IA Born

Everything says Elegant trogon to me, especially when I click on the pic and make it bigger. That's the only bird I know that looks like with that kind of green on its back. I"m guessing you are down southeast AZ somewhere and they are fairly common in canyons down there. Their call sounds about like a barking pig or sick seal. Cool pic!

Thanks for continuing to keep everyone honest on the use of the term "critical habitat." :-) My pleasure. Its great being able to talk to you guys about it all. This is nothing compared to the congressional inquires I've had to deal with because a politician somewhere created a major stink...all because he/she didn't know what they were talking about (imagine that)!

I agree with the consensus that the '06 will get the job done. I have a strong bias towards that round, but I've also done quite a bit of research on it and its original development. It was developed for longer-range use in combat (keeping up with the German 8mm Mausers), specifically in the Springfield 1903s. The development of the round eventually lead to the 176 gr match load sitting on top of 4064 (max or close to max charge). Battle sights on a Springfield 1903 (open sights) are set at 540 yards and soldiers in WWI were picking off Germans across the battlefield at 500-800 yards. Their ladder sights actually allow for much longer shots, but form and accuracy goes out the window quickly with the angle you need to hold the rifle to make a 2000 yard shot! Along with that, the .30-06 was the original open-sight 1000 yard round being fired from both 1903s and M1 Garands with open sights. I've got one of each and I'm fascinated by their capability. I consider myself a good shooter, but those rifles can definitely shoot better than I can shoot them (for now). A good friend of mine (like a 2nd father) was on the Army's National Match team when he got out of Vietnam and used to clean house at competition with a Garand at 1000 yards. There are many more rounds out there today that shoot faster and flatter than the .30-06, but that doesn't mean the .30-06 isn't capable. Admittedly, a human is not an elk, but my point is that, with the right load and practice, the 30-06 is more than capable of killing an elk or deer at 500+ yards.

Yep, its the Oak Fire in.near the Galliuros. I'm good friends with the FS biologist and she's been sending good updates. No structures are threatened at this time and the FS is allowing it to burn for resource benefit. From all of the reports I've seen, its a good cleansing burn that should result in some good deer hunting after the rains hit that area! And if any critical habitat (from an ESA standpoint) is in the path of the fire, the FS can easily let the fire burn through it and help improve it. Presence of CH is not a reason to stop a fire's progression. I've worked many fires in CH and I've worked with NPS, FS, and BLM on fires burning in critical habitat. Really no big deal.

Heel pad and symmetry of toe pads (can draw a perfect "X" or "W" b/w toes) tells me its a K9. Either a big coyote, someone's dog, or a feral dog. Tracks always look bigger when they are splayed in the mud, no matter what animal. And there are no wolves in 6a.

If you need the load data for Barnes for that bullet and that powder, let me know. I loaned my manual to a friend, but I can get you the min and max charge for 4350. As I said earlier, Barnes recommends starting 0.050" off the lands and adjusting seating depth from there. My personal load data won't help you, but I can tell you that with RL-15 at 97% max, 0.050" off the lands was right on. Good luck!

I'm loading 140 gr TTSX with RL-15 for my daughter's Savage Axis youth in 7mm-08 for her cow hunt. I can probably get you the recommended OAL for standard 7mm-08 per Barnes Manual #4, but if you are looking to customize the load to your son's rifle, you'll need to measure the seating depth of the bullet to get a good starting point 0.050" off the lands (per Barnes' recommendation). I use the Hornady OAL guage ( the modified case and the Hornady Comparator to measure off the ogive. There is an old school way to do it with a sharpie or lighter and just putting a bullet in an unprimed, but prepped case. I've done it both ways and definitely prefer the Hornday guage. If you were in Flagstaff, I'd say come on over and we'd get it figured out in about 5 minutes!

X2 on the Thermacell. I got one halfway through my early elk hunt 2 years ago and it is awesome! You can even get the fresh earth cover scent wafers for it.

