catclaw

There are some nice mulies in 10, but there are few deer period. I spent 18 days last september hunting and saw less than 10 the entire hunt. Most of what I did see was from the truck- driving to new areas. Did have 4 nice ones cross in front of me one day, the nicest of which might go 180. I wouldn't put in for 10 unless I lived in Williams or Seligman myself. I have seen more and better deer in 19 than 10.

Any of you guys been out on the spring bear hunt? I spent two days in 27 and glassed up 3 bears. I saw 70 mulies, 3 whitetails, 20 turkeys and 18 sheep. I saw upwards of 500 elk! None of the bears were shooters so I passed.

Have you not heard of snow machines??? Wow that's a lot of work for a stinking robe!

I was hiking in and over 2' of snow at times. I saw most of the elk driving in the early mornings. Saw a grouse which is the first one in 2 years for me!

You were low and I saw most of them high! I found them at 9300' still in snow! They seem to love those stupid fir thickets!

I have spent a lot of time in 8 recently and don't think it is worth 7 points for wt. I only see them sporadically and they are not wide spread. Saw lots of elk. A B&C bull on the late hunt in 8 is pretty optimistic me thinks. You better stay real low and way back in- like Sycamore or something to find a hold- out bull like that. It is soo thick that glassing is really tough.

I would have rather had a tag, but mine were sealed.

Just a few of the nightly visitors to the back yard...

Doug, according to Nosler's manual #6, a 55 grain BT will be down to 1600 at 600 yds, not 1900. This is not enough to count on reliable expansion.

I have had best luck when using copper jacketed bullets if I COMPLETELY clean the bore first. Gilding metal jackets (they contain zinc) seem to act like a tinning compound or a "primer" to copper jackets and facilitate faster fouling. The TSX bullets foul less than the un-banded X bullets for sure. All my X bullets have shot best with at lest a .050 jump, not the .005 jump that Schmitty likes. As for using them on bigger stuff- I saw an elk shot with that bullet two years ago- 6 times! It was still hanging on when finished off at close range. They are NOT magic. I would use them on elk only if I didn't have anything better and then hope that he didn't run too far because they leave a marginal blood trail.

The answer is that yes, you can use both. I use the hold-over marks for reasonable distance shots. What these distances are depends on the caliber and velocity and BC of your projectile. I am not familiar with the Vortex reticle but the instructions should tell you how to zero it, as Doug said, either 100 or 200 yds. Then reset your turrets to zero and use them for shots too far to be taken with the hash marks. I don't like to set scopes to 300 yds as it can really screw you up on close stuff.

Shooting deer with a 22-250 is a short range proposition at best. It will kill them but it takes a much better placed shot than even a 243. A typical 22-250 round at 600 yds has less energy that a 22 RIMFIRE magnum and barely more than most 22 LR loads. Would you feel comfortable shooting deer with a 22 LR??? The bullets wont' expand at these velocities and the BC on a factory 22 cal bullet is so poor that any wind is going to blow the bullet way off course. A lot of us starting out hunting them with 22-250s but eventually realized that it wasn't humane and certainly wasn't optimal. I don't want to see restrictions on caliber, but assinine comments like these will be just what it takes to get to happen. A 22 hornet is legal for elk, does that mean we should try it?? Come on people, use enough gun to be fair to the game. These aren't prairie dogs! I had to go to the Phx office to get a FOPE stamp

As I recall, AZ had to extend the deadline one year as well. There is a difference between "forgetting passwords" and having their entire system crash. It wasn't just their application computer than crashed, it was the entire system. I talked to a guy in accounting and he said that even the accounting computers were down. They had a colossal failure and that would have been hard to wiggle out of. Some agencies allow Postmarks to suffice, Arizona doesn't. You can't wait too long with the mail process either. Just because the mail man or the UPS guy doesn't get it there in time does not mean that the state has to change the rules. If NM has any heartache with this computer stuff- they need to take it up with there IT guys. On another note, the AZGFD is completely wrong to have their MAIN phone number as the one you call to check the draw results. The public has absolutely no way of conducting business with them during this time. They have a lot of other things going on besides the draw. They need a different number you can call so that they don't keep the main number out of service. What a nice few days to work there- especially if you are an operator! You wouldn't have to field a single call! None of these systems are perfect, but they know there will be a crunch and they need to prepare for it. It is easy enough to do in the private sector but they have tenured Govt employees who either don't have the expertise to do it or are constrained but other reasons. I hope they fix it because they will make one side or the other mad no matter what course they take should it continue to happen!

