40-year-AZ-hunter

"We have a group thats willing to lead and has the connections to do it." That's the kind of attitude that Hamberlin, Gilstrap, Weiers, and others (talk about connections) thought would win in 2012 with the HB2072 tag grab. We all can check the history of that effort. On another front, earlier in this thread someone posted an article about Colorado and Michigan raising license fees to fund an education effort. I tried Google but it failed me. Does anyone know of a State that has implemented a raffle/auction tag program in addition to existing special tags for the purpose of funding an education campaign or is AZ to be the first? I'd like to study the details.

again, i think I'll do as I please. Let me know how long you want to continue the pissing contest before we get back to more relevant conversation. A newbie with 29 posts such as this in a day. Such a way to win friends and influence people! I think you have a lot of insecurities if you are judging yourself off of post counts in a forum. And you are deluding yourself if you think they give you any clout. I think you might be just a tad bit upset that another rooster came into your henhouse and interrupted your bash fest of a good group of people. Thank you for your free psychoanalysis! I'll try to remember that my average of 20 posts/year should not make me insecure! I'll also remind myself not to bash "a good group of folks", but just hair-brained ideas. Thanks again - wink, wink.

again, i think I'll do as I please. Let me know how long you want to continue the pissing contest before we get back to more relevant conversation. A newbie with 29 posts such as this in a day. Such a way to win friends and influence people!

The requirements posted above are actually just the opposite. Tag fees no longer require legislative action to increase as long as the total collected is under 50% more than the FY2012-13 appropriation. See ARS 17.333A A. Through July 1, 2019, the commission shall prescribe by rule license classifications that are valid for the taking or handling of wildlife, fees for licenses, permits, tags and stamps and application fees. and 2019 is no longer the end of the authority. Then See ARS 17-333.01 for the limit placed on that authority. 17-333.01. Fee limitation The department may establish fees pursuant to this article, but the total amount of license, permit, tag and stamp fees collected in any fiscal year may not exceed fifty per cent more than the amount appropriated from the game and fish fund for fiscal year 2012-2013. Furthermore ARS 17-346 limits the "special" tags to 3 per species. 17-346. Special big game license tags In addition to any license tags issued under section 17-333, the commission may issue special big game license tags in the name of an incorporated nonprofit organization that is dedicated to wildlife conservation. No more than three special big game license tags may be issued for each species of big game in a license year. Notwithstanding section 17-332, subsection D, an organization that receives special big game license tags issued under this section may sell and transfer them if all proceeds of the sale are used in this state for wildlife management. So bottom line is that the situation is just the reverse. More auction/raffle tags require a change of the law. Increased license or tag fees do not require a change in the law as long as G&F is below the cap set as outlined above.,

Last night at the ADBSS meeting, it was clear that the Board was unanimously against HB2072. Good for them! Pete Cimellaro and Floyd Green were there pushing ADBSS to "agree with the concept". ADBSS did not bite. This is clearly the tactic now. Tell us what is wrong (around the edges) and we will fix it, but we need those tags to make the expo work. They are trying to schedule a meeting of many groups for next week to do just that. Pete Cimellaro said that at their meeting last week, ADA agreed with the concept. Funny, that's not what we are hearing - aren't they supposed to be surveying their members? He also said that the Antelope Foundation had agreed in concept at their meeting Monday 3/12. He also mentioned SE Az Sportsmen agreeing in concept. Seems the fight over 2072 "as written" is over, but a much bigger fight now looms. Defeat this whole concept. Pete Cimellaro also made refernce to all the great things that were going on in UT as a result of the work of Don Peay "who is a personal friend of mine" - and that is a quote. Bruce

Well Jay, I'm not sure you really wanted questions after your love-fest Podcasts with Pete. I have sent you a respectful PM last week that you have not bothered to read. I also sent questions last Wednesday to Conserve and Protect at their "info" email and am still waiting for an answer to even one of the questions. One of them was do they have an email list to send people updates. You did ask Pete that and he said sure - sign up on their web page as a supporter. Perhaps not everyone who would like to stay informed wants them to be able to list them as a "supporter"! I noticed you did not follow up. I hope you will find time to open your PMs. And I hope C&P will do more than just solicit questions.

NO

I'd like to buy it. Sent a PM. Thanks.

So some here such as trophyseeker argue that G&F can not engage in political activities. I believe that is true. On the other hand in Jay Scott's interview with Cimilaro, Cimilaro states emphatically that this is a new source of revenue that will be completely under the control of G&F. If that is so, how will it help fight political fights? Education maybe (which they can do now), political advocacy no. So why the need for more auction tags?

