Outdoor Writer

I'm currently sitting on the patio overlooking the beach at our time-share in Mazatlan. As we have done for many years, we drove down through Nogales on Mon. of last week, spending the night as usual in Navajoa, then continuing on to Maz. the next day. The trip was uneventful, and as usual all the folks we came in contact with were helpful and friendly. The same applies to the time we have spent here. The other day, I dropped my wife off in the more commercial area about 4 miles from the resort so she could shop. She wound up shopping her way all the way back to our resort on foot. We leave Mon. and will overnight in Hermosillo on the way back. We expect, like the trip down, it will also be uneventful.

Ditto, Mr. Quimby!

Hey, you guys probably wouldn't want to see photos of some of these gals in the teeny 'kinis. In fact, they should have a law that bans any gal over 125 lbs. and 21 years old from wearing them. Then again, after a few cervezas, they all look pretty good.

Well, we made it to Mazatlan. We didn't get killed, beheaded or robbed. LOL The trip was uneventful and everything went smoothly. Everyone we came in contact with were helpful and friendly, as they normally are. And now, I'm sitting here on the patio with a good view of the pool. It's amazing how much some gals can cram into very tiny bikinis.

No doubt many of those cats were tainted since Prock was a crook. I recalled when they nailed his butt way back when. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1088195/1/index.htm

Casey, I'm well aware of what goes on down there since I have been driving down to Mazatlan and other places in Mexico for going on 35 years now. They even grow a bunch of tomatoes and beans in Sinaloa that pass through. Geez, I even know one of the major cartels is based in Cullican, one of the cities we pass through on the way. I hope I don't scare them too bad when we go through there. My doctor and I drove to Lake Baccarac in 2009 and had to pass through the small city of Sinaloa De Leya, which is inland and also the home of a smaller drug cartel. While on the lake, we could literally see marijuana gardens growing a short way from the shoreline. Our fishing guide told us, 'No Problema, as long as you stay away from them." He said they're all over in the foothills around the lake.

My wife and I leave Sun. a.m. for our annual 2-week stay at our time shares in Mazatlan, Sinaloa. We will be driving as usual, with an overnight stay in Navajoa where we also enjoy a hearty shrimp chipolte dinner at the Del Rio. Will report if we get killed while we're down there. In the meantime, we still avoid driving in Maryvale (west Phx) and south Phx at night without a police escort.

Congrats to Grant. Well done young man.

