1uglydude

I was thinking the same thing. Kind of slow today. Instead of wasting employer time checking for credit card charges, they're tracking how their bracket is doing. I had Dayton beating Ohio State, so I'm still on track to win my billion dollars.

Upon reading it closer, it appears that the no refund rule only applies to combo licenses, which non-residents can't buy anyways: http://www.wildlife.state.nm.us/recreation/hunting/documents/FAQOnlineapp.pdf "If I am not successful, do I get a refund for the game hunting license? Refunds options are available for game hunting licenses purchased in conjunction with the draw. To be eligible for a refund the applicant MUST choose the refund option AND must be unsuccessful for all big game applications. If the refund option is not chosen, refunds will not be given. There is NO refund option for game hunting and fishing combination licenses."

Not true. They refund the license/tag fee for the animal, but not your general hunting license you have to buy. See the bottom of page 5 on their FAQ about the draw.

i really dont understand this comment. you do a lot of illegal stuff like killing endangered species?I think you need to go back and read 1uglydude post he seems to have a good understanding of how this works Whether or not it was an acceptable incidental take depends on whether the removal of competing squirrels was authorized under the recovery plan. The press release seems to suggest that it was, and it would certainly make sense, but if it wasn't then I'm sure we will hear more about this.

me too . But at my work I'm not a wild life expert who killed an endangered animal. Up to now I've been some what supportive of the dept. But my opinions will be shaped by the punishment handed out. If I accidentally shot a wolf tomorrow and there's a different punishment I think we can all agree that's crap. What if you had been tasked with eliminating another species of wolf that looked very similar and made an honest mistake? He was told to shoot other squirrels on site. It's not like he was out shooting whatever moved for fun.Incidental take as part if a larger recovery effort is not the same as intentional take or take as a result of unrelated activities...nor should it be. There is a reason "incidental take" is a defined term under section 7 of the ESA. who gets to decide what species gets eliminated and what species gets to live?It's outlined in the recovery plan approved by USFW and administered by either the federal or state agency, whichever is assigned to that particular population. Here, the elimination of competing squirrels is sanctioned as part of the recovery plan. The accidental take of the target species as part of official the official recovery plan is designated as an "incidental take." If the take meets the legal definition of an incidental take (which it appears was likely the case here) then there will not be any individual punishment. What's the difference between an agent doing it and you or me? Well, we don't have the authority under the ESA to take the actions that could potentially result in this type of incidental take. The shooting of a red squirrel that's not related to a sanctioned recovery action would be per se actionable.

me too . But at my work I'm not a wild life expert who killed an endangered animal. Up to now I've been some what supportive of the dept. But my opinions will be shaped by the punishment handed out. If I accidentally shot a wolf tomorrow and there's a different punishment I think we can all agree that's crap. What if you had been tasked with eliminating another species of wolf that looked very similar and made an honest mistake? He was told to shoot other squirrels on site. It's not like he was out shooting whatever moved for fun. Incidental take as part if a larger recovery effort is not the same as intentional take or take as a result of unrelated activities...nor should it be. There is a reason "incidental take" is a defined term under section 7 of the ESA.

If I decide to give my children an allowance then I'm going to require that they set aside at least $2 per week for tags. I've been paying for my own permits and tags since I was 12 years old because my father had no desire to go. I appreciated it a lot more. I remember saving and scraping anywhere I could to be able to save $70 for a season-long waterfowl permit for the Ute reservation in eastern Utah. Until I was 16 year old, it was probably the largest financial transaction I made each year...and well worth it.

Josh, it has been an item of discussion at commission meetings and i believe it may have even been listed in the regs. Found it. Page 2 under important information for 2014.

Josh, it has been an item of discussion at commission meetings and i believe it may have even been listed in the regs.

It's a credit vs actual funds issue. Same reason You can't buy lotto tickets on credit, but can wih debit.

How can they possibly know who they should be contacting? They can probably tell that Procrastinator One (P1) tried to update his card for elk, but that the system timed out, but what if Procrastinator Two was watching over his shoulder and was like "well, dang, the system isn't working," so he didn't even try to update. Then let's say the next day P1 contacts AZGFD and is told about the problem and that he will have an opportunity to update later (as some people have reported). So P1 tells P2 this news, and let's say P2 shares that info with P3 and P4. So, here they are, all waiting for an opportunity to correct. Instead, AZGFD reaches out to the people who it knows may have had an issue, leaving P2-P4 out in the cold. They'll be fine as long as they get the phone call about a correction, but it seems kind of pointless to delay everything when there's no way you're going to know who might be impacted. In the meantime, you've got a lot of people who didn't have a problem with their cards up to the date of the updating deadline, but maybe now have been issued a new number or had some fraud on their accounts. Every day the Department waits to actually run the draw, the number of people with new issues, that weren't of their own making, increases.