I'll throw my hat in for a 7mm-08. My 10 year old daughter has been shooting one since she turned 9 and loves it. Savage Axis youth with a Vais muzzle brake. That thing shoots lights out!

Are you interested in selling? I'd be interested in buying your RL22.

I forgot to mention that Barnes Manual #4 lists H-380 as the powder giving the best results for 140 gr tsx and ttsx bullets. I wasn't going to try and scramble to find it, so I went with the RL-15 I had in stock, which Barnes also lists as a good performer for those bullets. Of course you know every rifle is different with what bullet/powder combo they like.

I can get you the specifics if you are interested, but my daughter's 7mm-08 loves RL-15 with 140 gr Barnes TTSX. Just printed a 0.58" group with 97% max load last weekend. Savage Axis youth with Timney trigger at 3 lbs.

Its an awesome rifle. When my dad passed away 10 years ago and I had to get all of the firearms out of the house, that was the only one missing. I vaguely remembered him telling me something about who he loaned it to, but I still don't remember and it still bugs me. I'd give anything to have that particular rifle back in the family! I learned off that one. I've since bought a new (used) one and its just as great. You won't regret it!

I don't load Bergers, but I use a Hornady gauge with the comparators for my Barnes TSX and TTSX bullets. I won't reload without it. Like others have said, it measures off the ogive of the bullet and gives you much more consistent measurements. Its not the true OAL since its from the ogive, but its far more consistent than the tips of bullets, which, as others have said, can be smashed if you use too much pressure on soft-nosed bullets. IMO and from my research and experience, seating depth plays just as much of a factor in customizing loads to get the most accuracy. I've tightened up various loads just by adjusting the seating depth of the bullet.

You are very welcome, Chef! Same goes to all of you showing support above! It was my love of hunting and fishing with my dad growing up in Iowa during the 1985 Farm Bill that helped push me down the road of a career in conservation. At that time, I wanted to be an Iowa DNR Conservation Officer, but I left Iowa for grad school and it led me where I am today. I strive to use my love of hunting and fishing to do just what I did above and help educate and break down myths and misinformation. My supervisors love that I can reach out to the hunting community and help them understand what does/doesn't happen with the ESA and break down some of those two-way barriers. I truly do take my job working for you all (The American People) very seriously. I don't base any of my management recommendations on emotions and I don't believe that every species or habitat should be federally protected because someone else says it should be. I look at what the science tells me and bury any personal feelings. I won't lie, I want to conserve everything, but that doesn't mean using Federal laws to do it. I have coworkers who have big misconceptions about the hunting community and I have several coworkers who are as passionate about hunting and fishing as I am. I've also hunted with folks who have misconceptions about our agency. I've been in areas where I truly felt like I'd be in serious trouble if I admitted who I worked for, even as a hunter, and that has made me nervous about speaking up in certain areas and at certain times on CW so I truly thank you for your support. I promise you, we're not a bad agency to deal with. We have our share of nut-jobs, just like the hunting community does, but we have far more great biologists, just like there are far more great hunting ambassadors out there!

That's a good, fair, and legitimate question, trphyhntr. This is partially a case of your trusting a Federal agent (me) that you don't know to be telling you the truth. The Federal law (ESA) is very clear on what critical habitat can and can't do. After 10+ years of implementing that law and working on many critical habitat issues (including lawsuits by environmental groups), I can assure you anti-hunters and environlomental groups can never make that happen. Its been upheld in Federal court MANY times in MANY variations of attempts. I'm not saying anything on here that can't be looked up and proven. As for your concern about not wanting to give an inch...I don't blame you. Its that kind of attitude from folks like you and the environmental groups (they serve a purpose, too) that are what keeps our agency honest. Its why I take my job working for you all so seriously! And, you should try working for the Feds...talk about not wanting to give an inch for fear of them taking a mile! I've worked more 70-hour weeks in the past 3 years (while only getting my 40-hour pay and no comp time) than I care to remember.

