Arizona looses court case!

[Guest Guest]

Like many of you have stated in previous posts. We, as Arizona sportsmen need to come together not only on this issue but all issues related to our passion and our lifestyle. From what I have learned, hunters are really lazy people when it comes to speaking up and standing united and supporting our causes. It seems like the only time hunters show up to voice their concerns is when they are threatened, as witnessed at the commish meeting on Fri. They think for whatever reason someone will take care of it for them or those that are in power will do the right thing. WRONG ! We lost trapping and now we have decimated antelope herds and for the most part deer herds that are really going down the slippery slope and with this drought, getting worse. All of you need to take a look at the last AZ Wildlife views and the article and the study done on the Three Bar. It's an eye opener that shows just how hard coyotes and other predators hammer the deer and just how bad it has hurt our herds to loose trapping. I've been to several Commission meetings this year supporting the G & F on many issues and working to make changes in other areas, and aside from the Lion issue I can tell you that not many people show up to these meetings. I can guarantee you that you can make a difference, if you get involved. So I say to all of you join one or all of the local conservation organizations AES, ADA, ADBSS, AAF. Go to their board meetings and see just how hard these people are working for you on your behalf. They are working extremely hard for Arizona's wildlife and Arizona's hunters. Most hunters are consumers that rarely give back to their sport and their wildlife, as long as they get their tags and get to go hunting, that is the only time you will see them in the field. You sure as heck won't see them on a waterhole project or a habitat improvement or cleanup project. I have a strong feeling OL' Buster falls into this category, a selfish consumer just like the man he supports (Taulman), I use this term (man) very loosely as this idiot wasn't even man enough to put his own name on the lawsuit, he had to use some felonious Montoya guy. I support you all on this issue and like many of you I feel that States should have the right and ability to manage their own wildlife, manage their permits and determine the percentages of out of state hunters. Interstate commerce as related to guiding in AZ is a sham. Many of Arizona's guides got into the business because they wanted to go hunting and it is one of the only ways to go hunting unless you are lucky enough to draw a permit once in a blue moon. The money most guides make in AZ is spare change, and I don't know any, that don't have other jobs that are the main source of their income, and I know quite a few. They do it because they love the outdoors and getting out in the field. That is just the way it is here in AZ, we don't have alot of private land here with landowner permits to dole out. We don't have huge amounts of wildlife to hunt. The competition for permits here in AZ is fierce because we have so many people, and because we have quality animals. The difference between Taulman and the majority of AZ guides is simple, it is the Allmighty greenback. Taulman is in it for the $$$$$ and the rest of the AZ guides are in it for their love of the outdoors. The reason he is successful is because he has been able to con enough people to sell out for him and actually work as a guide for him. He must also be a good marketer and have a huge list of clients applying in our premier hunting areas. That is it period the end. I say get involved, stay long and stay strong. Peace Out !

[az4life]

Some questions have come up on the board today and , I will shed a bit more light from what I heard during at the public Commision meeting Friday.

 

The interstace commerce law is what is driving the whole enchilada. The fact that AZ allows sale of hides and horns is not the only factor as some might believe. Travel into the state by non residents can and is being construed as interstate commerce.

 

Jim Odenkirk is the Asst State Attorney who has been on the case. He stated there is one of the top constitutional specialists working with the AZGFD on this suit. There have been public notices and one person who sat next to me told me he had been at the last several commision meetings and this was one big part of each meeting. They anticipated the ruling but had no idea it would come at this point in time.

 

Contingent plans were not possible to be implemented until the runling formally came down. The 9th circus court of Appeals has jurisdiction in AZ. We are now waiting to see how a similar suit against Wyoming plays out before appealing further. If the 10th circuit finds in favor of Wyoming (this is what we wll should pray for) then we will lilely take both case rulings to the US Supreme court to determine the resolution on the conflict between the courts. Since the supreme court only takes about 4% of the cases brought to them (100 or so per year) it is only a slim chace they would hear AZ alone, but AZ and WY have a better chance.

