T
TheHunt
Guest
Does anyone know what the distribution tags are? 15%-20%-25% NonRes... I am feeling guilty that I was drawn.
TheHunt
TheHunt
P
PinonPaul
Guest
Several of the elk hunts will now be at over 40% non-residents with the supplemental hunters included. Next year will be worse because the residents who got a tag this year based on the old format will not be in there. I would look for Bull Elk hunts in AZ next year to be 50% - 70% non-resident. Have fun and good luck. Do us a favor and PLEASE do not book with USO.
S
shedhunter2
Guest
Pinion Paul what are you on? There were only a few units in which the 10% cap was in effect this year, and those are the units that they added tags. Most of the units in Az are still under 10% NR. Not because of the cap, but just because of the sheer numbers of residents who apply verses NR. Even in the units where they issued extra tags NR's only have between 10% and 20% of the tags.
And next year it wont get better for NR's. The Game and Fish department is changing the rules. They are going to most likley outlaw the sale of animal parts of game taken in Arizona. And this is what USO's whole lawsuit was based on. Also the on the table is NR will be required to hire a guide, NR tags prices doubled, and a one elk in a lifetime bag limit for NR. There are also many more proposals on the table, and more coming in all the time.
Lance
And next year it wont get better for NR's. The Game and Fish department is changing the rules. They are going to most likley outlaw the sale of animal parts of game taken in Arizona. And this is what USO's whole lawsuit was based on. Also the on the table is NR will be required to hire a guide, NR tags prices doubled, and a one elk in a lifetime bag limit for NR. There are also many more proposals on the table, and more coming in all the time.
Lance
R
RACKMASTER
Guest
LAST EDITED ON Jul-22-04 AT 11:06PM (MST)[p]LANCE
-BS!
WHAT ARE YOU SAYING? ARE THE VOICES IN YOUR HEAD TELLING YOU TO
TYPE THAT CRAP?
NO WAY IN HELL ARE THEY GOING TO EVER MAKE ELK A ONCE IN A LIFETIME HUNT! REMEMBER$$$$$$$ DOUBLE THE FEE FOR A TAG WOULD BE OK SINCE I HAVE A GREAT JOB!
ALL NR HAVE TO GET GUIDES! MOST ALL THEM WOULD BE ON THE USO PAY ROLL! THINK ABOUT IT! THE ONLY THING ON THE TABLE ARE THE PEOPLE OF ARIZONA AND THEIR BENT OVER! STATE KNEW THIS WAS COMING AND WOULD NOT EVEN DEAL WITH IT!
BY THE WAY YOU MAKE A GREAT CAB OVER CAMPER!
I LOVE MY 04' 1121! I get a warm fuzzy feeling thinking about when I can out in it again!
Good day!
RACKMASTER
-BS!
WHAT ARE YOU SAYING? ARE THE VOICES IN YOUR HEAD TELLING YOU TO
TYPE THAT CRAP?
NO WAY IN HELL ARE THEY GOING TO EVER MAKE ELK A ONCE IN A LIFETIME HUNT! REMEMBER$$$$$$$ DOUBLE THE FEE FOR A TAG WOULD BE OK SINCE I HAVE A GREAT JOB!
ALL NR HAVE TO GET GUIDES! MOST ALL THEM WOULD BE ON THE USO PAY ROLL! THINK ABOUT IT! THE ONLY THING ON THE TABLE ARE THE PEOPLE OF ARIZONA AND THEIR BENT OVER! STATE KNEW THIS WAS COMING AND WOULD NOT EVEN DEAL WITH IT!
BY THE WAY YOU MAKE A GREAT CAB OVER CAMPER!
I LOVE MY 04' 1121! I get a warm fuzzy feeling thinking about when I can out in it again!
Good day!
RACKMASTER
Anaconda
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,443
Arizona G&F needs to be careful about what changes they make. Lots of NR have paid a lot of money to build "points". Change the basic prameters of how thoses "points" can be used, i.e. requiring a guide, they could be sued for refunds of all that point money, + interest.
Even though they call it "buying a license", it was/is required to build points, and I belive that constitutes a legal "contract" to be able to use thoses point the same way you could when they were purchased, i.e. DIY without a guide.
