40-year-AZ-hunter

Mark, Thank you for your candid post and I respect your decision to make it a "one time post". I, and probably others, would still like someone, anyone, to say who provided such briefings. Clearly the person providing the briefings is being protected and that's a darn shame. People would not have been any more irate about HB2072 if Sandy Bahr or Stephanie Nichols Young were behind it. In fact, I would be less upset seeing it from them than from someone or some group that we thought were our allies. Trust is hard to restore once it is lost. Bruce

First and foremost, there was never a vote on the issue. There was never a member of the AZSFW at any of our recent meetings. If an item has not been voted on, it will not appear in the minutes. Just curious 40... do you belong to any organizations?... Have you ever worked a banquet?... Mr. Koleszar, Convenient that we will never know who from ADA knew about this stealth issue before it erupted on these forums. At least I guess we can surmise that the ADA did not back it (no vote) and you are speaking for yourself rather than as their president. As far as the personal questions go - yes I belong to organizations and no I have never worked a banquet. Would you like my tax return too? Needless to say, we have very different views on many issues. Bruce Johnson

Can we please see the minutes of the ADA Board meeting at which they were briefed on HB2072? Those minutes should reveal who was there from AzSFW and ADA. Amanda? BPJ?

Hellofa first post Ryan! Great!

In post 47 of this thread, BPJ says "There can be no way that the ADA will support the bill. It is history, so we move on. We pay dues to the AZSFWC... a different organization totally" http://forums.coueswhitetail.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=30026&view=findpost&p=290385 In post 189 of the HB2072 thread Amanda says " The fundraising side group of AZSFW is the AZSFWC." http://forums.coueswhitetail.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=29766&view=findpost&p=288877 Somehow this does not sound like a "different organization totally"!

The ADA board was given very little information and only briefed once shortly before the bill was dropped. I was attending that particular ADA board meeting by telephone and they actually didn't get the phone thing going until after the briefing about the bill so I missed hearing it directly. However, as I understand it, some of the concepts were presented and the board asked for more details and those were not provided prior to dropping the bill. The ADA board was not given time to review or comment on the bill. This bill did not receive the support of the ADA board. I believe the AZSFW group was trying to keep this very quiet in order to keep anti-hunting groups from gathering forces to fight it. It's extremely disappointing to me that AZSFW chose to keep the hunting community out of the process as well. with regard to your question about the outdoor expo, the AZSFW has nothing to do with that. There are actually two large hunting/outdoor expos in AZ and one is the International Sportsmen's Expo (put on by the ISE) and the other is the AGFD expo. Amanda, Are minutes available from that ADA meeting? They would be very helpful in this discussion. A record of who gave the briefing and what it contained would be especially interesting. The last minutes on the ADA website are from July 2011.

The ADA has not taken a stance on the bill. We were given a preliminary overview of what the bill was and what it would accomplish. The board asked for more information and the "devil in the details". Since we did not see the bill prior to the dropping in the state legislature and since there was a response that mandated not moving it forward, there will be no vote on an item that is moot. As far as membership, the ADA is not a member of the AZSFW. We are however a member of the AZSFWC. The purpose of the "C" is to have a forum for sportsmen, meet monthly to discuss items of interest, meet with the AZGFD (They come every month and brief us on what is current) and then review proposals for the spending of the wildlife plate monies. The ADA, the AES, the AAF and the ADBSS have in the past funded the lobbyist efforts of Capitol Consulting (Suzanne Gilstrap). That process will be up for review, pending any decisions as to the future of the AZSFW. Please feel free to ask any more questions. When did ADA quit the AZSFW? It is listed as a Platinum member. See above post. From the ADA website, "Officers and Board of Directors - 2011 President - John Koleszar"

BPJ says "There can be no way that the ADA will support the bill. It is history, so we move on. We pay dues to the AZSFWC... a different organization totally." "As far as membership, the ADA is not a member of the AZSFW." Well, ADA is listed as a Platinum member organization of AZSFW (Not referring to AZSFWC) which is a $10,000. http://arizonasportsmenforwildlife.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=137&Itemid=81 From AZSFW web site, "For an organization that wants to be involved and may be eligible to have a representative serve on Board of Directors. Listed on Web site with link to organization website, eligible to make recommendations for annual agendas plus other benefits... Platinum Level $10,000" From the AZSFW membership page, Arizona Deer Association (Platinum)

BPJ, When did you delete your statement of Jan 14 that you were making your last post in this thread?

