AZGFD Dec 7th Commission Meeting - Education Funding

[bassinix]

9 hours ago, HuntHarder said:

20$ x 3 kids and a wife is a 100$ x 2 draws a year is 200$.  Yes, at the end of the day 200$ isn't a make or break deal, but it is still extra money to stay the the same odds as everyone else...  I will admit, to me the 200$ is not crazy significant, but to other families it might be.  Any time you have to pay extra to stay at similar odds, I call BS.  You will never make everyone happy. This is simply my opinion and clearly you do not agree with it.  That is what makes America so great.  You do not have to agree with me, but you should try to understand my position on this matter.  Surely you did not come on a public forum and expect to sway everyone 11 posts in...

I understand the position of this being a  potential financial burden on some families and households. I totally get it. I went several years of not hunting at all due to lack of affordability during the Great Recession from 2007 to 2013. We can't let this funding option slide because some will not be able to afford it. It's too important. We'll never be able to make everyone happy. At some point, we have to let those who are able to spend more....well.....spend more. And this is enough incentive to get them to spend more. A monthly conservation magazine with pictures of bats and birds and "watchable wildlife" isn't enough. Meanwhile, us working class will face the reality of a miniscule reduced chance for a tag, or have to make sure we budget appropriately so we're able to participate. 

[bassinix]

28 minutes ago, jim said:

Sounds like Davis is the only commissioner that understands the draw system. 

Perhaps, but really this is nothing more than another loyalty point...just that it's not free. And really the loyalty point isn't free anyhow. You have to pay to play and keep that too. As long as you're spending at least a $13 application fee every year (whether putting in for a tag or just buying a bonus point) you keep the loyalty point. So essentially that costs you $13 per year. The super point will cost between that $13 to $25 per year. Nearly 60% of the polled responses said they'd be ok with a $20 to $25 range. The model laid out yesterday was budgeted at $20. So:

$13 per year keeps the loyalty point. 

$20 per year keeps the super point. 

It's all about perspective. Good thing about the super point is, on the years you can't put in for a tag and you buy a bonus point only, there's no sense in buying the super point. Yet it'll be there next year for you when you are ready to go. It won't take 5 years to earn it back. 

[bassinix]

2 hours ago, jim said:

I would not have posted my statement if you would have came on here explaining your end with out calling out members of this site. Every time this issue comes up you or another of your group sit an instantly tell anyone posting on here they are wrong and you are right and it gets old. With more of your explanations and the research your group has done was posted on here in a non confrontational manor you could probably sell the idea better. I for one like the point idea but in reality it is only going to get money from the top 2 or 3 point holders hoping to get in the bonus pass. It will be interesting to see how much money it actually raises.

Jim, I've actually never really been on this site. I've had a login for years, just prefer other social media. For the record I'm not trying to get confrontational, so no disrespect intended. I don't feel I called out anyone specifically, so my apologies for sounding that way.  I'll admit I suck at the "responding to" or the "quoting" of other comments  in this forum. What can I say? I'm new. My attempt at being here isn't to tell anyone they're wrong, it's to get the truth out. Because there are so many untruths that are flying about. I write and talk persuasively, that's just who I am. If that comes across as sounding like I believe I'm right and you're wrong, then I'm sorry. I will support my position with the facts and the truth and call out lies. I absolutely 100% do support this Super Bonus Point plan, and I'm committed to moving it forward to get the dedicated funding for public education outreach. You're not wrong for disagreeing with me, I'm just trying to get the facts and truth out there and get more people on board. Here are the truths:

1. There's no tag grab. It never was about tags to go to rich people only and cut tags out of the public opportunities. That's a bold faced lie. I don't care what happened a decade ago with any perceived or actual attempt at a "tag grab." I was outta the loop in 2008, so I don't even know what that was about. All I know is that it didn't go through, never happened, and it's old history. Once again, I don't care. So in talking about now, yes there was a proposal for some tags to go into a public raffle that EVERYONE could enter which would actually increase some folks opportunity to draw. If Joe Hunter says he can't afford a $325 sheep tag, yet buys 2 raffle tags at $5 each and wins, then well that seems like a good affordable option for more opportunities, not less. And saying that takes tags out of the public opportunity is BS because we have hundreds if not thousands of left over, non drawn tags after every draw. And early on even the Commission agreed there's room for an additional strip tag for deer, and a sheep tag, and a some premium elk tags, and some more cow elk tags, and a couple pronghorn tags, and it wouldn't decimate the wildlife. But it doesn't matter anymore, because that plan was shot down MONTHS ago. Yet naysayers keep bringing it up.

