Coach

Check out the link.

Another vote for Meindl. I bought the Perfekt Hunters from Cabelas this year and they are the best boots I've ever owned.

WOW - great find! That thing is HUGE.

No fair, I thought you were selling a Still. Mine's just about worn out.

Well, I have the 15's and the doubler and I have to admit, I haven't found the double all that useful. The problem is the mechanics of unscrewing one of the eye pieces to attach the doubler then finding the deer again. It's hard to relocate the deer and the added magnification is not the same clarity as the binos themselves. On the other hand, I also have a spotting scope that I rarely carry because of its bulk and the need for a heavier tripod. I also go very light. It's a great concept, but I would not pay extra for it. In a perfect situation, like a bedded buck, it could give you an extra edge, but if the deer is moving at all, I think you'll find yourself fidgeting with the doubler trying to make out that smallest detail only to get frustrated. I ended up leaving my double at home even though it is very easy to pack - it just didn't work in the hunting situations I encountered. Just my $.02 for what it's worth. Jason

I did a BUNCH of research on this about a year and a half ago. I was going to get the Canon GL2 but after reading lots of reviews I opted for the Panasonic AG-DVC30. It's a great camera. One word of caution - be sure you will actually use it. I bought mine almost 18 months ago for a big chunk of change and have found that I barely ever use it - probably less than 1 hour total so far. A freind of mine who owns the GL2 suggested a smaller, cheaper alternative but I opted for the "prosumer" route against his advice. I kinda wish I had saved the $$ and gotten a little pocket-sized one. It would probably get more use. Just my $.02.

Tony, To answer your question, I would only consider it underhanded if the person calling had any additional "pull" than any other caller.

Well, since you chose to turn this personal.... First off, I have no "personal" relationships with anyone at G&F. In fact, I've met the person I cited as a source face-to-face only once, and that was years ago. Any other contact with him has been via phone for research purposes either for management questions or issues such as this. If anything, you should be dang thankful that I try to provide as much FACTUAL information as possible. And I certainly have no "political agenda" that needs to be "leveraged." I leave that sort of stuff to politicians. There is absolutely nothing arrogant about trying to convince anyone of something. If there was, those here trying to convince others that baiting is a wholesome family activity to be enjoyed by all are no less arrogant. If you wish to support baiting, knock yourself out. Second, it seems you're saying that you're allowed that "one voice," but I'm not allowed my "one voice." If so, thatis arrogance at its finest. I have bought hunting/fishing licenses every year over the last 45 and many tags in this state. That alone qualifies me to have as much say on any issue as you do. The members of this forum are but one VERY small segment of total hunters in this state and a minuscule segment of the general population. That's something to keep in mind when suggesting that hunting rules/laws should be passed only with the majority's blessing. Other states have already discovered the results of that foolhardy notion. Remember that, especially if G&F doesn't put the bait ban in effect; it could be coming to ballot near you as an initiative soon thereafter and be a LOT more restrictive than one G&F puts on the books. And you can bet more than 50% of the voters -- including those "nonhunters" who aren't supposed to have a say -- will pass it. Pogo once said..."We have met the enemy... and he is us." Have a great day! -TONY Tony, Let's take a quick breath and a step back here. I did not intend to make it personal beyond expressing my opinion in my original post that you seemed to have a vested interest in seeing this thing passed. You asked me why I thought it would be wrong IF somebody was using a personal influence to circumvent the system to push their agenda. Based on that hypothetical situation, I gave you my answer - again clarifying that it was based on the hypothetical IF - and I stand by my answer. The YOU and YOUR only apply if the hypothetical fits YOU. Sorry for not clarifying that and it coming across as an attack. However, based on your responses, it doesn't seem like you really even read what was written there. For instance, no where did I say you should not be allowed a voice - only that no single license holder's voice should carry more weight than another's . I also never implied that there is anything arrogant about trying to convince someone about something. I said it would be beyond arrogant to try to slip a rule in the back door to FORCE your ethics on someone else via a law when your efforts to convince them have failed, just because you could. I respect your opinion and input on this forum, but I really think you might have misread my post. It truly was meant to answer the question you asked, and I opologize that it came across as an attack on you personally. For the record, I don't have any salt licks and have never killed a deer (or any other animal)over a salt lick. I am just tired of seeing OUR rights and hunting opportunities eroding more and more every year based on emotion and politics (and money). I too have hunted and fished here for decades and I certainly don't like the direction we are heading.

