Over the counter archery deer tag gone?

[billrquimby]

Let’s see if I got this right:

 

1. You guys don’t want to lose your “right” to buy deer tags over the counter.

 

2. You feel there are only a few places (such as the Kaibab) that are crowded.

 

3. You know that to avoid crowds all you need do is skip opening weekend or get farther away from the roads.

 

4. You also know that hunter participation drops off to almost zilch later if a season is long.

 

5. You can't believe the AGFD would voluntarily reduce the revenue it gets from your deer tag dollars.

 

Hmmmmm. Sounds like 1969, when at a rich Southern Arizona rancher’s request an influential politician threatened to deny a raise for the game department’s director if he didn’t announce a five-year moratorium on deer hunting.

 

A compromise was struck in the Arizona Senate’s Natural Resources Committee meeting and the director promised “to do something for the deer.”

 

The director got his raise, but the next thing we knew he ordered his regional supervisors and game branch guys to devise a plan to cut hunter numbers by 30%, starting with the 1970 season.

 

We’ve had permit-only deer hunting, with hunters confined to smaller and smaller units, ever since.

 

We also got “stratified” seasons with three and four opening days in certain units, and seasons were cut from three weeks (or more in some places) to ten or fewer days.

 

Isn't it funny how the more things change the more they stay the same.

[111]

Yep, and the more we restrict ourselves with smaller areas to hunt and more controlled draws, the less hunting that we all will be doing. Someday we'll all have our own square mile to hunt it will be so restricted..

[billrquimby]

Someday we'll all have our own square mile to hunt it will be so restricted..

 

Only if you can draw a tag, and only if you can get that day off work. Taken to the extreme, there will be seven seasons a week in each square mile "to spread people out."

[Red Rabbit]

Several years ago there was a survey done regarding the Kaibab archery deer hunt and whether it should be a draw. More recently, ABA questioned the hunter and harvest numbers, which resulted in the Kaibab archery stamp and the check in for successful hunters the last couple years. Harvest was much lower than estimated. ABA opposed the Kaibab going to a draw as it feared it would spread to a statewide draw. The Kaibab archery season was moved to be concurrent with the archery elk season in an effort to reduce the number of hunters north of the ditch.

 

RR

[bobbyo]

Let’s see if I got this right:

 

1. You guys don’t want to lose your “right” to buy deer tags over the counter.

 

2. You feel there are only a few places (such as the Kaibab) that are crowded.

 

3. You know that to avoid crowds all you need do is skip opening weekend or get farther away from the roads.

 

4. You also know that hunter participation drops off to almost zilch later if a season is long.

 

5. You can't believe the AGFD would voluntarily reduce the revenue it gets from your deer tag dollars.

 

Hmmmmm. Sounds like 1969, when at a rich Southern Arizona rancher’s request an influential politician threatened to deny a raise for the game department’s director if he didn’t announce a five-year moratorium on deer hunting. A compromise was struck in the Arizona Senate’s Natural Resources Committee meeting and the director promised “to do something for the deer.”

 

The director got his raise, but the next thing we knew he ordered his regional supervisors and game branch guys to devise a plan to cut hunter numbers by 30%, starting with the 1970 season.

 

We’ve had permit-only deer hunting, with hunters confined to smaller and smaller units, ever since.

 

We also got “stratified” seasons with three and four opening days in certain units, and seasons were cut from three weeks (or more in some places) to ten or fewer days.

 

Isn't it funny how the more things change the more they stay the same.

 

I have been reading Bill's anti unit, anti draw stance on hunting since I moved to Tucson in 1981. Quite frankly I thought he was "muy loco". I believed the availability of OTC rifle tags would mean the decimation of deer, which in theory seemed logical with a growing population and a limited deer herd. Now after 25 years of seeing how the majority of people actually "hunt" by either drinking or riding around on their ORV for opening weekend and then going home.( I am not judging people here. Just calling them as I see them.) I have to say that I am now on Bill's side of the fence on this issue. In addition, the current system has not increased the deer numbers one bit and may have actually help to reduce the total number of deer in this state. We as serious hunters should fight any regulation that actually decreases our hunting opportunities unless it could be proven scientifically that the regulation could help the viability of the deer herd. AZGF should not make regulations just to limit hunters in our favorite spots. Kaibab ect.

Bob

[dave]

Bobbyo,

 

Sorry to see you have gone the wrong direction. No worries, hopefully you will come back to your senses once again.

The years we had all of southern Arizona whitetail as one unit was the most destructive mismanaged brain fart ever invented.

 

Before we start managing game from the draw, we first have to manage the draw. If you all remember what just happened to archers by the Commission adopting the new way to look at the pie allocation, archers lost big time on elk allocations. This is the problem I see, they only count the first choice on the application as demand in the draw. So, if we go to a draw for archery deer (which I support) and all you folks put in first choice for rifle, the tags will be allocated based upon this current practice. Both the first two choices should be counted as the demand.

Managing animals unit by unit is the best way to control and manage animals. The problem besides drought is that the numbers of animals the department surveys is skewed and not accurate. It is based on how much revenue they want to achieve. Why do you think the Department does not want mandatory reporting for all weapon types for all species?

I think we should have only one round in each draw. If you don't draw your first choice everyone is thrown back in the pot and the draw starts over. I think this show a better example of demand. The Commission and Department must also learn the value of using weapon types as a method of offering opportunity without impacting the resource. This does not mean to move archery elk from September to November, this means giving more tags for the ones that really want to hunt and will pick up the bow rather than giving tags to the rifle hunters that want their demand counted but not their passion.

my .02

[bowsniper]

.

So, if we go to a draw for archery deer (which I support) and all you folks put in first choice for rifle, the tags will be allocated based upon this current practice.