I hate to break it to you but there are several jaguars roaming southern AZ, not just 1. I know that at one point AZG&F had 5 collared. I know the guys that chase lions down there with dogs have treed many but purposely don't post picture of it nor talk much of it. AZ does not want any land in Southern AZ deemed habitat for jaguars. If the feds recognize it as natural habitat for a roaming jaguar then it becomes a non-huntable protected area and we're screwed. This is actually not correct. I made a similar post a while back when the critical habitat rule was first published. As I said then, I rarely talk about my job because I know there is so much ant-Fed sentiment on here, but I work for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Arizona (northern AZ). I also spend most of my free time hunting and fishing and teaching my kids about hunting, fishing, and conservation. I try hard to use my status as both an endangered species biologist and hunter to educate folks about what Federal protections really mean. AGFD has not had 5 jaguars collared. We'd have been briefed on that and it would have been a big deal. There was one collared. Its entirely possible that there are multiple jaguars running around southern Arizona and they haven't been brought to the attention of AGFD or FWS. But if lion hunters are treeing them incidentally to their normal lion-hunting activities, they will not get in trouble for harassing an endangered species. If that were the case, you'd have heard about Warner Glenn and Jack Childs getting in trouble for treeing the three (2 in AZ, 1 in NM) jaguars they have treed over the years. They didn't get in any trouble and have been great conservation partners over the years. Unless a FWS Special Agent can prove that a jaguar was intentionally treed, the FWS can't and won't prosecute. We're really not bad to work with, I promise. As for habitat becoming non-huntable if it becomes federally protected, that's not true either. I guarantee you that 1000s of hunters in AZ hunt in land designated as critical habitat for some species protected by the FWS and they've been doing it for decades. A critical habitat designation simply means that that particular habitat is deemed essential for the recovery and conservation of the species, but does not, in any way, stop private land owners or, in this case, hunters from doing ANYTHING. All it means is that Federal land management agencies have to come talk to the FWS about their projects and how those projects can still be carried out, but in a way that ensures habitat remains intact. I hunt in critical habitat all the time when I'm off duty. Again, it has NO BEARING on hunters. I'm not posting this to start an anti-Fed debate or discussion. I'm simply trying to do part of what the American People pay me to do every day and educate folks as to what the ESA does and doesn't do. Anytime anyone wants to sit down and look at the ESA and talk about what it can and, more importantly CAN'T do, I'm happy to help out. Like I said before, once you take the time to listen and learn, you'll find out that (for the most part), biologists from the FWS, especially those who hunt/fish or understand hunitng/fishing, are great to work with. And to the original post, that's definitely a bobcat. Patrick Jr. nailed it on the head as to why. I appreciate you posting and clearing up what I had been told. I might have cut some corners of the specifics but the way it was explain to me by the AZG&F biologist who just retired this year was at one point in time we as a state were in possible jeopardy of losing huntable land due to the feds determining that a portion of Southern AZ was part of the jaguar's natural habitat. This is how it was explained to 100 hunters at a local predator hunters meeting back when the macho B incident occurred. He also told us that macho B was not the only jaguar they were keeping track of. I personally know of a very successful and well-known houndsman whose dogs have treed many jaguars. I sold him some confinement cages and we sat and spoke at length. They pull the dogs off and the jaguar is free to go. Those dogs can't tell the difference between a bobcat, lion, or jaguar. They give chase to any and all. Once the animal is IDs I'm sure they back off. I am positive they want no bad PR. These are they type of civil discussions I absolutely love. Hunters have never been in jeopardy of losing huntable land. The reality is that southern Arizona is, in fact, part of the jaguar's natural habitat. It has been (as has most of the state) since before white settlers came here. One thing that doesn't get made public is that there are some issues which cause great consternation between FWS and AGFD. I'm not surprised that it was explained as you describe it. I have a bunch of good friends and colleagues at AGFD and I have a good working relationship with many others there. But on some issues, there is bad blood between our offices. To be fair, its not all on AGFD's shoulders. We have our share of biologists who are difficult to work with and just as close-minded. In reality, AGFD does not understand how the ESA works as well as they think they do, overall. There are some there who absolutely get it, though. But, again, we have individuals (emphasis on individuals, not the agency) who abuse the ESA, too, and assert authority they don't have. Macho B was not the only jaguar being kept track of in Arizona at that time, that's for sure, but he was the only one collared. The Macho B incident brought much unwanted attention to both agencies. That's about all I can discuss about Macho B at this time. As for critical habitat and jaguars, I have my personal opinions that do not necessarily represent the FWS' official position on the matter. I can also tell you that I'm not the only one. Its tough when you (collectively as an agency) are told to do something by a Federal judge who has no understanding of biology. We originally produced a "not prudent" determination for jaguar critical habitat, but a District Court judge threw it out and forced us to write what you see. Critical habitat is there, we didn't back off the determination, but, again, it has no bearing on anyone's hunting, hiking, fishing, or camping activities on Federal land. You are also correct in that lion dogs can't tell the difference between cat species, which is why we will never prosecute a houndsman for treeing a jaguar or ocelot. They are out conducting lawful activities and not intentionally breaking any Federal laws. The houndsman I've spoken with absolutely don't want bad PR and most of them are excited to see a jaguar. And from my experiences, yes, they back off once they know what they have. Great pics, by the way! Again, great discussion and I hope you find it sincere that I take my job working for the American People very seriously!

