The Trail Cam Celebration

[Ringer]

Everyone on here needs to write all five commissioners recommending Andrew Gillette from Gilbert, AZ for the new committee. At least we will have one honest CWT member to represent the hunters in Arizona who are against gambling as a method of raising money for the cause. Flatlander would do the job for us. If Nefarious Red is on the committee I will know 100% that Pete and Don Peay have this program wired just like Utah.

[Flatlander]

 

I doubt that I would ever be selected by the commission knowing that many of them already have allegiances and ties to groups and although I am an AES member I am not necessarily endorsed by them.

But by all means, feel free to let them know you support the idea. It cant hurt.

That's cool that you're a member of AES. They do a lot of good work for wildlife. You should speak with the President of the Arizona Elk Society and get his thoughts on Conserve and Protect Arizona.

Rich and I have spoken. We are well acquainted with one anothers positons. I think he knows I want whats best for sportsmen.

[northAZarcher]

If anybody thinks that CAPAZ truly wants to raise money for the right reason they may want to rethink. Taking a simple fee increase off the table REALLY limits any way to raise money other than a tag grab. I am sorry but them saying a $5 increase would place a financial burden on sportsmen is total BS. They will start small saying they don't want many tags and the majority will not be trophy hunts. Give it a couple years and they will control a huge percentage of the most desirable tags in AZ and they WILL be auctioning tags at a big banquet not dissimilar to what Utah does. All they want right now is a foot in the door, which they have been granted.

Plus, didn't they say that it would be permanent?

[bonecollector]

All of this mess is because they failed to start educating the public a long time ago.

[AZ420]

I'm against Auction and Raffle tags, and especially against adding any additional. Since more money is needed, just put a mandatory donation box before you hit the submit on each species application. So if your applying for an elk tag for example; it might say you must donate at least $10, of course the wealthy can always donate more. For deer for example, it might say a different value, as well as a minimum donation fee for turkey, javelina, sheep etc...These donations can be based on how many applications they intend to receive for the draw.

[trphyhntr]

why dont they just take it out of the $7 app fee bump they did a few years ago. all this stuff reeks to me.

[brian390]

Like someone might have already mentioned earlier. The few on here defending the tag grab, raffle, auction, foolish idea or whatever you want to call it, are like just pass it then we will give you the details of how we're going to screw you afterwards. The raffle supporters on here are like arguing with Obama where you'll lie, cheat, and steal to get your way.

[brian390]

 

For the tag grab issue, they just need to end that idea altogether. If the department needs more money, just raise the price tag on quality hunts througout the state. New Mexico's draw is set up this way, and I think it would work well. I could justify paying a higher price when I draw a quality early season bull hunt, while the person who draws a late season tag would pay the current fee.

True. However you're beating a dead horse. Commissioner Davis took that option off the table at the end of the meeting on Friday. The individual at the beginning also made it clear too that after all the work to get the pricing down, he doesn't want any increase.

 

 

I haven't noticed a decrease in the price of tags lately. Maybe I'm missing something. So Commissioner Davis took raising the price of tags off the table so they say. Maybe a good proposal would be for Commissioner Davis to fund the "education," that's something that I would vote for. He's got my vote.

[brian390]

How many of you have submitted your name to all 5 commissioners to be on the committee? I hope all. The committee needs to be made up of a diverse group, but I get the feeling none of the folks on this forum that continue to criticize will step up and be a part of the solution(except Flatlander and SirRoyl). I keep hearing about how the rich want the tags but the reality is there are plenty of land owner tags around the country, Canada and Mexico where they can go kill 200" muleys and 380-400" bulls. Does AZ offer some great hunting? Yes, but get real, these guys can buy $60,000 stone sheep hunts and $50,000 Desert sheep hunts all day long. Don't fool yourself into thinking a December coues tag or a Sept bull hunt has that much value to a guy who can buy anything he wants. Although these tags have tremendous value to you and me as average fellas, the reality is the rich see things much different that you or I. Even the critics on this forum supported forming the committee, now get involved or please stop crying wolf....

 

The more I read the above statement the dumber it makes me.

 

So first we will talk about the part that makes sense in your statement. So you're saying that the committee needs to be made up of a diverse group, and I somewhat agree. The group that is on the committee now seems to have an agenda and isn't diverse. When you say diverse do mean it needs a few tag grabbers and a few people that would fight for sportsman? That's why i say I somewhat agree with you because it definitely needs some members without an agenda and it would be better if none of them had the rich man agenda.

 

So on the rest of your statement you say if you're a rich guy you can go to Mexico and get a 200" deer and Canada for a 400" bull yada yada. Then you state these guys got some major money and can get anything that they want. Then you say that these Arizona tags where they get to hunt the best animals at the best times don't mean anything to the rich guys and they mean a lot to the average hunter. And what point are you trying to make?

