bonecollector Report post Posted October 17, 2012 We Need Facts Period... How can the game branch make adjustments to the number of tags if they have no idea how many animals are being harvested. How can the department make rule changes If they have no factual data to support that decision!!! Show us the facts AZGFD. The only way you are going to even get close to this is by going to a draw. What is your opinion on going to a strict draw for all archery hunts? I dont think they would ever go to a draw for all archery hunts, they would lose too much revenue. Im sure there are a lot of hunters like myself that buy the otc archery tag even though we have a rifle tag. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Str8Shot Report post Posted October 17, 2012 Jamaro ... as it is now you can only take 1 deer per calender year ... January 1st - Dec. 31st .... with archery, what many individuals seem to get confused about, is when someone takes a Buck in Dec, and then another in Jan. this is two deer in two separate years and results in a a long wait until the next Jan. ... Sorry what I meant to say was you can hunt Archery OTC and still hunt Rifle Draw but you are only allowed 1 deer a year... In NM, we don't have OTC tags so you need to choose your weapon and season.. you can't hunt with different weapons until you kill... I bet this really contributes to the overall harvest... Of course it contributes, but it would be pretty hard to figure out exactly how much the impact is. Plain common sense tells you, that the more time you spend in the field with a tag and weapon allowing you take game the greater your individual odds of success will be . It is still no guarantee but neither is using BAIT ... but Bait does improve odds at quantity of game, quality of game, and quality of shots, if it did not then far fewer people including guides and outfitters would not be so vocal... I do not think Steve really thinks this is the beginning of the end of hunting ( easy to plant the seeds of fear in those who may not agree with the practice) , but he does realize it can have an impact on his business and he has a right to be vocal about his opposition to it... I respect his stand regardless if I support it or not. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GotBowAz Report post Posted October 17, 2012 Jmaro, even though we have an OTC tag and can put in for rifle and draw that tag we can still only kill one deer per calendar year. If you kill it with the OTC tag, then you can not hunt the rifle tag. Mandatory harvest reporting in my mind would be like our OTC bear tags in which you HAVE to report your kill within 24 hours and you must bring in the head to turn is a tooth in the case of a bear within 10 days. Anything less than that is a ticket or probably considered poaching. So for deer maybe they decide you bring in the antlers or head as proof in ten days or something along those lines. Now IMO by making mandatory phone calls each week to see if an area is still open until their objective harvest quota is met, like done with OTC sow bears in an area they would close it down. This still gives hunters opportunities to go to another area and hunt. It still has the same F&G OTC tag sales and other than the inconvenience of calling it in and bringing horns in or whatever they decide they can now have an accurate count of harvest. The same should be applied to the rifle hunters as well. In my mind it’s a win win. Harvest methods wouldn't have to be changed, same amount of revenue comes into the F&G and OTC hunters still have the same opportunity . I have a hunch the harvest objectives wouldn't get met most of the time. GBA Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
naturebob Report post Posted October 17, 2012 Tyler, I don't need to do any research. All I said is Baiting isn't Hunting. Don't mean to piss all You guys off that do it. But I hope it gets passed without all the other bullcrap You guys are talking about. Good luck. Also G&F needs mandatory reporting like New Mexico or You can't draw the next year. I am Just old school at 56. Never used a camera or gps. My highest tech tool is a range finder . If they outlaw them I could live with it.. Iv'e only had it for 12 years .Hope You Guys don't loose to much . But like I said Some Guys will have to learn to hunt the real way....BOB! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
elkaholic Report post Posted October 17, 2012 dump any thoughts to harvest objectives for deer - calling in and hunting more than one unit. it won't work for deer because they never really meet the harvest quota - there is not set quota - they give 600 hundred tag in hopes of harvest maybe 100 bucks so then ya got 500 more hunters traveling around to hunt other areas - total confusion and the wardens would n't be able to monitor whios' who in the field hunting which areas . most guys go and camp and hunt the whole season - its be a cluster ! forget that crap! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GotBowAz Report post Posted October 17, 2012 elkaholic, can you explain how they can do it with bear then? I do know guys that camp for two weeks in 23 for bear. They also go and make the phone call knowing full well it's required. As for harvest quota i'm pretty sure F & G have a good idea how many deer should be removed/harvested in an area and still have a healthy herd. I bet that number would not be met most of the time so baiting or any other method of take is a mute point and personal preference. And for hunters moving on to other areas, they would also have to call those in before hunting them as well. You make it sound a LOT harder than it has to be and I call BS. If they can and do do it for bear they can do it for deer or any other OTC big game. Hunter discipline and diligence will fall in line as required. GBA Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jamaro Report post Posted October 17, 2012 Jmaro, even though we have an OTC