 

 

Dave,

 

I may be a little slow tonight, but I'm missing your rationale. Why do you support a draw for archery deer? Do you think that archery really impacts the harvest numbers, or do just not like the rifle toating archers having a little more opportunity?

 

Mark

[111]

Dave I understand your point for the most part. I have a question...Since when has the first choice been the only choice counted as the demand? The way I know it is the first two choices are looked at, which means both choices have the same demand. If you want only your first choice as high demand that means it's the only unit your willing to hunt so it should be the only choice you put down.

[billrquimby]

“Managing animals unit by unit is the best way to control and manage animals.”

 

Dave:

 

After nearly 40 years of “management” -- especially with 60% fewer hunters than we started with -- wouldn’t you think we should have deer running out of our ears everywhere in this state?

 

The truth is, AGFD and its draw system manages us, but it hasn’t increased deer numbers. And don’t bring up those tired old excuses of “drought” and “increasing population.”

 

Does it take 40 years for us to realize that drought comes and goes in Arizona, and that no matter how many people have moved here the acreage of public land hasn’t changed?

 

What has changed under “management” is that we have fewer deer, fewer hunters, and shorter (and more) seasons.

 

We do have more locked gates blocking our access to public land, but that’s because we haven’t really demanded that land managers remove them. The hunters who are influential enough to change this won't do so because they know the people with the keys and they want places where they can hunt without being bothered by “slobs.”

 

But if you think Arizona’s deer permit numbers and seasons actually are based on the number of deer out there, I would like to introduce you to a banker in Nigeria. He has been trying to get $6 million out of his country. He just needs someone in the USA to send him a few dollars to cover his expenses.

 

Bill Quimby

[muleybull]

I'm for a draw for the archery hunt. Anyone thats been out in any of the units in N. AZ know how crowded with archery hunters places are becoming.

 

I know the harvest #'s are fairly low during the archery hunt, but these animals never get a break. The hunts for them starts in january (during their rut) and runs all month. Then in April people are back in full force turkey hunting until may or june? Deer still get pushed around by turkey hunters, then from August until the end of December there is a hunt of some type. Maybe 3 or 4 months rest all year? Not counting popular horn hunting areas to fill in between hunts.

 

The pressure definitely has an effect on their rut, so this is gonna effect them more than the archery harvest #'s.

[mattys281]

I ran into some other hunters on opening day of javi season, but didn't see another soul (or even another vehicle) the rest of the time I was out. Granted, that was only a few days, but still... If some units are more crowded than others, put a draw on them, but I see no need to have a draw in units where few people go anyway and where success rates are much lower than on Kaibab.

[IHunt2live]

I ran into some other hunters on opening day of javi season, but didn't see another soul (or even another vehicle) the rest of the time I was out. Granted, that was only a few days, but still... If some units are more crowded than others, put a draw on them, but I see no need to have a draw in units where few people go anyway and where success rates are much lower than on Kaibab.

 

 

I agree. Down here in the southern units I hardly ever run into other archery hunters. In fact, I can't remember the last time I have (I guess that might means that I'm in a bad spot ). I love the over the counter archery tags. I've archery deer hunted for years and have yet harvested a deer yet and I know my chances are low but theres always the chance. Plus, I didn't get drawn for anything this past year and I love having the archery tag to fall back on that allows me to get out and try my luck.

[KGAINES]

There should be another poll on how many of us buy both tags, draw only, or rifle only. I imagine that there are a lot of us that purchase both tags and that has to weigh heavily on the decision to go to draw for all, but then they would just raise the prices to cover their losses. Every time they take something away it makes it easier to take something else away, and if we continue to allow it to happen we won't realize our loss until it is too late. Not to mention it always seems a lot harder for us to get something back after it has been taken away. One hundred years from now our great grandkids might get lucky enough to draw the prized flathead catfish tag, or the whitewing dove tag, or get the coues deer photo tag ( of course you will have to buy the walking on public land stamp to use these).

Good luck to all in the draw, God Bless.

[mulie hunter]

I disagree with a Archery draw. I agree with Mr. Quimby. As for overcrowded conditions go on some these rifle hunts where way too many tags are allotted. Point in case 12aw in 2005 1000 rifle tags with approx. 40-50% sucess. I hunted Kaibab archery in '05, And 400-500 deer were not taken during that hunt or any other! Better manage the rifle hunts first.

Yes I am a Bow hunter first and foremost!

[billrquimby]

<<<<<<"Point in case 12aw in 2005 1000 rifle tags with approx. 40-50% sucess. I hunted Kaibab archery in '05, And 400-500 deer were not taken during that hunt or any other! Better manage the rifle hunts first.">>>>>>>>

 

I view this differently. When a unit has a 40% to 50% hunter success on BUCK-ONLY hunting it means to me tha there are plenty of deer in that unit and MORE tags could have been issued. Typically, hunter success rates drop as more people go afield, and 20% to 30% success rates are considered good in most states.

 

A similar thing goes for a high percentage of young bucks in the "harvest." Some hunters view it with alarm, but this is an indicator of a healthy, expanding herd. When the majority of bucks taken are 3 or more years old it means reproduction has suffered for the past couple of years.

 

<<<<<<<"If some units are more crowded than others, put a draw on them, but I see no need to have a draw in units where few people go anyway and where success rates are much lower than on Kaibab">>>>>>>>

 

Back in 1969, the original plan was to have rifle permits in just a few units near Phoenix, Flagstaff and Tucson, but wildlife managers feared a "domino" effect with hunters who normally hunted these units spilling over into the adjacent open units. Before we knew it, the damned things were across the board statewide. You can be sure the same thing will happen if bowhunters are forced into a lottery like riflemen.