Changing Seasons

[gamespec]

well, you managed to skirt both those questions pretty easy.

 

what i'm trying to get is someone to admit that average rainfall for Az. is very low, always. below average and above average rainfall is also very low, relatively. we just don't get much rain here. doesn't matter if we have an exceptionally wet or dry year, there isn't a lot of difference. but people seem to always want to use that as a reason, or excuse, for problems with game numbers. while rain really can be the main reason for whatever game numbers happen to hover around, it doesn't have a lot of effect from year to year, because we just don't get much rain. we get so little rain and the difference between whatever normal is and whatever abnormal is, isn't enough to have a big effect on game animals, for at least several seasons. it does hammer small game and in a hurry, but doesn't seem to have a big effect on deer unless there is really low rainfall for a long time. the browse in the desert is used to no rain. the game in the desert is used to no rain. go back east or north to a state that has high average rain and usually has a lot of feed and have a couple dry years and can be real devastating because the game numbers can be real high and all the sudden the feed is gone,the game numbers are high, and they starve. doesn't happen a lot, but it happens. out here, we never have much feed from year to year and the game is used to it. when we have a dry year it ain't much different than a wet year and it doesn't have much of an effect from year to year on game. the last wet year Az. had was 83. i know it was wet because i floated an elk out of big lake canyon in my row boat. we've had a couple since then that were normal or maybe even above normal, for a year, but nothing like 83.. but when it rains in Az. is more important than how much it rains. and a couple above average years doesn't mean much, because they don't even have that much rain in em. do ya get my drift? seems that every year i read something from the azgfd that says that rainfall has something to do with why permits are where they're at, when the difference between a wet, dry or normal ain't a lot. predators, overhunting, nonnative animal introduction and what looks to a layman like me like maybe poor decisions, appear to have more affect than rain. anyway, that's the way it looks to me, but what do i know?

 

as far as the predator comment, i'll go read your deal again, but i didn't read one word about predators in it before. maybe i missed it.

 

and as far as the permits for u22n, well, what can i say. just seems to me that doubling the permits in an area when there is absolutely no kill data to use, seems a little extreme. Lark. by the way, thanks for the response.

 

I would argue, respectfully, that average rainfall in AZ is, well, average. There is a big difference in habitat (quality and quantity of food and cover) between wet years when everything is green and dry years when everything is brown and crispy. Huge difference. It makes all the difference in the world when it comes to deer population dynamics. In wet years, does are fat, and give birth to heavy fawns, and produce a lot of milk, they wean on lots of nutritious forage, and the fawns drop into lots of hiding cover, amid coyotes who have full bellies from the bloom in rabbits and rodent populations. In dry years everything is against them. That is why most of our SW wildlife populations fluctuate dramatically with wet and dry cycles. We have all seen it with high deer populations in the 1980s and half as many deer now after mostly below average rainfall years since (some wet ones interspersed). Desert browse plants grow much longer stems and have much more nutritious leaves during wet years. Also, and more importantly, the bloom of forbs (weeds) that provide super high nutrition are abundant in wet years and non-existant in dry years. A carpet of green forbs from winter rains makes a big difference in their nutrition while they are pregnant and subsequent reproductive success.

 

I didn't post anything before about predators, I was referring to alot of work leading biologists around North America have done on the predation issue in the last 10 years and it is all available at www.muledeerworkinggroup.com.

 

I'm not sure how it looked like I skirted both questions originally, but if I still missed the mark, let me know and I'll try again.

JIM

 

 

 

 

[gamespec]

Thanks much Jim for taking the time to respond to everyone's questions. I know it's an impossible task to answer everything all the time, so I appreciate all the time you do put in. I don't even have time today to read all those lengthy answers you posted (!), but I am sure it's good information and I thank you for your time here. I know you have many other obligations and coming here to the forum can eat up a lot more time than you have available. Too bad we can't get more people from the Dept to help answer some of these questions to help take the load off you....

