AZGFD Rule Changes

[jnobleinaz]

I would like to add a few comments to the controversy about the bait ban currently being reviewed by the game and Fish Commission.

 

First off let it be known that I mite be a newbie on this site(sort of) but I am no newbie to hunting in Arizona. I am an Arizona native and have been hunting for over 30 years. I have taken probably more than my share of Whitetail and elk over the years as well as 9 of the big 10 and have seen hunting change drastically over the last 20 years, not all for the better. To think that rules don't need to be adjusted or changed over time is just plain crazy. If rules hadn't been implemented decades ago there would not be any game out there for us to pursue today. Things change, get used to it. Fact is, there is just too many people using the resources for things not to change.

 

I do respect other's opinions on this matter and would never revert to name calling or threatening. We all have opinions and the right to expess them in a civil manner. We will never all agree. Nothing I can say will change any minds nor can anyone change mine. It's never easy to decide just where to draw the line on matters like this but we all need to draw it somewhere.

 

I am sure that the G&F do have some valid scientific or management reasons for taking up the subject of baiting although we may never know for sure or agree with them.

 

I am very opposed to baiting animals for probably different reasons than most. First, I think that we owe the animals that we are pursueing a little more respect than to get them addicted to an unnatural food source for the sole reason of killing them. All the advances in hunting technology over the years has been ours. The deer's knowledge is the same as it always has been. At what point will it become not fair chase? Second, I believe that baiting has the potential to do more harm to our hunting rights by giving ammunition to anti-hunting groups everywhere. Most of the general public does not hunt or have an opinion either way about hunting but they are out there in greater numbers all the time. With all of the corn piles and food blocks out there they see them too. I would just about bet that most of them would say that baiting is an unfair way to hunt. I have talked to a few hikers who were very put off by it. It won't be long before the baiting issue is taken out of the G&F hands and put to the voters of the state, much like trapping was years ago. The trapping ban was not the fault of the G&F but rather the fault of a few unscrupulous trappers that placed traps wherever they pleased and caught peoples's dogs. Pretty soon it was front page news and the antis had the story they needed to get the voters to vote with their bleeding hearts. The same thing could easily happen here.

 

While I respect the views of the outspoken people expressing opinions here I will never agree. I don't ever see hunters uniting on controversial subjects unanimously. We live in a country where we have the right to stand up for what we feel is right and i would expect everyone to do just that. If we support things that we don't believe in we really are sheeple. I could not in good faith back something that I thought was morally wrong and I don't for one second think that this is just the tip of the iceberg in taking away our hunting rights. It might just be a move to help save them.

 

One thing is certain: we all have the right and duty to tell the G&F how we feel on the subject. It's easy to send an e-mail to them. If you don't take the time to at least express your opinion you don't have any right complaining whatever the outcome.

Thank you for taking the time to provide input. Regards, Kurt Davis

 

-----Original Message-----

From: John Noble [jnobleinaz1@cox.net]

Sent: Friday, October 12, 2012 08:14 AM US Mountain Standard Time

To: Kurt R.Davis

Subject: against rule change on baiting

 

 

 

Subject: against rule change against baiting

 

Comment:

Rulemaking Panel. Thank you for the chance to voice my questions and concerns.

I am an arizona resident since 1983. I am not in favor of the rule change against using salts, minerals and consumable products as a hunting method. Here are some of my problems with this rule change.

A. Where is the factual scientific data showing the effect on the wild animals of arizona from using minerals and consumable products as a hunting method.

B. Where are the case studies depicting which type of harvest method effects big game animals and how many animals are taken over salt licks and baiting sites.

C. Mandatory harvest reports on all big game animals with these methods listed for a choice.

D. Specific data showing what diseases are transferred from a salt or mineral site vs the water sources they congregate and drink from.

E. Data showing the tax dollars that will be lost from all the salt and mineral based products also to include corn and other products like “deer cane”, camping supplies, fuel, and food items that are bought in order to set these products out into the forest.

 

In order to make this rule change I would request that all the above be used and be made public to show the conservationist’s. And to not develop and enact a rule based on Theory. Theory is not a factual source. I do not agree that any other study from any other state should be used as well. We have our own micro climate in az and the study should only pertain to that. Thank you and I look forward to a reply.

 

Type:

 

Comment

 

 

Regarding:

 

Wildlife/Fish Management

 

 

John Noble

Noble Refrigeration LLC

[Jbird]

You guys are worried about AGFD taking away your baiting and eventually losing hunting all together. I'll leave the baitng alone for now. The real enemy is encroachment. Every year we lose more land to development. Rich gringos like me buying up land and building houses in the mountains. Every year I get to the top of my mountains and see buidings closer and closer. Then we hear the idiots crying about "I saw a wolf in my yard so kill them all", "a coyote killed my kitty cat", "wah wah wah". This government is doing things that are taking away the outdoors. Guys like me who don't approve of your lazy ways and say so are not the real enemy. I'll describe your enemy though. He lives at the White House, he's got big ears, he talks much smack, and he takes away and gives away everything our forefathers fought for, everything we fought for, and all that our sons and daughters are fighting for today.