I see no one has commented on the editorial in Fri.'s Republic. I posted the following as a comment on AZCENTRAL.COM at: Opinions. ***** The hatchet job on Prop 109 by the Republic was obviously written by someone with low reading comprehension. In fact, after reading it, it's easy to assume it might have been written by HSUS president Wayne Pacelle. For example, the comment about the poacher is erroneous from the get-go. The writer of the editorial apparently does not know the difference between legal and illegal. The amendment clearly states: "A. The citizens of this State have a right to hunt, fish and harvest wildlife LAWFULLY." By definition, poachers harvest wildlife UNLAWFULLY. Thus they have no right under the proposed amendment. Also, another comment addresses the possible return of leghold traps. By definition, trapping is neither hunting or fishing. I submitted the item below to the Republic earlier in the week knowing the topic would be covered in the Fri. issue. It outlines the true intent of Prop 109. Not surprisingly, the Republic chose not to run it, likely because it would have shown how far out in left field its own editorial is. The Republic's editorial contends there is no threat to hunting and fishing. The missing word in that conclusion is "currently." While there might be no threat now, HSUS and the other animal-rights organizations will do their best to change that. Note specifically the past quotes from Pacelle below, which point directly to the concern for the FUTURE. Vote YES on Prop 109 The election ballot this year includes Proposition 109, which would guarantee the right to hunt and fish in Arizona. It also will keep the status of wildlife management with the state legislature and Arizona Game & Fish Department (AGFD) just as it has been for many decades under Arizona's Title 17 statutes. The nation's leading extremist anti-hunting group, the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), in conjunction with other advocacy organizations such as the Sierra Club and Center for Biological Diversity, is working to defeat Prop 109. None of these three groups directly contributes a penny to the actual management of wildlife in Arizona. In reality, they annually cost this state and others millions of dollars because of the various, often frivolous lawsuits they file. While these groups represent the ballot proposition as a "power grab," nothing could be more untrue. In reality, Prop 109 will not change a thing. It will instead guarantee everything remains intact under Title 17: the legislature makes the laws and under those laws, they designate the AGFD as the caretaker of Arizona's wildlife. As such, the AGFD makes rules and regulations and enforces those and the laws in regards to hunting and fishing. The agency's nongame branch, using revenue mostly contributed by hunters and anglers through license sales and the federal excise taxes on the equipment they use, also manages myriad unhunted species with similar rules and regulations. Those rules often address the complete protection and preservation of many species, including endangered and threatened species. Informed voters should also be aware of the deceptively-named HSUS that has nothing to do with local animal shelters or organizations. HSUS is a self-avowed national anti-hunting group with an annual budget of over $100 million. In the past, HSUS has worked to ban specific hunting seasons, the hunting of specific species and even traditional methods of hunting. This anti-hunting organization has funded the successful campaign to close the dove hunting season in Michigan without any scientific reason to do so. And now HSUS has set its sights on Arizona. HSUS president, Wayne Pacelle, once claimed his goal is to create “a National Rifle Association of the animal rights movement.” He also said, "We are going to use the ballot box and the democratic process to stop all hunting in the United States" and "we will take it species by species until all hunting is stopped in California. Then we will take it state by state." If Pacelle has his way, it will signal the end of sound wildlife management in this state. The relentless efforts of the anti-hunting movement are exactly why Prop 109 is needed. It is specifically written to pre-empt anti-hunting groups from attempting to restrict the right of Arizonans to hunt and fish – the key reason why HSUS and the others oppose it. Prop 109, as written, will not only help protect and preserve the right to hunt and fish, it will also ensure that all of Arizona's wildlife, including that which is NOT hunted, will be managed with long-tested and sound scientific principles rather than by emotions that sometimes have disastrous consequences. Any voter concerned about the future of all of Arizona's wildlife should not allow it to be managed by the anti-hunting emotions of extremists. That means a "yes" vote on Prop 109.

Amanda, The Republic had a thingie in it yesterday that said they will have Prop 109 profiled on Fri. I sent the following into the editorial board and asked that it be published on that day, as well. Not sure they will, but we'll see. ***** Vote YES on Prop 109 The election ballot this year includes Proposition 109, which would guarantee the right to hunt and fish in Arizona. It also will keep the status of wildlife management with the state legislature and Arizona Game & Fish Department (AGFD) just as it has been for many decades under Arizona's Title 17 statutes. The nation's leading extremist anti-hunting group, the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), in conjunction with other advocacy organizations such as the Sierra Club and Center for Biological Diversity, is working to defeat Prop 109. None of these three groups directly contributes a penny to the actual management of wildlife in Arizona. In reality, they annually cost this state and others millions of dollars because of the various, often frivolous lawsuits they file. While these groups represent the ballot proposition as a "power grab," nothing could be more untrue. In reality, Prop 109 will not change a thing. It will instead guarantee everything remains intact under Title 17: the legislature makes the laws and under those laws, they designate the AGFD as the caretaker of Arizona's wildlife. As such, the AGFD makes rules and regulations and enforces those and the laws in regards to hunting and fishing. The agency's nongame branch, using revenue mostly contributed by hunters and anglers through license sales and the federal excise taxes on the equipment they use, also manages myriad unhunted species with similar rules and regulations. Those rules often address the complete protection and preservation of many species, including those that are endangered and threatened. Informed voters should also be aware of the deceptively-named HSUS that has nothing to do with local animal shelters or organizations. HSUS is a self-avowed national anti-hunting group with an annual budget of over $100 million. In the past, HSUS has worked to ban specific hunting seasons, the hunting of specific species and even traditional methods of hunting. This anti-hunting organization has funded the successful campaign to close the dove hunting season in Michigan without any scientific reason to do so. And now HSUS has set its sights on Arizona. HSUS president, Wayne Pacelle, once claimed his goal is to create “a National Rifle Association of the animal rights movement.” He also said, "We are going to use the ballot box and the democratic process to stop all hunting in the United States" and "we will take it species by species until all hunting is stopped in California. Then we will take it state by state." If Pacelle has his way, it will signal the end of sound wildlife management in this state. The relentless efforts of the anti-hunting movement are exactly why Prop 109 is needed. It is specifically written to pre-empt anti-hunting groups from attempting to restrict the right of Arizonans to hunt and fish – the key reason why HSUS and the others oppose it. Prop 109, as written, will not only help protect and preserve the right to hunt and fish, it will also ensure that all of Arizona's wildlife, including that which is NOT hunted, will be managed with long-tested and sound scientific principles rather than by emotions that sometimes have disastrous consequences. Any voter concerned about the future of all of Arizona's wildlife should not allow it to be managed by the anti-hunting emotions of extremists. That means a "yes" vote on Prop 109.

