Huntin'AZ

Thanks fellas. My brother and I will need to spend alot of time scouting. But it is good to have a reference point to start out with. We feel very fortunate to have drawn this hunt and want to make the most out of it. Any favorite camping spots in the area?

The AGFD released their survey results that appear to show that hunters prefer quantity or quality. I could have swore that the ADA did there own survey that said the opposite. http://www.azgfd.gov/h_f/hunter_study.shtml

I got this email from supporters of Proposition 106 in AZ. It appears to benefit hunters by conserving more of the State Trust Lands. In addition, it appears that the AZ Game and Fish is supporting the proposition. Does anyone have an opinion about how this will affect hunting opportunities in the state? Prop 106

I received an emailed COSTCO ad that listed a Magellen 500 LE GPS unit with the Mapsend software that they will be selling for $200. Cabelas sells the same unit for $299. Does anyone know if this is a good product? Thanks in advance.

My interest in raising this topic was to get answers to the following questions: Which one of these two props, if either, will conserve more land for hunting and will preserve access for hunters? From the responses so far, it appears that those questions may not be easily answered. But if anyone can, I would appreciate it. Thanks!

Amanda was nice enough to post some of our deer pictures from the last couple of years in the Arizona rifle section, page 77. Enjoy! http://www.coueswhitetail.com/az_rifle_hun...es_rifle_77.htm

Yeah, we had no idea it was there. As you can see the butcher sliced through it at each end before he realized it was there.

ARIZONA RESIDENT HUNTER ALERT In January, Representative Jerry Weiers introduced legislation that would cap nonresidents at no more than 10% of the hunts in any drawing. Insuring resident hunters (ourselves and our children ) would have at least 90% of this states hunting opportunities. This legislation strengthens a new Commission rule that was adopted last winter. This could be a tremendous gain for resident hunters! This legislation has moved through the House of Representatives and Senate with incredibly strong support. In the next few days, it will be sent to the Governor for signing. The only glitch in this process has been a split vote of the Arizona Game & Fish Commission. Three members of the five member Commission do not believe this legislation is necessary. Those three Commissioners, believe the Commission, and only the Commission, should have any say on legislation relating to hunting, fishing, wildlife management and more importantly, who gets to hunt. Unfortunately, on Tuesday these three Commissioners asked the Governor to veto HB2127. The reason this legislation was developed in the first place, is because of the failure of an existing Commission rule that capped nonresidents at 10%. When challenged in federal court, by outfitter George Taulman, the Commission's 10% nonresident cap rule was found to be unconstitutional. This almost eight year legal battle, at a cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars, ended with nonresidents being given equal status with residents in our hunt drawings. In the last two drawings (2004 & 2005), nonresidents have been drawing many of our most coveted permits. I some instances they are even drawing more permits in a unit than residents. The only thing that saved resident hunt opportunities, was a ground swell of concern from hunters throughout the west, combined with the strong support of western federal legislators, who rose to our defense and passed legislation in Congress, once again giving states clear authority to regulate hunting and fishing. President Bush quickly signed the legislation into law and the states were once again in control. As I mentioned earlier the Commission quickly adopted a new rule capping nonresident hunters, and we commend them for their action; but this time, after the past fiasco, we want even more protection. This is why we have asked for statutory protection and why Representative Weiers introduced HB 2127. The Legislature has strongly supported this additional protection. Now we must ask the Governor to do the same. We have a window of no more than a week to get our support for HB 2127 to the Governor. Below is the Governors web address and phone number. If resident sportsmen want this legislation signed by the Governor, they need to let her know they support it. Please don't delay do this now. Ask Her to SIGN HB 2127 and protect resident hunting opportunities. If the Governor does not want to go against her Commission she could always just let HB2127 become law without her signature. What would be tragic for resident hunters, and incredibly hard to understand, is if she would choose to veto HB2127. Governor Janet Napolitano's website, http://www.governor.state.az.us/ Then go to the left side of the home page to: Contact the Governor. Governor's office number 602-542-4331 Please do not delay, contact the Governor immediately. Protect resident opportunity to hunt in Arizona. In support of HB2127: Arizona Antelope Foundation Arizona Deer Association Arizona Desert Bighorn Sheep Society Arizona Elk Society Mohave Sportsman Club Yuma Valley Rod & Gun Club and Others

