.270

i've only met pete one time. so i can't have a real informed opinion. he has a real grating, caustic way of talking and has an adversarial relationship with the commission. and he feels like his way is the only way. big deal, so do i. i just thought the statement about her being young and having kids was way off base and counterproductive and hurt the cause and his standing. there's a time a place and a method for political incorrectness, and that wasn't it. and the papers are always gonna print what has the most controversy. if you notice, the article didn't give much of a hint as to why they really didn't approve her. it's apparent that there were other problems with the nomination, or it woulda passed. i can't ever remember em not approving one. from what i got from her words about not being a hunter, i sorta think she's a little anti. and a little anti is a whole bunch, to me. but i will say this about pete, he has passion. and if he wouldn't have did what ever he did (all we're gonna hear about is the young mother statement, from the paper) she probably woulda got rubber stamped. he spends as much time bein' a pain in the butts of the commissioners as anyone, and unfortunately, that's seems to be what they respond too. that and the strings that go from napalitano's fingers to their appendages. we need more pete's. just need to choose words better. the way things go anymore, you can say a million things right, and say one thing wrong, or just in the wrong way, and the one that's wrong will have more to do with what happens the all the right ones. in fact, if they find out a way to weasel her back into contention, i'll bet it'll have something to do with that statement. Lark.

it's gonna be a long summer. but one way to look at it is that fire is a good thing in the long run. even in the short run, if we get a little rain soon. fire is nature, just like rain, snow, wind, temperature, etc. it's hard to see and i hate to see folks get burned out, but until the weather cycle changes, we're going to see a lot of it. it ain't the end of the world, just a way that nature fixes itself. Lark.

here is the formula the azgfd uses to justify no waiting period. 44,000x$5=$220,000. just for elk. personally, i don't care. it's pretty much proven mathematically, that after awhile, bonus points, waiting periods, etc. accumulate to the point that they don't do much good after a few years. i'm gonna apply every year, for everything that i'm elligible for. if i ever become one o' the guys that everyone else gets pissed at for regularly getting elk or pronghorn tags, that's even better. i love pissin' folks off. they raised the set aside for max bonus points to 20% and it got rid of a lot of the max points guys, at least for elk. in a couple years they'll hafta raise it to 30% to make it work again, and on and on. there are only so many tags in Az. and as long as we have drought + poor management + more and more applicants, it'll = lower % of chances for everyone to get a permit. (how'dya like my equations? first time i used algebra since college) a waiting period would do some good, for awhile. after a couple years, the numbers catch up to it. be nice if someone could develop a plan that would work, but the only thing that will truly increase hunting opportunity is more animals so they can allow more permits. i've been applying for sheep for over 30 years. no tags. i've had one Az. pronghorn permit. that took 26 years and was 12 years ago. i've had a few elk permits. actually quite a few. but most of em were back in the early 80's when you could usually count on an archery tag over the counter after the other 3 draws were done. but outside those glory years, i've had a half dozen or so elk tags. all bull tags too. mostly late rifle, but i don't care what season it is. i've known some guys that i wanted to burn their house down because they'd get drawn for bull elk 5 outta 6 years or some dang deal. even that hard luck bullwidgeon got 2 real good elk tags in a row. but i sorta think they feel sorry for him for that birthmark he has between his ears and above his neck. it's the luck o' the draw, and after a few years of every new fad program, it's the luck o' the draw all over again. even colorado's preference point system has been packed up solid with folks with max points. some units are up to like 20 years out, if you start now. anyway, i hope i get drawn for everything i put in for. actually, if they'll just give me a sheep, pronghorn and elk tag, they can keep their deer tag. i already have a primo deer tag for outta state. and besides, starting in 3 years i will be guaranteed bull elk, pronghorn and 2 deer permits every year. unless montana changes their rules. good luck to all the good guys. Lark.

check it out. cabelas on the july 28th. http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/060...belas06-ON.html

now dat's funny. actually, that ain't a bad idear. Lark.