Jason, I forgot to address the above. IF it were true, why would it be "just plain wrong?" -TONY LOL. Well, to begin with, leveraging a personal relationship with the "boys in the club" to push a political agenda in the name of "ethics" is probably as close to the definition of irony as you can get. If you don't like salt licks and trail cameras (and you obviously don't based on the number of posts you've created blasting them as unfair), then don't use them. No single license holder in this state should have any more power in influencing policy than any other. Too bad that is not the reality - but choosing to take advantage of that situation just because you can't seem to convince other hunters to adopt YOUR brand ethics is beyond arrogant. Most of us only get one voice in terms of public input, and even that is usually ignored. A bunch of old buddies making the rules however they see fit with complete disregard for the will of the hunting public and lack of scientific basis for those rules is not a functional game management agency - it's an out-of-control club playing loose and free with the rights (and dollars) of Arizona's sportsmen. (Of course - this is all based on the hypothetical IF ) There are a LOT of people who consider all hunting unethical. How long will it be before they get the ear of the person in charge and the end casualty are YOUR rights?

Tony, Am I wrong in assuming you are one of the very vocal proponents of this bill actively pushing it along? It appeared from the flow of this thread that as soon as you heard Gino report that he heard salt was not going to be included you got right on the phone with your contact to make sure that wasn't the case. If I've read this wrong, then I apologize for reading to much into it. But if you are in fact leveraging your relationship with someone high up in G&F to push your personal ethics onto the rest of us, I think that is just plain wrong. Jason

"I am quite certain that if this rule does not reduce the harvest numbers ans they think it will..... they will find something else help to reduce success and then something else... until the numbers are where they want them...IMO." Maybe they need to replace rifle and archery hunts with paintball-only hunts. I would love to hear them rationalize how issuing hundreds of rifle tags OVER what an area can support is supposed to be offset by preventing a handful of archery kills. This "increased opportunity" nonsense is killing the credibility of G&F, IMO.

Great job! That'll get them hooked!

I had it done at least 10 years ago and it was one of the best things I ever did. I spent under $3K then (around $2700). Over the past few months I've noticed that my eyes are not as sharp as they used to be, but I was told that my eyesight would change over time naturally. I'm still not wearing glasses or contact lenses. I highly recommend it. J

I definately agree that G&F is going off the deep end as of late. First they destroy any reasonable chance of drawing a December tag while at the same time obliterating the herds by over-issuing tags for November. This of course *pushed* many hunters to start sitting treestands over salt since that was about the only way left to hunt trophy coues. Now they plan to take that away??? Others have hit on another really good point. If they do enact this, there will be A LOT of previously law-abiding hunters who finally decide that their own code of ethics are more palatable than a series of senseless, contradictory rules put fourth by a money hungry organization that is either trying to destroy hunting in Arizona or just doing so out of sheer incompetence.

This may be a good chance for those of us who have been disappointed with G&F decisions over the past few years to write some letters and make sure he knows exactly where we stand. It seems that a lot of "constructive criticism" has fallen on deaf ears, but maybe with some new leadership in place we'll get a little better response.

Congrats Gino! Great way to end the drought!

Now that's a test drive!

Awesome! Great job on your first archery pig! I'm glad you and your dad could share such a special time.

What a gorgeous buck!!! Congrats!

What an amazing buck. Gongratulations - you definately have a knack for trophy coues with a bow - Great job!

WOW - I am absolutely floored. What an amazing deer. Thank you for sharing the story and pictures with us!

Great buck! Congratulations!!!! Hope you get a big one in MX.

Alright guys, can somebody PLEASE get permission and post the pix???? I'm dyin' here.

Wow! That's one heck of a "first buck"! Congrats!

Yep, I agree from that angle it does look a lot more like a muley than from the first pictures. Nice buck regardless, and those other 2 are super bucks also.