diablo

In the early 80's I found an old practice bomb. It still had flour (rock hard) caked in it. It was made if sheet metal. This was in 37b. I have a picture of it somewhere around here. Also found a lot of indian artifacts and even a couple of old wood ammo boxes sticking out of a wash.

5. Diablo once cloned himself just to see if he could kick his own butt... It was a tie LOL

MEMO F-7 TO: Duane L. Shroufe, Director FROM: Bruce D. Taubert, Assistant Director Wildlife Management Division PRESENTER: Leonard L. Ordway, Game Branch Chief TITLE: Presentation of the Draft Arizona Game and Fish Department Guidelines and Recommendations for the 2006-2007 Hunting and Trapping Seasons and Proposed Changes to Commission Rules Regarding Wildlife Areas for Commission Approval DESCRIPTION: The public review draft of the Arizona Game and Fish Department Guidelines and Recommendations for the 2006-2007 Hunting and Trapping Seasons and proposed changes to Commission Rules R12-4-801, R12-4-802, and R12-4-803 will be presented to the Arizona Game and Fish Commission for any additions or corrections prior to being presented to the public. The Commission may vote to further direct the Department to consider changes and/or new opportunities in the hunting and/or trapping seasons. DATE: November 21, 2005 Summary: The Arizona Game and Fish Department annually solicits public review and comment concerning hunting seasons. To facilitate public review, the Department annually publishes the Arizona Game and Fish Department Guidelines and Recommendations for the hunting seasons (see attached guidelines). The document presents the management guidelines that are used by Department Wildlife Managers to prepare the annual recommendations for the next year's hunts. Additionally, specific direction from the Arizona Game and Fish Commission is incorporated into the guidelines, such as allocating 5% of the total elk permits to juniors-only antlerless hunts. The Department recommends changes to hunting structures that may differ from previous year hunts in this venue. After the Commission approves the guidelines, the document will be posted on the Arizona Game and Fish Department web page. Copies will be distributed to individuals through direct mailings and distribution at public meetings, which are tentatively scheduled in late January and early February in 11 locations around the state (schedule attached). Over 200 people attended similar meetings last year. Public comments will be accepted by fax, e-mail, and letter until March 1, 2006, and will be shared with the six Regions for consideration in preparing the final hunt recommendation package. The recommended Commission Orders for the fall 2006 hunts will be presented at the April 22, 2006 Commission meeting. Commission Orders for 2006-2007 bandtailed pigeon, dove, javelina, spring turkey, spring bear, spring buffalo, and waterfowl seasons will be presented at noticed Commission meetings during summer 2006. Within the draft guidelines, a proposed recommendation schedule is presented whereby the Department will implement an additional drawing for elk and pronghorn antelope beginning in winter 2006-2007. Seasons will be authorized at the December 2006 Commission meeting and the draw will be held in March 2007. Deer, turkey, bighorn sheep, buffalo, bear, mountain lion, small game, trapping, and population management seasons will continue to be authorized at the April Commission meeting with the draw remaining in July. Spring seasons will continue to be set in August with a November drawing. The intent of this proposal is to provide greater lead time to successful applicants for planning their hunts and possibly reduce the proportion of successful elk and pronghorn antelope applicants that may apply for deer hunts. Included in this proposal is a recommendation to consider an additional fall draw for javelina in Region 5 as part of the April Commission meeting. The Department recommends that the guidelines as authorized be used for both the 2006 and 2007 hunting seasons. The Department will come back to the Commission with the next recommended hunt guidelines in August 2007. Future public meetings will be held during September, beginning in September 2007. The Department will recommend that small game and trapping Commission Orders (Commission Orders 11-18 and 23) be approved for a two-year period, beginning in fall 2006. Additionally, the Department is recommending changes to many season structures throughout the state to standardize and simplify season openers and season length. These standardized structures are described in the hunt guidelines. Other recommended changes are primarily directed at enhancing hunter opportunity. Arizona Game and Fish Department proposed changes and Commission directives for the 2006-2007 hunting seasons are as follows: COMMISSION ORDER 2: DEER At least two percent (2%) of the general deer permits will be juniors-only. At least one juniors-only season will be offered in each Region. These seasons will be ten days in length and encompass either Columbus Day or Thanksgiving. In Unit 16A, the Department is recommending that the juniors-only muzzleloader season be stratified, with a ten-day juniors-only muzzleloader season encompassing Columbus Day and leaving the existing juniors-only muzzleloader deer season in December. This would partition opportunity between the two hunts with an increase in permits because of expected lower hunt success in the Columbus Day season. All units with white-tailed deer hunts will be recommended to have no more than 10% of the permits offered during the December season dates. Those units without early seasons in the past will be recommended to have stratified season structures to provide additional hunter opportunity. Guideline for offering late season opportunity for white-tailed deer has been added to the Alternative Deer Management Plan (see attached proposed draft). The Unit 27 archery deer season is being recommended for expansion to two months in length, split between September and January season time frames. This is in alignment with other archery seasons structures around the state. Unit 36B has been recommended for removal from the Alternative Deer Management Plan. Region 5 is continuing to work with the Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge to finalize deer management objectives. All general seasons that are outside of alternative deer management season structures will be recommended to provide 15-20% hunter success in accordance with guidelines. All deer seasons are recommended to be a minimum of ten days in length. Implement antlerless deer harvest in Unit 12AW as needed in accordance with the Alternative Deer Management Plan. COMMISSION ORDER 3: PRONGHORN