These guys and girls who we pay for making decisions about our hunting are hunters themselves. And they have done a pretty good job. We all want to have it our way. That's just how we are.

I gotta go get my tool box. I just bought some really nice Snap On ratchets/sockets.

[THE RIFLEMAN]

I would like to add a few comments to the controversy about the bait ban currently being reviewed by the game and Fish Commission.

 

First off let it be known that I mite be a newbie on this site(sort of) but I am no newbie to hunting in Arizona. I am an Arizona native and have been hunting for over 30 years. I have taken probably more than my share of Whitetail and elk over the years as well as 9 of the big 10 and have seen hunting change drastically over the last 20 years, not all for the better. To think that rules don't need to be adjusted or changed over time is just plain crazy. If rules hadn't been implemented decades ago there would not be any game out there for us to pursue today. Things change, get used to it. Fact is, there is just too many people using the resources for things not to change.

 

I do respect other's opinions on this matter and would never revert to name calling or threatening. We all have opinions and the right to expess them in a civil manner. We will never all agree. Nothing I can say will change any minds nor can anyone change mine. It's never easy to decide just where to draw the line on matters like this but we all need to draw it somewhere.

 

I am sure that the G&F do have some valid scientific or management reasons for taking up the subject of baiting although we may never know for sure or agree with them.

 

I am very opposed to baiting animals for probably different reasons than most. First, I think that we owe the animals that we are pursueing a little more respect than to get them addicted to an unnatural food source for the sole reason of killing them. All the advances in hunting technology over the years has been ours. The deer's knowledge is the same as it always has been. At what point will it become not fair chase? Second, I believe that baiting has the potential to do more harm to our hunting rights by giving ammunition to anti-hunting groups everywhere. Most of the general public does not hunt or have an opinion either way about hunting but they are out there in greater numbers all the time. With all of the corn piles and food blocks out there they see them too. I would just about bet that most of them would say that baiting is an unfair way to hunt. I have talked to a few hikers who were very put off by it. It won't be long before the baiting issue is taken out of the G&F hands and put to the voters of the state, much like trapping was years ago. The trapping ban was not the fault of the G&F but rather the fault of a few unscrupulous trappers that placed traps wherever they pleased and caught peoples's dogs. Pretty soon it was front page news and the antis had the story they needed to get the voters to vote with their bleeding hearts. The same thing could easily happen here.

 

While I respect the views of the outspoken people expressing opinions here I will never agree. I don't ever see hunters uniting on controversial subjects unanimously. We live in a country where we have the right to stand up for what we feel is right and i would expect everyone to do just that. If we support things that we don't believe in we really are sheeple. I could not in good faith back something that I thought was morally wrong and I don't for one second think that this is just the tip of the iceberg in taking away our hunting rights. It might just be a move to help save them.

 

One thing is certain: we all have the right and duty to tell the G&F how we feel on the subject. It's easy to send an e-mail to them. If you don't take the time to at least express your opinion you don't have any right complaining whatever the outcome.

Thank you for taking the time to provide input. Regards, Kurt Davis

 

-----Original Message-----

From: John Noble [jnobleinaz1@cox.net]

Sent: Friday, October 12, 2012 08:14 AM US Mountain Standard Time

To: Kurt R.Davis

Subject: against rule change on baiting

 

 

 

Subject: against rule change against baiting

 

Comment:

Rulemaking Panel. Thank you for the chance to voice my questions and concerns.

I am an arizona resident since 1983. I am not in favor of the rule change against using salts, minerals and consumable products as a hunting method. Here are some of my problems with this rule change.

A. Where is the factual scientific data showing the effect on the wild animals of arizona from using minerals and consumable products as a hunting method.

B. Where are the case studies depicting which type of harvest method effects big game animals and how many animals are taken over salt licks and baiting sites.

C. Mandatory harvest reports on all big game animals with these methods listed for a choice.

D. Specific data showing what diseases are transferred from a salt or mineral site vs the water sources they congregate and drink from.

E. Data showing the tax dollars that will be lost from all the salt and mineral based products also to include corn and other products like “deer cane”, camping supplies, fuel, and food items that are bought in order to set these products out into the forest.

 

In order to make this rule change I would request that all the above be used and be made public to show the conservationist’s. And to not develop and enact a rule based on Theory. Theory is not a factual source. I do not agree that any other study from any other state should be used as well. We have our own micro climate in az and the study should only pertain to that. Thank you and I look forward to a reply.

 

Type:

 

Comment

 

 

Regarding:

 

Wildlife/Fish Management

 

 

 

John Noble

Noble Refrigeration LLC

 

"One thing is certain: we all have the right and duty to tell the G&F how we feel on the subject. It's easy to send an e-mail to them. If you don't take the time to at least express your opinion you don't have any right complaining whatever the outcome."

