Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
AZ8

Surrender your tag. Here's your chance

Recommended Posts

Ok, cool. We're on the same page.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just so everyone recalls ( I was a young teen at the time) the Bonus Point Scam, as many of you call it, is what the Hunters of the state chose when it was implemented ... There were 3 options on the table I know one was limiting draw to once in 3 years ( if I recall right ) , The bonus point system , and I do not recall the 3rd ... Keep having fun bashing and feeling short sided by G&F if helps you sleep at night ... I do not like the idea of being charged but things in this world do not come free ... If you really do not like it you can always choose to hunt elsewhere

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me get this straight. I draw a tag that I have been waiting 8 years to draw. I have bought 8 yrs worth of points ($104) for a tag that costs $58. The week before the hunt I get really sick. Now if I was a "member" for those 8 yrs I would have Contributed $200 for the privilege to return my tag to reinstate my points but loose the cost of the tag, just so they could sell the tag again to someone else ( who is a member) for $58. Seems like a great idea to me, but for who?

 

does the second person loose their points or is it treated like a leftover?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe G&F could charge a "tag insurance" fee like airlines and cruise companies do so if you can't go, you get your money or at least your bonus points back. Then if you want to be protected, you pay for it. If you accept this as one of life's little random events (unless it is a Sheep tag) than maybe you don't by insurance.

 

Complicated systems are always cracked by people with the time, money and/or brains to do so. Think of how your new Jeep can now be hacked.....

 

I am not so sure the "problem" G&F is trying to solve is worth the risk. Unless the goal is not to solve a perceived problem but to make more money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keeping bonus points the first time seems like too big of a problem, everyone would now have TWICE the reason to get every mom and grandma and aunt 15 bonus points. What about all or nothing, everyone in the applicant group has to surrender or none of them can surrender?

 

I don't like the premium members get more privileges model, it seems like we are headed to the Hunger Games of hunting.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any notion of paying extra to get extra privilege stinks in my opinion. Seems like we have a bunch of spoiled brats running the Game and Fish Department these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keeping bonus points the first time seems like too big of a problem, everyone would now have TWICE the reason to get every mom and grandma and aunt 15 bonus points. What about all or nothing, everyone in the applicant group has to surrender or none of them can surrender?

 

I don't like the premium members get more privileges model, it seems like we are headed to the Hunger Games of hunting.

how's that fair if your buddy gets a called to duty?

your last statement is right on... kinda reminds me of sportsman for wildlife crap they tried to pull.

they should just keep it a petition, if you are called to duty that's a no brainer, if you are injured or have to have surgery... yeah, if you pick the wrong hunt # then you are sol.. you should have paid attention.

just a way for them to make extra $. at 15,$25 or whatever a year for whatever level membership x ?????? members could be a chunk of $

they will probably get sued from lefties.

 

James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Give back the tag for a fee. Give up ability to apply or earn bonus points for that species for the next year.

 

I like the idea of offering something to folks that run into situations but there needs to be something in place to make it less palatable for those wishing to abuse the system. There has to be a way to find a happy medium

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like AZG&F was taken over by the NAHC. You now have the opportunity to send us more money to be a TROPHY Life Member rather than just a plain old Life Member.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still not sure why a fee based membership is needed. Utah has a tag surrender policy. It's not complicated, nor does it require a membership into a paid club.

 

Straight from Utah's DNR:

 

(1) Any person who has obtained a wildlife document and decides not to use it may surrender the wildlife document to any division office.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About a year ago I attended an informal informational public meeting at G&F headquarters about the tag surrender club issue. Other CWT members were there. Literally everybody in attendance renounced the membership concept as a prerequisite for tag surrender. Here we are a year later, they want this "club" concept bad. They truly are out of touch with their subjects.

 

Tag surrender (with safeguards) is the right thing to do. Perverting the process by requiring membership to a special group further divides us. I'll write G&F some more but based on what they already know from past meetings, this club concept will fly no matter what we say. G&F is going to jam this club requirement up our throats.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest 300ultramag.

I don't want to sound like a complete dicke but they can pound sand with this members club. Wtf is this a country club? The fact that someone on the commission thinks this is even a good idea. All they see are dang dollar signs. And you know what I'm not picking up spent shells (that aren't mine) or trash that isn't mine. Anymore I use to pride myself and teach my daughter how to be a good steward to the land. But they won't lift a finger for us unless they are getting paid. Well I don't get paid to pick up others trash but I DO IT BeCause it's the right thing to do and we were on the same team. Clearly we are a bottomless wallet and they want to nickle and some the shot out of us for doing what Utah does for free!!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the proposed amendments to article's I & III you can read about the intent of the members club. I believe it is in pages 8-10, G&F clearly defines the members club proposal as method to raise funds for the department. When they get virtually no funding from the state's general fund coffers they need to think out of the box. I understand they have expenses and those expenses increase all the time. However, so do ours. Everyone raises fees and costs but my ability to pay them has not increased. In fact, I make substantially less today than I did 8 years ago. I wish the department would make cuts in their budgets like we have all been forced to do over the last few years. Start letting people go through attrition unless it is a vital position. The Department admin offices appear to be growing all the time but I see very few "boots on the ground" folks. I know this is speculation on my part but they used the run the department out of the Greenway offices and by their own admission, the number of hunters and fishermen is declining. The departments non-game branch has grown by leaps and bounds over last 15-20 years yet they bring in no funds. Stop getting bigger because it is not sustainable and it is totally dependent upon raising costs for their customers, the hunters and fishers. Because of this, and mere principle I am against the members club idea.

