AZGFD Hunt Recommendations

[coueskiller]

Subject: ready to give up camping and hunting yet?

 

Hey all - If you don't mind giving up hunting, camping and general forest recreation then delete this. OTHERWISE READ BELOW - THIS IS REALLY SERIOUS!

 

The majority of the Forest Service meetings are done already. If you see a road closed sign, bermed road or no "road open sign" please do not drive any type of vehicle there! They forest service is turning the current misuse of our forests against use. We have a few that don't license their quads/OHV's and feel they can drive them anywhere and that has ruined it for the rest of us. Same with camping and litering. We are very close to not being allowed to set foot in the forest without a reservation and only in specific area's. This is a smart way for the anti's to get rid of hunting. please read below and get active.

 

http://www.azgfd.gov/artman/publish/article_729.shtml

 

 

 

Greg McBride Trails End Wildlife Artistry e-mail: trailsendart@msn.com From: "Mark Healy" <mark@healyfinancial.com>

 

Have a look at this…

 

http://www.azgfd.gov/outdoor_recreation/fe...anagement.shtml

 

 

This is a classic case of an incremental loss of rights to use public land. It was just last July that the governor was pushing a “federal roadless area” agenda and her reps told everyone that although some areas of the state would be considered “roadless”, all that actually means is that no new roads could be built. They also claimed that a few roads (not main roads, but smaller roads) might be “decommissioned” and closed.

 

I went to the AZ G&F meeting about roadless areas that was held in the mesa office. The meeting room has space for about 100-150 people and they “allowed” about 20-25 to stand in the lobby and listen through the open doors. The AC was turned way up and the attendees, who were sweating like pigs, were fanning themselves with the handouts. Most had just come from work, thus they smelled like sweating pigs. All in all it seemed a well-orchestrated maneuver on the part of the BLM, G&F, and the USDA to keep the focus off of the public-access rights being lined up in the crosshairs, dissent to a minimum, and the meetings small and short. I notice that the meeting format is EXACTLY the same this year. Did I mention that the speaker from the USDA was well rehearsed in about 6 canned responses and used them to answer all questions asked of him? Even if the canned response didn’t fit the question asked? His prevarications made him look staged and foolish, but he stayed in the game for the allotted 60 minutes—quite a trooper. In short, all of his answers were designed to NOT let you know that a bigger plan for road closures was afoot.

 

Now, approaching a year later they’re making an announcement about a “planning efforts” meeting, but I note that although they talk about “proposed” changes they also make a reference to “the new policies and direction”. It sounds to me like the plan is in place, they’ve sought little or no input from citizens, and these are the formal ramrod meetings to tell the serfs that they’ve been taken. Sure, the presenter will take some heat from angry citizens, but s/he’s prepared for that and ready to take 6 floggings for the team. The agenda to remove public access is far more important than his/her personal comfort through 6 measly presentations. And, they understand this is like branding cattle—after the wound heals the poor saps that lost a few more rights won’t even remember it happened.

 

These state and federal agencies have slowly been infiltrated by the Sierra Club and other special interest groups that intend to remove public access to public land as much as they can. Working from the outside and through the courts has only been so effective, so the ranks are being supplanted with “team players”.

 

If you think I’m crazy and off-base, just read this section about Camping and Recreation:

 

Camping and recreation

• Where and how do I camp now?

• Where and how will I be able to camp once these plans are final?

• Will I be able to choose my own campsite, or will I be limited to identified sites only?

• Will I be able to collect firewood, or will I have to bring it in?

If they’ve pre-loaded these questions into the public meeting announcement, what do you think the answers are? I’ll bet the answers include a lot of nanny-state regulation and government hand holding, replete with penalties and fines for those who choose disobedience over compliance. I personally don’t like the idea of a USDA rep in a Smokey Bear hat and Teva sandals telling me where to camp.

