AZGFD IS ASKING FOR SUGGESTIONS

[KGAINES]

Here is my e-mail to them about resident/ non-resident on azgfd.

I think we should only allow non-residents one bull elk per lifetime, best case scenario, one bull elk every 10 years, they should also have to have an arizona hunters safety course, and attend an azgfd seminar on elk and our state prior to their first elk hunt, guides that are from out of state should have to pay for an arizona license that is at least 20 times more than a resident guide, and should have to attend classes at their expense in arizona to guide, also all non-residents should have to apply via the mail, no internet, and all tag fees should be upfront for them or for everybody, they should not be allowed to hunt sheep, antelope, or buffalo in arizona at all, we have such small herds that an arizona resident might never get drawn why should someone from out of state be guaranteed 10% because those animals are next on the list, I also don't think ranchers should be allowed to deny access to public lands, if there are public lands that are locked in by ranches there should be road easements that allow access. Those are just a few of my thoughts and I hope I can make to one of these meetings to show support for residents and arizonas wildlife

I think some of you guys had some great ideas and should send them to azgfd also, there is also link on their website.

http://www.azgfd.com/nrm/no_cap_comments.shtml

[Diamondbackaz]

That's pretty extreme Keith.

[DesertBull]

The Supreme Court of the US has already ruled in the ranchers favor in regards to the blocking of public land. They even said you cannot legally cross a section corner.

 

 

 

This is what I sent:

 

 

1. Make the address on the tag be the mailing address. In other words, USO cannot apply for a hunter in New York and have the tag mailed to New Mexico. The tag must go directly to the tag holder.

 

2. Make the sale of horns, hides, ivories, etc illegal.

 

3. Raise the price on NR outfitters icense fees through the roof.

 

4. Make the outfitter be present at all camps at least once every 3 days to check on the welfare of his clients. Not the guide, the outfitter that carries the special use permit and the insurance.

 

This is not a suggestion, but a comment. How can the plaintiffs declare that they are being shut out of the antler market when they can come here and pick up sheds all year long without any kind of permit or be limited to only one bull per year? Same with the hides and ivories. Cow elk have both and there are no tag restrictions on them. Guides and outfitters can guide for deer below the Co River and cow elk too.

[KGAINES]

I would be willing to bet that very few if any non-residents apply for a cow elk tag, and only a limited amount apply for deer not on the plateau. Before non-residents are allowed to hunt bull they should have to apply and receive a cow tag first. I already stated that the bull should at best be allowed every ten years for a non- resident and a cow tag should be drawn first. I agree that the tags should be mailed to the person that was drawn. With what I have read about the USO I wouldn't doubt that a fake id could be made pretty easy and the people that they want to hunt would hunt under an assumed name. Non-residents should have to check in at specified locations to have their tags checked during hunts also, or call and say that they will not be hunting this particular year if they have tags in multiple states and are not coming and then azgfd could sell those tags on a first come first served basis over the counter at azgfd. I would do anything in the states power to get the uso and their supporters out of arizona. We have a unique diversity of wildlife in this state and residents should benifit, non-residents should be allowed to hunt, but it should be under arizonas rules. The average non-resident and all residents are paying the price for rich guys that think they are better than everybody and the rules should be in their favor, you guys know that if a non-resident draws a tag and plans on hunting without a guide that these huge outfitters are just as ticked off at them as they are residents. If they aren't lining their pockets than it isn't fair. If wyoming wins their case it will go to the supreme court at some point in time and if our lawyers get their head out of there xxxxx, we can win this thing and I would still change some of the rules to hurt the outfitters out of state.

Edited January 1, 1970 by KGAINES

[az4life]

I sent my list in too! Cannot make it to any of the meetings.

 

If you can attend, do so, but if you cannot attend I would suggest all other CWD members submit their ideas in writing as well.

 

In this case, the more comments, the better.

 

Squeeky wheels get the grease, I just hope they put it on the right spot!

[Diamondbackaz]

I am for putting higher prices on trophy hunts. I think it's silly that a Bull tag is the same price as a cow, Kaibab hunts are only $15.00 more than the rest of the state for the crappy Mule Deer units, and a 4 day whitetail hunt costs the same for a 15 day hunt. I willing to pay a higher premium for a premium hunt, and also have the non resident pay a non resident premium for those hunts. I think this would also stand up in the courts.