2. The group who proposed that plan would not see a dime. Any raffling off of tags to generate public education outreach funding would have been done thru AZGFD and the funds would have stayed there. That was the proposal, and what Conserve And Protect Arizona still endorses to this day. Within the membership of CAPAZ they are not unified in support of the Super Bonus Point. Once again, I don't care. I'm not a part of that group, although I consider some over there acquaintances and some even friends. In my opinion the super bonus point it's a good plan and needs to be approved. 

3. This isn't a giant conspiracy to make anyone rich, or give rich people more tags. It's just about the dedicated funding. The surveys showed support of a super point nearly 2 to 1. And almost 60% said they'd pay $20 to $25 for each point. Frankly, from 2007 to 2013 I was out of the hunting loop working 4 jobs, 7 days a week, 16 hours a day to keep my head above water in the worst recession and housing crisis this country has ever seen. Recreational hunting was the last thing on my mind. I took 6 to 7 years off from hunting and fishing. So anyone saying I don't know what it's like to not be able to afford an extra $20 per application, uh...yeah I do. I lived that life for a long time.

4. As much as "habitat stamps" and "education stamps" have been thrown around, they won't sell. Every state that tries the voluntary stamp idea watches it fail. Last month AZGFD launched a Conservation Membership plan at 2 tiers...$35 per year and $100 per year. You get an online newsletter, a calendar, and monthly print magazine not geared towards hunting. They've sold 4 memberships in 3 weeks. AZGFD has had for several years a program that costs $25 per year called "I support wildlife." With that you get exclusive enhanced access to their online RAA maps, sneak peeks at stocking reports, a subscription to the Az wildlife views magazine, and a window decal. Not a lot of incentive, but it's something. They have around 1,000 memberships. That's out of 200,000 hunting licenses sold every year. Tremendous success in voluntary funding options I'd say. 🙄. So when folks say they'll voluntarily buy a stamp that gives them nothing in return, I call bullshit... history shows they won't.  Because right now they won't even buy a $25 membership that actually does have a "what's in it for me." Hunters have to be incentivized to spend more. A super bonus point fills that requirement.

5.  This isn't a sneak attack to benefit the rich or cater to the elite. This is crowd-funding for a purpose. And it's been well documented over the last year how this has come to pass. It's already gone thru all the public comment periods. It's followed all the state laws regarding public input and notification. It's nobody's fault but their own if they aren't paying attention to the regular emails, press releases, and calls to the public.

So once again, I apologize if I sound confrontational. I call it it being persistently persuasive. I'm nothing if not prepared to defend my position. And I won't change my mind, just like some others won't either about spending one more dime. We can agree to disagree on how my writing here sounds too. Everyone is entitled to their opinions, I'm just trying to get others to see the benefits of what's hopefully coming. Honestly, if it was up to me, we'd do all of it. Raffle tags, super points, more auction tags, put an education stamp out there, and have a huge fund raising banquet at the March Expo at Ben Avery. Just drive the revenue to get the public outreach program going. It's the best way to prevent the animal activists from taking away our hunting rights. 

[AZBIG10]

FWP uses a unique approach to provide all applicants at least one opportunity at drawing a license/permit, while still giving those individuals who have been unsuccessful in the past a chance to increase their odds of drawing a license/permit in the future. 

Hunters may only earn 1 bonus point per license year for a species special permit or license. The options are: 1) at the time of application for that species permit or license, or 2) between July 1 and September 30 if the individual did not apply for that species special permit or license. 