ANTELOPE Standardize all season dates for pronghorn antelope. Firearm seasons will be ten days in length unless the hunt areas offer both muzzleloader and general season hunts, then they will be six-day seasons. COMMISSION ORDER 4: ELK At least five percent (5%) of the total elk permits will be juniors-only antlerless permits. At least six general early bull elk hunts will be offered annually; two each in Regions 1 and 2 and one each in Regions 3 and 6. At least six muzzleloader bull elk seasons will be offered annually; two each in Regions 1 and 2 and one each in Regions 3 and 6. In addition to archery early bull hunts, the guidelines provide a late season hunt structure for archery any elk hunts. The intent is to move approximately 50% of the current bull harvest opportunity from the early seasons to this later hunt structure and double the related hunt opportunity. Place an upper limit on the bull:cow ratios in those units managed for higher ratios (Units 1, 9, 10, and 23 limited to 40 bulls:100 cows). General bull elk hunt success will be managed for 30 to 35%. Elk populations will be managed in accordance with Regional Elk Operational Plans (see attached plan from April 2005; plans are developed annually through public input from local Habitat Partnership Committees and provided to the Commission in April). COMMISSION ORDER 5: TURKEY At least two percent of the spring and fall permits will be offered as juniors-only permits. Fall juniors-only season dates will coincide with the general fall seasons. Hunt success for all firearm turkey hunts will be managed for 10-15% hunt success. All spring turkey seasons will be stratified. Institute a fall season for turkeys in Unit 17A. COMMISSION ORDER 6: JAVELINA At least two percent of the javelina permits will be offered as juniors-only permits for the spring seasons. Ten percent of the total number of permits for javelina will offered in the fall to coincide with the small game opener. Season openings dates will be standardized. Archery seasons will be shortened by one weekend to allow for a ten day juniors only season. HAM seasons have also been recommended for extension to ten days. Javelina herd size will be managed at 7-10 individuals. Given the history of leftover tags from the spring draw for Region 5 hunt areas, the Department is recommending that 15% of the permits across all season types will be offered in a fall season structure. Archery season will coincide with first ten days of the September archery deer season, the HAM season will coincide with the first ten days of the small game season, and the general season will coincide with the ten-day deer season in November. COMMISSION ORDER 7: BIGHORN SHEEP Establish a season for Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep in Units 23 and 24A combined. Manage for the harvest of 20-30% of Class III and IV rams. COMMISSION ORDER 8: BUFFALO No changes. COMMISSION ORDER 9: BEAR Implement Commission Rule requiring the physical check of harvested bears. Standardize archery and general bear season dates for spring and fall seasons. Split Unit 22 into north and south units to manage sow harvest in an area recovering from a recent fire. Split Unit 23 into north and south units to manage for a release site for bears that must be relocated during open hunting seasons. COMMISSION ORDER 10: MOUNTAIN LION Implement Commission Rule requiring the physical check of harvested mountain lions. Implement a season closure during June 1 to August 31 in units without multiple bag limits. Multiple bag limits and boundaries will be reviewed and modified as appropriate to address management objectives. Unit 42 has been suggested for consideration of a multiple bag unit if recently translocated bighorn sheep are suffering from mountain lion predation. COMMISSION ORDER 26: POPULATION MANAGEMENT HUNTS All population management hunts recommended for implementation last year are again recommended except for the following changes. Unit 35A is recommended to be eliminated from the proposed HAM bear season, whereas Unit 35B is recommended for inclusion in the general season, and Units 35A and 35B are recommended for inclusion in the archery-only bear seasons. Additionally, the Department is investigating the success of deer hunters that purchased either an elk tag or a buffalo tag in Units 12A and 12B. COMMISSION ORDERS 11: SQUIRREL; 12: COTTONTAIL RABBIT; 13: PREDATORY AND FUR-BEARING MAMMALS; 14: OTHER BIRDS AND MAMMALS; 15: PHEASANT; 16: QUAIL; 17: CHUKAR PARTRIDGE 18: BLUE GROUSE; 19: DOVES; 20: BAND-TAILED PIGEON; 21: WATERFOWL; 22: COMMON SNIPE; 23: TRAPPING; AND 24: SANDHILL CRANE No bag or season frame work changes; small game and trapping Commission Orders (Commission Orders 11-18 and 23) will be recommended for approval for a two-year period. Note: Season dates and bag limits for Commission Orders 19, 20, 21, 22, and 24 are subject to final approval of Early and Late season Federal Frameworks as prescribed by the Migratory Bird Commission. COMMISSION ORDER 29: SPECIAL BIG GAME LICENSE-TAG HUNTS The 2006-2007 Special Big Game License-Tag seasons were approved at the October 2005 Commission meeting. R12-4-802 WILDLIFE AREA RESTRICTIONS Additions underlined: 9. Chevelon Creek Wildlife Area (located in Unit 4B): a. No open fires. b. No firewood cutting or gathering. c. No overnight public camping. d. Motorized vehicle permitted on designated roads only, except as permitted by R12-4-110(G). e. Posted portions closed to all public entry. f. Additional posted portions closed to public entry from October 1 to February 1 annually. g Open to hunting in season, except seasonally posted portions closed to hunting from October 1 to February 1 annually. Recommendation: The Department recommends that the Commission VOTE TO APPROVE THE DRAFT ARIZONA GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT GUIDELINES AND MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES WITH GOALS, RECOMMENDATIONS, OR GUIDELINES FOR THE 2006-2007 AND 2007-2008 HUNTING SEASONS, INCLUDING IMPLEMENTATION OF A SEPARATE RECOMMENDATION AND DRAW CYCLE FOR PRONGHORN ANTELOPE AND ELK COMMENCING IN DECEMBER 2006. BDT:BFW:bfw Attachments DEER COMMISSION ORDER 2 2006 RECOMMENDED CHANGE FORM What do you want to change? I want to change the structure of the Unit 21 Whitetail hunt to a stratified structure, which will include a four-day season at the end of October and the current December hunt during the rut. Why? Include management objectives, with goals, recommendations, or guidelines. To increase hunter opportunity by offering more permits. What is the expected outcome? The expected outcome will be a lower hunt success on the early hunt, which will provide the opportunity to offer more permits while harvesting the