Poll: For or Against

[stanley]

PS: I think there should be a law that says any hunter with a child should take them hunting as often as they can! And I mean that!

 

Not all kids like to hunt

 

Touche'! Should have qualified that statement, I suppose.....

 

S.

 

[Santana Outdoors]

WalkingW , yes thanks for posting. Congrats to the young man and thank God we live in a country to where he can do that! Again we don't need anymore laws. If all of us will be ethical in the field and help those who are not.

 

Charlie Daniels says it all http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7f7nGWPvnKw

[ghost hunter]

I voted "no" because we "SHOULD NOT HAVE TO HAVE" any more regulations, however, our actions are making that an inevitable reality.

 

Every time someone introduces something that is not "naturally occurring" (yes, even salt)into the forest, we run the risk of crossing the line between "use" and "abuse". Just how many salt licks, corn flingers, and ??? stations per acre can you have before enough is enough? 45,000 deer tags and several thousand elk tags in 2010 bring the potential for alot of use/abuse.

[OpticNerd]

In this poll, I was one of the 'yes' votes. The reason was because I didn't have a choice to break down the nuances of baits (salt, corn, water, donuts, etc..........).

 

In AZ, we can't hunt bears over barrels of donuts & other trash, so I suppose we already have a ban on baiting that not many (at least not many on this site....) have complained about. So if you think about it, we already have a ban on baiting. It just didn't hit the soft spot that we have on this site..... I don't want to see bears baited with donuts & old cooking grease.

 

The argument of 'un-enforceble laws' doesn't hold water IMO. If that were the case, then there would be NO laws at all! There are not enough DPS officers to catch all speeders, and not enough other cops to catch all of the law-breakers out there for SO many laws already, but that doesn't mean they are not good laws. My personal opinion, I suppose.

 

S.

 

 

Good post!

[OpticNerd]

I'm one of the few for the ban. I never been opposed to baiting until C&S posted his other thread about the subject. Heck I've even used them for my trail cams but that was before I knew the G&F believes baiting may lead to the spread of CWD. Even if the G&F said there was only a 10% chance that using baits could help spread CWD I'd still be against the use of baits. The risk of spreading CWD is not worth it in my mind. There's already enough natural attractants or animal condensing features out in the hills. Things like tanks, ponds, springs, seeps, game trails, funneling areas like saddles and such. With a little homework there's really no needs for baits so until there is some hard evidence that proves baiting doesn't help with the spread of CWD I'll be against the use of baits.

[Rembrant]

Too many comments diss'ing the Game Dept. declaring bad science, mistrust, and ulterior motives. What does a popular vote on a site full of deer baiters prove? Are our motives what is best for the sport in the long run, or about what we can get now? Bad science? Bad motives? Look in the mirror.

Besides, y'all are preaching to the choir. I didn't vote - don't see a point.

 

Mike

[120carp]

there is nothing wrong with it. most baits benefit the animals.

[.270]

if your kid don't wanna go huntin', make em go. grab em by the ear and drag em if you have to. they are "your" kid. at least until they're 18. you need to make em go fishin' too. and hikin' and campin'. if your kid don't wanna go huntin' then they don't need video games and junk like that either. and all boys need to play football, unless they have some physical thing that keeps em from it. football too, not that sissy soccer game they like to call football.

 

like i said, i don't bait, but some of those that belong to the same club as me do. (the fraternal and holy order of the hunter) so therefore i support all the memebers of the club. don't let one more of our freedoms be legislated away in order to make some anti happy. the cwd arguement is pure BS. i don't care how they slice that one. Lark.

[4Falls]

I voted no. But it doesnt matter since sportsman have no voice in anything that game and fish does. The balance has shifted in the department to the side of the anti hunting community.

They know that they cant just arbitrarily ban hunting so they just keep making it more difficult, less enjoyable, more expensive. They also know that well just sit back and take it. So while were at it let me offer up some other great ideas that AZG&F might want to consider.

 

1. Treestand permits. Submit your applications early before all the good trees are taken. All treestands will require an inspection prior to being hunted from. The same thing could be applied to ground blinds as well of course all blinds would have to be inspected to insure they are safe and meet with G&Fs standards. And since ground blinds are on the ground you will have to pay property tax for each day your blind is in the field.

 

2. In order to maximize hunter opportunity and increase tag revenue do away with tag quotas and send everyone out at the same time for 1 day. October 15th.

 

3. Charge trophy fees to anyone who actually manages to harvest an animal. Of course if you manage to bag a trophy animal your obviously a poacher and will be dealt with as such.

 

4. Ban hunting away from improved roads. This will eliminate hunters getting lost and preserve the bucolic splendor of the forest/desert. Just remember that road hunting is illegal. (see #3 sentence two)

 

5. Make all tags "once-in-a-lifetime" and increase tag fees accordingly.

 

6. Make all wildlife the property of AZG&F. Hence they can reclaim all or any part of their property at any time to be auctioned at the next Expo to generate revenue.

 

Thats all I can think of right now... good luck in the draw everyone.

[stanley]

I voted no. But it doesnt matter since sportsman have no voice in anything that game and fish does. The balance has shifted in the department to the side of the anti hunting community.

They know that they cant just arbitrarily ban hunting so they just keep making it more difficult, less enjoyable, more expensive. They also know that well just sit back and take it. So while were at it let me offer up some other great ideas that AZG&F might want to consider.

