salt and feed no more in 2009

[bobbyo]

REpost from different thread.

QUOTE (azgfd @ Dec 2 2008, 06:09 PM)

Good Afternoon,

 

The below table shows the white-tailed deer harvest in game management unit 22 from 2001 to 2007. You will see the reported archery harvest increased until in 2006 more white-tailed deer were taken during the archery season than during the general firearms hunt.

 

GAME MANAGEMENT UNIT 22 WHITE-TAILED DEER HARVEST

 

Year Archery Harvest General Harvest Total Archery % of Total Harvest

2001 25 139 164 15%

2002 47 129 176 27%

2003 47 155 202 23%

2004 27 129 156 17%

2005 67 117 184 36%

2006 97 96 193 50%

2007 53 158 211 25%

 

 

 

Ron Day

Small Game, Predator and Furbearer Biologist

Arizona Game and Fish Department

 

 

 

Man you guys are well behaved today! Hopefully we keep this civil. Now let me add my gripes.

 

1. Why is it such a crime to have bowhunting harvest exceed rifle harvest. Why is there a cap only on bowhunting harvest. If you know what the bow harvest is through mandatory reporting just reduce the rifle tags. I know, what a crazy idea, rifle hunters are what we are managing game for and the archery guys are the ugly step child that needs more rules and regulations. Archery hunters seem to be a terrible nuisance to game and fish.

 

2. Unit 22 north is a perfect example of where bow hunting can be as effective as rifle hunting. The thick cover, lack of glassability make it a hard hunt for a limited rifle season. Unit 22 south is more suitable to rifle hunting tactics. I will bet a large amount of money that if 22 were split into north and south for deer like the Elk hunt that there is no way that archers could come close to the rifle hunters harvest numbers in the southern unit. Likewise even if baiting is banned archers are going to harvest close to the same percentage as rifle hunters in the north. Unit 22 archery success is terrain and enviornment driven. So when archers come up with a tactic that may slightly increase their already long odds of actually harvesting an animal a meeting must be called.

 

3. As you can tell I feel their is a bias against archery hunting. I know, we hunters have to stick together and support one another blah blah blah, but as i stated in other posts this proposed rule is not about harvest numbers. It is not about CWD. Its not about fair chase. It is not about success on little deer. Its not even about the anti-hunters. The real reason???? The huge trophy's archers have been shooting over salt. Deep down you know it is true. This rule is jealousy pure and simple. Look at the number of 120+++" inch bucks taken and pictured very nicely during the early bow season on this very site. Look at the nice, but yet, don't quite measure up rifle deer taken this year. Its easy, to see that it is time to make a new regulation to stop the archers from stealing all the rifle hunters trophy deer.

 

Bob

[dobbs07]

I have a couple of quick points:

 

>First off i would like to know why these meetings to obtain public input always seem to be held during the day, and during the work week, when a vast majority of the hunting population is unable to attend do to their jobs?

 

>Secondly why wasn't the public made more aware about this potential rule change, and upcoming meeting to discuss it? I've received emails and notification for much less concerning issues.

 

>Also why is it that the department feels the need to go after the archers? Do you not see that the rifle is a far more successful weapon, and that if you reduced the number of rifle permits, and more opportunity for archery, then wouldn't you be able to have more people in the field as the harvest would be much lower? And thats the name of the game for the commission these days isnt it? Increasing hunter opportunity?

 

>Has the department considered the fact that as a general rule of thumb most hunters sitting over salt/bait, have the opportunity to pass numerous immature animals that might otherwise be harvested, and take a more mature animal that may be nearing the end of it's life expectatncy, potentially leading to a heathier overall population of animals?

 

> Mr. Day, can you or someone else please explain to me why it is necessary to put a cap or certain percentage of harvest on the archers? When you cannot possibly know exactly how many animals are harvested in the rifle hunts? Im sure you have estimates, but without mandatory reporting for everyone, how in the world can you get an accurate picture of what the actual harvest is?

 

How bout this, when you get more, and better number that truly reflect what is going on with the deer harvest in this state, by both archers and rifle hunters. Also please obtain more statistics on how many deer were actually harvested with the assistance of salt/bait. Also be sure to obtain information on how many people are harvesting game while sitting over a water source. Then you can come back to us with your numbers and we will calmly discuss options. Until then please do not try to create b.s. rules that everyone knows will be nearly impossible to enforce, and cram them down the throats of the arizona hunting community.

