dave

I have two real deals, one seven deadly pins, the best sight by far is the Spot Hog Hunter Hoggit. Just a question here. If someone has shot a hunter hoggit and has found a better sight, spank me please.

I believe WHT_MTNMAN understands the rule correctly. Some confusion may come in when some record books may have other various rules about electronic devices. Too bad I have never had to be concerned about this.

I agree Chris. There just seems to be so many hung up on this because of Utah. I wish they all knew the board members.

You only can see one side of the brochure. On the other side you have the opportunity to make a $20 donation if you wish. I find this commendable in that they will let you join and are not requiring anything. The only way to support anything that we want to do is to gain the support of all sportsmen in Arizona. I hope this group can earn the trust of all and gain the support that will be needed in the future to preserve the future of hunting and sound game management. Each and every one of you are the future of hunting in Arizona. We have to find a way to unite and make our voice known to all. Dave

One simple solution would have been to have their position statement regarding landowner tags printing on their membership recruitment brochure that Amanda posted. That could have possibly answered a lot of questions for many. Also if they had included a statement of how they viewed the future advancement of auction tags. So many questions could be answered with just a couple statements. What I am hearing is that they would be over ran and swamped with support if they would just address those two issues publicly in a statement. What better way to do it than in a promise they make to the ones they are requesting support from? Just an idea. Dave

Allen, I will try to get Muley62 to answer your questions.

KGAINES & DesertBull, It is solely an Arizona organization. It does not owe anything to anyone outside Arizona. 10% of the money this organization raises is set aside incase there is ever a need to lobby for a certain issue. This could be a national issue in which they may join forces with other organizations to accomplish. A decision to do this would have to be made by the Board of Directors. They have picked some of the finest and most trusted sportsmen in this state to be on the Board of Directors. I know and respect all of them. I don?t believe anything kinky can come out of this group of people. There are many things that can be learned from what happened with SFW in Utah, some good, some bad. I don?t believe this group wants to make the same mistakes that SFW did in Utah. It is too bad they chose a similar name and have had to deal with the fallout created by Utah?s mistakes. There is nothing wrong with being skeptical and putting things to the test. There is everything right about also recognizing good things that are done and seeing the positive direction this group has taken. Some of the Board members are good friends of mine. They are totally opposed to landowner tags, as in ?over their dead bodys?. This group couldn?t go that direction as long as these folks are involved. The key to having a good organization that is on the right track and doing the right things is to have people involved in that organization that are good people on the right track doing the right things. This is why KGAINES & DesertBull should join the group.

I don?t believe AzSFW will be supporting landowner tags. Several of the people I trust the most will be on their board. The good thing is that the way the board is constructed; I don't think anything kinky such as land owner tags could occur. I think this idea is totally out of the question. I am sorry to still hear that some identify land owner tags with AzSFW. If you have kept up on some of the politics going on, you would see that the AzSFW folks have been behind supporting making our 10% cap become a state law or statute. Why would a group that wants to have landowner tags want to support residents? Wouldn't such a group want to bring in non-residents? All I know is that for now, I trust the ones that are working in this group. I don't blame anyone for having reservations about this. We need to always test everything that comes our way and make sure it is true. So far, I believe this is a true blue thing and I support it.

Keith, Commissioner Mc Lean and commissioner Hernbrode seem to have partied up with their agenda's. This is the World Wide Web and these words will go out to the world forever. None of our Commissioners now bowhunt. It seems they all hunt with guns. That is a good thing. I think most of them also fish. That is a good thing. What is not a good thing is to think that everyone wants to do what they do and think the way they think. I am glad that at least these guys hunt and fish. Our new Commissioner coming in this month has never hunted. Will she be persuaded by the others? Will she be able to understand what her supporting constituency thinks? I am just saying this because Mc Lean and Hernbrode have definite aggressive agendas to achieve their own desires if you were listening. They also may be more pro firearms than bowhunting. I hope this new Commissioner will be objective without a personal agenda.

DesertBull, I don't think we need to remove anyone from the Commission. The Governor is the one that could do that and now she has appointed three of the standing, which will soon be 4 of the standing Commissioners. God bless our lone Chairman. We can have all this stuff going on and only 40 hunters show up for the biggest meeting of the year. We are getting what we deserve. If 1000 hunters showed up at a Commission meeting which would be only 1/100th of the hunters that apply for deer permits. I believe they would have a voice. The scientific data shows that hunters will not show up and we will have mountain lion hunting banned in Arizona just as it was in Kalifornia. If anything, maybe some Commissioners will wake up the hunters. Talking to your friends and everyone you know about these things will hopefully find some people who care enough to show up and make a difference in our future.

