krp

Thank you for the update, I didn't get home in time to view the meeting or can find anything about what happened. Looks as AZSFW is willing to come out of hiding to lobby for funds. They don't seemed to worried or distressed over public opinion. Kent

Oh, OK.... I see it now, my representative is #5, Stinson... 5. One member of the general public or one member of a nongame organization that is qualified pursuant to section 501©(3) or 501©(4) of the internal revenue code. The general public (including hunting) and the anti's all lumped together... fence in all those meaners and haters... Glad I know what category I've been relegated to... Kent

17-202. Arizona game and fish commission appointment recommendation board A. The Arizona game and fish commission appointment recommendation board is established consisting of members appointed by the governor pursuant to this section and section 38-211. The board shall consist of one person who has been a resident of this state for at least five years from each of the following qualifying groups: 1. One member designated by the board of directors of an organization that is qualified pursuant to section 501©(3) or 501©(4) of the internal revenue code, whose membership consists of a significant cross-section of wildlife conservation and sportsmen organizations from throughout the state, that does not have an affiliation or charter with a national wildlife conservation or sportsman's organization and that has been in existence for at least five years. 2. One member designated by the board of directors of an organization that is qualified pursuant to section 501©(3) or 501©(4) of the internal revenue code whose articles of incorporation or bylaws stipulate that the mission or purpose of the organization is to increase, sustain or otherwise conserve wild turkey, deer, elk, pronghorn (antelope), bighorn sheep, ducks, quail or fish and that has been in existence for at least five years. 3. One member designated by the board of directors of an organization that is qualified pursuant to section 501©(3) or 501©(4) of the internal revenue code whose articles of incorporation or bylaws define it as a sportsman's organization whose membership is primarily confined to a specific geographic area or region of the state or an organization described in paragraph 2 of this subsection or is a chapter or affiliate of a national sportsman's conservation or shooting organization and that has been in existence for at least five years. 4. One member designated by the board of directors of an organization that is qualified pursuant to section 501©(3) or 501©(4) of the internal revenue code that is statewide, whose membership is comprised of cattlemen or ranchers and that has been in existence for at least five years. 5. One member of the general public or one member of a nongame organization that is qualified pursuant to section 501©(3) or 501©(4) of the internal revenue code. ------------------------------ So if.... 1. Gilstrap-AZSFW 5. Stinson-defenders of wildlife Who represents 2/3/4 and what are their qualifying organizations? Phillip Townsend, Susan Chilton, Donald Johnson. Which one of these represents me, an unaffiliated citizen?... so I may contact them and have my voice represented. Kent

In his testimony before the committee, Mr. Stinson expressed his pride in working with and lobbying for Defenders of Wildlife, working with the Sierra Club and Sportsmen For Wildlife (yes that SFW). He stated his position in assuring "diversity" in the make up of the commission so all interests can be represented. He is the only candidate that applied for the position. ----------------------------------------------- Mr Stinson is on the list I saw of sitting members, along with two ex G&F commissioners that served together, one being a board member of AZSFW. Anyone getting an itch yet? SFW controls a super PAC... this is an election year... When was the last sub'organization's dues paid to AZSFW? How much does SFW have and how much do you have left? Who controls the lobby? Who has the ear of legislators? Why has SFW isolated themselves, even before this legislation was leaked? Why haven't they come out and tried to put out fires and at least justify this move to save face and support? Is it because they are embarrassed, afraid... or is it that they put themselves in such a powerful position and timetable, they don't care what the orgs, G&F, average hunter think. Could we have been put on ignore as they forge ahead? Be afeared... Kent

Forget the wolf crap... forget the anti fearmongering... 2008, Nappy's commission and these same orgs were at the pinnacle of their animosity, they hated each other and we couldn't even go to a commission meeting as individual hunters without that animosity being directed at us. Yet we stood by the orgs and did everything they asked while they wailed and gnashed their teeth in frustration. I was frustrated that we had no vote for who the commissioners were. Obama did the one good thing for Az... took Nappy away and Brewer stepped in... what a breath of fresh air... 'She' saved us, not anyone else. The same orgs wanted control of the commission, they enacted SB1200, trust them... 2012, these same orgs we have supported turned on us when they have the power and are making a tag grab... now the commission are the good guys and we need to support them. I am getting sick of being caught in the middle with no voice either way. Kent

