Tines

This is the way I understand it: -There are two types of PERMIT tags: Those that are leftover and those that are not. But they're both PERMIT tags (i.e. draw tags). The leftover tags are still PERMIT tags. So because some might be "leftover", people confuse these with some OTC and Non-permit tags. A NON-permit tag is just that- a tag that isn't associated to a draw. But like I said earlier, An OTC tag can be both. But only ONE draw permit per genus, per calendar year (regardless of filling the initial tag) can be issued to a hunter. To change this, they would just need to change them from "leftover tags" to "NON-permit tags". Just as you explained, I tried to do the same thing a few years ago. I thought it was ridiculous that I couldn't purchase a leftover HAM tag when I didn't fill my archery Javelina tag. I was given the same response as you were given. That said, I agree with most of what you're saying. I don't care to shoot more than 1 a year, I just wanted "more opportunity" if I didn't fill my initial tag. And it made sense from a financial perspective for the G and F to allow it. They feel differently. I just think you're getting caught up interpretations. Which, in the end, doesn't matter what how WE interpret them. I actually thought it would be a great idea, if there were leftover permits, you could turn in your un-used permit and purchase a "leftover" for the next hunt. But ONLY after you turned it in could you purchase a leftover. I belive this can be regulated and implemented to reduce multiple animals "tagged" a year illegally with some minor thought behind it as well. G and F would excede their current revenue from tags and the allotted permits wouldn't have to change.

Thought I'd share this with you guys. My buddy and I were chasing some Mule deer when all heck broke loose and this guy came in. Finally things calmed but the bigger Mule deer buck chased this buck off. First thoughts were WT, but it didn't take long to realize this buck was just different. I managed to get some video of him before he disappeared.

Looks more like a G-4 to me than it does a NT point. Giving you the higher mass measurement. Great buck!

Sorry about your buck. Hope you find him. On a side note, I highly doubt the blades didnt open up. If I understand you correctly, you're saying the heat shrink band (or whatever they use these days to hold the blades in) actually held the blades in the ferrel? Was the band gone? There's a TON of resistance pulling against those initial blades as it blows through an entire deer. I'd venture to say it's physically impossible for it NOT to open up. Otherwise it's like trying to shove a small game head through a deer, if that makes sense?

Thought I'd share a new product out. A friend of mine developed this new vane. It's been in the works for a while. I can assure you that he doesn't let something go untested. They sort of remind me of the FOBS but more durable, can be shot through a Whisker Biscuit (something MANY hunters shoot) and pliable like a standard vane. I've been shooting them since August and I've been extremely happy. He just introduced them at the ATA show last week. They take like 5 minutes to install a dozen vanes. I didn't need the tool and I think most won't. I'm a "simple" kind of guy who appreciates efficient, durable equipment. Anything "hunter friendly" is my friend in the field. I'm a skeptic with lots of things. I don't fall for gimmicks. He encouraged me to be critical with these and I was. I couldn't find anything..... These vanes are everything as advertised. Check them out!

If FOC really made this much of a difference than the FOBS would be the worst "vane" on the market. They're not. And like the Blood Vane, the FOBS made some advancements in vane replacement and eased the burden of fletching. I thought about FOC when I got them. However, the new ones are lighter than the proto-types I first tried out. Both have shot fantastic! And from what I found, the extra 15+ or - grains made no difference in my arrow flight from when I was shooting Blazers. That being said, it was much less than 15 grains difference. But you got me thinking about some things. So I did some comparison.... 3 Blazer vanes- 19 grains 1 Blood Vane- 31 grains Difference of just 12 grains. Fletched Blazer shaft- 287 grains Fletched Blood Vane shaft- 296.4 grains Difference of 9.4 grains NOT 12 grains (this might be explained below AND factoring in glue). I then measured 6 bare shafts of the same length and nock. These are PSE Radial X weave Pro shafts and standard nocks. I found they were all within 4 grains of eachother. Just 4 grains. I then took 3 different nocks. The standard that come on the X-weave shafts, a Beiter nock and a Gold Tip nock. Beiter- 10.8 grains GT- 12.0 grains PSE nock- 11 grains Difference of up to 1.2 grains. So MORE THAN HALF of the 9.4 grain difference involved here is out of our control. Tolerances aren't tight enough in this world out of a vacuum. Is it better to get everything as close as possible? Sometimes... Because only sometimes does the benefits far out-weigh the "disadvantages". FOC is like paper tuning, IMO. It's a great reference but we are far inferior for it to make a difference with what the FAR majority of us are doing. Bullet holes are nice but they don't always equate into accuracy or efficiency. Your FOC will change from a 100gr fixed broadhead to a 100gr field point. Crazy, huh? Not by much but the hairs we'll split are relative if you catch my drift from the numbers above. The inconsistencies we have in hand torque, release vs fingers, wind drift, arrow spine, bow tuning, etc.. are all factors that positively or negatively affect FOC. If I sound argumentative, I apologize. Not my intentions. Just thought I'd share with you what I've come up with.