I hate to break it to you but there are several jaguars roaming southern AZ, not just 1. I know that at one point AZG&F had 5 collared. I know the guys that chase lions down there with dogs have treed many but purposely don't post picture of it nor talk much of it. AZ does not want any land in Southern AZ deemed habitat for jaguars. If the feds recognize it as natural habitat for a roaming jaguar then it becomes a non-huntable protected area and we're screwed. This is actually not correct. I made a similar post a while back when the critical habitat rule was first published. As I said then, I rarely talk about my job because I know there is so much ant-Fed sentiment on here, but I work for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Arizona (northern AZ). I also spend most of my free time hunting and fishing and teaching my kids about hunting, fishing, and conservation. I try hard to use my status as both an endangered species biologist and hunter to educate folks about what Federal protections really mean. AGFD has not had 5 jaguars collared. We'd have been briefed on that and it would have been a big deal. There was one collared. Its entirely possible that there are multiple jaguars running around southern Arizona and they haven't been brought to the attention of AGFD or FWS. But if lion hunters are treeing them incidentally to their normal lion-hunting activities, they will not get in trouble for harassing an endangered species. If that were the case, you'd have heard about Warner Glenn and Jack Childs getting in trouble for treeing the three (2 in AZ, 1 in NM) jaguars they have treed over the years. They didn't get in any trouble and have been great conservation partners over the years. Unless a FWS Special Agent can prove that a jaguar was intentionally treed, the FWS can't and won't prosecute. We're really not bad to work with, I promise. As for habitat becoming non-huntable if it becomes federally protected, that's not true either. I guarantee you that 1000s of hunters in AZ hunt in land designated as critical habitat for some species protected by the FWS and they've been doing it for decades. A critical habitat designation simply means that that particular habitat is deemed essential for the recovery and conservation of the species, but does not, in any way, stop private land owners or, in this case, hunters from doing ANYTHING. All it means is that Federal land management agencies have to come talk to the FWS about their projects and how those projects can still be carried out, but in a way that ensures habitat remains intact. I hunt in critical habitat all the time when I'm off duty. Again, it has NO BEARING on hunters. I'm not posting this to start an anti-Fed debate or discussion. I'm simply trying to do part of what the American People pay me to do every day and educate folks as to what the ESA does and doesn't do. Anytime anyone wants to sit down and look at the ESA and talk about what it can and, more importantly CAN'T do, I'm happy to help out. Like I said before, once you take the time to listen and learn, you'll find out that (for the most part), biologists from the FWS, especially those who hunt/fish or understand hunitng/fishing, are great to work with. And to the original post, that's definitely a bobcat. Patrick Jr. nailed it on the head as to why.

