654321

This is what I would like to hear more about. I believe it was prop 109 that was suppose to make that happen but failed. Why did it fail? What could be changed to improve it so that it could pass? How does someone go about bringing that back? Hire a lobbyist? Googles generic answer says a lobbyist costs $5K-$25K a month. Could hunters raise that kind of cash? And for how long? It seems like the goal right now is to drop $250K to hire this ballot initiative company every time the HSUS comes back. Why not drop that money on legislation instead and be done with it. Yeah I don't understand why a bill couldn't be introduced to make laws that effect game to only be made by game and fish? I have no idea how state government works does anyone have insight on how this process would start? Arizona Voters Shoot Down Prop 109Defeated by preliminary margin, Prop 109 results demonstrate Arizona voter support for animal protection policies and the right to citizen initiatives PHOENIX — Voters sent a strong message to the Arizona Legislature on Tuesday by rejecting Proposition 109, a referendum that would have amended the Arizona Constitution to give the legislature “exclusive” authority over wildlife issues while seeking to also forbid citizens from initiating statutory petitions. “We are grateful to the citizens of Arizona for once again rejecting an attempt by the trophy hunting lobby to block citizen initiatives to protect wildlife,” said Kari Nienstedt, Arizona state director for The Humane Society of the United States. “It’s always better to keep power in the hands of the people, and that’s just what voters did tonight by saying ‘no’ to Prop 109. This is a victory for voters and for wildlife, and a defeat for the NRA and other special interests that don’t trust the judgment of voters.” Prop 109 was one of 10 measures on the 2010 ballot. If passed, Prop 109 would have given the Arizona Legislature “exclusive” authority over wildlife issues, disturbing the system that is partially insulated from politics and has been in effect in Arizona for more than 80 years. Prop 109 also would have threatened voter rights regarding the initiative process when it came to inhumane and unethical wildlife treatment. “Arizona voters spoke loud and clear. They don’t want the Legislature to politicize wildlife policy,” said Stephanie Nichols-Young, chair of Arizonans Against the Power Grab – No on 109. “Prop 109 was a power grab, pure and simple—and the voters of Arizona not only knew it, but clearly opposed it.” Several former Arizona Game and Fish Commissioners lauded the results, encouraged that the vote will help keep science-based wildlife management in place. “My wife and I hunt and fish each year, and I’m glad voters saw through the shady language and deceptive wording of this referendum so that we could enjoy these wonderful traditions for years to come,” said former Commissioner Tom Woods. A coalition of organizations across the state provided the foundation for a strong grassroots effort. Funding for the campaign was provided by the Humane Society of the United States, with 230,000 supporters in Arizona. The primary funder among Prop 109 proponents was the National Rifle Association, which persuaded the Legislature to place the referendum on the ballot, and then contributed more than $223,000 in support of the campaign. Tempe resident Thomas Hulen, a hunter and self-described conservationist, voted no on Prop 109. “As a longtime hunter, I’m ecstatic that this ridiculous ballot referendum has gone down to defeat,” he said. “There is no threat to hunting and fishing in Arizona, and I’m glad my hunting buddies and other Arizonans who voted ‘no’ realized that.” Opposition to Prop 109 was widespread including prominent elected officials, community leaders, and organizations such as the Animal Defense League of Arizona, the Sierra Club, and the Humane Society of the United States. By the end of the campaign, nearly all major news outlets that weighed in on the issue editorialized against Prop 109 including The Arizona Republic, East Valley Tribune, Tucson Citizen, Tucson Weekly, Arizona Daily Star and The Yuma Sun. The failure of Prop 109 marks the latest defeat of efforts by special interests to weaken Arizona’s now well-established reputation for supporting animal protection efforts and the right to citizen initiatives. In 2006, Arizona voters approved the Humane Farming initiative. In 2000, Arizona voters overwhelmingly rejected a ballot measure that would have required all wildlife initiatives pass by a two-thirds vote. In 1998, Arizona voters approved an initiative that banned cockfighting after the Legislature failed to ban the practice and also approved the Voter Protection Act to protect the initiative process. And in 1994, Arizona voters approved a citizen initiative banning the use of leghold traps, again after the Legislature failed to act on similar legislation. -30- Paid for by Arizonans Against the Power Grab – No on 109, with major funding from The Humane Society of the United States and The Fund for Animals, national nonprofits based outside the state, with 230,000 Arizona supporters. Donate Sign Up Take Action Shop Media Contact List2

