NEW Ariz. 2005 Hunt Regs Info ...

[BuzzH]

Nummie,

My only "agenda" from the beginning on this issue was to see the residents of AZ get a vast majority of the tags while affording the average working NR hunter a "chance" to at least apply for a couple tags.

I wrote letters to YOUR commission, YOUR G&F director, and YOUR state and federal representatives stating exactly that. I strongly encouraged the AZGF to settle with Taulman for the 10% that he was suing over...which still gave the residents 90% of all available tags.

I got the nice, standard replies back..."thank you for your concern in this matter....."

I tried to help you guys and I'm sure that my letter writing was more than what 98% of the residents that it would effect the most even bothered to do.

Then, when you lose the case, you slap the average working NR hunter around with these new "regulations" that you THINK will hurt Taulman.

News flash, they wont, but you have successfully taken at least some average hard-working NR's out of the AZ draw...

Pat yourselves on the back boys...you really proved where your true loyalty lies.

Oh, and Nummie, my occupation has no bearing on this case. I work for the USFS conducting research in the field of Natural Resource Management...how is my occupation listed in my profile "embellishing" anything????

Apparently the Taulman victory has you jumping at the sight of your own shadow...I guess maybe I cant blame you...it sucks taking a beating like that.

 

[Funter]

The way this is going, sounds like something for SI.

 

[BuzzH]

Funter,

I dont think it belongs there at all.

Look, I've always been on the side of the Residents having priority over NR's in ALL states.

The problem I have is how the AZ residents are dealing with the defeat they caused by not settling this crap out of court. YOUR state-appointed attorneys and G&F department played hard ball and got their asses handed to them.

A bunch of NR's were on your side (me included) and now the thanks they get is to face huge increases in NR fees, buying $125 licenses they wont use and further making hunting more and more a rich mans sport...which the RESIDENTS are now bitching about.

Pretty tough for me to feel sorry for you guys and its impossible for me not to let the residents know just how ridiculous they sound bitching about the increased fees they now have to pay!

That isnt being just a little bit hypocritical is it????

Taulman may have been the catalyst to this case, but in my opinion the residents desire to get back at Taulman with these new "regulations" is only helping him and his rich clients.

Personally, I'd rather see a working-class self-guided NR hunter draw a tag than some rich dude booking a hunt through Taulman. But, apparently, somehow, the AZ residents believe that the increased fees will hurt Taulman...nothing could be further from the truth...you're helping him and his rich clients.

I'm still not sure how I became the "embellishing" bad guy for trying to help the AZ residents out????

 

[Delw]

Nummie, your wrong about Buzz big time on this issue, trust me I have known him long enough and he cares about as much as you do if not more on this issue.

While he might be rough with his replies, he cares about the common hunter more than most do, he also hunts his ass off more than most do.

I agree that the resident hunters of AZ blew this one way out, They are the ones to blame for the price increase's as well, since most of them wanted them( of cource it was to ward off non residents) thinking they would get back at tulman. it did blow up in the faces of AZ hunters, matter of fact some of the same people that wanted price increase's for non residents are the same ones bitching about the cap fees.
Some of the same people that wanted to keep non residents from hunting in az or limit there tags are the ones that are wanting to give away bonus points,
Some of the same people that dont want non-residents to hunt here are also the very same people asking to give ranchers land owner tags( but only a few ).

most of these people are just sheep and follow what anyone say's as long as its a beinfit to them, they have no clue what they are talking about. but yet in the very next sentence they are willing to do a 180 cause someone disagrees with them.

Dont get me wrong some of the az hunters tried to find quick remidies to the USO deal, the only problem was they didnt think before they spoke. A few of the hunters spoke and thought, unfortunatly it wasnt that many.

Yet most of these people are the same ones that wont support game and fish to give a few bull or buck tags to kids, they want them to have only antlerless tags( as not to interfer with there chances of getting a tag) but hey they will give rancher tags, but only a few |oo

A while back ago I collected a list of propsals these nutcase's had. I will try to dig them up and post them. I think you would even be shocked.