Correct me if I'm wrong, any AZ lawyers ?
Even though they call it "buying a license", it was/is required to build points, and I belive that constitutes a legal "contract" to be able to use thoses point the same way you could when they were purchased, i.e. DIY without a guide.
Correct me if I'm wrong, any AZ lawyers ?
AZBuckSnort
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,075
None of your points mattered a hill of beans when Colorado shafted the NR applicants invested in the Ranching for Wildlife Program. AZ will do what it has to do to protect the state's wildlife and the management practices utilized to set responsible tag numbers.
P
PinonPaul
Guest
OK Shedhunter lets look at some numbers ( facts )
I haven't had time to look at all of the hunts but will in due time. We will use hunt #3025 as an example, Unit 10 November Rifle Bull. Lets affectionately call this the new Foxworthy/Zumbo hunt. 350 tag quota for 2004.
On the supplemental list 105 tags have been added to the the 350 already drawn. Of these 4 are residents who now received a tag because they applied with non-residents who were bumped after the 10% cap was met.
Original draw = 315 Residents and 35 Non-Residents
Supplemental list = 4 Residents and 101 Non-Residents
2004 Hunt# 3025 Totals
319 Residents or 70%
136 Non-Residents or 30%
455 Total tags
Using these figures we can accuratley determine that had the draw been done without the 10% NR cap we would have had the following numbers.
214 Resident Tags or 61%
136 Non-Resident Tags or 39%
As far as the changes you say will be made by AZGFD. GET OFF THE CRACK! We now have a lawsuit weary G&F. They may outlaw sale of animal parts but still would take years to overturn the judges ruling, Guide requirement will never happen, price doubled maybe ( if a NM tag is worth 766.00 then an AZ tag is worth at least that much ), one tag per lifetime for NR will never happen. If 40% of Utah Limited Entry Elk Tags were being issued to non-residents the hunters of Utah would march on their state capital. Oh and by the way, of those 136 NR tags for hunt# 3025 noted above. 41 of them are being mailed to P.O. Box 4204 Taos NM 87571. Guess who?
We have big problems!
I haven't had time to look at all of the hunts but will in due time. We will use hunt #3025 as an example, Unit 10 November Rifle Bull. Lets affectionately call this the new Foxworthy/Zumbo hunt. 350 tag quota for 2004.
On the supplemental list 105 tags have been added to the the 350 already drawn. Of these 4 are residents who now received a tag because they applied with non-residents who were bumped after the 10% cap was met.
Original draw = 315 Residents and 35 Non-Residents
Supplemental list = 4 Residents and 101 Non-Residents
2004 Hunt# 3025 Totals
319 Residents or 70%
136 Non-Residents or 30%
455 Total tags
Using these figures we can accuratley determine that had the draw been done without the 10% NR cap we would have had the following numbers.
214 Resident Tags or 61%
136 Non-Resident Tags or 39%
As far as the changes you say will be made by AZGFD. GET OFF THE CRACK! We now have a lawsuit weary G&F. They may outlaw sale of animal parts but still would take years to overturn the judges ruling, Guide requirement will never happen, price doubled maybe ( if a NM tag is worth 766.00 then an AZ tag is worth at least that much ), one tag per lifetime for NR will never happen. If 40% of Utah Limited Entry Elk Tags were being issued to non-residents the hunters of Utah would march on their state capital. Oh and by the way, of those 136 NR tags for hunt# 3025 noted above. 41 of them are being mailed to P.O. Box 4204 Taos NM 87571. Guess who?
We have big problems!
Zim
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 2,291
Dam - 41 USO hunters in one unit! They will need 2 busses to ship'em and then build a temporary city to house all their clients. One hell of a base camp.
I am extremely curious to see how AZF&G approaches this whole situation for next year. Certainly there are legal limitations you know they are discussing now. I bet other states are paying close attention.
I am extremely curious to see how AZF&G approaches this whole situation for next year. Certainly there are legal limitations you know they are discussing now. I bet other states are paying close attention.
Well, I bet USO did not pick up many extra early rifle bull or 13B deer tags. He almost certainly put them in for a second choice with better draw odds (he wants them to draw). That would mean the unsuccessful applications would not have a low enough random number to get the first choice in the next go around.