same number of deer. Originator: Jake Fousek, Wildlife Manager, FOR6 2006 RECOMMENDED CHANGE FORM What do you want to change? I am recommending stratification of the whitetail hunt in Unit 22 by adding a new hunt that would open concurrently with the October mule deer hunt and run 4 days. The December whitetail hunt would then have a reduction in tags but would remain the same number of days as before. The net effect would be that more hunters would be required to take the harvestable surplus of whitetail bucks because some hunters (October hunters) would be hunting outside the rut when bucks are less active and less vulnerable to detection. Why? Include management objectives, with goals, recommendations, or guidelines. More hunters than ever are not getting to go deer hunting because of low permit numbers. It is the appropriate time to expand hunter opportunity for deer. Previous to now, all of the Unit 22 whitetail hunt opportunity has been during the rut in December. I want to increase hunter opportunity by exchanging December whitetail tags for October whitetail tags. At the same time there will be less pressure on rutting whitetail in December. This strategy should result in more hunter opportunity in Unit 22 while still allowing for appropriate levels of harvest for whitetail bucks in Unit 22. What is the expected outcome? I expect to harvest approximately the same number of whitetail by stratifying the hunt while increasing hunter opportunity. Hunter crowding is not considered an issue by combining the whitetail and mule deer hunts due to past permit levels for mule deer, and because whitetail hunters tend to hunt different country than mule deer hunters. If the biological objective of harvesting approximately the same number of bucks or the biologically appropriate number of bucks is not achieved, then permit levels can be adjusted accordingly. The conversion of December tags to October tags will be calculated during the hunt recommendation process. Originator: John Dickson, Wildlife Manager, FOR6 2006 RECOMMENDED CHANGE FORM What do you want to change? Stratify the whitetail deer hunt in Unit 24A. Add a new hunt that would open concurrently with the November mule deer hunt. The whitetail deer hunt in November would be an 8-day hunt opening and closing on a Friday with approximately 300 tags. The December whitetail hunt would then have a reduction in tags but would remain the same number of days as before. The net effect would, hopefully, be that more hunters harvest the same number of deer. This hunt would also coincide with the same hunt structure and hunt dates as proposed in 24B. 24B currently has a mule deer hunt at the same time as 24A and is also proposing to offer whitetail tags during its mule deer hunt. Why? Include management objectives, with goals, recommendations, or guidelines. More hunters than ever are not getting to go deer hunting because of low permit numbers. It is the appropriate time to expand hunter opportunity for deer without killing more bucks. Previously all hunts in 24A, other than archery, have been during the rut in December. I want to increase hunter opportunity by exchanging December whitetail tags for November whitetail tags. At the same time there will be less pressure on rutting whitetail in December. What is the expected outcome? I expect to harvest approximately the same number of whitetail by stratifying the hunt while increasing hunter opportunity. Hunter crowding is not considered an issue by combining the whitetail and mule deer hunts due to past permit levels being over 1000 for mule deer. Currently, the 5-year average hunt success for the December whitetail hunt is 51%. I expect the proposed November whitetail hunt success to be close to 30%. Based on these figures, approximately 125 permits will be offered in the December hunt (a reduction of 250) and 300 permits will be offered in the November hunt. This will be a 50 permit increase overall from 2005. If the biological objective of harvesting approximately the same number of bucks is not achieved, then the permit numbers and season dates of the non-rut whitetail hunt in 24A may be adjusted to accomplish the objective of allocating harvest between rut and non-rut hunts.. The conversion of December tags to November tags is only an estimate for Unit 24A. Originator: Natalie Robb ? 693, Wildlife Manager, FOR6 2006 RECOMMENDED CHANGE FORM What do you want to change? I would like to add an additional whitetail season into the hunt structure for Unit 24B. The season dates for this recommended hunt would be November 10 -17, 2006. Why? Include management objectives, with goals, recommendations, or guidelines. Approximately 70% of the whitetail range in Unit 24B is located in the Wilderness and is accessible only by foot or horseback. Only seven main points of vehicular access into whitetail range are available to hunters. Six of these access points are at the periphery of whitetail range. Permit numbers for the past 15 years have ranged between 300 and 500 for the December hunt. When permit numbers are in the 400 to 500 range, several popular hunting areas within the unit begin to experience a significant increase in hunter numbers. For example, in 1993 whitetail permits were increased to 500 for the December hunt. During that hunt, 35% of the hunters contacted in the field voiced a negative opinion or concern about the number of hunters in the field. The opinions and concerns were not solicited by AGFD personnel. Such comments were simply noted during the course of conversation with permitted hunters. After 1993, when the total recommended permit numbers were in the 450-500 range, an additional fall hunt was included to reduce hunter densities during the December hunt. The fall whitetail hunt in 24B typically has a lower success rate than the December hunt. Adding an additional fall whitetail season into the 24B hunt structure will provide the ability to add permits and increase hunting opportunity without increasing hunter densities during the December whitetail hunt. What is the expected outcome? The expected outcome will be an increased opportunity for whitetail hunting in Unit 24B, without compromising hunter densities that are perceived as acceptable by the hunting public. Originator: Dana McGehee, Wildlife Manager, FOR6 2006 RECOMMENDED CHANGE FORM What do you want to change? I propose a change in hunt structure for the archery deer hunt in Unit 27. Change would be to make the archery hunt in Unit 27 during the August-September season consistent with Units 1,3A, 3B, 4A, 4B, 5A, 5B, 6A, 6B (except Camp Navajo), 7,7M, 8,9,10,16A (except Mohave County Park Lands), 17A, 17B, 18A, 19A, and 19 B. There would be no December hunt in Unit 27, and to maintain hunter opportunity, there