 

I was also at the G&F meetings when this was discussed and I did not hear one person say they supported the idea of a members club. I will admit, the idea of joining a membership club to reinstate your BP's was never proposed or even discussed at the meeting I attended. They were just floating around some ideas that really had no value because all the information was already on the portal and it was free so why would anyone pay to join was the consensus from the audience. This recommendation now, is a totally new idea.

 

However, I do support the idea of surrendering a tag ONCE per genus over a lifetime and get your bonus points reinstated. I personally have made a mistake on an application and lost 7 or 8 points on a hunt that could have easily been drawn with 2. My sister tore her ligaments in her knee just before her 5B rifle antelope hunt and was unable to go so I know first hand that "life happens" and we should not be punished for it.

 

Better write the department to let them know your thoughts & concerns. Page 2 has Amber Munig's contact info and email addresses to write to.

 

 

 

Good Luck

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, I read the great big article one write-up and some things stood out as concerning. Bottom line is that the Arizona Game and Fish gets a lot of “marketing” power from the article one changes, all in the name of “running things like a business”. In most cases running things like a business is fine, but the Arizona Game and Fish department isn’t a business. Businesses are evaluated based on revenue, government agencies are evaluated based on how well they serve their customers, not by how many dollars they generate or how well they market themselves on TV and billboards through public awareness campaigns.

 

The largest customer for AZGFD is resident hunters of average means and their children who will be advocates in the future. The Game and Fish Department needs to preserve opportunity for their largest customers. This is a function of keeping the sport affordable and minimizing complexity that serves as a barrier to entry for new hunters. I also attended the information sessions last year about the membership program tag surrender idea, I can also vouch for the fact that there was very little support in the room for tag surrenders based on a membership of any kind.

 

I read through the changes and took notes since I know few other people would be inclined read them. If my understanding of the changes are wrong please feel free to correct me. http://www.azgfd.gov/pdfs/fishing/article1NPRM.pdf

 

R12-4-104 – Amendment to no longer send refunds for overpayments of less than $5.00. Spending $3.00 to send a $5.00 check that probably won’t be cashed is dumb. GOOD CHANGE

 

R12-4-107 – Provides some relief from losing loyalty point for a slight underpayment. Stipulates that loyalty point is preserved if the fee paid covers the license and application fee. Also clarifies which hunter education course qualifies for hunter ED point. GOOD CHANGE

 

R12-4-108 - Amendment to update Management Unit boundaries to incorporate future changes to management unit boundaries. I was wondering if this is laying the foundation to redistrict for private property hunt units similar to the CWMU program in Utah. That would be extremely unpopular with Arizona hunters. Maybe I am just paranoid since I heard there was a survey that went out within the past year with questions related to private property access for a fee. TO BE DETERMINED

 

R12-4-110 – Seems to give additional discretion to the Commission to control roads on State Land. As long as ranching and commercial interests aren’t lobbying the commissioners too hard this could be a good thing. TO BE DETERMINED

 

R12-4-111 – Department IDs as primary ID instead of SSN numbers. This is long overdue considering fraud concerns. GOOD CHANGE

 

R12-4-114 – This is the change to keep half the non-resident bonus pass tags for the random draw. This is probably the biggest change for non-residents, it gives most non-residents a chance at some currently unavailable tags. GOOD CHANGE FOR MOST NON-RESIDENTS

 

R12-4-118 – This is the amendment to allow for tag surrenders with bonus point re-instatement based on a new “membership” program on the AZGFD portal. The fact that the summary of this change required 2 ½ pages of single spaced lines to describe it raises flags on its own. Despite the fact that the write-up suggests that applicants are eligible to get surrendered tags at all membership levels, the reinstatement process establishes priority for those at the highest level of membership levels first. People buying entry level memberships may be thinking they are in the running for surrendered tags when in reality they may not be. The write-up of this program also mentions that the number of tag surrenders allowed per person will also be dictated by membership level. There are so many potential doors to abuse with this process that it defies any attempt at logic. Especially after public comments last year were against tag surrenders with bonus point reinstatement based on membership. If implemented this will be the first step toward separating hunters into classes in Arizona. A TERRIBLE IDEA THAT ESTABLISHES A TERRIBLE PRECEDENT

 

R12-4-121 – This allows the surrender of a tag and reinstatement of bonus points (with a membership) by surrendering a tag to a non-profit organization that provides hunt opportunities to terminally ill kids and veterans with a service related disability. Unlike the general tag surrender process, there were few details about how priority would be established for the recipients of the tags or what would happen to the tags if there were more tags available than eligible applicants. There is also an internal 501c3 qualification process that might leave some of the larger and more established veteran and sick kid non-profits out of the running if they aren’t paying attention. I believe that If we want to give tags to veterans or terminally ill kids, establish an allocation in the primary draw and price the tags at a minimal cost. That would ensure that opportunities are fairly distributed to all deserving parties and that the tags aren’t used to pull people through the door for banquets. AN EVEN WORSE IDEA THAN R12-4-118….TERRIBLE IS AN UNDERSTATEMENT

 

R12-4-125 – Provides more latitude to AZGFD staff management to approve solicitations or event details on department property. The only item of note is that there is now language that covers requirements for serving of alcohol on department property. My first thought was a beer garden at the Ben Avery Outdoor Expo or some raffle or auction for tags at headquarters. Neither would be a welcome addition. Hopefully Game and Fish continues to manage all events on their property and don’t farm it out to some new 501c3 group like they did with the Big Game Raffle.

 

I don’t know who is in a position (maybe the AZGFD Commission Chairman) to pull the e-brake on this membership tag thing but they ought to have a plaque in the lobby memorializing the fact that they were the person to change hunting for the worse in Arizona if this turd of an idea is deployed.

 

Ryan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×