G&F to vote this Friday remove baiting

[bowhunter4life]

The vote is this Friday!!!

Please resend all Commissioners emails again stating you are against the rule making change!

Can anybody make the meeting to voice your concern? This will be your last chance before the vote.




Thank you for your interest in the Department’s rulemaking process.

The draft final rulemaking will be presented to the Commission this Friday, January 11.

The Article 3 rulemaking is item #9 on the agenda, but please don’t ask me to specify a time as I don’t know how long it will take for the Commission to consider each agenda item.

Thank you, again and make it a great day.

[AZLance]

http://www.azgfd.gov/inside_azgfd/commission_members.shtml

 

Here is the link to the commissioners email addresses... Get going guys!

[DesertBull]

I just wrote to all of them. Took less than 10 minutes.

[elpepe25]

done, I dont love baiting, but I hate the lies even more so

[Buckhunter]

Now there on the radio asking anyones input to help keep up the population of wildlife. How about not having 2500 tags in a lot of deer units. And less archery restrictions.

[CouesWhitetail]

Thanks for the reminder Bowhunter4life!

[DesertBull]

If they vote to ban will it be effective immediately?

[AZLance]

Spent all day refreshing my salt licks in unit 33 today. Went thru 600 pounds of salt today. That should last me a while if they decided to ban the placing of salt and minerals.

[billrquimby]

'Spent all day refreshing my salt licks in unit 33 today. Went thru 600 pounds of salt today. That should last me a while if they decided to ban the placing of salt and minerals."

 

The ban probably won't be only against "placing" bait. I suspect the new rule would amend the language that now bans using bait for bears. It reads: "No person shall knowingly use any substance as bait at any time to attract or take bear." Expanding the rule would require only substituting the words "any game animal or bird" for "bear."

 

I'm not a lawyer but it seems to me that you would be in violation if you hunted anywhere near where you have placed bait. Whether or not you put those 600 pounds of salt out before the new rule is enacted would make no difference if you knew bait was nearby. It would be almost impossible to prove, of course.

 

It's obvious that you meant to type "45" instead of "33" when describing the game management unit where you left all that salt. :-)

 

Bill Quimby

[AZLance]

Bill, so if salt has been placed, and you can't hunt over it, how long after the salt is placed can you begin hunting that area again? I would guess that salt will stay in the soil for many years. And if this is the case that means almost every waterhole in the state would be off limits, as someone at some time has put a salt lick there. And then the question, of how far away from the salt do you have to be to legally hunt? Just picture this, you are sitting up on a ridge, and a G&F officer walks up to you and cites you for hunting over salt. You ask what the heck, I'm not hunting over salt. And then he begins to tell you that down in the canyon below you there is a old salt lick that still attracts deer, and therefore you are hunting over salt. And with some of our current G&F officers, I wouldn't put this past them. Then think about this. You work your tail off scouting a spring or saddle, only to show up on opening day to find a pile of salt under your stand. You didn't put it there, but now you are prohibited from hunting that area. Who put the salt there? Maybe another jealous hunter who wanted to hunt there, but found you had beat him to the spot, or maybe a outfitter who has located a big deer and doesn't want anyone else hunting the area, or maybe a Animal rights wacko who doesn't want anyone hunting.

 

Lots of Grey areas, where hunters get screwed! Let's not go down this path.

[AZLance]

Spent all day refreshing my salt licks in unit 33 today. Went thru 600 pounds of salt today. That should last me a while if they decided to ban the placing of salt and minerals.

 

A friend of mine got harassed by USFS just recently in 33 for setting up a blind and camera and a feeder. They came and took pictures, marked the area with flagging tape, brought laptops and were doing who knows what. They spent hours documenting the site. Know what they might have been looking for or doing?

Tell your friend to contact me, I can help him.

[billrquimby]

"Bill, so if salt has been placed, and you can't hunt over it, how long after the salt is placed can you begin hunting that area again? I would guess that salt will stay in the soil for many years. And if this is the case that means almost every waterhole in the state would be off limits, as someone at some time has put a salt lick there. And then the question, of how far away from the salt do you have to be to legally hunt? Just picture this, you are sitting up on a ridge, and a G&F officer walks up to you and cites you for hunting over salt. You ask what the heck, I'm not hunting over salt. And then he begins to tell you that down in the canyon below you there is a old salt lick that still attracts deer, and therefore you are hunting over salt. And with some of our current G&F officers, I wouldn't put this past them. Then think about this. You work your tail off scouting a spring or saddle, only to show up on opening day to find a pile of salt under your stand. You didn't put it there, but now you are prohibited from hunting that area. Who put the salt there? Maybe another jealous hunter who wanted to hunt there, but found you had beat him to the spot, or maybe a outfitter who has located a big deer and doesn't want anyone else hunting the area, or maybe a Animal rights wacko who doesn't want anyone hunting. Lots of Grey areas, where hunters get screwed! Let's not go down this path."

 

AZLance:

 

As I said, I'm not a lawyer, but the key word in the bear ban rule seems (to me) to be "knowingly." We will have to see if the commissioners approve the ban and -- if they do -- exactly what they have banned.

 

Bill Quimby

 

[bowhunter4life]

If you need to go to a closer office, you still can voice your concerns!

 

Thank you for your message.

 

The Phoenix office meeting room is not set up to allow persons to participate in a meeting via telephone or e-mail from their own home/business for a number of reasons.

 

However, it is not necessary for a person to go to the Phoenix office to attend/participate in a Commission meeting.

 

Commission meetings are also broadcasted at the five Regional offices (in Pinetop, Flagstaff, Kingman, Yuma, and Mesa); each Regional office has the ability to transmit electronic blue slips to the Phoenix office and allow attendees to speak to the Commission via an office telephone/intercom.

 

In addition, for those persons who want to view the meeting, but are not interested in speaking to the Commission may view the Commission meeting via webcast by accessing the following link:

http://www.azgfd.gov...issionCam.shtml

[Alpinebullwinkle]

Taking away the legal priviledge of putting salt out for animals will not only hurt our wildlife but will also make many honest outdoorsmen criminals.....in addition to causing lots of controversy that our AGFD can obviously do without!

[Whitesheep]

Done!