DWR director Jim Karpowitz responded to some of the questions I raised in a recent column charging that the agency, regional wildlife advisory councils (RACs) and the policy-setting wildlife board often exclude those who don't buy hunting and fishing licenses.

"Wildlife belongs to all of the people and all of the people should pay for it," Karpowitz stressed. "It is valuable to everyone."

Karpowitz said the DWR spends $8 million of its $53 million annual budget on threatened and endangered wildlife, mostly in an effort to keep species viable enough to stay off the federal list. That compares to $9.5 million spent on deer and elk and $17 million on fishing.

No hunting and fishing license dollars fund programs that benefit species that are not consumed. Those programs receive money from federal grants and state general tax dollars.

Karpowitz praised two major funding initiatives.

One is the Utah Wildlife and Conservation Foundation, which hopes to raise money from hunting and nonhunting groups through corporate and private donations to support wildlife research, conservation and education.

Another is a conservation license that went into effect this year. It requires wildlife watchers using popular state-managed areas, such as Farmington Bay, to possess a fishing, hunting or watchable wildlife permit to have access.

As for the RAC and wildlife board process, Karpowitz said it favors hunters and anglers not because of bias but because those boards deal mostly with hunting and fishing policy.

A new plan will put RAC discussions on the agency's Web sites two weeks before a meeting and allow for online comments. Dedicated hunters who were once required to attend a RAC meeting once a year now need to attend only once every three years.

The DWR director said major wildlife species in Utah are largely governed by species-management plans. Representatives who do not hunt or fish, known as nonconsumptives, are involved in formulating those plans, especially the controversial bear and cougar plans.

Karpowitz denied charges that organized hunters, especially Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife (SFW), set Utah's wildlife policy.

"We work with a large number of interest groups and we want partnership groups," he said. "None call the shots in the agency. Professional opinion is best for wildlife. Some groups are more active than others. SFW is very active in the public process and has been effective in doing great things for wildlife by raising millions of dollars."

One wildlife enthusiast offered another perspective.

"Nonconsumptives have to take responsibility for so far having failed to organize their ranks into a politically meaningful force that the Department of Natural Resources and DWR cannot ignore," wrote Debbie Goodman, a former northern region RAC member who is not a hunter or angler.

While wildlife enthusiasts who do not hunt or fish may not like it, hunters and anglers have done a much better job both raising money for wildlife and using the political process to control the system.

Like it or not, politics will always play a big role in wildlife management.

---

* TOM WHARTON can be contacted at wharton@sltrib.com. His phone number is 801-257-8909. Send comments to livingeditor@sltrib.com.