The bonus points can be used in future years to place the applicants name in the drawing additional times. The number of additional chances is calculated by squaring the base bonus points. Unlike a preference system, a Bonus Points system does not guarantee a license/permit to the applicants with the most bonus points and first-time applicants still have a chance to draw a license/permit. Any bonus points accumulated will not be lost unless the individual draws the species they applied their bonus points to. 

• Bonus points essentially offer you additional drawing chances and are used for the first hunting district choice only.
• Existing bonus points will be mathematically “squared” prior to the drawing. That means if you already have 3 “base” bonus points those will be “squared” and you’ll then have 9 bonus points going into the drawing.
• If you wish to participate in the Bonus Point program for licenses/ permits, at the time of your application, you must check “YES” on the Bonus Point questions and include the $20 (nonresident) or $2 (resident) Bonus Point fee per permit type. Then if you’re unsuccessful, you’ll be awarded an additional base bonus point for next year’s drawing.
• If you did not apply for a license or permit you can purchase a bonus point for that license or permit from July 1st through September 30th. The fee to purchase a bonus point without applying is $15 per species for residents and the nonresident fees are $25 per species except for Moose, Sheep, and Goat which are $75 per species.  Note: You cannot apply and purchase bonus points in the same year.
• Any bonus points accumulated will not be lost unless the individual draws their first choice on the species they applied their bonus points. 

Check Drawing Statistics to see how Bonus Points affect your chances.

Here’s a no-frills guide to navigating the black timber of nonresident tag applications 

You want to hunt elk. I know you do. But let’s say your state doesn’t have elk. Of maybe it doesn’t have tags you’re likely to draw in this lifetime. Or maybe you just want to hunt some different scenery. Then you’re going to need to learn about tags: how to apply and how to draw. For us do-it-yourself, public-land hunters, applying for tags outside our home state can sometimes be as pleasant as sitting on a hornet’s nest. But I’m here to help. 

As a guy who now hunts a good five months of the year for fun and for my TV show, I’ve been forced to learn to navigate the sometimes maddening blowdown of state regs. I’ll walk you through the process. The crux decision is what kind of elk hunt do you want? The answer will lead you to where you want to hunt, and how to apply to hunt. Don’t put this off. Deadlines loom.

Most western states manage certain areas for unlimited or liberal hunting opportunity and other areas for big, trophy bulls. It’s classic quantity versus quality. You need to decide if you simply want the best chance to draw a tag, or if you want the best chance at a really big bull. 

States such as Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah limit their tags in most areas, and so typically produce far more mature bulls. Your odds of drawing a quality tag in those states are not good the first few times you apply.  Of course simply pulling a tag never guarantees a trophy.  But your odds of seeing one or more big, old bulls are very good.

At the same time, if you just want to hunt elk and aren’t worried about the record books, Colorado and Idaho are your best states for a tag. The increased opportunity often comes at a price, though. In many units, you’re more likely to see other hunters and less likely to see big bulls. You may be hard pressed just to find a legal bull. Yet do not think for a minute that trophies are absent in these areas. Every year, record-book bulls are taken on the general rifle elk hunts in both Montana and Wyoming, and Colorado and Idaho as well. 

There are certainly other opportunities out there, but as a public-land hunter, I primarily look to Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, Idaho, Utah, New Mexico and Arizona. Canada offers some amazing elk hunting, but nonresidents are required to have a guide, so I don’t apply there. There are a number of up and coming elk states such as Arkansas and Oklahoma, but much of that hunting is private-land hunting for a fee. Kentucky and Pennsylvania now offer nonresident tags with some great public-land hunting, but you better have your lucky horseshoe if applying there.

 

The Point Game
You want to hunt elk this year, so you need a good strategy to increase the odds that you will get a tag.  You need to know how to play the point game. Most western states have some sort of program that awards you better future drawing odds for each year you are unsuccessful in their drawing lottery. The programs fall into one of two categories—preference points or bonus points. Idaho and New Mexico are the only states that do not accrue any benefit to unsuccessful applicants. 

