bassinix

No, not Don the Bass guy. Whoever that is. At least we agree to agree on the Super Bonus Point. Hunters united, is better than hunters divided.

There's talk of Mandatory harvest reporting coming, but first they have to simplify the draw. It's on the way. By the time we out in for turkey, javelina, spring buffalo next October...there won't be any paper applications. 95% put in online now as it is. Once they go more paperless, the mandatory reporting should, at minimum, be part of a questionnaire as you apply for tags the following year. Just another couple steps and boxes to check before you select your hunt numbers. I see the value of mandatory reporting for biology and management, don't see the value worth buying personally as a hunter, though. Tell me your reasoning, Guy.

Fair enough, I'm optimistic having seen the data at the presentation to the Commissioners.

We're talking money for public education outreach. TV commercials, radio spots, billboards, print ads in local magazines and newspapers, social media boosted ads. People believe what they see and read. The more they're educated that AZGFD already does it right, the less they'll sign petitions to manage wildlife via a ballot box.

Funny, that was part of my proposal to them too. I proposed a $100 per year club type membership. Include some fairly easy and cheap stuff: Hat, window decal, access to a preferred fast pass type line at AZGFD office, access to walk up and buy 1st come-1st serve leftover tags eliminating a mail in requirement for members, discount off AZGFD merchandise and books, easy to read hunt draw data and success data, access to aerial survey data, access to fish stocking schedule a couple days prior to the specific date-not just the day after stocking, but I also proposed this included a super bonus point for all species. Just like a loyalty point column in the portal account. Super easy to do.l and monitor. Set it up on a recurring credit card for the $100 per year, and nobody would ever notice it, just like an Amazon Prime acct. With this, we'd only need about 16% participation of everyone who put in for a hunt to achieve $2,000,000. Anyhow, they never asked for any elaboration or anything. They got plenty of ideas. Only moved forward with a super bonus point. Don't know what else to say.

Who knows? Honestly don't think the HSUS pressure was as great a few years ago as it has been the last 18 months.

Guy, they talked about raffling tags, too much screaming about "TAG GRAB." Talked about a voluntary education stamp, it won't work. Voluntary stamps don't sell or make any money in any state it's been tried. Remember this can't be a mandatory fee, has to be something people voluntarily pay for. Talked about a conservation membership, it's in place right now and has sold a WHOPPING 4 memberships in a month. 🙄. Talked about a huge AES type fundraising banquet at the AZGFD Expo every March at Ben Avery. It's still a possibility, but too many people making up lies and screaming about how it'll just make "hunting dignitaries" rich and the money won't go where it needs to. Another 🙄. So the super point is it. The model they rolled out to the Commissioners had some decent projections without requiring a HUGE participation percentage. Like 20% to 30% participation at $20 each super point could fund the education plan Several think we should do nothing. Just not an option. There were lots of ideas, this got the best response from the public, and has the best projections.

Commissioner Ammons talked about a lesser price to sell more volume, but the survey data shows nearly 60% are willing to spend $20 to $25 for a super point. Yes point guard is voluntary, I'm fairly sure that revenue goes into general funds. I'll make a proposal that it gets reappropriated to education. It definitely fits the bill as "discretionary funds." Good idea, within your idea, AZBIG10. 👍

I let the attack on my integrity go once, notice I never doubted or insisted that you source your bold faced lie about "1,000 tags." And truthfully, you can't source it anyhow other than to say, "well that's what I heard in a parking lot." 👍 Great bibliography there. But I'll go no further, as since you have decided to sink to insults and name-calling, I'll finish here knowing I won the conversation. Your uneducated opinions on the process are astounding. One more time, for those in the cheap seats. THE ARIZONA GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT RAN THE SURVEYS ON THEIR WEBSITE THROUGH THEIR PUBLIC OUTREACH OPEN COMMENT PERIOD! Outside of that, I won't suffer the opinions of fools. If you think Wayne Pacele's extracurricular activities are going to slow down the HSUS, you really don't have a clue. So enjoy the view below ground with your head stuck in the sand. Meanwhile, myself and others will save your hunting rights as well. You can thank us later. ✌️