would be a January 1- January 31 archery hunt. Why? Include management objectives, with goals, recommendations, or guidelines. For more consistency and consolidation of season dates and weapon types, this change would bring Unit 27 onto the same schedule as the majority of the Region and the adjacent Unit 1. The exception is that Unit 1 does not offer an archery hunt during the month of January. Since inception of an altered archery hunt in 2003, Unit 27 has gone from 16 Bucks:100 does to 24 bucks: 100 does. Fawn recruitment has seen a similar increase. The December archery hunt obviously has a large impact upon this deer population, and thus is a major limiting factor. More importantly, these changes in the hunt structure will satisfy Department direction for simplifying hunt structures and will not leave Unit 27 as a ?stand alone unit?. Due to hunter demand and in efforts to provide hunter opportunity, I recommend that the month of January be considered for a late season archery season. What is the expected outcome? Since the changes in hunt structures in 2003, the mule deer herd in Unit 27 has begun to stabilize and experience increased recruitment. Hunter satisfaction has increased, and harvest success has also increased. Eliminating the December archery hunt may allow some continued recovery in the mule deer population, but more importantly consolidate hunt structures across the Region. Originator: Steve Najar, Wildlife Manager, FOR1 PRONGHORN ANTELOPE COMMISSION ORDER 3 2006 RECOMMENDED CHANGE FORM What do you want to change? Change the date of the Unit 7M archery pronghorn antelope season dates to coincide with other pronghorn antelope archery season dates. Why? Include management objectives, with goals, recommendations, or guidelines. This change will move Unit 7M archery pronghorn antelope hunt to the same dates as the adjacent Unit and most of the state. This will allow for the same hunter opportunity and reduce conflicts with other recreationists in the areas surrounding the city of Flagstaff. Originator: Larry Phoenix, Field Supervisor, Region 2 BIGHORN SHEEP COMMISSION ORDER 7 2006 RECOMMENDED CHANGE FORM What do you want to change? The purpose of this form is to recommend a change in Unit 23 and 24A to allow for a Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep hunt in fall 2006. The proposed hunt is recommended to be run the same season dates and lengths as other Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep hunts currently offered throughout the state. Why? Include management objectives, with goals, recommendations, or guidelines. Ground survey efforts in the winter of 2005 indicated the potential presence of a harvestable population of rocky mountain bighorn sheep along the Salt River, which is the border between Units 23 and 24A. Visual observations over the last several years by Wildlife Managers have revealed sheep from this area on both the north and south sides of the Salt River upstream from the Salt River Bridge. Funding has been located specifically to survey Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep in Units 23 and 24A in October 2005. If data from the survey flights confirm the existence of a harvestable population of bighorns in Units 23 and 24A, a hunt would be appropriate. What is the expected outcome? The expected outcome is, pending confirmation of a harvestable population of Rocky Mountain bighorn in Units 23 and 24A, the addition of another hunt area for bighorn sheep in the state. Originator: Craig McMullen, Field Supervisor, FOR6 BEAR Commission Order 9 2006 RECOMMENDED CHANGE FORM What do you want to change? Commission Order 9 notes: 7. Bears that are causing property damage may be taken during a closed season pursuant to ARS 17-302 and R12-4-305. BEAR SPECIAL REGULATIONS: As prescribed in R12-4-308, all hunters must contact an Arizona Game and Fish Department office in person or by telephone at 1-800-970-BEAR (2327) within 48 hours of taking a bear. The report shall include the hunter?s name, hunting license number, tag number, the sex of the bear taken, the management unit where the bear was taken, and telephone number at which the hunter can be reached to obtain additional information. Within 10 days of taking the lion, each hunter who takes a bear or mountain lion shall present the skull, hide, and attached proof of sex for inspection. If a hunter freezes the skull or hide before presenting it for inspection, the hunter shall prop the jaw open to allow access to the teeth and ensure that the attached proof of sex is identifiable and accessible (pursuant to R12-4-308). Successful hunters are encouraged to contact the nearest Department office by telephone to coordinate inspections. Why? Include management objectives, with goals, recommendations, or guidelines. These changes have been recommended by the Department Predator Team. The changes in inspection and notification are required by new rule language in R12-4-308. What is the expected outcome? Outcome for the special regulation note is to reduce the number of rule violations by hunters unaware of the new reporting requirements. Are there any other possible solutions? Originator: Pat Barber, Predator-Furbearer Biologist, WMGM 2006 RECOMMENDED CHANGE FORM What do you want to change? I am recommending a unit 22 black bear hunt split into 22 north and 22 south. The 22 north and south hunts would open concurrently, each having a set sow quota. Hunt boundaries would follow the unit split of elk. Sow quotas would be managed in a more precise manner and would be more easily adaptable to management needs. Due to the fires in Unit 22 south, and indications from research regarding dramatic decreases in bear recruitment after fires in the Mazatzals, this recommendation will allow managers to respond separately to biological needs in the south Unit separate from the north Unit. Why? Include management objectives, with goals, recommendations, or guidelines. Since the summer of 2004, southern 22 has been hit with 4 large fires: Willow Fire, Edge Complex, 3-Fire and 4-Fire. These fires have burned much of the bear habitat in 22 south leaving all of 22 north untouched. 