 

One individual hunter at the meeting suggested the Non resident fees be raised to $20,000, or even $40,000 - and the fee structure was explained as a result. Non Resident fees are set using a pre determined formula in direct relation to the price of the same resident tag. The State Legislature must approve significant deviations from that pre-set figure. After several minutes of discussion it was revealed the factor is 5 times the resident fee. They use this fee, in part becuase the Interstate commerce law requires the fees charged "not be unreasonable" to non residents so as to prevent interstate trade and commerce.

 

In response to the fees the Indian nations charge, they are considered sovreign nations, so the interstate commerce laws do not apply to them. They can charge whatever the trade will bear.

 

The President of the AZRMEF Jim (I cant remember the last name) spoke and had a number of good points. Among them, His members recommended a progressive bonus point set-up for residents. This would give bonus points to residents in a 3,2,1 structure, Complete a hunter education and if you are not drawn for elk your first year, you get 3 points, 2nd year, you get 2 more and 3rd year and after you get 1 point. This will help assure hunters have more regular opportunity to hunt and give an edge to residents. A

Also suggested calculating the resident pull ratio, and applying that same ratio to non residents. If 1 in 100 Az applicaions is given a tage for an area, then the non Resident should also have a 1% chance of draw, but with higher fees.

 

The meeting this next Monday is to address the "relief motion" filed to let the draw results go forward. The Relif motion was filed since the timing of the USO ruling is creating logistic problems notifying hunters before the earliest hunts that are affected. A copy of the motion was offered to anyone intersted if you contact the AZGFD office.

 

There were several other groups of outdoorsman represented, including:

Az Vamint Callers, Desert Christian Archers, At least 1 representative of groups from Tucson and another fron Prescott, and Wickenburg.

Several Business owners potentially affected also spoke including

4 peaks game processing, Wild West Archery, And at least 1 or 2 other Archery shops.

 

Lastly, the cooling down on the board has really helped today, and I am permanently ignoring 1 individual. Thanks all for wanting to make this state's hunting and outdoors experience the best possible for everyone. especially the youth!

Edited January 1, 1970 by az4life

[couesdiehard]

Hey I am glad to see most of us have calmed down and started being more sensible. Buster is wrong in numerous ways but he has a right to his lame opinion and I would fight to defend his right to voice his lousy opinion. Of course the beauty of this country is that we also have the right to voice our opinions. Usually the majority opinion wins in the long run as long as that opinion is heard. I hope we all have learned something from this episode. Whenever something (B&C mule deer and elk) is great demand someone is going to try to make a fortune on it. Not that this is wrong in and of itself but it's fundamentally wrong when you haven't built this demand. Listen up Buster, the Feds do send a lot of funds to Az G & F in the form of the Wildlife Restoration Program and the like but that is based on the land area and Az hunting licenses sold each year. Not to mention the Heritage Fund monies from the Arizona Lottery, donations to wildlife on our state income taxes and our hunt applications. Let's not forget time spent volunteering on wildlife beneficial projects, cooperating with G & F officers to catch poachers, and time away from our families and jobs to attend meetings of G & F and other Wildlife protection groups. These are but a few of the reasons the hunters of Az or any state for that matter should be entitled to a better chance to hunt animals under the care of their G & F agencies. I know that resident hunters in all states in this Great Country feel the same about the wildlife in their respective states.

I don't begrudge anyone willing to spend the money to hunt outside their own state but the reality is that by far, most of the hunters and monies in any state come from the outdoorsmen and women in that state. I wouldn't ask any other state to make my draw chances equal to a resident's because I haven't earned it in another state. I will continue to apply in other states until are forced to raise the non-res fees as Co. already has and Az. soon will. Be prepared my fellow Arizonans there is plenty more to come. If it is deemed unconstitutional to cap bull elk and deer north of the Colorado, what do you think a court will rule on caps for sheep and buffalo. There are dozens of other states with similar caps who will be forced to follow in Az's footsteps. Ironically, your odds of getting drawn may actually be better in other states in the near future if you can afford it.

