donniedent

uh... it was 98% based on tag shuffeling around. You might want to go look that one up. When time permits I'll find ya the info. cmc You don't have to look it up, I remember the instance you're talking about. Well... you have a good point. Still doesn't change the fact that G&F is managing hunters more than the wildlife and that their decisions sure don't make alot of good sense. They need to take some lessons from Colorado or Wyoming, shoot Wyoming doesn't have much more water as of late than we do and they have a great deer herd. Donnie

I don't doubt that some have that attitude. I for one do not. I don't even hunt the units that are proposed, not regularly anyway. I probably wouldn't even be bothered if in the past 5 years I heard anything from G&F on what they were planning to do to rehab the muley populations. How is that the WT populations have stayed stable and muleys are down bacause of the rain????? Is there only a drought where the muleys are standing??? And I'm talking about units where they share habitat. All we hear from them is "we need rain", well I'm sorry there are other things that we can do to help. The possible reason you don't hear noise about cow tags is because it makes good management sense. Theres a valid reason for it. I don't even hear much noise when they drop bull tags. I mean there is grumbling but not surveys like this one. This isn't about lowering tags, its about shuffling things around for some strange reason. They aren't even following their own protocol! If I'm wrong I'm ALWAYS the first to admit it. If someone can show me where I'm wrong on this I'll listen. I have NO problem being wrong, thats how we learn. cmc, I can promise you this isn't about horns for me brother, I'm tired of seeing the dept. do things that don't make any management sense and we as hunters are the ones that suffer. Thank goodness this won't have any ill affects on the deer herds. At least I don't think it will. Donnie

Oops, I guess you're right, I forgot about the price hike. cmc, How the heck are we being greedy??? We just want changes to make good management sense. This isn't about tags! Like I said before and the part you must have missed, I don't care if they put it to a draw and there is a valid wildlife management reason for it. THIS DECISION IS NOT BASED ON WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT!!!! You disagree??? Prove me wrong! Prove to me how this will benefit wildlife. Prove to me how the current number of deer taken by archers are hurting the deer populations in those proposed units. Prove it and I'll shut up. Donnie

No, I read the whole thing. "They see tags as revenue, we see tags as opportunity" ...that told me all I needed to know. cmc I think your pickin' him apart a little too much. The general consensus I've seen around here is basically don't fix it if it ain't broken and thats exactly what G&F is doing. In their minds they're thinking "Archers are taking more than their share of deer and paying less than the rifle guys to do it". You see the department don't like that. Thats a money minded mentality. I can gaurantee you one thing, we'll be payin' rifle tag prices for those archery tags... mark my words. That will be when we find out what their really after. I wouldn't mind one bit if they were making these changes for a good management reason but they aren't, their managing money (hunters). This is the same reason all that crap went down with Taulman, money. If they make decisions based on wildlife management and they can relate that to hunters, 99% of us wouldn't make a peep, as long as it makes sense. But when you go making changes that make absolutly no management sense then yeah, guys are gonna make a stink! I've seen a few guys around here that are for it for the simple reason that they want to see less hunters in the woods, which I can understand but I think its a very short sighted train of thought. If you think these 8 or 10 units is where its gonna stop, you've got another thing coming. Oh and another thing, if you think the success rates for archers is too high now in some units, wait till it goes to a draw and they have time to really think about how their gonna hunt and where their gonna hunt, I'd bet the success rate goes way up. Remember, its not gonna be just a weekend getaway anymore, these guys drew this tag and they ain't gonna waste it! Donnie

I don't think we're opportunity folks. I think we're good management folks. Donnie

I'm still trying to figure what they have up their sleeve as far as losing money with the otc archery tags. My bet is that they will charge the same as they do for a rifle tag. They'll call it admin costs. Look at this comment from Dick King from another thread. "Their motives for this decision, from what I can see and after talking with Dept employees and attending the meetings, is that they feel archers make up about 20% of the pool of deer hunters, therefore they should not be entitled to more than 20% of the harvest in any unit. If the harverst should exceed that, they want to implement methods of reducing the harvest. That is, a draw, shorters seasons, no season, or whatever. " This was from Dick King the vice-chairman of the ABA. Dick also stated that he does NOT feel that they're are making decisions based on revenue. I happen to disagree. The retarded thing is that 99% of the archers that make up that 20% are rifles hunters too!!! The dept has to realize that so what in the world are they gaining by putting it to a draw. I think they will set the seasons for 1 month sometime in Oct. that way they lose less product for the same money. Its all a bunch of crap! Donnie