John... The wolf recovery program is mandated by the ESA of 1973, a federally mandated program not state voluntary. after many years and changes, Canadian wolves were released in Yellowstone and Idaho in 1995 and Then mexican wolves in AZ/NM 1998. The AZG&F have no choice on the matter and neither does the commission, they deal with the mandate best they can under federal guidelines. From G&F... The Arizona Game and Fish Department has been actively involved in reintroducing Mexican wolves to portions of their historical range for many years. In the 1980s, the reintroduction effort focused mainly on public processes necessary to reach a decision for or against reintroduction. Management activities during the 1990s included public opinion surveys, public meetings, site feasibility studies and surveys along both sides of the Mexican border for naturally occurring wolves. In addition, there was intensive coordination with cooperating agencies, including the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish and the USDA Forest Service. As a result of these activities and a Federal mandate from the Endangered Species Act of 1973, a Federal decision was made to release captive Mexican wolves in east-central Arizona. In March 1998, 11 captive-reared Mexican wolves were released into the Blue Range Wolf Recovery Area (BRWRA) in eastern Arizona. Additional releases have occurred since the initial release. With the birth of the first wild-born litter from a wild-born parent in 2002, the Mexican Wolf Reintroduction Project entered into a new phase, whereby natural reproduction began to replace reintroductions from captive populations. ------------------------------------- read the bold Between the Feds and our own local special interest groups, our vote is being silenced... Kent

John, endangered species are Federal under the USF&W... Kent

I understand and appreciate the listen... 500 donations and 10 bucks are minimum... to create the vessel... what of the member organization dues, which is a 'substantial' number. What about donations from individuals investing in their interest of tags. Before the super pac, they could donate 5000.00 an individual, now it's confusing but seems they can donate unlimited. I can't find where Utah SFW can't donate heavily with their orgs in Az. Don't overlook that they may have a huge warchest and attempted a quickstike to the endzone before a long draw out ground game... Who controls this two year super pac? Thanks again, someone look into all possibilities... Kent ------------------------ So-called super PACs, which were created following a pair of federal court decisions in 2010, are permitted to receive unlimited campaign contributions from corporations, labor unions, and wealthy individual donors. Traditional federal political action committees and candidate campaign committees may only receive limited contributions from individuals, political parties, and other political action committees. Under federal law, candidates and super PACs are not permitted to coordinate campaign activity.

Thank you archerycrazy, I appreciate you and the YVRGC for taking the correct approach, also AES. I've tried to be careful with Weiers, not be in the linch him camp, but also be firm that we need assurances in the near future. Thanks again. While you are at it... look at the Super PAC issue, timing of requalification and 2072... at least consider if there is a threat still viable from outside interests. http://www.arizonasportsmenforwildlife.org/?option=com_content&view=article&id=78&Itemid=66 Kent

Well, by your own list above, if you support SB1200, then you support a sitting Sierra Club member or some such on that board... also there isn't any reason to believe that with a little imagination, anti's can't word their 501 incorporation statements to qualify for any of the first three positions legally... Kent

I wanted it repealed as soon as I found out about it a week or so ago when BPJ referenced it and I studied it... It doesn't matter to me who brought the repeal bill up, it's correct and should be implemented... As much as I hate Obama, if he said he would completely disband the ATF after the gunwalking debacle... I'm not going to say NO! don't do it. This legislation should have never been enacted in the first place... needs to go. Kent

Yep... all special interest organizations that don't come close to representing the majority of hunters as far as paying membership goes, and three of the five have organizational and funding ties... The few knowing best for the many... Elitism, socialism, cronyism, possible corruption... No thanks... Kent

So another case of SFW knows best over the objections 'all' others... sounds familiar... SB1200 is a disaster... isolating the power brokers from/and insulating the general public having any choice of who their representatives/policy makers are in a government agency. That's worked so well with the DOJ, EPA, ATF, DEA, DHS, FS.... TSA with their hands in our panties... SFW is using the Acorn and NAACP playbook... Get you GD hands out of my panties!!!!! Kent

