hawkeye Report post Posted January 17, 2007 If the hunters of Arizona do not demand an elected commisioner to the Game and fish Dept. then you can decide to quit hunting in the next 20 years. I have lived and hunted in Arizona for over 40 years and I have seen our way of life taken over by greedy government. Since applying the draw process the mule deer population has decreased drastically. People don't realize that there is absolutely no game management happening today. The only management program being directed by the Game and Fish Dept. is the management of the millions and millions of dollars, and job preservation. Since the 1970's draw when I saw about 1600 tags a year given out in unit 24A have I seen the deer population at even close to the old days. When you herd people into areas they wouldn't have hunted you play havoc on the deer population. In the old days people hunted on the weekend because you knew you would hunt again next year if you didn't fill your tag. Now if you get drawn you hunt every day of the season because it might be 10 years before you hunt again. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DesertBull Report post Posted January 17, 2007 Most people don't hunt. You want some lifetime member of PETA or a greenie in Paradise Valley voting for the Commision? Anti-hunters would love to elect a barn full of commissioners. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hawkeye Report post Posted January 17, 2007 Most people don't hunt. You want some lifetime member of PETA or a greenie in Paradise Valley voting for the Commision? Anti-hunters would love to elect a barn full of commissioners. Tell me the difference what the heck do you think you have now. Most of the new game officers I have met latlely fit that description. One in perticular has never hunted in her life. And by the actions of the commisioners you already have it. You don't think the governor hasn't appointed the very thing you are so worried about. Go ahead and see if it gets any better this way. You sound like everybody with fear in there hearts. The fear the government instils in people. Go ahead and fear change and you sure won't like the change that is comming. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KGAINES Report post Posted January 17, 2007 Even though the one commissioner that you are talking about hasn't ever hunted at least she understands hunting and shooting sports, I don't want her as a commissioner and I hope that whoever replaces her is more of a hunter, but if we allow the people to elect our commissioners it won't be peta electing the people, it will be peta and the humane society getting elected. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hawkeye Report post Posted January 18, 2007 You missed my point. Why do you assume that the commisioners that are appointed are not tree huggers. The liberal Governor appoints them. How can anyone assume that free election of officials is a bad thing. As we speak people that don't have any concern about your hunting rights and any other isue of your concern are running the Game and Fish Dept. And as a matter of fact not one of them give a dang about you or your right to hunt. All they care about is creating a bureaucratic money making grab bag. All of us hunters and good ol' boys two years ago elected one of the dumbest son of a **** I have ever seen, as President. I am sure not a single PETA or tree hugger voted for him. So why do you assume there are more of them than us. If you think about it most of the troubles we as hunters have endured have been at the hands of appointed judges' and other appointed officials. As a matter of fact I think every County in the state should have an elected representative to the commision and do away with all of the present commisioners. The propoganda the Game and Fish people spread about tree huggers taking over the game and fish is a bunch of bull. The only way they could do it is if we are as dumb as we were a few years ago when they outlawed trapping. I hope we wouldn't be as lazy this time. If we were, we deserve to lose our rights. The problem with letting the Governor appoint the commisioners is, that they see it as an endless supply of money they can raid. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KGAINES Report post Posted January 18, 2007 The legisature has to confirm the commissioners that are appointed, thus Ms. Martin not getting the job for more than a year, but I don't think there are any anti hunters on the commission, they may be strictly politicians with only money in mind (and yes that is a bad thing), but they are not anti. If it goes to a vote you would have the humane society and peta dumping tons of money on candidates for the commission and not to mention the hollywood types that would be supporting them. Just another reminder that the NRA was all for Ms. Martin getting her nomination. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hawkeye Report post Posted January 18, 2007 If every county had an elected commisioner sitting on the commision then if the people of those counties vote in a tree hugger good for them. The thing is I don't think that would happen but rest assured being affraid of the unknown is not nearly as bad as what I see happening. If you think you will be doing any kind of quality hunting in Arizona 15 years from now good luck with that. If the commision structure stays the course then, I am glad that in 15 years I will be to old to care any more and I sure hope I don't say I told you so. If the decline in the quality of hunting is as bad 15 years from now as it has gotten in the last 15 years I will be showing all of my hunting pictures to my grand kids and telling stories about how every one used to get to hunt not just the privilaged few. Go to Europ and check it out. The only hunting done there is by the rich and famous. I know you don't think it will happen here. Just watch whtat happens years down the road. When the people don't have a say in there future the future is bleak indeed. "Absolute power corrupts, absolutely" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewp45 Report post Posted January 18, 2007 There are 3 applicants for the seat that will be filled by the governor this month. One is my dad a conservative hunter. The other is a close friend of the families who also is a conservative hunter. The last applicant is an outfitter from up north somewhere. These three applicants have been interviewed and are awaiting the decision by the governor. I think any of these men would do a great job and be an asset to the Game and Fish Commision. I agree I think there are more greenies that vote than hunters, so putting it to a vote may not be the way we want it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hawkeye Report post Posted January 18, 2007 Well I had fun venting my frustrations and I hope I haven't offended anybody but I am sure I will never convince very many hunters that voting would be a good thing. I am sure that years of being told that the tree huggers will take over has been imprinted in everyones mind. It is a very good propaganda tool. Make everyone fear the unknown. As for myself, Arizona has pushed me into hunting other states, and the reservations. If you look at the cost it isn't that much more, and I get to hunt. I have so many worthless points in Arizona. I wonder if I can sell my bonus points on E-bay. