Hunting and Fishing

[Coues&Bass]

Supporters of a proposition to make hunting and fishing a constitutional right in Arizona say they’re making a pre-emptive strike against any threat to what they deem a long-standing Arizona tradition.

Arizona voters will be asked on November 2nd whether to put the “right to hunt and fish and harvest wildlife lawfully” on par with freedom of religion, free speech, and the right to bear arms.

The proposal also would give the Legislature the exclusive authority to regulate hunting and fishing in the state.

Critics of Proposition 109, which include environmental groups, say it’s unnecessary because there are no real threats to hunting and fishing in the state. They contend it’s a power grab by politicians.

[sjvcon]

Only thing that concerns me about this is something I heard on the radio (KFYI...so Conservative Talk Show) this morning. It takes the regulatory power out of the hands of Game & Fish, and their wildlife biologists, and puts it in the hands of the voters. Any changes would have to be voted upon. So harvest numbers, etc. would be voted on. If that is true, I have a couple of concerns ... #1 is that if voters become more liberal they could decrease harvest numbers to unhealty levels trying to "spare the poor animals", and #2 is that what the heck to voters know about healthy harvest numbers.

 

Just some things to think about. It would be great to make it a Constitutional Right so that it cannot be threatened, but not so great to take the harvest numbers and subject them to voting. I need to do some more research on it.

[Broken Wheels]

Very valid concerns both of them and for all the times we complain about the "fish cops" we still must realize they are at least qualified to manage our wildlife! what we NEED to do as voters and hunters is manage the managers or in this case the "fish cops"! As long as everyone stays involved and has an eye on the managers I think in my humble opinion that AZG&F should continue to do their jobs. Hope I'm not wrong on this one...

[CouesWhitetail]

Arizona Sportsmen For Wildlife Conservation has put together a page with links to lots of info on prop 109.

 

http://www.arizonasportsmenforwildlife.org/Prop109.html

 

 

[Outdoor Writer]

Only thing that concerns me about this is something I heard on the radio (KFYI...so Conservative Talk Show) this morning. It takes the regulatory power out of the hands of Game & Fish, and their wildlife biologists, and puts it in the hands of the voters. Any changes would have to be voted upon. So harvest numbers, etc. would be voted on. If that is true, I have a couple of concerns ... #1 is that if voters become more liberal they could decrease harvest numbers to unhealty levels trying to "spare the poor animals", and #2 is that what the heck to voters know about healthy harvest numbers.

 

Just some things to think about. It would be great to make it a Constitutional Right so that it cannot be threatened, but not so great to take the harvest numbers and subject them to voting. I need to do some more research on it.

 

 

It does no such thing. In fact, it removes the threat of the "voters" doing anything. In effect, it does nothing to the way the wildlife is currently managed by the legislature in regards to the LAWS (Title 17) and by AZG&F in regards to the RULES, which is where the harvests, seasons, etc. come under. It has been this way for eons and nothing about that will change.

 

What the amendment WILL DO is REMOVE the threat of the environmental and animal rights groups from putting initiatives on the ballots where the "voters" would decide how to manage wildlife, i.e. the ban on public land trapping, as an example.

[sjvcon]

If that is the case, I would definitely have no issues with it. As always, before voting, I'll have to read the full proposition so I'm fully informed of what I am voting on. Laws and legislation tend to be crafted in a tricky manner ... like tacking the government takeover of Student Loans onto the Health Bill (a Bill I hope will be overturned for MANY reasons), etc. A Bill or Proposition that eliminates the influence of Environmentalist Whackos on Wildlife Management would be a GREAT thing (they ought to add Forest Management too, as we all well know) ... as long as it doesn't put the power in the wrong hands. If your statement is correct, then I'd say they'll have a YES vote from me for sure.

 

It always pays to research what you're voting on to make sure you know the full measure of the result ... to bad our Federal House and Senate members don't follow that ... what was it Queen Pelosi said ... "We have to pass the bill so you can find out what's in it ..." or something to that effect. She wasn't just talking about the public there, but every single member of the US Congress that voted "YES" without reading the 2000+ pages of BS they were voting on.

 

Thanks for the synopsis Tony. I was hoping I heard that wrong on KFYI.

