AZLance

We will be cleaning up areas in the units 36 A,B & C. We contact the ranches that give hunters access, we also cleanup on state and federal land as well. We have picked up over 100,000 pounds of trash at previous cleanups. Hope to see you all there. We should have some awesome prizes that compare to some of the big banquets this year, and you dont have to buy a raffle ticket at our event.

www.azhunterswhocare.org

http://www.kingguideservice.net/ One of the best guides in the state, well worth your money!

Did any of you catch the article in the paper the other day. The head ranger(Keith Graves) for the Coronado National Forest said that the illegal allien problem has become so bad, that the Nogales Ranger District, which includes Units 34a, 36b, 36a is recomending that hunters, campers hikers, and other recreationalists NOT camp on forest service land. He also hinted that the Forest Service is considering CLOSING the Forest, because the Forest Service can no longer gaurantee the safety of hunters, campers, hikers and others. Freaking Incredible. What next? Lance

And actually the news I heard today, is that the ACLU legal observers who are watching the minutemen actually set off the sensors, while trying to warn the illegals to go back. Classic!

A breakdown of Border Patrol apprehensions in the Naco, Ariz., region from Wednesday through Sunday. Minuteman Project volunteers began gathering Friday and launched patrols in the area Monday: Wednesday ...302 Thursday...296 Friday...205 Saturday...91 Sunday...103 Source: Associated Press

AZ4Life, as slick willy said, "It all depends on what the definition of IS is" Good Lord, what is this country coming to...... www.minutemanproject.com

Ernesto, you say, "I hope they also understand that they should leave that job to the professionals." Isn't that what we have been doing for the past decade? Isn't it the professionsals who are only catching 1 illegal for every 3 that cross? How did the 10 to 20 million illegals get here? Well,....They walked right past the professionals to get here.... minutemanproject.com Come on down for the rally in Naco on April 2nd and show your support for securing our border.

The article I was refering to was in the Santa Cruz Valley Direct newspaper, on March 16th.

Hey guys, Again thanks to the 288 volunteers who made it out to help our wildlife habitat a few weeks ago. But unfortunatley, one of the areas we cleaned has been trashed again. This is the area that many of you saw in the photo. The area was about the size of a football field, and was 1 to 2 feet deep with trash. This is prime whitetail habitat. Gabe Paz the WM for unit 36A went back out to this area on Saturday and couldn't believe his eyes. We had just cleaned 2 dumpsters full of trash out of the desert, and it was already trashed again. Wake up guys this is our country, this is our wildlife habitat, this is our hunting grounds, and the place our children should be able to hunt as well. Hunters need to be OUTRAGED! Americans need to be OUTRAGED! Guys start calling your congressmen, and representatives. Start taking pictures of the trash and sending those pics to your representatives. Go to the minutemanproject.com website and help get the mesage to Washington, that our country, our State, our wildlife habitat is being destroyed. Get off the couch, and do something!! Lance azhunterswhocare@hotmail.com

hey, you cant turn down free help!!!!!!!!!!!!!

A big thanks to all who attended the 7th Arizona Hunters Who Care Trash Cleanup Day. A whopping 288 volunteers from around the state converged on southern Arizona to help out the wildlife habitat. We picked up a whopping 48,000 pounds of trash. The dumpsters were so full, that G&F had to use two of their big trailers to haul off trash, and many volunteers left with trucks full of trash. The picture that many of you saw with the football sized area covered in trash has now been returned to wildlife habitat instead of a dump. Thanks to our many sponsors: Arizona Deer Association Safari Club, Arizona Chapter Pima County Waste Management Sunstate Napa Auto Parts West of the Pecos Gun Shop Unicoa Indunstrial Supply The Groundskeeper With their help we were able to give away a ton of stuff for free to our volunteers. And congratulations to the three volunteers who won rifles for their hard work. Next year will be even better. More give aways, including..... Well, I will make you wait to hear what what awesome giveaways we will have next year. to be continued...... Lance Altherr

cant draw an AZ tag, so I go to NM every year and kill 2 gobblers.... Can't wait!

