Auction Elk Tag filled ???

[BigMoqui]

I was going to stay out of this, especially after I read the "other Site". But when I read monstercoues post that he has the tag again!!!! Well I won't comment on the other issues with the investigation, but that is LAME. What a CHUMP.

[Noel Arnold]

Whether it was legal or illegal is not what makes me sad about this story.It is the breakdown of our hunting tradition were shooting the largest animal has become the only thing that matters for some people.Where is the fun of shooting a world class animal in July in close proximity to houses.And I have never had a problem with people who make there living by guiding.But I am afraid that the all mighty buck has made some ehtics go out the window.Not to bring up a dead horse again,but the auction tags are selling our game to the highest bidder. Shame on all the states who have auction tags.Let the flames begin!!!

Noel(hunting for the right reason's) Arnold

[Huntn coues]

Whether it was legal or illegal is not what makes me sad about this story.It is the breakdown of our hunting tradition were shooting the largest animal has become the only thing that matters for some people.Where is the fun of shooting a world class animal in July in close proximity to houses.And I have never had a problem with people who make there living by guiding.But I am afraid that the all mighty buck has made some ehtics go out the window.Not to bring up a dead horse again,but the auction tags are selling our game to the highest bidder. Shame on all the states who have auction tags.Let the flames begin!!!

Noel(hunting for the right reason's) Arnold

 

 

I think that the auction tags are a great thing. They bring alot of money to the table for different projects.

 

But I am going to reserve comment on the other situations until the true story is unvailed.

 

Just my 2 pennies.

[coues7]

Let me play the devils advocated here. Regardless of how rich/poor or in between the guy is.....honestly who cares.....most of us are simply jealous. Does anyone besides AZ402 personally know the guy? Who are any of us to judge his character??

 

I have to disagree with Noel on this one. The auction tags and big game raffle tags are a great idea. In the case of the govenors auction tags, it allows "outdoorsman" with lots of money (regardless if they were self made millionaires or daddy/mommy gave it all to them) to spend their money to BENEFIT THE WILDLIFE. In the case of the big game raffle it allows "outdoorsmans" lottery moneys to once again BENEFIT THE WILDLIFE. ISN'T THAT WHAT'S ITS ALL ABOUT? IF the money is handled properly by the AZGFD, then these funds do nothing more than preserve and help the wildlife for OUR CHILDREN AND FUTURE GENERATIONS! Isn't that what it's all about?????

 

Think of the AZ Deer Association, the NWTF, the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundations.....all these groups gather funds to benefit the wildlife.....same as the auction and raffle tags....they are just special interest.

 

All of us can point the finger.....we weren't there......we don't know.....but I'm sure there are many of us "sportsman", "outdoorsman" or the like that would take an animal of a lifetime under these same circumstances. What difference does it make if the thing was killed in a forest meadow or a forest meadow near a house? NO ONE KNOWS BUT THOSE DIRECTLY INVOLVED WHAT HAPPENED THAT MORNING!!! If they ranged the homes near where the shot was taken from and it was 1/4 mile or more.....than the tag holder had every right to harvest that animal! None of us have any control over what the animal does after being hit. I personally know someone (a human) who has been shot......between the shock and the adrenaline they didn't feel a thing (NO PAIN) for at least 1 hour after the incident. All of us should harvest animals ethically and humanely.....but this bull I'm sure didn't suffer.

 

Flame me all you want. This is just my opinion on the matter.

[Noel Arnold]

Coues7,

I would have to dissagree that most sportsman or outdoorsman would do the same thing under the same circumstances.Most of the people on websites like this(including me)would like the chance at shooting a trophy animal.But there are way more hunters that could care less how big there animal is.And as far as the money to support wildlife goes,I would rather they increase the tags to get the extra money.I wonder how many people who had archery bull tag's or the muzzleloader tags that were watching that bull and excited to get a crack at him.As far as being jealous (heck no),why would anybody be jealous of shooting a bull under these circumstances(auction)

Noel

[DesertBull]

The bull is at a taxidermist, a good friend of mine. Thats how I know. The Game warden was there during the shooting, didn't know from the hunters, but heard from the home owner that they would be there and were going to try to take the elk. This won't go to trial overnight, it will prob take a few weeks or so. The elk was seized for evidence and is the property of the AZGFD. The guy who shot it is filthy rich and has the Governors tag again this year. Poor Sapp.

