ShutYourLib

Every time I read one of your comments it pushes me even more to the total ban side. At this rate I don’t think you are doing much justice for your position.

Not everyone wants to be a guide. Personally, I just want equal fair chase opportunity and good times in the outdoors with my family. My problem is when you raise your kids with certain hunting ethics, wait 20 years to get a tag in a coveted unit, only for your kids to witness how the guides operate on their hunts. I had always thought cameras had a place and have several myself; it’s cool to see what’s out there! I never considered the extremes though, never even thought about every water source in a unit covered with game cameras by a guide. Now, I’m thinking about future extremes and can envision a time where a well financed investor sees how much money a trophy animal can bring, what stops them from having cameras blanketing an entire unit? Seems far fetched now, but the way guides hunt and run their business is something I would have never considered 30 or 40 years ago.

I don’t post often, and usually side with the “we don’t need any more regulation” side of the house. That said, there are some problems with game cameras. If you have ever been on a hunt in a trophy unit, where there are multiple guide services representing clients, it really sucks. There are 15+ cameras on every water source, the guides then send in large groups of people to check all of the cameras early each morning, then they radio the team to head where the big bucks were last seen, then they post glassers on every hilltop for a couple of miles from that mornings pictures. It makes it very difficult for a do it yourself hunter. I have no idea how to fix that, and don’t like regulation, but seeing that firsthand was the first time I thought that something needed to be done.

That's insane! I have driven three different f250's over the past 20 years. I drive a lot and have never been pulled over. I think I would flip my sh!t if I was getting "stopped and frisked" without any cause other than the make of my vehicle.

Nevermind my question. had no idea how this worked, just read up on it. Great idea.

Is it a 50/50 mix? Seems like a great, very accurate way to control the anneal.