 

Amanda

Just don't tell my boss that I didn't get that thing done again today.

 

JIM

[scoutm]

If "making it possible for more individuals to hunt without increasing significantly the number of animals killed" is the goal why don't they just add a 1000 WT tags to 37B. You'll have a 1000 more with the opportunity to hunt but with little chance of killing any animals. Meets the goal but doesn't really provide a quality opportunity.

 

I have to ask, wouldn't there be far more opportunity and more quality opportunity created by finding a way to open access to the thousands of acres of public land that private land owners have blocked access to? Has anyone ever studied the opportunity lost in this area?

 

I for one would like to see AZGFD take a much more active role in opening roads that are illegally locked and creating new access points to other blocked areas.

 

You probably know this, but I should mention that we have a full-time person (maybe that FTE mentioned before!!) that does nothing but work with landowners in SE AZ to preserve and open new access points. His name is Matt Walton in the Tucson office and he does a phenomenal job. We have others in Phoenix in a whole "Access Program" doing the same thing and they are very active, but I don't have to tell anyone here what a huge and widespread problem it is. They do what they can and they actually do some amazing things. This is something we all need to work very hard on - its only going to get worse.

 

JIM

 

I have spoken with Matt and I agree he does a great job. Unfortunately, he doesn't have much to work with. I think more legal action needs to take place to start opening areas that are closed illegally and more legislative work needs to be done to restrict private land owners' ability to block access to public lands. So many of them are using public lands for economic benefit while blocking the access to the public that's allowing them the privilege of that economic benefit - I have a difficult time accepting that. If they are going to receive economic benefit and block access then the land should be assessed as private and the land user should be charged the appropriate property taxes or the fees for using the public lands should be increased significantly to account for the restricted access. I recognize that forcing them to open the access creates a host of other problems but the way it is now the only people paying any kind of consequence it the public 99% of which respects the private property owner and works hard to ensure we leave it the way we found it.

 

I recognize that much of this is the result of the public abusing landowners property - fences, wells, water tanks - and we as users of the public lands need to be active in stopping the destructive behaviors.

 

Thanks.

 

[.270]

i agree with what you've just said. but the last time it was that way was 1983, by my recollection. we live in a desert. we never have a drought, it just never rains much here. the plants and animals are used to it and know how to survive. a little extra rain in any given year, if it is at the right time, can have some affect, short term, on deer numbers. but not enough to make much difference in permit numbers. but that's always the first thing that's pointed out. "we haven't had much rain lately". that applies for the last couple thousand years. the weather can't be controlled. quit using it as an excuse. but there are factors that can be controlled that can benefit wildlife. i don't see the azgfd willing to make the tough decisions that need to be made in order to get it done.

 

i'm all for anything that promotes hunting and fishing in a good way. getting kids interested is a good thing. but you need to get those kid's folks interested in it too. there are lot of adults out there that need exposed to the outdoor life, so they can bring their kids along in that style. but i don't know if having some sort of deer season going on for months at a time is good for the deer. looks to me like it has to apply a lot of stress. but like i said, i don't know. but i know how it looks.

 

here's some suggestions for ya.

 

quit taking the side of anti's whenever predator control or this BS of "endangered species" becomes an issue. we now have a partial season on lions. for as long as i can remember, it's been open year round. the azgfd actively campaigned to outlaw trapping on public land. anytime someone wants to have even a simple varmint calling contest, you guys step in and stop it. you've bought into the wolf and condor deal like it's a good thing. all this was done to the detriment of hunters and anglers in order to pacify anti's. in every case listed, the underlieing reason was to keep anti's from screaming. and i could probably think of a dozen other pertinent examples.

