GAME AND FISH TO CHANGE HUNT STRUCTURES

[Noel Arnold]

Desertbull,

So you have heard that there is bunnyhuggers also. What is this world coming to.!!!!!!!!!!

[dave]

Amanda,

 

Thanks for your words today. I thought you were right on, on every point.

 

I believe you understand more than the one that didn't understand you. I hope to help him understand it better.

[CouesWhitetail]

Thanks Dave!

 

For those of you that were unable to make the commission meeting, here is a small summary of events.

 

There were a fair number of hunters, but not as many as I thought would come. I think it was due to short notice and it being on a Friday.

 

Leonard Ordway gave a presentation on his recommendations. The commission asked some very good questions during his presentation. Then they asked for public comment. I gave some brief comments about how I was concerned about the loss of quality in favor of quantity of tags. I told them I was willing to wait several years for a quality hunt rather than get drawn more often for what I consider to be a tag of lesser quality. I mentioned Dec WT and Sept archery bull elk hunts in particular. I told them that I understood that they hear from a lot of hunters saying "I never get drawn anymore" and I wanted them to make sure they knew there is a large segment of the hunting population that prefers a quality hunt over being drawn more often.

 

Several hunters, primarily archery elk hunters, got up also and said essentially the same thing. The commission seemed to still think that the average hunter wouldn't agree that quality of a hunt opportunity is important. Seemed to me they were definitely focused on getting more hunters in the field, regardless of hunt success or draw odds. One commissioner didn't seem to understand why an archery bull hunt in Sept was of higher value than a Nov archery bull hunt. And another commissioner cautioned me that I should not imply the proposal raises money for the dept., or rather that money entered into the decision at all. I know lots of you think otherwise, but he was very serious about it not being a consideration in their decision making.

 

I urge all you guys to go to a commission meeting if you feel strongly about this. The dept is always under pressure to issue more tags. This proposal is one way to that. But I think it sacrifices quality of the hunts. It really bothers me to see that. But the only way it won't happen is if the commission believes that enough hunters feel the same way. If you go to a meeting, you can fill out a blue card so that you can speak. Or you can fill out written comments on the blue card and not speak. If you aren't comfortable speaking at the meeting, you can still go and write your comments and listen to others.

 

Also, the commission wanted suggestions on alternatives. They didn't just want to hear hunters say they were against the proposal. They wanted specific things that would provide palatable alternative. I think with more time to think about it, hunters will come up with some alternatives. A couple guys offered some at the meeting already.

 

Amanda

[Guest Bert]

Thanks Amanda for the report. Sounds like their going to get what they want regardless of the input from hunters. I?m with you, I want quality hunting. The December hunt is all I put in for. If I don?t hunt December whitetail I don?t hunt. As far as it not being about money .It?s always about the bottom line.(money) I?ll attend the February meeting in Tucson. I?ll say what you said about a quality hunt if enough of us say the same thing they might get the massage. But they seem heck bent on doing it there way.

Bert

[Guest Bert]

Amenda,

Sorry about the remark about it?s always about the money .Maybe it?s not. I personally know of 4 hunters in my department at work that didn?t get a tag for anything. If the changes help them, ok, do it. I just have a serious mistrust for any state run bureaucracy that is doing anything for ?my own good?

Bert

[Rembrant]

OK, so were trying to get more tags so more people can get drawn.

Seriously folks, even if we create hundreds of more tags, how will that give us better odds at getting drawn when there are ten's of thousands of applicants??!

Kinda reminds me of bonus points or the old "eligible every third year" trick that we used to use for elk until we realized that against unsurmountable odds, a few hundred or a couple of thousand don't make no difference.

The department is looking to maximize the resource. I can appreciate this, but do we really want to sacrifice our favorite hunts?

I'm tellin ya, adding a thousand tags ain't gonna get me and you drawn any more than we are right now.

 

Mike

[DesertBull]

Your odds of drawing one of those November archery tags are going to be near 100%.

 

IF they go through with the number of tags they are proposing for the November hunts, there will be left over tags. Who is going to burn a half dozen bonus points on a November archery elk tag?

 

Your odds of drawing a September hunt will go down to Sheep draw odds.

