New issue

[dave]

Jim Hefflefinger offers his time to open dialogue with us and we reward him by calling him and his dept personel fish/bunny cops? What in the world is wrong with you guys?

Mike

 

I guess I missed that one. Each individual is there own person. While many in the Department are some of the finest people I have ever met, each one is different. I strongly agree with some and disagree with others. The fact is the Commission directs the Department and the upper management of the Department directs the rest of the Department. In my opinion, many in the Department are far superior to the ones that direct them. The bottom line is that everyone gets categorized by the decision that was made and what the end result is regardless of their position. I do it myself. When the Commission votes 3-2 against what I want, they are a sorry bunch...while 2 of them agreed with me. If 100 people working for the Department agree with me but the three that direct them push their recommendations forward, we get a recommendation that sucks, therefore the whole Department sucks. I need to do a better job of expressing myself in a way that would have a positive impact and not stereotype a whole group by the power that controls it. With all that said, I am very disappointed by what has happened the last couple years, the direction that has been given and the recommendations that keep coming forth.

Here are a few of my opinions on some of this stuff:

There is no way archers have any measurable impact upon deer populations.

Out of state archery hunters buying over the counter tags crowd some units and reduce the quality of our archery deer hunts.

We have 3 firearms Commissioners pushing to increase opportunity for firearms hunters and take anything they can away from the archery hunters.

There is no way the Department can enforce any no-baiting rules period. It is futile that they even talk about it much less suggest there may be a rule change that will never be enforced. When was the last time you ever heard about someone being cited for baiting bear? Will they photograph you placing the salt? Will they be able to prove the salt you are sitting was placed by you? Will they be able to prove you even knew the salt was there? This is futile

[dave]

I have talked with several local WM's and they all say that putting archery deer hunting to a draw does not help them with there "hunter opportunity" objective. However, if they were to manage the archery hunts with a "Harvest Objective", (just as they use on the bear hunts) they could better manage areas that are getting too much preasure. This would also end any dicusion of what they need "take" from us to reduce success rates... .... And we can always go hunting in a different unit if one area limits out! They are happy and we are happy, too... .... what a switch....

 

There is no reason to manage for a harvest objective for archery, that is a joke. There is reason to manage for how many archers are in one place at one time. Limiting non-residents would be the first step. That will affect their revenue.

What is the real issue here revenue or opportunity?

[HUNTMUP]

Rembrandt....

 

I am with Coues 'n' Sheep, I didn't get a warm fuzzy from your post either....... We are not " disrespecting the agency that provides us this privelege"........

 

We are simply disagreeing with the agency "MANAGING OUR PRIVELEGE TO HUNT AS RESIDENTS OF THIS STATE!!!"........ the wildlife of Arizona belong to all of us, the AZGFD are simply managing it for the people ....

 

The archery deer harvest is so small, unless you look at the Kiabab, it is relatively insignificant in the idea that archery hunters are causing an impact on coues deer.

 

I am curious, how many out of state archery hunters for javelina and deer visit our state?

 

How many archery deer have you killed and how long did it take?? If you harvest one every year than you are better than 95% of the rest of us..

 

I am sure everyone on this site accepts the outcome and the odds of our "Big Game Lottery System" , As long as it is fair. The ones you hear complaining are the ones who have put in for years and have not drawn a tag when other people seem to draw quality tags quite frequently. I know people who have had archery bull tags 3 out of the last seven years while I have gone 1 tag in seven years.... Not fair for me or anyone else who puts in.. When the draw is fair, everyone will accept the odds.

If someone doesn't care about the quality of the hunt and just wants to draw a tag every year, then they can move to another state where that is the rule.

The rest of us will stand up and fight for fairness and the true quality of our resources. The future is probably here, I agree with that, however it will certainly become what you say even faster if we all just accept and go along with what we know is not right!

We are on the same side for sure and we will all will agree to disagree but we need to stick together on this stuff or this will be just the start of worse things to come...

[bowsniper]

By the way, what is ethical? Some say baiting with feed or salt is unethical. What about sitting the only water for 5 miles around? I don't know about deer, but my body can last a lot longer without food than it can water. So is sitting water more unethical that sitting bait? What about treeing a lion or bear with dogs and then shooting them down with a 20 foot shot? Is that fair chase or ethical? What about using scent or a call to bring in some sex crazed animal who just trying to reproduce? Is that ethical? What about shooting an animal with a broadhead and then waiting for him to bleed out. What about dropping some coues at 600 yards? Is that ethical? You can see where I'm going with this. So when Leonard says that he or some people question the "ethic" of baiting, where does it stop? It doesn't, because his ethic argument, along with "disease transmission" is just an excuse to promote his agenda. I once had much respect for the department, but with the current leadership and direction, that is gone. So Mike, for now I will continue to refer to the department as the "fish police". I hope that Jim and the other hard working and sane people in the department don't take that personally, and realize that it is directed their managers and not them. The sane people in the department are probably as distraught as we are.

 

Mark

[TAM]

It looks like the G&F would rather manage the herds using hearsay than sientific facts. Where is there proof that way too many coues deer are being killed over salt??? I'd bet money that the number of deer being shot each year over salt doesn't account for 1% of the total archery deer harvested. I've had trail cameras hung over salt for several years now and while it does help bring in deer, it's still not easy! I have yet to shoot a buck over salt.

 

Even on the Kiabab the archery deer success is only like 7%. I'll bet for coues deer it's even lower. If a few more bucks are being killed each year because of salt is this really enough to be concerned? I doubt it!

 

The other problem I see is that salt can and will last for years once leached into the soil. A 50 pound bag of rock salt left out in the summer during the monsoon's will melt into the soil in the matter of a couple good storms. There will be enough salt left in the soil to remain effective for the remainder of the hunting season. How will G&F determine if it's a man made salt hole or a natural salt hole if there is no salt pellets as evidence? How will G&F know if it's not the reminants of a salt block that a rancher left out years ago? What will stop hunters from putting out salt in July that melts away by archery deer season? Way to many variables on this one.

 

Making new laws that you can't enforce is a JOKE!!! The only thing worse than that is making new laws that never had good reason to be made in the first place!