 

and get rid of some of these elk in non traditional elk country. the cedars in u2, the desert in u28, the kaibab, the hay fields in u31 & 32. these places aren't elk country and they have really placed a lot of stress on the few deer in these areas. shoot em out. every one of em. i know elk tags bring much more money than deer tags, into the azgfd till. but you need to do what is right for the deer. these depredation hunts are a start. but the limited opportunity hunts you have in 2, 28, 31 and 32 for example don't do anything to alleviate the problem and in fact promote it. they are at the wrong time of year, there are too few permits and limiting some hunts to archery only doesn't do anything but sell tags. there aren't enough elk taken to matter. and you best do something about the advancing rocky mountain bighorns while you're at it. well, that is if you get at it. just heard the other day that rocky and desert sheep have been discovered in the same herd. and they are capable of cross breeding. what's that gonna do to our desert herd when that takes place? is b&c gonna have a new species called a rocky desert sheep? just wondering if there is a plan to deal with this or not? later, Lark.

[gamespec]

well Jim - 3,392 (to be exact) could have gone hunting if they had played the odds. I am sure there are probably thousands more (several thousand non-residents and several thousand residents) who only put in for the Kiabab and are not interested in any other 'opportunity'.

 

I don't know how many of those applicants are nonresidents choosing only a Dec WT tag or a Kaibab tag. I'll see if I can find out.

 

JIM

 

I received a spreadsheet from PHX with some 2008 draw info and I am told it will soon be posted on the website for all to see. I tried to post it here but the html formatting smashes all the columns over to the left. It lists the number of first and second choice applicants (res and nonres) for each hunt number. I can't see how many nonresidents are putting in ONLY for late WT or Kaibab. I just quickly added all the nonresident applicants for all SE AZ December WT and all Kaibab area (all 12A & 12B) hunts and the total is 2,217. There are another 5,083 (res & nonres) people who put in for only a bonus point, but they are not included in the total of "applicants" (even though they are interested in getting a deer tag at some point).

 

In 2008, we had 67,838 first choice applicants for 47,475 permits, leaving 20,363 deer hunters without permits this year. If you want to discount all nonresidents who put the Kaibab and late WT hunts as their first choice, you still have more than 18,000 deer hunters who can't deer hunt this year. If we have all the permits that the resource will allow, then that's just the way it is. If we can make changes (as we have) to allow more hunters the chance to hunt, that's a good thing in the big picture.

 

JIM

 

 

 

JIM

[gamespec]

quit taking the side of anti's whenever predator control or this BS of "endangered species" becomes an issue. we now have a partial season on lions. for as long as i can remember, it's been open year round. the azgfd actively campaigned to outlaw trapping on public land. anytime someone wants to have even a simple varmint calling contest, you guys step in and stop it. you've bought into the wolf and condor deal like it's a good thing. all this was done to the detriment of hunters and anglers in order to pacify anti's. in every case listed, the underlieing reason was to keep anti's from screaming. and i could probably think of a dozen other pertinent examples.

 

and get rid of some of these elk in non traditional elk country. the cedars in u2, the desert in u28, the kaibab, the hay fields in u31 & 32. these places aren't elk country and they have really placed a lot of stress on the few deer in these areas. shoot em out. every one of em. i know elk tags bring much more money than deer tags, into the azgfd till. but you need to do what is right for the deer. these depredation hunts are a start. but the limited opportunity hunts you have in 2, 28, 31 and 32 for example don't do anything to alleviate the problem and in fact promote it. they are at the wrong time of year, there are too few permits and limiting some hunts to archery only doesn't do anything but sell tags. there aren't enough elk taken to matter. and you best do something about the advancing rocky mountain bighorns while you're at it. well, that is if you get at it. just heard the other day that rocky and desert sheep have been discovered in the same herd. and they are capable of cross breeding. what's that gonna do to our desert herd when that takes place? is b&c gonna have a new species called a rocky desert sheep? just wondering if there is a plan to deal with this or not? later, Lark.

 

The partial season on lions was a recommendation that came from the lion hunters. It's so hot during those months they really didn't care and recommended the department close it in an effort to preserve the rest of the season. Our large Carnivore Biologist in Game Branch (Ron Thompson) can fill you in on the details of how that went down of you're interested give him a call to talk about it.