Actually Packer, you're right my numbers are off. The success rate statewide is only 4.4% for archers. Unit 1 was 3% with 28 deer taken. So there may be thousands of archers there but they ain't shooting that many deer. That number isn't just one year. Its from the last 5 years. The highest success rate was out of 35A at 9.8% or 37.4 deer. 12A was 6.8% or 168 deer I do agree that 12a needs to be put on a draw. We as archers make such a low impact that it doesn't make good management sense to put any of the units south of the ditch on a draw. Packer welcome to the forum and thanks for your input. Donnie The numbers I posted are from Dave Kings letter to the comission. He got his numbers from the "Hunt Arizona -2007 edition- Survey, Harvest & Hunt Data For Big Game" booklet.

Oh theres no doubt that the hunter population has increased but the amount of permits G&F issues has not, its gone down so how could there possibly be more hunters in the field??? Why do you think its so hard to draw tags here! Now, like I said before there are thousands more archery hunters now but the percentage of deer they actually take is still only an average of 6% of what the rifle guys are taking, so its obviously not a WILDLIFE management issue, its a HUNTER management issue. Lets not call it something its not. To claim that the increase in archery hunters is hurting the deer herds and thats the reason for the change is just not correct. All the units game and fish intends on adding a draw to have high archery success but also have low rifle success (except for the units above the canyon and those are the ones that need a draw) so its not that hard to get the achery success above the 20% they are talking about. If rifle hunters only take 10 deer out of a 100 tag unit and archers take 3, you're already above the 20% mark they are talking about. AGAIN, they need to quit trying to manage hunters so much and manage the dang wildlife more! Donnie

I'm gonna copy and paste these to the other thread... thanx for the info brother.

Archery hunters in the field have grown in numbers but not overall hunters. There are far less permits issued to rifle hunters now than 20 years ago so for that section of the hunting public there are actually less hunters in the feild. Archery hunters only take 6% of the deer taken, so how the heck are they affecting the herd numbers?? 6 out of 100 deer WILL not make or break a herd... sorry! There may be more archers out there but they aren't affecting the wildlife enough to warrant a draw system. Tony, I guess I just got educated... lol I actually did an edit to this post after readin what you said. Now I know why G&F hasn't done it yet!

-TONY Here is a copy of some of the posts Tony... " The main problem is not the total number of bucks, its the total number of deer. Muley numbers are down, plain and simple. So closing a unit for a couple years would be perfect for some units here. Largo3 makes a good point if you're trying to raise only the number of bucks but like I said, Arizonas problem is total numbers not just buck numbers. The other problem here is you've got a few very smart BIG bucks and a bunch of dinks. So many people shoot 1 1/2 and 2 1/2 year old bucks that the ones that make it disappear only to be seen during the rut, if even then. I see giants all the time.... at night. They're educated. AND.... all the units we love to hunt up north in the pines aren't open during the rut. But, overall the largest problem muleys in Arizona face is predators. Deer number have been going down since they did away with trapping. So... drought, predators, questionable management motives and hunters not letting the babies get bigger equals a sh!tty place to hunt muleys." AND "The best way for G&F to manage a systematic unit closure would be this, if said hunter wants a shot at the unit that was closed for 2 years he must pay tag fees for the unit every year its closed. They would probably make more money in those 2 closed years and the first open year than if they just continued to leave it open. Could you imagine the chance at hunting a unit thats been closed for a couple years???? I'd pay, thats for dang sure! Now check this out... all the hipe over said unit would last at least 5 years, so ride the hipe then do it all over again. Do that in a couple units a year and within 15 years you've got a top notch muley state. Now think about all the regular guys that just want to meat hunt, what would they do??? They'd just shift to the open units, so G&F doesn't lose a dime, in fact they'd make more money. Think about what the non-residents would do. They'd try to get in on the hipe unit too.... more money! Think about it from the G&F point of view, they'd be making money on a product that isn't being deminished. They are trying to run the dept. like a business, so why don't we use our heads and play their game to our advantage. Appeal to their pockets, thats what motivates them anyway, we can all see that!" Basically The idea is to shut a unit down for a few years to get the numbers back up.