22 south lost the majority of its dense vegetation and riparian corridors adjacent to large prickly pear slopes and mesas. On years with high prickly pear productions, bears are easily located with minimal cover to retreat. These years will lend themselves to high hunter densities in these areas, compounding to an already stressed population. Recruitment in the Four Peaks study area after the Lone Fire show little recruitment into the population for at least 4 years post fire. By splitting unit 22 into north and south, sow quotas can be adjusted to manage for these impacts without affecting the hunting opportunities in 22 north. With the opportunity to adjust the 22 south quota, we can minimize the impacts on the sow harvest while giving the same or greater opportunity of hunting GMU 22 as current management can provide. Harvest data compiled for 2002, 2003, 2004 in Unit 22 south show high sow harvest on years producing good prickly pear fruits. Three year average of sow harvest in 22 South is 9 compared to 7 in 22 north. In 2002, a good pear year, 5 of the 6 sows harvested were in 22 South. With a Unit 22 split, over harvest of sows would be eliminated, yet providing a greater overall sow quota unit wide. What is the expected outcome? The expected outcome is to reduce the pressure on bears in 22 south while keeping or increasing hunter opportunity unit wide. Adjustments in sow quotas in 22 south will allow an opportunity to keep sow harvest at appropriate levels in the burned areas in 22 south. This is based on research on burned areas indicates poor recruitment in the Mazatzals after fire. At the same time, sow harvest quotas in northern Unit 22, where there were not fires, will not be affected. Sow quotas can be adjusted accordingly. The sow quotas for 22 south and north will be calculated during the hunt recommendation process. Originator: John Dickson, Wildlife Manager, FOR6 2006 RECOMMENDED CHANGE FORM What do you want to change? We would like to omit 23 south from the unit 23 spring archery bear hunt so that the hunt occurs in unit 23 north only. Why? Include management objectives, with goals, recommendations, or guidelines. Per Department Policy (I1.13.D2), "No tranquilized bear will be released into a unit?during that unit?s bear hunting season." Currently, the Unit 23 spring archery bear hunt opens March 18 and runs until July 31. This season, unit wide, prohibits us from releasing bears into our most valuable release site in Unit 23 during the typical bear incident time of year. What is the expected outcome? Historically, there is a lack of harvest statewide on archery spring bear hunts. We rarely have bear incidents in Unit 23 south, rather they mostly occur in Unit 23 north, with the exception of really bad drought years. Even then there are a relatively low number of incidents in 23 south. Therefore, we expect no significant impact to bear hunter opportunity or bear harvest in unit 23. Not to mention, we have the general and archery only population management hunts as tools that we can implement in the event that we need to address certain irresolvable bear problems in 23 south in the absence of a permitted archery spring bear hunt. Most importantly, this change will open up the most valuable bear release site in Unit 23. Originator: James Simmons, Wildlife Manager, FOR6 2006 RECOMMENDED CHANGE FORM What do you want to change? I recommend moving back the 4B archery-only bear hunt to open with the statewide archery deer-turkey opener. Why? Include management objectives, with goals, recommendations, or guidelines. This hunt was originally structured to start with the archery deer-turkey opener. The hunt was then changed years ago to start during the first week of August. Rationale again includes: ? Having all archery hunts open across most of the Region (turkey, deer and bear) on the same weekend ? Consistency in season types. What is the expected outcome? To eliminate potential conflicts while still maximizing hunter opportunity. Allow sportsmen the opportunity to hunt archery deer-turkey in an archery-only season, without hunters chasing bears with firearms while others are archery deer-turkey hunting. Less hunter conflicts in the field (OGT calls, hunters stating that people are shooting at deer with firearms when bear hunting). Originator: David Halama, Wildlife Manager, FOR1 2006 RECOMMENDED CHANGE FORM What do you want to change? I recommend moving back the 3B archery-only bear hunt to open with the statewide archery deer-turkey opener. Why? Include management objectives, with goals, recommendations, or guidelines. This hunt was originally structured to start with the archery deer-turkey opener. The hunt was then changed years ago to start during the first week of August. Rationale again includes: ? Having all archery hunts open across most of the Region (turkey, deer and bear) on the same weekend ? Consistency in season types. What is the expected outcome? To eliminate potential conflicts while still maximizing hunter opportunity. Allow sportsmen the opportunity to hunt archery deer-turkey in an archery-only season, without hunters chasing bears with firearms while others are archery deer-turkey hunting. Less hunter conflicts in the field (OGT calls, hunters stating that people are shooting at deer with firearms when bear hunting). Originator: Shawn Wagner, Wildlife Manager, FOR1 2006 RECOMMENDED CHANGE FORM What do you want to change? I recommend moving back the 3C archery-only bear hunt to open with the statewide archery deer-turkey opener. Why? Include management objectives, with goals, recommendations, or guidelines. This hunt was originally structured to start with the archery deer-turkey opener. The hunt was then changed years ago to start during the first week of August. Rationale again includes: ? Having all archery hunts open across most of the Region (turkey, deer and bear) on the same weekend ? Consistency in season types. What is the expected outcome? To eliminate potential conflicts while still maximizing hunter opportunity. Allow sportsmen the opportunity to hunt archery deer-turkey in an archery-only season, without hunters chasing bears with firearms while others are archery deer-turkey hunting. Less hunter conflicts in the field (OGT calls, hunters stating that people are shooting at deer with firearms when bear hunting). Originator: David Halama, Wildlife Manager, FOR1 2006 RECOMMENDED CHANGE FORM What do you want to change? I recommend moving back the 27 archery-only bear hunt to open with the statewide archery deer-turkey opener. Why? Include management objectives, with goals, recommendations, or guidelines. This hunt was originally structured to start with the archery deer-turkey opener. The hunt was then changed years ago to start during the first week of August. Rationale again includes: ? Having all archery hunts open across most of the Region (turkey, deer and bear) on the same weekend ? Consistency in season types. What is the expected outcome? To eliminate potential conflicts while still maximizing hunter opportunity. Allow sportsmen the opportunity to hunt archery deer-turkey in an archery-only season, without hunters chasing bears with firearms while others are archery deer-turkey hunting. Less hunter conflicts in the field (OGT calls, hunters stating that people are shooting at deer with firearms when