 

The AZGFD director and commission actually took out TV commercials to try to preserve trapping when Prop 200 was on the ballot. The Department (as a state agency) is prohibited from campaigning for or against political referendums and initiatives.

 

The groups I am familiar with still get out and have fun with local weekend predator hunts.

 

Our elk management goals in SE AZ are to not allow an increase. We hjave been getting more and more aggressive with elk seasons because I don't think we have been doing an adequate job of keeping them controlled. I agree that these huge herbivores can only add more stress to our arid SW rangelands. We can hunt elk elsewhere in the state. We have been talking about just opening it wide open with over the counter tags to current deer tag holders and let the deer hunters take care of them. The concern here is that if some of these isolated places that hold elk are inundated with people pursuing elk, that could jeopardize some access points we currently have. Some locals like the elk to the point that they may not allow access for hunters to pursue them. These desert elk present some management challenges. Our current thinking is that by having 3 full months of open seasons on these elk, we can get tags in the pockets of locals who can get access and can get after them every weekend for 3 months. If anyone familiar with local elk movements has a better idea, we are all ears - there is plenty of opportunity to provide ideas/comments formally and informally. There's more about our goals and strategies in the Elk Operational Plans

 

I am very concerned about the sheep situation. See the comments we made (page 7) in the paper on Bighorn Sheep Genetics we published a few years ago.

 

JIM

[dobbs07]

If it's all about trying to give everyone the chance to go deer hunting every year, why dont we just make everyone hunt with a spear. That way the success rate will be very low, and the herds will be able to support the increased number, and everyone gets to go!!!

 

Thats the kind of logic that Im seeing here.

[.270]

you're correct, sorta, on the lion deal. a couple lion hunters, not all of em by any stretch, wanted it that way and got enough folks to go along with it that they got it through. but the reason they did it, from what i was told first hand, was to try to keep the anti's from wanting even more restriction. instead of getting tough and telling the anti's to shutup. this may be a good thing for hound dog lion hunters. it's too hot in the summer to run dogs. but what if joe hunter sees a lion in the closed season? it not only takes an opportunity away to take a really desired animal, but it also takes away a chance to remove a lion from the woods. i'm in the woods a lot. i've spent as much time as about anyone trailing hounds. i see what lions can do. Az. has a problem with them and anything that restricts taking them is not a good thing for the rest of the wildlife. they're a neat animal. a true hunter. but there are too many. if the guys who instigated this heard some of the things i've heard said about em, by lion hunters, after this happened, well they wouldn't be too happy.

 

propostion 200 was the first time trapping was voted on and trappers won. the next time it was voted on the azgfd was for outlawing it, and the trappers lost. i don't remember the propostion number. the azgfd was part and party to outlawing trapping on public land. seems they didn't like to administer the program and a few other things. i had a lotta game wardens tell me as much. i read it in the papers. it's well known that they let it go down. with the price of furs, it's sort of a moot point. i don't think a lot of folks would go to the expense and take the time to really get after it, when there wasn't a monetary return. but the azgfd didn't do anything to keep trapping from going away and trapping did have a beneficial affect on coyote control and it is one more privaledge that we won't get back. something that we are sorely in need of if for no other reason than predator control.

 

the azgfd, in knee jerk fashion, let a buncha anti's who were "offended" because some guys tried to organize an "Extreme Predator Contest" (can't recall the exact name) stepped in and passed a law, after the fact, that not only stopped this contest, but outlawed all other contests. a law that was promplty shot down by the Az. state supreme court. and a buncha funds were wasted on it. a law that had the potential to outlaw any kind of contest that involved taking wildlife. including fishing derbies and big buck contests. as i recall, the premise of organizing the extreme contest was because of concern about skyrocketting predator numbers because trapping had been outlawed. this was about the dumbest thing i've ever seen the azgfd do. now there are tight restrictions on predator contests. that wouldn't be there if the azgfd hadn't jerk their knee in the first place.

