bonuspointjohn

The Arizona Deer Association is looking for a few new Board Members. The current group has been active for a lot of years and a couple of our Board Members have been transferred out of state. While I would rather spend my time looking for sheds this spring, the Board is planning our banquet on May 21, 2011 and organizing our work project south of Payson, the Connor Catchment, scheduled for April 23, 24. The ADA Board has been active in raising funds for Coues and Mule Deer habitat, we sit at the table with the Arizona Game and Fish Department determining which projects are funded (Try reading a book longer than War & Peace with numbers), We try and inform the deer hunters of the state with regard to new hunts, revised hunts and any changes that we hear need to be made. We represent the deer hunters at commission meetings and we try and convey any political news that comes down either from Washington or the state legislature. So, there it is. We need some new blood and some fresh help. If you are interested, look us up on azdeer.org. You can contact me directly since I currently am the President. I know that there has to be someone out there that is willing to give back....By the way, I will pay any new board member triple what I make... Can't beat that can you? BPJ

Recent technology improvements have made it possible to track an animal from the comforts of home. With Trail Cams there is no need to spend massive amounts of time in the woods. With great spotting scopes, high ground becomes more important than reading signs. With Quads and similar vehicles, there is no need to be physically more ready than anyone else. It begs the question, where do we cross the line? I know that the technology is out there to implant chips in an animal as we do our pets now. Why not use tranquilizers to bring every young bull down, implant them with a serialized chip and then dole out hunts to individuals with tracking devices? We have the technology to make those fall hunts almost a certainty. If we look back a mere 30 years ago, virtually none of what we use now was available then. What will the next 30 years bring? What improvements will be made that will put humans so far above our prey that the outcome is inevitable? What defines "fair chase"? what invisible line do we cross to the point where it becomes a slam dunk? When a premium tag hunter offers $10,000 finder fee for a 400" bull, does he violate fair chase? I am not pontificating about what should be. I am not promoting any particular philosophy. I am concerned however that by using means other than sweat equity we have lost far more than we have gained. Perhaps time has passed me by (59). Perhaps my thoughts are meaningless, my concerns not worth a second thought. I just wonder if anyone else is thinking that we are crossing the line too easily these days?...What say you my technologically superior brethren?

The "consumptive" groups are in support of having a board which recommends names to the Governor. We would have open meetings where candidates for Commissioner would be able to plead their case. This Bill is being opposed by the following groups: The Center for Biological Diversity, The Sierra Club, The Animal Defense League, The Arizona Wildlife Federation and several others. The Board by the bill's definition would be comprised of 1 Rancher, 1 from the public at large and 3 from the varying sportsmen's conservation groups. The reason for this bill is that we, who pay for over 60% of the Arizona Game & Fish Department's budget have been relegated to accepting whoever a Governor wants in the position. Governor Brewer has been superb in appointing 2 Commissioners that the Conservation Groups all like. Commissioners Jack Husted and Newly appointed Commissioner John Harris. That could change in the November election if we elect a democratic governor. and then the next 5 appointments would be at the sitting governors will. The proponents of the bill are asking that anyone who has an interest to please let their thoughts be known. What say the CouesWhitetail.com folks?...BonuspointJohn

Hi Ringer.... The bill passed the Senate today, and hopefully the House on Monday. I guarantee you that this bill has NOTHING to do W/ landowner tags. I sat on committees about 6 years ago and ALL the sportsmen's groups were opposed to landowner tags. It just is not going to happen. The 6 year reign of terror by Governor Napolitano was the reason for this bill. If a "D" is elected in the future, and goes for 2 terms that governor could appoint a totally "Green" Commission... and you, the guy who buys the tags and pays the bills for the Department would be left in the cold... This way at least we have the ability to interview the prospective commissioners and have our 2 cents worth in it.... Hope you understand why we did what we did... Could use your support...BPJ

The absurd nature of the CBD's statement that deer and elk have overgrazed the Arizona landscape shows how little they really know about the outdoors. The ADA will be bringing some responses to the article that had no scientific proof, no background data, just a small group of enviro folks who would be delighted to abolish hunting... what better way than to have a massive influx of wolves?... and Jaguars.....and those elk sure have depleted the Strip and the Kaibab of all vegetation haven't they?...goes to show how much those idiots know...BPJ

