AZ- How long before we hit Bottom?

[coues32]

I know its gonna be tough to try to change things since they had the taste of the money.

 

Its going to take numbers to come together, its going to take the fellows with money, that know people. We donate our money we can have a say in it.

 

I have heard the main biologist here is from Colorado, and are running their model, maybe someone has some info on that.

 

 

I agree coues will be the last affected out of the others but flooding with tags and being able to put cameras out the numbers will keep falling with them also.

[4Falls]

Been happening for a loooooong time.

Mule deer hunting has been poor for quite a while and while other Western states seem to have recovered some were still the same.

Trophy elk hunting in AZ probably peaked a decade ago. From what I've heard NO units are managed for quality any longer.

Coues will be next. The units just can't handle that kind of pressure for ever and the tag levels will continue to increase.

Antelope hunting and sheep hunting is too rare to be considered.

Party hunting like was described in an earlier post is way more common than we realize. This website attracts a higher quality of hunters that are not the majority. So the majority are the demographic that AZG&F has chosen to ride with for obvious reasons.

There are other factors I believe as well... increasing predator problems, poorly managed public land and loss of habitat to name a few.

[lancetkenyon]

This might be an unpopular post in this thread...

 

I am not sure if I agree with the game quality going down this year. I have seen at least 3 bulls taken over 400", a desert mule deer over 300" gross, a possible new #2 P&Y Coues, and a ton of other Coues over the magic 100" mark. In a year that is not a great one for antler growth. Sure, we had a lot of rain on record, but too late in the season to do a lot of good for the antlers. Plus, look at all the photos (flower eating bull, game cam photos, etc.).

 

I, for one, would not mind seeing fewer tags, but at higher $$$ for the tags G&F do give out. That might not sit well with a lot of people on here, but if you look at the average cost we put into a hunt, and extra $100-200 for a tag is a drop in the bucket.

 

Sure, it cost me $750 in applications last year for elk and antelope alone, but I got most it back except for my daughter's elk tag she drew.

 

I also think the mature game are getting wise to the hunting tactics of the lazy, and head for the canyons and away from roads very quickly, if not altogether staying away from them year round now. And most mature game animals are nearly nocturnal in any area that gets hunting pressure.

 

I won't bag on G&F, I think they deserve more respect than they get here. Could they do better? Sure. But who couldn't? Have they screwed some things up in the past? Sure.

 

If you don't volunteer help or donate to other foundations that support our wildlife, you have no right to criticize. Just applying for tags is not enough support for people to get on a soap box and cry foul. Do something about it other than complain from behind a keyboard. With added monies, maybe the AZGFD could afford more actual enforcement of the game laws we have on the books, and be able to catch game violations more often. THAT might help increase the game populations. I have rarely seen G&F officers in the field due to the limited number of officers available. I would LOVE to see that change. Catch some of the people cruising around spotlighting, shooting from trucks or roads, "trolling" for big game, shooting multiple game animals and not looking for them, educations, freaking drinking and driving during the hunts and littering (WAY too many beer cans along the roads), poachers, etc.

[DesertBull]

Wait....what? I thought banning the corn piles was going to put a 100" whitetail in the back of every pickup?

[Gary I]

I couldn't agree more with this post.

There are a lot of factors that play into the diminishing quality of game and hunting in this state. Most have already been mentioned here. However the only thing that can consistently manage numbers and quality of game are tag numbers. I don't believe that current tag numbers have anything to do with proper management, only about the almighty dollar and perceived "opportunity". Not to say that there isn't some quality Game and Fish WMs that see what is happening and feel powerless to do anything about it. It is the Commission that sets tag numbers and sets Department budget numbers, they go hand in hand, what does anyone expect is going to happen. After all they are a government agency.