Simply put, a preference point system awards the tags to the applicant with the most points. A preference point is earned each year you strike out and don’t draw. If you have 10 points, you will be awarded a tag before any applicants with nine points or less. After all people with 10 points are awarded a tag, then tags will be awarded to those with nine points, continuing down the point ladder until the tags are gone. 

Preference points benefit those who have been in the point game the longest. This system offers the closest thing you can get to a guarantee that you will eventually draw a tag. It also lets you predict fairly reliably which year you will be hunting, as many states publish how many points it historically takes to draw a tag for your unit. (That is, unless the threshold increases every year because there are too many people with high points, which some states are struggling with now).

Bonus points should be viewed as raffle tickets. For each point you have, you get an additional “raffle ticket.” If you have eight bonus points, you have eight random numbers assigned to you, making your drawing odds eight times greater than the neophyte applicant with no bonus points.

The beauty of a bonus point system is that even if you have no bonus points, you have a statistical chance of drawing in any year. A state like Nevada squares your bonus points. So, if you have five bonus points, you are awarded 25 random numbers, plus the current year application, giving you 26 random numbers.
Some states issue only a portion of their tags based on the point system, allowing the rest to be drawn based on random application, without regard for points. Wyoming issues 75 percent of their nonresident tags based on preference points; the remainder are strictly random luck-of-the-draw.

Nearly every state charges a non-refundable application fee, typically around $20, and many require all license fees up front. When you don’t draw they refund most or all of it. But be sure to read the regs carefully and know the limits on your credit card.

 

Long Shots, Good Bets & Sure Things
Learning how each state operates its point program and working them to your advantage is one of the best ways to make sure you hunt elk every year. Here’s my strategy: I start in January when three of my states have a deadline near: Wyoming is January 31, while Arizona is due in February and Utah on March 1. All three now accept online applications. If you submit a paper application, allow ample time for mailing, as many states use the date it was received, not the date it was mailed.

Given the difficult odds in Utah and Arizona, I use them as my long-shot options. I look to Wyoming as my best chance for a good hunt. Wyoming has lots of elk in the western half of the state, and fortunately, that is where most of the public land lies. I will apply for the general tag in Wyoming. That tag gives me some really good units to hunt—not the best units, but every year, huge bulls are shot on that tag, and the odds of drawing are good. Best of all, I will know my results by the end of February, before I must apply in Montana, New Mexico, Colorado or Nevada.

If I draw in Wyoming, I can apply only for points in those remaining states, knowing those points will be helpful for future years. Since I have already applied in Arizona and Utah, I hope to buck the odds and draw one of those “miracle tags,” though it is highly unlikely. 

After all the drawings are done, if I find myself without a tag, Colorado has many units that allow me to purchase a tag over-the-counter. I’ve done this the past two seasons and had great hunts. Barring some windfall of long-odds tags, I’ll most likely do it again this year. Any way you shake it, I know I’m going to be hunting elk somewhere every fall. And you should be, too.

 

[Flatlander]

Huh?

[bassinix]

2 minutes ago, Flatlander said:

Huh?

Yeah, kinda "topic unrelated" 

[bassinix]

5 hours ago, Ringer said:

Bassinix are you that Redpecker guy that was trying to help Pete's group get tags to sell last year? Did we meet at the BPS meeting during that MDF meeting?

LOL! Leave my pecker put of this! But no, I've never been to an MDF meeting at Bass Pro Shop. 

[bassinix]

3 hours ago, jim said:

I would not have posted my statement if you would have came on here explaining your end with out calling out members of this site. Every time this issue comes up you or another of your group sit an instantly tell anyone posting on here they are wrong and you are right and it gets old. With more of your explanations and the research your group has done was posted on here in a non confrontational manor you could probably sell the idea better. I for one like the point idea but in reality it is only going to get money from the top 2 or 3 point holders hoping to get in the bonus pass. It will be interesting to see how much money it actually raises.

If you took offense to my "tag grabber" meme, sorry. That wasn't calling anyone out specifically. I just find it funny how the same rumors and lies get spread. So I poke a little fun at it. 