Support of 2538 Would thrill the CBD, Sierra Club and Defenders of Wildlife. Go Ahead and destroy what took years to bring around. Painted into a bad corner on this one George. Those orgs were against SB1200... as were Arizona Wildlife Federation and G&F... a pretty good cross section... Kent

With this legislation SFW successfully lobbied for in 2010, has member(s?) on the review board, the Super PAC status for SFW in 2010 and Weiers as their legislator... is it any wonder they aren't concerned about what we public think, or the other orgs. If the other orgs remove their support financially, the parent organization can still convert outside donations from those that want these tags and possibly even Utah tag money they control, into the Super PAC fund. Making another legislative attempt in the next two years, without being secret... and we or even G&F can't do a thing about it... Weiers is still the hinge... we need some reassurances from him on who he stands with. I'll now remove my Chicken'little suit and tinfoil... Kent

Does the 501C3 status not concern you? This removes the 'people' from another government process, not allowing us even the pretense of a voice to the Governor on who's appointed. Our only recourse in the past was our vote for governor to shape the G&F commission, that was restrictive already... example Nappy's appointees and then Brewer... we now have no say as the choice is dependent on special interest nonprofit orgs... socialism, no matter how you dress it. Kent

I'd like to thank Mr Woodhouse for his response and service on the commission. Also say that the Region 4 WMs and YVRGC are the real deal... though I'm from Mesa and spend very little time in region 4, I did spend days with these guys on a catchment project last year and was impressed with both the WMs and the equipment trailer that YVRGC had supplied. They are probably the top organization in Az for gett'n'er done. Opps, meant region 4, I'm from 6... lol Kent

Agree or not... Weiers and SFW were given the mantel of political leaders against the anti's by support and funding of the other organizations, and de facto the hunting community. That support has irrevocably been removed from SFW and Weiers is teetering on the edge. During the interim of trying to find a humpty dumpty to put back on the wall, we are extremely vulnerable... and the anti's are extremely savy... That's reality. Kent

I think we have to accept that the anti's just received a gift victory with this attempted legislation, approved or not... The rift created between the supposed mover and shakers that politically oppose them and the support base of the majority of Az sportsmen must have them dancing with glee... pointing, look at the fools. If the legislation would have been successful, it'd created an easy judicial battleground to tie up 350 tags with the possibility of gaining control of those tags legally. I truly believe we just experienced the biggest loss as Hunters in this state that has ever occurred, we survived the Nappy commission years and USO with some wounds... but this cuts deep and hopefully the fallout won't give victory to the enemy. Kent

Organizations are not the only game in town when it comes to G&F youth hunt camps or catchment projects, nor are they the only venue for a person to contribute to youth retention or wildlife habitat. Kent

Fail! now you're off the reservation... There is a reason I actually research my answers before I write them, being wrong never makes me look good. Kent

There were either only four members total or four present during the first session and it was chaired and approved that 2 votes would advance a candidate to the next round. Obviously there were initial rounds that led to other rounds reducing the number of candidates until the appointees selected were submitted to the Governor. Kent

Hi John, you need to distance yourself from these folks, Terry say's you're good folks, he'd say the same about me, I believe him. I've been courteous and responded to the info you gave me, if you have refuting evidence of my position, be specific. Kent

This legislation would create a legal battleground between a weak SFW and the combined might of the anti's, effectively screening out any interference from the AZG&F and sportsmen. Kent

I don't see the 'National' disqualification and they are active in this state... Sierra club is a 501c qualification but has ties to 503c organizations. I referenced more than one organization earlier and HSUS is a 503c organization that has many ties with PETA and Sierra Club. They also undoubtably control smaller organizations and the ability to challenge for these tags through the proposed legislation. Sierra Club activists have collaborated with the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) to agitate against modern livestock farms. In 2002, Sierra Club members in Florida teamed with HSUS to pass a ballot initiative that extends constitutional rights to pregnant pigs. In 1998, the two groups successfully campaigned in California for Proposition 4, which bars ranchers from using traps to protect their livestock from mountain lions, coyotes and other predators. The edict has hurt California farmers, who have seen a steep increase in predator attacks on their herds. The Sierra Club and HSUS are also both members of the Keep Antibiotics Working coalition, a PR campaign that frightens Americans away from the conventional meat supply with scientifically baseless claims about livestock antibiotics. Kent