 

So maybe you're trying to say that the rich guys won't want these Arizona tags?????? That would be a first, and something that I would have to see to believe.

 

Or maybe you're trying to say that the tags that mean a lot to the average hunter they will no longer be getting????

[brian390]

But not all have an opportunity to participate. If you don't have the 300 dollars for a sheep tag, you don't participate. However, we aren't going to lower the cost of a sheep tag. So an economic disparity already exists. But if someone has 10 or 20 dollars to enter a raffle for a sheep tag, they now have a chance. Provided some type of reasonable restrictions exist that prevent any one person from overpowering the raffle financially. Raffles would create more of a level playing field for those not economically viable.

 

So you're saying that I have a chance....Yeah of course, like one in a million.

[brian390]

 

 

 

 

Red- they are not going to give more tags to the various groups to raffle and auction? Just G&F will produce additional tags for the Big Game Super Raffle. Good to know.

IF raffle tags are used, and that's still an IF, a new program similar to the Big Game Super Raffle would be created. The current Big Game Super Raffle is mandated by legislation to disperse its funds to HPC. This one would be similar except funds would be Game and Fish. No outside organization would get any money.

Who get's the HPC money? I am pretty sure its the critter groups and they guys that run the critter are the same people on CPAZ.

In the above, I'm pretty positive ALL of the money from any auction/raffle tags is returned to the AGFD by law. That money is earmarked as HPC funds per species accordingly and is meted out for projects as determined by dept. and critter group committees for each game species. In short, the critter groups reap no financial benefit from any of it. The groups gain their owm operating revenue from dues, banquets and the other items that are auctioned or raffled during the year.

 

And while we're at it, there appears to be a bit of misinformation that has pervaded this threads on the subject. It has to do with the "Utah model." Over the years I have followed most of the threads at MM on that topic. The set-up in Utah is quite different than the proposal here. Off the top of my head, I can't recall the percentage, but Peay's group keeps a large percentage of the money it raises from the raffles/auctions and offers little in the way of accounting for what his organization does with that money other than enrich the administrators. It's pretty much a mess.

 

In contrast, the proposal here is for AGFD to receive and control 100% of the funds from any raffle/auction tags for the purpose of "educating the publc," akin to how it is now with HPC. And if that comes to pass, funds to battle the antis supposedly would come from other "sources" as was done this year with the lion initiative. Now, I'm guessing here, but other sources might include some sort of expo, banquets and private donors. In any case, it seems to be quite different than Peay's mess.

 

Of course, a concrete proposal needs to be thoroughly put forth because the "devil in in the details."

The references to the Utah Model are stemming from Petes comments on the podcast and at other meetings. He referred to it explicitly in several of the podcasts. And in the first podcast which was a recording of the CAPAZ kickoff meeting for the initiative he talked about how beautiful Peays system was and how when people raised concerns he shut them down right there on the spot. He discussed the importance of controlling the narrative around the initiative and the importance of having people engaged on all the social media platforms to refute any one who opposed the idea. This is how we came to know Dustin (nefarious red) as a regular poster.

 

Thats the reason folks keep referencing the Utah Model because Pete keeps bringing it up.

 

 

Flatlander, I haven't heard that particular podcast, but are you trying to say that before Utah got destroyed with these sort of tag grabs that they also got the hunt chat forums infiltrated with tag grabbers to try and control the narrative and silence any other opinions of better ideas? Whether they infiltrated Utah chat forums or not they definitely have infiltrated this hunting forum to try and shut better opinions down on the spot.

 

Some of the more obvious ones to try and control the narrative are like nefarious red, twigsnapper, and maybe azkiller. Another one might be idgaf but who knows. You will notice how nefarious red and twigsnapper are on here constantly to respond immediately to lie, cheat and steal to get their agenda across.

[AZkiller]

One observation:

 

I watched the live broadcast of last week's commission meeting and one thing that stood out was when Comm. Davis made it a point to tell everyone that any increase in license costs at this time is completely off the table. So it seems any proposal that puts that forth, including a heritage/conservation/education stamp which in effect is a license increase, will get very short consideration.

 

I don't know this to be fact, but I'm guessing they don't want to mandate this sort of increase for everyone who buys a license/tag. Instead, they are leaning toward the raffle idea because people have the choice to spend their money or not and could get something valuable in return.

Did anyone read this?

[Flatlander]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Red- they are not going to give more tags to the various groups to raffle and auction? Just G&F will produce additional tags for the Big Game Super Raffle. Good to know.