 

I’m going to motivate as many people as I possibly can to get involved, go to the meetings, and become informed. There might be a chance to stop the government creep. If you guys would be so kind as to distribute the AZ G&F link with meeting times to your hunting, fishing, and camping friends I’d appreciate it.

 

Here’s some additional supporting info: (This ones in action already but people still don't stay on open roads and its killing the rest of us trying to dothings right!)

 

Read ; http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/ohv/

 

Take a look these “permissible use” maps

 

http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/ohv/ohv_maps.shtml

 

 

Mark Healy

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----

From: AZGFD [mailto:e-news@phx-listserv.ad.gf.state.az.us]

Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 4:43 PM

To: mark@healyfinancial.com

Subject: Learn about federal land management planning efforts in Arizona

[Red Rabbit]

I keep wondering how the increase in Kaibab tags can be validated biologically (and not simply for love of money).

Loss of 58,000 acres due to the Warm Fire? But this was on summer range and not on limiting winter range.

The recent fire on winter range in the southwest corner (can't recall its name)? But the habitat on the larger area burned a few years ago should be recovering enough.

 

Seems strange that the number of junior doe tags on the Kaibab were reduced last year and then substantially increased this year.

 

Here's a story published for the ADA study done for the AZG&F a couple years ago regarding browse, and the deer population and permit allocations

http://azdeer.org/kaibab_article.htm

 

RR

[Red Rabbit]

Another problem is having 1000 turkey hunters the week before the Oct Kaibab deer hunt. Guess if you have the deer on alert from turkey season ending the day before the opener, deer harvest will be less and thus you can have more tags issued.

 

RR

[coues7]

Fellow CW's:

 

I just got off the phone with the AZGFD here in Tucson. Coueskiller started another thread here: Flagstaff Public Comment meeting These meetings ARE NOT I repeat ARE NOT public input meetings. They are simply the AZGFD gathering to inform one another as to what recommendations they will press forward with and recommend on April 21st.

 

On April 21st it would be wise to go to the meeting in PHX and voice your opinion.....this is when public opinion will be accepted.

 

As a side not the AZGFD has recognized the importance of monitoring and dispensing information through this forum and others. It appears that the ball has been dropped in this matter. A specific person within the AZGFD has been assigned to monitor these sites......his name is Rory Aikens. Amanda is aware that he should be dropping in here to keep us updated and to dispell false information.

 

Call me brain washed and stupid but I spoke with a biologist at the Tucson AZGFD Office about what is going on.....and I must say I at least have respect for the wildlife biologists and managers......they seem to have a genuine concern for the wildlife and their future......not just $$$. It just appears that THE MAJORITY of hunters in AZ would rather hunt than hunt trophies like us. And the biologist and game managers believe the game can handle the increased pressure.

[DesertBull]

Give comments here

 

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

[CouesWhitetail]

Guys....please keep the discussion civil here. Personal attacks and rude language really isn't helpful.

 

If you want AGFD to come here and discuss this, I suggest just listing your concerns in way that can be addressed.

 

Amanda

[gamespec]

Wow What a lively discussion we have here! As Coues7 said there is a lot of misunderstanding about what these regional open houses really are. The concept is new (last year). It is not the old public hunt meetings we used to have (we will have those this summer) - they are simply this: An opportunity for anyone to come in to the office afterhours and look at the documents that are posted on-line (if they don't have internet access) and, more importantly, to talk to an AZGFD biologist about why we are doing this or doing that. From reading the posts in this thread I can see what a great need there is for a little two-way dialog. Most of these questions posted are very good questions (I would have worded some differently!). An open house like this allows you to come in and ask very specific questions and then you and the biologist can look at the data and guidleines together and he/she can explain why each change was made. This is much better in my opinion than just a runaway train of complaints. Here is the press release I wrote to explain to everyone what this open house really is. This was supposed to be distributed far and wide. After talking to Coues7 I called around the dept and did some research and found out that we as a department did a very poor job at advertizing these. My press release (below) went only to the Tucson Citizen and the AZ Daily Star. Game Branch thought the regions were doing a good job in advertizing these and they did not send it out or post it anywhere. That's not good and we will do better in the future. I just checked our website and found that the notice of these open houses was not distributed in the Wildlife News e-mails, Hunter Highlights e-newletter, not posted on the Sportsman's Calendar, nor was it on the website as new information. I'm embarrassed that we didn't do better - I will personnally make sure we do it right next time.

