AZcoues_addict

Mulepacker had it right, and you misunderstood Buffett's quote - he said he pays less tax rate (or percentage) than his secretary. Not less taxes (or smaller dollar value). 2 different things commonly confused.

I had a sig kilo 2k, loved it. But the LED's in the display went out after about 4-5 years. Sig said its out of warranty, only offered a discount on buying a new unit. Total crap. Same exact thing happened to a friend, but his went out on his rifle elk hunt so he couldn't read the distance. Very bad! I loved the Sig until I realized it's a short lifetime with bad warranty. I'm not the type to buy a new rangefinder every 5 years. So I bought the Vortex ranger 1800 for the lifetime warranty over spending my money with Sig. The Vortex works for me. But I don't need it read much further than I can shoot. I can get it to read out to about 800-1000 fairly consistently. That's far enough for me, or I need to get closer. Probably good advice, and a decent unit for new young hunter.

Thanks Edge I figured as much. Just curious if it was a reg, statue, or state law, and which / where? Figured someone on here may know exactly. It's obviously good practice and should always be followed no matter the situation, but that is another discussion.

Nobody was hammered. Simply having their first when done hunting, passed with flying colors. So much for the smart a$$ comments. Thanks for contributing and assuming.

Updated above to state no driving involved. Just archery hunting. I understand you never have to submit. Just wondering if the ask for a test is beyond the regulations or not.

Can someone point me to a specific arizona regulation or statute? I searched and couldn't find anything on the topic. Maybe I glossed over it. Can you be sobriety tested when archery hunting in Az? Please keep the personal opinions to a minimum for sake of the information, no smart a$$ remarks, no it wasn't me either....Please just post the regulation or statute number, and wording or quote that is relevant please. I already know you can't discharge a firearm. But I'm talking about archery, no firearms involved. No driving involved. Thanks.

Not sure this solves anything, but it results in less hunter opportunity. The harvest is already limited, so it doesn't reduce take by much. This just means less people in the woods, and less income for AZGFD due to reduced sales. I've bought an archery tag and rifle tags for many years, but can only take 1 deer. Meaning the rifle tag is trash and a donation if I harvest during archery.

I would assume some portion of salaries are considered Program Administration. In a nutshell, that is what the department mostly does and why they were created in the first place...to administer wildlife restoration. Either way, salaries aside, he was specifically talking about gas cost, and 50k trucks. I would think those do qualify under the definition. Those are 100% "on the ground"...

The WY prices increases do seem steep IMO! Maybe AZGFD doesn't get general AZ tax money, but Pittman Robertson is general federal funding IMO, along with federal grants some years, they do have multiple sources of income...it may not be enough, but I'm just saying...

Manadartory reporting for bear/lion had already been around for quite a while. And we already had OTC bear hunts. The difference is they did away with the more limited/coveted archery bear tags in spring/summer. So less options, less opportunity in my opinion. Big BOOOO here as well...

Then you agree there is definintely a first-come first-served "line" for 20% of the tags. That was my point for Geoff, which he may not understand correclty from earlier comments I read. We are all in this "line" currently, it just changes based on how we apply each year. Not sure why others said it's lottery and no line? It's both. We are also in a random lottery (no line) for the 80% pass every year also (when we are too far back in the line for the first 20%). Personally, I'm more a fan of AZ and NV systems. Everyone has a chance, however small. NV doesn't have the game to support the demand, so preference systems won't work (similar to Az), but squaring bonus points like NV does might be a nice add to AZ system in my opinion. Instead of an linear increasing chance in the 80% pass, it would be squared. With decreasing habitat, game, drought, and more people living in the state every year - I think squaring bonus points might be good option to think about going forward.

I thought tags are guaranteed in the bonus pass once you have enough bonus points? And the only draw in the 20% bonus pass is between people "tied" at the lower bonus point levels? The only reason the stats don't show as 100% - is because the people with enough points drew their other choice (1st OR 2nd choice) in that pass - eliminating them from one of their choices. But the stats include them in both hunt numbers. So the stats are not 100% correct and somewhat misleading? At least that's how I think of it.

The difference with elk is they are all draw tags, so easier to manage. Deer has OTC combined with draw tags. My guess is they want to try and keep the deer rifle tags #'s relatively flat with only small changes in tag numbers each year (easier for budget and objective planning), while still selling as many OTC tags as possible (to optiminze budget), all while not killing too many archery deer that will drastically affect next years rifle tag numbers or buck:doe ratio negativley. And they think 20% works. Just simple management. So the OTC archery tags are cut first, since the rifle tags are more difficult to manage and plan for. In other words the OTC tags take a back-seat. They assume you will hunt another unit that is open, or not hunt at all. I don't like this idea, it's just what I've come up with, after many years of sitting glassing for archery deer, while wondering the same thing as you.

Lost PSE bow near Sunflower, at FS road 22 parking lot (posting for little brother). Was left at trailhead (trail going into Bushnell tanks). Left bow by car accidently, came back later and it was gone. Please let me know if you have any information. Thanks.

Crazy rule in my opinion, thanks for bringing this to our attention. They "should" likely refund you the difference if they really want to promote youth hunting. It doesn't make much sense to penalize a youth tag interms of $$, just because they want to also apply for adult tags at the same time? Some of those youth tags have worse odds than some adult tags...that is another reason why this rule doesn't make any sense to me. Back when tags were paid for upfront, this rule maybe was intended to charge you for the more expensive tag upfront (like the check/money order old days). But again they should have reimburse you if you drew the lesser tag. My opinion. Somewhat similar to UT and NM who have premium or high demand hunts, you pay the higher price, but get refunded if you draw the lesser tag cost.