Hello wet mule... thought you were the CBD.... too many issues and not enough time...BPJ

Hi Larry.... I meant about us having a board that recommends a number of people to the Governor for the position of Commissioner. The Tucson papers may carry the bad stuff, but when push comes to shove, we can always point to all the good things that should outweigh the bad things... unless they belong to some of your wacko groups down there.... By the way, what is in the water there that makes the CBD like they are? Yes, the department does publish the results of the poachers... why not?... the ethical sportsmen are leading the way to prevent those guys from ever setting foot in the woods again... and the groups that are supporting the bill are the ones that offer rewards for any information that helps nab poachers. I suspect that you know as well as I do that the AWF board is a very mixed bag, with some who are considered "green"... and a few of us who are of the hook and bullet persuasion. Do you feel that the AWF represents sportsmen?.... do you feel that they have the pulse of what the public says?.....Do you think that there is any way top determine what ATV enthusiast is destroying the habitat?.... Look how hard some of us worked on getting that bill passed last year... and then the legislature sweeps the funds..... Any anti-hunter will portray us as the black hat boys..... The AWF should examine why they are so heck bent on separating themselves from the mainstream of the conservation community...Look at the results of the poll....These are not the hard core guys who work on the various boards... these are your normal everyday guys who have a life and just enjoy talking about hunting....If this were even a close vote it might point to something... but based on what I am seeing and what the true conservation groups are saying, I think the proof is in the pudding as they say. 95% is a big index for anyone to look at. And that number is skewed because Mike Golightly, Bill McLean and Brad Powell voted against it..... I look at the potential of another "D" as a governor and feel that hunting will be a thing of the past... Most of us will fight that and this is a step in the direction of at least being in the process. To think that our enemies will play fair in the future is absurd...BPJ

Brad is a friend of mine who I happen to disagree with... by the way, thanks for the "NO" vote, we were running way short of those. Brad your comparison of the Federal Land uses by the big mining companies is way off base. First of all, yes, we do derive some benefit from the past time that we all enjoy... however, by no stretch is this even close to the profits of mining. The Arizona Game & Fish Department is funded by us, and yet for the past 5 years, the Commission was being counseled by those who would rather do away with hunting than to see it prosper. We are not Alienating the general public in any way... We are however, getting those who do not pay really ticked off, because they had a lot of power in the past 5 years and they can see that going away. The future of Arizona is certainly less conservative than in the past, as more of the "D" crowd moves in. If this bill does not make it through, and if another "D" becomes Governor and that "D" is like former Governor Napolitano, then we are in a world of hurt. A biug concern for Brad is that the AWF, which he is a board member of is not voting for the bill. There are 2 solid reasons for that. 1) they have a long standing resolution that prohibits any change in the commission structure. That decision was based a long time ago and should be honored. 2) The AWF was at one time probably "THE" organization for sportsmen across the state. That has changed over the years, and the traditional conservation groups now all belong to the AZSFW (Arizona Sportsmen for Wildlife). I know that the AWF was asked to join the AZSFW, but they chose not to, stating that they were not joiners. That sometimes leaves them out of the loop, because they send no representatives to any of the meetings. There were some hard feelings that they were not part of the planning and wording of this legislation.... and we shall leave it at that. The general public is in no way offended by what we are doing... they have no clue about anything the department is or does. We, the hunting community function however at their passive consent. There is nothing in this that affects them and really, nothing that we do can be construed as "making a profit" off wildlife. It is exactly the opposite... We, hunters and fishermen pay much higher fees than those states that have a Department of Natural Resources, because the public pays nothing. I would suspect that given the general information the public at large would say... "hey, they are footing the bill, and as long as it does not affect me financially let them do what they want." The extra funding that we pay and the labor of love that we do in banquets, raffles and other fundraisers does make a huge difference for habitat. The habitat of this state, if you were to take out the millions of dollars that the special tags have generated, would be in a sorry condition. Every project that we do for a species specific critter has a trickle affect that benefits all creatures, not just one. So, comparing us to those who profit by taking from the land, or utilizing the resources is just plain wrong. Sorry Brad, we will continue to disagree on this item... But I still respect you...BPJ

