Prop 106

[redneck74]

with this commission...heck now the Gov is appointing her lesbian friends that have never hunted and never held a hunting or fishing tag. What would you expect? We need to get her out of office...she is a bad apple

[DesertBull]

If you cannot understand the legal-eze, then just look into who supports these measures with financial backing. Anything supported by land developers and/or anti-hunters is an automatic no vote for me.

[bowsniper]

Good advice desertbull.

 

I like to keep track of environmental groups that are also anti-hunting, so I spent an hour surfing the Center for Biological Diversity website (http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/) I could not find any real anti-hunting stuff, unless it's anti-hunting about endanged species, or species they think should be listed and endanged (i.e. polar bear). If someone has more info on this group being anti-hunting, please let me know. I like to keep track of these groups.

 

Thanks,

 

Mark

[Diamondbackaz]

If you cannot understand the legal-eze, then just look into who supports these measures with financial backing. Anything supported by land developers and/or anti-hunters is an automatic no vote for me.

 

 

Then how would you vote???

Land develpopers are against it while the eviros are for it...

[dave]

Mark,

 

I think a good rule of thumb is to see what action groups take rather than to just trust what you read on their website.

Living in Phoenix you really don’t get as good a feel for these things as living in Tucson where most of these groups have chose to congregate.

Remembering back when we had a little fiasco in Sabino Canyon, their leader then was removed from the Game & Fish Regional office by the authorities once. He has been on the news many times and the news papers always go to him for an opinion. I hear he has moved on to a new job somewhere now. I don’t remember any of these events being about any endangered species.

Sorry I don’t have any documentation to give you. Possibly you could surf the web, check into what groups and people were involved in getting lion hunting banned in California. See if they are connected in any way with any groups in Arizona now???

 

If you are serious about looking into this, you will find that most preservationist groups claim to be conservationists. They claim to not be against hunting and want to join with hunters in conserving our resources. If you look at the ACTION they take, you will find that they are ANTI-HUNTING. If you find that this group supports predator management as a way of controlling the loss of endangered species, let me know, I must have missed it. The only predator they want to control is man.

 

We are also dealing with other boderline groups, we have one Commissioner that has voted to ban Sandhill Crane hunting. They are hardly endangered and are highly regulated by the federal government. Now we have four Commissioners voting to support a prop. that very well may lead to preservation of animals. I hope they did not know what they were voting for and were just going along with the "feel good" thing. I doubt it. I think we are in trouble.

 

When the train runs through your house, maybe you will wake up, drive down the road a ways and start ripping up some track.

[bobbyo]

Good advice desertbull.

 

I like to keep track of environmental groups that are also anti-hunting, so I spent an hour surfing the Center for Biological Diversity website (http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/) I could not find any real anti-hunting stuff, unless it's anti-hunting about endanged species, or species they think should be listed and endanged (i.e. polar bear). If someone has more info on this group being anti-hunting, please let me know. I like to keep track of these groups.

 

Thanks,

 

Mark

 

Mark, I agree with you that more wilderness area is a good thing. I also believe that a tree hugger/hunting alliance may be the only way to preserve a non high fence hunting habitat for our children. I do believe that Center for Biological Diversitys ridiculous behavior during the "mountain lions in the school yard crisis"last summer in Tucson would have to put them in the anti hunter group. Yet just because they supoort a proposition does not mean it is bad. I would be more concerned about whether the big developers support the proposition or not.

Bob

[dave]

The lion thing was a couple years ago.

 

The asset that Arizona has that the whole world wants is it's land. Once you sell the land, it is gone.

We have to come up with better ideas than prop 105 or 106 of how to treat a resourse we can never recover if we sell it.

 

Anyone that thinks more wilderness is a good thing has not researched the amount of wilderness Arizona already has.

Wilderness is a good thing to an extent.

We have more wilderness than we need. We need to find a way to manage the remaining land we have and prop 105 and 106 does not do that.

[cmc]

The lion thing was a couple years ago.

 

The asset that Arizona has that the whole world wants is it's land. Once you sell the land, it is gone.

We have to come up with better ideas than prop 105 or 106 of how to treat a resourse we can never recover if we sell it.

 

Anyone that thinks more wilderness is a good thing has not researched the amount of wilderness Arizona already has.

Wilderness is a good thing to an extent.

We have more wilderness than we need. We need to find a way to manage the remaining land we have and prop 105 and 106 does not do that.

 

well said Dave.

 

Prop 106 has a definition of conservation = preservation. To sportsman that is not good. That's why the CBD endorses it. Preservation and nothing less.

 

cmc

[bobbyo]

We have more wilderness than we need. We need to find a way to manage the remaining land we have and prop 105 and 106 does not do that.

 

Dave I don't mean to be an a-hole, but what the heck does that mean. You must never hunt in October. Also I think the deer, elk and other critters would be fine without some more management from humans.

Bob

[dave]

At one time Arizona was a Samson. But then came so many Delilah's.

 

Hey, when your eyes are blinded I guess you need some more wilderness to feel around in.

[bobbyo]

Dave,

I love literary references, but I guess my old testament is rusty I still don't get what you mean. Are you saying we should see the forest through the track home development.

Bob

[dave]

Protecting our land is what we should do bobbyo, selling it or buying into one of these props is a wrong thing.

 

We do need to come up with a good management plan for our state trust land. I feel like it is a cottontail ran over in the road with 50,000 vultures sitting around waiting to grab it.

 

Hold the bus. Get a better plan. Don't sell off Arizona.

 

Look at the big picture here folks!!! We have been under the rule of Mr. Napalitano and 60% (according to his poles, support him).

 

Just as this debate has devoloped, you can see that there is division in how many view things. As I have always witnessed, hunters will debate the size of the horn while the mouse carrys it off.

[dave]

We have more wilderness than we need. We need to find a way to manage the remaining land we have and prop 105 and 106 does not do that.

 

Dave I don't mean to be an a-hole, but what the heck does that mean. You must never hunt in October. Also I think the deer, elk and other critters would be fine without some more management from humans.

Bob

 

 

It seems you edited your post. You should really check into the CBD. It may be right up your alley.

Your right, after being born here and hunting all my life, I may have missed something, doubt it was in October.

[bobbyo]

Dave,

I completely agree with your sentiments about protecting the land and the buzzards swarming. You know and I know that both Republicans and Democrates are in the pocket of some Fat cat who will manipulate the system ( politicians) to get the state trust land for a song and then flip it for development and make millions. These are the buzzards you are talking about. These propositions are suppose to take the power to sell the state trust land away from politicians and give it to the so called "independent board of trustees" and supposedly get a fair value price for sold land and set aside 690,000 acres free of development. Of coarse they never say how much state trust land there is. If there is 2,000,000 acres of state trust land then we are only preserving 1/4 of the land. I don't know if I will vote for it or not. I will research it some more. You are probably right a better plan can be made,but on the shallow surface this proposition looks to be a better system then the current free for all that is going on.

Bob

P.s. Thanks Dave for getting me going. I just did my 100 post. Am I an advanced member now?

[dave]

glad I got you over the hump

 

We don't have to accept this. So what if one or two things are better than what we have now. If you accept this, there is a butt load of baggage that will come along with it.

 

VOTE NO! and work for a better plan.