Coues 'n' Sheep

I totally agree with you 100%!! We even have a 48 hour rule with clients... if they draw blood we spend the next 2 hunting days looking for that ONE animal dead or alive...

Awesome!

Awesome! Congrats Seth!

Very lightly used Gitzo 1276M Magnesium ballhead. This is a very smooth head. This is Gitzo's off-center style allowing for greater/easier articulation compared to a standard vertical ballhead. This is a very nice head that is easily operated with one hand thanks to the large single locking/friction control knob. Weighs 1.25 lbs and has an 11.0 lbs rating. The quick release plate engages the lock automatically when the camera is inserted, and has a secondary safety latch to prevent accidental release of the camera. This mechanism is easy to operate and does exactly what it should. This is the prior model to the current GH2750QR ballhead. It retailed new for about $250. I bought this head in a combo deal and really only wanted the legs for my Big Eyes and triclawps... the head is okay for this aplication but has too much adjustent for me actually. Asking $150+shipping (and open to resonable trade offers) Please feel free to text me if you have interest (928)978-2900

I have the BIG Gitzo legs and love them for shooting off of... and for my big eyes...

Prayers sent... Hang in there man!

Thanks guys... I have been away for a while and I hope you all got your letters in... Please also plan on going to the commision meeting and speaking on ONE talking point for 3 minutes... just pick the one topic that you are most pashionate about and give them your best 3 minutes... that is all you get.