Not true. The 10% cap for Non-res is a CAP, not a set aside. That means that AT LEAST 9 of the bonus tags will go to residents, but every single one of the 18 tags could go to a resident if there were not any non-residents with more points. Or, if there were non-residents with the same amount of points, it would just be a matter of who had the better randomly assigned bonus pass draw number. There is no advantage to being a non-resident. I wish I had the draw report that actually showed each unit broke down by residents and non-residents. I would bet that rifle antelope, every early bull tag most archery bull tags and every deer tag north of the big ditch all make it to the 10% cap in fact except for the archery bull I would bet that most of those tags reach the 10% cap in the 20% pass.To my knowledge there is no such report.Flatlander, send me a PM with your email address.

Not true. The 10% cap for Non-res is a CAP, not a set aside. That means that AT LEAST 9 of the bonus tags will go to residents, but every single one of the 18 tags could go to a resident if there were not any non-residents with more points. Or, if there were non-residents with the same amount of points, it would just be a matter of who had the better randomly assigned bonus pass draw number. There is no advantage to being a non-resident. I wish I had the draw report that actually showed each unit broke down by residents and non-residents. I would bet that rifle antelope, every early bull tag most archery bull tags and every deer tag north of the big ditch all make it to the 10% cap in fact except for the archery bull I would bet that most of those tags reach the 10% cap in the 20% pass.Just because that is how it works out in many of the premium hunts, it doesn't mean it is always guaranteed to happen. Also, there is currently an Article I rule change in the works that will keep the 10% non res cap in place but will limit non res applicants to no more than 5% of the total tags during the bonus pass. So, where there are 20 bonus pass tags for a 100 tag hunt, non residents could not pull more than 5 tags during the bonus pass. Five tags could still go to non resident applicants, but they would have to draw them in the next round while competing with everyone.

Elk tag charge will be $135

Do you have an exact amount of the charge? By the way...I'd upgrade from those 45gr Amax bullet if you go out for elk....(I'm the one who was glassing above you in 16A a few weeks back). :-)

Here's hoping that if your daughter is drawn that you'll be able to solve the issue when the Department makes its phone calls to rejected card holders. Keep the cell phone on and stay where you have service. That being said, if they don't officially extend the updating period and give everyone an opportunity to make the changes, they're going to have a lot of complaints. And, the longer they wait to run the draw after closing the payment service, the more likely they are to get people with newly-expired and replaced cards.

..and now it appears to be down again, but this time it's just not letting you select the big game species. This is usually what happens when the close the update feature for good.

Not true. The 10% cap for Non-res is a CAP, not a set aside. That means that AT LEAST 9 of the bonus tags will go to residents, but every single one of the 18 tags could go to a resident if there were not any non-residents with more points. Or, if there were non-residents with the same amount of points, it would just be a matter of who had the better randomly assigned bonus pass draw number. There is no advantage to being a non-resident.

Congratulations! What a blessing that they have grandparents around to help out. My wife was born at 25.5 weeks, and that was 30 years ago. She spent 87 days in the NICU, but was a miracle child who somehow came out of it all without any lasting problems...other than being more ornery than most (my FIL's words, not mine). Little girls are tough.

The update feature appears to be fixed now. I just tried updating one of our apps as a test (using the same card I had on file before) just to see, and it went through the whole process. It worked exactly as it did three weeks ago when I updated as soon as I knew there might be an issue with my cards.

My reply was directed at the one below you claiming that you have to pre-pay in Utah and Nevada. You don't.

Full fee up front. That's how. You obviously haven't applied in Utah or Nevada recently.

Actually, the contract with company that processes payments for ALL STATE AGENCIES (read, not just AZGF to all the folks on here who place the blame solely on the Department) expires on March 28th. I'm guessing the main reason for the extra week this year between payment update deadline and tag issuance is to give the Department time to work through any issues (such as we're seeing today) and get all payments finalized well before that contract expires. By the time the fall draw comes around the Department plans to have it's own system in place. It will be interesting to see how they are able to handle it when it falls to them for the first time.

I will take it if you are close to the Valley.

Interested in the cot and lanterns. where are you located?