.270

exactly, the desires of a few guys were taken in order to pacify some folks that were going to ask for limits on lions, before they asked for it. not a decision based on anything to do with biology. nor did it have anything to do with "creating opportunity". instead it took away 25% of the lion season. and who suffers? not the lions, not the hound doggers, not the huggers. nope, it was the deer and the hunters that might have a chance at shooting a lion in those closed months. azgfd has some real hard choices to make and i don't see em wanting to make the right ones. they make the one that will pacify the folks that will squall the loudest and will make the most money. while leaving the wildlife, and the folks that truly care about it and provide the dollars to fund the programs, on the outside looking in. in wildlife management, the things that concern the wildlife should be paramount. they should come first. time and time again, that isn't the case. whatever makes the most money and causes the least amount of bad press is what seems to be the bigger concern. i said 30 years ago, the first time i saw a rocky bighorn south of eagle creek, that they would eventually mix with the desert sheep. and now they have. and there is no plan whatsoever to take care of the problem. and it's a pretty simple fix. is the azgfd oblivious of it? i hope not. you guys spend more time in the field than even me. i hope you've seen it coming. this elk deal has been going on for 30 years too. but i don't see any attempt to fix it. only ways to profit from it, at the expense of the deer and other wildlife. before that it was the lion/deer problem on the strip, allowing trapping to die all over the state, getting on the wolf wagon with the huggers, etc, etc, etc. there have been some many crummy decisions made by the azgfd that it ain't funny. and they were always made for the same reasons. pacify huggers and money. same with the doves. say what you want, but they will eventually cross with the native animals. hide and watch. and the azgfd's intial reaction to them was to limit it. probably didn't make any difference, but just the fact that they did is a convenient way for a joe hunter like me to come up with a good example of a trend that bugs me. wildlife management should be the azgfd's #1 goal. not hunter opportunity or the bottom line. if wildlife can be managed and still have enough animals for folks to hunt and angle, then you can worry about the other stuff. what i see is a concerted effort to enhance the bottom line, while skirting around anti's protests as much as possible, with the welfare of the wildlife coming in a distant 3rd. "opportunity" is great. i appreciate the work that goes into creative ways to provide it. but i don't see all this opportunity doing much more than selling more tags and adding to the stress on the deer herd. crunch the numbers and count the beans all you want, there are only so many game animals and they aren't livestock. they aren't a commodity to be sold. show me some real effort to balance things and do it in a way that is based on science, and i'll be on the wagon with ya. but keep up the "head in the sand while at the same time smiling for the cameras" attitude, and i'll just do what i do best. needlin'. i aint' stupid and it really ain't a crank. i'm just tired of what i see as really poor decision making. Lark.

exactly, the desires of a few guys were taken in order to pacify some folks that were going to ask for limits on lions, before they asked for it. not a decision based on anything to do with biology. nor did it have anything to do with "creating opportunity". instead it took away 25% of the lion season. and who suffers? not the lions, not the hound doggers, not the huggers. nope, it was the deer and the hunters that might have a chance at shooting a lion in those closed months. azgfd has some real hard choices to make and i don't see em wanting to make the right ones. they make the one that will pacify the folks that will squall the loudest and will make the most money. while leaving the wildlife, and the folks that truly care about it and provide the dollars to fund the programs, on the outside looking in. in wildlife management, the things that concern the wildlife should be paramount. they should come first. time and time again, that isn't the case. whatever makes the most money and causes the least amount of bad press is what seems to be the bigger concern. i said 30 years ago, the first time i saw a rocky bighorn south of eagle creek, that they would eventually mix with the desert sheep. and now they have. and there is no plan whatsoever to take care of the problem. and it's a pretty simple fix. is the azgfd oblivious of it? i hope not. you guys spend more time in the field than even me. i hope you've seen it coming. this elk deal has been going on for 30 years too. but i don't see any attempt to fix it. only ways to profit from it, at the expense of the deer and other wildlife. before that it was the lion/deer problem on the strip, allowing trapping to die all over the state, getting on the wolf wagon with the huggers, etc, etc, etc. there have been some many crummy decisions made by the azgfd that it ain't funny. and they were always made for the same reasons. pacify huggers and money. same with the doves. say what you want, but they will eventually cross with the native animals. hide and watch. and the azgfd's intial reaction to them was to limit it. probably didn't make any difference, but just the fact that they did is a convenient way for a joe hunter like me to come up with a good example of a trend that bugs me. wildlife management should be the azgfd's #1 goal. not hunter opportunity or the bottom line. if wildlife can be managed and still have enough animals for folks to hunt and angle, then you can worry about the other stuff. what i see is a concerted effort to enhance the bottom line, while skirting around anti's protests as much as possible, with the welfare of the wildlife coming in a distant 3rd. "opportunity" is great. i appreciate the work that goes into creative ways to provide it. but i don't see all this opportunity doing much more than selling more tags and adding to the stress on the deer herd. crunch the numbers and count the beans all you want, there are only so many game animals and they aren't livestock. they aren't a commodity to be sold. show me some real effort to balance things and do it in a way that is based on science, and i'll be on the wagon with ya. but keep up the "head in the sand while at the same time smiling for the cameras" attitude, and i'll just do what i do best. needlin'. i aint' stupid and it really ain't a crank. i'm just tired of what i see as really poor decision making. Lark.

