1uofacat

OK, back up a moment. Are you referring to NM or AZ? Is it the same for both states? I'm assuming you are referring to NM given the oil/gas lease comment and whiile living in NM gas and oil leases were "everywhere" in northern NM. I also am aware that in AZ anyone can purchase a SLD access permit, which was not very much as I recall (like $15/year?). While some do purchase a permit, I've personally never heard of anyone buying a SLD access permit in AZ. Regardless, what I was responding to was that I disagreed with a rancher, who pays as little as 10-15% of his profits/animal, having the right to tell those who hunt whether or not we have his permission to camp on state land, which he is using for profit. I'm was not talking about where the state makes their money from, although what you said was not surprising. In Arizona, hunters do not have to ask a rancher his permission if we were to camp on state BLM land. To me, that's ludicrous. I'm not a proponent of transferring fed land to state as I saw it too often in AZ growing up where the BLM would purchase/trade prime hunting habitat for checkerboard and basically useless tracks of land elsewhere and then pat themselves on the back for doing it! Who knows what other "deals" were going on when some of those discussions were taking place. As far as the policy comment, well, yes I agree that elections DO matter, a lot. I've never thought about who would enforce a policy given it's not law, which I recall was a discussion when the whole SLO starting to charge for access came up in AZ many years ago. I do recall that the AZGFD stated immediately that those who carry a valid hunting and/or fishing license have access to all AZ State BLM land.

I was in the southeast part of 8 yesterday. There has been some moisture there over the past few days, and some of the roads had standing water in them from the Friday/Saturday storms that passed through the area. Overall though some parts in the south half have still had very little rain compared to the north half. As an example, a road that is typically almost impassible at this point (due to monsoons) was basically dry. I did watch a small rain cell move right through the SE area yesterday evening online though. The good news is most of the south area is getting some rain and there is a lot of green out there unlike a month and a half ago. The tank I spoke of earlier in 8 now has a few feet of water in it too, but that's in the NE part of 8. The best news I had yesterday was seeing a pic of a bull in one of the dry areas that has what looks like 16" 3s, very massive, and still growing. His T5s were also very long (12"+) and still growing. It wasn't my camera so I don't have the pic, but was shown the pic by the camera owner. Still could use a lot more rain though...

Well, among others, I too one disagree with you. The law they proposed wasn't based on any facts, study, or trying to learn from other states that made the same mistake (namely Montana). It was clear to me that this proposed law was more like a "Knee-jerk" reaction to isolated cases. I'm glad the commission saw through this. Should there be changes? I think so... but an all-out ban to 1/4 mile from any developed water source? To me, that's as ridiculous as what adicted said he did in this thread!

While true remember that if you choose to camp on State Land you have to have permission from the lands lesee (usually this would be the rancher leasing the land for his cattle). Am I alone here feeling about how that sounds? That seems so wrong to me... a rancher pays a fee to the state to let his cattle graze on "my grass" so he can sell me his cattle/beef (indirectly), and I have to ask him permission? That's total BS! I'm glad I moved out of NM years ago and back to AZ. But it's not the public's grass, it is the state's grass. State trust land is not public land. Who owns the grass is not the point. The state is the agency/body that manages the resources be those animals, other recreation opportunities, range grass, what have you. In Arizona since I have a hunting license I have rights to access all Arizona BLM land, by law, as I too "pay a fee" to "use the land who's 'resources' are managed by the State. Why should any hunter have to ask a rancher permission to camp on state land? What if a rancher says no? Ranchers are in it for their own profit. Ranchers don't manage the land, they just use it and often times abuse it. In NM, it costs about $6/mo for a cow/calf pair to graze on state land. If it takes 2 years for a calf to grow to "mature/market" status, for about $200 in grazing costs (2-3/4 years fee) you can have a cow get pregnant, have a calf, let it mature, then sell it after it's 2 years old. Aren't full-grown cattle work $1500 - $2,000? You do the math... of course there's other costs, but bottom line is not about the work or profit to ranchers or the state, but this is about our access/land use rights. How often do we see over-grazed lands in our pursuits in the field? While every rancher is different and some actually do care, my opinion is that most don't care about overgrazing other than how overgrazing affects profits. While I agree to a point that state trust land is not simply "public land", I disagree with you if you are suggesting that a hunting license does not provide additional rights to use for the lawful pursuit/use, or that a rancher has more rights than I do in this case. Besides, where does the agency that manages state land get their $s from? I'm guessing that mostly their $s come from residents and taxes. As a resident of any state we inherently pay taxes. For those of us who who hunt we pay more than those who do not and probably why AZ agreed that having a valid hunting license affords hunting license holders access to AZ BLM land. IMHO, giving ranchers (businessmen) the right to deny a hunter a camping location is wrong, period! Besides, we don't typically want to camp where there's a lot of cattle around, or have them walk by/through our camp crapping all over. I really don't see any point to that law/requirement as it only gives a rancher the right to deny a lawful hunter his rights. I've often moved camp or camped elsewhere because of the cattle in an area. To me, that's a totally BS law that should be removed. Just because that is a law doesn't mean it's a good law either. my 3 cents worth...