Here is my letter. I have stollen key points and words form others, Please feel free to do the same.... To whom it may concern, As a 37 year resident of the great state of Arizona, and having spent nearly ½ my life in the outdoors in some way shape or form, I wish to convey my opinions in regards to the proposed Article 3 rule change. I am opposed to this rule change, I am opposed to the verbiage, and I am disappointed in the group that is pushing this open ended and discriminatory agenda, and here is why: The Facts.... 1) There is NO data collected in the state of AZ to support a ban on baiting or anything of the sort. 2) Members of AZGFD are taking a fast track approach to this issue (during hunting season) with very little effort to inform those most affected about the “new rule” ramifications. 3) All the “data” AZGFD claims to be using is from states that have 20+ deer per square mile. Fact: Other than a few residential areas there are no deer numbers that approach this in AZ. 4) Water sources concentrate game in Arizona FAR more than any bait source PERIOD… water is our rarest commodity, yet we are site bait as a danger? 5) We do not have the winters that CWD states have, we don’t have “deer yards”, and we do not have major migration routes that concentrate hundreds of animals per sq. mile. 6) We as hunters must realize that supporting “how” others hunt and their personal right to do so is a good thing… especially if it has little effect on you as a hunter. This agenda most affects those we wish to recruit and retain as hunters: Children, Women, Elderly, and Handicapped hunters. 7) The fact is no one knows how many animals are harvested over bait; it really doesn’t matter if harvest objectives are in place to insure a consistent management model. The checks and balances of this are when a unit gets shut for the August or December hunts, because archers harvested the predetermined objective. 8) Opportunity… The AZGFD (in recent years) dumped tons of tags into the hunts in order to boost “hunter recruitment” and “hunter opportunity”, so why with NO REAL data would we as hunters support a rule that removes opportunity and recruitment for many hunters???? Specifically: youth, women, elderly, and handicapped… WHY!!!?? 9) Economic impacts: How many $$$ are generated for the AZGFD, local businesses, and households in AZ due to resident and NON-Resident hunters who use this method?? This number is HUGE… Every small, local archery shop, feed store, Sportsman’s Warehouse, Cabela’s, Bass Pro Shop, Wal-Mart, etc will take a hit as well. Check out the “bait” isle at any of these places and you will see how it will affect the especially the Small Mom & Pops shops…. And I know many are also anti-guide, but many folks feed families & pay mortgages by working in the outdoors and some of those guys will also take a hit, so doesn’t this rule touch on our right to commerce? 10) AZGFD must do its “Due Diligence” when making a rule change that affects this many different facets of the hunting community. The small group that pushes this agenda has changed their stance on why this rule should be in place every time we hit them with a bullet point that they can’t defend. A rule like this requires DATA, and they have provided NONE that applies specifically to our state and our herd numbers. My personal thoughts about things that must happen before a rule change like this is discussed in earnest: I do think the department should implement a Harvest objective for Archery deer hunting in each unit similar to how the bear hunts are operated and that we should not go to a draw for archery deer, mainly because it would be a loss of opportunity and revenue, as well as a waste of resources. I do believe the department should make every effort to stop CWD and other disease at the borders of our state, first and foremost. I really don’t care how folks harvest deer, if it's legal it is also ethical. We should all exercise our rights and freedom of choice!! There is No True Data that suggests that any of the proposed rule changes are unethical or impractical for use here in Arizona. I agree with mandatory success reports for ALL HUNTERS, not only for outfitters, or bow hunters, but all hunters in the state. I do believe AZGFD must perform studies within Arizona in order to formulate consistent data for our deer numbers. This includes hunter reporting, disease studies, and economic studies before the true merit of such a rule change will be presentable. I do believe that many factors in our changing environment and evolution of hunting can affect the herds. However, there is no data to suggest that the ingestible substances being used by hunters are not beneficial to all wildlife and over all to hunting. I having seen bait in use, and also have witnessed that truly Wild Deer show very little interested in any “bait” that does not occur naturally in the wild. However, in locations where deer coexist with humans and local homeowners feed the deer, there is a higher success rate. Moreover, these “urban deer” are being concentrated, more so, by the public and not hunters. The “urban deer” are not legally or productively hunted by rifle hunters, therefore the data collected in mandatory harvest numbers is currently skewed because many of these deer are not even harvested where rifle hunters are hunting. Having hunted my whole life, using every advancement in technology, every advantage legally afforded to mankind as the top predator in the food chain, I see no greater advantage in baits, than I do in trail cameras, high powered optics, high powered rifles, super accurate muzzleloaders, high tech archery equipment, cross bows, or any other technological advancement… and there is NO PROOF that bait causes more success than any other method. Although I am never in support of more laws and rules (as we have too many) the AZGFD must not write/propose changes that leave it open to “interpretation”. This current verbiage can and will be miss interpreted to include many other facets of hunting including: the use of trail cameras, ground blinds, hunting water sources as a whole, agriculture vs. hunting, and commerce. I hold objection to these sorts of power grabs, by using vague verbiage that can and will leave the door wide open to more changes to the rules, and more infringement on freedom of choice. The two excerpts from the proposed rule change exemplify this: “In addition, the Commission believes that R12-4-303 exists to prohibit devices and methods that either compromise the spirit of fair chase or adversely impact hunter success rates”. The Commission should believe nothing of the kind. This not only sets hunters against one another it depletes the strength and unity between hunters and the AZGFD. Such a concept applied to day-to-day life would lead to the government telling us which autos we are “allowed” to purchase with our own money. AZGFD should manage our herds, not hunters. “The recent increase in the use of baiting has resulted in disproportionally high harvest rates among those using this method of hunting. Consequently, the Commission is offering fewer hunting opportunities, which negatively impacts hunter recruitment and retention.” There has never been a less accurate statement by the AZGFD, because there is ZERO DATA to support such. They have not asked a single hunter if he harvested his animal over bait, and I am not sure that they have a right too. The Commission is offering the same or more opportunity today to deer hunters than ever before and lower success rates have never been posted due to more hunting pressure week in and week out in the woods. More hunters are harvesting deer in a spot and stalk method with archery equipment than ever before and there are no stats to support this either. I really don’t feel this is the beginning of the end to hunting, but I will say that if Arizona outlaws hunting over bait our success rate will be maintained as it is. We know where to hunt; we are in the field all the time and know the animals better than most. Hunters will just sit water and whack every buck that comes in there, we will be unable to spread out the harvested animals and the concentration of hunting pressure. I do not want to see any changes to the current laws pertaining to R12-4-303. I would like to ask for data pertaining to the fact that the department feels that hunters utilizing the method of hunting has affected the deer numbers and the harvest rates. In closing, can anyone currently answer all the following questions that I have pertaining to this issue, as a Taxpayer, as a member of the base that provides income to the AZGFD, and as an avid hunter and conservationist (if not we must have these answers before such drastic changes are made.) . Here are my questions: Provide scientific data gathered in Arizona showing the transmission of disease at water sources, Bait sites, Mineral sites, Licking Branches, Scrapes, Natural food sources. Provide the number of Archery deer tags sold over the past 10 years. Year by year. Provide factual data pertaining to the number of deer harvested by the archers over the past 10 years, year by year. Provide the number of rifle deer tags sold over the past 10 years. Year by year. Provide factual data pertaining to the number of deer harvested by gun hunters over the past 10 years, (Year by Year). Provide factual data showing with what method archers have utilized to harvested their animal for the past 10 years, “Example” Spot and Stalk, Water Holes, Salt based Products, Bait sites, Scent Products, Tree stands, Ground Blinds, Calling. Provide factual data during deer surveys for the past 10 years, Why deer survey numbers are down but the rifle hunter success is still high. Why Archery are the only hunters that have to report deer harvests. Does anyone think if all Arizona hunters were required to report their harvest the Arizona Game and Fish Department would have better data to manage the game? Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. Sincerely,