i can't b'lieve you fellers are findin' negative things about us gettin' a cabelas. taxes, gas, too far away, too many people. c'mon boys, WE'RE GETTIN' A CABELAS!!! it's like a holy place to woodsmen. once yer there, you'll fergit about any misgivings. and just like goin' in a casino, only take what you can afford to spend, cuz you'll spend it all. onliest they're missin' is a rollycoaster. Lark.

even a bassackward state like nevada has been doin' it for about 30 years. Lark.

green aliens? only aliens i ever seen in 27 wuz sorta brown lookin'. and the tags are decreasing? i don't pay much attention to the cow tags, but haven't the bull tags increased a little lately? they went way up in u1. i do know this, per the usfw info, there aren't enough deer and elk in 27 to support the number of wolf/dogs that they want to have there. but that's a different story. i think that moving both the early hunts and the late bull back a week will improve the hunting, especially in u27. it will really improve the u1 archery and early rifle hunt. don't know if it's weather patterns or just the way o' the season, but the rut seems to be a little later and stretched out a little longer than it was some years back. i know last october it was still hot during the early hunt in u1. whatever the deal is, i'll take any bull tag they wanna give me in either one o' them units. Lark.

didn't get to hunt in 27 last year. my oldest boy helped a friend get a nice 6x7 on the late hunt, from an ugly canyon off the rim. did get to hunt a friend during the early rifle hunt in u1 tho. didn't seem like the cows were really very hot to me. the guy we were with shot a 360 bull. it was one of 14 bulls after one cow. seems to me like the rut is sorta drawn out anymore and you don't get those 8-10 days of extremely hot elk like it seemed to be in years past. and the really big bulls are completely nocturnal. never make a peep after the east horizon starts to show a little light. never saw a really big bull in the early hunt, but did see a couple real thugs on the late hunt in u1. didn't get em tho. one that a guy i know missed was shot a couple days later by some flatlander and it would probably net over 370. really a good one. 27 has some really big bulls. usually ya see em about 3 miles away in a snowy canyon in november. they don't seem to show up during the rut except at night. Lark.

i can't even think of a reply for that mess. what a cryin' shame. Lark.

i was told awhile back that pronghorn has the worst odds of all big game in Az. even less than bighorn. once the odds get below 1%, they list them all as the same. bighorn has better odds because of the high price of the permit. anyway, it took me 26 years to get my one and only Az. pronghorn permit. that was 12 years ago. i know guys that have had a half dozen rifle permits in the same time. i'm just unlucky. at least in the goat tag deal. i'm still real good lookin' and smart. with hunters safety and the habitual hunter point, i oughta have 13 or 14 points i think. i'd say rather than apply for the unit that has the best odds of drawing, i'd apply for the unit that had the best bucks in it. seeing as how you may only get one permit in your whole life, make it a good one. my poor ol' dad has never had an Az. pronghorn permit. nieither has my uncle. my aunt got one last year, after over 30 years off applying. but somebody has to get drawn. do a little home work and roll the dice. Lark.

i'll make a prediction. it won't be long till you have to buy a shed hunting license. or have to pay so much a pound for the sheds you do find. in some way the azgfd will find a way to make a buck off it. guaranteed. this deadhead crap is just that too, crap. one warden doesn't care. another one cites folks for felonies that don't exist on the books. and then they want folks to "cooperate" with em? wierd. Lark.

this is too funny. now she wants respect. heck, she might still be able to lock the place up from the joint tho. sure be a shame. turkey creek is some fine country and the road in from winkleman is one rough sob. be nice to have a season where a guy didn't have to worry about a locked gate. Lark. http://www.eacourier.com/articles/2006/05/...n/opinion03.txt

hey K, i don't know if you know it, but she's in jail right now too. guess she musta wrote the letter from there. got busted for counterfitting and spreading around bogus century notes. seems like she ended up with around a year in the pokey. she's writing because folks can pretty much have the run of her place while she's makin' license plates. Lark.