Mr. Golightly made his comments..... A "Narrow" group of sportsmen?..... and a "power Grab"...... Come on Mike.... Power Grabbing is when someone wants a 3rd term as Commissioner.....Power abuse is when a Commissioner tells someone in the public "you don't listen"... or "you do not represent sportsmen". I feel sorry for Bill... he never learned that Commission meetings were not part of the adversarial process. He viewed meetings as conquests, a winner and a looser... and by God "let me tell ya" was always trying to punish anyone who disagreed with him. I know that Bill has a good intellect, but he was as abrasive as anyone who ever sat in that chair. Over the past couple of years I have learned that to say even a minor criticism of Commissioner Hernbrode would have him in a snit fit. His parting farewell at the Commissioners banquet got me a ton of apologies from various folks who attended....And you say this is a good thing????? the systems is not broke????? Mike, this bill is a reaction to the flagrant disregard of the very people who make up the backbone of the Department... their customers. US.... not the CBD, not Defenders of Wildlife, and certainly not the Sierra Club!. Why has the Commission decided to try and have an outreach to the conservation groups? Because we turned away and decided to heck with attending meetings where the Sierra Club is fawned over. Please Mike.. admit that the Sierra Club is not even close to being in the league of sportsmen.... They are activists and litigants... calling them conservationists does a disservice to all who hunt and fish and contribute to projects, banquets, buy tags and licenses and work diligently to maintain our hunting heritage. Is there anything in the Sierra Club that states they want to continue our hunting heritage?.....Look who is ion favor ow placing wolves all over the state... not just in an experimental area...The CBD, Defenders of Wildlife and the Sierra Club......just what we need... Wolves all across the state... and even across the Strip and the Kaibab...Stated in Last Saturdays edition of the Arizona Flagstaff Daily Sun.....Geez Mike... you really need to stop bashing those who are trying to keep hunting alive in AZ...BPJ

To all who took the time to vote, I thank you. At the meeting of the stakeholders today in the Senate, it was quite obvious that the Sierra Club, Defenders of Wildlife and a couple of other groups look at this as a terrible bill. A couple of former Commissioners also were there. Bill McLean from Gold Canyon and Tom Woods both of whom objected to the bill. At this point it looks as if we will agree to disagree. Senator John Nelson did a fine job of chairing what could have been a contentious meeting. Certainly, tempers were on edge. Senator Nelson, after listening to all the comments (almost 2 hours) said that he understands the feelings of Sportsmen that we want a proportional say in the Commission since we proportionally pay over 60 % of the departments funding. That said, be prepared for a blitz of e-mails from the Sierra Club and disgruntled former Commissioners. It is amazing that while they profess that wildlife is for all of the citizens of Arizona and held in trust for all Arizona citizens, they feel quite comfortable in letting the sportsmen carry over 60% of the financial burden.....But hey... it's only our money.....Thanks again for your input and votes....BPJ

you mention the "very few" who might abuse the privilege Bill... that is why we are continually asking those who pay the bills for their input.... looking at the vote from this forum I see an overwhelming response in the affirmative. For too long the few who have done the fighting at the Capitol and at the Meetings have been told we represent only ourselves..... if that were so, why is the response so positive? Why did we have so many people who attended the ABA banquet last night sign up with a "support" next to their name? There was NO one who read the bill who said "no support".....Until Sportsmen tell us in this type of forum to get lost, we will continue to represent them to the best of our abilities.

Beg to Disagree with the attorney from Gold Canyon..... If it is not broken, then why has the commission been trying to get Conservation Groups back to the meetings? Why has it been an adversarial process for the previous 5 years?... Are you prepared to say that we had terrible Commissioners when the AWF ruled the roost?...Look at who would be on that Board.... it is not one group... it is from over 30 organizations across the state and represents all those folks who buy the tickets to promote habitat...Bill, what fears are there from having the people who pay the bills have a say in who should be Commissioner?.... By the way... Commissioner Norm Freeman, who is certainly not a hook and bullet knuckledragger met with the AZSFW prior to his appointment, and we did not know him from Adam.... but he represents a lot of good things... he is independent, owes no one, cares about wildlife and above all listens to what people are saying. In one hour he was able to get a ringing endorsement from that body. Good people have a way of being able to rise above the fray.... and I suspect that even with this minor adaptation, they will always do so. Sure seems that you guys do not trust Sportsmen at all...... Give us a little credit for having an IQ... We may not be learned justices, but common sense does abound...