Also you Arizonans don't be so quick to down our G & F. They have after all been fighting this since 2000. They didn't just roll over. They could have done like some other states and dropped their caps when they heard they might be sued. Keep supporting them and letting them know how we feel.

 

Don't give up the fight. But don't let anger get the best of you.

Good luck in the draws! (Whenever they come out)

[Guest Buster]

Mr. Couesdiehard,

 

I'm glad to see that at least one person here is in tune with how state G & F departments are funded. It would be in every hunter's best interest to look into this for various states and clue in. This info is easily accessible.

 

However, you are very wrong in your statement that "I don't begrudge anyone willing to spend the money to hunt outside their own state but the reality is that by far, most of the hunters and monies in any state come from the outdoorsmen and women in that state". Again, I will use Colorado as an example. Colorado is a tremendous hunting state with a large variety and huge quantity of animals (over 300,000 elk). The reason that the license split there is so favorable to nonresidents (again, 60/40).......... and is so difficult to get reversed........... is that about half the CDOW funding comes from non-resident license sales! It has also been documented there that the average non-resident hunter spends several times more in Colorado than a resident hunter does for each trip on food, gas, motels, supplies, etc... This makes since because nonresident hunters use these services more. Since Wyoming is another big hunting state, I have a hard time believing that this isn't true there as well. This is why it makes my blood boil when I see non-resident hunters get discriminated against.

 

Buster

[muskrat]

OK - so if they used interstate commerce, i.e the selling of hides, ivories, and antlers as their "end run"... maybe someone should look into that. Do they have the right vendors licenses? I need a transaction and privilege tax license, to sell stuff. Did they collect the appropriate taxes? Jump through the appropriate hoops to act as export agents when facilitating the transer of said items from State to State? Not sure of all the applicable laws - just pointing out that there is more than one way to skin a cat... especially a polecat

 

Finding a way to "get" USO would make far more sense than blanket condemnation of non-residents....

 

Another idea that I got off of bowsite

 

Ok lets put toghether a pool of locals that will guide any hunter that has a cancelled contract with uso outfitters. All they have to do is cancel with uso and we help them with their hunt.

 

Not as guides of course... but as friends

Edited January 1, 1970 by muskrat

[Guest usafr]

I agree with an earlier post, we should start and organization that takes out-of-state hunters out hunting at no cost to them. Put these over priced guides out of work. Also, all states should have the same laws placed upon them. I remember just a few years ago NM guides tried to pass a law stating all "out-of-state" hunters needed to hire a NM guide to hunt in that state. It was shot down if I remember right. That's when they got their 12 percent tag quota. That seems to be in jeopardy if this ruling stands.

[The Chase]

Buster pull your head out of your butt and breathe some fresh air. I don't care hoe much money you dnated to those USO asses far as I'm concern you can take your bullshit and take to another state you liberal SOB. And nut up and register on this site before you come over here and stir shoot up.

[GreyGhost85]