Here is the letter I am sending to AZGDF and everyone else I can think of... I have plagerized some good points of Steven Ward and others and hope that you all find lots in here to use in your own letters feel free to copy and paste the whole thin if you like.... To whom it may concern, As a 37 year resident of the great state of Arizona, and having spent nearly ½ my life in the outdoors in some way shape or form, I wish to convey my opinions in regards to the proposed Article 3 rule change. I am opposed to this rule change, I am opposed to the verbiage, and I am disappointed in the group that is pushing this open ended and discriminatory agenda, and here is why: The Facts.... 1) There is NO data collected in the state of AZ to support a ban on baiting or anything of the sort. 2) Members of AZGFD are taking a fast track approach to this issue (during hunting season) with very little effort to inform those most affected about the “new rule” ramifications. 3) All the “data” AZGFD claims to be using is from states that have 20+ deer per square mile. Fact: Other than a few residential areas there are no deer numbers that approach this in AZ. 4) Water sources concentrate game in Arizona FAR more than any bait source PERIOD… water is our rarest commodity, yet we are site bait as a danger? 5) We do not have the winters that CWD states have, we don’t have “deer yards”, and we do not have major migration routes that concentrate hundreds of animals per sq. mile. 6) We as hunters must realize that supporting “how” others hunt and their personal right to do so is a good thing… especially if it has little effect on you as a hunter. This agenda most affects those we wish to recruit and retain as hunters: Children, Women, Elderly, and Handicapped hunters. 7) The fact is no one knows how many animals are harvested over bait; it really doesn’t matter if harvest objectives are in place to insure a consistent management model. The checks and balances of this are when a unit gets shut for the August or December hunts, because archers harvested the predetermined objective. 8) Opportunity… The AZGFD (in recent years) dumped tons of tags into the hunts in order to boost “hunter recruitment” and “hunter opportunity”, so why with NO REAL data would we as hunters support a rule that removes opportunity and recruitment for many hunters???? Specifically: youth, women, elderly, and handicapped… WHY!!!?? 9) Economic impacts: How many $$$ are generated for the AZGFD, local businesses, and households in AZ due to resident and NON-Resident hunters who use this method?? This number is HUGE… Every small, local archery shop, feed store, Sportsman’s Warehouse, Cabela’s, Bass Pro Shop, Wal-Mart, etc will take a hit as well. Check out the “bait” isle at any of these places and you will see how it will affect the especially the Small Mom & Pops shops…. And I know many are also anti-guide, but many folks feed families & pay mortgages by working in the outdoors and some of those guys will also take a hit, so doesn’t this rule touch on our right to commerce? 10) AZGFD must do its “Due Diligence” when making a rule change that affects this many different facets of the hunting community. The small group that pushes this agenda has changed their stance on why this rule should be in place every time we hit them with a bullet point that they can’t defend. A rule like this requires DATA, and they have provided NONE that applies specifically to our state and our herd numbers. My personal thoughts about things that must happen before a rule change like this is discussed in earnest: I do think the department should implement a Harvest objective for Archery deer hunting in each unit similar to how the bear hunts are operated and that we should not go to a draw for archery deer, mainly because it would be a loss of opportunity and revenue, as well as a waste of resources. I do believe the department should make every effort to stop CWD and other disease at the borders of our state, first and foremost. I really don’t care how folks harvest deer, if it's legal it is also ethical. We should all exercise our rights and freedom of choice!! There is No True Data that suggests that any of the proposed rule changes are unethical or impractical for use here in Arizona. I agree with mandatory success reports for ALL HUNTERS, not only for outfitters, or bow hunters, but all hunters in the state. I do believe AZGFD must perform studies within Arizona in order to formulate consistent data for our deer numbers. This includes hunter reporting, disease studies, and economic studies before the true merit of such a rule change will be presentable. I do believe that many factors in our changing environment and evolution of hunting can affect the herds. However, there is no data to suggest that the ingestible substances being used by hunters are not beneficial to all wildlife and over all to hunting. I having seen bait in use, and also have witnessed that truly Wild Deer show very little interested in any “bait” that does not occur naturally in the wild. However, in locations where deer coexist