Rembrant

Magnificant buck! Very high in the Record Book. I can believe this buck had a huge body, but the long nose takes the cake. Any chance this is a hybrid?

Nothing wrong with killing big animals or wanting to kill big animals. The problem is in the human ego. The first and original meaning of the word "pride", which is an overly high and undue opinion of one's self. It is a condition that has plagued humanity since the first man. Mike

Relax guys. Those are the handicapped people. Mike

Bryce Canyon, It is way different. The difference is private vs. public. Foster Ranch is a solid piece of private property where the owner is providing access to the public. The Big Chino is checkerboard private/state (public) land that the leasee is closing to the public. I don't know the breakout of the Chino Ranch; how much is state vs. how much is private. Most Arizona ranches are a private acerage with the house barn etc., and most of the ranch is leased Forest Service/ State Land. The Big Boqillas in unit 10 is checkerboarded State land/ Private (Navajo). In this state, the leasee is leagally able to deny access to anyone even though half of the land (or more) may be public. Usually the acess road goes through the front yard of the ranch and that is where access is denied. Sometimes the private is 10 or 20 acres and the blocked off public land behind it can be thousands of acres. So if its legal, is is right or wrong? I lean toward the idea that it is wrong to deny public land to the public. There's nothing wrong with using your assets in making money. But I wouldn't use your assets to make my money, at least not without paying you for the opportunity. Not everything that is legal and moral is neccesarily right. This is why I think the Game Commission is being bold. What do you think BRYCE CANYON, How would you sort this out? Thanks for asking. Mike

The Game Dept. is managing our hunts for “opportunity”; there are a lot of permits all over the place, but that is a different subject. The deal in Chino is that a rancher wants to close a major part of a quality unit that is comprised of a whole bunch of public land, for his own reasons. The screwy thing that reeks of underhandedness is that they announced this closure two days before the perceived release of the antelope draw results. Was the rancher thinking the draw was complete and too late for the Game Dept to change the results? Not my job to know what people are thinking, because I’m not a mind reader, but what this rancher did doesn’t look good. Suspicious people like me wonder why someone would mess with a system that has worked for decades by denying the public access to public lands. People quite often are motivated by money, yet they state they are closing the ranch to pursue solar energy. OK, fine, they are pursuing solar energy – that’s what they say. We’ll take ‘em at their word. I don’t know why the ranch has to be closed for that reason, but that’s what they say. This leaves the Game Dept. with a dilemma. This long standing big game draw system now has a wrench thrown into it at the eleventh hour. Not a good situation considering the quality of this unit, the rarity of an antelope tag, and the passion of the people that want a tag in this special unit. So the Commission votes to issue zero tags for the unit. The rancher doesn’t want antelope hunters on the ranch because of ‘solar energy’ reasons, so the Commission in effect, agrees with the rancher and abolishes the hunt so they can do their solar energy thing. This is a stroke of genius. If the rancher wants no antelope hunters on the ranch (like he says) then the Dept. is bending over backwards to accommodate them, at risk of much criticism from sportsmen. But, if the rancher is underhandedly trying to make a bunch of money by “privatizing” public land for a select few that can afford a high guiding fee, they now have no tags to work with. And people say the commission has no balls. This won’t solve the problem ongoing; there are some good suggestions in this string on how to do this, but I appreciate the Commission stepping up to the plate and playing hardball. Mike

So is it right or wrong? If you can't afford to pay to play, and you're not the one making the money, it's wrong; If you can pay the money, or if you are the one making the money it's right. A guy should be able to do with his private land what he chooses, and making money is good. Public lands are public lands to be enjoyed by everyone. I say cut a new road into the public land and bypass the private. But wait a minute, some of the best whitetail country is protected by this very same situation. How should this be sorted out?

