azgfd commission news

[.270]

i don't know a whole lot about this, but i sorta like it that at least a little attention was paid to the nomination and it wasn't just rubber stamped. as far as her being a nonhunter, what have the "hunters" on the commission done that is good? just the fact that mr. napalitano appointed her is enough for me to not like her. i don't care what anybody says, she has an agenda and it ain't good for us. but some of cimalleros comments are about as stupid as they can get. she can't be a commissioner because she has a kid? i mean i'm glad that what happened, happened, no way i wanted her on the commission, but dang, lets use some real stuff here. and the fact that the NRA said she was cool is another reason to not want her. the NRA does some great stuff nationally, but they don't need to have any input whatsoever into Az. wildlife management. them or sci or the sierra club or peta or anyone. the NRA really rode the fence in the uso deal, along with sci, too. but the thing that really jumped out at me is that gilstrap's wife is a lobbyist representing outdoors interests? is this a conflict of interest or what? good night, i wonder what the heck is really going on in those commission meetings?

 

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/l...nsider0622.html

[peloncillo]

Maybe now we can get someone in there that is at least a hunter. I can only imagine that Pete's statement was taken out of context. I am sure he had real reasons to oppose her nomination as we all did. To bad we can't get someone like Lark on the commission. I'd be at every meeting.

 

Keven

[DesertBull]

I do not know enough about her to say yea or nea, but maybe if we started using biological fact to manage wildlife in Arizona instead of economical/political gain, we would all be better off?

 

If he really did say that about her "young family", that is a friggen embarrassment. Everytime someone gets caught with their foot in their eating orafice, they claim they were taken out of context.

 

Also, I have emailed this Pete guy several times about AZSFW and he has never once responded.

[.270]

i've only met pete one time. so i can't have a real informed opinion. he has a real grating, caustic way of talking and has an adversarial relationship with the commission. and he feels like his way is the only way. big deal, so do i. i just thought the statement about her being young and having kids was way off base and counterproductive and hurt the cause and his standing. there's a time a place and a method for political incorrectness, and that wasn't it. and the papers are always gonna print what has the most controversy. if you notice, the article didn't give much of a hint as to why they really didn't approve her. it's apparent that there were other problems with the nomination, or it woulda passed. i can't ever remember em not approving one. from what i got from her words about not being a hunter, i sorta think she's a little anti. and a little anti is a whole bunch, to me. but i will say this about pete, he has passion. and if he wouldn't have did what ever he did (all we're gonna hear about is the young mother statement, from the paper) she probably woulda got rubber stamped. he spends as much time bein' a pain in the butts of the commissioners as anyone, and unfortunately, that's seems to be what they respond too. that and the strings that go from napalitano's fingers to their appendages. we need more pete's. just need to choose words better. the way things go anymore, you can say a million things right, and say one thing wrong, or just in the wrong way, and the one that's wrong will have more to do with what happens the all the right ones. in fact, if they find out a way to weasel her back into contention, i'll bet it'll have something to do with that statement. Lark.

[wetmule]

Like it or not, politics has become an integral part of our AZ G&F Dept., Wildlife Management, The Commission and all that relates to what we like to do as sportsmen and women; which is fish, hunt when we get drawn and enjoy the out doors and the wildlife in it. Unless sportsmen & women have a seat at the table in the political process, including the nomination of commissioners - we WILL be left in the dust and decisions will be made on our behalf that we will not like and decisons have already and are continuing to be made that the average hunter doesn't agree with. I know Pete well, and although I don't agree with every thing he says or does; there is no one out there that works harder for sportsmen and women and AZ's wildlife than Pete does. He certainly has rubbed some in the wrong way, but that IMO, is not a bad thing. He is one of a very few out there that saw the direction this commission and the Dept. is headed and saw or sees that direction as heading south, as many of us do. He, they whoever -- a group of very concerned sportsmen got together during the USO Outfitters G&F FIASCO and started the process of forming SFW, an organization to give sportmen and women a seat at the political wildlife table. They put forth, very transparently, a list of candidates for consideration as nominees for the commission vacancy all of which were well qualified, active sportsmen and women with long historys of doing good things for wildlife in this state. The NRA originally endorsed one of those candidates Mrs. Nancy Lewis. Mr. Napolitano elected go his own way and not appoint anyone on the list that was endorsed by any of the conservation groups - ADBSS, ADA, AAF, AES, RMEF etc. all of whom openly participated in meetings, discussions, talked about their resumes desires and qualifications etc. She appointed Ms. Martin and through their political influence and effort got her blocked from going forward. Somewhere in the middle of all this crap the NRA changed their support from Nancy Lewis to Ms. Martin in some backdoor midnight shady deal with the governor I suspect.

Like Lark said the NRA does a great job at what they do - gun rights, gun ownership, gun laws, gun advocacy

etc. They have never participated at all in any wildlife or G & F issues in AZ and IMO they need to keep it that way. It is very obvious that the Gov. Mr. Napolitano contacted her "friend" the Pres. of the NRA and asked them to get involved, knowing that they would have a big chance to sway the legislators with the NRA endorsing ms. Martin. It almost worked, well it kind of did work-- because I just heard today that the Gov. dismissed Mr. Gilstrap and immediately replaced him with Ms. Martin as interim commissioner, which she can legally do, until the next session starts. So we have Ms. Martin on the commission until Jan. I think, then she is gone.