 

Anyone that feels that the quality or quantity of game in Arizona is anywhere near what it was just 10 years ago hasn't been out in the woods very long. It is very difficult to find anyone that spends a great deal of time in the outdoors, is a taxidermist, a guide etc. that isn't complaining about the "management" style and the lousy quality of game available. There will always be the occasional exceptional animal taken but it is the exception, not the rule. And at this rate that won't last either. Even the units that have been known for quality lately are under attack. Permits keep going in unit 23, 6A, 10, 9, 7, etc. It won't be long and these units will be opportunity only units too. The whitetail are still holding their own in a lot of units but that won't last forever.

 

I think it is way past time for the Game and Fish to do a survey of all users, hunters, guides, taxidermists, outdoorsmen, antler hunters, etc. Ask questions that are worded directly, not written in a manner that gets the answer you want to hear, like the last survey about opportunity. Then actually use the information to manage the resource. Opportunity is great for a while, but it eventualy becomes just taking your gun for a walk in the woods. We all like to have the chance to pursue what ever quarry that makes our heart beat faster in whatever legal manner we choose but if something isn't done soon hunter interest and recruitment will collapse. What then? Maybe that will bring about the change that is so desperately needed.

 

But then again, maybe I'm wrong. Been wrong before, will be wrong again. But at least we can all have an opinion. We still can, right?

[coues32]

This post is not to bag on G&F, guides, or hunters, Looking for solutions to a problem we have low numbers.

 

Get hunters more involved on the decisions made with our game. Other states do it.

 

The sheep got hammered by lions, what happened? Bounty on lions, multiple limits, hunting at night,

Money and Power gets things done.

 

 

Yes there has been some great trophy's taken this year. Its always been that way, There is a big gap in between 400" and 300" bulls didn't used to be that way.

[firstcoueswas110]

So let me get this straight...

 

Wildlife professionals set the tag limits based on science and unit populations...

 

Now it is the hunters fault?

 

well what were these wildlife professionals doing before when there was half as many tags then, you think theres been that much of an increase in game?

[DesertBull]

4-5 years ago they did survey and they claimed the majority of hunters want more tags. They were accused of wording the questions in a manner that influenced the results to fit their agenda.

[Coues79]

I know there could be flaws and "lying" to mandatory reporting, but I still don't understand why we do not have mandatory harvest reporting for every species to assist with a more sound "management". Many of states do this, the Native Tribes do this, but, we still do not have this mandatory reporting. Of course, some will lie. However, I like to think that the majority of hunters will in good faith be honest with it and could help to a better management tool.

[Sneaker]

I put this together really fast. I think I got it all in there, give or take a year in some cases(used '64 in a couple of cases instead of '63 when they didn't have hunts). Looking at Harvest Data, at tags issued every 10 years, the only tags that have gone up alot recently appear to be elk, but elk's range and population has also spread alot. Food for thought.

Book1.pdf

[BeardownAZ]

Anybody who thinks money doesn't account for majority of there(game and fish) decision making has there head in the sand. Biologist may put in there input but they work for that same agency that pays there wages whose whole revenue is based on what we give to them by tags, licenses, etc. Hmm I wonder if money has ever made a government do things for less then honest reasons??

[Coues79]

Alright, after looking at the hunt recommendations, compared to 2014, they are decreasing tags in quite a few units.

 

For example,

 

-1, 2B and 2C late rifle bull is being decreased by 50 tags (this past year they decreased them as well I believe)

-Late 3A, 3C is being decreased by 25 tags

-Decreasing tags in 27 (the late bull hunt goes back to 400; I never thought this would happen again, I was proved wrong)

- They eliminated a cow hunt altogether in 27

 

On the contrary, they are piping tags in the 7's pretty heavily....

 

Do you think they have listened to hunters in the white mountains? Or is it something else?

[naturebob]

They lowered rifle tags a little in unit one but upped archery a bunch in the last few years. I wish they would just raise fees and lower tags. You spend thousands on gear what is a little more to have quality hunts?...........BOB!

[ThomC]

I have noticed an increase in knee-jerk complainers who don't have a clue and wont read the real facts or have an agenda that just wont change. Sound familiar?

[bonecollector777]

They dropped some tags in a few units so the elk didn't go extinct. They didn't have a choice.