tag and can put in for rifle and draw that tag we can still only kill one deer per calendar year. If you kill it with the OTC tag, then you can not hunt the rifle tag. Mandatory harvest reporting in my mind would be like our OTC bear tags in which you HAVE to report your kill within 24 hours and you must bring in the head to turn is a tooth in the case of a bear within 10 days. Anything less than that is a ticket or probably considered poaching. So for deer maybe they decide you bring in the antlers or head as proof in ten days or something along those lines. Now IMO by making mandatory phone calls each week to see if an area is still open until their objective harvest quota is met, like done with OTC sow bears in an area they would close it down. This still gives hunters opportunities to go to another area and hunt. It still has the same F&G OTC tag sales and other than the inconvenience of calling it in and bringing horns in or whatever they decide they can now have an accurate count of harvest. The same should be applied to the rifle hunters as well. In my mind it’s a win win. Harvest methods wouldn't have to be changed, same amount of revenue comes into the F&G and OTC hunters still have the same opportunity . I have a hunch the harvest objectives wouldn't get met most of the time. GBA Talk about expanding the government..... Reading that just made my head spin... There is no way the Dept has the resources to take that on... Personally, I have always been about managing harvest NOT opportunity but I just don't see how the Dept can manage unless they go to a draw. I am sure the Dept is managing for a certain buck to do ratio how do you obtain that unless you put a cap on archery harvests???? Like I said I am happy that Archery is OTC because it saves me if I kill early in NM but I just don't see how they can manage buck to doe ratios... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jamaro Report post Posted October 17, 2012 So here is a question for you... Say that they figure out that 100 deer can be killed in a certain unit... AND all of those deer are killed before the late rifle seasons start..what happens to those that drew tags?? LAWSUIT in the making... How do they handle people that have booked guided hunts? J- Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GotBowAz Report post Posted October 17, 2012 1st off phone calls and info is a recording letting you know if objective has been met. You just punch buttons. 2nd off you would report your game to the F&G office, they are there all day at work so why would you need more government spread out all over? I don't understand your question. They do this with bear. 3rd, each area has an OTC harvest objective and a rifle objective. Meaning it is cut off way before the rifle hunters opportunity is gone. That would be more animal harvest control than we currently have today... because we have no accountability for rifle hunts. Now were talking real numbers. GBA Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jamaro Report post Posted October 17, 2012 I am not trying to be a jerk but this is a pipe dream... People just want to hunt... They are not going to want to go thru this so what is going to happen? People are going to kill and not report.... And what about my outfitter question... If I pay for a hunt and then a unit shuts down prior to me killing I would be livid. J- Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GotBowAz Report post Posted October 17, 2012 I believe people will do this to keep OTC tags verses a draw like they did with Javelina I would call on and report my Javelina if they brought back OTC tags. Now that its a draw I am forced to put in for certain areas and I hate that. Also, people already do it for bear. And then they would have dead lines and hassels to get put in for the draw AND they may not get drawn on top of that. OTC, there is STILL opportunity for everyone. I don't think your trying to be a jerk, at least i'm not taking it that way... it's your opinion and point of view to express. As for your outfitter question. I failed to address it clearly so i will use your analogy. If there is a total of 100 for harvest in a unit for a year then the archery OTC tags for that area would be stopped at 50 or maybe 25. The other 50 or 75 would be set aside for the rifle hunters so the area would not be closed down for the rifle hunt. Does that make sense? GBA Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jamaro Report post Posted October 17, 2012 Ok.. so what happens when those 50 or 75 people kill and report. Is my guided hunt over? So I paid for a service that cannot be fulfilled? J- Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DesertBull Report post Posted October 17, 2012 I've never hunted with a 20x rifle scope, a 1600 yard range finder, a 50x spotting scope or a rifle capable of putting 5 shots into an 8" circle at 1200 yards. I think we should outlaw those and make people become real hunters. Because, after all, the way I hunt is the way EVERYONE should hunt. Obviously. DUH! Now, should I ever acquire any of these items, then I would NOT be for banning them...duh. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DesertBull Report post Posted October 17, 2012 The quota would work if it were a quota per hunt number, not total killed per calender year. But, as stated, it's a logistic nightmare. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
elkaholic Report post Posted October 17, 2012 theres not 1200 bear hunters hitting a specific unit each yr. for a limited time period - so if the quoata is filled in the majority of units the first weekend - i didnt even plan a hunt till the last part of the season - now - i might have to drive 1/2 accross the state to even be able to hunt which will now have 15, 000 hunters going there because the other units have met a quota - be real here !! its rarther a ====== idea for deer = 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