Gee Mike..... talk about Landowner Tags is like going back several years. Sportsmen have for years denied that notion and we have buried it at every turn. There are many good ranchers out there, even though you could only name a couple. I look at it this way. Ranchers are on the land every day, during good times and bad, during drought and plenty. They help in a multitude of ways and they are the only payers at the table.... (don't go to their allotment costs, they did not set the rates). Let's turn the table around... what are you afraid of in a more referred process? Why do you feel that we are being unreasonable?.... What has the Sierra Club , CBD, Animal Defense League etc ever done to really help the Department? Give me one reason why the hunters and fishers of this state should not have a say in who becomes the Commissioner. We pay the bills and under Governor Napolitano we were never in any loop...you know that. Landowner Access has become a huge item, but you know as well as I do that if you walked into my backyard, cut my fences down, played mud bog in my water tanks and then littered to cap it off, you too might be reluctant to invite the public. We try and mitigate damages done by the species and yes, we have paid for that though some of the funds... but hey, who thought of the Arizona Big Game Super Raffle?... certainly not any of the groups that are screaming about this bill. I have issues with any one who denies the public to public land, but that talk drifts us off the main topic here today..... What are you and current Commissioners afraid of???

To all on this Website: Current Commissioner Norman Freeman has just contacted me and asked that I print a retraction. I stated that he had told both Stephanie and Sandy Bahr that he wanted to hear from all Stakeholders. The information that I posted was indeed second hand, and since I cannot verify the statement I am hereby retracting it. I do know that a comment was made that the Commissioners wanted to hear from all the stakeholders on Monday. Commissioner Freeman has been an admirable Commissioner and I have no disputes with him. I do know that he told me at our meeting last week that he wanted to hear from others rather than the usual suspects who take the time to go down to the legislature and plead for our issues. The whole reason for this posting was to get the opinions of those folks who work at regular jobs and do not have the time or money to present their thoughts to the commissioners and the legislature. BPJ

Hi Mike.... you should know as well as anyone that the AWF was the board that supplied names for over 40 years..... nice to see that we have 2 former Commissioners on this sight..My assumption is that since the Department monitors these chat rooms, you both were told to chime in....

Well Well Well... Former Commissioner Mike ..... Welcome to the fray. Founding fathers?????? I suspect that you need a lesson in history Mike. The Arizona Wildlife Federation for over 40 years was the sole source that provided names to the Governor for the position of Commissioner. Upon election then Governor Babbitt decided that he wanted the political clout to name whomever he wanted. Since that time we have had governors naming the Commissioners. So, if you would like to rely on history and the founding fathers, I suspect that a further insulation by those who pay the freight of the department (over 65% by the Departments numbers) should have a say in who is appointed to the position. The system was not broke until the 1980's... and has since become a bit ugly. During the reign of Governor Napolitano, we the paying sportsmen, were not included in the information feed that the Sierra Club was...and yes, Sandy Bahr has a license which she is proud to tell everyone.... But...What kinds of dollars do you think the Sierra Club raises?. I have not seen them raise funds for wildlife by virtue of banquets. I have not seen them raise monies through raffles for habitat... I see them as exactly who they are... Activists and litigants.... no more, no less... and yes, sometimes we are on the same side of the fence, but more often, Sandy and the Defenders of Wildlife are on the same team holding the department and sportsmen in their sights.

