hawkeye

I had an Ameristep Brickhouse set up for elk hunting in unit 5A and on the second day of the hunt the sorry maggot forest service ranger left a big red warning ticket with a note. It said the trail cam. and the blind was abandoned property and if not picked up would be confiscated. It also said when not being occupied it needs to be removed. The name on the ticket is officer Jon C. Selby. Badge No. 1256. There was also a couple of phone numbers to call. I tried calling a number of times and left messages. I guess I wasted about $400. on two blinds. Arizona is turning into a police state. I am sure one of the paying outfitters wanting to hunt the water hole complained, because in the remote area I was hunting I never saw a single game and fish officer or a forest service person in two weeks of hunting. Mr. Ranger must have showed up in the middle of the day when I wasn't there. Sure makes me mad. I wasn't making claim to the water hole. As a matter of fact if someone showed up when I wasn't there, I wouldn't have minded if they used the blind.

Actually the biggest profiteer when it comes to gas is the Federal Government. You want lower prices, have them suspend/alter/adjust the fuel taxes. Yeah, the oil companies make a lot of dollars, but they also spend a lot. Their profit margins are in the single digits... 8 or 9% if I remember correctly. There are lots of businesses that make a far healthier profit than that, off of us. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5365439 http://www.angelfire.com/pa/sergeman/issue...t/gas/main.html That is a crock. Last year Exon Mobile made the biggest profit for a corporation in the history of the world.

I've bought several different ones and I settled on the Leica 1200. I was using one with the black read out and couldn't read the yardage on a bull elk at about 40 yards because of the dark shadows. I was in heavy timber and the black numbers blended in with the back ground. I guessed at the range and made the kill. No thanks to the rangefinder. After that, I got a Leica, and it has a red L.E.D. read-out. I have loved this range finder and have used it for a few years with excellent results. I wouldn't trade it for anything.

BowNut thanks for the info and i will keep an eye out for you, i was also wondering if there was anywhere to camp near the shoot? Im planning to pull my trailer down from flagstaff but not going to bother if we cant camp close. They have places to set up camp at the range. No charge.

I have been trying to make heads or tails of what this bill means for the average OHV user. The lawyers that wrote this bill makes it as clear as mud. After reading it a couple of times I can't determine the ramifications of this bill. To me it seams that it is going to cost us a bunch of money. Can someone involved in this bill or with an interest in it explain all of the aspects of it. And maybe explain how it will effect people that have already registered their OHV for highway use. http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?in....2443jw.doc.htm

Yep. I just read through the regs. Still it would save me from having to purchase a NR liscence every year, which would be very expensive. Might as well take advantage of being a resident of Arizona for 52 years. $525.00 will be a good investment. I could still come back to visit my sons and do some quail hunting with them every year.

Just bought a place in NM. and will be scouting places to hunt elk and deer. I will be moving this summer. I've hunted my whole life in Arizona, and Colorado. Looking foreward to scouting out new areas. I will be living in Pie Town. Is it as hard to draw a resident archery elk tag in NM as it is in AZ? If so I guess I'll have plenty of time to scout. Saw some nice mule deer neer Quamado, but need to find out where Public land hunts are available.

I didn't know about that. I sure will look into that. I never had a reason before to pay attention to the liscense rules. It wouldn't cause any problems with my resident status in NM would it.

I've applied a couple of times as a NR and haven't been succesful, but I didn't put in with an outfitter. I have a bull tag this year in Arizona, finally. I guess I'll start over next year in arizona with out of state apps. and apply in NM as a Resident. Some of the ranchers around my place have landowner tags, but they are too expensive for my pocketbook. I'll just keep taking my chances. I think I'll try a Wyoming antelope hunt next year. Since I have never hunted them. I have 16 points in AZ. Next year I'll be a NR maybe now that it will cost me more I might get lucky.