Hey guys, It is that time again. Time to mark Saturday March 5th on your calendar. That is when the 9th anual Arizona Hunters Who Care Trash Pickup Day will be held. In case you dont know what this about, Arizona Hunters Who Care is the fastest growing grass roots hunting orginization in the state. We strive to give back to the sport that has given us so much. Our Trash Pickup Day will be held on March 5th, at the intersection of Hwy 286 and Arivaca Road (unit 36). Everything will be provided, gloves, trash bags, and lunch. All you need to do is show up and work for however long you can. The event will kick off at 8:00am and lunch will be from 12:00 to 1:00. If any of you are wondering, will cleaning up units 36a 36b and 36c. All of these units and the wildlife that use them have been devistated by the illegal allien traffic. Areas that used to be prime Mule deer, whitetail, Javalina and quail habitat, now have trash that sometimes is 2 feet deep. And hunters are the only one willing to make a difference. Last year our spring cleanup day had 128 people and our fall cleanup day had 180 people. We have made a big difference. Many of the ranchers whose property is trashed, have promised to keep their land open for hunting access, because of the good work hunters have done for them. This will be a great event to meet other hunters, G&F unit managers, Border patrol officers, and officials from the Buenos Aires Wildlife Refuge. Come on down and bring the whole family. Teach you kids about giving back to the wildlife that has giving us so much. If any of you are willing or able to help in set up or donations, please call my self at 955-4090 or Gabe Paz in the Tucson G&F office. thanks for your help, Lance Altherr Arizona Hunter Who Care azhunterswhocare@hotmail.com

Here is a picture of one of the bad spots we will be cleaning up. It is in prime Whitetail habitat, but obviously the deer arn't hanging around here! See you guys on Saturday!!

HELP!!!!! Any of you who have contacts in the media, please inforn them of this event. We would love to have them there. Please pu them in touch with me ASAP. Lance Altherr azhunterswhocare@hotmail.com

I will have the petitions at the trash cleanup day, that should easly be 200+ signatures... Lance

Ok, guys, just one week left before the biggest hunter volunteer event of its kind. We will be raffling off more hunting gear and guns for free than any other hunting banquet in the state, Any of you guys coming down for the camp out friday night?? Get there early if you want a spot....

getting close.....

Just wanna say THANKS to the ADA for stepping up to the plate again and donating to the cause. The ADA will be bringing their kitchen trailer, as well as helping out with the food. Thanks ADA Lance

I called one in to 6 feet 3 weeks ago, and now he is at the taxidermist....

so, whose coming?? Who is going to show up for the sport they love so much?? anyone got a 1/2 a day for wildlife??