with humans and local homeowners feed the deer, there is a higher success rate. Moreover, these “urban deer” are being concentrated, more so, by the public and not hunters. The “urban deer” are not legally or productively hunted by rifle hunters, therefore the data collected in mandatory harvest numbers is currently skewed because many of these deer are not even harvested where rifle hunters are hunting. Having hunted my whole life, using every advancement in technology, every advantage legally afforded to mankind as the top predator in the food chain, I see no greater advantage in baits, than I do in trail cameras, high powered optics, high powered rifles, super accurate muzzleloaders, high tech archery equipment, cross bows, or any other technological advancement… and there is NO PROOF that bait causes more success than any other method. Although I am never in support of more laws and rules (as we have too many) the AZGFD must not write/propose changes that leave it open to “interpretation”. This current verbiage can and will be miss interpreted to include many other facets of hunting including: the use of trail cameras, ground blinds, hunting water sources as a whole, agriculture vs. hunting, and commerce. I hold objection to these sorts of power grabs, by using vague verbiage that can and will leave the door wide open to more changes to the rules, and more infringement on freedom of choice. The two excerpts from the proposed rule change exemplify this: “In addition, the Commission believes that R12-4-303 exists to prohibit devices and methods that either compromise the spirit of fair chase or adversely impact hunter success rates”. The Commission should believe nothing of the kind. This not only sets hunters against one another it depletes the strength and unity between hunters and the AZGFD. Such a concept applied to day-to-day life would lead to the government telling us which autos we are “allowed” to purchase with our own money. AZGFD should manage our herds, not hunters. “The recent increase in the use of baiting has resulted in disproportionally high harvest rates among those using this method of hunting. Consequently, the Commission is offering fewer hunting opportunities, which negatively impacts hunter recruitment and retention.” There has never been a less accurate statement by the AZGFD, because there is ZERO DATA to support such. They have not asked a single hunter if he harvested his animal over bait, and I am not sure that they have a right too. The Commission is offering the same or more opportunity today to deer hunters than ever before and lower success rates have never been posted due to more hunting pressure week in and week out in the woods. More hunters are harvesting deer in a spot and stalk method with archery equipment than ever before and there are no stats to support this either. I really don’t feel this is the beginning of the end to hunting, but I will say that if Arizona outlaws hunting over bait our success rate will be maintained as it is. We know where to hunt; we are in the field all the time and know the animals better than most. Hunters will just sit water and whack every buck that comes in there, we will be unable to spread out the harvested animals and the concentration of hunting pressure. I do not want to see any changes to the current laws pertaining to R12-4-303. I would like to ask for data pertaining to the fact that the department feels that hunters utilizing the method of hunting has affected the deer numbers and the harvest rates. In closing, can anyone currently answer all the following questions that I have pertaining to this issue, as a Taxpayer, as a member of the base that provides income to the AZGFD, and as an avid hunter and conservationist (if not we must have these answers before such drastic changes are made.) . Here are my questions: Provide scientific data gathered in Arizona showing the transmission of disease at water sources, Bait sites, Mineral sites, Licking Branches, Scrapes, Natural food sources. Provide the number of Archery deer tags sold over the past 10 years. Year by year. Provide factual data pertaining to the number of deer harvested by the archers over the past 10 years, year by year. Provide the number of rifle deer tags sold over the past 10 years. Year by year. Provide factual data pertaining to the number of deer harvested by gun hunters over the past 10 years, (Year by Year). Provide factual data showing with what method archers have utilized to harvested their animal for the past 10 years, “Example” Spot and Stalk, Water Holes, Salt based Products, Bait sites, Scent Products, Tree stands, Ground Blinds, Calling. Provide factual data during deer surveys for the past 10 years, Why deer survey numbers are down but the rifle hunter success is still high. Why Archery are the only hunters that have to report deer harvests. Does anyone think if all Arizona hunters were required to report their harvest the Arizona Game and Fish Department would have better data to manage the game? Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. Sincerely,