[idgaf]

An extra bonus point is like buying an extra lottery ticket for the power ball, will  it change the percentages, slightly yes, but it is a better option than giving a 1000 plus tag to the political hunting dignitaries in the name of propaganda. 

It has been explained to me in detail by the dignitaries how the raffle money, auction money and the like is used  and who allocates it.  Lets keep them from getting more tags.  

Is marketing needed, probably not, but its a hot button topic right now so an extra bonus point would be an acceptable compromise that would increase 'marketing funds' and the long term effects would be minimal.

 

[bassinix]

4 hours ago, idgaf said:

An extra bonus point is like buying an extra lottery ticket for the power ball, will  it change the percentages, slightly yes, but it is a better option than giving a 1000 plus tag to the political hunting dignitaries in the name of propaganda. 

It has been explained to me in detail by the dignitaries how the raffle money, auction money and the like is used  and who allocates it.  Lets keep them from getting more tags.  

Is marketing needed, probably not, but its a hot button topic right now so an extra bonus point would be an acceptable compromise that would increase 'marketing funds' and the long term effects would be minimal.

 

I'll agree the super point benefits anyone who wants to buy it, although probably only by small percentage points. Not sure where you come up with 1,000 tag number, or that they're given to "political hunting dignitaries." That was never the plan. It was 100 to 150 tags for a public auction open to anyone. Perhaps a few of those tags would go for high dollar auction, but raffles would probably garner more revenue than an auction. And those details never got hammered out before the whole idea hit the cutting room floor several months ago. As far as if there's really marketing needed, the answer to that is absolutely yes. Animal rights groups are going to city hall meetings in every small town they can right now to shut down "killing contests." They want to ban all predator hunting. They'll start by making the coyote calling contests illegal first. This is happening every week across AZ. And they're winning. Why? Because the general non-hunting public doesn't understand that AZGFD already has the predator hunting and population control handled. The balance (although not balanced enough in most of our eyes) is there because of the current predator hunting climate already in place. That includes the coyote calling competitions. It ain't broke, don't try to fix it. That's why this outreach plan is important. We have to show the science behind it, and thst allowing hunters to have their traditions, is more important than the emotional pleas from animal activists.

And I'll tell you this, the predator hunters are their own worst enemies. The more they post dead coyotes and ugly bloody head shots, the more the activists come for them. Especially when they taunt by posting those pictures on the activists' websites and social media pages. 

[idgaf]

1 minute ago, bassinix said:

Tli agree the super point benefits anyone who wants to buy it, although probably only small percentage points. Not sure where you come up with 1,000 tag number, or that they're given to "political hunting dignitaries." That was never the plan. It was 100 to 150 tags for a public auction open to anyone. Perhaps a few of those tags would go for high dollar auction, but raffles would probably garner more revenue than an auction. And those details never got hammered out before the whole idea hit the cutting room floor several months ago. As far as if there's really marketing needed, the answer to that is absolutely yes. Animal rights groups are going to city hall meetings in every small town they can right now to shut down "killing contests." They want to ban all predator hunting. They'll start by making the coyote calling contests illegal first. This is happening every week across AZ. And they're winning. Why? Because the general non-hunting public doesn't understand that AZGFD already has the predator hunting and population control handled. The balance (although not balanced enough in most of our eyes) is there because of the current predator hunting climate already in place. That includes the coyote calling competitions. It ain't broke, don't try to fix it. That's why this outreach plan is important. We have to show the science behind it, and thst allowing hunters to have their traditions, is more important than the emotional pleas from animal activists.

And I'll tell you this, the predator hunters are their own worst enemies. The more they post dead coyotes and ugly bloody head shots, the more the activists come for them. Especially when they taunt by posting those pictures on the activists' websites and social media pages. 

I went to the meetings, I am sure I have video somewhere of the dignitaries  saying 1000 tags.  I would love to see the raw survey data of pubic opinion on hunting that justifies your statements.  if we are talking in generalities small town america (sedona/verde valley may be the exception) love hunting its the cities that are an issue.  