Anyone else having fits getting this done?? For three straight days we have tried to get this done and the website is either down or so bogged down that it times out about 3/4th through the process. On top of that, their phone lines are down... I thought Arizona was bad- if they don't extend the deadline, they will have some serious retributions from folks! :angry:

I don't consider it procrastinating, I call it good fiscal sense. I will wait as long as I can to take money out of my account when I am losing or paying interest on it. If they say you can apply up until the deadline time on the 8th, then that is what they have to be prepared for. I am obviously not the only one who feels this way. Their system broke and they stood to lose hundreds of thousands of dollars on it- this is their budget money. Not only did their computers crash, but their phones crashed as well. They know there is going to be a crunch and they weren't prepared. They really had no choice but to fix the problem. The IRS gives us until April 15th to file. All those who have to pay will wait until then. That is just business. There was no doubt in my mind that this was going to be extended. If it had only "broke" during the last few hours of the last day I would say that they would not have been obligated to extend- but it was screwed up for 3 days. I know a number of people that stayed up until 4 and 5 am just trying to get through for two days prior. This is not acceptable in Government. They knew it and they did the right thing. Those of you that are pissed because you paid early and want better odds because those of us that waited until the last week couldn't get in should be ashamed for being so self-centered. This didn't need to happen- they should have either let an outside vendor that had the capacity to handle it run it or updated their systems. They didn't and it broke!

All you experts that are defending G&F and all you experts that are crucifying them need to sit back in your easy chair and sip on a beer. This isn't over by a long shot. There will be indictments before this is over. There will be people either retiring or losing their jobs. This was obviously done without the proper channels and permits being utilized and certainly a lot of deception has taken place. Every agency, no matter how good, will have its bad members. There are those who always have an agenda. This will not have a happy ending! Mark my words.

I have two of each and I got shot down on most of the names I suggested. I wanted to name one of my boys Fred but my wife wouldn't have it. We went with Austin and Levi. My grandson is Porter. I think name popularity comes in cycles or waves. Just don't name him LeeRoy, or Ashmahl or Rosheed... Congrats..;

Now THAT would be an obstruction! I am all for mandatory reporting,but it needs to be convenient for the hunter- You have until the end of the year or so. It could be all set up online so you just input your tag # and check yes or no...

I have one and it alone cost $2500 10 years ago. I pulled the tether off of it and haven't got it fixed.

I agree some will fudge the truth, but the vast majority will not. More data is always better. I don't think they "can handle the truth"

That's why they want to implement a baiting ban- so there are no more obstructions for hunters... Make a heck of a lot of sense. I am for it. I think the current survey is a joke and useless. They have no statistics to show that the surveys being turned in are representative of the real story. I quit doing them about 5 years ago when I realized how many were not turning them in- I, like many others I have spoken to, quit sending them in hopes that they would be forced to make it mandatory. I don't think this is a huge deal people. You could do it online in conjunction with your bonus points. It could be as simple as costing you a bonus point for failing to report. They make lion, sheep, buffalo and bear reporting as well as archery deer reporting mandatory, what's the big deal with including the permitted hunts as well. This would only add elk and general deer to the equation. The only ones I think should be voluntary are the non-big game surveys such as small game or waterfowl.

Based on some correspondence I have seen from him over this baiting stuff- I can only say "thank goodness"

Yep, you could chamber an Encore in .25 auto and it would be legal! I've killed a lot of the buggers with a 22-250 but had one go wrong and won't do it again- it's a stunt.

I totally disagree with you and this is exactly what they want to happen. It's no different that stating that you don't care if they take away semi-auto rifles as long as they leave the bolts actions alone (because you don't hunt with semi-autos). When it comes to things like this, it's better all or nothing. The corn isn't hurting a dang thing. It is FAR from a guarantee that you will even have a buck hit it. I know several guys who have been putting corn out all fall and NOTHING has touched it- even though we found deer tracks in the snow not 30 feet away. Next they will outlaw radios, then laser range finders, then tree stands- it will never end if we don't make a strong stand now. Even if you don't use corn and salt- you should be manning up for the rights of hunter collectively. Look what happened to Jim Zumbo when he made his dumb comments about AR-15s and hunting. It cost him his job and his endorsements and rightly so. This is a very divisive issue and if you don't have a dog in the fight- you should support the rights of your fellow hunters too! My original question was why these other two guys- they have basically NO say in this issue. I think we are wasting our time unless we go to the commission meetings with a well planned out agenda and address the commission directly. I have stood in front of them a number of times and even called for Shrouf's resignation over the way the USO lawsuit was handled. I got some good head nods from the commission when I said that. We are ranting and raving here on this forum but we should be doing it at the commission meeting. I got a response from the Chairman but he didn't like me calling this an attack on archery hunter - which is blatantly is. How many rifle hunters put out feeders etc? I think we need to quit trying to legislate ethics and let the other sportsmen handle their own. If someone doesn't like to put out corn- then they shouldn't do it- plain and simple. If someone doesn't like to hunt with a scope on their muzzleloader- then don't. If you think radios are unethical- don't use them. If you think 80% let-off compound bows are unethical, don't buy one. This all comes down to the individual. I don't like them making laws to govern what should be ethics- not criminal behavior. I have never put a pile of corn out in my life and never hunted over a salt block, but I will fight for the right to be ABLE to do this should a situation suggest it!

Why are we sending letters to Brian Wakeling and A Munig? I understand Celeste Cook and the rulemaking committee but not the other two? Any answers?