This is a cool thread! I wouldn't even know where to begin with the stuff I've inherited over the years, although there is a bunch of stuff that was lost when our house burned to the ground when I was 5 years old in 1978. Several firearms, including some rare/collectors items. I have all of his good meat-cutting knives and sharpeners from his meat-cutting days. I have a pair of Ho-Chi-Minh sandals that my dad brought home from Vietnam. Said he got them from a VC that "didn't need them anymore." I have his original jungle fatigue shirt, too. The shirt and sandals tuned up at a friend's house many years after the house-fire. I have the H&R Topper single shot .410 that was my dad's dad's and was the first shotgun I hunted with. I have my great grandpa's (mom's side) WWI uniform, complete with leggings and C-cap. I remember my great-grandma giving me that shortly after he passed away. Before too long, I should be getting his original helmet that is hanging in my great-aunt's house. I also have his tackle box. I still remember the day he gave it to me. My grandma was one of 12 and he said I was the only great-grandkid that looked like him, so I was getting it. I have my grandpa's (dad's dad) tackle box as well. I aslo have the tackle box of a guy who helped raise my dad. Every now and then I crack them open and marvel at the antique lures in there. I need to get them in a display. And one of my favorites is the 1978 F-150 Custom that my dad brought brand new in August 1978. He paid $7k cash back then (bill of sale still in glove box). He handed me the keys they day I turned 16 back in 1989. It needs a new fuel pump, but otherwise runs great. It was my daily driver until 2002. It also needs some other TLC on the body and interior, but once I get the fuel pump replaced, its a champ!

As an instructor, I can tell you that I see kids in the classroom do much better than online kids, especially the younger ones. The classroom seems to hold their attention and there is a great deal of review for the test. The biggest issue with the online class and subsequent field day/test is that it can be weeks to a couple of months before taking the test. I highly recommend a classroom class if you can for your younger kids.

I use the non-hooded version of this bag and, with warm pjs, I'm plenty warm down to way cold during winter hunts. Its definitely a car camping/camper type bag, but with my cot or in our pop-up, its tough to beat!

Definitely not Crucifixion Thorn. That's more tree-form. This is definitely an Opuntia cactus and, from the pic, its most likely Desert Christmas cactus. With regards to the intoxication from the fruits, a co-worker walked by right as I was typing my original reply so I bounced it off him. He had a good point: its a fruit; if you let it ferment long enough, of course you can get intoxicated! For the life of me, after 20+ years of ecology, I can't see where Desert Christmas cactus would have any more intoxicating effect than any other Opuntia fruit! Knock yourself out, Oneshot (not literally, though; unless you have a GoPro to record it)! I'm going to make wine from the Sahuaro fruits soon, the fruits arent ripe yet, and I have an idea for making a flavored liquor also from sahuaro fruits... Coincidentally, a bottle of Saguaro fruit wine is my typical consulting fee for plant identification!

Definitely not Crucifixion Thorn. That's more tree-form. This is definitely an Opuntia cactus and, from the pic, its most likely Desert Christmas cactus. With regards to the intoxication from the fruits, a co-worker walked by right as I was typing my original reply so I bounced it off him. He had a good point: its a fruit; if you let it ferment long enough, of course you can get intoxicated! For the life of me, after 20+ years of ecology, I can't see where Desert Christmas cactus would have any more intoxicating effect than any other Opuntia fruit! Knock yourself out, Oneshot (not literally, though; unless you have a GoPro to record it)!

Definitely looks like a Desert Christmas cactus, although I've never heard of intoxicating effects from its fruit. None of my field guides or cactus-specific books reference that. I also wouldn't trust Wikipedia for the most accurate scientific information (no disrespect to JLW intended).

Another bump for a great deal on a GREAT gun. About 4 years ago, my uncle back in Iowa sold me his NIB 94 AE in .30-30 w/24" barrel and that was right after Winchester went out of business. I paid about that same price back then, but that was because he didn't know the full value of what he had. The price you have listed is a great deal, IMO, and I hope someone jumps on it. If I didn't have mine sitting in my safe (still NEVER fired), I'd jump on that. Good luck!