Published: 02.10.2006 Development plans imperil Biosphere Landmark glass terrarium impedes views By Joseph Barrios ARIZONA DAILY STAR A local developer's plan for the 1,600-acre Biosphere 2 property north of Tucson may mean tearing down its landmark glass terrarium to improve the view for new, luxury houses. Fairfield Homes has signed a contract to buy the huge tract 16 miles north in Pinal County and intends to close the deal sometime this fall, said David Williamson, CEO and president of the company. Fairfield plans to develop a master-planned community with residential lots no smaller than about 1 acre and homes costing at least $300,000. Williamson would not discuss the price of the property. "We have tied up the Biosphere and we're talking about doing a master-planned community and commercial property. We're going to do a high-end community," Williamson said. Although the plans are still preliminary, Williamson said it will be a challenge to integrate the 70 buildings at the Biosphere 2 site, including the 3.1-acre glass terrarium on the 140-acre campus. Several structures may have to be torn down. "We've been looking at the Biosphere and been trying to integrate. There's probably no way of making those building code requirements work, so we're probably going to be shutting that down," Williamson said. "If there's anything we can save and utilize, we'll save it." Roughly 200 acres of the land could be used for commercial projects, he said. Last month, Fairfield Acquisition Inc., a subsidiary, registered the trade name "Biosphere Ranch" with the Arizona Secretary of State's Office. The Biosphere property's landscape is "magnificent," said Peter Douglas, a broker with Picor Commercial Real Estate Services. He said he worked with two developers ? one from Tucson, one from out of town, neither of whom he would name ? competing with Fairfield to buy the property. "It has fabulous views. It lends itself to custom and luxury home building, as well as some production home building. You just have to figure out what to do with the Biosphere in the middle," Douglas said. "Every real-estate transaction has an issue, and I think that's what it is in this one," he said. "Do you keep it? Do you demo (demolish) it? I think that's going to be the challenge for Williamson." Christopher Bannon, the general manager for property owner Decisions Investments Corp., said in a written statement that the company is "excited to have a potential buyer for this extraordinary property. We hope to be able to announce by year's end that we have successfully concluded the transaction." Bannon did not return calls seeking elaboration. Texas billionaire Ed Bass, president of Decisions Investment, spent more than $200 million building Biosphere 2 as a self-sustaining environment for humans. In 1993, eight "biospherians" ended their two-year residence in the sealed ecosystem. Columbia University began managing the complex in 1996 and three years later pledged to expand research and programs there. But Columbia pulled out in 2003, as part of a lawsuit settlement with Decisions Investments. Decisions announced in January 2005 that the campus and surrounding land were for sale. Biosphere 2 is uniquely equipped to study global climate changes by studying "carbon cycling," or how carbon is absorbed and redistributed in the environment, said Joaquin Ruiz, dean of the University of Arizona's College of Science. The campus experienced scientific shortcomings because not all conditions inside the glass could be controlled. "All the issues of what we call carbon cycling are really complicated, and the Biosphere would have been a really good place to study that in detail," Ruiz said. "It is too bad, but it's not surprising that this is going to happen." Ruiz also said the facility is "extraordinarily expensive to run." "The story now is that it's going to be a bunch of houses," Ruiz said. "Does it have scientific merit? The answer to that is there were a few things that this facility could do better than any other place, but that the experiments were really, really expensive." The purchase, if each unimproved acre costs a minimum of $25,000, would cost Fairfield about $40 million, said Richard Foerster, a broker with Tucson Realty & Trust Co. He called that estimate a "guess" but said the land could be costly. "This would be excluding (demolishing) the Biosphere. If that had to be torn down, it would be expensive," Foerster said. ● Contact reporter Joseph Barrios at 573-4237 or jbarrios@azstarnet.com.

I believe this is just a natural variation of the deer. A ranger checked our kill a couple of years ago in Unit 33 and checked it for "spots." He casually called them "spotties" and explained that it was just a variation among the deer. It didn't sound like age had anything to do with it.