Snapshot

There are better ways to die.

Phoenix got pounded before we did here in Tucson. It was an all out Blitzkrieg from the rain today. There was 5 - 6" of water running through the parking lot of a place I was working at. Not sure how much we got?

"Taxidermy man gunna have a heart attack, when he see's what I brung him"

You guys are killing me During a normal storm you see the lightning, and then here the thunder a few seconds later. Well.......sumpin wasn't right with yesterdays storm. It was just.......out of sync.

My self imposed removal of my political content is not motivated by any form of "Protest", or reprisal. Rather, it is a matter of personal choice. Similar to erasing a mistake on a blackboard. Amanda, as well as a number of members, have expressed concerns over a dislike of non hunting politics on this forum. I understand, and respect, those concerns, hence, my reason for removing content created by me. It has never been my intention to create animosity among the membership. I don't apologize for what I believe in, but I will keep my political babble on internet sites that are more suited for that type of dialogue. I do not wish to disrupt the intended vision of this website, nor create problems for the administration. There are other members here who should consider a more civil path when people post something they don't agree with, rather than resorting to open hostility and name calling. Things can become toxic when one member pushes another too far. There are other entities that can ruin a website other than Political posts. It comes down to how people respond. I hope everyone can honor the same request that was asked of me. I would have saved the trouble and deleted the entirety of my topics. However, this website does not allow the author of a topic to delete they're own topic in the political forum. Peace.

No. We are honoring the request of the website owner, and administrator. Someone we all respect.

Been raining for over an hour in Mid town Tucson. Amazing lightning show,and funky sounding thunder. The thunder didn't seem in sync with the lighting.

Muy Grande Venado.!

If you think about it, it does not make sense for drug cartels to help destroy this country. Who they gonna sell dope to? Another successful attack on the US will likely send our economy into a deep depression. Not good for their business. They should be killing those ISIS dudes hanging out in Juarez. It's just something I read on a news clip. You know how rumors are. Who knows. For the right amount of money, I would bet the cartel would provide them with an armed escort to the border? Crazy times!

Any potential terrorist that is trying to make their way into this country is going to keep a low profile, and try to blend into the crowd. Most likely joining up at some point with whatever comrades, or sleeper cell, that is already here. I doubt hunters along the southern units have much to worry about in that regard. There has been some innuendo about the Mexican Cartels possibly helping these goons to achieve their objectives. The Mexican Cartels are ruthless, and I would be more concerned about the role they may play in the future. I don't normally hunt the border units, but when I do it is the northern sections of 30B, and 34a. I've only heard stories of what has been seen in the occupied zones

If someone is firing a gun at me, I'm not going to be concerned about what type of gun it is

If we had real leaders in Washington D.C, instead of Golfers and fundraisers, our borders would be secure, and we wouldn't be having this debate.

Nice pics. Too bad you didn't get that 4 x 4. Maybe next time. Great adventure. 85 pound backpack? Did you guys stuff a couple 30 packs in there, or what?

I don't like wolves. Wolves are killing machines. These are not 100% Wolf, but a hybrid. Mankind is tampering with evolution. Not a good thing. The big game resources we already have are much more valuable, then packs of wolves raised to make the bunny hugger crowd feel good. But....I am a hunter and very biased. I can see the other sides position on this, as long as they are not using it as a political tool to advance a questionable agenda. Which is likely the case. Honestly, the wolf expansion project has way more negatives then positives. The people behind the program refuse to acknowledge this, but I wouldn't expect anything logical to come from the Federal Feel Good Camp. If Arizona G&F supports this expansion program, what are they getting out of it? Federal dollars? 750 -1000 Wolves equals a whole lot of game animals being eaten around the southwest. I would much rather have the Grizzlies back.

Latest intel says 11 commercial airliners are missing from a Libyan airport.

Invariably better than 70 ex wives.

You bad boy!

40? or 70? I'm not really sure, except that they are all Koo-Koo. In the words of Ted Cruz "Bomb ISIS back to the stone age"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=a4dWTKo5u7M Valentin Gruener has formed a special relationship with this lioness who lives in Botswana, Africa. From the Huffington Post: Jonathan Hawkins, a teacher living in Seoul, South Korea, captured this video during a visit to the Modisa Wildlife Project in Botswana, according to Mikkel Legarth, co-founder of the project. * One of the co-founders of the preserve, Valentin Gruener, developed a close bond with some of the lions, including this lioness who he helped raise that gives Gruener a giant hug when she’s released from her enclosure. It’s clear to see — great friendships like this one require hugs this big.