One can argue with the Judge cuz they are just gunna write tickets... Sad but true...

Sorry Bobby... we all share your pain... Our Pals mean alot to many of us. I would focus on the good past and not the how... probably just natural causes, but even if you determined that it was not it won't bring any compfort. Best way to go is sudden in my book... no pain, I hate to see any critter suffer... and that goes double for Dogs. March on, you will need to fill that hole in your heart and house soon... I found that a new addition was the best medicine for that.

In other words "You" can't put it out... The words are there and they are how you read them... Grey areas....

I just want to say thanks to guys like Tyler and Steven (Champions of Hunter's rights, IMHO), and all the other guys that do and don't bait that see this topic for what it is... not an opportunity to bash one another but a time to stand up to a bold power grab... This is not a rule change we "Need" or one our wildlife "Need".... There is ZERO DATA to prove that we do need such changes... it is plain and simple a control issue and a lack of effort on t6he part of the AZGFD personnel who are pushing this agenda... Bravo to those who are using fact and not emotion in their opinion on these issues!

I think if you read more closely it states that Ranchers can place salt, but we cant take game on it or place it... the language of the "rule change" is just vague enough that it is going to left up to how each WM personally reads it... infact some of the wording could even alow you to get a ticket for cameras, ground blinds or other items if placed on water and is determined to deter game... this rule change leaves the door WIDE open for more!

More over as your post points out... the wording could affect the use of trail cameras on water if it is "determined" that, say your flash scared an animal off the water??? ...and they also slipped a few jabs at hound hunters... just nails in the coffin. Sad actually that some folks would rather play "Joe Biden", laughing and sneering all the way, than to see the noose tighten around all we do. Why is it so hard to support others who do not do it like you do, and why is that Government as a whole seems perfectly content to forever take more. The funny part is that there is NO wording at all that is really definitive... It is vague so they have the power to site you based on their interpretation of those couple of phrases.... and some are just nodding their heads "Yup, sign it!"... I say PROVE IT AZGFD... Show us some hard data... show us some facts... show us a shred proof that any of this holds ANY water at all!! They cannot and will not, because a very select few are pushing a personal agenda. I know some of them and have spent time discussing this issue, as individuals I like these people, but their predetermined "take" on this topic has been set in stone for years and they don't care which Malarkey reason they have to use to justify it, they just want it stopped. i never have gotten a straight answer from them as to "Why" it has to be stopped, just that it has to end... every time I have pinned them down on a "reason" and debated it to a standstill they would abandon that "point" and pick a new one... IT ISALL BS, and even some of their own friends are raising eyebrows now because we are grasping at straws and feeding BS to the Commission to try to get this passed during hunting season “on the low down”... The Commissioners know that there is strong opposition to this rule change, they are smart and articulate people and they are just waiting to hear the other side... Don't be a Joe Biden.... Pitch in and stop this rule! There are far more reasons to stop it than there are to let it pass!

Based on the "Political" take on it above I totally agree! Job validation... However this is very much about them having ZERO data or proof that we have this to worry about in AZ.... Therefore at this time we have no reason to even discuss a rule change of this nature...