 

Only thing that concerns me about this is something I heard on the radio (KFYI...so Conservative Talk Show) this morning. It takes the regulatory power out of the hands of Game & Fish, and their wildlife biologists, and puts it in the hands of the voters. Any changes would have to be voted upon. So harvest numbers, etc. would be voted on. If that is true, I have a couple of concerns ... #1 is that if voters become more liberal they could decrease harvest numbers to unhealty levels trying to "spare the poor animals", and #2 is that what the heck to voters know about healthy harvest numbers.

 

Just some things to think about. It would be great to make it a Constitutional Right so that it cannot be threatened, but not so great to take the harvest numbers and subject them to voting. I need to do some more research on it.

 

 

It does no such thing. In fact, it removes the threat of the "voters" doing anything. In effect, it does nothing to the way the wildlife is currently managed by the legislature in regards to the LAWS (Title 17) and by AZG&F in regards to the RULES, which is where the harvests, seasons, etc. come under. It has been this way for eons and nothing about that will change.

 

What the amendment WILL DO is REMOVE the threat of the environmental and animal rights groups from putting initiatives on the ballots where the "voters" would decide how to manage wildlife, i.e. the ban on public land trapping, as an example.

 

[TrentSwanson]

Amanda, thanks for posting the link to the AZSFW website!

 

Tony, great explanation!

 

I encourage all of you to vote YES ON PROP 109 and ask as many of your friends and family as possible to do the same. This could be the single most important thing we sportsmen can do to promote scientific wildlife management, support the AZG&FD, and protect hunting and fishing for future generations.

 

No, I don't always agree with G&F, but I agree with its policies and procedures much more than the whacko environmentalists who use the initiative process to change proven management techniques by using emotion at the ballot box. I also want to ensure that my 10-week-old son has as many, or more, opportunities to hunt and fish as I did.

 

This should be an absolute no-brainer for all hunters and anglers... VOTE YES ON PROP 109!!!

 

FYI:

Partial List of Supporters

•Arizona Sportsmen for Wildlife

•Arizona Sportsmen for Wildlife Conservation

•National Rifle Association

•Arizona Game and Fish Commission

•Arizona Desert Bighorn Sheep Society

•Arizona Deer Association

•Arizona Antelope Foundation

•Arizona Elk Society

•Arizona Chapter of National Wild Turkey Federation

•Anglers United

•Arizona Flycasters Club

•Yuma Valley Rod and Gun Club

•Arizona Wildlife Federation

•Mohave Sportsmen’s Association

•Southeastern Arizona Sportsmen’s Club

•Safari Club International

•Arizona Trappers Association

•Arizona Bowhunters Association

•Outdoor Experience 4 All

 

Partial List of Opponents

•The Sierra Club

•Humane Society of the U. S.

•Arizona Animal Defense League

•Humane Voters of Arizona

[CouesWhitetail]

Some ideas on how you can help from AZSFW

 

Help us Pass Prop 109, The Right to Hunt and Fish

 

Arizona Sportsmen for Wildlife needs your help to pass Prop 109. Getting this bill on the ballot was a big step, but now we must get it passed. Hunters and anglers understand the importance, but they are only a small part of the electorate.

We need to get the message out to as many non-hunting voters as possible. We cannot do that without financing and we can’t do it without your help. In addition to voting on November 2, you can help in the following ways:

 

• On all future emails you send out use this link to the AZSFW Website http://www.arizonasportsmenforwildlife.org

 

• If you have a Face book or Twitter account, start the buzz with all of your contacts and direct them to the AZSFW website using this link http://www.arizonasportsmenforwildlife.org/actionalerts.asp

 

• Help us fund the Pro Prop 109 Campaign by contributing to the Arizona Sportsmen for Wildlife Issue Mobilization Fund http://www.arizonasportsmenforwildlife.org/html

 

• Volunteer to help (assistance is needed to place signs throughout Maricopa and Pima Counties as well as rural counties; volunteers needed to distribute literature and bumper signs at pre-determined locations throughout the state) For Maricopa County, contact Suzanne or Cindy at suzanne@capitolconsultingaz.com or cindy@capitolconsultingaz.com For Pima County contact Todd Rathner at trathner@aol.com

 

• For the non-hunting public, please refer them to the following website:

www.outdoorheritagearizona.com

[Coues&Bass]

Thanks for the link Amanda and I agree with Outdoor Writer. Lets keep the Enviornmental Wackos out of AZ.