[111]

Heres what I will send to Arizona Game and Fish.

 

1.) Every nonresident should take an Arizona Hunter Safety Course in Arizona and it has to be a three to four week course like I had to take, not no weekend deal.

 

2.) No guide out of the State of Arizona should be able to guide in the State of Arizona. Resident guides only.

 

******3.) No nonresident can apply for big game permits in the State of Arizona.*******

 

4.) Illegal to sale hides and antlers if thats whats going to end that court stuff.

 

5.) I don't like seeing the rich have all the fun but the nonresident tag fees will have to be raised dramatically to keep their numbers down.

 

6.) No nonresident can apply on the internet. The application has to be filled out and returned to an Arizona Game and Fish office in Arizona.

 

7.) I would like to see tag fees charged to your account for residents and nonresidents as soon as you apply, NOT as soon as you recieve your tag.

 

8.) Nonresident licenses should be tripled at the least.

 

9.) One nonresident elk tag per lifetime. One nonresident deer tag in the State of Arizona. No antelope, buffalo, or bighorn sheep tags to be given out to nonresidents.

 

Residents in all States deserve the opportunity to hunt over a nonresident.

[COUESAZ]

Why mess around with what we as Arizonans have to pay to hunt. If you ask me it is just fine the way it is for us.

 

Now the non res hunters Can have it put to them I do not care.

*I would agree with raising there cost.

 

*Make them attend an Elk seminar Along with a hunting deer in Arizona seminar.

that will cost them a couple days stay in the heat.

 

*Make them pay Up front, not only if they get drawn.

 

*There should be a set number of years for them after they draw a tag before they draw again.

 

*They should have to wear a blaze orange vest that says non res hunter on it.

 

I do not blame them for wanting to hunt in this great state. And for you good guys that are part of this site and live in another state please forgive us for the way we fill. We have been pushed and cowboys and skatters do not react very well to people that push us.

Edited January 1, 1970 by ARIZONA GUIDE

[Elmacho]

I bet if the state required the hunter safety course from Arizona for any person to have a license, and a license remains required to have a bonus point, it would weed out a bunch. Furthermore, putting a 5-7 year waiting period after one is drawn(elk & Kaibab) would sour it a little more too. Each hoop stings a bit more. Oh yeah, the internet deal...it really screws things up. Too easy to apply, not enough money required. Here in CA, they went to a system for drawing duck hunt reservations of all things. Everyone can buy a season of applications and submit all at once. some duck hunts are harder to get than a kaibab tag, most are harder than a nov coues tag.

 

 

I am from out of state, I took the hunter safety course, I buy a license every year, and it is still inviting to enter the draw, just because I know I MAY draw whether I have points or not. If I didn't live as close as I do or have relatives there, I would have never considered jumpimg thru all the hoops.

 

A hopeless hunting addict,

 

Mark

[.270]

in my opinion, and i'm always right (if ya don't believe me, just ask me) the single best thing that the azgfd could do is to quit using electronic applications. make folks put the money up, up front. mail in applications only. if they have to increase fees, so be it. this crap of every "hunters pool" and antihunter being able to apply for 5 bucks has gotta end. this played right into georgy boy's hand. now instead of him having to tie up all the money that his "pool" fronts him, all he has to tie up is $5.

and dang the politics and do what sound, scientifically collected data tells you to do. if it says to shoot predators, shoot predators. heck with what some poor offended yankee might say. if it says to increase or decrease permits, do it, no matter how much the hunting public might complain.

another thing that i really think is going to be an even worse problem is allowing animals that are not traditional to an area, to get a foothold and establish a population. like elk in the gila mountains and unit 31 and south of kingman and in the cedars along the new mexico line. and those dang mountain bighorns in u28. oh yeah, and the wolf/dog crosses. bblluuuuhhhhhh, don't get me started there. in areas where this has taken place, have a hunt and get rid of all of em. especially the elk. what few deer that were in these places have been displaced, ran out, and just flat dissappeared because of forage loss. forage that wasn't very good to start with. anyway, that's where i'd start. Lark.

[TAM]

Here is my list of ideas that I also posted on another website.

 

I think we all need to remember that it may take several different ideas being put into action to resolve the issue. There is probably not going to be just one single change that will straighten everything out. AZ G&F will more than likley need to impliment several different new rules in order to make things right.