I saw the same thing, and it's scary that Arizona is going to cut three months off lion season. First it started with no harvesting lions with kittens, now they are starting to take the season away. Right now California is having serious problems with an over population of lions, and if Arizona wants to head in that direction our big game are in serious trouble... I think you hit our problem right on the head. I noticed something about the people in the Dept. Durring the awards presentation a whole lot of them were hired right out of school from California. The California wave is coming. I know our own WM in the Globe area was hired from Oregon. Never hunted, and didn't even know the area when she arrived. She seems like a descent person, but my problem is why not recruit and hire people from our own state. I am sure their are a lot of tree hugger attitudes coming along with these new recruits.

Today was the first time I have attended a meeting where official business was voted on. I have only attended informational meetings in the past. My take on the whole event was that of a three ring circus. I have always been told that the Dept. managers and staff were working in our best interests, and that the commisioners always had their own agendas. Well to me I saw 4 commisioners who was trying to listen to the public input from the hunters, one commisioner that didn't give a dang about the response from the public, (Hernbrode), and then I saw Leanard and his staff trying to ram a whole bunch of crap down our throats. Even after all of the negative public input since the posting of the proposed changes. I have a whole new take on what is going on. Hernbrode didn't give a damned about any of the people and hunters who spoke at the meeting and their views. He didn't think that the hundreds of negative e-mail and phone calls was enough to make the changes. I saw the rest of the commisioners actually listening and responding to the hunters concernes. The commissioners only have Leonard and his staff to make recomondations on these matters and Even after all of the negative feedback Leonard still made his origonal recomendations. Chaiman Golightly has no idea how to handle a fomal meeting and looked confused through the whole process, but at least he tried to understand the hunters take on the issues. I think Arizona is in big trouble in the future. The Dept. only objective looks to be that of adding as many permits as possible while moving hunts to times that will insure low success.

Hi Dick I see you are logged in. I really would like to see some kind of positive outcome from this. And I am sorry for putting down someone you obviously have respect for. I haven't met Leonard. But I have called him and I have never had him return a call. I did have Brian return a message I left for Leonard to call me back. The thing that set me off was when Amanda said that she talked to him, and he told her that the banning of hunting over saltblocks had come from trying to appease the publics perseption. Come on now. You know and I know that 99% of the non-hunting public doesn't even think about or even know if it is legal in AZ. Unless they are involved with animal rights activities that is. I called the Game and Fish Dept. a few years ago to ask about that very thing. It took quite a while for someone to find out. And they work for the Dept. So with that statement I began to get a good idea of what kind of guy he really is. Doesn't sound like a straight shooter to me.

Ok so what you are saying is that he just doesn't care what a vast majority of the response is. He has gotten more negative feed back from this but it sounds like he just doesn't care. Why else would he just go ahead and stick to his proposal. Or is it that he is the kind of guy that won't admit he is wrong? What ever it is. when he said he is going ahead with his original proposal after all of the feed back in the opposite direction. It appearse that he is the problem not the commissioners. The commissioners rely on him to make sound proposals not half baked half thought out plans, and after hearing from everyone it sounds like he just doesn't listen or doesn't care. There are several negative aspects to leaving the overlapped hunts in place. Someone please tell me the positive position on this matter.

where do you get your %50+??? If you look at the report is says that 47% dems think that gun laws won't change and 46% rep think that gun laws won't change... remember the Foxnews poll about gun control... it was 80% in favor of tighter controls.. jason jamaro, I thought the Fox poll was just the opposit. I thought I saw that 80% polled said NO that stricter gun control was not the answer. Maybe I saw it wrong. I hope not . I was all excited to finally see a poll go our way. Maybe I was wrong.

from what I understand it used to be pretty easy but it is harder now days. I am looking into it though.