 

Here's my press release:

“The Arizona Game and Fish Department is holding an open house at the Tucson Office to allow the public an opportunity to review the fall hunt recommendation packet. This open house will occur 6-8pm on April 10, 2007. There will not be a presentation at this open house and no input will be recorded, however the draft regulations will be distributed for review before they are finalized by the Commission at their Public meeting on April 21, 2007 in Phoenix. This is a chance to review the Department’s hunt recommendations to the Commission prior to that meeting for those who may want to provide input directly to the Commission. Public meetings will be held this summer to obtain comments on the Hunt Guidelines (season structures and management guidelines, not permit levels) for the next 2 years”

 

As for the specific questions that appear in this thread, I can't do a good job at answering those that are outside of SE AZ. But, your copy of the regs and the AZGFD website (and 1411) have the numbers of all the AZGFD offices in the state. It is so easy to just pick up the phone and call and get more information about a specific topic. For example if someone called and said: "Why is your head so far.....I mean, why are you increasing WT permits in GMU 31 when I didn't see any deer last season in 10 days of glassing?" I would pull out my data binder and go to WT31 and see that the B:D ratio was 40:100 this year (after the 2006 seasons) with 138 deer sampled. This is quite a bit above the 20-30 we manage for. It is also a steady continuation of a multi-yr increase in this respect. The B:D ratio has increased from 16, 27, 32, to 40 in the last 4 years. In addition, the hunt success was 26% in the Oct hunt, 28% in the Nov hunt, and 47% in the Dec hunt. We start thinking about increases in permits if B:D is over 30 and hunt success in the Oct/Nov hunts is over 20%. So several pieces of informaiton (that's not all we use) indicated we could let a few more people hunt WT in 31 in the fall of 2007. This 100 permit increase will result in another 23 bucks killed in more than 400 square miles of WT habitat in 31. I think this is a reasonable recommendation and in keeping with the way we have successfully managed deer herds for many decades. I lay this out there as an example of why we made this particular recommendation. There is a similar story for every one of the comments in this thread. You may not agree with the department's recommendation, but there is a good reason (in the opinion of the biologist) for each change.

 

Miscellaneous comments:

The MD hunts in 29 and 31 were getting to such small permit levels that we thought it would be better to combine the hunts into one Nov hunt to reduce the interference with WT hunters in the Oct time frame. The number of MD hunters in the field should still be below the number we used to have during the Nov hunts when we had much higher permits. This should be a good deal for everyone.

 

I was told that the Elk archery hunt was moved earlier so it would better encompass the peak of rut. This was a move the department made in response to public comment. The overlap with the deer archers was the result (we DO listen and sometimes it gets us in trouble with other users). If you feel strongly about this being a good or bad thing, you know what to do. I always hear about how the dept doesn't listen, but those of you that have been to April commission meetings know this is not true as a rule. I don't remember an antlerless Kaibab recommendation that was approved as recommended. Polite and well-reasoned public comment does make a difference. Keep in mind that there is a large segment of the hunting public that does not come to the April commission meeting and have never posted on this site. We have to manage for them also.

 

One more comment, but an important one. I read "us" and "them" way too much. With all the challenges we will see in the future of hunting, let's remember that the "moat" is out there around us all.

 

Jim Heffelfinger

Tucson Regional Game Specialist

AZGFD

[DesertBull]

Thank you for your time.

I think when you hear the "they never listen to us" comment, most are refering to the Commission and the bean counters, not the biologist and such. IMO anyway.

 

Thanks again.