 

azgfd's goal is to not let an invasive animals (elk) numbers get any higher? ok. why not shoot em all out of areas they don't belong? sure seems to me that the azgfd has turned the elk herd into livestock and each animal has a price on it. seems to me that the difference in the price of a deer tag and elk tag means quite a bit to the dept. maybe it's just me, but it sure looks odd. i hunt deer in a crappy place in the desert. every year i see more bull elk and rocky bighorn rams than i do mule deer bucks. neither is native to that country. in fact, if you wan't to get right down to it, neither are native to Az. i really like to hunt elk. i'm a really good elk hunter. but why can't we keep em in the mountains? why can't we shoot em out of the places they don't need to be? maybe take up a plan like kentucky has with their herd? there is no need to let elk proliferate in an area that doesn't need anymore competition, especially when their presence puts stress on an already precarious deer population. and the sheep deal? well, if what happens like looks like what's gonna happen....... well an animal that is as important and unique to Az. as desert sheep shouldn't have to become a bastard crossbreed because steps weren't taken in time to prevent it.

 

i really do appreciate the good things that competent wildlife bioligists do. i really get yanked when the azgfd refuses to use the data they spend a bunch of money paying the biologists to collect and when they refuse to listen to the experience and knowledge of the outdoors public. and when they continue to do things that aren't in the best interest of wildlife and the people who truly care about it. and when they pass laws to restrict outdoors people in order to pacify anti's. like it or not, but the azgfd is at a crossroads. and they've been parked there for awhile. they have to choose one road and one road only. can't run down the bar ditch. hope you guys choose the right road. Lark.

 

 

[DesertBull]

High draw odds hunts

Oct and Nov General Deer

ML'er deer

Archery draw unit deer

Cow general elk

Cow ML'er elk

Cow Archery elk

Limited Opp Elk

Archery Javelina

HAM Javlelina

Gen Javelina

Spring Turkey

Fall Turkey

 

----

 

Over the counter

 

OTC Fall bear

OTC Spring bear

OTC archery turkey

OTC Archery deer

OTC Elk

Duck, quail, geese, rabbit, squirrel

 

 

If someone is complaining about no opportunity to hunt, perhaps they can't read or maybe they don't really want to hunt?

[.270]

you're exactly right desertbull. i have some nonres friends who apply for elk every year and complain about having to buy a license. i always tell em to apply for javelina and come quail hunting. if you already have a license, quail is free. and a javelina is a quite a trophy for someone from a state that doesn't have em. with a little work, a bear is real possible too. i don't have a hunt that i drew a tag for until mid november, but i will be hunting almost every weekend until then. and maybe catch a fish or 2 also. Lark.

[gamespec]

the azgfd was part and party to outlawing trapping on public land. seems they didn't like to administer the program and a few other things. i had a lotta game wardens tell me as much. i read it in the papers. it's well known that they let it go down.

 

 

This is not true. It should be easy to find evidence of this is the newspaper archives and other on-line media if it were. You are right about it being Prop 201 or 202 when it was finally passed. As I mentioned before, it is against the law for AZGFD to actively campaign for political issues -- that's where the voice of the sportsman is so important.

 

JIM

[DesertBull]

I didn't draw any tags and have spent 6 full days hunting in the last month.

[gamespec]

azgfd's goal is to not let an invasive animals (elk) numbers get any higher? ok. why not shoot em all out of areas they don't belong?

 

i really do appreciate the good things that competent wildlife bioligists do. i really get yanked when the azgfd refuses to use the data they spend a bunch of money paying the biologists to collect and when they refuse to listen to the experience and knowledge of the outdoors public. and when they continue to do things that aren't in the best interest of wildlife and the people who truly care about it. and when they pass laws to restrict outdoors people in order to pacify anti's. like it or not, but the azgfd is at a crossroads. and they've been parked there for awhile. they have to choose one road and one road only. can't run down the bar ditch. hope you guys choose the right road. Lark.