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DesertBull Report post Posted January 18, 2007 Well I had fun venting my frustrations and I hope I haven't offended anybody but I am sure I will never convince very many hunters that voting would be a good thing. I am sure that years of being told that the tree huggers will take over has been imprinted in everyones mind. It is a very good propaganda tool. Make everyone fear the unknown. As for myself, Arizona has pushed me into hunting other states, and the reservations. If you look at the cost it isn't that much more, and I get to hunt. I have so many worthless points in Arizona. I wonder if I can sell my bonus points on E-bay. Don't you think it would be much easier to just vote in a new Governor that try and change the whole system? I don't fear the unknown as much I as fear the 7 ear ring wearing, 37 tattoo sporting, Hybrid car driving, hemp shoe wearing, North Scottsdale vegan voter having a say in the game and fish laws. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hawkeye Report post Posted January 18, 2007 It sure sounds good but what makes you think any Governor gives a dang about hunting isues. How many have you seen that ran a platform of hunting reform. All of us hunters, and the wildlife of Arizona, are nothing but a cash cow for pollititions. People seeking public office have greater aspirations than reforming the Game and Fish Dept. so they are left to govern themselves. And we have all seen how that works. I am sure everything will stay as it is, but in 10 to 15 years remember this conversation. I will probably have changed my lifestyle of hunting and fishing because of financial reasons. Some times the cost of the hunt just aint' worth it. I wish I could convince people that something has to be done, but I give up. Hunters would rather leave it to politicians and others to deal with. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ronaldo Report post Posted January 18, 2007 I agree with you, brother... If it keeps going the way it has in the last 15 years, It aint going to be worth a sh1t in the next 15 years. Just look at the cost of applying, its gone through t he roof for the benefit of the political money grab...Hunting is clearly going the way of only the rich and famous can afford it. how much longer till Mexico is all shot out from all them big muleys and coues bucks they take out every year? What kind of plan does mexico have to control this? I'm sure none! The tags go to the highest payer...more money=more tags,and its getting no better here. The rich guys love this, because it cuts out the littleuys who cant afford to apply anymore. then more of their rich buddys can get drawn and they can all go roll in there fricken money pits together,Bastards... If every county had an elected commisioner sitting on the commision then if the people of those counties vote in a tree hugger good for them. The thing is I don't think that would happen but rest assured being affraid of the unknown is not nearly as bad as what I see happening. If you think you will be doing any kind of quality hunting in Arizona 15 years from now good luck with that. If the commision structure stays the course then, I am glad that in 15 years I will be to old to care any more and I sure hope I don't say I told you so. If the decline in the quality of hunting is as bad 15 years from now as it has gotten in the last 15 years I will be showing all of my hunting pictures to my grand kids and telling stories about how every one used to get to hunt not just the privilaged few. Go to Europ and check it out. The only hunting done there is by the rich and famous. I know you don't think it will happen here. Just watch whtat happens years down the road. When the people don't have a say in there future the future is bleak indeed. "Absolute power corrupts, absolutely" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rembrant Report post Posted January 18, 2007 Deep, deep....sigh.... Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coues79 Report post Posted January 19, 2007 Wow! pretty heated topic. Let's hope the men that are in the running will do a good job. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billrquimby Report post Posted January 19, 2007 "how much longer till Mexico is all shot out from all them big muleys and coues bucks they take out every year? What kind of plan does mexico have to control this? I'm sure none! " Mexico's wildlife management is done through a partnership between the government and landowners, using "UMAs" that regulate the amount of game animals taken annually. Previously, although there were game laws passed in Mexico City, these were mostly ignored and poaching was rampant. The fact that landowners now benefit financially from game animals on their lands should help reduce or eliminate poaching. Those "big muleys and coues bucks they take out every year" are coming from only a few areas leased by a few outfitters. Several may be overhunting their leases, but there is no shortage of deer and sheep in Sonora as evidenced by that beautiful whitetail buck that Ernesto took recently. I was down there in December with an American and a Mexican who have bought three entire mountain ranges that have good numbers of mule deer, whitetails and bighorns that have not been legally hunted in recent years because the former owners of the land never applied for UMAs, and hunting rights were never leased to anyone. I've forgotten how many square miles they now own, but it is huge -- something equivalent to owning the Tumacoris, Santa Ritas and Canelos, and all the land in between them, judging by what I saw. To obtain a UMA, government wildlife biologists first assess wildlife populations. From what I've seen, these biologists are extremely conservative. (One mountain range where surveyors using a helicopter and ground spotters was given an estimated population of 450 bighorns and only two UMAs for sheep.) As for hunting becoming more expensive, it's a matter of supply and demand, as is everything else in this world. And, as for electing game and fish commissioners with a popular vote, be careful of what you wish for because you might get it. You can count the non-hunters and anti-hunters in this state by the millions. Hunters can be counted in a couple of hundred thousands, and our numbers shrink every time hunting permits are cut. Bill Quimby Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