I heard unit 1 had a ton of trees down, real hard to get around

you havent seen anything yet, do you remember back in the day when that one women and her Rancher husband was in the commission or had something to do with that. they also started a CONSERVATION ORGANIZATION. they were dirty as the day was long and only cared about selling out land own tags. this was also during the USO debacle. Cant remember her name but I know RINGER DOES. they are other ones that need to be watched very closely Sue Chilton

The Forest Service has a prescribed fire going right now north of Apache Maid

I could be wrong but I don't believe you will be able to even scout the big bo for your hunt until probably august so scout the country that isn't on the ranch hard until you can access the ranch. If your not finding what your looking for off the ranch then pony up the money for the access to the ranch.

The 2018 fall hunt recommendations are out, let the bitching begin.

I thought U of A's butt kicking was bad and now Virginia just got thumped by the 16 seed by 20 points. You have to love March Madness.

Looking like the Pac-12 will be 0-3. typical Wildcats one and done

well pac-12 off to a great start, 0-2 BYE BYE ASU

I thought since Sundevil liked Wikipedia so much he might enjoy this. As of April 5, 2017 the University of Arizona holds the all time record in all 3 major men's sports. Starting with basketball they hold a record of 150-82 against ASU. They also hold the all time record in football 49-40-1. Finally holding the all time record in baseball 247-215-1.

Not sure if they specifically do pig surveys but I would guess when they're up in the air doing other surveys they keep track of all big game observed.

The answer to your title is no the G&F is not secretly meeting, as you mentioned every one of their meetings is posted on their website thru 2018 and even the first one in 2019.

Tice hasn't worked for the AZGFD for quite a few years now and I believe Amber Munig is the one who brings the hunt recommendations in front of the commission.

I don't know about playing 10 times and each winning 5 but I do know about playing twice and U of A WINNING BOTH!!

Same outcome!

Were you the hunter? Do you remember when you could buy the permit and if they limited the number of hunters allowed on the ranch? No I wasn't the hunter, and I didn't buy my permit until right before the hunt, but if I remember correctly there was a certain date that was set when you could get your permit before the hunt started. As far as I can remember there was no limit on the number of hunters or the number of helpers allowed. At $80 a head I think the ranch loves to see each hunter have his 10 person possey. Last year rumor had it that the Grimmets had at least 2 tags that they personally turned back in and told 3 others to turn their tags back in but you know how rumors go. I've only been on a few antelope hunts, 2 in 10, 1 in 19B, 1 in 5A and 1 in 4A and for me unit 10 was my least favorite but again that's just me. 10 has definitely produced some real hogs over the years and I'm sure there are still some in there but I just wasn't blown away. I will say Big Bo is a very good name for that ranch it is HUGE country. Good luck in whatever you decide.

I went on the Antelope hunt last year on the Big Bo, everyone that assisted had to have the $80 permit. We were checked by the WM for unit 10 and if you don't have that permit its a trespassing ticket. He said the ranch was redoing the agreement in December and I said it would probably now cost a $100 a person and he said he had know idea what would happen. Personally I wasn't that impressed last year with the Goats I seen but to each their own.

According to Wyoming's draw report from 2017 9 preference points were about 10% and 10 and above were a 100% and this was for the normal draw.

Tags the AZGFD sets aside that only the Hopi's can apply for in exchange for access to their ranches.

We lose way more than 60 elk a year to vehicle collisions, maybe instead of salvage permits given out it should be citations given out and then the commission could go after them for civil fines for the loss of elk to the state.

Wildcats just put Stanford down

Just because you have to madatory report doesnt mean that the G&F is going to get an honest report.

The G&F can still come at you for their civil fines even if you're found not guilty, they just can't revoke your license.

I know three different people who self-reported and not one of them received a citation.

AP POLL U of A- 14 & ASU- 16 COACHES POLL U of A- 17 & ASU- 14 RPI U of A - 24 ASU - 25 PAC 12 U of A- 4-1 ASU - 2-3