Keith, Bob Hernbrode is the Commissioner. I hope all hunters read the minutes of all the Commission meetings if they were not able to attend. The minutes are posted on the G&F website. It takes about six months for the minutes to get posted. Pretty high-tech stuff. Takes a while to interpret certain things. December will be here before anyone knew what happened. The Sierra Club and the ADL usta video the meetings so they would know what was said and what we look like. Haven't seen their cameras in a while, I guess they have found a better way to conduct their agenda now.

Keith, You are RIGHT ON! We all need to know and realize that there are ideas coming forth from this Commission that is contrary to what the hunters in Arizona would want. It is possible that our Department and a couple Commissioners pay a LOT of attention to polls, surveys, etc. around the nation and how others conduct wildlife management. It is possible that a Commissioner could have had previous experience dealing with wildlife issues in another state and want to do some of the similar strategy here. Some of that strategy may be beneficial and some may take us in a direction we don't want to go. So far, the ideas coming forth recently have taken precedence over public comment. There will be many more ideas coming forth. I think this coming December will resemble the same thing we just went through. We as hunters must unite and pull together in mass to make our clear voice known. Studies that have been conducted by some seem to show that the voice of the 100,000 that put in for a deer tag is totally different than the voice of the public they hear. They will create some scientific, random survey to support and push their agenda. Only if the vast majority of sportspeople stand up and show up will they have to back off. The ADLA, DOW & Humane Society will take all of hunting to the ballot box if they ever get enough money to back a ballot initiative. We have a Commissioner that has voted against a Sandhill Crane hunt. He also made several motions at the last Commission meeting to change the mountain lion hunt in conjunction with the wishes of the Animal Defense League of Arizona. He is also the one that has spearheaded more opportunity for hunters. He also spoke out of place reprimanding a hunter that was just stating facts. It would be a worthy cause for the hunting community to show up in force and voice their opinions. Arizona does not get a 14 foot snow pack every winter. Arizona may be different than some areas of our country that only support hunter opportunity

As far as I know, there were only two people that thought something was wrong the the ADA's survey. What was wrong with it is that it was contrary to the agenda of those two Commissioners. They also dismissed the public comment at meetings held through out the state, written public comment and the comments given at the Commission meeting. I am sure they can construct a sientific random survey to push any agenda they might have. Hey, how would you folks like some more hunting opportunity?

Too bad we don't have mandatory success reporting for all species on all hunts. Oh well, some surveys are judged good and some are dismissed. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure how science and agenda's don't mix. I am sure that scientific data and surveys played a big part in how our wives got stuck with us. Good thing it was not a random study.

Tony, I would be very interested in hearing your interview. Please share it with us. I doubt that the many folks that worked on the survey have much understanding of how all this works. I would like to hear exactly what Brian says is wrong information. I would like to hear their explanation of exactly all the components that went into their "retention" survey and how it differed from the ADA survey and the Elk survey. I would like to know if the ADA did not receive correct guidance from the Department in conducting their survey. I would like to know why the "retention" survey was even conducted. I would like to know how the "retention" survey takes precedence over the established guidelines for the public to communicate with the Commission. I would like to know why the established methods for the public to communicate with the Commission have been disregarded. I would like to know why the public?s voice is now interpreted by the Department to be different than what they are actually saying. There is a lot of bull flying around; I hope you can get to the bottom of it. I know in the very limited time (several hours) I have spent talking to people in the Department and Commissioners about this issue, I totally do not buy any explanations given. I believe this was a plan to create more revenue. Being from the south, I think stratifying the central units was a good thing, however, the way it was done and the percentage of tag distribution was wrong. It would have really meant a lot to many hunters if this Department and Commission would take a little more time communicating before going against everyone?s wishes and slamming the hunters, their supportive constituents. Now we have one Commissioner making recommendations to create female harvest objectives for mountain lions in conjunction with the wishes of the Animal Defense League of Arizona. Please don't question that at a Commission meeting. Hey, since you and Mr. Quimby seem to understand all this and have it all under control, maybe I should just forget all this and go hunting. Dave

I think that is why I said 10% for southern units is too much???