 

1. Treestand permits. Submit your applications early before all the good trees are taken. All treestands will require an inspection prior to being hunted from. The same thing could be applied to ground blinds as well of course all blinds would have to be inspected to insure they are safe and meet with G&Fs standards. And since ground blinds are on the ground you will have to pay property tax for each day your blind is in the field.

 

2. In order to maximize hunter opportunity and increase tag revenue do away with tag quotas and send everyone out at the same time for 1 day. October 15th.

 

3. Charge trophy fees to anyone who actually manages to harvest an animal. Of course if you manage to bag a trophy animal your obviously a poacher and will be dealt with as such.

 

4. Ban hunting away from improved roads. This will eliminate hunters getting lost and preserve the bucolic splendor of the forest/desert. Just remember that road hunting is illegal. (see #3 sentence two)

 

5. Make all tags "once-in-a-lifetime" and increase tag fees accordingly.

 

6. Make all wildlife the property of AZG&F. Hence they can reclaim all or any part of their property at any time to be auctioned at the next Expo to generate revenue.

 

Thats all I can think of right now... good luck in the draw everyone.

 

 

This response is so hilarious, that I KNOW you must be joking!

 

The only reason sportsmen "have no voice" is because they (WE) aren't using it!!! A few do, but most don't! Including those on this site. Sad, but true...... This site represents many folks that are HARD CORE hunters, yet the majority on this site never show up to game comission meetings or get involved in the few clubs/organizations that are actually trying to represent our love. Some show-up at banquets/auctions, but that is about as far as most take it. The department is not 'arbitrarily' banning hunting, and I haven't really noticed how they are making it more difficult.

 

As far as making it more expensive, uhhh....... Have you looked at the price of ANYTHING lately? Gas, for instance? How do you think the department pays for gas for their trucks? Why would hunting tags/permits be exempt from inflation?

 

Again, I know you must be joking....

 

S.

 

[cw4192]

HOW ABOUT INFESTING NATURAL HABITAT WITH ALFALFA, OATS, SUGAR, MOLASSES,CORN ECT... AND WHEN ANIMALS GET USED TO EATING THAT AND ITS NOT THERE, WHAT HAPPENS. ITS LIKE EVERYBODY SAYS THAT THEY DONT HAVE THE TIME ANYMORE TO DO THE SCOUTING AND GET TO KNOW THE AREA. MY FEELING IS IF YOU DONT KNOW MULTIPLE AREA'S TO HUNT AND ONLY GO TO AN AREA THAT IS CLOSE TO HOME THAT IS YOU'RE FAULT. IF YOU MAKE A LIVING BY TAKING PEOPLE HUNTING THEN I UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR SUPPLEMENTS. BOTTOM LINE GET OUT AND FIND NEW AREA'S. THE GOV'T WILL DO WHAT IT WANT'S. I THINK THAT AZGF NEEDS TO MAKE A HUNTER SAFETY COURSE FOR BOW HUNTING AND ALL NEW HUNTERS WHO JUST PUT IN WITH BUDDIES FROM WORK AND HAVE NO CLUE. FIRST TIME DRAWS IN ARIZONA SHOULD BE MANDATORY HUNTING CLASS. TOO MANY YAHOO'S HUNTING NOW.

[4Falls]

Of the western states that have reported cases of CWD how many of them allow baiting for deer/elk etc.? I know that Montana has had cases of CWD but yet they have recently banned trail cameras. Maybe trail cameras are linked to CWD somehow? Maybe we need signage at animal condensing features like ponds, drinkers or rancher placed salt licks to warn them of the dangers of sharing saliva. Of course we'd have to print the signs in both english and spanish, for the ungulates that range close to the border.

 

Please know Im not making a joke about the seriousness of CWD. More so I am making a joke of how our gov't agencies handle such serious matters.

[QCwtAddict]

Banning baiting would just be one step closer to banning hunting altogether

[Coues 'n' Sheep]

The use of CWD as reason for this ban is unsupported considering that every spring bow, water catchment, pool or pond of standing water, or ranch salt is a far greater danger to the pread of CWD than any of the proposed bait items.

 

This is why we must all be educated about what they are feeding us... scare tactics only work on the un-educated... please do your home work and find reasons why you should not stand with you hunting brothers. Please.

[OpticNerd]

The use of CWD as reason for this ban is unsupported considering that every spring bow, water catchment, pool or pond of standing water, or ranch salt is a far greater danger to the pread of CWD than any of the proposed bait items.

 

This is why we must all be educated about what they are feeding us... scare tactics only work on the un-educated... please do your home work and find reasons why you should not stand with you hunting brothers. Please.

 

 

There's nothing we can do about the spread of CWD from water sources because an animal has to drink. But an animal doesn't need bait to survive. I don't care if baiting is only 1% of the cause of CWD that's 1% too much. Until proven otherwise I'm not going to use baits anymore be it salt, corn or any other form of attractant. I still can't understand why some people think the G&F is out to get us and to shut hunting down piece by piece. It's their job to do what's best for the animals and to ensure that we have healthy herds so we CAN continue hunting. Sometimes we might not like what they are doing but that doesn't mean it's not what's best for our animals. Over the years collectively the G&F has done more research, surveys, historical data or any other form of animal studies then any of us. Put this all together and you got the most educated group of people that knows what's best for our wildlife and not just deer and elk but all of AZ's animals. Like them or not the G&F deserves our respect because without them we wouldn't have the quality of hunting we have today.