 

I hope all the rumors seize. These are the facts and I don't know the hunter or the guides, other than seeing there hunting videos haha, but they will have to live with what they have done and see what the judge has to say. Not all the home owners in the area were in agreance to let them shoot the elk within 1/4 mile of there residence. Thats what the violation was, shooting that bull within 1/4 mile of a residence, building- home presumed to be occupied.

 

 

For what it is worth, it does not matter if the home owners agreed to let them shoot less than 1/4 mile from the house or not. The law, to my knowledge, does not allow for compromise just because the owners of the building(s) agree to it.

 

My only question is, did this bull never wander away from these houses or what? Was this the only way to get him?

[Outdoor Writer]

[For what it is worth, it does not matter if the home owners agreed to let them shoot less than 1/4 mile from the house or not. The law, to my knowledge, does not allow for compromise just because the owners of the building(s) agree to it.

 

Not quite. If the property owner gives permission, someone can legally shoot off the back porch, as long as there are no OTHER houses within 1/4 mile of that porch, where the owners HAVEN'T given permission.

 

Pertinent part of A.R.S.17-309 below:

Violations; classification

A. Unless otherwise prescribed by this title, it is unlawful for

a person to:

 

4. Discharge a firearm while taking wildlife within

one-fourth mile of an occupied farmhouse or other

residence, cabin, lodge or building without permission

of the owner or resident.

 

-TONY

[Ron G.]

For what it is worth, it does not matter if the home owners agreed to let them shoot less than 1/4 mile from the house or not. The law, to my knowledge, does not allow for compromise just because the owners of the building(s) agree to it.

 

Here it is straight from the regs, page 87 under most common violations:

 

Shoot Too Close To An Occupied

Building or Residence

(A.R.S. 17-309 A 4) Page 96

Without the resident’s permission, you may

not discharge a firearm within 1/4 mile of an

occupied residence while taking wildlife. All

structures including barns, sheds and cabins

should be assumed occupied.

 

And from the actual ARS 17-309 A

A.R.S.17-309

Violations; classification

A. Unless otherwise prescribed by this title, it is unlawful for

a person to:

1. Violate any provision of this title or any rule adopted

pursuant to this title.

2. Take, possess, transport, buy, sell or offer or expose

for sale wildlife except as expressly permitted by this

title.

3. Destroy, injure or molest livestock, growing crops,

personal property, notices or signboards, or other

improvements while hunting, trapping or fishing.

4. Discharge a firearm while taking wildlife within

one-fourth mile of an occupied farmhouse or other

residence, cabin, lodge or building without permission

of the owner or resident.

 

Don't really want to comment on this incident, but I think people hunt (and shoot) a lot closer than 400 yards to residences all the time. I know up where my parents live almost every place bordering the subdivisions have salt and water, and sometimes feed out. So, of course the animals are going to be there. I have had stories relayed to me of residents getting upset seeing people hunting 'their' animals... I just wish there were bulls of this caliber up by my parent's place!

[Ron G.]

Whoops, looks like Tony beat me to it!

[DesertBull]

[For what it is worth, it does not matter if the home owners agreed to let them shoot less than 1/4 mile from the house or not. The law, to my knowledge, does not allow for compromise just because the owners of the building(s) agree to it.

 

Not quite. If the property owner gives permission, you can legally shoot off the back porch, as long as there are no OTHER houses within 1/4 mile of that porch, where the owners HAVEN'T given permission.

 

Pertinent part of A.R.S.17-309 below:

Violations; classification

A. Unless otherwise prescribed by this title, it is unlawful for

a person to:

 

4. Discharge a firearm while taking wildlife within

one-fourth mile of an occupied farmhouse or other

residence, cabin, lodge or building without permission

of the owner or resident.

 

-TONY

 

Thanks! That makes sense.

[coues7]

Your right there are many of us that would not shoot a bull under those circumstances. Most likely that same cituation under those same circumstances may not have ever happened or ever will happen again. That's not the point.