the tooth requirement has been in effect for years. sometimes they would want one, sometimes they didn't. they use a little premolar that isn't even attached to the jaw. they fall off when you clean the skull anyway. last bear i shot, i called in, in u1. phoned in the kill and that's all they wanted. said i didn't need to send a tooth, even tho the reg called for it. every other bear i've ever shot, they wanted a tooth. even before it was required, i've had em still ask for a tooth. the law states that you are supposed to eat bears. i'm sorta thinking that maybe they are going to make an effort at enforcement. lotsa guys would kill a bear and leave the carcass in the canyon. if you're serious about a rug or other mount tho, skin it in a hurry and get the skull out. bears will sour and slip the hair faster than anything. Lark.

aw c'mon '06, you know it's funny. i got a nasty gram from the "boy" this morning. no need to reply to that bs. back to the ranch. i really do feel that a lot of the reason the folks that own land near the border and get it trashed on a regular basis don't get much press is because they are considered "ranchers" and ranchers are considered bad. at least by the left. some years back there was a fairly in depth article about the trials of some of the folks in this same area. one old woman said that she quit locking her house because they would just break the door down. she said she got used to not even getting up from the tv when a bunch of em came in and helped theirselves to the contents of the 'frigerator. purty sad. Lark.

BANG, BANG, BANG. that's the sound of me banging my head against the wall. c'mon little boy, ain't ya never heard o' sarcasm? it's when ya sorta make fun o' somethin'. never mind. if all the bp's are the same intellect (smart) as you, no wonder ya never catch nobody. sheesh, what a maroon. ok guys, in case ya didn't know, sometimes i poke a little fun at hopeless situations. in case anyone else is confuses, i'm on the ranchers side on this deal. Lark.

alls i see is a red x. is that like a bullwidgeon chromosome? Lark.

the key word is "ranch". ranchers are bad, mmmkay. cows are bad, mmmkay. Lark.

the fall pig hunt makes absolutely no sense to me. put some pig hunters in the way of deer hunters? i don't get it. some years back the u27 late deer season overlapped the late bull elk hunt. man, that was a joke. it's not a lot of permits, but still seems sorta ignernt. moving the dec. whitetail tags to november is gonna backfire. i think a lotta guys are better hunters than the azgfd thinks. putting a lot of hunters on the same hunt isn't going to decrease the kill numbers. i'm betting it increases them. now the deer have drought, lions and hunter saturation to deal with. i do see a lot of procedural and regulation changes, so read the fine print. they're gonna fine print us outta the woods i think. they did raise the stinkin' mountain sheep tags on a couple hunts. from 2 to 3. 50% increase. maybe no i can use alla them sheep points i have. the lion regs seem to be a little more cornfusing that before and i see that both bear and lion killers hafta check in the carcass, physically. can't just call in anymore. so ya best pack out the meat, like the law says. oh yeah, and eat it. bear meat, things that make ya go BBLLUUUHHHH. only way to fix this is get a new governor fellers. this commission is outta control and doesn't listen to anything but each other. i see that they finally put a picture o' shroufe on the cover o' the regs tho. Lark.

looks like the gate'll be open for a year or so. http://www.eacourier.com/articles/2006/04/...news/news02.txt

right on packhorse. walk around with one in the pipe and the safety off. if that's what ya wanna do. when i'm in a place where i think what i'm after might stand up, you bet i have one in the barrel. my thumb on the safety too. sometimes the safety is off. oh yeah, and i shoot at runnin' game too. straight away, straight on, quartering away and towards me, broadside. close, far, i take whatever shot i get. i also have one in the barrel when i hunt birds. if i have a double, i have one in both barrels. never shot anybody yet. i mean other than when i was tryin' to shoot em. if you use a gun right, it won't hurt anyone. and if it's legal, it's ethical. and don't ever put me in the same boat with ya pilgrim. we ain't anything alike. guaranteed. and i'm real glad about it. Lark.

