Hunt proposal, more limited archery units

[Desertguide]

I think we will end up finding out these changes are due to the high success rates in Aug/Sept 2020. If I remember correctly, Game and Fish pulls archery hunts when the archery success rate is greater than 10% of the total rifle harvest in a particular unit. Don't quote me... I'm going strictly from memory on that. 

 

[trophyseeker]

5 minutes ago, huntlines said:

I knew it went for a couple of years. First year I almost forgot and our local game warden called me. Second year I remembered and called him to let him know he couldn’t arrest me. 
 

Then it was gone without an explanation and no changes to hunt structures. Weird 

I think a couple units went to a draw but I can't recall which ones. Check the 2012-2013 regs. 

[HuntHarder]

4 minutes ago, Desertguide said:

I think we will end up finding out these changes are due to the high success rates in Aug/Sept 2020. If I remember correctly, Game and Fish pulls archery hunts when the archery success rate is greater than 10% of the total rifle harvest in a particular unit. Don't quote me... I'm going strictly from memory on that. 

 

Only problem is, they have no concept of either rifle or archery success rates... 

[huntlines]

5 minutes ago, Desertguide said:

I think we will end up finding out these changes are due to the high success rates in Aug/Sept 2020. If I remember correctly, Game and Fish pulls archery hunts when the archery success rate is greater than 10% of the total rifle harvest in a particular unit. Don't quote me... I'm going strictly from memory on that. 

 

But how do they know what the archery success rates are? Lots of hunters never fill out the voluntary survey.

[Desertguide]

Also, Game and Fish only cuts rifle tags for 2 reasons. Either the buck:doe ratio has dipped lower than the prescribed minimum for the unit OR... they want to raise buck:doe ratios. If you look, they're cutting rifle tags in nearly every unit they cut archery hunts in. That tells me buck:doe ratios have dropped. 

[Desertguide]

2 minutes ago, HuntHarder said:

Only problem is, they have no concept of either rifle or archery success rates... 

Well they think they do. I've talked to several game and fish employees who have said that they know within 1% or 2% what overall success is based on how many people return their surveys. They figure that if X amount of animals are killed based on returned surveys... Y amount of deer were actually killed. 

I think its BS and they should have mandatory reporting but what do I know? 

[Desertguide]

6 minutes ago, huntlines said:

But how do they know what the archery success rates are? Lots of hunters never fill out the voluntary survey.

I answered the same question for HuntHarder. 

[huntlines]

Just now, Desertguide said:

Well they think they do. I've talked to several game and fish employees who have said that they know within 1% or 2% what overall success is based on how many people return their surveys. They figure that if X amount of animals are killed based on returned surveys... Y amount of deer were actually killed. 

I think its BS and they should have mandatory reporting but what do I know? 

Agreed, also their buck to doe ratio is based on aerial surveys. After a long discussion with a warden on how that works, I have real doubts they have a firm grasp on that number either.

[HuntHarder]

Just spitballing here, but what about a harvest objective similar to bear.  Again tho, this would require mandatory reporting.  I like the idea of actually managing based on solid factual #'s not just a round about #.

[Desertguide]

7 minutes ago, huntlines said:

Agreed, also their buck to doe ratio is based on aerial surveys. After a long discussion with a warden on how that works, I have real doubts they have a firm grasp on that number either.

I had the opportunity to sit down with a former Game Branch Chief. I asked him all kinds questions. Supposedly they have some complex mathematical formula they use to determine the total number of bucks, does and fawns based on what they see when they fly. Problem is, they only grid and fly certain areas of a unit... never the entire unit. 

What I've always wondered is how they do aerial surveys in thick country like in the pines. You're telling me they can get a relatively precise count of elk and deer flying over a pine canopy? Horsesh!t. 

Not to mention they pay $1500 per hour to fly. 

[68OLDS]

Best bet, ask them directly.  These are all valid points.  

www.azgfd.gov/webcast 

6pm 

[Desertguide]

14 minutes ago, HuntHarder said:

Just spitballing here, but what about a harvest objective similar to bear.  Again tho, this would require mandatory reporting.  I like the idea of actually managing based on solid factual #'s not just a round about #.

Me too man!!! We pushed all this pretty heavy back in 2011 and they stonewalled us. Made me walk away from being involved with Game and Fish hunt recommendations or the rule making process. Unless there is major outcry from the hunting community, they do what they want when they want. The only exception is when they start getting lawyer letters like the one SirRoyals group sent about trailcams. Those actually work from what I've seen. 

[huntlines]

22 minutes ago, Desertguide said:

I had the opportunity to sit down with a former Game Branch Chief. I asked him all kinds questions. Supposedly they have some complex mathematical formula they use to determine the total number of bucks, does and fawns based on what they see when they fly. Problem is, they only grid and fly certain areas of a unit... never the entire unit. 

What I've always wondered is how they do aerial surveys in thick country like in the pines. You're telling me they can get a relatively precise count of elk and deer flying over a pine canopy? Horsesh!t. 

Not to mention they pay $1500 per hour to fly. 

That’s what I learned as well after my long conversation. When I started asking those difficult questions I was dismissed. Didn’t go well at that meeting....

[Desertguide]

50 minutes ago, huntlines said:

That’s what I learned as well after my long conversation. When I started asking those difficult questions I was dismissed. Didn’t go well at that meeting....

Yeah... they're not big fans of people as smart as them. 

And don't get me wrong.... I learned volumes in my meeting with Brian Wakeling (former Game Branch Chief). The things he taught me about mule deer management have stuck with me to this day. But there were areas... like surveys and mandatory reporting... that he definitely wiggled out of. 

[creed]

6 minutes ago, Desertguide said:

Yeah... they're not big fans of people as smart as them. 

And don't get me wrong.... I learned volumes in my meeting with Brian Wakeling (former Game Branch Chief). The things he taught me about mule deer management have stuck with me to this day. But there were areas... like surveys and mandatory reporting... that he definitely wiggled out of. 

I will never again try to work with those arrogant Richard heads