Way to go, Doug. That buck has some nice mass to it.

Good looking mount. Kudos to both Scotts.

Congrats, Ron. Great bull, story and pix.

Just returned from picking up the double pedestal of the two TX bucks I killed last winter. Chris Krueger, Krueger's Creations, did the work. Note how he matched the "habitat" to the area where I hunted, as seen in the second photo. The buck on the left had a 3" hole where the 180-gr. bullet from my .300 Win. mag exited. It's now invisble. Also, at my request, he repaired the broken crab claw on the right antler of the same buck. The bottom rack in the third photo shows what it looked like broken.

Thanks all. I'm quite pleased with the mount. In fact, I had two old Coues deer racks laying around and decided to have Chris do a similar set up with them. One of the bucks is the one pictured on the back of the book that has about 6 inches broken off one main beam. Chris will repair that. Right now he's working on a bobcat/snake combo for me, though. Ernesto, I don't "do" elevated blinds, feeders or bait piles. We hunted these TX deer just like I hunt Coues deer. Here's a few messages I had posted elsewhere back in Dec. and Jan. ******* From my first trip: Here's a photo of the oryx bull I shot last weekend in TX. I also killed a very nice, heavy-beamed 9-pt. buck. Unfortunately, I won't have a photo of the buck until I get the antlers sent to me, likely this week or next. I hit the buck too high just before dark on Sun., and he ran off into the thick cedars. We tracked him for a couple hours that night, then came back the next morning again. We eventually lost any blood trail and gave up since I had to leave for home and the ranch manager had to go to his other job. He went back to the area the next day and found the buck dead. He was lying about 20 feet from a water hole. So he recovered the antlers and will be shipping them to me. Now I'll have to get a cape somewhere. **** From my 2nd trip two weeks later: Here's the buck I tagged this past weekend north of Uvalde. It's a legit 10-pt. without the broken point on the crab claw of the left main beam and a little kicker point coming off the right brow tine. Inside spread is 16 inches. The other buck I shot two weeks ago is a good heavy 9-point with an 18" inside spread. I got another cape for him, too. I need to go drop the capes off at the taxidermist right now. I'll take a couple of photos with both sets of antlers together and post them later with a few other terrain photos. etc. ***** These are a few pix of the terrain. The first one -- taken at 3X from where I shot -- is where I killed the buck this weekend. We were glassing from a ridge about 600-800 yds. away, and I found him with my 12X binocs. He was bedded with three does where the left arrow is pointing. I stalked within 200 yards when one of the does nailed me. The buck popped up and trotted to the opening where the arrow on the right is pointing to him on the ground. He stopped, facing almost dead away and looking back at me. Because I thought my .264 was shooting too high, I had left it in camp and used my custom Robar .300 Win. mag (in the photo above). I nailed him low in the neck -- bang-flop, DRT. The 180-gr. TBBC blew through the neck, leaving about a 3" exit hole for the taxidermist to patch up. Other than the different types of vegetation, the terrain was very much like the areas where I hunt Coues deer. Since I refuse to hunt over feeders, it was an ideal situation. Doug, the ranch manager, looking over one of the valleys.

