Outdoor Writer

azshtr, I pulled this image up from the thread I have in Other Big Game. If you look closely at my rifle, you'll see the front base overhangs the bolt area because I had the same problem you had encountered. Also, note how the rear base has the thicker area to the rear, as well. The ring slots in both bases were offset, so either one was reversible. And these were Leupold bases and rings used with a Leupold scope! I chose to reverse the front one because that interfered less when filling the magazine and most importantly, if I had reversed the rear base, the eye relief would have been too much because the scope would have been too far forward.

Sorry. The devil made me do it. -TONY

The above is a quote from the letter. Maybe G&F needs to do what a couple other states now do: no report, no permit the following year. That should increase compliance for better harvest stats, huh? And yes, it SHOULD include ALL hunts so the stats are accurate. Here's why: In the How To Hunt Coues Deer book, I explained how the harvest stats are derived from the mailed survey cards and why they can be really skewed, especially in units with a low number of permits. The stats are taken from only those cards that are actually returned. So if a unit has 100 permits but only 20 get returned and 10 people report killing a buck, the success rate is put at 50%. Of course, no one knows about the other 80 permits holders really did, but the assumption being made is they had the same average success rate. The problem is the statistical base to conclude that is really too small. -TONY I just finished reading the entire letter and saw the recommendation for manadatory reporting/no license was indeed suggested in it. Bingo! Then all they would need to worry about is hunters telling the truth on the survey cards. -TONY

The above is a quote from the letter. Maybe G&F needs to do what a couple other states now do: no report, no permit the following year. That should increase compliance for better harvest stats, huh? And yes, it SHOULD include ALL hunts so the stats are accurate. Here's why: In the How To Hunt Coues Deer book, I explained how the harvest stats are derived from the mailed survey cards and why they can be really skewed, especially in units with a low number of permits. The stats are taken from only those cards that are actually returned. So if a unit has 100 permits but only 20 get returned and 10 people report killing a buck, the success rate is put at 50%. Of course, no one knows about the other 80 permits holders really did, but the assumption being made is they had the same average success rate. The problem is the statistical base to conclude that is really too small. -TONY

Geez, Tam, a whole can of powder for four shots??? -TONY

Now that's certainly a novel idea, Mike. Everything stated in your message is dead on. -TONY

One other thing you might check is the WIDTH of the rings from front to back, not side to side. The Nikon ones might be wider, thus giving you less adjustable distance from front to back. -TONY

Doug, One thing I forgot to mention in my last reply: The annual funding for the new headquarters complex will come out of the Arizona Wildlife Conservation Fund, not the general operating AGFD funds. Here's how Conservation Fund receives its money: This fund was instituted after Arizona voters in 2002 approved Proposition 202, which continued limited and regulated gaming on Arizona tribal lands. Proposition 202 distributes a portion of shared gaming revenues, through the Arizona Benefits Fund, with the State of Arizona and local governments to support specified state and local programs. The Arizona Wildlife Conservation Fund is administered by the Arizona Game and Fish Commission. -TONY

If the ring slot in one of the bases is closer to one end than the other, try reversing it on the rifle to shorten the distance. Just be sure the bottom curvature fits the receiver the same way. If that doesn't work, return the Nikon stuff and get the Leupold bases/rings. If you can't find them, call Leupold. Give them your scope and gun models and have them ship you the rings/mounts that will work. -TONY

Doug, Here's the update straight from the powers-that-be -- the head of the Special Services Division. The property G&F currently occupies sits on 8 acres and has been appraised at $5 million. That area is now zoned as low-density residential, so the only thing that could be built by any developer would be a couple single family houses -- no condos or apartments. The sale is NOT finalized yet, but the city is now negotiating it where either the PD or FD will take over the site. The new quarters will be paid for with bonds up front, utilizing a limited partnership arrangement with everyone involved, and the lease back to pay off those bonds is for 25 years, with an annual payback of about $1 million. After 25 years, the agency owns it lock, stock and barrel. The breakdown of construction costs for what is called an "environmentally advanced" complex is about $16-17 per sq. foot., which as I had mentioned earlier also includes all the maintenance and custodial services. In addition to the energy savings, the rent for the area on the south side of Greenway will also be history. -TONY

Doug, Haven't you yet learned never to put forth facts into a lively discussion? Actually, the deal for the old headquarters complex on the north side of Greenway has already been consummated with Phoenix PD. It's a done deal. I should have the sale figure shortly. The property and buildings on the south side never belonged to AZG&F; they were leasing that part. BUT...even the funding for the new building has an interesting wrinkle to it. The general contractor is building it, and the department will have a 30-yr. lease-back arrangement whereby it pays so much a year toward the actual construction and maintenance costs. In return, the contractor will shoulder all the maintenance and custodial responsibilities for the duration of the lease. After 30 years, the department owns the whole enchilada. Additionally, just the savings in energy operating costs alone, amounting to about 50% less per sq. ft than now, will be substantial at the new complex. -TONY

One comment, and then you all can carry on with yours. As outlined in the other Auction Hunt thread, the proposed surcharge on applications per species will NOT change how the money is spent or doled out. The Habitat Partnership Committee Process will still exist, and the organization that would normally be in the thick of determining projects, etc. will still have the say. The only difference will be WHERE the revenue comes from. The SEPARATE habitat/conservation stamp fee or something similar could be either divided up on a percentage basis to go into the same fund (the old TAG fund for each species) or be kept intact in a separate "tag fund" account for ANY habitat project/improvement for small or big game. Any surcharge for each species would likely be less than the cost of a bottle of beer in Hooters because that's all it would take to make up for the loss of the tag revenue. For the less glamorous species, it would be like maybe $.50 or $1. The habitat/conservation stamp fee would also be nominal at a few bucks. Lastly, the result of any of this will be no NET LOSS of money from what it is now; in fact, it should result in MORE. -TONY