The Facts.... I know we all get charged up and mad.... I know we all want to put emotion into it... But the facts is where the truth lies. 1) There is NO data collected in the state of AZ to support a ban on baiting or anything of the sort. 2) AZGFD is taking a fast track approach to this issue (during hunting season) with very little effort to inform any of us about the “new rule”. 3) All the “data” AZGFD claims to be using in from states that have 20+ deer per square mile. Fact: Other than residential areas there are no deer numbers that approach this in AZ. 4) Water sources concentrates game in Arizona FAR more than any bait source PERIOD… water is our rarest commodity. 5) We do not have the winters that CWD states have, we don’t have “deer yards”, and we do not have major migration routes that concentrate hundreds of animals per sq. mile. 6) We as hunters must realize that supporting “how” others hunt and their personal right to do so is a good thing… especially if it has little effect on you as hunter. I mean let’s face it… I dislike the guys that think camping right where the elk like to rut is a Major Jackarse move, but it is a free country and I certainly don’t want another rule to stop them from camping there! 7) Opportunity… The AZGFD dumped tons of tags into the hunts in order to boost “hunter recruitment” and “hunter opportunity”, so why with NO REAL data would we allow them to ramrod a rule through that removes opportunity and recruitment for many hunters???? Specifically: youth, women, elderly, and handicapped… WHY!!!?? 8) Economic impacts: How many $$$ are generated for the AZGFD, local businesses, and households in AZ due to resident and NON-Resident hunters who use this method?? This number is HUGE… Every small, local archery shop, feed store, Sportsman’s Warehouse, Cabela’s, Bass Pro Shop, Wal-Mart, etc will take a hit as well. Check out the “bait” isle at any of these places and you will see how it will affect the especially the Small Mom & Pops shops…. And I know many of you are also anti-guide, but many folks feed families & pay mortgages by working in the outdoors and some of those guys will also take a hit. 9) AZGFD must do its “Due Diligence” when making a rule change that affects this many different facets of the hunting community. They have changed their stance on why this rule should be in place every time we hit them with a bullet point that they can’t defend. A rule like this requires DATA, and they have provided NONE that applies specifically to our state and our herd numbers. 10) Unity: It is our responsibility as tax payers, who pay the salaries of our government, to force them to Prove the point and not just make more rules on whimsical emotion… We are seeing it not only at the state level but also at a national and global level and if we as Americans don’t put on the breaks it will lead to tyranny….

Go read hunt arizona 2012. Shows statistics on archery harvest from G&F. The amount of whitetail taken by archery has almost doubled since 2003. Mule deer has stayed around the same, whitetail has greatly increased. Just so happens that they are the animal that seems to respond to baiting the best. A simple harvest objective in units as needed, just like bear hunting would solve any concern of over harvesting by achery hunters while removing Zero opportunity to hunt other units.

AverageJoe, please don't think I am singling you out, I am quoting you because your statement is the root of what will cause outdoor enthusiasts to eventually lose all our rights, in this state and all states. The hunters and fisherman didn't fight for the trappers and we lost leg holds and more. In Cali. they lose a bit more each year as they divide and conquer outdoor enthusiasts. So please read on and consider ALL the ramifications of having more un-needed laws rammed down our throats. My problem with it two fold... #1.... I hate Big government getting bigger. They are constantly thinking up new and better/ways to regulate EVERY thing in our lives... WE don't need "LAW MAKERS"... we have plenty of laws already!! #2... How is it my right to define ANYONE's idea of hunting as "is" or "isn't" really hunting... Is sitting water, really hunting? Is bumbling around in the woods hoping to kick something up, really hunting? Is glassing something up with high powered optics and chasing it down, really hunting? Is hunting with 3,4,5, or 10 of your family/friends, really hunting? H E L L YES!!! ....and so is sitting over BAIT... it is REAL for someone!!! We are all individuals with individual trophy expectations, weapons, styles, equipment, and physical limits. The ban will affect my overall success in hunting very little, however as I get older that ban may affect it greatly. It will certainly affect the 10-18 year old hunters that we bring into bow hunting. It will affect the 75%+ of the women we bring into bow hunting. It will affect a good many elderly bow hunters. Let's face it folks... Success is key to cultivating and retaining hunters!! Even showing kids a time in the woods over bait where they don't kill is a huge win if something comes in!! The smiles and good times that I have witnessed by others, old and young alike in part due to some form of "bait" makes my heart warm. Some very Hardcore (Baton death march) hunters that I know today were made into hunting junkies at a young age due to a form of "bait" hunting. This is not a CWD or any health related issue... there is NO data what-so-ever that AZGFD has collected in this state to support the ban. The only "data" they have is the mandatory reporting of deer harvested by bow hunters and that several units have a higher harvest than they want. Couple this with a self-righteous agenda by a few key figures in the AZGFD and you have a trumped up, BS rule that will affect ALL hunters more than we think! If they are sooo truely worried about CWD they would focusing their efforts on importation of meats into our state and the migration of herds into and out of our state... THIS IS NOT A DISEASE ISSUE.... IT IS AN ATTACK ON HUNTERS RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS. Will your favorite hunting tactic be next on the chopping block??? Wise up and Take a stand with your fellow hunters!!!!! AZGFD preaches the want to increase "OPPORTUNITY" and when we fired back that they were taking away opportunity, only then did they drum up the CWD idea... it is an AGENDA driven by a few to hamstring success rates, Period. Keep in mind that at a Federal level we have laws inplace that forbid inportation of non- native plant species (seeds) onto our forests and well as littering laws... Sooo if they just inforce the laws we already have in place the "MASTER BAITERS" are already in violation. WE DON'T NEED MORE LAWS/RULES!!!!! UNITE AND FIGHT!!!!

