Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'game and fish'.
Found 3 results
I debated on posting this. I rarely bag on the AZGFD (on a public forum, anyway ) but this one really hit a nerve. My nephew drew an archery bull tag this year. It's his first. The kid loves to hunt. He also loves football. He's a senior and plays for his varsity high school football team. Pretty talented kid all-around. A couple of weeks ago he broke/dislocated his wrist during their game. They put it back in place and realized a little bit later that he needed to be in a hard cast, not the soft one he was in. Go figure, his new hard cast goes up to his bicep and drawing his bow is all but impossible. My brother contacted the game and fish trying to see if there was anything that could be done to salvage his hunt. Not the outcome they were hoping for. Because it's not a "permanent disability", he won't qualify for a crossbow permit. This got me thinking. How long is "permanent" and should each case be evaluated differently? To have a blanket policy of all "permanent" disabilities being the same is rather short-sighted, IMO. I remember the moment my wife and I watched Oscar Pistorius from South Africa run during the 2012 Olympics. Amazing!! A double amputee that became "disabled" at such a very young age. Yet he's far from disabled. Modern technology provided him an opportunity (key word) to not only walk, but run. And run he did!!! Did he have an extra advantage over the other runners with his bionic legs? It was determined no. And I think anyone who watched would clearly agree. Oscar didn't strike me as someone who was looking for an advantage over his peers, just an opportunity to compete. He had a great attitude towards everything. The Olympic panel took the time necessary to do the right thing and recognized the reprecussions of NOT considering Oscars case. We're all glad they did. Now, would Oscar qualify for a CHAMP permit in AZ? He would. Yet Oscar is in better shape and runs faster than more than 6 billion other human beings! Does anyone else find this ridiculous?? I think it's time the department thinks about the ramifications of some of their policies. Is it too much to ask for a case by case evaluation? Will issuing a crossbow permit to a 17yr old boy who's unable to draw his bow for the time frame of his hunt create an unfair advantage over those who can? Maybe I'm naive but I'll bet every hunter would say "give the kid a dang crossbow permit!!" AZGFD, you have an opportunity to think. Do it. Think about the definition of a "disability", what's really an advantage, and what's really not. This is a 17yr old boy asking for an opportunity to still shoot any old bull elk with an arrow, not a mzldr or a rifle. He just needs a little help with drawing and propelling that arrow. G and F, I think you know exactly what the right thing is to do.....