Flatlander

Though it has burned through a corner of the subdivision they have a lot of structural crews on scene and though they are reporting some structures burned we do not know at this time if those were outbuildings like sheds or barns or homes. Fire on the ground is not necessarily a bad thing so keep the faith. Believe me, its houses. Most of the houses(not all) along the canyon in clear creek pines unit 9 have burnt to the ground. Guy Mauro has sent me many pictures in the last 12 hours and Ill wait for him to post them. My cabin in unit 8 was spared, Ive heard no cabins in 8 burned. It is starting to affect Mogollon ranch now. Not sure how they will fare. Heres one house that was Ron Greens family house. D8895C4B-0E91-4199-AD15-DE729A0DC316.jpeg I thought this fire was in 5A?

Below is a series of emails I exchanged with Commissioner Davis who has been noted by CAPAZ as being an ally. I reached out to all of the commissioners with a similar message to ensure they knew my thoughts on the matter. Commissioner Davis was the only one who responded. I will allow you to draw your own conclusions: Commissioner Davis, I am writing you to express my concern over an initiative that has begun to arise among the members of the Conserve and Protect AZ organization. Their initiative proposes to allocate special tags for auction and raffle to raise funds for education of the public regarding the contribution makes to conservation. I know that this a group with which you have had association, and I am grateful for any guidance you may have provided during the HSUS defense. While I whole-heartedly agree that such a fund is critical to the perpetuity of hunting, I could not disagree more with the mechanism for raising those funds. My concern has nothing to do with the organization, its members, or its purpose. Rather, I see that the use of tags in such a way clearly contradicts the North American Model. I understand that there are some tags being used in a similar way already through the HPC program, and I see the benefit that those tags have brought for wildlife but my question is; Where does the practice stop? First it was the Auction/Raffle tags, then it was the HPC, now it is CAPAZ. If the intent of tags is to simply raise as much money as possible, then we could certainly sell every tag to the highest bidder. But rather than go the way of Africa and Europe, it is my opinion that the responsibility for protecting our privilege of hunting and fishing lies with the sportsmen. Hunting and Fishing nationally is a $58 billion industry, certainly through other revenue streams we can gather enough money to protect the future of our lifestyle. I believe that there are a number of options available which have not been explored or vetted that do not require us to compromise the model under which our wildlife is managed. Out of respect to your time I will not list or detail some of the ideas that have been discussed among like-minded sportsmen, but should you want to explore that conversation I would be happy to provide some proposals. Thank you for your time and for your dedicated service to AZ's wildlife. Andrew Gillett Thanks for your email. The Commission has received no proposal for auction tags. Thank you, Kurt Davis Thanks for the response Mr. Commissioner. Have you received a proposal for the use of raffle or other special tags? It is my personal belief, and admittedly not the viewpoint of all sportsmen, that any special tags separates us further from the ideals of the North American Model that have benefitted wildlife in this country for more than a century. Further, it is also mathematically challenging to see how raffle tags would provide anywhere near the amount of funds required for education of the non-hunting public. If for instance 200 tags were to be assigned to this raffle, and they varied in desirability from premium to average, and if those tags more or less aligned with current seasons then I see the numbers shaking out roughly this way: 500 tickets per application (a limited number of tickets is part of the arrangement I have heard in meetings), at a cost of $5 per ticket, then that only raises $500k. That is only 25% of the cost that CAPAZ has suggested is required for the outreach. Instead the entire amount could be raised via other methods that do not require legislation. We have emailed a copy of this method to all of the commissioners. I am a concerned sportsmen who is here to help and willing to act, but I must express my total opposition to auction or raffle tags. Andrew Gillett No proposal. However, 500,000 would do substantial assistance for education. Earnest people have lots of ideas. The Commission hasn't done anything in my six years to harm the North American Model and I am sure wouldnt now. The current department Conserve and Protect effort is highly effective and it is my hope will grow more robust over time so that the second most urbanized state in the nation has an educated citizenry about the North American model and the power of how conservation is funded. Thx again, Kurt Davis I think every sportsman in the state would agree that educating the non-hunting community is necessary. We are all on the same page for that. However, decreasing opportunity for the general public and re-allocating those tags to be more accessible to those with more means is exactly the opposite of the North American Model. Sportsman need to bear the burden of educating those in our communities, but I feel strongly that tags is not the way to do it. Andrew Gillett I have never heard anyone proposing decreasing opportunities, tags,;etc...ever. kurt