quit wasting time and thought on this buster joker, guys. he's probaly sittin' nekked fondling himself while he reads and writes this stuff. quit replying and he'll go back to the kiddy porn sites he usually surfs. i hear some guys saying to support the g&f and the commission and stuff. who do you think got us here? think real hard. when was the last time they did anything for resident hunters of Az? i can't remember even one. all i've seen is take from us give to somebody else. the took away trapping. actually campaigned with all the bleeding hearts to have it outlawed. their big reason was they didn't want to have to enforce it. in other words, they were too lazy and we afraid of offending someone. look what has happened to the coyote population since then. and look at it's effect on the deer, pronghorn and small game population. when was the last time you saw a jackrabbit? remember a few years back when some guys were gonna have an "extreme' varmint calling contest? i thought they were a little far out there in their advertisements, but i dang sure signed up. looked like fun to me. a few folks got "offended" and shroufe and his buddys stepped in and stopped it. then they outlawed future contests. then it was contested and they lost in the state supreme court. so then they came back with another set of rules on contests. seems the first one would have even outlawed fishing derbys and big buck contests. ok, now how much money was wasted on thsi effort? doesn't take long to blow a million bucks when lawyers are involved. then the next big glaring deal i remember is the wolves. first off, they ain't wolves. mexican grey wolves are extinct and have been for 40 years. they found a few that were crossed with dogs and bred up a bunch of the kurs and turned em loose. this is the truth guys. everyone of em have dog dna. and shroufe and his treehugger staff jumped right in and helped the whole thing all along. and mark my words. the wolf/dog crosses will be the elimnation of hunting in unit 27 and unit 1. doesn't take long with a calculator to see that the numbers they want in the woods will not allow for hunters and wolves. get the data and read it. there aren't enough deer and elk in those units to support the designated number of wolves desired. i've maintained since it's inception that the only reason for the wolf program is to elimnate hunting. then we got the "callifornia" condors? huh? they said that there have been prehistoric condor bones found in arizona so they musta been here once. just not california condors. anyway, just another sore spot. the state is being overrun by non-native species and they stand by and watch. from crayfish to rocky mountain bighorns. where i like to hunt deer i'll see 40 to 50 bighorn rams each season. rams. who knows how many ewes. last year we saw 2 bucks. they let out 4 bighorn permits. wonder where their loyalty lies? not with native species here. now we have this uso crap. from what i can tell, the state didn't fight this any harder than sorority girls in a pillow fight. shroufe is worried about buttkissin' a liberal governor, not about standing up for the guys that pay the bills. if you say get behind this guy, you're always gonna be behind. get in front of this jackass. get rid of him. this is just stuff i can think of off the top of my head. there is a clear pattern here. whenever there is any controvery shroufe's answer is to take away from the guys that pay the bills. can shroufe for a start and go from there. either that or get to where you like to bend over frontwards. Lark Hubbard.

[Diamondbackaz]

Please Read, This is what you agreed to when you signed up for this site: Please remember that we are not responsible for any messages posted. We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message. The messages express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of this BB. Any user who feels that a posted message is objectionable is encouraged to contact us immediately by email. We have the ability to remove objectionable messages and we will make every effort to do so, within a reasonable time frame, if we determine that removal is necessary. You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this BB to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law. You agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or by this BB.

[Diamondbackaz]

Also, remember this site is administered by a lady.

[Idahocoueshunter]

Boy this is a hot issue, and I think it needs to be. Yes, I live in Idaho and Yes I have applied to hunt Coues deer in Arizona this year. I won't bore you with all my connections to Arizona, the Arizona town I was born in or how much overtime I had to work to afford the trip. I was bitten by the Coues bug at age 12 and can't seem to shake it. But I do agree with the majority of this forum. I think non- residents should be looked at differently, and feel a 10% cap is adaquate. Idaho has a 10% cap on draw hunts, and offers unused non-resident tags back to residents (at non-resident) prices. Although I probably will never apply for an Arizona Elk or Strip tag, I think the 10% should not be stricken. As someone earlier wrote, this could be a leg hold for the antis to slip in and take advantage of the desention among the sportsmen of your state and mine. We had an article in the paper today about the Arizona decision. That decision not only affects Arizona, but will eventually affect the other states as well. The Miranda decision (reading suspects their rights) was an Arizona Case that the whole country must abide by now. I understand the anger displayed in this forum, but you must unite now and fight this in the courts. Every sportsman group, no matter how small must unite to the common cause and write congressmen, the govenor, and even the Judge, to let their voice be heard. I am a member of RMEF, DU and IMDA, and I plan on getting them involved in this issue. It can't hurt. I know Ernesto is right, it will all pan out in the end, hopefully before long.