The most tags I ever heard was Pete Cimarello on the Jay Scott podcast saying 100, maybe 150. And your use of the word "dignitaries" is just an over-exaggeration. This was never about "catering to the elite." Doesn't matter now anyhow because it's a moot point and dead proposal. My statements on the surveys are directly from the data presented at the Commission meeting yesterday. There's no need to justify it, it's public record. Period. Thanks for questioning my integrity. Whether you want to admit it or not, regardless of how pro-hunting they are, small town Arizona is under attack. Dewey-Humbolt already got bullied by HSUS to ban coyote calling contests. That town council buckled to them. Voted 4-2 to ban "coyote killing contests" within town limits. No hunters were there to defend anything. HSUS appealed to Kingman as well. There were multiple animal activists at the Commission meeting yesterday, yet only a few hunters there in total, and only one to stand up to them and counter their claims to the Commissioners. Hunters will bury their heads in the sand and deny anything is wrong until it's too late and we have to convince the public to vote for or against a ballot proposition. At that point, we've already lost. And we can't outspend these activist organizations. They have deeper pockets. Eventually, they'll win a big one. And the hunters will cry out, "How could the Game and Fish Department let this happen?" And the blame game will start, while the few of us who busted our asses in the trenches sit and hang our heads and try not to say that we told you so. And my comment on predator callers being their own worst enemies wasn't anything but exactly that. A simple statement. My opinion is that if left to them, they will be the downfall of predator hunting. Taunting is not how you get the animal activists to go away. Not suggesting any legislation against dumb gross dead dog pictures. You're just trying to be argumentative. I would just hope they'd show more restraint. Predator hunting is the avenue to end all hunting. Ban the predator hunting, the predator population booms, and then hunters won't need to hunt deer and elk anymore, the predators will keep it all in balance. I'm not going to go round and round with you over what's needed and what's not. We can agree to disagree. I feel there absolutely is a need for the public education outreach. Everyone in the AZGFD sees it as well. It works in states like Colorado where HSUS can't get any traction. Colorado is far more tree hugging liberal than Arizona. Their "Hug a Hunter" campaign resonates. So you can continue to deny a need if you'd like. Meanwhile, others are working hard to preserve hunting rights for everyone. At least you're on board with the super point.

I'll agree the super point benefits anyone who wants to buy it, although probably only by small percentage points. Not sure where you come up with 1,000 tag number, or that they're given to "political hunting dignitaries." That was never the plan. It was 100 to 150 tags for a public auction open to anyone. Perhaps a few of those tags would go for high dollar auction, but raffles would probably garner more revenue than an auction. And those details never got hammered out before the whole idea hit the cutting room floor several months ago. As far as if there's really marketing needed, the answer to that is absolutely yes. Animal rights groups are going to city hall meetings in every small town they can right now to shut down "killing contests." They want to ban all predator hunting. They'll start by making the coyote calling contests illegal first. This is happening every week across AZ. And they're winning. Why? Because the general non-hunting public doesn't understand that AZGFD already has the predator hunting and population control handled. The balance (although not balanced enough in most of our eyes) is there because of the current predator hunting climate already in place. That includes the coyote calling competitions. It ain't broke, don't try to fix it. That's why this outreach plan is important. We have to show the science behind it, and thst allowing hunters to have their traditions, is more important than the emotional pleas from animal activists. And I'll tell you this, the predator hunters are their own worst enemies. The more they post dead coyotes and ugly bloody head shots, the more the activists come for them. Especially when they taunt by posting those pictures on the activists' websites and social media pages.

If you took offense to my "tag grabber" meme, sorry. That wasn't calling anyone out specifically. I just find it funny how the same rumors and lies get spread. So I poke a little fun at it.

LOL! Leave my pecker put of this! But no, I've never been to an MDF meeting at Bass Pro Shop.

Yeah, kinda "topic unrelated"