You are late and all of this has been discussed in a number of other places, but I will do my best to try and answer your questions. I have read where people want to raise tag fees or create a habitat stamp. If they do that then G&F collects the money and they, by law, are not allowed to get involved in ballot initiatives or politics. The money raised by an auction or raffle tag system could not be used to fund a political fight either. It would be used to enhance the departments existing marketing campaign towards educating the non-hunting public. Any money raised through tag sales / auctions / raffles etc. must be returned to the department. The exact same thing can be accomplished with tags from a license fee increase, or a stamp etc. The money raised needs to be done by a separate group not directly affiliated with G&F. Once they raise the money then they have more flexibility in where the money is spent. Actually the opposite is what we probably need to accomplish. The goal is to raise funds that are earmarked for public education, and cannot e used in the general fund. So these dollars need to have less flexibility for spending rather than more. Much the same way that the HPC funds are allocated directly for habitat and cannot be used for other things. Regardless none of the money earned can be used for political purposes. Mostly I hear guys say they are against it but they offer no real solutions and who is going to organize it and manage it. Several viable options have been offered by community members and organized presentations have been delivered to CAPAZ, the commission and members of the general public who have expressed willingness to help. Pete's response was to thumb his nose, insult and argue with any proposal that didn't align with his personal agenda. Others members of CAPAZ have expressed interest in other options. Some have stated that they want to develop as many revenue streams as possible so accepting some of these ideas doesn't preclude still using tags as a mechanism. However, your comment that no one else is willing to do anything is lame, false and a cop out. If you were engaged and at the meetings and reading the other info that is available, you would know this. So don't let Pete fool you that everyone is apathetic so we have to use his plan or the world will end. Something that also needs to be considered is the more of the these auction/raffle tags available the less monetary value they have. The reason why they sell for hundreds of thousands of dollars is because there is only one auction tag and one raffle tag. If we try to action 20 high quality elk/deer/sheep tags the sales price will certainly be much lower. Basic economics of supply. When supply is kept very low but demand is high the price will be high. This point was discussed and is valid. The dept and commission already have concerns about devaluation of the existing commissioner tags due to collusion among buyers.

Yup, thats a good deal.

Year?

what has changed, as far as your perspective? I thought there was some solid ideas put on the table.Speaking for me personally, my perspective of the board has changed. I first thought they were all unified on the tag grab. Now I feel the majority are looking for legitimate ways to go forward. the lack of new blood is apparent because they have a tendency to fixate and focus on the hsus issue when the topic has changed to recruitment and retention. I agree that all of the board members have different objectives, but they all agree they need to raise money to pursue their ideas. As far as the HSUS fight, Pete is the one using that as a scare tactic to try and push his tag grab agenda. Appreciate all who have reached out and look forward to being part of the solution. PS - I agree mister Williams did a fine job moderating and many on the board helped keep the meeting on track and making sure folks got heard.

Happy to help. I apologize but I cant keep all the board members straight between real names and screen names etc. so I dont know if we spoke last night or not. Jim, Tracey and Eddie all have my contact info. Feel free to hit me up. I am traveling with my kid back east the next couple days so might be a little slow to respond. Dont take it personally.

Blake your survey data came across as very well informed. You reached more people in that survey than they have in weeks of outreach. I suggest emailing the results to the commissioners just as we are planning with the presentation.

Maybe 30 people in the room.

I dont trust Pete one bit. I think he showed his true cards when he started calling people he didnt even know as FOOLS. I spoke with several other board members and appreciated their thoughts, input and dialogue. I think most of them are very interested in coming up with as many ideas as possible. I think Pete is a snake and I think that he unwaveringly committed to getting tags. I dont think thats the case for everyone on that board.