 

The best ideas I've heard so far are:

 

1) Charge full price up front. No more $5 just to apply.

 

2) Eliminate non resident bonus points. (they all just gripe about our BP system anyway)

 

3) Raise NR tag prices to a competive level with other states. $750-$1000 for an elk tag. Deer tags should be $450-$600

 

4) Allow residents the opportunity to earn additional BP's by getting involved in G&F approved projects.

 

5) We MUST make it illegal to sell or purchase horns and hides of AZ harvested animals. (let Georgy & company come look for sheds if they want to sell antlers)

 

6) We must require that ALL hunters pass an Arizona certified hunting saftey course.

 

7) We could require that ALL guides be AZ residents or at least make it more difficult to get a guide's license in Arizona. There should be ongoing training, testing, and saftey instruction and certification for all guides. (USO hires a lot of 20 year old kids with little or no experience to act as guides)

 

8) We need to require that tags be mailed to the individual applying for the hunt and not to third party application services like USO.

 

9) Why not make it illegal to use airplane's for any scouting purposes? (how would ole Georgy Boy find any good bulls if he can't fly his airplane?)

 

10) We could implement NR bag limits to one bull/deer in a lifetime.

 

11) We could implement NR waiting periods. (NR's can't apply again for 3-5 years once they've been drawn)

 

12) Restrict the NR hunting dates/seasons.

 

I'm sure there are other ideas in addition to these. There is no way that all of these ideas will get any consideration by the G&F, and not one of them by itself will solve the problem. If we can work with the G&F commission to consider several of the best options and move forward quickly, we can create more favorable circumstances for the Arizona residents.

[.270]

TAM, i like the no non residetn bonus point deal. need to come up with something like the colorado preference points for residents. maybe they could give the non-residents bonus points, but just have them apply only to the nonresident tags. whatever is suggested, it has to be reasonable. the commission won't listen to it and will just write a guy off as a crank if it isn't. making folks travel here to take a hunters safety course is sorta unreasonable, i think. but making hunter's safety mandatory, for any age, isn't. colorado is sorta that way. to be old enough to not have to have a card you had to serve in WWI or some deal. anyway, i see some good comments. folks are thinking. here is what i wote em. i'm sure it'll hit the round file real quick, but hey, i tried to enlighten em. probably just put my name on the permanent $h!t list in their computer, but oh well, i've taken my share i guess. Lark.

 

here it is:

 

well, you asked for it, so here it is. let me start by explaining a little about my backrgound. i'm a 4th generation Az. native. i'm a hunter. a true outdoorsman. so is my dad, so was his father and his father, etc. my sons are outdoorsmen. my entire extended famliy likes to fish, camp, hike, hunt etc. just generally poke around the west doing whatever comes natural. and we eat everything we take. don't leave trash on the ground. don't leave gates open. we're good stewards. there isn't a unit in Az. that me and my boys haven't drug a buck or bull out of, or shot a quail or caught a fish. we hunt fish and enjoy this entire state. i'm not a crank, don't belong to any organizations other than the NRA. but i believe in right and wrong and there is no gray area when it comes to right and wrong. you're either right or wrong, you either tell the truth or you're a liar. you are either honest or dishonest. that's my opinion.

i'll try to be brief.

the #1 most important thing that the azgfd can do, right now, to improve hunting in this state, is to eliminate the electronic game applications. go back to mail in only. if it requires a fee increase or surcharge, so be it. electronic notification after the draw is ok, i guess. can't see a real problem with that. but the ability of anyone to take 5 minutes and apply for the most sought after public land big game permits in the world for only 5 bucks just isn't good for the state. it allows hunters pools, like the one that george taulman and his uso group are famous for, to flood the system with nonresident applications. you know what i'm saying. i don't have to go into detail.

#2. use sound, scientifically collected data to make wildlife management decisions and dang the politics. when properly collected information says to do something, do it. don't bend to the governor, or anti-everything extremists, or hunters and anglers. this fiasco over the lions in sabino was disgusting. if you need to shoot some lions do it. i was ashamed and appalled at the weakness displayed by the department and the commission over this. there was an article in the paper a week or so ago about a predator study done by 4-peaks. in the article an azgfd spokesman was quoted as saying that the data was there but there wouldn't be much if anything done because the dept. was afraid of adverse reaction from anti groups. this is quitting before you even start. sometimes things are worth fighting for.