[sjvcon]

Well I took a few minutes to go through this today, and I'm convinced that I should vote "YES". I read several opinions, one if which was a favorable opinion from someone pretty high up with Game and Fish. While granting more power to Legislature is never something I'd do lightly, this bill acts to cement CITIZEN RIGHTS, which I am ALWAYS in favor of. The arguments against were weak, and claimed that the amendment was a response to a "NON-EXISTANT THREAT" ... there is no such thing where the Sierra Club and similar organizations are concerned ... there is always a threat.

 

I'm going to be OUT ON THE STUMP with everyone I know about this one.

[Outdoor Writer]

While granting more power to Legislature is never something I'd do lightly,

 

The amendment doesn't grant any more power to the Legislature than it ALREADY has! The Legislature has been making the laws in regards to the state's wildlife management for decades. And within the those laws, they may designate that management to the AZ G&FD, which then has the task of doing that management under the RULES it puts forth. When it comes to actual LAW changes, however, the game dept. MUST go through the Legislature, as it always has been in the past. In other words, the game dept. works as an agent of sorts for the Legislature.

[sjvcon]

Which I guess would be one of the main reasons Game and Fish stands behind it, right? Makes sense.

 

The more I've gone over the arguments against it, the weaker they are.

 

Thanks for the additional clarification Tony.

[TrentSwanson]

Today I attended both Town Hall meetings hosted by the Secretary of State (one in Prescott, the other in Chino Valley) and spoke as the official proponent of Prop 109.

 

There was no official opponent in Prescott, and the only audience member that voiced any concern was a lady who was offended that I referred to our opponents as "radicals" and "extremists." Go figure. All others I talked to commended me and supported the issue.

 

In Chino Valley there was a much smaller crowd, and a man from the Sierra Club spoke as an opponent. There was no participation from the audience so it was harder for me to get a read on the crowd. After the meeting I spoke with the Sierra Club guy and he was offended that referred to our opponents as "radicals" and "extremists." Go figure again.

 

One thing I learned is that no one understands what Tony so eloquently describes: "The amendment doesn't grant any more power to the Legislature than it ALREADY has!"

 

I was proud to represent sportsmen and would encourage all of you to attend the Town Halls. After the official proponents and opponents speak, the audience can ask questions or make statements. It would be a perfect opportunity to stand up for what you believe in. Here is a link to the future Town Hall meetings:

 

AZSOS Town Hall Meeting Schedule

 

Of course they talk about all the other propositions, too, which was very helpful to me to become educated on their meanings and ramifications.

 

VOTE YES ON PROP 109!!

[CouesWhitetail]

Thank you for attending those meetings Trent and for giving us a report on how they went. And thanks Tony for all the clarifications

[archerycrazy]

I have watched this proposed amendment since it was first introduced in the Legislature as HCR 2008. I watched all of the hearings and debate. There was extensive interaction between the Game and Fish Commission and the NRA in order to arrive at language that the Commission could support. You can thank Commissioners Freeman and Woodhosure for that effort. I have studied it extensively. I have also studied the current Arizona Constitution and Arizona Revised Statutes Title 17.

Opponents claim that this is a power grab by the Legislature. Under the Constitution, the Legislature currently has the authority to pass wildlife laws. By enacting Title 17 they established the Game and Fish Commission and Department. They gave the Commission the authority to set all rules and regullations regarding wildlife and wildlife habitat.

Oppenents claim that there is no threat to hunting or fishing in Arizona. Technically they are correct. However, history shows us that they have actively attempted to ban hunting or methods of hunting in many other states including Maine, Michigan, Oregon, California to name a few. They successfully blocked wolf hunting in Idaho, Wyoming and Montana.

Opponents spend millions on litigation and initiatives. They spend nothing on wildlife management. They work to block wildlife management.

I attended the first Townhall in Phoenix on Wednesday. Interestingly and opponent of Proposition 109 decided that she needed a supply of Prop 109 bumper stickers.

 

I encourage all voters to study Article 22 Section 21 of the Arizona Constitution and Title 17 of Arizona Revised Statutes.