Also, the problem isn't too many hunters the problem is too few animals. It feels like too many hunters because the deer that are left are concentrated is smaller areas forcing us to hunt on top of each other. The other problem is that we as hunters have gotten very lazy. We don''t get off the beaten path far enough to find the areas others don't go. Donnie

I don't have a problem with draw archery tags, what I have a problem with is why! They aren't doing it for the good of the herd, they're doing to manage hunters. So much is focused on how to keep this group or that group happy while keeping the money rolling that they're forgetting about the most important thing and the reason they exist.... wildlife management!!! The main reason they want an archery draw is to keep the 20% of the so called archers (most hunt with a rifle also) from taking more than 20% of the deer out of said unit. Where is the wildlife management in that????? There are 1000 different things they could do besides going to a draw. There is a discussion on a different forum about systematically shutting down units for up to 3 years to get the total numbers up, thats wildlife management. Not this crock of crap they're trying to feed us now. I don't know and don't really care if its the comission or the department but someone needs to remind them why they exist in the first place. WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT!! Donnie

This is all just another way to manage hunters (which in the end makes them more money) instead of managing deer (which costs more money). Donnie

I have a buddy that has the Pentax 16's and he basically put them away when he got the swaro 10X's. Says he can see better with the 10's than he can with the cheaper 16's. If I were you I would look into a doubler or tripler. There's a fella that sells one here that is supposed to be awsome. So instead of lugging around a big set of bino's you can carry a tripler at a few ounces and the fantastic pair of 10's you already have. Just my opinion. The main problem is gonna be trying to carry 2 sets of bino's. 16's are too big to be able to just pull up and hold if you gotta take a quick look at a buck. So imagine pulling out the tripod everytime you wanna get a good look at something fast. Also no matter how clear they are if you can't hold them steady what are they worth??? Get a tripler. At least with the 10's you can hold them fairly steady, at least long enough to count points. Just my opinion. Donnie

I don't have any brand I get that crazy about. One of my fav guns is my 30-06. Its a Rem model 710. It was cheap as rifles go but dang that thing shoulders well. I can shoulder that thing with my eyes closed, then open them and everthing is exactly where its supposed to be. Gun just feels right. Then there's the tank (7mm mag) good long range gun but its the sh!ts to carry around. Donnie

I have the same model 70 only it has the boss system. Not the quietest rifle I own but talk about fine tuning a gun!!! I won't put anything but those 139's through it. No reason to. My Kiwi brother-in-law is a huge Tikka fan. I won't even say Tikka around him or I've got to hear all his freakin' stories. LOL Donnie

Tony, I recall seeing some pics of you down there recently, is that correct?? You gotta meet my brother-in-law. This guy was a HARDCORE Tahr hunter. He used to hike up to where the Tahr were and hunt em' on foot. Freakin mountain goat this guy. Now that he lives here, he's had quite a time adjusting to the way we have to do it here. He's not used to passing deer simply because they don't have antlers, goes completely against his grain. He and I and another buddy drew 21 early WT tags this year and I think he may like hunting coues deer. We'll see. Donnie

Crossman has got their pellet guns doing 1200 fps these days! Really though, its such a tough call. We shouldn't always give in to the bigger is better argument but on the other hand, are we as hunters as good with our tools as we used to be? My great-grandfather never used anything bigger than a .243 and killed anything you could hunt in Arizona except sheep and bison. Then you hear stories like one I have from a Wyoming trip: I put 4 good shots on an antelope with a 30-06 3 years ago and the little booger still ended up going a total of 300 yds. Its such a toss up. I guess for the animals sake its better to be over-gunned than under-gunned. BTW Tony, I have read your book nearly all the way through 4 times now. Great info man. I read alot of books and most of them read like a PBS transcript, yours on the other hand is very entertaining. Donnie