if it's a tie they're gonna tie their left wrists together and give em each a knife. if i was mccain i'd defer to palin in the knife fight with obama. she obviously knows how to use one and obama is used to folks cuttin' his food for him and feedin' it to him. Lark.

ok, 3 bar, i've got u27 on my mind right now. i knew if i kept at you long enough you'd talk yourself into a corner. you say that removing predators causes the deer population to shoot up? i agree. fully. 100%. and i agree that it isn't feasable to remove all the predators. nor is it a responsible thing to do. in fact it is completey irresponsible. predators are a very important part of the outdoors. they are integral. removing them is like removing a gear out of a drive train. it doesn't work anymore. seems like i was told, many years when i was in college, they did something similar to that many years before on the kaibab and it had a disastrous affect on the deer, because they ate themselves into starvation. sort of like the lions did on the strip some years back, when they killed off the deer to the point that there wasn't even a deer season for awhile. but tell me, where does shutting down lion season, even if for a few months in the summer, just because guys don't like to run their hounds then, help even one thing? at least as far game management? even if a minimal number of lions are taken, it would be a help. dang sure wouldn't hurt. if a guy finds a kill, it ain't a big deal to catch a lion with hounds, no matter what the weather is like. or sit on it and shoot it when it returns for another meal. and it takes the gun right out of the hands of anyone who might just bump into one while he's out doing whatever. unless you're actually going to argue that our lion population is too low? or even just right. removing even a couple lions from some areas could relieve the deer herd tremendously. look at what just a couple lions are doing to sheep in the kofas right now. looks to me like this new law really helps outfitters because it saves a few lions that might be taken by anyone who got lucky, for when it's a little cooler and they feel like turnin' the hounds loose and have a client, while possibly denying joe hunter a chance at a lion because the season is closed. that or he can be an outlaw and shoot it anyway. i really don't know for sure, scientifically, that there are too many lions. but i know i see more sign now than at anytime in my life, and i've spent a lotta time in lion country. and i do know that lions are one sneaky sucker and they are real hard to get a handle on, if you ever lose it. and i do know that with everything else that we have stressing wildlife, especially deer, a few less lions would not be a bad thing. as far doves, who cares? i just like to use that one. the asians will interbreed with whitewings and mournings and we'll have a bastard buncha doves soon anyway. sorta like the sheep. Lark.