Judging by market trends, hunting permits that went under-subscribe a couple of years ago now are taken before the second portion (3-4-5) part of the draw.  Javelina permits are long gone as we discuss this for units that had left overs weeks after the hunt started . Indicating an upturn an hunter interest.  

Do we need to change legislation and procedure because a few predator callers do not show a little more restraint on how they post a picture?  Taking permits away from the general draw or ignoring the science that goes into tag allocation by throwing   100-1000 extra tags out there.  Probably not.

Although I consider Marketing funding an accessory not a necessity,   A Super bonus point compared to the 'taking tags option' as acceptable.  

 

[stanley]

Given the alternative options that have been floated out there to raise the money for public education, I'm in support of this.  Buy an extra point each year for a VERY slight additional chance or not, I get to choose.  All good, IMO!

 

 

[bassinix]

3 hours ago, idgaf said:

I went to the meetings, I am sure I have video somewhere of the dignitaries  saying 1000 tags.  I would love to see the raw survey data of pubic opinion on hunting that justifies your statements.  if we are talking in generalities small town america (sedona/verde valley may be the exception) love hunting its the cities that are an issue.  

Judging by market trends, hunting permits that went under-subscribe a couple of years ago now are taken before the second portion (3-4-5) part of the draw.  Javelina permits are long gone as we discuss this for units that had left overs weeks after the hunt started . Indicating an upturn an hunter interest.  

Do we need to change legislation and procedure because a few predator callers do not show a little more restraint on how they post a picture?  Taking permits away from the general draw or ignoring the science that goes into tag allocation by throwing   100-1000 extra tags out there.  Probably not.

Although I consider Marketing funding an accessory not a necessity,   A Super bonus point compared to the 'taking tags option' as acceptable.  

 

The most tags I ever heard was Pete Cimarello on the Jay Scott podcast saying 100, maybe 150. And your use of the word "dignitaries" is just an over-exaggeration. This was never about "catering to the elite." Doesn't matter now anyhow because it's a moot point and dead proposal. My statements on the surveys are directly from the data presented at the Commission meeting yesterday. There's no need to justify it, it's public record. Period. Thanks for questioning my integrity. Whether you want to admit it or not, regardless of how pro-hunting they are, small town Arizona is under attack. Dewey-Humbolt already got bullied by HSUS to ban coyote calling contests. That town council buckled to them. Voted 4-2 to ban "coyote killing contests" within town limits. No hunters were there to defend anything. HSUS appealed to Kingman as well. There were multiple animal activists at the Commission meeting yesterday, yet only a few hunters there in total, and only one to stand up to them and counter their claims to the Commissioners. Hunters will bury their heads in the sand and deny anything is wrong until it's too late and we have to convince the public to vote for or against a ballot proposition. At that point, we've already lost. And we can't outspend these activist organizations. They have deeper pockets. Eventually, they'll win a big one. And the hunters will cry out, "How could the Game and Fish Department let this happen?" And the blame game will start, while the few of us who busted our asses in the trenches sit and hang our heads and try not to say that we told you so. And my comment on predator callers being their own worst enemies wasn't anything but exactly that. A simple statement. My opinion is that if left to them, they will be the downfall of predator hunting. Taunting is not how you get the animal activists to go away. Not suggesting any legislation against dumb gross dead dog pictures. You're just trying to be argumentative. I would just hope they'd show more restraint. Predator hunting is the avenue to end all hunting. Ban the predator hunting, the predator population booms, and then hunters won't need to hunt deer and elk anymore, the predators will keep it all in balance. I'm not going to go round and round with you over what's needed and what's not. We can agree to disagree. I feel there absolutely is a need for the public education outreach. Everyone in the AZGFD sees it as well. It works in states like Colorado where HSUS can't get any traction. Colorado is far more tree hugging liberal than Arizona. Their "Hug a Hunter" campaign resonates. So you can continue to deny a need if you'd like. Meanwhile, others are working hard to preserve hunting rights for everyone. At least you're on board with the super point. 