All Concerned Sportsmen, USO and their attorney James Scarantino are at it again. They are threatening to sue the AZGFD on grounds that the difference in fees between residents and nonresidents for the proposed caps are unconstitutional. You can read the letter to the Director below. FYI, the attorneys telephone # is 505-250-8754. I urge you to call and let him know what a piece of $!@# he really is. Lets shut clog up his phone system for the next few days... Here is the letter... James R. Scarantino Attorney At Law 714 Montc1aire NE ? Albuquerque, NM 87110 (505) 250-8754 ? (505) 232-4515 Fax December 22, 2004 Duane L. Shroufe Director Arizona Game and Fish Department 2221 W. Greenway Road Phoenix, AZ 85023-4399 Re: Proposed License/Tag Fee Ceiling Increases Dear Director Shroufe: I write on behalf of United States Outfitters and its many nonresident clients. We wish to share our views on the proposed statutory increases to the license/tag fee ceilings. While we understand that the proposal is phrased merely as an increase in the fee ceilings, we cannot overlook the fact that once the ceilings are raised by the Legislature, the Commission by rule making may then set the fees at any level within that range. Therefore, we view the request to increase the fee ceilings as a request by the Commission for authority to at some point in time increase the actual fees to the maximum level authorized by the Legislature. The growing real disparity between resident and nonresident fees as reflected in the proposals is cause for great concern. Nonresidents already are being unfairly burdened by having to pay much more for the same opportunity to hunt game. This unfairness is made even worse by the fact that the majority of those hunting opportunities take place on federal public lands, lands owned and supported equally by all Americans, regardless of their place of residence. There are limits to the extent to which nonresidents can be expected to tolerate and overlook being subjected to discrimination. The proposed fee increases exceed the limits of tolerance. Under the proposal a nonresident could be charged $775 for the same bull elk hunt for which, at most, a resident would only be charged $150. In the case of a premium bull elk tag, nonresidents could be charged as much as $3200, compared to only $350 for residents. Further examples of outrageous disparities are found throughout the proposed fee ceiling table being circulated for comments, including but not limited to the proposals concerning deer, premium deer, antelope and bighorn sheep license/tag fees. We also wish to object to the fact that the spread between nonresident and resident could be increasing. For instance, currently nonresidents pay five times more for an antelope tag than residents. Under the proposal, nonresidents could be paying 7 times as much. Duane L. Shroufe December 22, 2004 Page Two Under the current fee structure, nonresidents pay 5.13 times as much as residents for a bighorn sheep tag. The proposal could increase this differential to a factor of 8.96. Nonresidents may currently purchase Class G General licenses for 4.45 times as much as the resident rate. Under the proposal, they could have to pay as much as 5.3 times for the same license. And, by way of one more example, currently residents pay 4.03 times as much as residents for a Class F Combination license. Under the proposal, they will have to pay nearly $100 more, whereas residents would at most face only a $16 additional levy. The sheer difference in the amount that could be charged residents versus nonresidents is what makes the proposals unacceptable. There is no rational basis for the disparities. The true costs to society of a bull elk hunt, for example, are not reflected in the amount that residents could be charged. The same holds true for other species. Furthermore, it does not cost hundreds or thousands of dollars more to administer a nonresident deer, bull elk or premium bull elk hunt than it costs to administer similar resident hunts. The only plausible explanation for the differential is to (a) force nonresidents to increase their subsidy of resident hunting on federal public lands and elsewhere in Arizona and ( to intentionally discriminate against nonresidents in access to hunting opportunities. The disparities are so extreme we believe they are also intended as a means of defying the District Court's decision in Montova v. Shroufe. There exist many recorded declarations, including statements from the Commission, that nonresident fees would be raised to punitive levels as another means of excluding nonresidents and also retaliating against nonresidents for daring to successfully vindicate their federal constitutional rights. Even under the United States Supreme Court decision in Baldwin v. Montana Game and Fish Commission, there are limits to the degree to which nonresidents may be subjected to discriminatory fee structures. As I need not remind you, in light of the Ninth Circuit's ruling in Conservation Force v. Manning, nonresidents can challenge Arizona's discriminatory fees under Commerce Clause strict scrutiny. Arizona would have to prove that it had no other means to serve its legitimate purposes of maintaining resident hunting opportunity and conserving wildlife except to charge the precise discriminatory fees being charged nonresidents. It would have to demonstrate that no lesser range of nonresident fees would serve those purposes. I do not think I overstate the case when I say that such a burden would be impossible to meet. Losing a Commerce Clause challenge to discriminatory fee structures would not only expose Arizona to sizable claims for attorney fees, it would also expose Arizona to claims for monetary damages, and certainly refunds with interest to all nonresidents who had paid the discriminatory fee. This would impose additional legal and administrative costs upon the Department that would be better spent in game conservation programs. Nonresidents already bear a disproportionate share of the costs of game management in Arizona. They do not mind paying more to some reasonable extent. But, as I said when I addressed the Commission in Safford, there are limits to nonresidents' tolerance. The Duane L. Shroufe December 22, 2004 Page Three Commission cannot act unreasonably and expect nonresidents to acquiesce in being mistreated and callously exploited. I note that in the explanation you have given for the fee ceiling proposals, you point to the fact that license sales fell 16% from 1998through 2003. This drop-off occurred during the period of time the Department was vigorously resisting allowing any more licenses to be sold to nonresidents. To some extent, the Department and Commission must accept responsibility for the fiscal pressures behind the need to raise license sales. Had the Department negotiated a reasonable increase in nonresident access when we first invited settlement in 1997, it likely would not be facing the same fiscal pressures it confronts today. Moreover, if the Department were to factor into its calculations increased sales to nonresidents, at fair rather than punitive license fee levels, I think you would find even less justification for the astronomical ceilings proposed for nonresident licenses. The Department could continue to benefit from nonresident subsidy of resident hunting, without forcing nonresidents to take legal action to protect their rights. We also strongly believe that residents need to begin to pay more of a fair price for the privilege of hunting big game. There are real costs to preserving habitat and raising a large game animal to maturity. The fair market value of big game hunts is far above what residents are currently paying, or will be paying under the ceiling increase proposals. Making residents realize the true costs of game management will have the salutary result of promoting greater interest in increasing hunting opportunities by conserving more wildlife habitat. The real force driving up the costs of hunting is the conflict between an exploding human population and the need for more wildlife habitat. Nonresidents are not the cause of increased resident hunting fees; they have been and will likely continue to be a moderating force that helps hunting continue to be an affordable activity. Nonresident tolerance for the extent to which they are being exploited is, however, reaching a breaking point, leaving litigation as their only recourse. We believe the entire proposal should be reconsidered. The Department's needs for expanded funding should be addressed with fairness to nonresidents in mind, as well as adherence to the legal restraints against discriminating against nonresidents in their access to hunting opportunities. We hope you and the Commission will take these comments into consideration in reformulating your approach to future license fee structures. Sincerely, JAMES R. SCARANTINO Arizona Hunters Who Care azhunterswhocare@hotmail.com