Delw

 

[Delw]

http://www.azgfd.com/artman/publish/article_225.shtml

11-24-04

Commission meeting for tag and license ceiling caps


Attendees:

There were 16 people at the meeting that were not part of the commission or the game and fish. This wasn’t a bad showing but I really thought that the hunters and anglers were more concerned about this price increase and felt that there would have been more people attending. Maybe there will be more at the Phoenix meeting on December 2nd at the La Quinta Inn located at 2510 W. Greenway Road at 6 P.M. There is another meeting in Tucson on December 1st and that meeting will be at The Arizona Game and Fish Region 5 Office located at 555 N. Greasewood at 6 P.M.

Presentation:

The presentation was a walkthrough of the information that you can read on the Game and Fish web site http://www.azgfd.gov/artman/publish/documents/FeeCeilingIncreaseInformation.pdf

For the most part the department spokesperson was trying hard to justify the needs of these increases and he did make some very good points—such as; drought and the effects on fishing and hunting, bark beetles and the effect on over all recreation, and a myriad of different things that we are all aware of, i.e., the rising cost of doing business.

The spokesperson did mention the overwhelming cost of medicating the bighorn sheep in the Silver Bell Mountain region and he gave a total of $60,000 to $100,000 dollar loss to the game and fish. There was a question raised about litigation to recuperate the losses from the individual that released the goats that caused these problems and he answered that the department is looking into litigation at this time but did not know if and when they would have a settlement. He also said that this money came out of the game and fish fund, so, that is something that we are now paying for.


Q&A

Many of the hunters were concerned that the ceiling cap was too high and felt that the non-resident ceiling percentages should be at the same rate as the resident increase. You can find the proposed ceiling increases on the Arizona Game and Fish web site http://www.azgfd.com/artman/uploads/fee_ceiling_table__11-10-04_.pdf Most of the people made comment that the last time the ceiling was raised, in 1998, that it didn’t take very long for the ceiling to be reached and now, they fear, that if the ceiling is raised as high as the proposal that they will not be able to hunt, or they will be limited to one species.

There were a few questions regarding youth hunts and I am pleased to announce that the game and fish will not be raising the license cap for the youth hunters. The next questing regarding the youth was about tag fee’s—the game and fish had not taken that into consideration—it was noted and it will be presented for further consideration.

There were a couple comments about people on fixed income, such as, single parents with hunting children, handicapped hunters who are disabled. These folks were very concerned about the increase and the reason is pretty obvious.

Non-resident hunters were hit on several times. Most of the comments were very similar to some that we have already read of the boards—“make em’ pay out the nose”, or, “why should the non-residents have the same chance as us to get a tag when we pay all of the bill?” type statements. The presenter informed us that 97% of all tags are distributed to resident hunters and the other 3% were for the non-resident. He didn’t really give a great answer as to why deer tags might go up to $50.00 for residents, which is over 2 times what it is now, and why the non-resident will only go as high as $200.00 which is only a $74.50 increase—you can do the math on the comparison of percentages.

All in all, that just about sums up what the questions were on the increases, however, there is more!

Premium hunts:

There were some talk about premium hunts and how they would determine how they would designate these hunts. The deer is pretty easy, anything north of the Colorado River will be a premium hunt, however, it wasn’t clear if the early Kiabab hunt will be a premium hunt, or, just the late hunts. The strip will be a premium buck hunt unit..

Elk is a whole different issue. The speaker couldn’t tell any of us what units, what seasons, or when these hunts will be issued. There was a question about the early muzzleloader hunters and the early archery hunts—the speaker said that he thought it would only be the early rifle bull hunts, but he wasn’t completely certain about that. It was asked how they would designate a unit as a premium unit when in almost every unit it was possible to tag a “premium bull”? He really didn’t have the answer to this question, other than the early bull hunt as mentioned above. —In defense of the game and fish, I believe that these are all just proposals and they are still testing the waters from the public on the outcome of these proposals.