you have 3 full months of elk hunting, a lot of it with bows, which isn't a good way to remove animals. and there are very few permits. a few folks get to hunt, but very few elk get taken. i'm talking about going in and shooting them all. get rid of all of them. have an open season. they are a detriment to the habitat and the native animals in those areas. do it before it gets worse. and you best do something now, not tomorrow, about the rocky sheep. gonna be a cryin' shame when the b&c no longer allows entries because they've crossed with desert sheep. manage the wildlife. what i said about trapping is true. i read more than one article about it that stated that the azgfd was all for outlawing trapping and every warden i talked to echoed that. it was well known that the last time trapping went to a vote that the azgfd did not support continuation of the program. probably not a big deal, like i said, because of poor fur prices and the politcal correctness of not wearing fur. it ain't a money makin' deal anymore. i guess bobcats still bring some bucks. but trapping did help control coyotes and more than a few lions were accidently caught. and we do have a lot of coyotes and lions now. and putting a closed season on lions is not helping that situation. say what ya want, i was involved in it deeply and was sorely dissapointed in the direction the azgfd took on the situation. as far as ignoring data, just last year you did a big predator study on the 4 bar that showed that predator controll needed to be stepped up. and right in the newspaper article about it the azgfd spokesman said that becasue of political pressure from anti's that there would probably be little done with the data. and if you're gonna be a proactive, do something about the desert elk and the rocky sheep, now. a few years ago when these asian doves started showing up the first thing the azgd did was put a season and limit on em. they retracted it later, but the first reaction was to set a season and limits. there are too many glaring problems with wildlife management in Az. for folks to just sit by. you can flower things up all you want, but we have some real problems that needed dealt with yesterday, not tomorrow and the longer folks wait, the more the wildlife of this state suffers. like i said, i love to hunt elk. there are few things i'm better at. but they don't need to be in the desert and the longer they're allowed to stay in the desert, the worse off the deer are. this state is divided and subdivided and sub-sub dividied into many small areas. by highways, freeways, fences, towns, cities, canals, industrial complexes, reservations, etc, etc. and each area between those dividers needs managed as it's own little habitat. there isn't any wilderness anymore. we have what we call wilderness areas, but they aren't big enough to be true wilderness. everything needs good management and the management needs to be ahead of everything else. you can't wait until a problem becomes critical before you work on it. Lark.

you're exactly right desertbull. i have some nonres friends who apply for elk every year and complain about having to buy a license. i always tell em to apply for javelina and come quail hunting. if you already have a license, quail is free. and a javelina is a quite a trophy for someone from a state that doesn't have em. with a little work, a bear is real possible too. i don't have a hunt that i drew a tag for until mid november, but i will be hunting almost every weekend until then. and maybe catch a fish or 2 also. Lark.

cool. the guys i was with got one that will go in the 83 to 85 range. the other one was ok, but no record. good job. Lark.

good deal. it's a stinkin' shame when huggers would rather let animals die off than allow sportsmen to help conserve them. good on all involved. Lark.

that's gotta be a first.............. that is funny. i bet the bear was as scared as the biker. wonder if he crapped all over thing like they always do? the bear that is. Lark.

you're correct, sorta, on the lion deal. a couple lion hunters, not all of em by any stretch, wanted it that way and got enough folks to go along with it that they got it through. but the reason they did it, from what i was told first hand, was to try to keep the anti's from wanting even more restriction. instead of getting tough and telling the anti's to shutup. this may be a good thing for hound dog lion hunters. it's too hot in the summer to run dogs. but what if joe hunter sees a lion in the closed season? it not only takes an opportunity away to take a really desired animal, but it also takes away a chance to remove a lion from the woods. i'm in the woods a lot. i've spent as much time as about anyone trailing hounds. i see what lions can do. Az. has a problem with them and anything that restricts taking them is not a good thing for the rest of the wildlife. they're a neat animal. a true hunter. but there are too many. if the guys who instigated this heard some of the things i've heard said about em, by lion hunters, after this happened, well they wouldn't be too happy. propostion 200 was the first time trapping was voted on and trappers won. the next time it was voted on the azgfd was for outlawing it, and the trappers lost. i don't remember the propostion number. the azgfd was part and party to outlawing trapping on public land. seems they didn't like to administer the program and a few other things. i had a lotta game wardens tell me as much. i read it in the papers. it's well known that they let it go down. with the price of furs, it's sort of a moot point. i don't think a lot of folks would go to the expense and take the time to really get after it, when there wasn't a monetary return. but the azgfd didn't do anything to keep trapping from going away and trapping did have a beneficial affect on coyote control and it is one more privaledge that we won't get back. something that we are sorely in need of if for no other reason than predator control. the azgfd, in knee jerk fashion, let a buncha anti's who were "offended" because some guys tried to organize an "Extreme Predator Contest" (can't recall the exact name) stepped in and passed a law, after the fact, that not only stopped this contest, but outlawed all other contests. a law that was promplty shot down by the Az. state supreme court. and a buncha funds were wasted on it. a law that had the potential to outlaw any kind of contest that involved taking wildlife. including fishing derbies and big buck contests. as i recall, the premise of organizing the extreme contest was because of concern about skyrocketting predator numbers because trapping had been outlawed. this was about the dumbest thing i've ever seen the azgfd do. now there are tight restrictions on predator contests. that wouldn't be there if the azgfd hadn't jerk their knee in the first place. azgfd's goal is to not let an invasive animals (elk) numbers get any higher? ok. why not shoot em all out of areas they don't belong? sure seems to me that the azgfd has turned the elk herd into livestock and each animal has a price on it. seems to me that the difference in the price of a deer tag and elk tag means quite a bit to the dept. maybe it's just me, but it sure looks odd. i hunt deer in a crappy place in the desert. every year i see more bull elk and rocky bighorn rams than i do mule deer bucks. neither is native to that country. in fact, if you wan't to get right down to it, neither are native to Az. i really like to hunt elk. i'm a really good elk hunter. but why can't we keep em in the mountains? why can't we shoot em out of the places they don't need to be? maybe take up a plan like kentucky has with their herd? there is no need to let elk proliferate in an area that doesn't need anymore competition, especially when their presence puts stress on an already precarious deer population. and the sheep deal? well, if what happens like looks like what's gonna happen....... well an animal that is as important and unique to Az. as desert sheep shouldn't have to become a bastard crossbreed because steps weren't taken in time to prevent it. i really do appreciate the good things that competent wildlife bioligists do. i really get yanked when the azgfd refuses to use the data they spend a bunch of money paying the biologists to collect and when they refuse to listen to the experience and knowledge of the outdoors public. and when they continue to do things that aren't in the best interest of wildlife and the people who truly care about it. and when they pass laws to restrict outdoors people in order to pacify anti's. like it or not, but the azgfd is at a crossroads. and they've been parked there for awhile. they have to choose one road and one road only. can't run down the bar ditch. hope you guys choose the right road. Lark.