there ya go, usin' that 2 dollar word again red, ethics. just because me, you, pilgrimboy, or whoever feel that folks have some sort of limitation on their shooting ability doesn't give anyone the right to limit them. all ethics are is your opinion of something. you (and i'm using 'you' to refer to everyone, not just redrabbit) feel that someone has done something "unethical". as long as it's legal, at least when it comes to hunting, it's ethical. you may not agree with it, but it's ethical. that's the way it has to be. can you imagine what would happen if all the sudden game wardens were also ethics cops? if there was a legal range you had to stay within? "sorry sir, the breeze was above the ethical limit when you made that shot, we're gonna take your license for "ethical" reasons" even tho ya guessed the wind right and hit it between the eyes. check out the baiting issue. it's legal, it's ok. but i can still tease folks about it. but it's ok. if we keep slingin' around this "ethics" deal, pretty soon someone is gonna try and legislate ethics. then you'll have someone interpreting ethics as their opinion. folks won't be able to hunt because they can't shoot good enough or they can't afford a scope or don't have the kind of bow someone feels they oughta, etc. i've read right here on this sight that folks felt it was "unethical" to hunt and not own a range finder. others say that anyone that shoots over 40 yards with a bow is "unethical". then others have a yardage limit that they feel is unethical to stretch with a rifle. if there is one thing that the Azgfd has done a good job on it is keeping hunting method rules simple. any centerfire rifle or handgun is legal for big game. any bow over 40 lbs and with a broadhead over 7/8" is legal. if it's too dark to see, don't shoot. that's about it. they leave the rest of it up to the hunters. they know that hunters are smart enough to use adequate weapons at reasonable distances. they know that after time and experience, hopefully experience handed down by someone who has some, most hunters will turn out ok. they know that hunters are smart enough to take the shell outta the chamber before they get in the truck. and smart enought to know when it's too dark to shoot. some states have so many rules and regulations concerning calibers, draw weight, legal shooting light, etc. that you can't hardly be legal if you want to. i say do what ya wanna do and let holier than thou, smug, stuck on theirselves psuedo-snipers take their little posts, that are aimed at starting a fight, somewhere else. i was raised by one of the greatest snipers and military marksmen that ever was. i can shoot. whoever pilgrimguy is, he would be in a world o' hurt if he was really serious about packin' a target and lettin' me fling lead at it. and i'm an old guy with an old rifle. some o' you kids with these hotrod rifles, range finders, bipods, dial in scopes, etc., would probly splatter this dumb joker all over the place. every peta member thinks everything we do as hunters unethical. we each owe it to ourselves to hunt hard and be good representative of what we feel a hunter should be. the guy that throws his junk in his truck the evening before the season and heads out with a .30/30 and only gets a buck every 7th year has just as much right to the woods as someone with a half million bucks invested in his outfit and hunts 300 days a year. lets hunt. Lark.

hey pilgrimboy, i'll take ya up on that "you carry the target deal". there are some of us that really, really can shoot. and you can run as fast as you want. i get to pick the canyon. and i won't pack yer carcass out. you'll hafta make them arrangements. Lark.

first off, "ethics" ain't nothin' but somebodies opinion. ethical=legal. if a guy want's to blast away or make precision shots, it's up to him. i don't care. they're the one puttin' in the time in the field. whover this joker is, he's just tryin' to get folks riled. as for me, i'll shoot as far as i want, as many times as i want, with whatever gun i want, with whatever bullet i want, at whaever i want, and don't give a dang who says different. in hunting conditions, i'm the best shot i know. if i miss, i miss. if i hit one and have to track it down, i track it down. whatever it takes. i never don't shoot, because i'm afraid some dude will think i'm unethical. heck, ever peta creep out there thinks any shot ya take is unethical and any time ya kill somethin' is unethical. don't talke ethics. ya can't legislate em. i hafta turn my head and shudder at some of the stuff i see folks do, but i ain't gonna judge anyone who is hunting legally. well o' course, except them bait sitters. that just ain't right . Lark.