pretty good rain and thunderstorm rolling through 6A right now... too bad it isn't in the southern part of 8!

While true remember that if you choose to camp on State Land you have to have permission from the land’s lesee (usually this would be the rancher leasing the land for his cattle). Am I alone here feeling about how that sounds? That seems so wrong to me... a rancher pays a fee to the state to let his cattle graze on "my grass" so he can sell me his cattle/beef (indirectly), and I have to ask him permission? That's total BS! I'm glad I moved out of NM years ago and back to AZ.

Well said. I'm a firm believer in "getting what you pay for." Having said that however, the "good enough" comment was key here for me when I picked up the Badlands. Let me clarify why I like the 2200 and don't need something like a Kifaru. The Badlands 2200 pack, when I picked it up 10 years ago, was about half-off the regular price, and given I only needed a "day pack", it was what I needed at the time. After using if for a cpl years, I realized it was worth full-price as I really like the features, size, and material the old 2200s had on them (quiet when brushing up against something). For carrying a lot of weight I have different choices however. For starters, I have an "old" Gerry internal frame pack, purchased almost 40 years ago, which is still very comfortable, & zippers still work good too! Note I've carried an extreme amount of weight in the Gerry over the years with as much "adjustability and comfort" that one could reasonably expect (carrying in excess of 150# at one time on one hunt). I also use an external packframe (welded Kelty) for packing out as it's easy to strap things on (I installed a "shelf" on it) yet still relatively comfortable. Note I started doing this in the late 70s, and Kelty/Gerry were the best to meet hunting/backpacking needs IMO at the time. North Face back then was primarily backpacking and not as easily adaptable to hunting needs. Whatever you do, rest assured that you're going to get what you pay for. With the three packs that I have, I don't need a single do-all pack however. Funny, now that I think about it, I've spent more $s on my 3 backpacks combined as I'd spend nowadays on one Kifaru or Stone Glacier backpack! So, in the end... either buy a few packs to meet different uses/needs, one great pack to meet all your needs, or hunt with others that have great backpacks and let them carry all the weight when you kill something! You may have to listen to them brag, but that'd probably be worth it! haha

Clearly, to each his own, whether you carry a full backpack or just a knife in your pocket, but I carry a mid-sized hunting backpack anticipating needing/wanting everything in it, or not wanting to be out in the woods w/out it. Like Recurve"dude" I too have a badlands 2200, however mine is the original/old style (unlike those we see for sale today). I really like it for day hunts, but I typically carry enough to stay out the entire day if my morning's "escapades" have taken me far enough away from the truck that it makes sense to stay put for the evening hunt. That said, I also carry just enough to stay the night if an emergency/tracking etc. takes me there, which it has several times... and having the right stuff to bivy a night in the forest is cool! & it doesn't have to weigh that much either. So, here's my list: tag/license/driver license in it's own "orange" separate pouch as I do not carry a wallet phone (on "airplane mode") compass GPS Garmin Inreach (I finally picked one up because I'm usually not in cell service range where I hunt) "blood-trailing" flashlight and small headlamp, perhaps extra batteries matches/lighter knife and small steel plastic gloves TP (don't leave your truck without it!) first aid "stuff" water (2L CamelBak, plus a small water bottle). I also "hydrate" before I leave the truck, especially in the morning. For an evening hunt I may not refill the CamelBak and often pull the water bottle out. a lunch (i.e. bagel/ham sandwich perhaps, fruit, granola bar-type stuff, chips or something salty, and an "evening snack" that typically stays there for days) small 5x5 "tarp" and/or lightweight rain jacket, but only if weather is predicted some rope, perhaps 10-20' one large deer-sized game bag to help w/hanging quarters (weighs basically nothing, but is a huge help,,,,,, 2 large (hefty 6mil) trash bags (can be used for many things) flagging tape This may look like a lot, but it's actually lighter than my bow & arrows when you remove the water and food "stuff", which is depleted as the day wears on. The 2200 leaves a lot of room for clothes I shed as it gets warmer outside, plus you can carry out backstraps etc. with all of the rest when you're out for the day. I didn't include my calls, small binocks, rangefinder, or bow etc., but that goes w/out saying and I carry that on me outside of my pack. Few other minor things too... Back in my "kill bag", next to my external frame pack, I keep more rope, a small come-along and heavy duty game bags (cotton/canvas style), another knife, bone saw, and a cpl cheesecloth-type game bags (used/washed from previous years). The champagne is on ice along with bacon for the elk steaks back in the trailer! This is what works for myself, but to each his own.