i agree with what you've just said. but the last time it was that way was 1983, by my recollection. we live in a desert. we never have a drought, it just never rains much here. the plants and animals are used to it and know how to survive. a little extra rain in any given year, if it is at the right time, can have some affect, short term, on deer numbers. but not enough to make much difference in permit numbers. but that's always the first thing that's pointed out. "we haven't had much rain lately". that applies for the last couple thousand years. the weather can't be controlled. quit using it as an excuse. but there are factors that can be controlled that can benefit wildlife. i don't see the azgfd willing to make the tough decisions that need to be made in order to get it done. i'm all for anything that promotes hunting and fishing in a good way. getting kids interested is a good thing. but you need to get those kid's folks interested in it too. there are lot of adults out there that need exposed to the outdoor life, so they can bring their kids along in that style. but i don't know if having some sort of deer season going on for months at a time is good for the deer. looks to me like it has to apply a lot of stress. but like i said, i don't know. but i know how it looks. here's some suggestions for ya. quit taking the side of anti's whenever predator control or this BS of "endangered species" becomes an issue. we now have a partial season on lions. for as long as i can remember, it's been open year round. the azgfd actively campaigned to outlaw trapping on public land. anytime someone wants to have even a simple varmint calling contest, you guys step in and stop it. you've bought into the wolf and condor deal like it's a good thing. all this was done to the detriment of hunters and anglers in order to pacify anti's. in every case listed, the underlieing reason was to keep anti's from screaming. and i could probably think of a dozen other pertinent examples. and get rid of some of these elk in non traditional elk country. the cedars in u2, the desert in u28, the kaibab, the hay fields in u31 & 32. these places aren't elk country and they have really placed a lot of stress on the few deer in these areas. shoot em out. every one of em. i know elk tags bring much more money than deer tags, into the azgfd till. but you need to do what is right for the deer. these depredation hunts are a start. but the limited opportunity hunts you have in 2, 28, 31 and 32 for example don't do anything to alleviate the problem and in fact promote it. they are at the wrong time of year, there are too few permits and limiting some hunts to archery only doesn't do anything but sell tags. there aren't enough elk taken to matter. and you best do something about the advancing rocky mountain bighorns while you're at it. well, that is if you get at it. just heard the other day that rocky and desert sheep have been discovered in the same herd. and they are capable of cross breeding. what's that gonna do to our desert herd when that takes place? is b&c gonna have a new species called a rocky desert sheep? just wondering if there is a plan to deal with this or not? later, Lark.