concerning article regarding federal lands, including national parks: http://www.businessinsider.com/congress-lays-groundwork-to-get-rid-of-federal-land-and-national-parks-2017-1 In the midst of highly publicized steps to dismantle insurance coverage for 32 million people and defund womens healthcare facilities, Republican lawmakers have quietly laid the foundation to give away Americans birthright: 640m acres of national land. In a single line of changes to the rules for the House of Representatives, Republicans have overwritten the value of federal lands, easing the path to disposing of federal property even if doing so loses money for the government and provides no demonstrable compensation to American citizens. At stake are areas managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), National Forests and Federal Wildlife Refuges, which contribute to an estimated $646bn each year in economic stimulus from recreation on public lands and 6.1m jobs. Transferring these lands to the states, critics fear, could decimate those numbers by eliminating mixed-use requirements, limiting public access and turning over large portions for energy or property development. In addition to economic stimulus from outdoor activities, federal land creates revenue through oil and gas production, logging and other industrial uses. According to the BLM, in 2016, it made $2bn in royalty revenue from federal leases. The Outdoor Industry Association estimates federal tax revenue from the recreation economy at almost $40bn. Ignoring those figures, the new language for the House budget, authored by Utah Republican representative Rob Bishop, who has a history of fighting to transfer public land to the states, says that federal land is effectively worthless. Transferring public land to state, local government or tribal entity shall not be considered as providing new budget authority, decreasing revenues, increasing mandatory spending or increasing outlays. Essentially, the revised budget rules deny that federal land has any value at all, allowing the new Congress to sidestep requirements that a bill giving away a piece of federal land does not decrease federal revenue or contribute to the federal debt. Republican eagerness to cede federal land to local governments for possible sale, mining or development is already moving states to act. Western states, where most federal land is concentrated, are already introducing legislation that pave the way for land transfers. In Wyoming, for example, the 2017 senate has introduced a joint resolution that would amend the state constitution to dictate how public land given to the state by the federal government after 2019 is managed. It has little public support, but Wyoming Senate President Eli Bebout said that he thought the state should be preemptively thinking about what it would do with federal land. The Congressional devaluation of national property is the most far-reaching legislative change in a recent push to transfer federal lands to the states. Because of the Republican majority in Congress, bills proposing land transfers could now swiftly diminish Forest Service and BLM lands across the country. We didnt see it coming. I think it was sneaky and underhanded. It exemplifies an effort to not play by the rules, said Alan Rowsome, senior director of government relations at The Wilderness Society. This is the worst Congress for public lands ever. boundary waters minnesotaShutterstock Rowsome said hes not exactly sure how the rule will be used, but he thinks the first places to come under attack might include areas adjacent to the majestic Grand Canyon National Park in Arizona and Minnesotas Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness. Those areas hold uranium and copper, respectively. Rowsome said hes worried that sensitive tracts of public land, like the oil-rich Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, could soon be up for sale. Some 60% percent of Alaska is made up of national land, and the states representatives have tried to pass laws claiming parts of it for state use as recently as 2015. Its amazing ecosystem and worthy of protection, and its very likely that House Republican majority will open that up for drilling, Rowsome said. This latest effort comes on the heels of a bill adopted in 2016 that directs the Department of Agriculture to transfer 2m acres of eligible Forest Service lands to each state. Giving away national land has been part of the Republican Party platform since the mid-80s, after Reagan declared himself a Sagebrush Rebel, but its regained steam in the past few years as 20 states have introduced some form of legislation suggesting that federal property be given to local governments. In 2015, Bishop and fellow Utah representative Chris Stewart formed the Federal Land Action Group, a congressional team with the specific intent to come up with a framework for transferring public land. Washington bureaucrats dont listen to people, Bishop said in a statement. Local governments do. But Rowsome argues thats a populist message without any popular support, pushed by a small faction of legislators with support from industries like mining and energy. Despite the Republican message that Washington has overstepped in designating national parks and monuments, a 2016 study found that 95% of the American public believes that National Parks are worth protecting and 80% said theyd be willing to pay higher taxes to do so. Western Republicans that are perpetuating the idea are very well funded by the oil and gas industry during their campaign, Rowsome said. Its special interests wielding power for an agenda that will advance their goal. Nearly 90% of BLM lands are already open, but they cant stop trying to get more. A 2016 Colorado College survey of seven western states found that 60% of voters rejected both the sale of public lands to states and giving states control without sale. In 2012, Arizona voters struck down two pieces of legislation that would have turned over federal land to the state, including one that claimed the Grand Canyon as state land. Opponents fear that local governments, especially in states with small budgets, wont be able to invest in management and will sell off land to make money. Last summer, the Forest Service was spending $240m a week to suppress wildfires, and the Department of Interior estimates the cost of deferred maintenance, like updating roads, at around $11bn. In December, Wyoming Governor Matt Mead said that transferring public land to his state was legally and financially impractical. He cited firefighting costs on public land as something that the state budget wouldnt have room for. Historically, when federal lands have been transferred to states, they have become less accessible. Idaho sold off almost 100,000 acres of its public land between 2000 and 2009. In Colorado, access has been limited the public can only use 20% of state trust land for hunting and fishing. John Gale, conservation director for the advocacy group Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, said that hes worried about access for sportsmen. He believes that theres a further danger in segmenting ecosystems through state-by-state development. 70% of the headwaters of our streams and rivers in the West are on public lands, he said. Rivers and migratory corridors dont follow state boundaries. The incoming administration hasnt been clear about where it falls on transfers. Montana Congressman Ryan Zinke, tapped to be the next Secretary of Interior, voted for the rules package, but in the past hes been against land transfers. President-elect Donald Trump has spoken out against reallocating federal land, but hes also met with prominent pro-land transfer groups. Nevertheless, bills proposing land transfer will now have an easy route to passage, as they wont need to be backed by any financial justification. The entire rules package passed on party lines, but it runs counter to legislation that passed both the House and Senate in November, the Outdoor Recreation Jobs and Economic Impact Act of 2016. Signed into law in December, the legislation requires the Department of Commerce to count the over half a trillion dollars from the outdoor recreation economy in the countrys GDP for the first time. Its not just natural resources that are on the auction block, but jobs, said Gale. For a party that prides itself on being fiscally conservative ... theyre talking out of both sides of their mouth.

All this 6.0 bashing, I don't get it! I have an 04 f350 6.0 that has 310k and I have replaced one alternator, ficm, batteries and tires, shocks, break pads and rotors, and one EGR valve. Still have the Same injectors. Just keep up on all the maintenance, no tunes, and they are great. My previous 7.3 was sold with over 500k and was needing injectors but still ran and pulled. Great trucks!