Now see, I read it entirely differently... Since he was "deprived" of a traditional tag in the draw, it naturally become his "deprivation" tag! (& yes I'm bored...)

Tree stands are a lot of work. It takes some specific gear to set one up safely, can take hours to set one up depending on the area, and you need to find the right tree. Once you set one up it's generally there for the hunt given the amount of work to set it up in the first place. The best manufactured treestands aren't cheap either, so that's why I make my own. It's easy to just order ground blinds which takes only a couple minutes to set up, and you can move them wherever you want to at a moments notice. The last two elk I've taken were from treestands including a P&Y bull in my avatar from about 12 yards who never knew I was there (bulls were not talking much as it was a "hot" September that year). While portable blinds can be the "lazy man's" way of hunting, they have advantages such as the ability to move around in them w/out the fear of being seen, having two people in them relatively comfortably such as taking your wife or kids hunting and getting them real close to animals, not having to climb a tree in the dark, not worrying about falling out of a treestand, being able to take a nap if you want, some protection from the elements, and of course ease of use/setup/take-down etc. It's certainly a whole lot cheaper for my treestands as mine only cost me about $25 of steel to fabricate one (I am a welder too), whereas the most effective portable blinds cost several hundred dollars each (great material, construction, etc.). My family and I have several of the original Double-Bull blinds before they sold out to Primos, which are the best I've personally seen. There's other good portable blinds, but none I have seen that I like more then the original Double Bull Blinds. I think the rancher you mentioned was a very isolated case that probably happened once, and IMO he over-reacted. For all we know, he cut the treestand down, or made the whole thing up because he's had bad encounters with hunters. I've never seen treestands just taken down and tossed aside, nor have I ever heard of that before your post. What's (probably) more true to life is other hunters taking treestands that they feel are "abandoned" to use themselves elsewhere. 10 years ago in 5BN I found a treestand which was still fastened to a tree that had died, split, and fallen over destroying the treestand. The strap anchoring it was dry-rotted indicating it was there for many years. I was in that exact area the previous 2 years hunting elk and never noticed the treestand before convinced I walked right by/under that tree many times. That year an elk was taken by our group within 30 yards of where that treestand was too,,, it was by a "very good" trail no doubt. I have several treestands, and actually have had one set up for years on a good trail, but it's relatively hidden so I doubt anyone, other than those of us who use it, know its even there. We put up our treestands a week before season, then and take them down at the end, or right after the end of the season (w/in a week or so). Note that we generally don't put up treestands adjacent to tanks as it's too easy for someone else to "screw it up" for us, whether it inadvertently done or on purpose. We place treestands on trails and use them based on current use, which seems to change a lot during season with pressure. That's why we usually have several set up, not just one or two. Oh, and most importantly, we use cameras to identify current use, what time of day, and what animals are using the trails. We typically put out cameras a month or more before season and "hide them" as best we can so unless a hunter is looking for cameras they won't be seen. That said, we've never had a camera stolen. We also use lock boxes on most of them, so that at least makes us feel safer about camera thieves anyway.

I drew a rifle Valle Vidal bull tag back in the mid-90s... that was a truly awesome hunt! Hit the weather/elk perfect that year, but the poor archers that September had a tough time of it as the bulls had only started to bugle some. By the time our season came around (early October as I recall), the bulls were in a full-out rut! I took an average 6x the first morning after chasing/being between 4 separate herds all morning... it was AWESOME! Some of the most beautiful elk habitat/country I've ever had the privilege to hunt too.

What is wrong with you??? You are making us who have tags in September wanting to go out now! STOP IT! haha... seriously though, Congrats!