bear hunting). Originator: Steve Najar, Wildlife Manager, FOR1 MOUNTAIN LION COMMISSION ORDER 10 2006 RECOMMENDED CHANGE FORM What do you want to change? Season dates for all units without multiple bag limits will change to: September 1, 2006 through May 31, 2007. Commission Order 10 Notes 15. Lions that are causing property damage may be taken during a closed season pursuant to ARS 17-302 and R12-4-305. MOUNTAIN LION SPECIAL REGULATION: All hunters must contact an Arizona Game and Fish Department office in person, or by telephone (1-877-438-0447), within 48 hours of taking a lion (pursuant to R12-4-308). Within 10 days of taking the lion, each hunter who takes a bear or mountain lion shall present the skull, hide, and attached proof of sex for inspection. If a hunter freezes the skull or hide before presenting it for inspection, the hunter shall prop the jaw open to allow access to the teeth and ensure that the attached proof of sex is identifiable and accessible (pursuant to R12-4-308). Successful hunters are encouraged to contact the nearest Department office by telephone to coordinate inspections. Why? Include management objectives, with goals, recommendations, or guidelines. These changes have been recommended by the Department Predator Team. The closed season, in concert with recent rule changes that identify legal wildlife under CO 10 as any lion except a spotted kitten or a female accompanied by spotted kittens, is recommended to protect mountain lion kittens during the time of year when they are most vulnerable. The season closure also addresses specific public comments and will bring Arizona in line with lion management practices of most other western states as identified by benchmarking efforts. The changes in inspection and notification are required by new rule language in R12-4-308. What is the expected outcome? Mountain lion survival during the June to August period would increase. Hunter harvest from June to August is relatively low due to high temperatures and dry conditions that negatively affect hunters? abilities to use hounds. Sport harvest in the summer period has accounted for 5% of the total annual harvest in 2002 (13 in summer/264 total), 5% in 2003 (11 in summer/218 total), and 6% of the harvest in 2004 (15 in summer/247 total). Originator: Pat Barber, Predator-Furbearer Biologist, WMGM 2006 RECOMMENDED CHANGE FORM What do you want to change? Institute a multiple bag structure for mountain lions in Unit 42. Why? Include management objectives, with goals, recommendations, or guidelines. The Department is trying to reestablish bighorn sheep in the Bighorn and Belmont Mountains in Unit 42 and will be transplanting about 25 sheep into the Bighorn Mountains in November 2005. Most of the sheep will be radio collared and we will be able to investigate the cause of death of any that die. If it?s found that significant predation by mountain lions is occurring, then we may want to try to increase the sport take of lions in the area to reduce pressure on the sheep population. Setting a multiple bag structure in the unit would encourage more hunters to take lions there. What is the expected outcome? It?s hoped that the multiple bag structure would encourage an increased harvest of lions, and thus reduce the mortality rate of newly introduced bighorn sheep. Originator: Bob Henry, Game Specialist, FOR4 POPULATION MANAGEMENT HUNTS COMMISSION ORDER 26 2006 RECOMMENDED CHANGE FORM What do you want to change? Population Management Hunt Season (PMH) for Bear: 1.) Add 35B to the PMH general bear season. 2.) Discontinue the PMH HAM Bear hunt in 35A 3.) Add units 35A and 35B to the PMH archery-only Population Management Season Why? Include management objectives, with goals, recommendations, or guidelines. Currently, the population management hunt guidelines allow for general firearms hunts in 35A, HAM seasons in 35A, and no archery hunt in 35A or 35B. Due to the increase in bear populations in Unit 35B, along with an increase in calls from landowners and ranchers throughout the district it is felt that there is potential to use population management hunts in the future. The current general seasons include the spring general firearm hunt and an archery only hunt for units 35A and 35B. These hunts run from April through July. There is a potential to receive nuisance bear calls later in the year, and the population management hunts would allow for specific bears to be harvested through this system rather than handled by Department personnel. It is my belief that the HAM season is not necessary since the general firearms season allows for all weapon types to be used. An archery season should be initiated since nuisance bears in both units are usually located in or around populated areas where the use of a firearm would not be allowed by law. By adding the archery hunt to the population management seasons would allow the wildlife manager to decide what weapon type is necessary to handle the problem animal and to allow the Department to contact the hunters on that specific list. Otherwise, if archery equipment is necessary due to the location of the offending animal, many more hunters would need to be contacted to locate one wanting to hunt with archery equipment. What is the expected outcome? Using PMH general firearm hunts and archery-only hunts to handle specific, nuisance bear issues will allow for sportsmen to have the opportunity to harvest a bear instead of the Department having to remove it. This will save much time and expense, but still allow the offending animal to be handled with minimal impact to the resource and landowners. Originator: John Millican, Wildlife Manager, FOR5 2006 Public Hunt Guidelines Meetings January 12, 2006 ? Yuma ? 7-9 pm AGFD Yuma Regional Office ? 9140 East 28th Street January 17, 2006 ? Mesa ? 7-9 pm AGFD Mesa Regional Office ? 7200 East University January 18, 2006 ? Flagstaff ? 7-9 pm AGFD Flagstaff Regional Office ? 3500 South Lake Mary Road January 19, 2006 ? Page ? 7-9 pm Glen Canyon National Recreation Area office ? 691 Scenic View Road January 24, 2006 ? Pinetop ? 7-9 pm AGFD Pinetop Regional Office ? 2878 East White Mountain Boulevard January 25, 2006 ? Payson ? 7-9 pm Payson Police Department conference room ? 303 North Beeline Highway January 26, 2006 ? Prescott ? 7-9 pm Yavapai County Board of Supervisors Room ? 1015 Fair Street January 31, 2006 ? Kingman ? 7-9 pm AGFD Kingman Regional Office ? 5325 North Stockton Hill Road February 7, 2006 ? Safford ? 7-9 pm Graham County General Services Building ? 921 Thatcher Boulevard February 8, 2006 ? Sierra Vista ? 7-9 pm Performing Arts Center at Buena High School ? 5225 Buena School Boulevard February 9, 2006 ? Tucson ? 7-9 pm AGFD Tucson Regional Office ? 555 North Greasewood