Problem is you can't regulate ethics. So the dept SHOULD step in and do whats best for the animals. I agree that technology has advanced, in turn making bows much more effective. But there are too many variables to consider when making a flat 30lb minimum requirement. We can all sit around and talk about how important it is to teach proper ethics (which I totally agree with) but we still need black and white laws to clarify. It's in the best interest of the animal, not the hunter. After-all, we're supposed to be "managing wildlife for tomorrow", not today. IMO, buffalo needs to be 50lbs. Elk at LEAST 40lbs.

Awesome! Great job, man

The big difference IMO is that when push comes to shove, I can shoot back or at the very least, dial 911 and know someone's coming to help ME and not them!

I've been in your shoes thinking "my" buck might have been taken. It's a big stretch asking people to provide the unit on where their animal was taken and expect an honest answer. IMO the best way to go about doing it is like Stanley mentioned. You're also more likely to get cooperation if YOU provide details of where "YOUR" buck is located as opposed to some hunter you don't know sharing with you where HE shot it. Maybe even exchange photos and such to confirm. In the end, you don't need to know the unit. If this is a buck you've been watching for a while, you'll know if it's him.

I don't like the sound of any of it.

As far as Danner goes, I really do feel like there's a big difference between those made in the U.S.A and those that aren't (the Pronghorns). I wore the Pronghorns for 4 seasons and went through 3 different pair. They were super comfortable, lightweight and quiet. But they just didn't hold up for me and a few others, I've noticed. Meybe we've got "hillbilly feet"? You generally get what you pay for and if you hunt in the elements and terrain of AZ often (several+++ weeks out of the year), you're probably not going to find a boot under $180 that will last you more than a couple seasons. Lance on this site has worn Timberland PRO series boots for several years now and as much as that guy spends in boots and in the hills, I've been pretty impressed to say the least. Not to mention he's harder on any piece of hunting equipment that I know of!!!! I was turned on to the Danner Sierra's (made in the U.S.A, stitch down boot) back in 2008. I just sent them in to get re-crafted after their 4th season. They're normally a $300 boot and the re-crafting is running me $180. In the end, I'm literally getting new boots, minus the leather which will be my old leather (which is being conditioned as well). Debbie in their re-crafting department has been fantastic to work with. I'm excited to get them back. I also believe the sole makes a huge difference. My buddy purchased the identical boots from Danner, except they came with the "bob sole". I can't remember the model but they were more for upland bird hunting. Pheasant, maybe? But they were on sale for cheap so he bought them. NOT a good sole for AZ!! I also saw his Kenetrek's soles literally fall apart after a few months. Of which Kenetrek said it was "normal wear and tear". Sorry, chunks of your sole and seperation from the boot is UNACCEPTABLE as "normal wear and tear". Maybe he got a lemon, I don't know. But I think his next pair has served him well. I can only say what has worked for ME (the Sierra's) and what hasn't. I believe the Pronghorns are a fine boot.... depending on how often and where they're worn. But keep in mind they're NOT manufactured here.

Thanks for the comments, guys! I failed to mention something pretty vital. This is HIS "honeyhole". I'm pretty lucky to have a buddy that trusts me enough to take me in there. Coues Sniper, Here's a head on picture. You can see them okay but I actually think you can see everything best from the profile. The head on picture does show how FREAKISHLY massive he is, though!!!

Congrats, Nick! Big body on that sucker!!