Jim, I've actually never really been on this site. I've had a login for years, just prefer other social media. For the record I'm not trying to get confrontational, so no disrespect intended. I don't feel I called out anyone specifically, so my apologies for sounding that way. I'll admit I suck at the "responding to" or the "quoting" of other comments in this forum. What can I say? I'm new. My attempt at being here isn't to tell anyone they're wrong, it's to get the truth out. Because there are so many untruths that are flying about. I write and talk persuasively, that's just who I am. If that comes across as sounding like I believe I'm right and you're wrong, then I'm sorry. I will support my position with the facts and the truth and call out lies. I absolutely 100% do support this Super Bonus Point plan, and I'm committed to moving it forward to get the dedicated funding for public education outreach. You're not wrong for disagreeing with me, I'm just trying to get the facts and truth out there and get more people on board. Here are the truths: 1. There's no tag grab. It never was about tags to go to rich people only and cut tags out of the public opportunities. That's a bold faced lie. I don't care what happened a decade ago with any perceived or actual attempt at a "tag grab." I was outta the loop in 2008, so I don't even know what that was about. All I know is that it didn't go through, never happened, and it's old history. Once again, I don't care. So in talking about now, yes there was a proposal for some tags to go into a public raffle that EVERYONE could enter which would actually increase some folks opportunity to draw. If Joe Hunter says he can't afford a $325 sheep tag, yet buys 2 raffle tags at $5 each and wins, then well that seems like a good affordable option for more opportunities, not less. And saying that takes tags out of the public opportunity is BS because we have hundreds if not thousands of left over, non drawn tags after every draw. And early on even the Commission agreed there's room for an additional strip tag for deer, and a sheep tag, and a some premium elk tags, and some more cow elk tags, and a couple pronghorn tags, and it wouldn't decimate the wildlife. But it doesn't matter anymore, because that plan was shot down MONTHS ago. Yet naysayers keep bringing it up. 2. The group who proposed that plan would not see a dime. Any raffling off of tags to generate public education outreach funding would have been done thru AZGFD and the funds would have stayed there. That was the proposal, and what Conserve And Protect Arizona still endorses to this day. Within the membership of CAPAZ they are not unified in support of the Super Bonus Point. Once again, I don't care. I'm not a part of that group, although I consider some over there acquaintances and some even friends. In my opinion the super bonus point it's a good plan and needs to be approved. 3. This isn't a giant conspiracy to make anyone rich, or give rich people more tags. It's just about the dedicated funding. The surveys showed support of a super point nearly 2 to 1. And almost 60% said they'd pay $20 to $25 for each point. Frankly, from 2007 to 2013 I was out of the hunting loop working 4 jobs, 7 days a week, 16 hours a day to keep my head above water in the worst recession and housing crisis this country has ever seen. Recreational hunting was the last thing on my mind. I took 6 to 7 years off from hunting and fishing. So anyone saying I don't know what it's like to not be able to afford an extra $20 per application, uh...yeah I do. I lived that life for a long time. 4. As much as "habitat stamps" and "education stamps" have been thrown around, they won't sell. Every state that tries the voluntary stamp idea watches it fail. Last month AZGFD launched a Conservation Membership plan at 2 tiers...$35 per year and $100 per year. You get an online newsletter, a calendar, and monthly print magazine not geared towards hunting. They've sold 4 memberships in 3 weeks. AZGFD has had for several years a program that costs $25 per year called "I support wildlife." With that you get exclusive enhanced access to their online RAA maps, sneak peeks at stocking reports, a subscription to the Az wildlife views magazine, and a window decal. Not a lot of incentive, but it's something. They have around 1,000 memberships. That's out of 200,000 hunting licenses sold every year. Tremendous success in voluntary funding options I'd say. 🙄. So when folks say they'll voluntarily buy a stamp that gives them nothing in return, I call bullshit... history shows they won't. Because right now they won't even buy a $25 membership that actually does have a "what's in it for me." Hunters have to be incentivized to spend more. A super bonus point fills that requirement. 5. This isn't a sneak attack to benefit the rich or cater to the elite. This is crowd-funding for a purpose. And it's been well documented over the last year how this has come to pass. It's already gone thru all the public comment periods. It's followed all the state laws regarding public input and notification. It's nobody's fault but their own if they aren't paying attention to the regular emails, press releases, and calls to the public. So once again, I apologize if I sound confrontational. I call it it being persistently persuasive. I'm nothing if not prepared to defend my position. And I won't change my mind, just like some others won't either about spending one more dime. We can agree to disagree on how my writing here sounds too. Everyone is entitled to their opinions, I'm just trying to get others to see the benefits of what's hopefully coming. Honestly, if it was up to me, we'd do all of it. Raffle tags, super points, more auction tags, put an education stamp out there, and have a huge fund raising banquet at the March Expo at Ben Avery. Just drive the revenue to get the public outreach program going. It's the best way to prevent the animal activists from taking away our hunting rights.

Perhaps, but really this is nothing more than another loyalty point...just that it's not free. And really the loyalty point isn't free anyhow. You have to pay to play and keep that too. As long as you're spending at least a $13 application fee every year (whether putting in for a tag or just buying a bonus point) you keep the loyalty point. So essentially that costs you $13 per year. The super point will cost between that $13 to $25 per year. Nearly 60% of the polled responses said they'd be ok with a $20 to $25 range. The model laid out yesterday was budgeted at $20. So: $13 per year keeps the loyalty point. $20 per year keeps the super point. It's all about perspective. Good thing about the super point is, on the years you can't put in for a tag and you buy a bonus point only, there's no sense in buying the super point. Yet it'll be there next year for you when you are ready to go. It won't take 5 years to earn it back.

I understand the position of this being a potential financial burden on some families and households. I totally get it. I went several years of not hunting at all due to lack of affordability during the Great Recession from 2007 to 2013. We can't let this funding option slide because some will not be able to afford it. It's too important. We'll never be able to make everyone happy. At some point, we have to let those who are able to spend more....well.....spend more. And this is enough incentive to get them to spend more. A monthly conservation magazine with pictures of bats and birds and "watchable wildlife" isn't enough. Meanwhile, us working class will face the reality of a miniscule reduced chance for a tag, or have to make sure we budget appropriately so we're able to participate.