BTW, was wondering if you lost the camera that took this pic...? http://www.coueswhitetail.com/forums/topic/80019-the-trail-cam-celebration/?do=findComment&comment=797295

In unit 8, some tanks are dry that I haven't seen dry for the last 5 years, whereas others still have water. I'm not concerned about the tanks being dry so much as animals will find water. The bigger issue is probably feed overall. From what I've seen so far on my trips I'm not too concerned (for my Sept bull tag). With the monsoons finally here, my main concern now is having the ability to scout on some back roads due to the ensuing mud that will be here before we know it, if it's not already! One issue is that we are about 1/2 the annual rain/snowfall from last fall to now, so we are in a drought. That affects the largest tanks/ponds and lakes more than the small stock tanks etc. The best news is the fire danger is substantially minimized this summer, and given the 3 forest "openings" this past Wed, I'd say we're there. I can also say that the forest is "greening up" nicely even since the rain started last weekend. What tag do you have?

wow, what a read... like others here, was hoping to see pics of those caught in the act, but perhaps later. I've not had any cameras stolen, but have locked some of them, and others were not easy to get to or far off the "beaten path", so perhaps that's part of why I've been "lucky." I have had a treestand stolen however. As far as the 72 hour thing, where did that thing come from? What law is that? So, if someone parks a trailer in the woods, goes back into town for 3 days, we can take that too because it's considered "abandoned"? I'd like to hear that logic explained to a judge! Looking forward to some pics of the guilty ones!

It's reassuring to read the posts here as I don't disagree with anyone's comments. As far as "knowing where someone is if a sign is posted", that alone won't keep me out of an area, but if there's a tank in the area and I find a sign without a vehicle, the sign alone may not stop me from going in there. If I do choose to go in, I'd know I may find someone there and then need to back out/go elsewhere, or know that if nobody is there they may show up. Again, it should be First Come, First Serve... I have had one treestand stolen from 5BNorth. It was locked to the tree with a chain, 12' off the ground, w/out steps, so somebody had to work at getting it... (bastards!) They cut the lock and left the chain, but took the stand and strap I had securing it to the tree. Odd thing is it was 20 yards from a trail well off the "beaten path" 1/2 mile from any road. I hope I find it someday as I made it along with 3 others that I still use (welded construction) and it's got some unique features... that would be an "interesting" conversation if I ever did find it! One other time I was in my hunting partner's treestand hunting elk in unit 27 from which he took an elk a week earlier (great trail) & in the stand at "dark-thirty" early one morning. A quad drove in and parked about 1/4 mile away, on a CLOSED FS road. We didn't drive in to get there or set up, we hike in from an open road about a mile away and packed it in BTW. This BOZO fumbles in the dark, makes a ton of noise after parking his quad, and then I notice him heading in my general direction in the dark with his bright white flashlight waiving all around. After he turns and starts heading directly towards the treestand about 50 yards away, up a steep hill, I flash him with my flashlight while up in the treestand. His light immediately goes out, and aside from the heavy panting and wheezing, I hear him wisper... "dam*"... He then turns around, crashes back down the hill to his quad, and drives away... not being any too quiet either, and right through the area that elk should have come through to go by the stand! He was a bastard IMHO too!, but only for driving a quad on a closed road to get to a treestand where he essentially screwed it up for anyone in the area, not just myself, but for himself too. Needless to say no elk that morning.

Here's my general feeling regarding blinds archers set up before or during hunts: I've heard of individuals who set up/have blinds at several locations at the same time, and am sure it's not uncommon, especially for archery antelope Not every blind left in the field will always be occupied Just because someone sets up a blind at a tank in advance, that act alone does not give them "exclusive hunting rights" at that location As with other situations, IMO, hunting in a particular location is a "First Come-First Serve" situation, and that goes for sitting at water holes or on trails, whether or not an unoccupied blind is already there. If someone beats me to a location to hunt, then I go to another spot, and expect others to do the same thing While I don't generally leave portable blinds set up out in the field, I know some do. That said, I would not use another's portable blind if I came across one while hunting Posting a sign at a "parking location/trail head" that one intends to hunt there (in the future) falls into the same category... a posted sign on public property does not give anyone "exclusive hunting rights" to that location. Again, it comes down to, "First Come, First Serve" as far as I'm concerned. If someone posts a sign at a "parking location" that they are already at a tank, and a vehicle is there, then I'll go to another location as they were there "first"... I'm interested in other's opinions on the topic

Personally, I think you should only scout on the ranch as I won't be spending the cash and would rather you hunt there as opposed to public land! Also, if you would please, when you see good bucks, try something new and unexpected... walking straight at them when you have public land right behind them. It will confuse them so much that they will just stand there and let you walk up to within good bow range as nobody ever does it! ...& if by some odd chance it doesn't work for you on any given day, it may help others so it's a win-win! All kidding aside, best of luck!