To those who have questioned the "Why"... or if it ain't broke, don't fix it..... For the past 5 years, the conservation groups have stayed away from the Commission meetings in droves. Certain Commissioners either a) loved to hear themselves talk and would expound for hours on what could be said in minutes b.) Would hear no criticisms of the process or their decisions c) Would publicly chastise the representatives of the conservation groups for "not listening" or "you do not represent sportsmen" and d) found themselves enamored w/ the Sierra Club , Defenders of Wildlife, etc.... Almost all were appointees of Governor Napolitano. She would not release the names of her nominees (But the Sierra Club knew who they were) and purposely avoided anyone that the conservation groups would back. The simple part is that we had 5 years of Napolitano and we have had 2 years of Governor Brewer. Governor Brewer has had an open mind, listened to sportsmen and asked our input into who should be Commissioner. If Governor Brewer looses this election, we will be faced w/ a future that has appointments of someone again who does not like the "hook & bullet" crowd. Last but not least..... Sportsmen's dollars PAY THE BILLS FOR THE DEPARTMENT!!!!! Having a commission that listens to the Sierra Club or Center for Biological Diversity and then having us pay the freight is just not what we want. There are no General Fund dollars that pay for the Department. WE DO!!! We pay through our license fees, our self imposed taxes on firearms and ammunition and our donations, banquets, work projects etc. Why shouldn't we have a say in who is our Commissioner?...The 3 groups that would sit on the board would be delegates from a pool of all the Conservation groups that are present in this state. That would include such folks as RMEF, AES. ADA, ABA, AFA, Trout unlimited, Anglers United, Phoenix Varmint Callers, Arizona Predator Callers etc.... And that is why on Monday at the Senate, we need to have responses that support the bill. Commissioner Freeman told Stephanie Nichols Young of the Animal Defense League and Sandy Bahr of the Sierra Club that he wanted "all the stakeholders" to voice their opinions at the meeting on Monday. Please.... pass this information on and if you have any more questions, I will respond all week-end...BPJ

Hey Terry...... I have a feeling that the petting zoo guy is just a little weird. Noticed from the article that they "buried" the animals..... what a waste of meat. He also expressed a concern that his environmentally conscious friends would object..... What do they put in the water in Tucson?...Please note however..... the biggest concern we as sportsmen have is from the Center for Biological Diversity. Those folks are just not in tune w/ reality. They have repeatedly made claims that are not realistic and have several other fringe groups that sign on as co-plaintiffs. The Sierra Club is our most visual target, but the HSUS, CBD, and others are much more dangerous. I have had several conversations w/ Sandy Bahr and she is pretty irate w/ me and the hunting community because of statements that I made at the commission meeting when they awarded the tags. Commissioners Martin and Hernbrode are also livid w/ me because of articles I wrote in the "Tracker".....I hope that we all appreciate the next two years, because if we have another democratic governor we are pretty much assured of ideologies that are not in line w/ ours. Hunters may bitch and complain but they seldom get off their butts to do anything. The Sierra Club w/ 13,000 members has clout, political connections and lots of $$$$$. Might be smart for hunters to start joining the AZSFW because other than that group we have NO clout...bonuspointjohn

Hi Terry..... as one of my favorite quotes reads : Keep your friends close but your enemies closer.... I agree that the SC has done many things that makes me want to tear my hair out... but.... why not have them kick in money?....they already demand tons of information from the Department as well as the commission.... why not have them spend some $$...We know that their position is to leave every wolf and lion alone..... come to the July meeting when the U.S. Fish & Wildlife will report back that they have not finished their work.... the Commission will then be forced to deal w/ offending lions in the Kofa's.... should be an interesting show.....bonuspointjohn

The Sierra Club did apply for a lion tag to be auctioned... the application was not successful, as the Super Big Game raffle, the ADBSS and the ADA all received the tags. It is noteworthy that the Sierra Club was denied pretty much on the grounds that they did not have a marketing plan or any history of working tags. That all said, I would hope that the Sierra Club would actually buy a tag for some raffle person and hold the type of event they were talking about. Historically they have been litigants and very involved politically. As a national organization they do have a lot of clout..... but seldom do they place any of their $$$ on the ground. If they were to have the event they talked about (and they could hold several each year). they could then give the funds back to the department for the benefit of lion studies and lion habitat. We (the hunting community) pay for all species of wildlife...both consumptive and non consumptive. So..... let the Sierra Club kick in some money for their favorite critters... wolves, lions etc. we should welcome them contributing the $$...bonuspointjohn