 

I've gotta be honest with you sir. I used to be a proud hunter in the state of Arizona. Proud of the quality of hunting in this state, proud of the trophy class animals we produced year after year, and most of all proud of the job the Arizona Game and Fish Department was doing to ensure that this would be the case for years to come. These days I find myself speaking out against the department more and more, and becoming less and less proud of hunting in my state, and the department that manages it.

[JMP]

i was actually really surprised he posted those numbers as a way to justify this new rule, any high school junior that has done statistics sees right through them. i truly believe that most of the game officers are good at heart, underpaid and overworked, but with the way these numbers were thrown on here, it makes me wonder if he just didn't understand them, and took them at face value, or worse. At least in justifying the new November hunt structures, and increase in permits in units like 33, they had good(ish) statistics.

 

I was encouraged to see everyone here tear through the harvest data the officer posted, and brought up many objections to the rule and the justification for the rule that, most of which i hadn't thought of.

 

Jay

[JMP]

one other thing... wasn't 2006 a year of extreme drought through the winter? wouldn't that suggest that archers sitting water would be more likely to see animals, since the number of water sources was limited?

[bowsniper]

All you evil bowhunters who kill, PLEASE PLEASE be sure to put down the CORRECT unit you kill in so Mr. Day and statistics "experts" at G&F can come up with more bogus data to promote their underLYING agenda. You certainly would not want to put down the wrong unit, say some unit with a very low success rate. Why, that might actually make the mandatory archery reporting success rates as suspect as the voluntary reporting kill statistics. If that happened, how could G&F keep comparing apples to oranges?

 

Mark

[Guest 300ultramag.]

this thread makes me giggle.......what a joke seriously he he

 

ive hunted on a lick for 5 seasons and havent harvested 1 deer yet!

 

I kill everytime i get drawn for Rifle! he he lol this is too funny.

 

 

 

 

[Guest 300ultramag.]

this thread makes me giggle.......what a joke seriously he he

 

ive hunted on a lick for 5 seasons and havent harvested 1 deer yet!

 

I kill everytime i get drawn for Rifle! he he lol this is too funny.

 

 

 

he he ha ha

[Guest 300ultramag.]

I have a question?

 

 

Why is it that the unit 27 elk tags didnt come with a CWD pamphlet.

 

but the unit 27 deer did. AZGFD

[swede]

I have a question?

 

 

Why is it that the unit 27 elk tags didnt come with a CWD pamphlet.

 

but the unit 27 deer did. AZGFD

 

"I think us hunters need to take a strong stand on what we believe in and I'm sick and tired of attending meetings with the comission that will not listen to the public. Where would the department be with out us hunters that spend our hard earned money hunting in AZ??? I wish that every resident and nonresident hunter in the AZ hunt pool would come together and boycot buying and licenses or tags for 2 years in the state and maybe then with all that money lost the AZGFD would listen to what we have to say."

 

I agree with coueskiller! I would be willing to give up hunting for one or two years if we could get a commitment from the majority of the hunting community and hunting forums online may just be the way to do it. You know the saying "money talks" and it talks both ways!

I am not so much set against the salt and feed ban but I am sick and tired of the management practices that have been well put forth in this thread. The new game and Fish office could just as well been built in Washington because that is just how tall the 'GLASS TOWER" has become with the AZG&F!

[jim]

I think they should ban the big glass for hunting as I would bet alot more deer hit the dirt with the aid of bino's than all the salt in the state. In almost every post it start's with we/I glassed up this buck and started to move in on him. By the way just joking about banning the bino's. This rule will be virtually impossible to enforce there are ridges in 27 that a deer can not move and not be moving towards a salt lick.

[eagarcoues]

I think Jim is right he has taken me all over those ridges and I think between the ranchers and the hunters and natural licks and water holes and springs you can glass a deer, bear or elk going to any of these spots in the prime time on any given day with big glass. If you cant make it that afternoon more than likely they will be there tomorrow. I think that is a big help in the % going up.

I also believe that the quality of hunter has gone up more guys are willing to put more into it. better equipment,trail cameras, scent control,bows, map sys, broad heads "2 1/2 in cutting dia." you hit them in the toe and they bleed out.