Who was the memo addressed to or was it a "press release"?

As another poster said, look into a prepaid plan using the Verizon network. You dont have to go to Verizon. There are other resellers like Net10, Straight Talk, etc that have phones that use the Verizon system and cost A LOT less and you dont need to sign up for a contract. Just pay by the month and if you don't like them, leave.

Here is the response I received... "Bruce, Individuals are not eligible to sit on the Board of Directors. Thanks for the inquiry. Suzanne" So it appears the control of the AzSFW is VERY tightly controlled. I'd still love to see their Bylaws but they don't seem to be available to us either.

Did you ever get a response to your email to Rep. Weiers? I've been watching for you to post it but have not seen it. I ask because I sent emails to the contact listed for AzSFW with questions that they have not answered. The silence from those pushing the bill has been deafening. Thanks.

Nick, I have emailed Ms Gilstrap (AzSFW's contact person) and asked "If I am not a member of a sponsoring organization, a business partner, or a $1000 donor, how do I get to be a Board member of AzSFW?" IF.... I get a reply I will be sure to post it. If they cant even update their website more than every couple years it's just one small example of the multitude of reasons that I and others on this forum seem to distrust the organization with something as important as the tags that are the subject of HB 2072. By the way, how were Board elections carried out?

Nick, With all due respect, it is not "bunk" but taken directly from their web page. Go to their site and click the tab "about AZSFW" and "membership" http://arizonasportsmenforwildlife.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=134&Itemid=78 It lists 4 types of membership - General, Business, Organization, and "Sportsmen Circle Member". Only the last 3 are listed as eligible to serve on the Board and those memberships start at $1000. You were probably on the Board as a representative of YRGC which I suspect paid the $1000. The "regular joes" that you served with were all members of organizations that ponied up the money. Please go check their website before you decide something is "bunk".

Seriously, after all the vitriolic name calling and finger pointing, why would Rep. Weiers want to discuss this issue with folks on this forum? I mean really, is there any chance he could change your mind? Unless you're just hoping to conduct a public flogging, the opportunity for civil discourse is long gone. The majority of individuals posting to this thread are not supportive. Continuing to rehash conspiracy theories and nasty accusations is not going to solve anything one way or another. I hope Amanda will lock this thread off as I don't see anything positive to be accomplished. Once future meetings are held with Rep. Weiers, AZSFWC and others, then Amanda could start a new thread to provide updates and where we could (hopefully) discuss this issue with a greater level of respect for one another. Gee, by all means let's hide this topic as best we can before those behind it provide any real answers. That would fit right in with the way the whole issue was started by those behind the scenes.

To Bonuspointjohn, You have conveniently ignored (or tried to cover up) the main reason for the emergency clause. The emergency clause causes a bill to go into effect immediatly upon signature by the govenment. It is NOT subject to referendum. Claiming (as you have throughout this discussion) that is is merely so the expo can proceed is BS as you said in post #76 and others. It would preclude any group that disageed with the law from challenging it at the ballot box. From the State's 2011/2012 bill drafting manual "A measure that is enacted by the legislature is not operative for a period of ninety days after the adjournment of the session (unless it is enacted under special circumstances that allow it to be effective immediately). During this ninety-day period five percent of the qualified electors may file a petition with the secretary of state to have the measure referred to the people for approval or rejection. The number of qualified electors required is calculated by determining the total number of votes cast for all candidates for governor at the general election preceding the filing of the referendum. The measure is approved by a majority of those voting. Note: The following enactments are not subject to referendum by the people because they become effective immediately on the governor's signature: 23 1. An emergency measure that is passed by a "supermajority" vote of the legislature." http://www.azleg.gov/alisPDFs/council/2011-2012%20Bill%20Drafting%20Manual.pdf I'm also still waiting to hear from you the answer to the questions posed in post #139. Since the email sent to the "contact" link at AzSFW ( suzanne@capitolconsultingaz.com ) does not seem to be very forthcoming. Who votes the Board in? I see from their site that you have to donate $1000/year to even be eligible to be a Board member "For an individual who wants to make a special commitment to the AZSFW Mission and who may be eligible to serve on the Board of Directors. Annual Fee $ 1,000 Three Years $2,500" So much for representation by the average hunter! We are all still waiting to hear if we will be welcome to discuss this bill at the meeting next Tuesday. By the way Amanda, Rep. Weiers is well enough to attend that meeting is he not? It's funny he can't find the strength to type a few sentences to reply to the hunters on your forum.

