StickFlicker

You know they're opening one in Chandler in September, right (scheduled for 9/30/23)? 3065 W Chandler Blvd, Chandler, AZ 85226

Are you referring to landowner tags where you buy the voucher from a landowner and then buy the tag OTC from Game and Fish?

You know that Cabelas has already been owned by Bass Pro for a few years now, right? The change to Redhead junk occurred a long time ago. This is just a matter of apparently deciding to stop supporting the two different store names. It's not likely to change a single thing inside the store at this point. That ship has sailed.

Oakley, They would also have to return to the days of requiring people to pay in cash/money order. It would be against the state's banking laws to allow the use of credit cards for that process, which is why they discontinued it when they began to allow credit cards in the draw process. I would not be opposed to returning to the days of cash, I'm just pointing out why they don't require payment in full up front anymore.

It's already mostly pre-determined. It's based on 10% of the total of all OTC deer tags sold, averaged over the previous 5 years. So that might be up or down a little from this year, but probably not significantly different.

I understand that it's based on 10% of the TOTAL resident and non-residents that were sold in 365 days, not 10% of the previous amount NRs bought. The highest ratio of NR to Resident OTC permits ever sold was 10.5%, and only in one year (the rest were at or under 10%), so I believe my statement to be pretty accurate.

Coues247, I certainly never said that, if that's what you're implying. I was saying that it's ridiculous for NRs to scramble in the first few hours to buy tags that normally take a full year to sell out., just because G&F set a limit (the limit is based on the number sold when they were unlimited in prior years).

U of A basketball is #4 in the country too

Ridiculous. The number that are for sale is based on the average they have sold in past years in 365 days (when it was unlimited), so there should have been plenty to last the entire year. A perfect example of making something seem scarce and everyone has to have it. I'm guessing a lower percentage of those purchased will actually be used than in previous years when people just waited to buy them until they knew for sure they were coming. That's probably a good thing for residents.

Nate, who did you hunt with near Kimberly?

You must be OLD school!

At least every bowhunter that wishes to hunt the unit is guaranteed 6 days per year to hunt it. It wasn't that way under the previous system. Under last year's regulations, only 125 hunters were drawn to kill virtually the same number of deer that will be killed this year. Actually, a few more deer will be killed this year (at least 35 v. 32 under the draw last year). I suppose an argument could be made that those 125 hunters had less competition and crowding, but at least under the new regulations, the majority of hunters will be guaranteed the chance to hunt at least six days in their favorite area (unless theirs is in one of the very few draw areas). The hunt is only scheduled to be no more than 3 weeks long for the entire year, just like it was under the draw system. There will be, and should be, people on both sides of the fence in a unit like this as to which format is preferable. But I think overall the majority of hunters statewide will see more opportunities to hunt under this new system in the majority of units. If 125 hunters killed 32 deer in three weeks last year, it should only be expected by all of us that a significant number of hunters greater than 125 will reach the 35 deer quota in less than three weeks this year. But a lot more people had the chance to enjoy hunting the unit, even if for a shorter time, than they did last year.

Because it's closer for most hunters, for one reason, for the hunt and possible scouting trips.

The thing that makes no sense to me is the apparent randomness of the 20% max archery harvest that they've used for years. Let's just look at an extreme case to see if this model works correctly; If most of the rifle hunters decided that they preferred to be bowhunters for deer, G&F would still not allow more of the kill to go to bowhunters because it is capped at 20% of the rifle kill. That's true even if 95% of the hunters showed a preference to hunt with a bow instead of a rifle (I said we're looking at an extreme example to see if the system works). Shouldn't it be set on a dynamic basis so that the more hunters that expressed a preferred desire to hunt with a bow (or even if more expressed a desire to hunt with a rifle for that matter), the permits and subsequent kill should reflect that? It is that way for the other species. If a higher percentage of hunters applied for archery ELK first choice and not rifle, they would adjust the number of permits (and resulting harvest) to give more archery permits and fewer rifle. But for deer hunting, they have a flat and fixed percentage that can't change no matter how much demand for archery permits increases and rifle permits decreases? That has always made no sense to me.

You do know he said he had an archery tag, right? Several of the landowners in that hunt charge trespass fees to hunt on their property. Although, I believe one of those ranches was sold to an anti-hunter and is not huntable anymore.

During the G&F meeting when they were discussing this, I believe that Amber Munig said they only had another week or two to work it out in time for them to finalize the permit numbers in the hunting regulations that needed to be sent to the printer. So, that date has now passed. I would think if G&F managed to save the hunts, we would have heard about it (so no news is bad news), but who knows.

Electronic tagging is already approved. They're just working out the logistics to get it started.

Four out of five statistics posted on social media sites if made-up (including this one)!

But nearly never enforced. State Land laws have become a joke. I wish they would enforce them.

Arizona manages the OTC hunting opportunity so that they continue to remove portions of the season to lower the success when their hunt success objective for any given unit has been exceeded in recent years. They actually have proposed eliminating the OTC opportunity, but a few hunters have been proposing other alternatives. Stay tuned to see how this shakes out in the coming year. They are also looking at capping NRs to 10% as they currently do for the draw hunts. It is not clear whether this will be based on OTC permits sold or success on the hunts. AZ G&F paid hunting TV shows to promote these hunts to NRs in their episodes, which helped to cause these events, so there's that.

Keep in mind that the cost of a good guide in the better the units (those north of the Canyon, and the strip in particular) is usually higher than the cost of one in the rest of the state, so factor that in as well. It could easily cost $6,000-$7,000 to hire one of the better known guides on the Strip for a 7 day hunt.

...or at least you THINK you know which number to use on that app...😁

My portal shows that I don't even have an "ID Number". So, it was impossible for me to have even applied? Are some of you saying that it shows your application for this special drawing in your portal results?

Jet Crashes Here's the closest a jet that was passing just a little over my head ever came to me! This happened about 100 yards or so in front of me as I was waiting for my dad to pick me up for our annual deer hunt that was to begin the following day.