We've talked to the folks in Oregon, one big funder has bank rolled the entire stamp program. They've sold less than 700 stamps in 2 years. Were it not for the wealthy funder, the program would be completely insolvent and costing money...that's what we've been told from people within their fish and game department who manage the stamp program. It just won't generate the money needed. The AZGFD Commission and all the top brass agree with this. Fundraising experts know that voluntary stamps and memberships (with nothing in return other than the "I feel good about this" emotions) just aren't enough incentive to get hunters to buy in. Hunters after to have a WIIFM, What's In It For Me? It's one extra point for that draw that does not renew. Whethwr you draw or not it goes away. It has nothing to do with wealth, so if I have $20 extra to put towards a draw so that makes me wealthy? Come on. This isn't the tag grab for the rich everyone cried about in 2008. When will anyone be happy? The point creep you speak of really wouldn't change any different than we have now if that super point expires every year. It's actually no different than the loyalty point right now. Keep putting in, you keep it. And once again, this isn't about habitat it's about public education outreach. It's about informing the non-hunting public about the scientific methods of management the AZGFD uses (the North American model of Wildlife Management) and how the AZGFD has the best interest of all wildlife species in mind already and has it under control. Feed the public that info for a few years and they'll believe it, especially because it's true. That way when the animal extremists start pushing their signature petitions based on emotion in everyone's faces, the non-hunting public will just decline to sign them. That's what this is about. Hunters won't donate to that cause, so we have to figure out a way to fund it differently. Super bonus points are it.

It's one extra point for that draw that does not renew. Whether you draw or not, it goes away. It has nothing to do with wealth, if I have $20 extra to put towards a draw so that makes me wealthy? Come on. This isn't the tag grab for the rich everyone cried about in 2008. When will anyone be happy? The point creep you speak of really wouldn't change any different than we have now if that super point expires every year. It's actually no different than the loyalty point right now. Keep putting in, you keep it the loyalty point. Keep buying the super point, you have it every draw. And once again, this isn't about habitat it's about public education outreach. It's about informing the non-hunting public about the scientific methods of management the AZGFD uses (the North American model of Wildlife Management) and how the AZGFD has the best interest of all wildlife species in mind already and has it under control. Feed the public that info for a few years and they'll believe it, especially because it's true. That way when the animal extremists start pushing their signature petitions based on emotion in everyone's faces, the non-hunting public will just decline to sign them. That's what this is about. Hunters won't donate to that cause, so we have to figure out a way to fund it differently. Super bonus points are it.

No, because the $8.50 per year is once again, a Mandatory Fee. We need VOLUNTARY dollars to fund the public education outreach program. A voluntary super point fits this.

But everyone won't. They aren't counting on 100% participation. Just like not everyone buys that bonus point on years where they don't put in. It's optional.

I don't honestly know, I just know the depressing numbers that came from Utah, Oregon and Alaska saying a "voluntary stamp" has completely flopped. Side note, the AZGFD has already started a program for those wanting to help fund an education program, it's a Conservation Membership. It has 2 levels. $35 per year, and $100 per year. They've sold 4 whole memberships in the 3 weeks it's been out. Most hunters have to get something in return for their donation. That much is sure. Be it a raffle ticket for optics, or a gun, or whatever. A monthly magazine, a calendar, and a weekly email isn't enough incentive to get hunters to buy a membership like this. Tie super bonus points to it, and it will sell.

But you don't have to buy it, do the research and see if buying that point gets you in the max point pass...if so you wouldn't spend $20 to get that early archery bull tag? If it doesn't get you in the max points pass, then don't buy it and your odds really don't change that much anyhow.

Nope, that's off the table. The public awareness/education plan has to be funded with voluntary/discretionary money. Period. A mandatory stamp would generate revenue, but by law, that money couldn't be used for the outreach. A voluntary stamp has been tried over and over again around the country, and it never generates enough money to even cover the cost of administering the stamp program itself. Stamps are out, even Commissioner Brake gave up in the stamp and bumper sticker idea.

Stanley, I appreciate the correction. Good integrity there sir. The pursuit of whether funding raised by auction tags vs. raffle tags is a touchy and dangerous subject. The president of the Big Game Super raffle proposed a 2nd super raffle every year, and only 1 tag of each species going to the critter groups for auction. I think that's potentially devastating. But, it would mean only 1 Commissioner elk tag, deer tag, sheep tag etc would exist for live auction. Could that now mean a deer tag goes for $450k instead of 2 at $150k each? Same for an elk tag? Could it drive the value up on each, while generating another $700,000 from a 2nd super raffle? Hard to say, but it would be a dangerous chance to take, and could backfire if the 1 Commissioner tag sells for it's normal average amount and not more. Then we've REDUCED the money going into the Habitat Partnership Committee.