Bonusptjohn, perhaps as a member of the AzSFW Board you can help. I emailed the contact link on their site (Ms. Gilstrap's email) and asked how many individual paying members of AzSFW there are. I have not received a reply. I know the group cites a large figure for membership, but I believe most of those are people who belong only because they belong to one of the sponsoring organizations, not because they chose to. In fact, many may not agree with AzSFW positions. So, can you tell me how many individuals chose to pay the dues to belong? Another other question relates to the control of the organization. Again, I looked on the site for a link to the organizations bylaws and did not find anything. Can you help? I'm particularly interesting in knowing how the Board is selected. Is it done by a vote of the membership (relates to the first question)? I also did not see any accounting of the funds generated and spent by the organization. Is that available for reveiw? Will individual hunters be invited to the meeting to discuss this bill? There are over 100,000 big game hunters in AZ and the vast majority do not belong to any of the sponsoring organizations, much less pay to be individual members of AzSFW (see first question). They would all be affected by this bill. Thanks.

Nick, Sorry if anyone was misled about your involvment. The list of Directors was taken from the AzSFW website today. Looks like they cant even keep their own stuff up to date. How the heck should we trust them with a proposal like this is beyond me. Glad to hear you dont favor this stuff and thanks for the clarification.

"The money will not be going into the general fund. The revenue will be paid directly to the AZSFWC and therefore no state agency can touch the money." Not very reassuring..... AzSFW in charge.

The bill is schedule for a hearing in the House Commerce committee on THIS Wed. Jan 9. Tell me that this is not being rammed thru? http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/agendas/01110202107%2Edoc%2Ehtm Interestingly, Weiers is the Chair of that committee. Guess what will happen? This is before the Commission meets on the 10th. WTF.

"Of course we are talking about 0.2 of 1 percent of the tags, the change in drawing odds is so small that it cannot be calculated. " This is very misleading. Look above at the description of the tags to be sold. It includes many of the best tags in the state. While it may be only 0.2% of the TOTAL tags, it is a MUCH higher percentage of the most sought after tags. It should also be noted that the person who wrote this is a member of the unelected Board of Az Sportsmen for Wildlife. Funny he did not mention that in his signature line. Here are the members of that unelected Board, ARIZONA SPORTSMEN FOR WILDLIFE CHAIRMAN: Alan Hamberlin BOARD MEMBERS Chris Denham Brian Dolan Randy Gaskill Hays Gilstrap Floyd Green Todd Hulm Nick Heatwole Mark Nuessle Art Pearce Trent Swanson (Note added at 9:30 PM on 1/9/11 - Nick Heatwole has clarified later in this thread that he has not been on the AzSFW Board for over a year! http://arizonasportsmenforwildlife.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=81&Itemid=67 It appears that this list taken from their website today is not maintained. How the heck can we trust them with all these valuable tags when they don't even seem to know who is on their Board? Also of note is that this bill is never mentioned on their website including under their list of "Political Action" or "Current Issues". I wonder why they are not so proud of it????) I've looked at their website and can not find a copy of the bylaws for the organization. That would be interesting to see. Some of us were very suspicious of Az Sportsmen for Wildlife when the group was formed by a few VERY well to do fellows. It is still run by an elite group that includes some VERY well to do fellows who are not elected. Everyone should read this bill VERY carefully, then contact your State representative and senator as soon as possible. Dont wait either. Notice that the bill has an emergency clause "This act is an emergency measure that is necessary to preserve the public peace, health or safety and is operative immediately as provided by law." I dont get what the hurry is except to get it done before the majority of hunters hear about it. We surely dont need more raffles for hunt permits. The drawing is essentially a very fair raffle. Let's keep it that way.

Great gesture Frank!

How long have you owned the shotgun?

Congratulations. I'm thrilled to see one go for that much money. I hope mine are in that range if I decide I need to sell.