Seems that there are a lot of people with two personalities, their real one, and the alternate persona that they have online. One of my favorites is this guy, on a different forum, bragging about how hard he hunted. Always bashing road hunters and telling everyone how far into the woods he goes. Well, we connected to do some scouting, and upon getting to his house, he was so obese that he could hardly get into the truck. He was about to die after we walked about 300 yards to set up glass. As I alluded to earlier, many have shot a coyote or snake and left them, and in the simplest example, you would probably kill that coon ransacking your garbage can out of pure anger. The moral police are out in full force, and they are everywhere. It seems it is usually to push an agenda, buy a vote, or just to get people to like them, but it's getting ridiculous - we shouldn't play their game too! Heck, people get in more trouble nowadays for kicking a dog than they do for kicking a person. Most of us would probably spend less money buying a cow to slaughter than we do on an elk hunt - it's not about the meat. If it is only about the meat for you, then please stop putting in for bull elk and go after the better tasting cows. I'm with AZLance on this, after all of the hard work, money, and time spent pays off with a kill, then I think that there is something wrong with the person that doesn't express some excitement, doesn't shout joyfully, or jump up and down!!

Unless it's a useless yote or rattlesnake, right? This debate can deep pretty quickly.

Egr valve. If white smoke, loses all power but does it off and on..

Nice! Where is the video?

I beat one in court. I was very polite, had a good attitude, and told the judge that I believed that there must be something wrong with the camera. I asked how often the cameras had to be calibrated and tested. The judge asked the officer, who replied that it had to be calibrated every 90 days. I asked for proof of the calibration, which resulted in a new court date while they attempted to find the information. At the next court date the documents showed that the camera had not been calibrated since installation, which is probably the norm. The judge dismissed the case. This was in El Mirage.

No bail needed, but he put aside his own personal ethics to hunt where he bashed others for hunting... Way to go!! Bash your fellow sportsman then hunt along side of them. I'm betting that you are also the guy that thinks I do not NEED some of my firearms, but have deemed them ok for yourself.

Lug marks? From your rifle? If that's what you are talking about I would think that you have a problem with your bolt, the face may not be square. I would think that it would have to be a pretty big die problem, one that you could see with your eyes, to cause that issue.

Everyone needs to take a year off.

I'm not even sure what you are talking about? Overrated in relation to lion hunting? Elk hunting? Youth hunts? I think both of those calibers have a home depending on what they are going to be used for. I think a .300 ultra is a bigger waste of resources.

Sold?

Look for the upcoming response from NY enemy "nobody needs a serrated knife to skin a deer"

Not sure I agree with that. From my understanding the cases are identical, but the actual chamber dimensions are different. If I remember correctly the 5.56 chamber has a longer throat to accommodate higher pressures. There are a lot of cartridges that will chamber in other caliber rifles, but not safe to shoot.

Wear your seatbelt. I believe that John Noveske was killed in an auto accident shortly after posting the same information on FB.

So, now that the bait ban has been put into place, I thought it would be interesting to list out our predictions of what the department may come up with next. I believe that we will move to an archery deer tag draw. With all of the new regulations, you need enforcement. I think that tag prices will move up. Game cameras will be considered an unfair advantage and will not be allowed over water, and eventually at all. Is it a problem that I cannot think of any positive things that may change?

That's the beauty of true democracy. Regardless of their background, it’s ultimately the vote of the people that make the decisions. There has to be some sort of research, analysis, or rational to justify any potential recommendation for change. I am not fully up to speed on the current actions necessary to modify existing G&F activities, but it would appear that a small group makes a pitch for a recommended change, they get buy in from what 5 commissioners, and shizam.. it’s a done deal. I do not think that we “screwed”, but any change will take sacrifice. The problem with folks nowadays is that they are fine with getting screwed for a very long time. Everyone seems fairly content with the crumbs, but one day, everyone will have had enough and make them change. The ball is truly in our court. The department is fully funded by us, we just lack the camaraderie, discipline, and inconvenience of making it work our way.

Wow, in reading this thread, it appears that nobody actually uses bait. Why are you all so worked up? HAHA.. too funny that nobody will admit to using. In general, I am 100% against the passing of any new laws. In my mind, if there are concerns about a disease, or anything else for that matter, there should be some research conducted by the appropriate biologists employed by G&F or private party. The findings of that research made available to the hunters of the state, then a vote should be held for all licensed hunters in the state. They should only be concerned with enforcement of laws that the sportsmen/women have deemed appropriate. If they are not appreciative of the collective voices, provided no factual studies or evidence, I am no longer going to give G&F my regular donation that I contributed to them annually. What needs to happen is for the great people of AZ to decide that enough is enough. Everyone should take 2014 off from hunting, do not buy any tags, or put in for any annual hunts. The only way to make our voices heard is to take away the allowance. Things would change in a hurry.

Try a cl ad in the lost and found section