In closing:

The main issue with the ceiling cap is the detriment to the heritage and the tradition of hunting. It was said that if the prices were to be raised too high that there would be a drop off of younger hunters, older hunters and hunters who are on a fixed income. I am not sure what the drop would be but I know it would make some folks think hard about putting in for a big game tag.

I would encourage all of you to look through these two links that I have posted and get real familiar with what is proposed. I would really like to see a lot more people attending the Phoenix meeting so you and all of your friends and hunting buddy’s can speak their minds about all of this. Without your voice there can not be any action—good or bad.

For what it is worth, my take on the proposals is that the game and fish paid out the nose on the law suit that they just went through, the drought is killing them because of habitat issues, and the cost to medicate the bighorns in the Silverbells. In fact, if you look at the “G&F Fund Revenue & Operating Costs” chart you will see a huge drop in 2003, just about the same time as the Silverbells, and the crux of the Montoya lawsuit—interesting isn’t it?? Even though we have been in a drought for at least 6 or 7 years 2002 was a money making year for the department—it begs to ask, what happened in 2003??

Bonus POint PIMPING

Proposal


Any person offering information to the Arizona Game & Fish Department resulting in the conviction of a poaching violation, will be limited to one (1) of the following rewards or options:

Resident:

1. $500 reward for any Big-Game species, or

2. $250 reward for any Small-Game species (including all prescribed migratory/non-migratory waterfowl or bird). or

3. Issued 5-Bonus Points toward any permit/application/drawing for any Big-Game genus of choice, (excluding Big Horn Sheep and Buffalo, unless the conviction is a Big Horn Sheep or Buffalo poaching violation) and are transferable to any legal minor child, upon written request, who has successfully completed the Hunter Safety Course. Rewarded bonus points (5) would be added to any existing accrued bonus point(s). or

4. Issued one (1) Big-Game tag, for any authorized genus of the poached species, in any authorized Game Management Unit of their choice. A Resident opting this reward, would retain any existing accrued bonus point(s) for the species rewarded, and their bonus points will be carried over into the following year application/drawing.

Non-Resident:

1. $500 reward for any Big-Game species, or

2. $250 reward for any Small Game species (including all prescribed migratory/non-migratory waterfowl or bird), or

3. Issued 5-Bonus points toward any permit/application/drawing for any Big-Game genus of choice, (excluding Big Horn Sheep or Buffalo, unless the conviction is a Big Horn Sheep or Buffalo poaching violation). Rewarded bonus points (5) would be added to any existing accrued bonus points

There were some comments about charging a trophy fee for the size of the animal you shoot--You shoot a 350 class bull and you get charged an extra 150 bucks, the person who presented that was thinking it would work better than charging all hunters more for elk--it didn't go over to well but it was a suggestion.

I am sure I can find some more if you want


Delw

 

[ringer]

I forgot about the stupid reward point idea! Now that one is bullshit. If you are a hunter and need free bonus points for doing the right thing against poachers then you need to go away. I will be turning one of you guys in to get my free points. I do think that we will pay a lot more to hunt but so what? You stop buyin' gas when it's over $3? Maybe fewer hunters will push people to varmint hunt more and help the deer and lopes come back. I paid over a hundred bucks to fill my bass boat last week.

A volunteer point can help with habitat and rancher relations so what's wrong with that one? The 20% max point pool will help USO then even out to a resident advantage. The point deal was just an attempt to offset the ruling for the short term and most of it won't help anyway. I say that some of this stuff is stupid and some will help but one thing I know as a fact--Buzz writes the most obnoxious and rude responses to people he never met and couldn't have too many freinds.

 

[BuzzH]

Ringer,

Whats your definition of rude and obnoxious??? Maybe the TRUTH?

I dont sugar-coat the truth...it is what it is.

I helped you guys out and you slapped the NR hunters and YOURSELVES fretting over Taulman. You had a chance to nip it in the bud, but you got as greedy as Taulman...you wanted all the tags, now you get to compete with me on an even playing field.

Should have settled for the 10%...as there is a real potential for NR's drawing a much higher percentage than that.

Delw is right on as well, you arent "fixing" this problem with all these new regs.