You Guys are funny here I took a buck off of bait a few years back and you guys dogged me telling me how unethical I was and how wrong it was and look at all you now. I talked to a Guide up here yesterday that took a 390 inch bull this last week end at 580 yards just another to take big game. What a shot!! and I don't shoot a rifle.

It is another way to take big game I dont want to lose any opportunity and don't take me wrong on this I love to hunt and have taken game every way their is almost!

I know a older guy in town retired 72 years old and it is a hobby to him and this will kill him if they take this away. He has the best pictures and he has shown me so much in reading sign, scent control and the wind he has put thousands of dollars into his stands and he has taken a deer or so it is awesome all the game that has came through while we have been in the stand.

I try to make the meetings up here and I have spoken up on this more than a few times and have spoken to the WLM on this they told me that is was coming.

Please guys fight a good fight I leave in a month or so for a year and I would like to be able to hunt when I get home.

[bowsniper]

Guys,

 

According to a source at G&F, as of this morning (Thursday), they had only received 10 emails/phone calls about the baiting issue. 8 were in favor of the ban, 2 were against. We definitely need more calls/emails into G&F voicing opposition against the new rule before tomorrow morning. Please drop everything and call or email Celeste Cook 623-236-7390 ccook@azgfd.gov and voice your opposition. The commissioners will considering this input tomorrow when they decide whether or not to proceed on the new rule. Please do it now!!

 

Sorry for the duplicate post, this topic has really gotten scattered around several threads.

 

Mark

 

[tjhunt2]

Guys,

 

According to a source at G&F, as of this morning (Thursday), they had only received 10 emails/phone calls about the baiting issue. 8 were in favor of the ban, 2 were against. We definitely need more calls/emails into G&F voicing opposition against the new rule before tomorrow morning. Please drop everything and call or email Celeste Cook 623-236-7390 ccook@azgfd.gov and voice your opposition. The commissioners will considering this input tomorrow when they decide whether or not to proceed on the new rule. Please do it now!!

 

Sorry for the duplicate post, this topic has really gotten scattered around several threads.

 

Mark

 

I hope everyone makes a call. It only takes a few minutes of your time. Thanks!

 

TJ

 

[thequest]

I definately agree that G&F is going off the deep end as of late. First they destroy any reasonable chance of drawing a December tag while at the same time obliterating the herds by over-issuing tags for November. This of course *pushed* many hunters to start sitting treestands over salt since that was about the only way left to hunt trophy coues. Now they plan to take that away???

 

Others have hit on another really good point. If they do enact this, there will be A LOT of previously law-abiding hunters who finally decide that their own code of ethics are more palatable than a series of senseless, contradictory rules put fourth by a money hungry organization that is either trying to destroy hunting in Arizona or just doing so out of sheer incompetence.

 

 

I couldn't agree more!

[thequest]

Here's the response I got from Game and Fish regarding the email I sent opposing the proposed rule change...

 

 

Hello,

 

Thank you for your comment.

 

 

 

On Friday, the Department was given permission to begin the official rulemaking process.

 

 

 

The Department anticipates filing a Notice of Docket Opening and a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking with the Secretary of States office. The notices are published in the Arizona Administrative Register and, upon publication in the Register, the 30 day public comment period will begin.

 

 

 

If you like, I can add either your e-mail (for an e-mail notification) or your mailing address (for a postcard notification) to our notification list so that you will be notified of the proposed rulemaking. Then you may read the actual proposed amendments to the rule and comment on the proposed language.

 

 

 

Either way, this comment will be held for review by the Department.

 

 

 

Thank you again.

 

 

 

Sincerely,

 

 

 

Celeste Cook

 

 

 

 

 

Celeste Cook

 

Rules and Risk Unit

 

Arizona Game and Fish Department

 

5000 W. Carefree Highway

 

Phoenix, AZ 85086

 

Phone: (623) 236-7390

 

Fax: (623) 236-7677

 

Email: CCook@azgfd.gov

 

Website: www.azgfd.gov/inside_azgfd/rulemaking_process.shtml

 

 

 

Conserve and Protect Arizona's Wildlife and Habitat for the Future.

 

Get the latest news on Game and Fish at http://www.azgfd.gov/eservices/subscribe.shtml

 

 

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------