The above statement is meaningless...The AZGFD is a state beauracracy run by people that could care less about what hunters or the general public opinion is! Not to run down education or "science" but the highly educated "wildlife biologists" are highly biased against hunting and wish to regulate it into oblivian! "Scientific Sudy's" done by these biased people will always result in new laws and hunters losing more oportunity's. Jnoble for you to assume that the AZGFD is correct in all its actions is a slippery slope..... You sound like a democrat!

I do like your list of sudies and concernes that shoulkd be completed before making any new law! Like I said the commission would just pitch it in the round file and do as they please!

[200"mulie]

P.S. February 2012 field and Stream had a survey where 51 % of hunters, even some that admitted to using bait said they even believed that hunting over bait was not fair Chase

 

+1

[bowhunter4life]

So your not worried about this small rule change, just check out the following!

 

Bait also can not be placed on such public lands in preparation for later hunting, such as to attract deer to trail cameras in an area that will be hunted later on.

No matter the source, no hunting can be done within 100 yards of a bait pile on public lands managed by Wildlife and Parks.

 

Jones also reminds hunters they’re now limited to no more than two elevated stands per public hunting area.

 

That includes stands that hang from the tree, ladderstands and tripods.

 

Climbing aids, like screw-in steps and strap on climbing sticks, can be left attached to a tree, but most be removed when the hunter is done for the season.

 

All portable ground blinds, like pop-up blinds, must be removed at the end of each hunting day.

“If you haul it in, you have to haul it out every day,” Jones said. “It can not be left unattended overnight.”

 

 

 

 

http://www.kansas.co...l#storylink=cpy

[Jbird]

Excellent!! Anything left out for extended periods of time is trash and should be picked up. They should do the same with the cameras.

[jamaro]

Lord forgive me for giving my input but...

1) Every time I see a nice AZ Archery Coues, I think..."Nice Bait, Buck". In NM we can't bait or use salt or even use scents... We have to hunt them old school

 

2) Bottom line is that the AZ Dept of Game and Fish is trying to get a handle on the abnormaly high success rate for archery coues deer. If things stay the same and you can continue to bait be prepared for no more OTC Archery tags... That will be their only option...

 

J-

[jnobleinaz]

Cage match

[654321]

I don't agree with every decision the AZGFD makes but to say they are highly biased against hunting is just ridiculious, if they don't sell hunting and fishing license they don't exist. For those of you that think they get az tax money think again, they don't get a dime from the tax payers of az. why do you think they push recruitment and retention so hard

[THE RIFLEMAN]

I don't agree with every decision the AZGFD makes but to say they are highly biased against hunting is just ridiculious, if they don't sell hunting and fishing license they don't exist. For those of you that think they get az tax money think again, they don't get a dime from the tax payers of az. why do you think they push recruitment and retention so hard

I said the biologists at G&F are biased against hunting - They would love to have hunting stopped and let the wolves take care of our deer,elk & antelope.... They are beaurocrats with college degrees that think the know it all!!! Beaurocrat=democrat=liberal=more government=less freedom&moretaxes! I bet everyone of the biologists at G&F voted for Obama and will again!

[Couzer]

I could care less what happens, ban bait, don't ban it? It's not hard to hunt without it.

[654321]

the biologists are the WM's and they are not biased to hunting

[runningbird]

I don't agree with every decision the AZGFD makes but to say they are highly biased against hunting is just ridiculious, if they don't sell hunting and fishing license they don't exist. For those of you that think they get az tax money think again, they don't get a dime from the tax payers of az. why do you think they push recruitment and retention so hard

I said the biologists at G&F are biased against hunting - They would love to have hunting stopped and let the wolves take care of our deer,elk & antelope.... They are beaurocrats with college degrees that think the know it all!!! Beaurocrat=democrat=liberal=more government=less freedom&moretaxes! I bet everyone of the biologists at G&F voted for Obama and will again!

 

 

I would have to disagree 100% with you on this. I have met quite a few of the Biologist at G&F and not one of them seemed to be anti hunting or fishing.

 

I got a nice buck last year and the both biologist that checked my deer seemed more excited than me. They both took pictures and congradulated me over and over.

[520HUNT]

why do you think they push recruitment and retention so hard

 

Well whatever they are doing isnt working! Recruitment and retention is at all time lows...

[AverageJoe]

Maybe you should go work for them and solve all their problems.

 

Seriously though Game and Fish gets a bad rap in every state. Thing is they have to think about the big picture, not just making hunters happy. They need to ensure the species stays healthy now and for the future, they need money to operate, they have pressure from all sides saying they arent doing good enough. How can an agency please everyone? They cant so they try to balance it the best they can. It might not be perfect to everyone, but it couldnt possibly be perfect.

 

People on this site need to stop bashing game and fish. Game and Fish is developing a bad taste in their mouth for Coueswhitetail members because of it.