Some good points, but one needs to use the broad-brush approach carefully. For example, not one of the groups in AZ makes a "profit" off the gift tags and neither does the game dept. Second, even those tags have been removed from the general draw over the years, the money raised has probably added more tags to the general draw for certain species because of projects and transplants. That's a win-win. A while back, there was a thread on another site about bighorn auction tags in the West. Tony Mandile, who once posted here on a regular basis, put up some very pertinent info on the program here in AZ from articles he did years ago. Another member of that site posted the positive aspects of what has gone on in Montana. I don't want to repost them here without permission, and in deference to Amanda, I won't post the site URL. Does this mean I'm for the present tag grab? Not necessarily. And I won't decide one way or another until I see the proposal actually fleshed out in its entirety. If it looks anything like the abomination in Utah, though, it's a non-starter for me. Buzz - Thanks for the input, you took the words right out of my mouth. This proposal simply doesnt align with the North American Model. TS - I do not believe anywhere that these special commissioners tags are allowed that they are sold for a Profit per se, all of them do support wildlife and conservation to some extent. The fact remains, we could certainly raise far more money if every tag was sold to the highest bidder. But thats not how the model works, look to Africa or Europe if youd like to see how turns out. I do have an idea for raising funds, perhaps for education or for the proverbial war chest political fund. Will post that later on a separate fund. Just a reminder, there is a meeting Monday at 6:30 at BPS. CAPAZ has said they will Not move forward with this if they do not have the support of the sportsmen, lets give them the chance to make good on that and show up to let them know our thoughts.

I'll be there Monday. My brother said he showed up a little late tonight. Said any questioning of motives or disagreements was treated very defensively rather than looked at as trying to come up with different ideas. Said the guy that came up with the $2 habitat stamp had the board stumped like they never thought that was a possibility (or they dont want it a possibility) add a $5 stamp or license increase on all licenses and they'll have money coming out of their ears and the tags can be left alone. If they insist on the tags its obvious their one mission is the tags and only the tags. Who was your brother? The habitat stamp idea works. I will say that I don't think that everyone on C&P is in it to get more tags to rich people, but I do believe the rich people have them persuaded. The question asked if I opposed the current raffle / auction model, I don't know that I have ever considered it because it has always existed in my memory. After some thought my question is this, where does it stop? We could certainly raise more money for conservation if we auctioned every tag to the highest bidder but then our model would cease to exist. I do not believe that the integrity of the model is worth sacrificing for any mount of money. I believe there are other ways.

I was there. The C&P crowd did not seem real receptive to people saying they were not in support of the idea. Dissenting opinions were characterized as "Criticism". There is a meeting at Bass Pro fine gun room Monday as stated above. Didn't seem to me that there was much brainstorming for new ideas, although several commenters provided suggestions. I have a few more ideas. In the meantime, we need to get out and speak up. Please fill up the meeting on Monday. Remember that we cannot be at each others throats, rather we need to be appreciative of those who carried the flag during the HSUS fight and who do the bulk of the heavy lifting in the state's conservation efforts. Instead, we need to come with solutions and be willing to pitch in to help with those solutions. Ultimately, I am not sure that everyone at C&P cares what we have to say, but I hope to be proven wrong. And in the meantime, I will take my voice elsewhere. The commission meeting in May will be important, the commissioners need to see that there is support, otherwise we are left to be represented by those who do speak up. Hope to see everyone on Monday.

That deer is rad. Congrats!

Dave I commend your call to action. But here is my beef with whats going on. This thing is first sold as just one way to do it and they want everyones input. Whatever it takes to stop the bad guys. Then everyone gives input and expresses their concerns, and the tone changes to Fine if you dont like my idea, do it yourself... To make a blanket statement that the people providing these comments need to get off their collective ### doesnt sit well with me. You have no idea who I am, how I spend my time or my money. I suspect this is true of most of these guys. We need to be working cooperatively and helping each other find ways to make a difference. This idea clearly does not have the support of many sportsmen. Is the ADA open to ideas other than this? Or if we suggest something at tomorrow nights meeting is it going to be met with Good idea . . . do it yourself!

Wow, you pretty much nailed it.

Thats not true I left an entire list.

Look, I am all for raising money to fight the antis. But I believe that this type of shift away from the North American model, and toward a pay to play system is wrong for our heritage our community and the wildlife. This system isnt asking hunters to give more than they take away anymore than me buying a lottery ticket is me supporting education. The sacrifice I am talking about is way more than tags, its the fidelity of the system of wildlife management in this state and throughout the West. I agree, hunters need to contribute, and I have said many many times, its our responsibility in life to bring more than we take away. That means actually taking part in conservation, not just trying to get a second round of dollars out of our wildlife in the form of raffles for tags that everyone already applied for. The more I listen to the pro auction/raffle tag crowd, the more opposed to the idea I am becoming.