 

[Delw]

A volenteer point is one of the worse, you know how abusive that can get. There are people who will volenteer no matter if they get a point or not.

There was also a welfare bonus point thats right for people on low incomes.

As far as land owner tags, the answer should be NO plain and simple. if people settle on ONE tag for a rancher then you just opened pandorias box for more lawsuits. This one will blow up really bad.

Most hunters will abuse the system and make it benifit themselves before they will help fix the system.

Delw

 

[ringer]

Del, you are right about private tags but I still think there is a lot of hunters who say they will volunteer but never show up. I am concerned that the organizations will take advantage of this and how it could be managed by G&F. Just figure if they get ten thousand hunters volunteering it could do some good and have value. JMO.

 

[Delw]

Ringer, on the volenteer points I am betting they wouldnt get more that 2-5 more than they normally get. I also dont want Game and fish managing(or anyone) this think about it, they are low on resources to begin with so now they have to create another one, that = more money, how would they get that money??? why not raise tag fees again.

Delw

 

[ringer]

Probably correct and that was my concern as to how they would manage it without spending a million bucks for a hundred grand of free labor. Also I noticed the groups were pushing it and wonder if they will just get a free point for every member. Bottom line is our G&F seems like typical gubmint workers who like to talk about anything that will get them more dollars. Either way we will have to live with the results and pay the money if we want to hunt. Buzz is right that the biggest mistake was flipping the bird to USO instead of thinking about the downside. We had some weak legal advice on that one.

 

[cjcj]

Buzz if i get a Bighorn tag ..i will fill it thats a guarantee.... you see i know a real sweet spot along the Colorado... i will shoot it right out of a boat or from the shore.[no problem] I`m not in a wheelchair i just use a cane...so no disrespect taken.... But i` have no problem with you taking a coues or javelina [leftover tags] I`m sorry can`t see sharing Elk/Bighorn/Buffalo/ and Especially ANTELOPE with ya. I understand some guy who doesn`t have a certain species in his home state going out of state. but why should i have to drive 800 miles for a deer/elk/lope tag. wouldn`t be prudent ..not going to do it.

 

[cjcj]

On a side note saying we have ourselves to blame is too easy of a statement... thats like its our own fault for all of the illegals that are here ...the government/courts /G&F/lawyers U.S.O. all have a part of the blame.... we will see how Wyoming fares with U.S.O. in the future

 

[Delw]

On a side note saying we have ourselves to blame is too easy of a statement

Cj
the bottome line its true. we as people can change the laws it takes the majority, unfortunatly the majority doesnt aggree with hunters, as far as the illegal problem we also can change it, but it takes a majority, the gov isnt going to listen to much to a few thousand people but they would listen to the whole state or a bunch of states. but I bet that will never happen.

20 guys down at the game and fish office arent going to do dittly. 400 guys writing letters wont do crap eaither. if you were able to get the whole hunting public say about 100,000 of them I guarentee you things would change rather quickly. things wont happen over night, you need to start on one rep and work your way up,

hunters for the most are are very unorganized when it comes to representation. most hunters will rob peter to pay paul. look at the NRA you have them going at all different directions and thats what is hurting the NRA. if they would just say no instead of maybe we can wheel and deal things would get done.

Delw


Delw

 

[cjcj]

I agree with you Delw....and there are parts of what most the Arizona boys and Buzz says have merit...and alot of this is opinion[mine]...The sad truth is "Big Money" talks the loudest and they use their power/influence to their advantage,,,,,,its in every facet of our lives...Big oil..Big Credit...Healthcare. Insurance.etc.etc the Big money boys all "buy" influence.... and like you say Hunters arn`t organized enough..... Big Money [U.S.O.] is... I don`t know what to do except keep trying to challenge the People to make a difference... sadly there are more anti-hunters than hunters.... But it can be changed not to change the topic .but look at the illegal issue its coming to a head....and i`m glad to be a part of it.

Buzz i`m glad you wrote those letters [proud of ya] Thanks for the effort..

But i think you are being a little unfair to some extent...Your favorite assclown CJ.