well, you managed to skirt both those questions pretty easy. what i'm trying to get is someone to admit that average rainfall for Az. is very low, always. below average and above average rainfall is also very low, relatively. we just don't get much rain here. doesn't matter if we have an exceptionally wet or dry year, there isn't a lot of difference. but people seem to always want to use that as a reason, or excuse, for problems with game numbers. while rain really can be the main reason for whatever game numbers happen to hover around, it doesn't have a lot of effect from year to year, because we just don't get much rain. we get so little rain and the difference between whatever normal is and whatever abnormal is, isn't enough to have a big effect on game animals, for at least several seasons. it does hammer small game and in a hurry, but doesn't seem to have a big effect on deer unless there is really low rainfall for a long time. the browse in the desert is used to no rain. the game in the desert is used to no rain. go back east or north to a state that has high average rain and usually has a lot of feed and have a couple dry years and can be real devastating because the game numbers can be real high and all the sudden the feed is gone,the game numbers are high, and they starve. doesn't happen a lot, but it happens. out here, we never have much feed from year to year and the game is used to it. when we have a dry year it ain't much different than a wet year and it doesn't have much of an effect from year to year on game. the last wet year Az. had was 83. i know it was wet because i floated an elk out of big lake canyon in my row boat. we've had a couple since then that were normal or maybe even above normal, for a year, but nothing like 83.. but when it rains in Az. is more important than how much it rains. and a couple above average years doesn't mean much, because they don't even have that much rain in em. do ya get my drift? seems that every year i read something from the azgfd that says that rainfall has something to do with why permits are where they're at, when the difference between a wet, dry or normal ain't a lot. predators, overhunting, nonnative animal introduction and what looks to a layman like me like maybe poor decisions, appear to have more affect than rain. anyway, that's the way it looks to me, but what do i know? as far as the predator comment, i'll go read your deal again, but i didn't read one word about predators in it before. maybe i missed it. and as far as the permits for u22n, well, what can i say. just seems to me that doubling the permits in an area when there is absolutely no kill data to use, seems a little extreme. Lark. by the way, thanks for the response.

my house is paid for. it could use a new set o' tires tho. Lark.

is it just me, or did my question get dodged again? Lark.

if it's a GM, it's worth a bunch. generall motors m-1 carbines bring a premium. i'd say a grand plus. when i was a kid, they couldn't give m-1 carbines away. now even a beat up rusty one is worth about $600. if it's a GM, take to someone you can trust and don't let some gun dealer screw ya on it. or take it to a gun show. there is one soon. walk around with a sign on your back and tell em it's a GM, you'll get a lotta offers. during WWII, GM, underwood typwriter, singer sewing machine and a bunch of other manufacturing companies were pressed in to service building weapons and other stuff for the the war effort. any of the weapons made by these non-firearms companies are worth a bunch. try to buy a .45 auto made by singer or underwood and you'll see what i mean. Lark.

who makes the best range finder? leupold makes the ones that figger the angle for ya and all that. but i've heard they are real labor intensive to figger out. bushnell makes one that looks pretty good. goes to like 1500 yds and all that. figgers the angle too. but it's a bushnell and they don't have a super reputation. i've had good luck with the bushnell stuff i have had, but anyway. leica makes a good one but i've bought good horses with a saddle for less than they want for one o' them things. anybuddy have any comments? lemee know what your experience with em is and lets have us a discussion. Lark.

well, i was gonna vote for mccain anyway, if for no other reason than just because he ain't obama. but as an outdoorsman, a hunter, a shooter and a guy that really cares about what is right, i'm purty excited about this gal he picked as his running mate. any woman that ain't skeered o' crawdads and will shoot an m-16 with some accuracy is ok. on a strictly outdoor basis, Sarah Palin is the person hunters, anglers, shooters and general outdoor folks have needed in office for a long time. her other positive conservative attributes are just icing, for outdoor folk. whatever liberal short fallings mccain has, she makes up for. her daughter being pregnant just shows she has kids. how many folks do you know who've dealt with the same thing? how many of em had to deal with it in the worldwide press? i read in detail about her dealings with her drunken highway patrol ex-brother in law, and it looks to me like she did what needed to be done. his boss wouldn't fire him, so she fired his boss. this is a tough gal and i'm even happier with the choice than i was when i first heard it. read the article. Lark, http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/...icle1640770.ece

well, maybe he ain't gonna reply. my theory was that i saw a lotta uso action up there. it was apparant they applied a lotta folks for that unit. like they useta do in 27. anyway, i figgerd with the cap on nonresident tags for any given unit, they upped the tags in order to get more o' them big nonresident dollars. but that's just my theory. and until someone shows me some real data as to why they did, that's what i'll believe. i don't know how they could arrive at the numbers they did, without any success data to use. the Az elk herd is pretty much livestock that is being managed to finance the rest of the azgfd, with the deer herd paying a big price. Lark.

