoofsandWings intended).
Arguments FOR RMEF are:
1.   From eastsidebugle – “I spend 35 bucks a year on way stupider crap than that…”  
2.   From Craig – Donated land is still habitat that otherwise may be purchased by a developer (or otherwise used for something other than the benefit of elk/deer/non-game species, etc.).  Even if you can’t hunt it, it’s still great that it exists and is protected.
3.   Their charter is to purchase lands and sponsor projects that help/enhance habitat for elk (and other species).  An example is around the Eburg area with the lands that they’ve purchased and the gates that they’ve paid for on some roads in the Naneum unit (something that I’ve noticed.)
4.   The website promotes elk, elk habitat and hunting (Bugle Magazine, eNewsletters, TV program.)

Things that I’m unclear about:
1.   From HoofsandWings – I think that you are saying that there isn’t enough money coming in from donors ($20 to $50/year) to cover the projects that RMEF is doing.  Are you implying that there is “hidden” money coming to the organization from somewhere?  Or, are you saying, that there are more projects than money and some things are just not getting done – RMEF needs to become the size of DU to get enough money to complete necessary projects?
2.   From Huntbear - Elitist Attitude:  Does this mean that you need to have money to be invited to the party with the big boys?...I'm unclear if this means that you just don't like the people (that's fine), you don’t get invited to some of the organization’s meetings (which may have the consequence that you don’t get a chance to provide input into organizational decisions) or if it means that you think that there is some hidden agenda to eventually disallow hunting on RMEF purchased lands at all or unless you can pay (or some combination of the above).
3.   From wadu1 – You state that RMEF puts as much money as possible into conservation of land as possible.  While this is certainly what I hope is happening (and why I give them my money), have you verified this?
4.   Is there anything in the charter, fine print, etc. that says what RMEF can do with the land?  IE. Sell, make off limits to some all members, stop hunting, etc.?  I’m not sure…just wondering if anybody knows the answer to this question.
5.   From Killbilly – “And everything they score for us (supposedly) will be subject to their control and can and, I believe, will be off limits to us someday. I truly believe they have a huge hidden agenda that is going to ruin it for us someday. 

Can you expand on what makes you think this way?  Did they do something already, is it the “elitist attitude” as mentioned above?  Is it just a gut feeling?
6.   From Edmondshunter – “If, and I mean, if the RMEF tried to close the Cle Elum area, they would be met with all sorts of opposition. The mining industry in that area, ATV (groups), public area national forest, etc.  Public lands are just that: Public.  Part of these land sale contracts from the State and public sector involve access rights to folks just like us here on this site.  For example, if a housing developer builds along a river, stream etc.  they have to allow public rods access to the water way Via Private Prop. or easements. Having said that I don't need a bunch of crap about Grandfather Clauses and so on.”

I think that you are saying that at least some of it would need to be left open as an easement for the public to access public lands if RMEF tried to restrict access?  Can you clear this up?  Does this also mean that the land would be off limits with the exception of a road/travel easement to access public or private lands with different owners than RMEF?
Please feel free to add anything to the lists above.  If anybody wants to clear up the comments they made, I’d appreciate that as well.  That goes for the “unclear” section as well as the “For” and “Against” sections.  I am NOT trying to put words in anybody’s mouth, either.  If I misconstrued someone’s comment(s) or have them out of context, please correct me.
I currently give my membership dues to RMEF every year and I want to make an informed decision about where to put my money.  The list above is not an attempt by me to convince anybody to be for or against RMEF – just hoping to gather some facts and clear up my misconceptions where they might exist.

[HoofsandWings]

Halflife65,
"Or, are you saying, that there are more projects than money and some things are just not getting done – RMEF needs to become the size of DU to get enough money to complete necessary projects?"
Yes that.
DU takes in 250 million dollars a year vs RMEF at 50 million.

See www.charitynavigator.org

[halflife65]

I was pretty sure that was what you meant, but I wanted to be sure so that I wasn't jumping to any conclusions.  Thanks for the link - I'll check that out.

[lewy]

 

[royalbull]

sponsor member from 1998-2007, committee member for last 6 years Enumclaw / White River chapter. Our banquet is the first Saturday every April. Plan on becoming Life member at next years banquet. Can't remember when I joined, just know it was a long time ago.

[dewandgin]

Been a member since 96 and a committe member since 2001