[coues7]

Jim,

 

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR STEPPING UP TOTHE PLATE! I've spoken with your self and a number of others within the AZGFD over the years and am VERY impressed with "our" biologists!

 

I HOPE TO SEE YOURSELF AND MANY OTHER FELLOW CW'S AT THE MEETING ON APRIL 21ST!!!

 

AGAIN THANK YOU.

[Coues79]

Jim,

I respect your opinion and know that you take your job seriously and diligently. My question about Unit 31 in particular was addressed in a post made on a different area of this forum. After having many family members, friends and relatives hunting this unit for many years, it seems apparent from our observations, that the buck numbers don't appear to be that high. I can specifically recall numerous conversations held with family over the past year, in regards to days spent hunting, and the main points always discussed were, "Man, we just aren't seeing the bucks like we used to."

 

I know that is all heresay, but when you have people that frequently hunt the unit, frequently get out and scout, and are successful at knowing how to spot game, and these people are all saying the same thing, it just appears that the numbers aren't there to back up the increase in tags. This information comes from people who care about where they hunt, and in specific, care about the future of their hunting grounds.

 

I can remember specifically from hunting this past year, there were two days spent that myself and my brothers spotted over 18 does and each day, and only one small buck. The majority of the days spent out hunting proved to be the same way. Lots and Lots of does, not a whole lot of bucks.

 

When you have seasoned hunters hunting the same areas they do year in and year out, I feel that their input is important. We are the eyes out there, and we do care about our areas and how they are managed. That is why I don't understand the increase in tags for 31. But I guess numbers don't lie either. If those numbers are what you say they are, then i'll live with that. I wish I could see that ratio of bucks to does when I'm out in the field.

[firstcoueswas80]

i dont think there is any way that 700 more doe tags up north, and 900 more whitetail tags can be explained down south... AT ALL. there is no way that "based on the deer numbers" it is justified. now, it can be explained through the AZGFD's want for $$$. sad sad sad sad sad.

[missedagain]

I applaud the game and fish for trying to keep up with the times and finally assigning someone to speak for them on these forums.

 

Unfortunately the az g$f has already lost all credibility to approximately 15,000 of its most loyal customers when they chose to ignore our opinion on the deer hunt structures. This loss of trust will not be regained easily and if the g$f ever hopes to they need to start giving sound management reasoning for all of the unpopular decisions that they make.

 

In my opinion they also need to find someone else to do the fishing reports because it is painfully obvious that the person that does it now knows nothing about fishing

[coueskiller]

My posts on this subject are directed at the commission and not the wildlife managers as I feel they are in the same boat as us in it that the commission does what the commission want's to do. Thanks Jim for coming on and giving us the info you did and now we know why everything was not communicated to the general public and I understand we all make mistakes. Let's all do what we can to have our opinions and concerns heard at the April meeting. Sorry if I offended anybody with my previous couple of posts and I have given Amanda my apology. I just stand strong for what I believe in.

 

Later,

Geoff

[gamespec]

Just a note: I'm not here because anyone told me to -- I'm here because I care about you all getting good information and having your questions answered. In fact, I have some very important things that were supposed to be done long ago, and I set all that aside to provide some information here. In fact I have to get materials ready for this Open House!

 

I posted a response to the WT 31 thread a short while ago so here's a link. http://forums.coueswhitetail.com/forums/in...?showtopic=5527

 

You don't have to agree, but you should ask specific quesitons to the specific issues you are interested in. Your regional office is your best bet for on-the-ground details related to hunt recommendations - that's where the recommendations come from.

 

Also, keep things in perspective: We are a $68+ million/year agency, the money generated from a couple hundred more deer tags is not what drives our management decisions.

 

JIM

[gamespec]

That figures. The one quesiton outside my region that I tried to answer just to be of assistance I apparently got all wrong . My apologies if I was the source for misinformation this time. I think readers understand that I was not trying to deceive anyone, just trying to help. I'll stay in my own backyard from now on.

 

Thanks for the correction!

 

JIM