Early bull elk hunts, 24% of tha tags to non-res. 3001 Unit 1, 40 tags non-residents got 23% of those tags 3002 Units 3A-3C, 25 tags, non-residents got 44% of those tags. 3003 Unit 3B, 30 tags, non-residents got 20% of those tags. 3004 Unit 4B, 40 tags, non-residents got 0% of the tags. 3005 Unit 6B, 25 tags, non-residents got 8% of those tags. 3006 Unit 10, 50 tags, non-residents got 32% of those tags. 3007 Unit 22N, 30 tags, non-residents got 27$ percent of those tags. 3008 Unit 22S, 30 tags, non-residents got 20% of those tags. 3009 Unit 23N, 20 tags, non-residents got 40% of those tags __________________

caseys in flagstaff

http://plicmapcenter.org/

unit 10 nov bull elk unit 34b nov coues

www.huntmap.com

34b coues nov tag, unit 10 bull elk nov tag

This is from, John J. Jackson, III, Chairman of Conservation Force The voice of nonresident hunters and anglers has been silenced by Congress. On May 11th the Reid bill, S.339, passed as a rider to an emergency military appropriations measure, H.R.1268, Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief, for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2005. It was signed by President Bush on the night of May 11th. Senator Reid portrayed the amendment as one of "States' Rights." The new law grants the unlimited right to states to discriminate against residents of other states when issuing hunting and fishing licenses. The new law delegates to states the authority the Federal Courts have said is reserved to Congress by the U.S. Constitution. The law expressly authorizes states to charge nonresident hunters and anglers any price for licenses and to discriminatorily limit the number of license available to that class of applicants. John J. Jackson, III, Chairman of Conservation Force, an organization supporting fairer treatment of nonresidents, stated that, "It is the first and only natural resource law of its kind in the nation. It is unthinkable for states to hoard any other natural resource. States have tried to hoard their resources such as petroleum and natural gas without success. Now they can do it with game and fish. What is incredible is it passed without legitimate debate in the Senate or House as a rider to an appropriations measure when it was not even an appropriations issue." Congressman Collin Peterson of Minnesota, past-Chair of the Congressional Sportsmen's Caucus, was one of the few who made a dash to stop the "fast track" measure. The Congressman challenged the Reid rider before the Rules Committee because it was not germane to the emergency military appropriation. He argued that it was a substantive matter unrelated to the appropriation for the military. Reid claims that the measure was necessary to overcome a 9th Circuit court decision in Arizona last year. That case held that discriminatory licensing of nonresident hunters was "unconstitutional." The elimination of such warring between the states was the very reason for the Convention that adopted the U.S. Constitution, according to the court. "The new legislation eliminates the last hope for nonresidents to be more fairly treated when hunting or fishing out-of-state," said Jackson. "It makes no difference if it's public or federal land or a migratory species that flies across the nation and is otherwise largely regulated by the USF&WS. Nonresident sportsmen and sportswomen have been relegated to second-class treatment on federal lands and to leftover game. It's no coincidence that Senator Reid represents Nevada, which has limited nonresident licensing of deer, elk and pronghorn antelope to as low as 5 percent of available licenses, even though more than 85 percent of that state is federal land." "Some have seen the issue as an undesirable contest between hunters over a limited resource," Jackson said. "It is not a contest, because it is one-sided. Nonresidents are underrepresented before state legislatures and game commissions that determine license allocations and prices. The contest was already uneven, now nonresidents have lost their U.S. Constitutional protection and Congressional representation. It's inherently unfair, particularly on federal lands and with migratory species. It's also unfair to private landholders and businesses that cater to nonresidents. The whole multi-billion dollar interstate hunting and fishing industry has been compromised, even though it has been a growth component of the larger industry. One out of seven hunters hunt out-of-state each year. It remains to be seen if they will be able to in the future." Jackson promised that, "Though the fledgling rights of nonresidents have been silenced, it's not over. We will be watching closely. The states have made it a Congressional issue. Indeed it now will be if the discrimination worsens."

Wildlife News March 25, 2005 Fall 2005 big game draw changes Applying for a hunt permit-tag in this fall's draw? Significant changes have been made to the process this year: The online application process has been suspended. For the fall 2005 draw, a manual system with paper applications is the only way to apply. To apply: 1) fill out a paper application. 2) include a check, cashier's check or money order payable to the Arizona Game and Fish Department for all applicable license, hunt permit-tag and application fees. 3) mail or deliver to any department office by 7 p.m. (MST), June 14. Note: The department must receive completed paper applications by the deadline; postmarks don't count. Inside tip: On deadline day all Arizona Game and Fish offices will be inundated with people who waited until the last minute. Save time: apply early. If you apply by May 27, the department will review your application and attempt to contact you if any errors are found. Pick up the new regulations and hunt draw permit applications at department offices, at license dealers or download them from the department's Web site. Regulations and applications will be available first from azgfd.gov in downloadable PDF format on May 2. Hard copies will be available at all department offices and license dealers around May 20. Throw away any old applications. Due to process changes they are no good. The new applications are yellow; the old ones are white. All applicants must buy a hunting license. In the past, applicants could ask that a license be issued only if they were drawn. This year, all applicants must have a hunting license to be eligible for the draw. Hunters who don't already have a license can apply for one on the hunt permit application form. If you choose to apply for a license at the time of application, you must include the license fee with each application you make. However, only one license will be issued and the other license fees will be refunded. Buying a license to enter the draw? For twice the fun, buy a combination hunting-fishing license. Take advantage of Arizona's wettest winter in a decade - fish Arizona! Hunt permit-tag fees must be paid up front. All application fees, hunt permit-tag fees, and license fees (if applying for a license at time of application) must be included with the application. Hunt permit-tag fees will be refunded if the applicant is unsuccessful in the draw. A bonus point may be purchased for the cost of the license (if needed) and for the application fee only, instead of paying the entire tag fee. A loyalty bonus point has been created. A single loyalty bonus point will be awarded for people who buy a license and apply for big game hunts for five consecutive years. The point is genus specific and will be retained as long as the hunter continues to apply each calendar year for that genus. The starting year for record keeping purposes is 2001. So, anyone who applies for a genus, and has applied for that same genus every year beginning in 2001, will earn a loyalty bonus point for that genus in this drawing. A proposed conservation bonus point that hunters can earn for volunteer effort is in the rulemaking process and will not be in place for the fall 2005 draw. The bonus point pass percentage is higher. The bonus point pass percentage has increased from 10 to 20 percent, meaning that 20 percent of tags will be set aside for applicants with the highest number of bonus points. A set-aside percentage of bighorn sheep hunt permits for nonresidents has been created. Fifteen percent of the total available bighorn sheep hunt permit-tags in any calendar year will be set aside for nonresidents. Eager to hear draw results? By July 29, customers will be able to get draw results through azgfd.gov and by telephone at (602) 942-3000. Permits will be mailed to successful applicants in late July.