IF raffle tags are used, and that's still an IF, a new program similar to the Big Game Super Raffle would be created. The current Big Game Super Raffle is mandated by legislation to disperse its funds to HPC. This one would be similar except funds would be Game and Fish. No outside organization would get any money.

Who get's the HPC money? I am pretty sure its the critter groups and they guys that run the critter are the same people on CPAZ.

In the above, I'm pretty positive ALL of the money from any auction/raffle tags is returned to the AGFD by law. That money is earmarked as HPC funds per species accordingly and is meted out for projects as determined by dept. and critter group committees for each game species. In short, the critter groups reap no financial benefit from any of it. The groups gain their owm operating revenue from dues, banquets and the other items that are auctioned or raffled during the year.

 

And while we're at it, there appears to be a bit of misinformation that has pervaded this threads on the subject. It has to do with the "Utah model." Over the years I have followed most of the threads at MM on that topic. The set-up in Utah is quite different than the proposal here. Off the top of my head, I can't recall the percentage, but Peay's group keeps a large percentage of the money it raises from the raffles/auctions and offers little in the way of accounting for what his organization does with that money other than enrich the administrators. It's pretty much a mess.

 

In contrast, the proposal here is for AGFD to receive and control 100% of the funds from any raffle/auction tags for the purpose of "educating the publc," akin to how it is now with HPC. And if that comes to pass, funds to battle the antis supposedly would come from other "sources" as was done this year with the lion initiative. Now, I'm guessing here, but other sources might include some sort of expo, banquets and private donors. In any case, it seems to be quite different than Peay's mess.

 

Of course, a concrete proposal needs to be thoroughly put forth because the "devil in in the details."

The references to the Utah Model are stemming from Petes comments on the podcast and at other meetings. He referred to it explicitly in several of the podcasts. And in the first podcast which was a recording of the CAPAZ kickoff meeting for the initiative he talked about how beautiful Peays system was and how when people raised concerns he shut them down right there on the spot. He discussed the importance of controlling the narrative around the initiative and the importance of having people engaged on all the social media platforms to refute any one who opposed the idea. This is how we came to know Dustin (nefarious red) as a regular poster.

 

Thats the reason folks keep referencing the Utah Model because Pete keeps bringing it up.

Flatlander, I haven't heard that particular podcast, but are you trying to say that before Utah got destroyed with these sort of tag grabs that they also got the hunt chat forums infiltrated with tag grabbers to try and control the narrative and silence any other opinions of better ideas? Whether they infiltrated Utah chat forums or not they definitely have infiltrated this hunting forum to try and shut better opinions down on the spot.

 

Some of the more obvious ones to try and control the narrative are like nefarious red, twigsnapper, and maybe azkiller. Another one might be idgaf but who knows. You will notice how nefarious red and twigsnapper are on here constantly to respond immediately to lie, cheat and steal to get their agenda across.

It was the very first Jay Scott podcast on the topic.

 

Also, idgaf put a lot of effort into putting another forth another option and presenting it to CAPAZ and then getting it to the commission.

 

And we need to be careful about calling people liars and cheaters. Although I certainly do not agree with AZKiller or Twigsnapper they are long time members here and have been very open about their ideas and for the most part have not jumped into the petulant name calling and mud slinging. I dont agree with their opinions but they certainly arent plants here just to fight Petes cause nor have I seen them state anything untruthful. Now . . . Nefarious Red, well the only reason he came to this site was to carry Petes banner and I have never seen him post anything else on this site. I have spoken to him and he is just here to defend the cause and stir the pot. Its what he thinks is best for hunting in this state but I prefer to have my dialogue with those who I know and trust from their other contributions to this site.

[Nefarious Red]

Like Bonecollector 777? You seemed to be real cozy with him at the meetings, rubbing his back and all. You trusted him quite a bit, and you used him because you thought he would help you get somewhere. Now he's in a little bit of trouble and you turn your back on him and slander him. You have no interest in the continual education plan, you have never defended it, and you have even mocked it at times. Good enough for me that the Commission has computers and knows how to use them. Continue how you see fit, but you aren't fooling anyone that matters.

[Flatlander]

Like Bonecollector 777? You seemed to be real cozy with him at the meetings, rubbing his back and all. You trusted him quite a bit, and you used him because you thought he would help you get somewhere. Now he's in a little bit of trouble and you turn your back on him and slander him. You have no interest in the continual education plan, you have never defended it, and you have even mocked it at times. Good enough for me that the Commission has computers and knows how to use them. Continue how you see fit, but you aren't fooling anyone that matters.

Yup, like Blake. Because we put our personal differences aside and collaborated on something that would help the common good.