runningbird

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?

The ADA has not taken a stance on the bill. We were given a preliminary overview of what the bill was and what it would accomplish. The board asked for more information and the "devil in the details". Since we did not see the bill prior to the dropping in the state legislature and since there was a response that mandated not moving it forward, there will be no vote on an item that is moot. As far as membership, the ADA is not a member of the AZSFW. We are however a member of the AZSFWC. The purpose of the "C" is to have a forum for sportsmen, meet monthly to discuss items of interest, meet with the AZGFD (They come every month and brief us on what is current) and then review proposals for the spending of the wildlife plate monies. The ADA, the AES, the AAF and the ADBSS have in the past funded the lobbyist efforts of Capitol Consulting (Suzanne Gilstrap). That process will be up for review, pending any decisions as to the future of the AZSFW. Please feel free to ask any more questions. So who gave the preliminary overview of the bill? will we ever be told the answer to this?

at the azgfd meeting on Wed. Norm Freeman said that he had over 200 email that day alone wanting to get rid of that outfit.

I agree 100% with this. If the ADA is to be credible at all they need to clean house.

One thing that I keep noticing is if you look at the board of the different groups, you frequently see the same peoples names. . So what we have then is different organizations with the same agenda, and in some cases a self serving agenda.

Great idea George! I was at the meeting on Wed. and am still in the cooling off period. Looking forward to some good responses from everyone here!

purple hammer. But hammer all the way. Maybe I'm half normal which would be more credit than my family gives me.

http://www.azgfd.gov/inside_azgfd/documents/2012.01.25%20Agenda%20-%20Telephonic%20Mtg.pdf Looking at the agenda for this afternoon it looks like some of this mess may be addressed at the meeting. This could give us some additional insight.

The ADA has not taken a stance on the bill. We were given a preliminary overview of what the bill was and what it would accomplish. The board asked for more information and the "devil in the details". Since we did not see the bill prior to the dropping in the state legislature and since there was a response that mandated not moving it forward, there will be no vote on an item that is moot. As far as membership, the ADA is not a member of the AZSFW. We are however a member of the AZSFWC. The purpose of the "C" is to have a forum for sportsmen, meet monthly to discuss items of interest, meet with the AZGFD (They come every month and brief us on what is current) and then review proposals for the spending of the wildlife plate monies. The ADA, the AES, the AAF and the ADBSS have in the past funded the lobbyist efforts of Capitol Consulting (Suzanne Gilstrap). That process will be up for review, pending any decisions as to the future of the AZSFW. Please feel free to ask any more questions. So who gave the preliminary overview of the bill?

Sounds like the ADA got JACK SQUAT for their $10,000 Or maybe the ADA almost got exactly what it wanted? I'll stand by this idea since BPJ has not really answered any of the real questions asked in these two threads. And now he complains that the ADA could not get names from a former governor. BPJ you have been asked for names multiple times in these two threads and you have not given them either.

it does look like the swacker or the sonoran. But I like that it locks and swivels.

Actually, as I posted before, I haven't decided on this yet. When making a decision about this, I think it's important to get as many facts as possible. I think it's important to hear from lots of hunters, the AGFD commission, other sportsmens groups as well as the people who created this bill. I expect to be attending a meeting next week with the sportsmens groups to discuss this issue. Just wondering if you did in fact attend a meeting on this subject. If so what did you find out. Thanks!