Yep, a few bone heads shoot stuff up and the rancher closes off tons of public lands because the road goes through his private land. But wait a minute... maybe the rancher is excercising his American free interprise rights. What? Yeah, there's lots of money to be made here. Isn't this some of the very best archery trophy antelope hunting ground in the world? Even though we may be talking about large tracks of state (public) land, one guy can close it off because the road goes through his yard. When all this trophy antelope country is excluded from the public, the one guy can then allow anyone of his choosing to access the land. Enter the big time guide. The big time guide solicites tag holders and finds clients that can pay thousands of dollars to hunt this publically managed, on public land, special trophy area that just became "private". Then the big time guide pays the rancher a big time access fee. And all this can happen without 'Land Owner Tags' like other states do. It's all about money, folks. Pure and simple. Mike

All states have their regulations and rules. The Minnesota Game dept had to sort it out just as the Az Game Dept. would have to sort it out. In Az., it would have been determined that the death was not man-caused and the guy who found it would get to keep it. The Game Departments are not the bad guys, folks. Mike

Too many comments diss'ing the Game Dept. declaring bad science, mistrust, and ulterior motives. What does a popular vote on a site full of deer baiters prove? Are our motives what is best for the sport in the long run, or about what we can get now? Bad science? Bad motives? Look in the mirror. Besides, y'all are preaching to the choir. I didn't vote - don't see a point. Mike

Looks to me that Steve was smiling. Mike

On my screensaver. Mike

The WT. deer in the northern states are large bodied. The WT. deer in the southern states are smaller. Our desert WT. deer are smaller yet. The size and other characteristics are a result of survival in certain environments. I'm not a biologist, but let me take a guess; The northern deer are larger because they require more size/fat/hide to survive the bitter cold northern winters. The desert deer are smaller because the feed is different, they don't require large size to fight the cold, and being smaller probably helps in the heat and with lack of water. I do believe the Keys deer is it's own subspecies (race). Yet they are all the same species. The whole "subspecies" thing is man's classification of noticable differences in the various races. So, what is a subspecies and what isn't, is subject to what the genious's in the ivory towers want to call them today, or tomorrow. A practical application of all this classification is in the record books. Coues deer can't compete with northern whitetails in the record book, so it's good that the 'book' classifies them differently. In this sense, "subspecies" is important. But they're still the same critter, or species, and always will be. Mike

Good thread and good insights in it. Whitetailed deer are whitetailed deer; one species. A Coues deer can breed with an Iowa whitetail, and the result will be a whitetailed deer. Subspecies are a recognition of taxonomical differences brought out of the vast genetic diversity of any particular species by the various invironmental niches they live in. (pretty much what Bill said). I think of "subspecies" as being the same as "race". An indiginous African is black, an indiginous Norwiegan is white; the resulting offspring is a human being. The genetic diversity placed in us and other creatures by our Maker, to ensure our survival by the ability to adapt to various invironments is really quite incredible, and not to be confused with macro evolution. Animals don't change into other animals. That notion is erroneous. Couesfan is barking up the right tree with dwarfism. In human genitics we sometimes get a midget, and we sometimes get a Shaq O'Neil. Way cool deer Couesfan!

"They'll shoot their eye out"!!!! Mike

300ultramag, Got a little time on your hands? Mike

I can't believe this string was dug out' of the grave. It's over 5 years old. We can't be that bored. Where's Lark when you need him? I ain't sending in 5 year old pictures. Heck I don't send in pictures at all. I just draw pictures. All them stories are made up anyway. Mike

Scoutpylot, I agree with you about the City. Arogance. And I had the same thought about the Forest Circus trying to ban wildcat shooting. They can close pits (have already), but I don't think they can enforce a no-shooting law on the forest. Mike

