1uglydude

Pm sent

I did I did, and so did six of my friends and family. No monsters in there yet, but we know it pretty well.

It changes slightly each year, but you can usually predict which units it will be based on history. Also, if a unit has a big ram come out of it a couple years in a row, chances are it will end up in a bonus pass pool only system the next year.

Second dins on the scale if it falls thru.

NEVER MIND...A FRIEND IS GOING TO LOAN ME SOME FOR NOW, BUT I MAY RESURRECT THIS REQUEST IF I NEED A LARGER SUPPLY AFTER MY TESTING I have one pound of unopened H1000 that I would like to trade for an unopened pound of H4350. If you're intersted, please send me a PM. I would also consider purchasing H4350 for a fair price if you have no need for H1000.

Sending a PM

Total hours?

I will take the binos

No, it doesn't. Tag and license money gets taken to the general fund to pay for other state services, but the money doesn't move the other way. Feel free to review the attached document. You will find several examples of tax money going to the AZGFD. As with many other things, the AZGFD would prefer the average person not know that they do receive tax dollars. So, like politicians they make cleaver statements like "The Arizona Game and Fish Department does not receive general funds from the State of Arizona. But here are a couple of examples from the attached document: Source of Revenue: Monies received through intergovernmental and interagency service agreements. Source of Revenue: Collections from local governments for the Urban Fishing Program, transfers from the state Risk Management Fund, proceeds from the charitable auction of bighorn sheep tags, and private donations from private contributors. fis(1).pdf Before the recession (i.e. 2007) the Legislature made attempts to pay back some portion of what they would sweep in prior years. It was never the full amount. And, in 2008, the Legislature swept more than $7.8million from the Department. You're good with percentages, so I'll let you figure out what impact that had on their $30M budget. So, would yousay that if Peter steals $10 from Paul, and then later pays Paul $5 that Paul is now operating on $5 of Peter's money? Here's a 2006 FAQ from the last price increase that lays out the budget challenges the Department must meet. Note the discussion of retirement costs--those are even higher now, and the Department doesn't get any help from taxpayers on that. http://www.azgfd.gov/temp/fee_increase.shtml

No, it doesn't. Tag and license money gets taken to the general fund to pay for other state services, but the money doesn't move the other way.

Actually, we don't. AZGFD doesn't receive any taxpayer money for game management. It's all through licenses and tags. And, in lean times, the Legislature sweeps their funds for the general fund. As to only going up a few percentage points each year. Okay. With no changes since 2007, what would a 3% increase per year over the course of 7 years look like? North of 20%, Let's not all forget that none of the proposed increases are above the fee caps the Legislature already had in place. In other words, the Department had authority to raise tag prices even higher than this before the "simplification" bill. They're just doing it now because they can also change the licensing structure. And to the guy complaining about they "keys to the Kingdom" license for resident and non-resident youth. Youth have always paid the same price for youth licenses, regardless of residency. Its in place, in part, to encourage new youth to try out our unique hunting experiences, but it also allows Arizonas resident fathers with children living out of state to bring their kids here for the same price as if they lived with the full time. I haven't made up my mind about all the other changes, but I support the $5 youth license 110%. They're our future hunters (and voters), and we should make it as easy for them as possible to get into the field and have a positive experience. So let me see if I have this correct? You want to argue against my point that “we subsidize AZ Game and Fish with our taxes each year” and then state a few sentences later, “in lean times, the Legislature sweeps their funds for (I believe you mean 'from') the general fund”. Thank you for arguing against my point by strengthening it. I never said how our tax money subsidizes AZGFD, just that it does. Second, you suggest that “With no changes since 2007, what would a 3% increase per year over the course of 7 years look like? North of 20%”. They aren’t recommending a 20% increase, they are recommending a 37.4% increase for elk, 107.9% increase for deer and a 73.3% increase in the application fee. As far as “none of the proposed increases are above the fee caps the Legislature already had in place”. Since the federal government has no cap on how much of our income they could potentially tax, I suppose that means the federal cap on income taxes is 100%. So we should be glad if one day the federal government raises our income tax to only 99% since it is short of the cap of 100%? As Obama might suggest I guess we hunters “aren’t paying our fair share” and “should pay just a little more”. You must be a democrat because yours is the most liberal arguments I have heard yet. No mistake...it's "for," not "from." The Legislature TAKES money (your tag dollars) from the Department to use in the General Fund. You obviously do a good job of staying up on the issues. Also, your percentages reflect the pricing for the proposed "premium" tags. You know darn well that they represent only a fraction of the tags offerred, so the total revenue increase is much lower than what you represent. As I said, other than the change for kids, I haven't made up my mind on the proposals yet. I was merely showing that there are other ways to look at it--trying to be a voice of reason. In turn, I get personally attacked? Nice. What is it with this board lately? Anyone who trys to acknowledge that there is more than one way to look at things is shouted down by belligerant bullies.