Following Jay's conversation with Cimelarro, and Cimelarro's pledge of an open process and that they will answer all questions, I sent them the following questions. I will post any/all replies as I get them. I have the following questions; -Name the "we" you kept referring to in the Apr 10 meeting that have formulated this. Anyone from G&F? -Where specifically have your future meetings been posted and where will they be posted? -Did you make an effort to obtain and review all the comments from the public written on sites, submitted to G&F, etc during the 2012 HB2072 process? -I heard in the podcast that you invited many folks and 12 showed up. Did you invite folks who were clearly opposed to HB2072? -Where will future meetings be posted and how far in advance? Seems the average Joe is just hearing about this today. -Do you have an email list of folks to broadcast too (many of us refuse to use Facebook, etc)? -Will you post prominently open your books to date so everyone can see who is funding your activities? -If you say there are about 100,000 total tags and they want 150-200 that is 2/10 of one percent. Would you be satisfied with 2/10 of one percent of each "class" of tags (ie. sheep, rut elk, antelope, strip deer, etc) and all being raffle tags with a limit on tickets purchased so it is CLEARLY aimed at the regular Joe rather than the wealthy? That would mean 1 sheep tag about every 5 years, etc. How about no tags to this process where the chances of getting one in the regular draw are less than 2%? -This sounds like a back door way of using a State asset (game tags) for political purposes. Are you on solid legal ground? Who says? -The "extra week or two" on a "regular tag" (oxymoron) that Pete referred to - would it come before the regular season or at the end? - You seem to take complete credit for HSUS pulling their initiative drive. How much credit should be given to the new law that makes it harder to put an initiative on the ballot? - Please be specific (Pete dodged the question in Jay Scott's interview). What are the differences and what is the same between what you are now thinking and the process in 2012 in HB2072? Is it the case that 1/2 the Board of this organization were also Board members of AZSFWC when they pushed HB2072 ( John Kolazar, Jim Unmacht, Eddy Corona, Charlie Kelly)? Thank you, Bruce Johnson

Conserve and Protect Arizona Board Pete Cimellaro, President Rich Williams, Vice President Tracy Unmacht Secretary Charlie Kelly, Treasurer Eddy Corona, Director Jim Unmacht, Director John Koleszar, Director Brad Remfrey, Director AZSFWC Board 2012 behind HB2072 from (http://forums.bowsite.com/tf/bgforums/thread.cfm?forum=5&threadid=406174) AZSFWC Council President/Chairman - Jim Unmacht Secretary/Treasurer - Alan Hamberlin Director - Eddy Corona Director - Joe Del Re Director - Floyd Green Director - Charlie Kelly Director - John Koleszar Director - Jerry Nelson Director - Mark Nuessle Director - Art Pearce Director - Brian Pinney Director - Shane Stewart Director - Gary Stinson Director - Robert Thomas Best I can tell of the current Board that Pete Cimellaro claims is a "completely different" organization, 4 of the 8 listed were Board members of the AZSFWC in 2012 that pushed the tag grab that was HB2072. Anybody look up incestuous?

---Jay, Thank you for the heads up. Here are some initial questions for Pete C. -Who are the officers and Board of Directors of C&P? -Name the "we" they kept referring to in the Apr 10 meeting that have formulated this. Anyone from G&F? -Where specifically have their meetings been posted? -Did they make an effort to obtain and review all the comments from the public written on sites, submitted to G&F, etc during the 2012 HB2072 process? -I heard in the podcast that they invited many folks and 12 showed up. Did they invite folks who were clearly opposed to HB2072? -Where will future meetings be posted and how far in advance? Seems the average Joe is just hearing about this today. -Do they have an email list of folks to broadcast too (many of us refuse to use Facebook, etc)? -Will they post prominently their books to date so everyone can see who is funding them? -If they say there are about 100,000 total tags and they want 150-200 that is 2/10 of one percent. Would they be satisfied with 2/10 of one percent of each "class" of tags (ie. sheep, rut elk, antelope, strip deer, etc) and all being raffle tags with a limit on tickets purchased so it is CLEARLY aimed at the regular Joe rather than the wealthy? That would mean 1 sheep tag about every 5 years, etc. How about no tags to this process where the chances of getting one in the regular draw are less than 2%? -This sounds like a back door way of using a State asset (game tags) for political purposes. Are they on solid legal ground? Who says? More will probably come to mind when these are clearly answered. Thanks again Jay,

AND, please begin to spread the word to folks you know who may not be on this or any of the sites. HB2072 was soundly defeated in 2012 and here they are back again in 2018.

Iphones hold their value well. I don't think the 7 came in 16gb. I think 32 was the least. You might want to double check the memory and also let us know which carrier it was, the model number (A1660, A1778, etc.) and whether it is unlocked so it can be used on other carriers.

PLEASE check your PMs that I've sent since 3/15 so we can finish the tripod transaction. THANKS!

Sent you a PM on the tripod.

Sold.

Got this gun a couple months ago and will never use as I'm not a lefty! Appears to be in pretty nice shape. Rifling is bright and sharp. Bottom metal bluing worn some, but the top is nice. No sights. Nice wood stock that probably was refinished. Has been glass bedded and free floated. Whoever did the free floating took out more wood than I would have done. Nice rifle in a great caliber if you are a southpaw Does not include the scope but will leave it on for an extra $50. Its a Barska 6-24 AO with target turrets in Weaver type rings. Also available with the rifle sale is 5 boxes of 100g factory ammo for $50. Located near Shea and the 51 in N. Phx.

ttt

I'll take them. PM sent.

I hope we can all agree that it is in the best interest of both buyers and the seller that the seller provide as much information as possible, both good and bad, in the posting. That should save misunderstandings and what I see too much on this forum - an "SPF" then a "still available" or "I'll take it" then "still available". Let's also agree that there can be honest differences in the objective evaluation of a used firearm. What's that old saying - one man's porridge is another man's poison. Personally, I like to see others post their view of items for sale. I learn from them. Just one opinion.

Yep. Also barrel is thicker ahead of action and longer barrel These are standard weight. Boy, don't I wish recoil pads had not been added. Great shooters.

Thank! I really enjoyed the walk down memory lane!

Yeah the 60s BDL stocks came with a "fancy" pressed checkering on the forearm and pistol grip. Originally they had a high gloss finish and a plastic buttplate. Looks like someone did a nice job of reducing it by a few ounces.

HuntHarder is a great guy! He went out of his way to GIVE me some 18" wheels! Thank you!!!