I am too slow at reading and comprehension to understand all that has been said here. This is what I understand and pointed out to the Commission in my address to them. There are only three legal ways the Commission can hear input from the public. 1. Comments made at a Commission meeting. 2. Written comments sent to the Commission. 3. Comments given at public meetings that are held throughout the state. Any new ideas of how public input should be received by the Commission are something that should be voted on and become new rules. It really doesn?t matter because on all accounts, the public's voice was voted against in this last Commission meeting. In my opinion, this Commission is not responsive to the vast majority of their constituents. In my humble opinion, they have actually broken the rules and pushed their own platform forward. If you all have kept up with what the three Commissioners that our current gov. has appointed, you will see that they now write their own rules and request surveys that they can either like or dislike. There is currently no provision that I know of in Arizona law that gives any weight to any surveys this Commission may request or crap on. It is clear, some have agenda's.

I think one of the main problems that have got in the way is how many folks understand this. There is a difference between the central hunts and the southern hunts. This whole thing was about stratifying the central hunts. If I wanted to hunt the central units next year, I would look at the difference between the southern units that have three seasons and the now central units only have two seasons. I would think that there needs to be an adjustment between the percentage of tags that are offered for units that have three seasons and units that only have two seasons. While a 10% allotment for December tags in the southern units is more than should be allotted being that they have three seasons there. A 10% allotment for December tags in the central units is not equitable. If you only have two seasons there, there should be a more equitable spit. I was thinking 70/30. Not my dog in the fight, just an idea. This would be something I would want to try to establish by next year if I hunted central Arizona. I guess we in some ways would wish we could boycott new ideas that we don?t agree with. I wish we could. Someone will buy the tag. Money seems to be more important than heritage.

I disagree. I think we all need to get off our rumps and make a difference. Giving up and throwing the towel in wont get anything done. We live in the best state in America and we need to protect and preserve our rights here. If your son got beat up by a bully, would you move your family somewhere else where there is no bully's? Is your son worth protecting? Would you want him to enjoy the same hunting in Arizona that you have? Hunters first!

I feel your pain Desert Bull. The only way we can make a difference is to get involeved and try to communicate with them. Hey, I have been at Commission meetings when the ADLA and the Sierra Club has had 6 or 7 public speakers there and I was the ONLY lone hunter. Yep, the ONLY hunter there. These groups are able to continue to make changes to rules and gain headway because they are MORE PASSIONATE about what their mission is than we are about ours. PURE AND SIMPLE. I guess the future will tell how passionate you hunters are.

Keith, I saw you there and Amanda told me who you were. I got side tracked every time I went to go talk to you. Thank you for showing up and it is good to hear your passion for showing up to future meetings. If only every hunter could make one meeting and see what goes on, they would also want to join you in seeing the importance of showing up and voicing your opinion. We are going to get our como sey amo handed to us if we do not get involved and take control. Thanks Keith, Dave

This is a good reason for us all to be at as many meetings we can.

That is a good reason to ask them to hold on. If the team is something they want.

25-06, It gets pretty tricky trying to talk about all this stuff because you don't know where people are coming from or where they hunt. If you live or hunt in the southern units, we already have three gereral stratified hunts for whitetail. Adding days to the October hunt down here would have negative results. If you are thinking about the proposed hunts in the central part of the state, I don't see how you could put 90% of the hunt opportunity in a four day hunt. I think with so many things being proposed this year, many do not really know what is going on. I don't think the four day thing is the main issue. The main issue is stratifying all of the central whitetail hunts. Those hunts in Oct/Nov are recommended to be 10 days long. Geeze, it only took me six months to understand this and I am probably wrong.

Allen, You make a good point. Of everything that has happened this year, the thing that saddens me the most is the fact that the Commission, Department and the Customers are not together. We have no team strategy. We need to ask them if they want the customers to be part of the team. We need to ask them if they want to make this a team. I need to know if my passion for the health of the resource is reciprocated by the Commission and the Department. I would gladly change my strategy of hunting to promote the betterment of all hunting for all of the customers and the betterment of the resource. It will be a sad day if the Commission or the Department wants to discredit the validity and importance of the 6500 people that took the time to do the deer survey. I have had many ideas pass through my mind about how we could compromise and get something done tomorrow. I have lost heart thinking about compromise when we are not a team. Only if we become a team will we be able to go forward. I hope we can recognize the value of being a team. It is valuable enough to stop the current recommendations until we unite together as a team and agree on our future.