 

We have developed a structure of about 3 full months where hunters can pursue elk in GMUs 28, 31, 32. I'm not sure this is going to be good enough to control them but it is our current strategy that can certainly be altered by well-reasoned input from the public - especially those who know that herd well and have specific and constructive suggestions. As I mentioned, there are some locals who control access that like the elk - it is impossible to make everyone happy at the same time so we do what we think is right for the long-term health of the resource.

 

I'm not sure what data we are ignoring, but would be more than willing to use anything important that we have overlooked when making management decisions. Some members of the public get upset when we don't do what they want done, but we manage a lot of resources for all residents of the state. Hunters need to be proud they are the providers of that resource management system. Some don't understand the importance of sometimes being proactive to preserve the big picture. The Dept has to always be looking at the big picture and that means we aren't always going to do what everyone wants.

 

The Dept is ALWAYS interested in input from those who may spend more time in the field than we do. Our phones always work and our e-mail addresses work 24/7. In addition, there are several opportunities to provide more formal input during times when hunt guidelines or hunt recommendations are being constructed.

 

JIM

 

 

[bowsniper]

azgfd's goal is to not let an invasive animals (elk) numbers get any higher? ok. why not shoot em all out of areas they don't belong?

 

 

Hey! If we're going to start shooting invasive animals, let's start with cattle!!!

 

Mark

[.270]

you have 3 full months of elk hunting, a lot of it with bows, which isn't a good way to remove animals. and there are very few permits. a few folks get to hunt, but very few elk get taken. i'm talking about going in and shooting them all. get rid of all of them. have an open season. they are a detriment to the habitat and the native animals in those areas. do it before it gets worse. and you best do something now, not tomorrow, about the rocky sheep. gonna be a cryin' shame when the b&c no longer allows entries because they've crossed with desert sheep. manage the wildlife.

 

what i said about trapping is true. i read more than one article about it that stated that the azgfd was all for outlawing trapping and every warden i talked to echoed that. it was well known that the last time trapping went to a vote that the azgfd did not support continuation of the program. probably not a big deal, like i said, because of poor fur prices and the politcal correctness of not wearing fur. it ain't a money makin' deal anymore. i guess bobcats still bring some bucks. but trapping did help control coyotes and more than a few lions were accidently caught. and we do have a lot of coyotes and lions now. and putting a closed season on lions is not helping that situation. say what ya want, i was involved in it deeply and was sorely dissapointed in the direction the azgfd took on the situation.

 

as far as ignoring data, just last year you did a big predator study on the 4 bar that showed that predator controll needed to be stepped up. and right in the newspaper article about it the azgfd spokesman said that becasue of political pressure from anti's that there would probably be little done with the data. and if you're gonna be a proactive, do something about the desert elk and the rocky sheep, now. a few years ago when these asian doves started showing up the first thing the azgd did was put a season and limit on em. they retracted it later, but the first reaction was to set a season and limits. there are too many glaring problems with wildlife management in Az. for folks to just sit by. you can flower things up all you want, but we have some real problems that needed dealt with yesterday, not tomorrow and the longer folks wait, the more the wildlife of this state suffers. like i said, i love to hunt elk. there are few things i'm better at. but they don't need to be in the desert and the longer they're allowed to stay in the desert, the worse off the deer are. this state is divided and subdivided and sub-sub dividied into many small areas. by highways, freeways, fences, towns, cities, canals, industrial complexes, reservations, etc, etc. and each area between those dividers needs managed as it's own little habitat. there isn't any wilderness anymore. we have what we call wilderness areas, but they aren't big enough to be true wilderness. everything needs good management and the management needs to be ahead of everything else. you can't wait until a problem becomes critical before you work on it. Lark.