 

There a lots and lots of people who of have never even seen a bull of that magnitude. For some people, the circumstances under which an animal is killed have little to do with a decision. Whether the decision is based on "It's big and very few people will ever kill an animal of this caliber so let me kill it OR what a magnificant animal and it's only a 266" bull, it the time spent in the outdoors that counts. Just because its not the way you or I and many other think doesn't mean its wrong. ONCE AGAIN WE HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE TAG HOLDER WAS THINKING.....so who are we to pass judgement.

 

Jealousy has two flavors in this situation.......jealous of the wealth......jealous of the bull. Am I jealous of the the opportunity to harvest such an amazing bull...YES. Am I jealous of a mans wealth....NO!!!!!

 

I have not been able to find anyone in the AZGFD that has the info on the revenues from the govenors tags, but the Big game raffle raised $514,055 for wildlife in AZ.....I don't know about anyone else but I'd hate to have to spread that amount over the species I hunt. Talk about having to be rich to hunt.

 

No hard feelings toward you Noel.

 

Just my $0.02.

[Noel Arnold]

Coues7,

No hard feelings at all.I never judge the shooter's that buy these tag's.I do question the top dog's of the Game departments that give out these tag's.One way the department could make more money is to have the draw in march or april.This way they could make interest on the money.We are one of the last states to have our draw.

Noel

[Outdoor Writer]

I do question the top dog's of the Game departments that give out these tag's.

 

 

Aah yes, time to blame the "Game departments" again.

 

Hint: It was all of the special interest groups that lobbied and brought raffle/auction tags into being. In AZ, it started decades ago with the AZ Desert Bighorn Sheep Society and mushroomed from there as each new alphabet group came into existence.

 

BTW, the draw for elk, which this topic is about, had a deadline in Feb. this year. The drawing took place in March and permits were mailed in April. Moving the deadline earlier doesn't make any more interest unless they delay the actual drawing for several more months AFTER that. -TONY

[.270]

sounds like a lot of hairsplittin' goin' on here. anytime it comes down to a tape measure to decide if you were being legal or not, a guy might shoulda been somewhere else. don't know anyone involved. don't even care, but huntin' in a subdivision fulla folks just doesn't seem like huntin' to me. there's big bulls in other places that are a lot more like real huntin'. as far as the auction tags, i don't much care for em. they raise some money, but how much good does it do? in the big scheme of things, the money they get from the auction tags isn't a real big piece o' the whole pie. it's gonna be interesting to see how it finally burns out. anytime lawyers hafta get involved, it ain't good for anything. Lark.

[Outdoor Writer]

For those here who weren't around 25 years ago, here's a column I wrote back then that provides some perspective on the auction/raffle permits. -TONY

 

PERMIT PROCEEDS WILL BENEFIT AZ BIGHORNS

 

A few months ago, I received a bulletin from the Arizona Game and Fish Department which stated that the first of two desert bighorn sheep permits had been auctioned to a California resident for an astonishing $64,000. Maybe, this figure is not really "astonishing" to Don Pocapalia of Rancho Palos Verde who won the final bidding, but for me, raising $150 to apply for a normal sheep drawing can sometimes be a chore.

 

Well, this month the second permit donated to the Arizona Desert Bighorn Sheep Society will be given away to the lucky person whose name is drawn from the hundreds of $25 raffle tickets sold. Sale of the chances ended on August 1, and when the final tally is made, the ADBSS hopes to amass between $20,000 to $30,000 more in funds to go into an interest-bearing account along with the earlier auction money.

 

Where is this all going?

 

Quite a while ago, when I first learned of the donation of the two sheep permits to the ADBSS, I was thoroughly incensed by the whole affair.

 

My anger really peaked when I heard about the selling price for that first permit. I simply could not understand why the game department had the right to donate two permits to an organization for the purpose of raising money, especially since my license money has been contributing to sheep research and department salaries for 25 years. And, during those years, I had never been drawn to hunt the desert bighorn.

 

Now, before someone starts shouting "sour grapes", let me say that over the last few months, my feelings toward this practice have mellowed considerably. In fact, I am now totally in favor of and support it.