[idgaf]

1 hour ago, bassinix said:

The most tags I ever heard was Pete Cimarello on the Jay Scott podcast saying 100, maybe 150. And your use of the word "dignitaries" is just an over-exaggeration. This was never about "catering to the elite." Doesn't matter now anyhow because it's a moot point and dead proposal. My statements on the surveys are directly from the data presented at the Commission meeting yesterday. There's no need to justify it, it's public record. Period. Thanks for questioning my integrity. Whether you want to admit it or not, regardless of how pro-hunting they are, small town Arizona is under attack. Dewey-Humbolt already got bullied by HSUS to ban coyote calling contests. That town council buckled to them. Voted 4-2 to ban "coyote killing contests" within town limits. No hunters were there to defend anything. HSUS appealed to Kingman as well. There were multiple animal activists at the Commission meeting yesterday, yet only a few hunters there in total, and only one to stand up to them and counter their claims to the Commissioners. Hunters will bury their heads in the sand and deny anything is wrong until it's too late and we have to convince the public to vote for or against a ballot proposition. At that point, we've already lost. And we can't outspend these activist organizations. They have deeper pockets. Eventually, they'll win a big one. And the hunters will cry out, "How could the Game and Fish Department let this happen?" And the blame game will start, while the few of us who busted our asses in the trenches sit and hang our heads and try not to say that we told you so. And my comment on predator callers being their own worst enemies wasn't anything but exactly that. A simple statement. My opinion is that if left to them, they will be the downfall of predator hunting. Taunting is not how you get the animal activists to go away. Not suggesting any legislation against dumb gross dead dog pictures. You're just trying to be argumentative. I would just hope they'd show more restraint. Predator hunting is the avenue to end all hunting. Ban the predator hunting, the predator population booms, and then hunters won't need to hunt deer and elk anymore, the predators will keep it all in balance. I'm not going to go round and round with you over what's needed and what's not. We can agree to disagree. I feel there absolutely is a need for the public education outreach. Everyone in the AZGFD sees it as well. It works in states like Colorado where HSUS can't get any traction. Colorado is far more tree hugging liberal than Arizona. Their "Hug a Hunter" campaign resonates. So you can continue to deny a need if you'd like. Meanwhile, others are working hard to preserve hunting rights for everyone. At least you're on board with the super point. 

I wasn't prepared to get trolled, but I will argue with the crazy guy outside of Circle K once in awhile to keep my wits sharp especially after a couple of Sam Adams Winter Ale. 

I wasn't Referring to Jay Scott's podcast, I stopped listening to that a long time ago I am not his type of hunter.  I was referring to what the AES Guy said at the  first meeting and what Pete said in the parking lot after the second meeting.  Pete also brought up the Utah Model several times. 

Would you prefer the word luminaires?  I am asking for the source of that data not CAPAZ interpretation of it.  Who ran the survey? How many people were surveyed? what was  the demographic?  what are the geographic influences?  Etc.    

HSUS has there own problems that will deplete excess capital soon:

PER thenonprofitchronicles.com

"Last week, the Humane Society of the US announced a “reconciliation process” that is intended to heal its workplace. HSUS is inviting “anyone who may have experienced or witnessed sexual or other kinds of harassment, inappropriate workplace behaviors, a hostile work environment and/or retaliation” to share their experiences in confidential interviews with Kate Kimpel, a respected DC lawyer and advocate for women.

Aside from the language around reconciliation — it’s not the job of those who have been harassed to reconcile with those who mistreated them — this is welcome news. It’s an open-ended investigation, at last, into the widespread allegations of sexual harassment lodged against Wayne Pacelle, the former CEO of HSUS.

His behavior, it appears, enabled others to engage in inappropriate conduct and set an unhealthy tone for the organization; at least three other senior executives at HSUS have been accused of workplace misconduct affecting women in recent years.

A fish rots from the head down, as the saying goes. “Women could be preyed on for years,” said Kelly Dermody, a lawyer representing women at the animal advocacy group. By email, Dermody told me that she is pleased by this latest development: “The selection of Kate Kimpel as the outside investigator gives the whole process enormous credibility, and certainly serves my clients’ interests in advancing the mission of serving animals.”