Went to the public forum in Flagstaff last night. Interesting. The Game Dept was invited to come and share about the proposed range, because there is public concern of a shooting range near Flagstaff and especially near Walnut Canyon National Monument. The presentation was good. The Game Guy gave a history of the Dept's efforts to bring a shooting range to the Flagstaff area; 15 years, 50 locations considered, and the fall out at a handfull of locations. After that there was an extensive list of all the public notices about the proposed site: articles in various publications, radio and tv from around the state. Curious. Then there was the talk about access, what the range could look like (big or small), other recreation possibilities, like camping. And of course explanation as to why this particular location. There was an audio specialist there that explained the audio testing that was done and the results thereof. More talk about how to reduce the already low decibles even further with layout, burms etc. When the City began their questioning, the the tone and intent became clear, and I then understood the long explanation from the Dept about the extensive public notices. The City Counsel wanted to know why they were not directly notified, and implied in their questioning that the Dept had pulled a fast one on the City of Flagstaff and Walnut Canyon. They wanted to know about sound. They asked if the range could be an indoor range. They asked if the Dept knows what effect the shooting will have on birds and other animals (the irony is killing me) and if studies have been done. The Dept stated that they have ample information on the subject that can be accessed. The City wanted to know what response the Dept has made, if any, to the letter the Hopi's sent to the city and various agencies expressing their concern about the site. (?) At one point Mayor Pressler, in asking a question about sound, said she was walking in the canyon the day before and came upon a sign that read, "Migration does not mean abandonment." I know that she is a liberal and have always thought she was a bit strange. She paused and allowed for one of those moments like when somebody farts in church and everyone's mind strains at the question, "Did I just hear what I thought I heard?" Not sure what she meant, but after 24 hours I'm thinking she was implying that the ancient spirits could possi... naw, nope, I ain't gonna try and figure out was she meant. I don't want to know. But I can happily say that I didn't vote for her. Most of the City's questioning centered around why they weren't notified about something this important. Bryce Canyon you are correct about this range going to disrupt some beautiful country and great elk and muledeer habitat. This is another in the line of events that is chopping away at 5B north. But this is nothing compared to the land that the Hopi's aquired (will someone explain this Hopi land deal to me please?). And we can thank the friends of walnut canyon for the proposed extension of the monument. I think I can answer some of your many questions, Bryce Canyon. Why did they choose this property? It's a great property that will serve the purpose. And it is PRIVATE PROPERTY that will not lay under the jurisdiction of the city, forest or monument. Who benifitted from the sale of the property? The owner did. And we did. Who was the property owner? I'm guessing an American citizen excersizing his free rights. Who was the broker? Another guess - a realestate person making a living in a free enterprise system. I don't believe everything on the internet either. Bryce, with you living in Flagstaff you know that road won't be closed for six months. Natural disaster? One way out? You got 'em there. Good point. Why not Two Guns? You know of available private property there? Or were you thinking of asking the Hopi's? Raymond Ranch? Too far. Most people will continue to shoot weapons 'wildcat' style instead. This was part of the G&F study. Luepp Road? Good idea. I don't know why. Maybe the private propery issue again. The main argument at the forum was sound. If it was really about sound, why isn't the city mitigating with the airport in behalf of the monument? (talk about sound, read that last sentence and see if it sounds funny.) Well it was just as funny last night. The city and canyon should be happy they have the Game Dept for neighbors. If I had bought that PRIVATE PROPERTY and wanted to put a shooting range on it, I would tell the city to go to the canyon and take a hike. Nope it ain't all about sound. It's about opposing world views: those that shoot guns and hunt animals vs. those that don't like guns and think animals are more important than people. Mike

Congratulations Weston. That is a dream buck in anybody's book. Keep huntin' bud. Mike

Thanks for sharing this story Dog, There is always hope when Jesus is involved. I know that Mavy is holding on to this hope, as well as your sister and brother in law. They know. As for Dory? He is standing before the Master Of The Universe, hearing these words, "Well done, good and faithful servant". Praise GOD! Mike

AOO' DISH NEH Apache 7mm??! Pictures don't lie. Mike

Ted Keresote is a liberal with a capital L. He can say he's a hunter, but any Arizona outdoorsman who reads the above bloviation will know that he is not. He is a human secularist that wants to save the planet and ban hunting as one of the ways to do it. Mixing hunting ethics with human population control in the same article is a good clue that the man has an agenda. A 30 second glance at his website reveals that he is an author and who publishes his work. Have a look/see. I am amused when secular liberals use the word 'sacred'. But of course God has given us all free will; we can choose to worship the Creator, or the created. Naturally some will choose the latter. Mike

The wording in this Coronado proclamation has holes all through it. If I lay out salt somewhere, I am no longer "possesing" it, nor am I "storing" it, nor am I "discarding" it. And I kind of like point #1: "Persons with a permit specifically authorizing the prohibited act". It doesn't state USFS permit. A deer tag is a permit, right? And the governing agency that issues this permit allows the use of salt. This is a lot like BLM lands being off limits without authorization, and a hunting liscense is authorization. This is a good example of why the state should handle the issues within our borders and the Feds should go sue themselves. Mike

Obviously the result of evolution and global warming, uh, I mean climate change. Mike

From James Chapter 5: "The prayer of a person living right with God is something powerful to be reconed with." According to this thread there are a number of believers petitioning the Master of the universe in behalf of your family, Lark. This is not silly useless religion. This is power; God's power, bringing us together for the cause of your grand daughter's life and health. Mike