I had a 4 level laminectomy in early Feb, '11. It went well, but was a long recovery (12 weeks out of work). I also followed doc's orders and by September was able to chase elk with a bow in a very limited fashion. I didn't connect that year, but I'm sure I wouldn't have been able to carry much if I had. My back is now basically fine, and for the most part doesn't affect me much other than soreness every now and then (just as "sheep" said above, will never be the same, but for myself it was that or never walk again). My avatar pic was taken in 2010 about 4-1/2 months before the surgery and it was all I could do to carry just that much... had lots of help though. Best advice I can give is don't wait too long and stick with your surgeon's recommendations afterwards! I have a friend who had a similar surgery to what you described as needing right before I had mine and he pushed it a lot during recovery. He also actually went skiing the next fall against everyone's recommendations, said it was "OK", but he could only make one run... He basically pushed it all the time, and now only has a good day a few times a month! Therefore, don't "push it", listen to your body as everybody is different too. Best of luck!

good website Yep. I won't lie. This is going to be the year that makes me glad I gave up wildland firefighting. The Beast will be hungry this year. It's May 2, 2018 and snowing right now in Flagstaff... not much, but it is wet at least. We sure do need the moisture!

Take heed, lots of things in this. https://s3.amazonaws.com/azgfd-portal-wordpress/azgfd.wp/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/27140635/Article-3-NPRM1.pdf Among the changes are... No “live-action” trail cameras… I assume they mean those that send electronic updates etc., but not sure if this is the case. Many use images from a “live action” trail camera so what does this mean? No more trail camera use? (pg 34) They are also proposing no trail camera use w/in 1/4mile of a “developed water source.” Also, no use of drones in the aid of taking wildlife (does anyone do that?) Also a wide-scale approval of 30# bows for big game now as well as approved use of “ceramic or metal covered ceramic” cutting edges on broadheads with 7/8” cutting surface (width is same, but bison is still requiring a 40# pull). No live satellite images. Haha, wouldn't we love to have access to that? GAME AND FISH NEWS March 27, 2018 Article 3 rule changes subject of public forum, webcast Thursday Game and Fish Commission proposes to amend rules for taking, handling of wildlife PHOENIX — The Arizona Game and Fish Department will host and webcast a public forum on proposed rule changes within Article 3, “Taking and Handling of Wildlife,” at 6 p.m. Thursday at department headquarters (Quail Room), 5000 W. Carefree Highway, Phoenix. The webcast can be viewed at www.azgfd.gov/webcast. Topics of discussion will include proposed changes by the Arizona Game and Fish Commission pertaining to trail cameras, pneumatic weapons, drones and “smart” firearms, among others. Questions can be asked in-person in the department’s Quail Room, or submitted by e-mail during the forum at questions@azgfd.gov. All public comments about the proposed rulemaking will be accepted through April 15 by: E-mail: rulemaking@azgfd.gov, or jcook@azgfd.gov. U.S. Mail: Arizona Game and Fish Department, Attn.: Jay Cook, Regional Supervisor FOR6, 7200 E. University Drive, Mesa, AZ 85207. Telephone: Jay Cook, Regional Supervisor FOR6, (480) 324-3540. The final rule will be presented to the five-member commission at its May 4 meeting at the Mohave County Board of Supervisors Auditorium, 700 W. Beale St., Kingman. To track the progress of this rule, view the regulatory agenda and all previous Five-year Review Reports, and to learn about any other agency rulemaking matters, visit https://www.azgfd.com/agency/rulemaking/.

Not having the permit isn't a problem... until you want to access and can't! Just get it and be happy with your decision. Know you may not need or want to be hunting near the "outfitter turnpikes", but the fringe areas could be huge as well as not having to worry if you do need the extra access.

Either last year or the year before the NAD put archers and rifle hunters in the same area at the same time due to "activities" they said were going on reducing the overall area. It was a disaster for some archers (a friend of mine had an early archery tag). Rifle hunters fared better, and given you have a rifle tag even if that happened again, while you'd have 2X as many hunters in your "area" as you thought there would be, most would make it work. At least you have a tag and therefore a "chance" at a good hunt. I've hunted adjacent to the NAD for years in unit 8. If interested I'll share what I know... pm me.

They issued the tags I (& probably most others) thought should have been issued last week... 20 antlerless. For those 20, it's like finding a Christmas present you never knew you had!

Ha easiest fix for them. Without any repurcussions. either that, or another "draw" occurring today!