Hadn't seen that clip yet Tony... pretty cool huh??? Thanx! I'm not sure you can get the chopper wars movie here, the way I saw it was my brother-in-law brought a copy over from N.Z. Thanx again Tony. Donnie

That is very interesting. I've never heard that before. I'll take that into consideration when buying my son's first rifle. Theres a movie out called the "Chopper Wars". Its all about the professional meat hunters in New Zealand back in the 60's and 70's. They started with old .303's left over from the war. Then they ALL migrated to .223's, either Bushmasters or M16's. These guys would shoot 100 Reds a day hanging out the sides of helocopters, ALL neck shots. Its an amazing story actually. Just goes to prove that a smaller caliber in the right hands can do just about anything. Donnie

The important thing is this. No matter if you use a .300wsm for coues or a .223 for reds in N.Z. you gotta be good with what you shoot. No matter what you carry out to the field, you're doing the game an injustice if you can't hit what you're aiming at. SOOOO many guys pull out their guns on the way out to camp and plink 3 rounds at a pie plate at 100 yds, hit the middle once and say "good ol' .06 still has it". Be honest with yourself, if you can shoot a 22-250 and hit what you want... use it. If you can't, go with somthing like a .270 or better yet get yourself a 7mm rem mag and load it with 139 grain btsp's from Hornaday. Talk about a killing machine. I would use that load on anything in Arizona short of a Bison. Donnie

22-250 is plenty for Coues deer. I know a guy that has killed deer with a 22mag. People are way over gunned here in the states. My brother-in-law is from New Zealand and they use .223's on Red Deer and.... they laugh their butts off when americans show up with .338's for Tahr and Reds. Its ALLL about shot placement. If you can't shoot for sh!t, get a bigger gun! Donnie

I know its a ways north but my dad just saw 2 WT does by his cabin in Groom creek last weekend. If they're up there, theres no reason they wouldn't be down in 20c. Donnie

When I say that an area looks good, I mean that it has all the things a coues deer needs and wants. Cover, food and water. If you find those three things in deer country, they should usually be there. The only things that would change that equation are pressure and predation. There is next to nothing you can do about the predation but you can find areas that don't have as much pressure. BUT... you're gonna have to work your butt off to find and get to them. The area I'm hunting this year is heck to get to in my 4x4. Once I park the truck, I'm hiking 1400 feet up and about 1 mile in. Yeah, not much fun with a 40lb pack on. The reason for the heavy pack is because I don't want to make that climb every morning so once I'm up there I'm not coming down for 4 days. Did I mention I'm gonna haul 15 gallons of water (enough for 4 of us) up before the hunt so I don't have to come down for it? Thats how you get away from people. Unfortunately, with the number of hunters out there, as time goes by here in Arizona its gonna take getting tough and getting away from people to have a successful hunt. There are still plenty of places that the average hunter drives past and says "I bet theres a monster up there... but I'm not hiking up that mountain" and keeps on driving. You'll find most of those guys in the same area come opening morning. But the guys that are willing to work their butts off, like alot of guys here, those guys are gonna be rewarded. And what if they don't get one??? I'd be willing to bet they're happy all the same. You''ll always be able to count on one thing when it comes to hunters, 90% are laaazzzy. Use it to your advantage. As far as what you're running into Dan, don't give up on that area. If there are does there are bucks... and probably not far away. Heres what I would do, pattern the does, watch where they're coming from and going to in the morning. Back track where they're coming from (food most likely) and check the sign on the opposite side of where they're coming form (say a buckbrush hillside or a stand of Ocotillos) You might have bucks feeding in the same areas but leaving to bed away from the does. Do the same thing with any water you can find. I'd bet there are 2 trails leading in and out of that water, one might be does and the other bucks. Also don't forget to try a trailcam, you can scout from your couch with one of those. Anyway, I hope all that babbling helps and good luck with your hunt. Donnie