runningbird

very impresive. way to go!

I'll wait for the new models then. Maybe they will have some good deals on last years models. I do love my covert camera's that I have now though.

any chance that you might have the two pack of camera's for sale again sometime? thanks Mark

waiting for the statement as well.

+1

I'll be there has well.

Is it possible for several groups who have common goals,ideas to share a lobbyist?

Do other groups have lobbyist? Do we really need a lobbyist, or are lobbyist telling us we need lobbyist. I look at what Suzanne Gilstrap has done the past few weeks and am very nervous about lobbyist. Does the AZGFD have a lobbyist? Would need or be allowed to have one? I have a feeling that a few organizations put there trust in Suzanne and that doesn't seem to have worked out well.

Thanks for posting that video. I've shown it to people at work often. Many just don't understand anything about hunting. Especially in AZ where so many are form big city's. I have quite a few people from NYC and Chicago that never had anything but a cement playground.

great buck!

I hunt because I love it. Most of the time I hunt without a weapon or the intent to kill something. But I'm still hunting. Then when the season is open I carry my bow and if I have the opportunity I decide if I want to kill or not. Most often I choose not to, but I have still loved the hunt!

Very interesting news. So not all the orgs on the AZSFWC board even knew this was even a consideration as a proposed bill? I should also note that most of the groups or people that responded to my question where very professional and understanding. I think all in all most of our groups are organized by people who really care and are not self serving. This is my impression from the limited contact I had this weekend. Runningbird, I have been informed that this is not entirely true. AZSFW made a presentation to the AZSFWC board. All the representatives of the orgs that sit on the AZSFWC board and were present knew of the idea of this bill. Chef, I am not doubting what you are stating or what you have been told. But I will again state that I have been told differently. I also will say that I also heard they were all present. But when they responded to my question after your prompt I was told differently. This whole thing is a shame in that it has brought up a lack of trust. Don't know what else to say. I'm not sure if we will ever find out the real truth, but we will all need to move on. Hopefully in a positive direction.

Very interesting news. So not all the orgs on the AZSFWC board even knew this was even a consideration as a proposed bill? Seems like AZSFW didn't care about hurting peoples feelings with their introduction of this bill. I should also note that most of the groups or people that responded to my question where very professional and understanding. I think all in all most of our groups are organized by people who really care and are not self serving. This is my impression from the limited contact I had this weekend.

I have made a few contacts. In fact not all the orgs that are on the board were given the spiel.

Thanks Amanda for digging up the info. I look forword to the meeting on the 21st.

I did not realize that all the others were given the spiel. Thanks for the help!

"Same thing goes here, things are kept quiet on who proposed this bill etc. People are too afraid to damage relationships and in my opinion, they need to ask themselves who they have in their best interest. Remember, AZSFW surprised you with the pushing of this bill before you or the commission could detail it, now tell me who is on your side? " This is my point exactly. The ADA knew this was comming, supposedly did not support it, but still did not let others know about it. Also they won't give up the name of the person that presented the issue to them. Why are they protecting this person, I wonder if it is one of there own?

I did not see where BPJ was threatened. If I missed that post than I apologize. I have asked repeatedly who gave a preliminary talk about this bill. That answer has been avoided. I did not ask because I want to cause more problems, I asked because I like many average Joe's am trying to figure out who to trust. By avoiding some questions and answering others it is, in my opinion making it hard to trust BPJ or the ADA. I also do understand that we need lobbyist, but after hearing Gistrap speak I can not support her. I hope to attended the meeting, not to cause problems but to move foreword with a good working trusting relationship.

I think an emergency meeting would be a step in the right direction. There are still questions to be answered. Some of the hard feeling could have been avoided with simple honesty and accountability.

Remember there are others on this forum that know some of these answers or have the ability to find out. They have become strangely silent.

I could not agree more Allen! I think we all want an organization that we can trust and count on. Has well as one that open to our comments and concerns and does not turn and run.

please do post this info. I guess I should try to attend has well.

I have been to many Mule deer Association meetings. They then Changed there name to ADA. There are a few good people that have the best interest for all sportsmen in mind. I quit going because there was a private agenda. And from what I have seen over the last month it still exist. Chef I love your thoughts and ideas, but I have to say I truly did try at one time and was shut down and excluded from the ADA. Also did any of you go to the last G&F meeting and hear Gilstraps closing comments to the public? If so, I doubt anyone of you would want anything to do with a lobbyist who would make these comments in a public setting.

All I asked is who gave the preliminary report? No big deal, why the secrets? You have made quite a statement in terms of where the ADA stands. It is all a secret and the public does not deserve to know the truth. Yet you expect sportsmen to support you and your group. and you claim to represent us all.

BPJ is there a reason that you won't tell who gave the preliminary overview of the proposed bill? Or are others correct that all involved with this just assume it will all go away if the sportsmen don't know the truth?