More than likely an activity that you do not want to pursue.... Public lands have a protocol that must be followed. If you see a project in the making, advise the appropriated land agency and then ask the corresponding conservation group what they can do to get a full project going. I have been a part of many projects and sometimes the "unintended consequences" are what throws everyone into a tizzy..... good luck... and if it is in deer country, try the Arizona Deer Association for some feedback...Bonuspointjohn

The decision by the Commission was to not award the tag to the Sierra Club. They have every right to apply for the tag and they did so. The decision to not award the tag was that they did not have a comprehensive marketing plan, nor have they exhibited any past history of working with tags. That all said, I would really like to see the Sierra Club actively pursue this type of activity in order to raise funds to put money on the ground. Their philosophy is to typically work in the political arena and not base anything on specific species work They have donated many hours on projects that they are interested in..... much like us. I have had many discussions w/ Sandy Bahr and most of them have been with some degree of disagreement. I hope that everyone recognizes that they are not "Evil".... just different. Many times we clash over our philosophies... but sometimes we agree.....And we do join forces when we agree....Bonuspointjohn

Hi Amanda.... thanks for the update..... depends on where the site is.. Public land?... Forest Service?.... a whole lot of people I know would love to get to examine it... Some of the Archaeologists will throw a fit that you moved anything in any way. A call to the governing land agency is step one... Based on the harsh life that was a reality in the older west, none of this surprises me. Could be an old burial site, a death scene, or even a simple wash down from higher up the stream bed. The skull seems very small... who can tell... Get ready for all kinds of government questions... I have found burial sites in the past as well as some teeth... humans... Reporte4d to the Apache Sitgreaves and left it alone after that... VERY INTERESTING DISCOVERY... Bonus point J

Having spent the last 3 weeks at projects or meetings I find it strange that over 150,000 souls apply for deer tags and fewer than 1000 across the state can be counted on to work on projects or join the conservation groups that support the deer herds of Arizona. I am not and probably will never be a forum regular, but Amanda let me get in to ask this question. I know that between family and work (those of us luck enough to have one) it is hard to do stuff that has no particular payoff. I am asking the question in hopes that I can find out what the other 99.3% of the people do that want deer tags but do not offer support when it comes to projects or conservation groups. What does the Coues Whitetail .com group think?....BPJohn

Back again with some questions. Most of us would rather cut off our fingers than surrender our bonus points.Several organizations are placing the ":conservation Bonus Point" on the front burner again. The details have not been worked out, but we are looking for a general attitude about what hunters feel. Would any of you be willing to put in say 32 hours during the year for an additional bonus point? The logic is that you could take a family camping, spend time working on some great projects, get the kids exposed to what really goes on in the forests and earn a bonus point at the same time. I know some will say that we should do it because we want to... and I agree. Because my kids are grown, I probably spend at least 1,000 hours a year at meetings or on projects. I will continue to do so in the future, but it would be a nice morsel for the Department to offer a small token of their appreciation for work done. The department also logs in all the volunteer hours and applies for matching funds based on the man hours that we contribute. There are millions that are earned by sportsmen each year for the department... but there could be more. We need to get the youngsters out in the woods on a more frequent basis. getting drawn once every 5 years does not let them understand the cycles of nature nor do they appreciate the hard work that ranchers do to maintain wildlife habitat & drinkers. I know that only by sitting around a campfire with someone who walks in totally different shoes can we appreciate their life. Sharing common ground by working together can only enhance the relationships that are so necessary for future hunter access. Getting youngsters exposed to ranching life gives them a new perspective. I think a lot more folks would think twice about cutting fences if they spent some time with the folks who maintain them.Yes, the AES work project had a lot of attendees... I was one of them. It is the first and only time that the project has filled up. There can be more projects in the future... but we need volunteers.... any one want to help?.....The argument that the costs for doing these projects has a ton of merit. But the good years (3 years ago) had even less participation. Where we go in the future depends a lot on the people who read these forums and feel like responding.... thanks for reading this piece...BPJ