#3. remove all non traditional populations from the areas they have inhabited. i.e., the many elk herds that have taken hold in areas they've never been before. i realize that Az.'s entire elk herd isn't native. the Merriams became extinct and yellowstone's were imported. that was also nearly 100 years ago. but please, keep them where there is good elk habitat. allowing them to take hold in the desert and cedars, etc. isn't good for the elk, first off. and it has devastated the deer population of these areas. the increase in the few elk permits that are allowed in these "limited opportunity" areas doesn't come close to covering the lost opportunity for deer hunters. another real bone of contention is mountain sheep in the gila mountains. come on? is this traditional mountain sheep country? last year, i saw over 40 different rams in u28. i saw one buck. had to hunt my tail off to find it. and there are only 4 permits total for sheep. something needs done here. don't know what, but it ain't right. i recently did some investigation into hunting in kentucky. they have an imported elk herd there. they want them to stay in a set number of counties. to do this, any deer hunter who sees an elk outside of the boundary, can shoot all the elk they see, without a permit. just have to notify the game warden, after. Az. should look at something like this to eliminate or at least severely reduce the elk herd in non traditional areas. this limited opportunity thing is a farce and allows the herd to continue to grow.

the "wolves" are another thing. what a joke. mexican gray wolves are extinct. by the usfw's own admission, every animal they have,has dog DNA. they are wolf/dog crosses. they aren't wolves. they're curs. they've been bred and raised in captivity. they're domesticated. when one does show truly wild tendencies, they're shot, because they can't tell a cow from a deer. it's a joke. i know that the azgfd has a limited say in this, but why support it? lets worry about things that matter.

#4. put resident hunters and anglers first. do things that make them happy. they pay the bills. anti's, whatever you want to call them, don't. i'm sick of the dept. and the commission making decisions because someone might be offended. over the past 20 years i've seen the deer dissappear from the strip because mountain lions were allowed to kill them all. talked at length to an azgfd person about this once. he said that recomendations were made to the director and the commission for years and nothing was done because of the fear of "offending" someone. it got so bad that there wasn't even a deer hunt on the strip for awhile. the greatest trophy mule deer herd in the world was wiped out while the game and fish sat by and watched. i doubt it will ever recover. i remember a few years ago some guys wanted to have an "extreme" predator calling contest. and it was absolutley legal. maybe a little "out there" in the concept and the advertising. but there was nothing illegal, or in my opinion "wrong" with it. but here came the dept. and the commission. "oh no, we might offend someone". and actually stepped in and stopped it and then passed a law banning all such things that was then shot straight down by the state court. a lot of money was wasted over nothing other than not wanting to offend folks who do not contribute one dime to wildlife conservation.

i also watched trapping be outlawed. and watched the dept. actually side with all the folks who were "offended" by it and actually campaining to outlaw it. trapping may be a thing of the past. fur prices are low, etc. but it did a lot to control predators. look at what the coyote and lion populations have done since it was outlawed. it's ridiculous. this state is over run with lions and coyotes. you know it, i know it. predator control has to be implemented before the entire state goes the way of the strip mule deer.

#5 don't know for sure what to do, but you'd best do the absolute best thing you can do, about this "no non-resident cap" deal on permits. i'll really be surprised if this fall's hunts take place without something really tragic happening. this was allowed to turn into something really ugly. and it's going to get uglier. like i say, don't know for sure what to do, but it'd better be the best thing you can do, and it had better have a resident slant. when this case was lost a couple years ago, you, the director and the commission, should have negotiated out of it then. waiting until the draw was the absolute worst thing you could have done. you did irrepairable damage to the image of the dept. and the commission. there is no crediblity left with joe hunter in Az. believe me.

#6. the director, duane shroufe and the commission, every member of it, should resign. in my opinion, you've failed miserably to make things better for wildlife in Az. and for those who like to enjoy it. i feel you're too weak to hold up to that task and too easily swayed by political and public pressure. you're all too privleged and politically well connected to do the right thing. time and time again you've demonstrated weakness, the inability to be innovative, the lack of desire to listen to the hunting and fishing public, and total disregard for those who you are supposed to serve. that's my opinion. and sadly, the opinion of every person i've talked to as of late. sincerely, Raymond Lark Hubbard, Queen Creek, Arizona.