The amendment doesn't grant any more power to the Legislature than it ALREADY has! The Legislature has been making the laws in regards to the state's wildlife management for decades. And within the those laws, they may designate that management to the AZ G&FD, which then has the task of doing that management under the RULES it puts forth. When it comes to actual LAW changes, however, the game dept. MUST go through the Legislature, as it always has been in the past. In other words, the game dept. works as an agent of sorts for the Legislature.

Groan. Those are ibex on a dam in Europe -- Lake Camposecco in Italy to be exact. This one is cool too;

R12-4-319 Use of Aircraft to Take Wildlife A. For the purposes of this Section, the following definitions apply: 1. "Aircraft" means any contrivance used for flight in the air or any lighter-than-air contrivance. 2. "Locate" means any act or activity that does not take or harass wildlife and is directed at locating or finding wildlife in a hunt area. B. An individual shall not take or assist in taking wildlife from or with the aid of aircraft. C. Except in hunt units with Commission-ordered special seasons under R12-4-115 and R12-4-120 and hunt units with seasons only for mountain lion and no other concurrent big game season, an individual shall not locate or assist in locating wildlife from or with the aid of an aircraft in a hunt unit with an open big game season. This restriction begins 48 hours before the opening of a big game season in a hunt unit and extends until the close of the big game season for that hunt unit. D. An individual who possesses a special big game license tag for a special season under R12-4-115 or R12-4-120 or an individual who assists or will assist such a licensee shall not use an aircraft to locate wildlife beginning 48 hours before and during a Commission-ordered special season. E. This Section does not apply to any individual acting within the scope of official duties as an employee or authorized agent of the state or the United States to administer or protect or aid in the administration or protection of land, water, wildlife, livestock, domesticated animals, human life, or crops. R12-4-320 Harassment of Wildlife A. In addition to the provisions of A.R.S. § 17-301, it is unlawful to harass, molest, chase, rally, concentrate, herd, intercept, torment, or drive wildlife with or from any aircraft as defined in R12-4-319, or with or from any motorized terrestrial or aquatic vehicle. B. This Section does not apply to individuals acting: 1. Under the provisions of A.R.S. § 17-239; or 2. Within the scope of official duties as an employee or authorized agent of the state or the United States to administer or protect or aid in the administration or protection of land, water, wildlife, livestock, domesticated animals, human life, or crops.

Way to go guys. Two fine "meeses."

Superb bull! Congrats to Jody.

Congrats on a super bull.

It does no such thing. In fact, it removes the threat of the "voters" doing anything. In effect, it does nothing to the way the wildlife is currently managed by the legislature in regards to the LAWS (Title 17) and by AZG&F in regards to the RULES, which is where the harvests, seasons, etc. come under. It has been this way for eons and nothing about that will change. What the amendment WILL DO is REMOVE the threat of the environmental and animal rights groups from putting initiatives on the ballots where the "voters" would decide how to manage wildlife, i.e. the ban on public land trapping, as an example.

Way to go, John. A unique "rack" for sure.

And...if all else fails, I would bet the dog has a microchip implanted that can be scanned by any vet. I think Petsmart will even do the scan. Generally, the owner's info is available once the number is known.

Way to get it done. Nice bull. Congrats.