I am yet to be convinced that every hunter in the state should have to sacrifice the opportunity to hunt or take their kids hunting in order to get some rich guys money. The facts are that all of us should contribute to the level we are able and should not do so at the expense of another. I could not in good conscience use my dollars to take opportunity away from another and call it conservation.

I agree 100% with what you have said. We have to be able to discuss these things without acting like a jackass.

I dont think that I need a great deal of detail to know how to feel about this. I am willing to listen to anything but this is all I think we really need to know: 1. Does the initiative redirect tags from the AZGFD administrated draw process to an outside organization(s) who will sell them to raise additional funds? If the answer is yes, then my question would be how does AZGFD plan to deal with the loss of said funds? My guess would be that they will raise tag fees to make up the difference. 2. What is being done with the funds that AZGFD cannot do themselves right now? Education? Title 17 does not restrict state funds from being used for this purpose, AZGFD can and does use their dollars for educating the general public (ever see those giant billboards with the bighorn sheep on them?). When a political fight comes up, I understand funds are needed to fight that, but that does not occur every year, so what happens in the meantime? 3. Are there other means to raise these funds, that do not require using wildlife as the medium for raising dollars. For instance, most political lobbies are suppprted by the industries they serve. So could the outdoor industry provide goods or services which could be used to raise funds? Are we as sportsman willing to pony up and provide financial suppport? I must say that I do not believe I can be convinced that this is a good idea. But I will listen to what is being proposed. I believe that selling more tags or opportunities for tags to those with more financial means feels like a perversion of the North American Model. The presentation of the initiative feels backhanded to me and that may be feeding my uneasiness. But it appears to me that although this would provide funds for the political fights like we had with HSUS it certainly is not the only way to raise money for these fights, and the bill certainly provides an added benefit to those who have money and those who have businesses that serve those who have money. Selfishly, I could probably afford a few more raffle tickets than most, so I may get a few more tags this way, but I agree, using state resources to raise money for political action does not feel ethical to me. Will be interesting to see how this shakes out. And please if anything I have stated is inaccurate please feel free to correct it.

I dont think that I need a great deal of detail to know how to feel about this. I am willing to listen to anything but this is all I think we really need to know: 1. Does the initiative redirect tags from the AZGFD administrated draw process to an outside organization(s) who will sell them to raise additional funds? If the answer is yes, then my question would be how does AZGFD plan to deal with the loss of said funds? My guess would be that they will raise tag fees to make up the difference. 2. What is being done with the funds that AZGFD cannot do themselves right now? Education? Title 17 does not restrict state funds from being used for this purpose, AZGFD can and does use their dollars for educating the general public (ever see those giant billboards with the bighorn sheep on them?). When a political fight comes up, I understand funds are needed to fight that, but that does not occur every year, so what happens in the meantime? 3. Are there other means to raise these funds, that do not require using wildlife as the medium for raising dollars. For instance, most political lobbies are suppprted by the industries they serve. So could the outdoor industry provide goods or services which could be used to raise funds? Are we as sportsman willing to pony up and provide financial suppport? I must say that I do not believe I can be convinced that this is a good idea. But I will listen to what is being proposed. I believe that selling more tags or opportunities for tags to those with more financial means feels like a perversion of the North American Model. The presentation of the initiative feels backhanded to me and that may be feeding my uneasiness. But it appears to me that although this would provide funds for the political fights like we had with HSUS it certainly is not the only way to raise money for these fights, and the bill certainly provides an added benefit to those who have money and those who have businesses that serve those who have money. Selfishly, I could probably afford a few more raffle tickets than most, so I may get a few more tags this way, but I agree, using state resources to raise money for political action does not feel ethical to me. Will be interesting to see how this shakes out. And please if anything I have stated is inaccurate please feel free to correct it, just be sure to write in crayon.

500cc?

I am sure he appreciates that. Since just the bow package without arrows sells for $350. If you want to low ball the guy, at least do it through a PM.