i hunted with an ol' model 94 for several years, before i grew up into a .270. i bought it used at talley and son's for $42. got it and a box of shells with 11 unshot ones it. it was made in 1928. i can remember always wishing i could put a scope on it. a .30/30 is a deadly thing for sure, in the hands of a real hunter anyway. i've killed a buncha stuff with mine. deer, elk, bear, lion, javelinas, coyotes. they ain't a .270, but they ain't a cork gun niether. i'd rather have one o' them than a 7mm/08, that's for sure. Lark.

who all is headed out after the speedy pronghorn this weekend? what's the outlook look like? seen any good ones? i'm gonna go to 2a with some pals. hopefully we'll find something worth the wait and then they can shoot straight after we find em. 2a has changed a lot in the past few years. lots of what used to be 2a is now rez and lots of places that weren't locked up, are. my kids are gonna go with a buddy to u1. they haven't seen much as far as big ones. but i imagine they'll drag somethin' outta there worth the work. anybody else got a tag or goin' with somebody who does? goat tags are hard to come by. hope everyone does well and is succesfull. and remember, doctors recommend that you don't smoke, but if you do, smoke em with a .270. Lark.

sorry, but the rules are real specific. the vp has to be a human. Lark.

ok, i have a question or two. well i have about a million of em, but i'll try and hold it to 2 simple ones. 1. why do folks, especially wildlife professionals, always act like dry years are something out of the norm in Az. and use it as an excuse for declining game numbers? this is ARIZONA. it's a desert. it's always dry. that's why we have cactus and mesquites instead of coastal cedars and moss. sometimes we have a wet year, but those are the out of ordinary years. the dry years are the normal years. i also have a hard time with any type of deer data that says absolutely nothing about predator numbers. you guys do know we have soyotes and lions don't ya? 2. i asked this question of an azgfd guy a couple years ago and he wouldn't answer me. i hunted in 22n with my cousin a couple years back. i can't remember the year for sure, maybe 2006? he had the 2nd of 2 late hunts. saw a lot of elk, they got a couple, had a good time. this was the last year that we had to apply for deer, elk, pronghorn, sheep, etc all at the same time. the draw for elk for the next year was the first year with the early drawing for elk and pronghorn. seems like the numbers for permits were out within days of the end of the season. lo and behold, they had doubled the tags for one of the u22 late bull hunts and had over a 50% increase for the other u22n late hunt. what kind of data did the azgfd use to come up with the increases in permits? it dang sure wasn't from the harvest mailers they send out, because the permit numbers were set before they were ever mailed. there was no time to do any kind of good survey with ariel or land based methods. just exactly what kind of data was used? i have my own conspiracy theory that i will always assume is correct, because i'm a smart guy and can make 2+2= whatever i want it to. anyway, this is something i've been wondering about for, well since it happened. only reason i noticed it was because i was thinking of applying for that hunt. i wait with anticipation for answers. Lark.

cabelas makes a scope pre-calibrated for leverevolution ammo. the new kinda pointy ammo that is safe in a tube magazine. i'd get one o' them and just use that ammo. check it out. Lark.

some guys i work with got their trailer broke into and lost a buncha stuff in 36b last year. hi dollar bino's, several guns, all their food. they also had a face to face confrontation with some illegals that ended up with guns bein' pointed. be careful. Lark.

if i get elected the first thing i'm gonna do is lock up gamehauler for, well, somethin'. and i'm gonna give myself a "presidents" tag for everthing. good for anything, anywhere, anytime. and outlaw 7mm/08's. and see i can get casey some professional help. at least with the banjo. and i'm gonna have javelina surprise and grits at my victory dinner and zztop and wierd al yankovich will play. dang, i'm sorta likin' this deal. i can see myself as havin' a buncha fun. the rest o' are in for a hard time tho. now, who can i git for a runnin' mate????????? Lark.