Hunters did not show up to some of the council meetings instead of blaming hunters for that: look within, did your group send an email to people in the area saying show up? Maybe its the Hunting political leaders they do not want to follow.     Ask yourself "WHY" and "HOW do we fix it"

 

To accomplish "education"  the system doesnt need to be changed.  G&F needs to hire a savy social media advisor (100K) and get four interns even from ASU (free)

This is like the last few minutes of a Scooby Doo episode I have to know if I guess right on who you are.  Are You DON the BASS Guy on CAPAZ or Are you that Ponytailed guys wife?

 

 

[bassinix]

1 hour ago, idgaf said:

I wasn't prepared to get trolled, but I will argue with the crazy guy outside of Circle K once in awhile to keep my wits sharp especially after a couple of Sam Adams Winter Ale. 

I wasn't Referring to Jay Scott's podcast, I stopped listening to that a long time ago I am not his type of hunter.  I was referring to what the AES Guy said at the  first meeting and what Pete said in the parking lot after the second meeting.  Pete also brought up the Utah Model several times. 

Would you prefer the word luminaires?  I am asking for the source of that data not CAPAZ interpretation of it.  Who ran the survey? How many people were surveyed? what was  the demographic?  what are the geographic influences?  Etc.    

HSUS has there own problems that will deplete excess capital soon:

PER thenonprofitchronicles.com

"Last week, the Humane Society of the US announced a “reconciliation process” that is intended to heal its workplace. HSUS is inviting “anyone who may have experienced or witnessed sexual or other kinds of harassment, inappropriate workplace behaviors, a hostile work environment and/or retaliation” to share their experiences in confidential interviews with Kate Kimpel, a respected DC lawyer and advocate for women.

Aside from the language around reconciliation — it’s not the job of those who have been harassed to reconcile with those who mistreated them — this is welcome news. It’s an open-ended investigation, at last, into the widespread allegations of sexual harassment lodged against Wayne Pacelle, the former CEO of HSUS.

His behavior, it appears, enabled others to engage in inappropriate conduct and set an unhealthy tone for the organization; at least three other senior executives at HSUS have been accused of workplace misconduct affecting women in recent years.

A fish rots from the head down, as the saying goes. “Women could be preyed on for years,” said Kelly Dermody, a lawyer representing women at the animal advocacy group. By email, Dermody told me that she is pleased by this latest development: “The selection of Kate Kimpel as the outside investigator gives the whole process enormous credibility, and certainly serves my clients’ interests in advancing the mission of serving animals.”

Hunters did not show up to some of the council meetings instead of blaming hunters for that: look within, did your group send an email to people in the area saying show up? Maybe its the Hunting political leaders they do not want to follow.     Ask yourself "WHY" and "HOW do we fix it"

 

To accomplish "education"  the system doesnt need to be changed.  G&F needs to hire a savy social media advisor (100K) and get four interns even from ASU (free)

This is like the last few minutes of a Scooby Doo episode I have to know if I guess right on who you are.  Are You DON the BASS Guy on CAPAZ or Are you that Ponytailed guys wife?

 

 

I let the attack on my integrity go once, notice I never doubted or insisted that you source your bold faced lie about "1,000 tags." And truthfully, you can't source it anyhow other than to say, "well that's what I heard in a parking lot." 👍 Great bibliography there. But I'll go no further, as since you have decided to sink to insults and name-calling, I'll finish here knowing I won the conversation. Your uneducated opinions on the process are astounding. One more time, for those in the cheap seats. THE ARIZONA GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT RAN THE SURVEYS ON THEIR WEBSITE THROUGH THEIR PUBLIC OUTREACH OPEN COMMENT PERIOD! 

Outside of that, I won't suffer the opinions of fools. If you think Wayne Pacele's extracurricular activities are going to slow down the HSUS, you really don't have a clue. So enjoy the view below ground with your head stuck in the sand. Meanwhile, myself and others will save your hunting rights as well.

You can thank us later. ✌️