This solicitation letter was posted onanother board. Take a look. Subject: URGENTLY needed help for the future of hunting: In late 2004 a bill was introduced (S 2978) in the U.S. Senate to totally end nonresident hunting and fishing rights in all the states of the United States of America. The purpose is to authorize states to exclude nonresident hunters and anglers at will and to permit states to charge nonresidents any price whatsoever with absolutely no limit. Some states will raise the license prices so high that only the very wealthy can hunt when and if they can get a license at all. Fourteen (14%) percent of licensed hunters (two million) hunt out-of-state each year and twenty-six (26%) percent of anglers (nine million) fish out-of-state. The bill would be unfair to more Americans than it favors and it seriously impacts the right of use of federal land managed by the U.S. Government which is half the land in the United States. This bill will terminate any and all nonresident rights of hunting and fishing access on those public lands as well as state and private lands - all lands! NOW it is imperative that nonresidents let their Senators and Representatives (Companion bill expected) know that they want their rights protected, not abolished. At this time only United States Outfitters, Conservation Force, Dallas Safari Club and African Safari Club have had the guts to try and stop the discrimination against us, the nonresident hunter. Conservation Force has created the Non-Resident Rights Defense Fund to oppose the legislation. Tax deductible donations can be sent to "Conservation Force's NR Rights Defense Fund". Mail to "Conservation Force" 3900 N Causeway Blvd, Suite 1045, Metairie, LA 70002. Take a few moments to contact our Senators and urge them to oppose this bill. Their information is as follows: Jeff Sessions 335 Russell Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510 (202) 224-4124 Richard Shelby 110 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510 (202) 224-5744 E-mail: senator@shelby.senate.gov This is another step in trying to deprive us of our hunting rights. Take the effort to let your voice be heard. We have everything to loose. Thanks, Randall Bush Regional Representative Region 22 Safari Club International 7059 Pineview Lake McCalla, AL 35111-4042 (205) 491-4464 If you're going to make a hole, make it a big one. NRA Life Member NAHC Life Member Native American (Apache) Life Member

Its time for those boxed treats everyone so loves..LOL. The council here in Flagstaff had their cookie kick off last night and sales started today.( I am a registered GS leader for my girls troop. AKA troop pack mule!!! LOL.) This is Not a solicitation. Just Fair warning!!! LOL. Diablo

If you need to borrow a weapon just ask. I have several to choose from. Diablo Ds

Rancher's suit puts enviros on defense Jim Chilton says he was libeled in a press release and Web posting. ?By Mitch Tobin ARIZONA DAILY STAR Tucson's Center for Biological Diversity is no stranger to lawsuits related to grazing. But in a turning of the tables, the litigious group now finds itself as the defendant in a Pima County courtroom. Arivaca rancher Jim Chilton is suing the environmentalists, alleging they defamed him in a two-page press release and 21 photographs posted on the center's Web site in July 2002. Chilton's libel suit, which seeks unspecified monetary damages, argues that the news advisory and photo captions contain "false, unfair, libelous and defamatory statements" about Chilton's management of his 21,500-acre Montana Allotment, northwest of Nogales. "These are lies masquerading as facts," Kraig Marton, Chilton's attorney, said in an interview. "This case also shows how photographs can lie." Chilton's wife, Sue, was appointed to the Arizona Game and Fish Commission in 2001 over the strenuous objections of environmentalists. The center's advisory says she "tried to suppress" Game and Fish recommendations about the allotment on the Coronado National Forest and that the Chiltons "have an agenda hostile to wildlife and endangered species." The center, which has built a national reputation for aggressive litigation and media work on behalf of endangered species, says its actions weren't libelous because they were opinions. "The news advisory and the pictures are not false information - they're the truth," said Robert Royal, the center's attorney. The center also says documents on the Web site can't be libelous because they were public records that were part of its unsuccessful effort to block renewal of Chilton's grazing permit. "The Chiltons are really trying to create a chill effect to scare people away from commenting on public lands and the actions of public agencies," said Kieran Suckling, the center's policy director. Judge Richard Fields has already ruled the Chiltons are public figures, which raises the bar for proving libel. The jury of six women and four men is expected to get the case next week. Marton said he'll reveal in his closing statement how much money his client is seeking. "The primary focus of the case is to prove the center made false statements," he said. The suit names not only the center, but three of its current and former employees: Martin Taylor, author of the release; Shane Jimerfield, the Web site designer who posted it; and A.J. Schneller, who was responsible for some photos and captions. The suit alleges the center hurt Chilton's ranching business and caused him "to suffer great mental anguish, humiliation, public hatred, contempt, ridicule" and damage to his "integrity and reputation." "I'm outraged," Chilton said after Tuesday's hearing before a nearly empty courtroom. "For five generations we've ranched in Arizona as stewards of the land and all evidence indicates we're doing a wonderful job." Larry Medlock, a now-retired Forest Service official who concluded grazing on the allotment didn't have a negative environmental impact, testified Tuesday that the press release had several false statements. Medlock, who visited the allotment some 20 times, disputed the center's claim that part of the allotment was "grazed to bare dirt." He said it was true cattle had broken into a preserve for Sonora chub, a threatened fish, but the cows had come up from Mexico and weren't Chilton's. Chilton's lawyer asked if the photos showing denuded areas were an accurate representation of the allotment. "It doesn't give a true picture of what the Montana Allotment looks like," Medlock said, adding the ground could have been laid bare by activities other than grazing. Taylor, author of the release, then took the stand for nearly two hours of sharp questioning from Chilton's lawyer. Taylor said he wrote the release in an hour, faxed it to the news media, then called some reporters in a failed bid to drum up coverage of the controversy. "I wasn't biased against the Chiltons," said Taylor, an entomologist who left the center in 2003. He flew in from his native Australia for the trial. Marton sought to prove Taylor had an anti-grazing agenda and an ax to grind when he went out to inspect the allotment. The lawyer said Taylor willfully ignored scientific studies showing positive effects of grazing and said he took photos that focused on bare sections rather than areas around them covered by vegetation. "I wanted to document the problem areas," Taylor said. "I wasn't attempting or pretending to do good science." "Did you ever call the Chiltons before you wrote the news advisory to get their side of the story?" Marton asked. "That's for journalists to do," Taylor said. "Not us." ● Contact reporter Mitch Tobin at 573-4185 or mtobin@azstarnet.com. __________________