Thanks all... Was a great B-day spent in Vegas... Had a great day on the town with my Bride and some famlily & friends... then ended up play Craps with my oldest Son till 3am the next day... HaHaha!

Way to Go Cody!

Simpl6y AWESOME! Congrats!!

Congrats on an Amazing bull!

Oh yeah! Way to get it done Pal! Congrats to Pops on the dandy speed goat! Also thanks again for hanging out with us last weekend it was awesome to get Bloody!

I think it is imoprtant that hunters (all hunters) stay informed and stick together about AZGF adding more laws, instead of enforcing laws that are in place and simply managing wildlife... rather than take opportunity.... Personally I don't care about the "Bait" rule as they word it now, but it will affect us all in their attempt to inforce it... This is Stupid. I've spoken to one of the guys who is on the push for Prohibition of all "Baits" in AZ. It appears that in 2011 they may try to reopen the law making process here for a bill that will outlaw the placing of “Bait” for the purpose taking wildlife. How they will word what is included in the term “bait” remains to be seen. I am told that Salt will not be included nor will water be included… however, I look for them to go after these items next. One of their biggest pushes on this law is that they don’t like the success numbers of Archers who “may” have hunted over “bait” and that by “baiting” you are creating a “feedlot” environment that “could” spread CWD. Really? Spring boxes, steel troughs, stock tanks, and salt blocks don’t promote the spread of the saliva transferred disease? Okay… My point is this: 1st: We don’t need another unenforceable law… like the flying law. The flying law specifically targets methods that deteriorate the fiber of the sport here in AZ and they can’t enforce it or defend it a the Court of Law…. There is now Case law on that… Sad but True. 2nd: They (AZGF) are always talking a great game about hunter recruitment and hunter opportunity…. Then why would they outlaw the greatest method of introducing women and children to hunting and the opportunity for handicapped hunters to bow hunt?? WHY??? Because bow hunters should only hold 20% (or less) of the annual rifle harvest numbers. There are only a few units in the state that have this problem of exceeding that 20% from time to time, so why not institute a Harvest Objective for Archery deer hunts in these units?? I don’t know… We already have to report our harvest, so making the archery deer hunts just like that bear hunts would not require nearly as much effort as trying to enforce a law like this with our over stretched WM’s…. Shouldn’t they be out catching poachers and managing our wildlife instead of wasting their time trying to catch a few ”Master-Baiters”???? 3rd: Baiting changes animal habits, according to AZGF. Really??? In the units where AZGF identify a “Baiting” as a problem there has been no research done to prove if a Coues deer will go “out of its way to go to bait”… nor that the high frequency of “bait” in some areas (AZGF ‘Problem’ areas) is so high that indeed it is no advantage at all… Similar to having a gas station on every corner. It is also public knowledge that in most of the deer numbers impacted by archery hunters are in habitats too thick to ever be impacted by rifle hunters. 4th: What of the benefits to wildlife across the board, blue jays, squirrels, turkeys, pigs, deer, and elk… all receiving a healthy boost during the hardest, leanest months of the year paid for by sportsman. It is a law that is anti-commerce, literally 10’s of thousands of sportsmen’s dollars being spent in this state for the wildlife in the state. Anything that is good for the health of our wildlife that the Gov. doesn’t have to pay for is a good thing! Look at water catchments, they have helped wildlife across this great state. There is more but I have to go… Get educated… this law has far worse ramifications than benefits for our state and our wildlife. It is true there are Slobs among us who do things that are not right, legally or morally, in hunting and in life as a whole. Our very own USDA has laws in place that do prohibit littering, destruction of forestlands, and the importation of non-native species… Why doesn’t out State agency enforce Federal laws like these?? It may help take a few of the Slobs out of this issue…. This is just another instance of Big Government wanting more laws. Just My $.02…….