I second the Lark for commissioner, I'm not kidding, you would be exactly what this Dept. needs - heck I'd even give you that sheep tag you've been pining for if it was up to me.

[KGAINES]

Very well said wetmule

To me it is sort of like voting, if you don't vote don't complain about the outcome, if you are not allowed to vote then you have a gripe.

 

As far as being taken out of context I don't know, but I do know that it happens and the press or media love to give certain things a spin to make them more enticing to readers or viewers.

 

I am not trying to defend anyone here, I think that she surely could have done the job and taken care of her family, her qualifications and her background are what should have been the issue as to whether she got the job, and I for one think there were several more qualified people out there and that is what makes her appointment even more questionable.

 

I will also say that that meeting was held in march and we are only now hearing about the young family comment, leave it to the az republic to bring it up, if it was said in such a derogatory way we would have heard about it then, ms. martin or the gov. would have been all over that, so I also question why now and not then.

[dave]

I agree, wetmule has stated the facts about as good as anyone could.

[JVS]

My vote is with Lark...

 

Too bad we can't do away with "appointments". Appointments are usually for people that can't get there on their own. Who wants that for a commissioner? We need good ole democracy. Let's VOTE!

[az4life]

A lot of intelligent and insightful comments here. I agree with a most of them.

I also believe Pete's comments were carefully scoured for the most inflamatory excerpt to create a diversion story. Then "reported" when the political timing was right.

 

A few things we know for sure are:

 

AZGFD is a political entity in the state.

 

The NRA is more about politics than sportsmens issues.

 

When the game is politics, no one ever has the whole story. Backroom deals and favors stay secret.

 

Jammit Napolitano is no friend of sportsmen. She is a well connected political animal.

 

The Media in general will spin any story, to "report" only the angles they want you to see when they want you to see them.

 

The AZ Repugnant is a poor excuse for journalism by anyones standards.

 

 

We will never agree on everything but when politics are in play the general population has little chance of getting the best results.

Eliminating politics is never going to happen, so we have to fight it and Pete is doing that.

[KGAINES]

I went to the commission meeting this morning and was able to stay until the break for lunch, nice seeing you there peloncillo, was anyone else there from here. I wanted to be there for the approval of the dove, sandhill crane, and band tailed pigeon seasons and limits and also for the talk on pick ups and possession of wildlife parts, but had to leave beforehand. They changed the schedule during the meeting and moved those items to last, I would like to know how that turned out, I seen there were 5 or more people from the earth first group there also.

This is the second meeting I have been to and I am very concerned with the way they operate, they will motion and second with little or no discussion and simply vote, they disregard all that was said and go forward with what they think and seemingly all fall right in with them, except for chairman Melton who seemed frustrated that it kept happening. In the time I was there Ms. Martin did nothing for me to say anything against her, she actually did very little, commissioner Hernbrode and Mclean seemed to me to be the ones making most of the motions and proposals and I do not know if that is a good thing. We need an average sportsman with in my opinion very little political background on the commission to give us a voice. Lark I don't know what you would have to do to get on the commission, but I would be behind you also. I would just like to say there is someone up there who is one of us, and us being an AZ native or someone who has grown up here who hunts and fishes this state and has its best interest at heart.

 

I would appreciate an update on what went on after the lunch break if at all possible.

 

Please get involved it is real frustrating seeing these earth first people there and knowing that the commission could go in their direction on any issue simply because we are not showing up.

[bowhuntinmaniac]

JVS, you really dont want the general public voting or commissioners.......remember, we as hunters are outnumbered.

[KGAINES]

Garth you are sure right about that, how many people vote for stuff that they have no idea about, they just pick a candidate by political party, man or woman, they like the name, somebody told me to, or eenie meenie miney mo, and that doesn't include the antis or the tree huggers, I don't think we need that risk All they need is three out of five to mess everything up and two would cause a lot of problems. At least the governor understands that the azgfd has a job to do and there is a large constituent of voters that are hunters, at least I hope she does.

[dave]

Glad to hear you were there Mr. Gaines. Sorry I was not there. I am sure we will hear more feedback soon. I wished you could have been the for the Sandhill Crane vote to inform us all. Last year Hernbrode voted agaist the hunt. I wonder what the motions were this year and who voted for what?

Kinda sad a hunt that is regulated federally is opposed on a state level. Earth first and any other group opposing this hunt including commissioner Hernbrode should take their message to the feds and not bug Arizona with their agenda.

 

Looking forward to hearing what happened.

[KGAINES]

I was wondering the same thing especially with Ms. Martin having a vote, but early on in the meeting she did say something that was in support of waterfowl and the duck hunters, I can't remember what that was exactly, but that could be a good sign for the short time that she is on the commission.

 

I know there were members from each hunting group there maybe one of those guys can update us or at least let one of us know and we can post some input, otherwise we will have to wait for the meeting minutes or spring regs.

[peloncillo]

I too was only able to be there for a short while but what I heard was kind of disturbing. I 'm sorry I don't know there names but one commissioner said that he wanted Game and Fish to be in charge of regulating and enforcing all off highway vehicle usage in the state. I know some sportsmen use OHVs but I'm sure there is a greater percentage of recreational riders. I did hear Mrs. Martins comments and they were to the effect that she wanted it known that the waterfowl in Arizona are here due to international and other states involvement. Hopefully next time I can be there longer.

 

 

Keven