My bad. He sure doesn't sound like one. With the things he tries to push through. Maybe he is influenced by PETA of some other kind of tree hugger close to him. How long has he been hunting? Maybe he just doesn't know any better. I can't believe he thinks overlapping the deer and elk hunt is a good idea. And I really can't believe his statement that the public peception is why he is advocating doing away with salt blocks. Sounds like a PETA move to me. I don't hunt salt blocks but I do know the general public is not concerned about people hunting over salt blocks. Maybe animal rights activists might be concerned. And I think he is listening to them more than he listens to us.

Well then the take I get on Leonard is that he is an arragant butt. I can't belive the dolt can't see the problem. That is what happens when you have an anit-hunter in control of things. It sounds like he doesn't care about all of the calls and letters, and he will do what ever he wants be damned everyone else in the process. I really thin the man is an anti_hunter and I hope everyone sees it. If he was a square shooter he would tell the commission he made a mistake and that they should listen to alternatives. Sounds like a man not willing to admit he made a mistake.

It's at Elk Ridge. about 6 miles north of HWY 60 on road 603. I haven't heard of either. But I'm new to the area. I've met a few of the ranchers around the area. They are a good bunch of people.

It sure is. I spent a lot of time up there last summer putting in my water system and building a barn. I'll be moving at the end of may or first part of june. My place is almost right on the Continental Divide, at about 7,600 ft.

Yea! I can't wait till this summer. I'll be really busy with the move, but I'm sure going to do some looking for some hunting locations. I have elk and antlope visiting the property all the time. I got 12.5 acres and I'm going to make sure there is plenty of water for the wildlife. I'll probably keep putting in for unit 16. I have put in for that unit several times without ever being drawn. Maybe when I become a resident it will be easier.

"THIS JUST IN" After a meeting with PETA, Leonard has just proposed that fishing with bait is an unfair advantage. So he will propose to end the use of bait while fishing. This will be a big step in helping the public perception of our sport. And we all know that public perception should be at the forefront of all decision making processes.

Well, the "public" isn't buying hunting license, tags, permits, paying application fees, etc. WE ARE. What a crock. Leonard is talking out his *ss. 99% of the non-hunting public has no idea about the baiting isue. This is nothing but another anti-hunting proceedure being implemented by the anti-hunting G&F. They give a crap more about PETA than they do about our way of life, and Game Management. Our worse feares have been realized. The Game and Fish Dept. have been infiltrated to the highest ranks by PETA, and TREE HUGGERS. I guess "THE PUBLIC", is a new term for PETA and TREE HUGERS.

So go ahead and tell me how voting in the commisioners would be worse than allowing them to appoint the bunny-huggin mess we have now. I haven't seen anything positive come from our Game and Fish Dept. in a very long time. I have been a hunter in Arizona for 50 years, and in the last 15 or so years I have seen nothing but anti hunter sentiment coming from the Dept. I read a thread a while back saying how it is just the commisioners. I know of a couple of new officers that never hunted and are against most of what all of us believe in. I don't want to post any names but It won't be long till the whole Dept. is full of tree huggers and wolf lovers. They want to protect wolves and do away with the lifestyle we have lived for decades, but when it comes to enforcing the laws we have they don't give a damned. In my 50 years of hunting I can count on my hands the number of times I have been checked in the field. And then they want to open it up to let poachers come and go as they please during the archery elk hunt. I will gurantee there will be whole families out hunting on one tag. All they will have to have is a deer tag, and let the fun begin. When our grandchildren have to go to other states to hunt, we can all tell them stories of how hunting used to be a way of life in Arizona until the Game and Fish Dept. did away with it. And the big question is, What Can We Do About It?

Thanks Amanda. I wasn't sure if they would let people speak just before the vote. I'll be there. But as in past practice I don't think they will listen. Once they print the proposals it's pretty much over, from what I have seen from past practices.

I was going over the agenda for Saturdays AZGFD meeting, and the second thing on the agenda is voting on the hunt guidlines. The public statements aren't heard until the end of the meeting. Will they let people speak before they vote or is this just the way they set up their meetings?