Jason, You might be able to find the manual online. Maybe when I get some time later this week, I'll take a looksee for ya. -TONY

Two seconds seems like a very long time. The specs on that camera says it normally takes anywhere from .3 to .6 sec to completely process an image. That's about right for most of the lower end P&S cameras. In contrast, the higher-end models, such as the Canon D30 I use, do it almost instantaneously. But you will pay more for that convenience. One way you can speed that lag time a bit is to do as someone else suggested -- pre-focus by holding the shutter button down partway. Then when the kids do something you want recorded for posterity, push hard to trip the shutter. A good way to learn about your camera and its many nuances is to read the instruction manual. It contains a lots of good info that you can refer to from time to time. That said, many newer models have stepped up the processor speeds. Should you decide to replace it with a newer model, go to Steve's Digicams. It is an excellent source for getting all the specs and for unbiased reviews on just about any model of digtal camera. -TONY

And the fastest shutter speed it offers is 1/1000 sec. -- even slower than what Jason has now. -TONY

Jason, I got to thinking a bit, which is always dangerous. Are you perhaps talking about the lag time between tripping the shutter to the actual image capture? If so, that has nothing to do with the shutter speed per se but the actual speed of the processor, including the auto-focus mechanism. -TONY

Tony, she has a Kodak Easy Share that's at least 3 maybe 4 years old. It's got 3.1 mp. The model # is DX6340. Hmmm. That camera has shutter speeds up to 1/2200 of a sec. That's about fast enough to stop a bullet in flight. You didn't mention what the problem is, i.e. if the photos are blurry, or...? But if that is the case, perhaps the setting being used is the real culprit? For action, you need to use something like the Sport setting, and in low light, the flash as to also be activated to stop the action. If you use the camera all automatic without selecting a specific shooting mode, it will tend to average the film and shutter speed and aperture. For the best reults for stop-action, shooting at the highest film ISO, such as 400, in SHUTTER-PRIORITY is the way to go. If you look at the bird photos above, you'll see they are also blurred because of too slow a shutter speed or possible camera movement. -TONY

Sounds good. Are you having someone draw up official plans or are you working like I do -- rough sketch, mostly in my head? Anyway, I would be glad to come help out with the rough framing if I'm around when you do it. I was involved with building $300K homes during the winter months in Colorado when I lived there, and I have a good assortment of tools, including pneumatic nailers/staplers, worm-drive Skill saw, etc. -TONY

Scott, Are you building on a concrete slab, piers, concrete or block stem walls? What is your basic construction gonna be -- block, wood framing with siding, wood framing with stucco, etc.? -TONY

Jason, What is the make and model of the camera your wife has now??

I certainly don't have a problem with a double-barrelled approach. Many other states already have some type of conservation stamp in place. Our trout stamp is quite similar and provides the necessary funds to run the state hatcheries to supply put-&-take fish. The application surcharge should be high enough to replace the funds generated by the special tags for each species. The license stamp could be nominal, i.e a few bucks, and then get divided on a percentage basic determined by the number of hunters who apply for each big-game species. Or maybe just leave it as a lump sum to be used for habitat, etc. for both small and big-game. -TONY

That won't rid the onus of the special tags that have seemingly become perverted by egos and greed. What we wind up with is possibly another incident like the one that just happened. Plus, I'm not keen on any sort of voluntary contribution because that gets away from the "everybody pays" concept and will make the total revenue for each species an unknown commodity from year to year. In contrast, the number of applicants usually stays within a predictable range. -TONY

For discussion purposes: Although I've fully supported both auction and raffle tags for that past 20 years, mostly because of what the money does, that doesn't mean I wouldn't be against getting rid of both and looking at alternative ways to raise the same amount of revenue. For example, let's look at elk for 2007. The various special auction and raffle tags brought in $335,000. Also in 2007, 102,325 hunters applied for a tag. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to do the math and find out that an additional surcharge for applying of $3-plus would generate the same total. The caveat would be that money would be earmarked toward the same projects as the auction/raffle funds are used for. This same surcharge concept could be used for every species, with the amount determined by the average number of applicants and total revenue required to make up the shortfall lost from the special tags. Another alternative would be a flat surcharge on licenses -- not apps or tags -- across the board with the total funds split on a percentage basis between species. Obviously this single surcharge would have to be quite a bit higher because a hunter buys only one license yet applies for one or many species. In either case, it's known as the "everybody pays" concept. -TONY

Okay, as requested by Amanda, here are some pix of LIVE animals from Africa. I'll start it off with me and my friend, Savanah. A few lions .... A couple leopards.... A couple king cheetahs.... And some miscellaneous....

This is the NEW 14'x32' trophy room -- an addition to the old family room and kitchen. I did all the work except pour the concrete slab. An overall look. The bear really enjoys watching fishing shows, so I have a hard time wresting the remote away from him. Looking back toward the kitchen. The archway in the lower left leads to a 7'x10' alcove where the door to the backyard is. There's another archway at the opposite end that goes into the other trophy room, and the archway at the right side of the alcove goes into the kitchen area. The big archway is where the old house wall was. This is the old family room that was remodeled when I did the addition. I had already remodeled the kitchen 4 years ago. I built the table using using wood from a couple old waterbeds. The thingie on the wall is made from the backskins of 10 sprinbok hides. There are also sprinbok hides on all the tables and the pillows have sprinbok hides as covers. These are newer photos after I hung more mounts. L. to R.: springbok, bushbuck, chamois and tahr. Next bunch are close-ups of all the mounts.