[muskeg]

Some of the things you all have listed have already been found not-leagal to implement, I'm sure.

 

You cannot restrict guide licenses to residents only. Alaska has already been through that one, I believe.

 

The AZ safety course requirement for non residents, also will not fly. Orentation meetings or siminars required could fly. You must go to one before hunting Kodiak Brown Bear and Moose in Ak. Starting this season all Sheep must be checked by ADF&G after the kill.

 

Actually the 4 year Brown Bear rule in Alaska (one Bear every 4 years) has to be for every one, res and non-res alike. I don't think it can be specific to non-res only. Bag limits for the non-res vrs res can vary though.

 

You used to have to pay for tags upfront in AK to get into one of the few draws we have. They changed this, in AK, probably for legal reasons. And the mass paper work and expense in refunding the non-drawn persons.

 

You could have no-non-res draws like Ca. But once in a lifetime draws can not be specific for the non-res only, I don't believe.

 

I would be interested in how many non-res put in for Cow tags. More than you would imagine I'm sure. Also how many non-res do get drawn and do not hunt? Probably again more than you realise. I knew a party tag of 3 hunters (from NH) for unit 23 dec WT last season that had to cancel thier hunt. Do you all consider that as 3 wasted tags (that could have gone to a res) or 3 bucks that were not killed and available to give the heard a gain making it better for this year? The formula in AK is 33%. One third are successful, one third are not and one third don't hunt the drawn tag. That is the general rule and an average from much info gathered over many years. It varies though.

 

There are some draws in AZ that have very few (if any) non-res apps. This is apparent by the left over tags for some hunts.

 

Do AZ residents go hunt other states? You bet, many do I'm sure. Many come to AK. You must keep that in mind when restricting the non-res hunter.

 

What goes around comes around.

 

But a word of warning. When the Federal Gov took over the fish and game management in AK on federal lands, it has become a real nightmare. Local hunters are restricting non-local hunters, because the fed law gives the local hunter the upper hand when push comes to shove. I'm not talking state residency here. I'm talking game regs written based on your zip code. This is what we have here now.

 

When game management and science is taken out of the biologists hands and put into the legal, political hands (like has seemed to happen around the country under the Bush admin) it is a no win situation for the hunter/fisherman. Especially the Sport hunter and Sport fisherman. Like in Alaska the fed gov has defined us as a sport hunter or subsistence hunter by our zip codes. The State of Alaska constitution says ALL ALASKANS are equal when it comes to fish and game harvest. But as we see the fed gov has different ideas and the Bush admin has told our Attorney General to suck it up.

[.270]

muskeg, what does the "bush adminstration" have to do with this deal in Az? not one person on the supreme court was appointed by him and they don't take any guidance from anyone. and comparing alaska with Arizona just isn't a good comparison. you're using a state with very limited resources, an exploding population, very limited habitat and has roads everywhere and comparing it to a state that has a very small population, no roads, very abundant game with premium habitat. in fact, comparing any state to any other state, isn't a very good comparison, because all states are vastly different in population, habitat, and tradition. Az. has problems and strong points that are unique to it. we have traditions that are unique to us. and so does every other state. i hunt other states every chance i get. i've been to alaska. i deal with their rules and their traditions, with no questions asked. so far, Arizona is the only state that has had a federally mandated bomb dropped on it, like this. we'll work through it. but it will be painfull. our main concern is that it is least painfull for us. i'm not worried about how montana or oklahoma or maine does things. if i decide to go there, i'll deal with their rules. i am concerned about what happens in my home state.

[TAM]

I personally don't think anyone, including the AZ G&F, should discount any idea. Many people are speculating that certain ideas or solutions are already discriminatory to NR's and therefor we can't use them. AZ G&F could go ahead and impliment just about any new rule they want as long as it does not impose on the current ruling. At that point if NR's or USO doesn't like the new rule they would have to go and start the legal process all over again. It could be tied up in court for several more years. In fact it is very reasonable to think that no matter what new rules AZ G&F puts in place we will be sued by USO or anyone else that is not happy with the end result. You can be sued for just about anything these days!

Edited January 1, 1970 by TAM