I wonder how many less lions are killed since "25% of the season" has been closed? I'd be willing to bet that the amount of lions killed during that period is a drop in the bucket compared to those during the season we currently have. The greatest evolution in the past 20 years of hunting is optics and rifles capable of long range shots. But optics are by far the most effective tool these days. Because we're talking about SEEING them, not harvesting them. The harvest number hasn't increased as much as people might think. So it's pretty obvious that's why so many lions are seen. Is there an influx in the lion population? Maybe. I've been glassing on a tripod since the early 90's and I finally glassed up my first lion back in mid November. Then two weeks later I glassed up my second (the one in the video). It's easy for me to jump to the conclusion that lions are "overrunning" Arizona based on what I found this year but I won't do that quite yet. Give me a few yrs and I might change my mind, who knows. Lions are fairly easy to make out when they're in your field of view. Much more so than WT in most cases. So my point is this. I'm no better of a glasser this year than I was last. My binoculars just happened to be pointed in the right direction at the right time. I used to spend a lot time deep sea fishing with my grandpa. I'd be on one side of the boat and he'd be on the other. I never understood why he caught all of the bigger fish when we used the same set-up, bait and we were only 5 feet away from each other. Sometimes there's no answer as to "why"....

lol!!!! Too bad it's not a honey badger, eh?

Great job, John! And a big congrats to Ryan.....

What is the difference in B+C and SCI? Becker touched on the scoring part of it. Which is more recognized and how much difference is there between the two? SCI is more internationally recognized for obvious reasons. But B&C is probably more notable to us in the states. It's personal preference at that point. I'd say the main difference other than the end result in score is the criteria met to enter an animal. Some may be more versed on this than myself but SCI seems to abide by a states' definition of legal method of take/fair chase as opposed to B&C having their own rules and criteria on when an animal can be entered. Does that make sense? Which would any of you recommend? In the end it won't matter. You pay a fee to be entered into either one. You'll get a certificate and maybe a plaque that will be cool to look at for a few days, maybe even show your friends. But the animal on the wall will be the only thing that has any material or sentimental value. Hope this helps and congrats on whatever is being considered!!!

Beast! Big congrats....

Yes. Guess that's what I meant with "....and you shoot it well.."

Spot on, Bill....

To add to my post, I forgot to mention that I needed to put another round in that buck. Yes, placement means a lot but I didn't "miss" by much at 500yds. A different bullet would have made it a one shot kill, IMO. I understand why flat shooting is better. But with turrets and confidence in your rifle it's just as effective as the flattest shooting rifle out there. As for the .243, the discussion can go back and forth on its effectiveness. I also think you can kill a coues with a spoon if you hit it hard enough in the right spot. I'll just say that I think there are more effective rounds/rifle combos that are just as easy to shoot.

Sorry, Chris, I'm a .243 hater.

I've shot a few Coues deer with the .338. IMO, if you like the gun and you shoot it well, shoot it! Don't let anyone convince you otherwise. Sure, maybe there's such thing as "too much gun". But I'd be MUCH more concerned over too little of a gun. If you don't hit shoulder with the .338, it doesn't absorb much energy on a Coues deer. Just pokes a hole. So anything in the body other than the heart or lungs, in my experience, it usually required a follow-up shot. It usually takes a little more than a Coues deer to slow 200+ grains down. I have, however, seen marginal shots on elk with the .338 that really slowed them down fast. Kinda expected, I guess. I agree that if you hit them in the shoulder, especially an opposite shoulder, you're gonna lose some meat. But my 25-06 with Accubonds does the same thing. Here's a 225gr Hornady SP that I hit a Coues buck with at 500yds. He was quartered pretty hard away. The bullet entered behind the last rib and traveled up through the body. Took out a little bit of one lung, broke the far shoulder and lodged in the hide on the far side- IMO exactly what the bullet was designed to do. Maybe not the best bullet choice but I wasn't reloading at the time and they were shooting really well out of that rifle. But that was the only .338 round I ever recovered from the several Coues bucks shot with it.

My concern is how they will enforce "zero tolerance". There's "zero tolerance" on mistaking a doe for a buck and shooting it but it happens every year and a slap on the wrist is all the offender gets if they're honest. And that's during DAYLIGHT hours! Why wouldn't mistaken identity at night with a spotlight be treated any different? But I'm sure everyone can tell the difference between a fox and a coyote pup, right? I was worried for a second. If you're wondering, yes, I can tell the difference between the two. But when someone mistakes something obvious like antlers when there's not, that seems even more ridiculous, right??? WM's and the state are limited on what they can do due to resources (or lack there-of). If they had a never ending pocket-book, I might feel a little different about this. But they don't and I just see this new law creating some issues. I'm all for "more opportunity" but I don't know about this. This is a tough one for me as also I understand the importance of predator control in the units mentioned. I'm curious to get some WM's thoughts on this? Am I the only one that finds it disturbing that a jeep full of teenagers and spotlights mounted on rifles driving around the desert near the Kofa's at 2am on a Tuesday morning is perfectly legal???? But I'm sure there will be adequate enforcement in these units. Just sayin'.....