The Grizzly man took things a little too far. They say one out of a hundred grizzlies have a real bad attitude. I guess he found that particular one.

At least you got a nice bear out of the hunt. The person who did that to your tree stand is a warped individual. It's a real shame that people like that are out there hunting.

Haven't you heard? Obama doesn't have a strategy to deal with ISIS. Get enough "good ole boys" together and we will send ISIS to meet they're paradise, and 40 virgins.

I would rather take it to the park where the women walk their dogs........ The dogs would be like " that the biggest dang cat I've ever seen"

From: The White Mountain Independent Wolf hearing was a dog and pony show sham Karen Warnick - The IndependentKaren Warnick - The Independent Posted: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 5:00 am 21 comments The Aug. 11 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service public hearing on the Proposed Draft Environmental Impact Statement on the wolf expansion program was a total done deal before anyone set foot in the Hon-Dah conference center. The FWS was sued by environmental groups over the wolf expansion in what has become known as sue and settle litigation. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce published a report last May on this issue called: Sue and Settle: Regulating Behind Closed Doors. The report explains the process: “Typically, the federal government defends itself vigorously against lawsuits challenging its actions. But not always: Sometimes regulators are only too happy to face collusive lawsuits by friendly ‘foes’ that are aimed at compelling government action that would otherwise be difficult or impossible to achieve. Rather than defend these cases, regulators settle them in a phenomenon known as ‘sue and settle.’ This tactic has exploded under the Obama Administration, costing the economy tens of billions of dollars while eroding political accountability and public participation in government.” This explains why in previous public hearings over the wolf and the Environmental Protection Agency’s sudden decisions on the Haze Rule in 2011, comments against the proposals were basically ignored. In the case of the wolf expansion to most of Arizona and New Mexico, the decision has already been made — by the environmental groups that sued. “When such lawsuits were initiated, EPA does not disclose the notice of the lawsuit or its filing until a settlement agreement had been worked out with the private parties and filed with the court. As a result, court orders were entered, binding the agency to undertake a specific rulemaking within a specific and usually very short time period, notwithstanding whether the agency actually had sufficient time to perform the obligations imposed by the court order. With no public input, EPA binds itself to the demands of a private entity with special interests that may be adverse to the public interest, especially in the areas of project development and job creation. Sue and settle activities deny the public its most basic of all rights in the regulatory process: the right to weigh in on a proposed regulatory decision before agency action occurs,” the report says. These settlement agreements are done with no public or state knowledge or ability to intercede. The settlements almost always favor what the suing parties want. Though sue-and-settle litigation goes back to the Clinton Administration, the numbers have increased in the past five years. Between 2009 and 2012, 71 lawsuits were settled. Those settlements and the 100 new regulations that came out of them have cost the taxpayers of this country over $488 billion. The EPA and FWS are most often targeted but other lawsuits have been brought against the Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, departments of Interior and Agriculture, Army Corps of Engineers and Department of Commerce. Guess who’s doing the suing the most? Yup, Sierra Club, Wildearth Guardians, Center for Biological Diversity, Defenders of Wildlife and several others. “By being able to sue and influence agencies to take actions on specific regulatory programs, advocacy groups use sue-and-settle to dictate the policy and budgetary agendas of an agency. Instead of agencies being able to use their discretion on how best to utilize their limited resources, they are forced to shift these resources away from critical duties in order to satisfy the narrow demands of outside groups,” notes the report. “For all of these reasons, sue and settle violates the principle that if an agency is going to write a rule, then the goal should be to develop the most effective, well-tailored regulation. Instead, rulemakings that are the product of sue and settle agreements are most often rushed, sloppy, and poorly conceived. “They usually take a great deal of time and effort to correct, when the rule could have been done right in the first place if the rulemaking process had been conducted properly. “In cases where EPA allows public comment on draft consent decrees, EPA only rarely alters the consent agreement—even after it receives adverse comments. “Sue and settle agreements cut this critical step entirely out of the process. Rather than hearing from a range of interested parties and designing the rule with a panoply of their concerns in mind, the agency essentially writes its rule to accommodate the specific demands of a single interest. Through sue and settle, advocacy groups achieve their narrow goals at the expense of sound and thoughtful public policy.” That statement above says it all. And it’s not just the EPA. None of the comments by ranchers, politicians and concerned citizens will be taken into consideration. They were just politely giving us the illusion that they were listening. They weren’t. It’s already been decided. There will be more wolves in Arizona whether we want them or not and we don’t have a say in it at all. So much for the rights of citizens and states. It seems the environmentalists and the federal government have all the rights.