elkaholic Report post Posted April 5, 2012 sorry - not to say all will be influenced you are talking in reguards to the 2 good guys - I agree with you!!! BUT __ what we are worried about is the 3 that are in question in reguards to their relations with azsfw . what can you say of the others ?? do you know them as well what happens when sue leaves / how can we stop the 2 names who may be influenced by azsfw !? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Heat Report post Posted April 5, 2012 sorry - not to say all can be influenced you are talking in reguards to the 2 good guys - I agree with you!!! BUT __ what we are worried about is the 3 that are in question in reguards to their relations with azsfw . when sue leaves we can only hope one of the 2 names appointed by this board is as good as sue has been!! how can we stop the 2 names who may be influenced by azsfw !? what can you say of the others ?? do you know them as well I'll be perfectly honest. I worked with both Hayes and Sue as the rep for the Club. I like them both. I don't have the same level of confidence with Hayes and didn't seem to agree with him as much or don't feel that he had the same mostly positive relationship with the Club that we might have enjoyed with Sue Chilton, or Robbie Woodhouse (obviously). I don't agree with Gary Stinson on a few things and said so publicly in the WCC emails that used to go around. Other than that, I don't know much about him. I have my own doubts about him, but mostly believe he would represent whoever it is he is supposed to represent well. I don't know a thing about Don Johnson, other than what was posted. I honestly don't believe that AZSFW got the Commission appointees they were really after in the first two go rounds, so facts tell me that the AZSFW conspiracy machine isn't working all that great. After they have been exposed recently, I honestly don't believe they'll have a whole lot of horsepower in the coming years. Nick Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
krp Report post Posted April 5, 2012 This is real politics, not some special interest board meeting of 400 members... Let me see if I can break this down by guessing and tell me how close I am... Gilstrap, excommissioner, azsfw linked in everything Chilton, excommissioner the same time as Gilstrap and asked to serve because of the connection and ranching Johnson, long time connections with the the same lobby group at least in association if not membership of azsfw, critter groups ect. Townsend, YVRGC were talked into supporting the legislation then reconsidered too late and were able put one of their own on the board. Stinson, a azsfwc director with obvious connections to the same group as Johnson. So 4 of the 5 were hand picked, Townsend and probably Clilton will listen to this new uproar from us and consider it, if we replace Stinson or Johnson with Taylor then we have a majority, maybe. Now this is a lot of trouble for a solution, to a problem, that was created with a built in self serving interests. Of the five sitting, how many folks do they represent by legislation, 2000 at most... they don't represent me and 300,000 other sportsmen who depend on the commission... let alone any general public who enjoy wildlife. It needs to be gone, not controlled. Kent Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Heat Report post Posted April 5, 2012 Wrong on Townsend, YVRGC. George and Robbie pretty much disagreed with the Bill at first, then agreed and took Credit in a Club meeting for getting it done, now disagree. Let me let you in on how the Club actually voted. I'll first point out that a few of our very well respected and experienced members including Joe Melton and Jonny Fugate spoke in favor of the bill. I was in favor as well. As hard as Robbie and George tried, the club voted overwhelmingly, and by that I mean at least 90% of the club voted in favor after it was passed by the BOD. Your Stinson connection may have some flawed assumptions as well but I really don't have facts to back it up. I believe he represented a fishing group on the WCC which became AZSFWC, and does not have the all the baggage that AZSFW carries. But again I dont know much about him or Johnson. Hayes Gilstrap you're on the money. Kent I wish you would have had the pleasure of going toe to toe with Lori Faeth and her thoughts on this type of appointment. I honestly believe you would see where I am coming from and would'nt be putting so much faith in having the pleasure of an appointment like this lie solely with the Governor. If you don't think special interest is still in play without a bill like this...I got some Oceanfront Property for sale! Nick Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rthrbhntng Report post Posted April 5, 2012 I was going to stay out of this one but can't do it. Right now the person you need to be worried about is Gary Stinson. Gary does have the baggage. The other issue you need to be concerned about is that if it is true, Hayes may not be a resident of AZ for long. You need to make sure his replacement is someone you trust. My take is that Don J. will represent the position well and will be an asset for sportsmen. Yes he is a friend of Pete's but if the ADBSS supports him I feel that he will work out. As far as Sue and Phil they are standup. Nick is right about not doing away with this board. If you don't have the knowledge of Lori and Janet and their connections to the environmental movement then you may need to trust Nick. I have that knowledge too and so do some others and what Nick is alluding to is a very real threat to the hunting community. Steve Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
krp Report post Posted April 5, 2012 So, because YVRGC agreed 90% with azsfw and the lobbyist, Townsend was put on the board by azsfw recommendation? That'd make it 5 of 5 hand picked. Or did he go independent to the Governor to be seated? Are all appointment boards so narrowly restricted to seating special interest requirements? Or are they an open seating? I'll discuss this with anyone, I'm right here. Kent Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Heat Report post Posted April 5, 2012 Townsend was put on the Board by personally applying, having credentials and support, and the Governor's choice. AZSFW had very little if anything to do with it, other than YVRGC being an affiliated organization at the time. How do you keep coming up with AZSFW having so much percieved power and influence? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
krp Report post Posted April 5, 2012 The argument about solely with the governor is my same argument about solely with a few special interests... Kent Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
krp Report post Posted April 5, 2012 Townsend was put on the Board by personally applying, having credentials and support, and the Governor's choice. AZSFW had very little if anything to do with it, other than YVRGC being an affiliated organization at the time. How do you keep coming up with AZSFW having so much percieved power and influence? Azsfw is a PAC and lobbyist, they brought the legislation to the legislature and got it passed. It was their idea, the appointment board members didn't walk in off the street, each has ties to founders of azsfw. Kent Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Heat Report post Posted April 5, 2012 Thanks Steve. Didn't take long to be reminded why I "retired". I really don't have much desire to fight about these issues anymore. Thought I might interject some facts and history to the discussion, but I can see that I'm not getting very far. Oh well. Good luck gentlemen, Nick Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KGAINES Report post Posted April 5, 2012 Someone can be a founder of a group or organization that turned out bad and still make sound decisions. There are a lot of people that started something for all the right reasons and as it grows or they leave it takes a turn for the worse, they look now and shake their heads at what it is, not what it was. Those people aren't all bad, heck I bet the founding fathers of our country are probably disgusted by what it has become. You can't judge everyone by who they were affiliated with at one time, people change and so do organizations. The azsfw needs to go away, but sportsmen need to unite and stand together to keep what opportunities we still have from going away. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chef Report post Posted April 6, 2012 I do know Phil Townsend personally and trust that man like I might trust someone in my own family. He is salt of the earth. If you are going to question his morals and ethics you are certainly not very well informed at the least. I won't go any further than that. Well said. True. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
archerycrazy Report post Posted April 6, 2012 Don Johnson made it through committee today 5-0-1. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
elkaholic Report post Posted April 6, 2012 AZSFW having so much percieved power and influence? look at what just happened with 2072 - azsfw was willing to go lie and decieve- betray all organizations they were said to represent - to further their own good . they are 100% opposed to the g&F they have stated publicallly they are incompentent a few chosen people and the right law - bingo - on more step in aligning the pieces . they know what money can buy - 3 paid lobbyists to fight against all the sportsmen and women in Arizona . key board membders on all the organizations to help with the fight! THey were willing to prove they had the power and the influence but it was stopped by joe hunter - now joe hunter needs to finish the game! we need to put a tag on azsfw! and anywhere they show thier influence and precieved power . this board by its current members shows its a threat -its got azsfw members with the right people anything can be a good thing - with the wrong people its dooms day! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