[COOSEFAN]

Thank you Amanda, for attending the meeting and standing up! The timing and location of the meeting was bad for most of us that wanted to be there. If anyone feels that strongly about the proposed changes, then they should voice their opposition at the meetings, that is the only place it will count! Those of us that couldn't attend and feel the same way Amanda feels are lucky she went and spoke out! Whether they are creating the change to increase revenue, we have know way to know for sure. It seems that way, but there IS alot of poeple who just want a tag of any kind and COMPLAIN every year if they don't get it. The commission is definitely trying to satisfy those folks, thats obvious, and the changes will happen if those who oppose don't attend in greater numbers and be heard. Thanks again Amanda and thanks for the report! JIM

[azhuntsmen]

Thats all we need is for more hunters in the early hunts to trip over. Old saying that i live by "if its not broke dont fix it". I am all for allowing for more people to enjoy hunts but a hunter survey would have been nice. Like alot of ya have said most hunters that put in for the dec hunts fully understand the odds and are willing to accept them. I would love for a dec hunt but for now i am totally happy with just filling the freezer or in this years case tag soup.To also keep in mind there is also the dec-jan archery hunts that i think of as trophy hunts and we dont have to worry about local and draw odds so there is a silver lining to this cloud. Best of luck on this battle and if time permiting i am going to attend a meeting or 3 just to help out my fellow hunters that i believe have a strong case.

 

 

p.s i got blanked on my unit 9 elk tag TONS of fresh sign just a day late and a hill short i guess.

[BowhuntCoues]

I attended the Game and Fish meeting today, couldn't make it yesterday. There was no discussion of the restructuring of the archery elk tag and whitetail tag alotment, I did fill out a blue card for my 2 cents on the issue.

 

They did discuss, for starting year 2007, a price increase for most tags and licenses, up to a 50% increase. I do not think any Jr. tags or licenses will be affected.

 

It was also discussed and voted against having premium tag cost. The Commissioin opted to stay with standard tag fees for each species regardless of when the hunt occured. We don't want to make this a rich persons sport!

 

It was a very interesting experience and I urge all of you to attend any meetings in the future. It did seem to me the Commission did want to here any views or ideas from the public.

[CouesWhitetail]

sdrhunter....I don't know if they have any records of the need to increase tags. I am assuming that the commissioners hear it from people verbally. I have no doubts that the dept hears lots of complaints from hunters that they never get drawn.

 

And Rembrant and sdrhunter I agree the draw odds won't improve appreciably and certainly go down for the preferred hunts.

 

 

And thanks Coosefan for the thank yous!

 

And thanks to BowhuntCoues for going to the meeting on Sunday and filling out a card and giving us some feedback.

 

I do also believe the commissioners are interested in hearing ideas and finding ways to improve things for hunters. And if we have some good alternatives, I think the dept will agree with them too.

 

Amanda

[BowhuntCoues]

You're right about the Commission wanting ideas Amanda. I also think if we can meet with them as a group or organization, we would have a louder voice.

[CouesWhitetail]

I am sure the AZ Deer Association will be putting together some kind of statement or alternative ideas. Most of the board members are out hunting and so it's been hard to get together to talk about this. But we have jan and feb to give feedback to the commission.

 

Amanda

[dave]

I would encourage all of you that are concerned about what has went forward and may become reality in April at the Hunt Set meeting constructively get involved.

It seems the Commission has chosen the ABA to be the spokesperson for archers. They are asking the ABA to offer an alternative recommendation (compromise) to the Departments recommendation.

Although almost every sportsmen group and many bowhunters ALL told the Commission that they were opposed to the proposed change and that they preferred a quality hunt over the opportunity that the Department proposed, the Department contended that the all bowhunters that were at the Commission meeting were in the minority of bowhunters and that the vast majority of bowhunters would prefer the added opportunity that the Departments proposal was offering.

I would argue that whatever poll the Department conducted to conclude this did not include the specifics of their recommendation and give the bowhunters taking the pole the choice between their proposal and present hunt structure. I believe it was more just asking if you would like more opportunity without giving them any specifics to choose from.

I would like to propose that we ask the Department to re-pole archery elk hunters prior to making any changes to the current structure. I think they could put this pole up on there website within a week and pass the collected data on to the public at the public meetings in January and February and allow people to continue to poll until the hunt set meeting in April.

 

I would like to see three choices on the poll:

 

1. Keep the current archery elk hunt season structure.

2. Implement the Departments proposed changes.

3. Implement the ABA?s compromised proposal.

 

Let all the bowhunters see the dates of the proposed hunts and the number of tags they would be applying for in order for them to make their choice.

I would also like to make sure that the Department requires a hunting license number from the people that are able to take this poll and verifies that they have either purchased or applied for an archery permit or tag within the last two years.

 

I would suggest the ADA also do a similar thing with deer.

[dave]

Yes, if it is conducted properly with specific data to choose from and not just an vague question like, "would you like more opportunity?" Also, if they are able to document that the people completing the poll have a hunting license and have participated in the specific hunts being polled.