 

After some investigation, many things surfaced which altered my position. Conversations with personnel at the Game and Fish headquarters explained some of the reasons behind their actions, but the most enlightening facts came through Don Johnson, a past-president of the ADBSS and the current chairman of the committee entrusted with the disposal of the two "fundraising" permits.

 

According to Johnson, this is the best thing to ever happen for the desert bighorn in the state of Arizona. For him to feel that way is quite surprising since he, like myself, has never drawn a sheep permit!

 

Because all of the money spent on wildlife research and habitat improvement in the state comes from department funds and not from any general tax funds, traditionally, money for sheep projects has been hard to raise. However, with the dollars from the two permits, research on the bighorn will be vastly expanded.

 

The desert bighorn has experienced a troubled existence in Arizona since the late 1800's. Miners, prospectors, soldiers and others overhunted the sheep for food and trophies. Because of additional habitat loss, new diseases and the indiscriminate hunting, the bighorns experienced a major decline in their historic ranges.

 

Finally, folks began to realize the need for some protection, and in 1939 the Kofa Game Range and the Cabeza Prieta Wildlife Refuge were established to help save the animals from extinction.

 

In 1958, Game and Fish moved 16 sheep into the Aravaipa Canyon from the Kofa Range, the first transplant management effort. The permit being raffled this month will allow the lucky winner to hunt this area, Unit 31. Although Aravaipa was not opened to hunting until 1980, it has consistently produced record heads including a huge ram taken in 1982 by John Harris.

 

Recognizing the need for additional management of the bighorn, people who were concerned for the animals' long-term welfare organized the Arizona Desert Bighorn Sheep Society in 1967. Over the years, this group has donated many hours and countless dollars, the main ingredients for successful management.

 

Unlike some of the other so-called "wildlife organizations", there are not any "fat-cats" who sit behind a desk reaping a profit at the ADBSS; everyone is strictly a volunteer concerned with the welfare of the sheep. No one draws a salary!

 

This fact is evident in the administration of the two donated permits; all of the costs involved in the auction and raffle are being underwritten by the Society. Not one single dollar of the monies from either will be used for anything but to help the desert bighorn survive.

 

In order to obtain the permits for their endeavor, the ADBSS had to fight an uphill struggle with the Game Commission and the legislature to make the donation possible since it was illegal until new legislation was enacted.

 

"When we first approached the game department, they had mixed emotions. They thought there would be a huge public outcry against such a move", Johnson says. "We finally convinced the department to present our plan to the commission, and they instructed Game and Fish to further investigate the matter from a legal standpoint, the public's opinion and the way other states did it and how it worked."

 

After the matter became public, it was found that the opinions on such a move were favorable leading to the legislation making the donation possible.

 

The bill became law in July 1983 and includes all big game species, not only sheep. These tags will only be issued to incorporated, non-profit, wildlife conservation organizations with the stipulation that ALL of the proceeds be used in Arizona for management of the animal for which the tag is designated. Any group requesting these tags must also agree to underwrite all of the costs involved in their sale and transfer.

 

Of course, there are some people who are still against this fundraising effort, especially in the Tuscon area. These folks are miffed because one of the permits allocated for the Aravaipa Canyon hunt is being used for the raffle.

 

"Some people felt that these permits would magically appear as extra permits. Of course, this is not the case. If the areas involved could support the extra permit, it should have existed last year. If there are two permits in an area, and one of those is allocated to the raffle, that leaves one available for the general drawing," Johnson states.

 

If a person really thought about it, he would realize that without the management efforts, there would not be ANY permits available in Aravaipa. He would also realize because of the extra money and concentrated efforts of the Arizona Desert Bighorn Sheep Society, the Arizona Game and Fish Department and the other government agencies involved, that permits never before possible will be made available for the general drawing in the future. Proper management, needed waterholes, transplants of sheep into historic habitat now devoid of any, will all lead to herd improvement. In fact, many of the biologists involved feel that the population could easily double in no time.

 

If this happens, who knows, maybe both Don Johnson and I may eventually get a permit to hunt the bighorn sheep.