game and fish proposals

[.270]

no wonder the azgfd is always outta money. was just reading the proposals that they want public comment on. most of it is just verbage, i guess so the lawyers can't pry things around. but there are a couple proposals that sorta worried me. one was them being able to have some control over OHV's. off highway vehicles. when did they become the highway patrol? i mean, i don't even like 4 wheelers and stuff. they're just in the way to me. won't get me where i want to go. noisy. but i don't have a real problem with folks that use em with a little responsibility. but why does the azgfd feel like they need some legislation so they can have more control over em? ain't there enough rules and reg's in the forest circus, the blm, state land dept., county laws, etc. to pretty much govern OHV's? sounds like a ploy for some other purpose that they don't wanna come right out and state, to me. the other was wanting to increase the size of crayfish nets from 24" to 30". now i'll put up with a lotta crap, but this just unsportsmanlike. ok, i'm bein' fecesious now (and feces is the root word of fecesious). why do they need an act of congress, literally, to increase the size of a net used to take an animal from the waterways that they don't want here and does more damage to our pretty fragile desert aquatic places than about anything else? why not make the net size unlimited and allow ya to use dynamite? just seems like a pretty mickey mouse thing to waste time on to me. crawdad nets. and ya know they payed some lawyer to come up with the words used in it. why? i guess if the crawdad population gets low they'll be wanting to protect them next. just last year they were trying to get everyone to do all they could to erradicate em. Lark.

[JVS]

I went to the meeting the other night regarding the proposed ceiling fee increase. I hear ya. The G&F claims to run the dept like a private business, not spending a dime on unnecessary projects or issues. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the G&F non-game branch is mostly or partly funded by license and tags fees, taxes, etc. Why do we as a hunters have to pay for non-game species monitoring and studies? Not saying non-game is bad, but I don't think hunters should have to pay for it. Also, if you look at the proposals they have for the deer tag increase...the increase cost for a resident tag is 125%! No, it gets even better...The increase for a non-res is only 75%! What is the game and fish telling us??!! First of all a slap in the face 125% increase, and then only increase the non-res deer tags 75%. If an increase happens at all, it should be equal, if not skewed to make the non-res pay more. If we want to let the Game and Fish know what we want as hunters, we need to join local sporstmans clubs and voice our opinions through an organized club. They pull more weight than you might think. Let them know that an average of 75% tag cost increase across the board for big game tags is WAY too high...unless you agree of course. What ever floats your boat. Let them know we are not going to pay for programs not directly related to "hunting and or fishing". Let other Bureaus or Depts pick up the bill. Let the Feds pick up the bill. They spend bazillions of dollars on some of the dumbest things anyway. Hunters and fishermen should not be singled out and forced to pay for programs not related specifically to hunting and fishing. Those are just two examples of hundreds that we can come up with to show the game and fish the alternatives to high tag fees. Unless we give them alternatives, we will pay big bucks for our tags, and guess what...another increase is due in 5 years.

[az4life]

Well, it shows the apathy of most sportsmen. Generally we are all trying to follow the rules, and whatever the AZGFD changes them to, we will comply. Grumble a bit and we get told to be involved more so you don't miss input on the things that affect you.

I think the AZGFD is like any other company or agency and has their own agenda being driven from the top. People in the Drivers seat push the Fee increases paying for new verbage and requirements on Crawdad nets and additional funding of studies with questionable value. these are all on the "accessory list" and the people in the driver's seat want them, so we have to pay for them.

Not enough oversight and we all pay for it in more than just the tag fee.

 

It seriously looks like the commission is trying to cater to non residents more, maybe to keep out of court. Anyway, I said months ago, this could be the beginning of the end. A traditional way of life for sportsmen is definitely changing in AZ. Sad part is, where else is there to go?