 

Good luck on the draw (when ever it is), and I'll be in a borrowed Arizona pickup if I draw. I hope Lark didn't put in for my unit.

 

Craig.

[Guest Guest]

I saw 3 jackrabitts today.

[Guest Buster]

Mr. 'The Chase',

 

For you and the others who keep accusing me of being a liberal, the correct term you are after is 'postmodernist'. And I am not one of those either, I'm just clarifying this for you. Postmodernists believe that in order to reach the epitome of a great civilization, that all humans must be completely equal and on the same level in all ways. And they believe that it is the government's responsibility to ensure this. I only want non-resident discrimination in hunting to be stopped. If it takes a Federal Court to correct this injustice, then so be it.

 

 

 

I did get a few answers to my original questions, although I wanted more. Based on these answers and filling in a few blanks myself, I would say that your anger and threats are generated from the following things more than actually giving up your chances for a big game tag.

 

1. Interference by the federal government in what you feel is a state matter.

2. Realization that Arizona is not a country and that there is a higher government.

3. Those %$#& outfitters getting their way again.

4. A %$#& non-resident controlling what you feel is resident business.

5. $$$$ and rich guys controlling hunting.

6. $$$$ and rich guys overruling the working class.

 

Since I have never heard an Arizona resident (not once!!!) complain about all hunters (res & nonres) being in the same draw pool for Coues deer tags, I just don't believe that your anger is solely about the tags.

 

One of the things that some of you need to realize is that neither the AZGFD nor the State of Arizona can overrule the Federal government on this issue, no matter what. Sorry. Discrimination of all kinds has always been addressed by the Feds.

 

 

 

Heeeeeey Sir Lark,

 

I completely agree with everything in your latest post except your description of me. Keep in mind, Lark, that just because I am on the other side of the fence from you on this issue doesn't mean I am a loser or a pervert. It means I stand strongly for what I believe in (same as you) and enjoy the freedom I have in this great country to express my beliefs.

 

Your statement that "wolves were introduced by the huggers to stop hunting" is a fine one. Check out what has happened in Wyoming & Idaho in the last decade. It is unbelievable. Wyoming is a state with plenty of real men (unlike Arizona which has plenty of whiners-but-not-do'ers, city people, greenies, and liberals) and they are suing the Feds over the wolf reintroduction. They also whack a wolf every chance they get. Why don't you relocate to Wyoming, Lark? A great big game hunting state with lots of public land. Hunting is big business there, not politics and catering to the enviro wackos and City folk. Anyway, Sir Lark, keep after the AZGFD because they are definitely a lame one (not because they lost this case, but because of the other reasons you mentioned). I can't believe they are using my license $$$$ that was gained from big game to reintroduce a stupid-a$$ FROG!!! I really get tired of state game agencies spending $$$ that were generated from hunting on non-game species such as frogs and lynx. Also, did you know that 40% of the Colorado DOW employees are anti-hunters? They are also hypocrites because hunting pays their salaries. Colorado is another chickenstuff state, similar to Arizona.

 

The forum Administrator must be away since this thread hasn't been nuked yet. But it has been a great one. Enjoy it while you can boys, because it will go the way of your elk tags when she returns.

 

Buster

[25-06]

Well anyways ,Computers been out of order since wednesday morning untill now...And WOW! What happened? Does this mean there is less of a chance that I might not get a tag? That could hurt....

[Idahocoueshunter]

Ladies and gentlemen, I don't think name calling and sarcasm are appropriate, especially from adults, as I assume we all are. Anonymity seems to bolster everyones courage and rage. I know ethical sportsmen would never revert to tire slashing and violence over a deer permit. But, Buster is right, the ball is in the Feds court now, and only an injunction or sucessful appeal will overturn the decision. Maybe the G&F will come up with an alternative, since it appears the Judge left the door open for them.