You're referring to Pittman-Robertson dollars, which are collected federally and then distributed to the individual states. While a "tax," it can hardly be said that they are Arizona taxpayer dollars going to AZGFD, and given their federal nature, could not seriously be used to argue that they subsidize resident tags.

Actually, we don't. AZGFD doesn't receive any taxpayer money for game management. It's all through licenses and tags. And, in lean times, the Legislature sweeps their funds for the general fund. As to only going up a few percentage points each year. Okay. With no changes since 2007, what would a 3% increase per year over the course of 7 years look like? North of 20%, Let's not all forget that none of the proposed increases are above the fee caps the Legislature already had in place. In other words, the Department had authority to raise tag prices even higher than this before the "simplification" bill. They're just doing it now because they can also change the licensing structure. And to the guy complaining about they "keys to the Kingdom" license for resident and non-resident youth. Youth have always paid the same price for youth licenses, regardless of residency. Its in place, in part, to encourage new youth to try out our unique hunting experiences, but it also allows Arizonas resident fathers with children living out of state to bring their kids here for the same price as if they lived with the full time. I haven't made up my mind about all the other changes, but I support the $5 youth license 110%. They're our future hunters (and voters), and we should make it as easy for them as possible to get into the field and have a positive experience.

wouldn't your licence need to be valid for the season date for the hunt you apply for? the migratory stamps I see your point.... just change the stamps date Jan 1- Dec 31....... James It depends on how they set up the system. In Utah, you only need a valid license at the time of the application. If you're drawn, you need to get a new license to validate your tag. It's nice for those of us who apply from out of state because I can buy a license the last week of February, apply for the hunts, then the next year submit my application during the first week of February, and I don't have to buy another license. So you get two years of applying for only one license. You have to make changes if you actually draw a tag, but there are worse problems in life.

Seriously!?! He was the only guy I trusted up there.

Yea I have all the serial numbers for all my firearms. It was reported that night. I'm hoping someone gets stupid and try's to pawn or sell it to someone who has the number ran. The shitty part of all this is from the inside looking out it ha to be Someone who knows me. To many variables, dogs were home, they are barkers and go nuts when someone comes over. Neighbors were home and heard nor a peep. Toss in the fact I'm on a tail end of a divorce and it makes you think. And I'm sure you are wondering, I didn't kill a gobbler. They kicked my butt for 3 days. Weird season to say the least. Thanks for the replies guys. Sounds like your soon to be ex wanted to hit you where it hurts. That sucks.

Did you have the serial numbers to give to the police? The one and only time I have had firearms stolen, I was very lucky to get them back. The police picked up the punks a few days later with an apartment full of stolen goods. Mine were the only guns listed as stolen, probably because I was the only one who kept track of my serial numbers. Best of all, the barrels were all the same length they were whent they left my home.

The Hualapai Rez offers javelina hunts year-round

Interested...calling you

The current proposal being kicked around would be for a license that is good for 365 days from the date you buy it...like they do in Utah.

You don't lose your points when you get a leftover tag, unless for some reason the Depot tags are treated differently.

This past weekend I had an opportunity to participate in a fence modification project in the northern part of Unit 21. I participated as a member of the Mule Deer Foundation, but I understand that the Arizona Antelope Foundation and the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation may have also had a hand. AZGFD was there as part of the Adopt-A-Ranch Program, and USFS personnel were onsite to direct activities as well. I apologize if I left out any organizations. Over the course of a little more than a day, more than 30 volunteers modified or removed several miles of fencing. Our primary goal was to remove the bottom wire from the fences and replace them with smooth wire lifted to 18” off the ground. We also dropped the top wires down to 42.” Research shows that these dimensions provide deer and pronghorn the best opportunity to make it under or over a fence as the circumstances may require. We also installed several H-braces and tightened all of the existing wires. At one point, a group of us broke off and removed an entire corral that impeded access to a nearby tank. I took my little girl along so that we could enjoy some daddy/daughter camping time. Several others brought children too, and it was a great family activity. All in all, it was a great day. I didn’t take many photos, but here’s a few I snapped. Making ‘smores around the campfire: Posing at the worksite (note the CWT hat): Getting down to work: Receiving instruction from those in the know:

Lol

The reason you see some of those items stricken is because they would now be handled by Commission order or rule, rather than by statute. Note that the transfer of tags still requires children under 14 to have hunters education. You'll likely see a Commission rule that keeps that requirement in place for all big game hunters under 14 years old. One of the goals of the legislation is to make it easier to get kids involved, but there is no way they would completely eliminate the education requirement.

The left has the loonies from Code Pink and MoveOn, and the right has it's own squeaky wheels who lack reason, judgement, temperance, and tact.