LAST EDITED ON Jan-24-05 AT 11:33AM (MST)[p]I saw on the Arizona state senate site that there is a meeting at 1:30 on January 26th with the Natural Resources committee in room SHR109. The group is "Ranching for Wildlife". Members are Alvin Trujillo/Navajo Nation, Steve Rich/wildlife consultant, John Peay/former Director of Utah Game and Fish and Fred Hinkelmeyer/sportsman. Does anyone know what they are proposing and is anyone attending from Arizona?
Landowner tags proposal.
- Thread starter gleninaz
- Start date
B
Bura Nut
Guest
I have read the ranching for wildlife proposal prepared by a guy named Manuel Nikel-Zueger. I imagine that the meeting discussions will center around this proposal or something very similar. Glen, I will fax this to you if you like. Call me at 602-454-2146 and give me your fax number. If ranching for wildlife happens in AZ, it will be just another huge nail in the coffin for your everyday joe hunter like me....anyone who would like to continue and preserve the quality of animals we have here should be against something like this. As a group, we hunters non-res and resident alike have lived with poor draw odds but knew/know that if we are drawn, we have a chance at a trophy sized animal. If ranching happens like the proposal outlines, anyone with small amounts of land can get tags awarded to them and in turn sell to the highest bidder. Please know that the proposal mentions that you will not have to hunt on the ranchers land, you can hunt on adjoining BLM land or State trust land. This just increases the harvest without allowing your average joe to have a shot at the tags...... Allen Taylor......
coueskiller
New Member
- Messages
- 0
ALLEN
WILL YOU ALSO FAX ME THIS INFO @ 1-928-556-1550
THANKS
GEOFF LLOYD
WILL YOU ALSO FAX ME THIS INFO @ 1-928-556-1550
THANKS
GEOFF LLOYD
Contact info for the committee.
Jake Flake, [email protected]
Robert Blendu, vice [email protected]
Marsha Arzberger(rancher)[email protected]
Tim [email protected]
Robert [email protected]
Marilyn [email protected]
Rebecca [email protected]
They should at least know the public is watching regardless of your position.
Jake Flake, [email protected]
Robert Blendu, vice [email protected]
Marsha Arzberger(rancher)[email protected]
Tim [email protected]
Robert [email protected]
Marilyn [email protected]
Rebecca [email protected]
They should at least know the public is watching regardless of your position.
B
Bura Nut
Guest
This is really scary stuff for AZ. Geoff I just faxed the proposal to you. Anyone who would like to preserve hunting in Arizona needs to be vocal and oppose the landowner tags for Arizona........... Thanks, Allen Taylor......
Looks like it's time to start emailing these legislators too.
Ranchers and hunters have generally been on the same side of the table in the past. I guess you could say we both kind of needed each other. I sense things are starting to change. If landowners in Az start to shut out more and more of us hunters then I would think hunters would react. I could see a push for public land leases to go to a public auction. Let the highest bidder get the leases. I could imagine some hunting organizations bidding on some these leases and paying substantially more than what ranchers currently pay.
As of today, I do not support this idea but I could change my mind. Personally, I like to see ranches and ranchers making a living running livestock. But you know what? I used to like watching cartoons too. I don't anymore.
John
Ranchers and hunters have generally been on the same side of the table in the past. I guess you could say we both kind of needed each other. I sense things are starting to change. If landowners in Az start to shut out more and more of us hunters then I would think hunters would react. I could see a push for public land leases to go to a public auction. Let the highest bidder get the leases. I could imagine some hunting organizations bidding on some these leases and paying substantially more than what ranchers currently pay.
As of today, I do not support this idea but I could change my mind. Personally, I like to see ranches and ranchers making a living running livestock. But you know what? I used to like watching cartoons too. I don't anymore.
John
My buddy covered the meeting and said it was weak and not a chance to happen in the near term. Said Flake pointed out to a real need for a solution. Buddy talked to NM and was told private tags there are a 30 million dollar business! We need a habitat stamp for $5 required for every license to help rancher relations. Make it unavailable to politicians as NM loses over half of their fund to the theiving legislature. Require ranchers who get money and labor to open their land to the public for hunts.
If we can all come up with a solution and work with ranchers and against the dreaded huggers we will all be better off IMO.
If we can all come up with a solution and work with ranchers and against the dreaded huggers we will all be better off IMO.
sneakem
Active Member
- Messages
- 599
If you don't like it make sure you speak your voice. If there anything like the CO G&F, it probably won't even matter. Landowners get 15% of the tags here before the draw. We also have ranching for wildlife that are alotted tags. We also have game damage tags during the winter. out of the 85% of tags left after land owners have there way, non residents take close to 40% of the rest. If you look at it like that residents draw about 50% of the total tags here in Colorado. What is the resident % in AZ? in other states. Landowners have big pull compared to the average joe when it comes to government agencies. I would be prepared to be let down just like the rest of us in other states.
Us Az residents definatley pay attention to what hunters from other states have to say about land owner tags. We know they bite the big one and that is why those of us who are paying attention are fighting it.
IMO New Mexico has it the worst. So far, their dept has sold out the average resident hunter to greedy outfitters, landowners, and special interests.
I am sorry to see Colorado residents account for aproximatley 50% of the tags. That is not right. Residents in every state should get the vast majority of tags. If your a non-resident and don't like it either move to that state, don't apply, or shut-up and play by each states rules. Very simple.
If there is any consolation in Colorado is that you have somewhere around 300 thousand elk and tons more habitat than AZ has. Your state human population is slightly less than Arizona's yet we have aproximatley 35 - 40 thousand elk total. New Mexico has about 60 - 70 thousand elk.
good hunting
john
IMO New Mexico has it the worst. So far, their dept has sold out the average resident hunter to greedy outfitters, landowners, and special interests.
I am sorry to see Colorado residents account for aproximatley 50% of the tags. That is not right. Residents in every state should get the vast majority of tags. If your a non-resident and don't like it either move to that state, don't apply, or shut-up and play by each states rules. Very simple.
If there is any consolation in Colorado is that you have somewhere around 300 thousand elk and tons more habitat than AZ has. Your state human population is slightly less than Arizona's yet we have aproximatley 35 - 40 thousand elk total. New Mexico has about 60 - 70 thousand elk.
good hunting
john
walltenthunter
Member
- Messages
- 9
Responding to sneakum here is the info I was provided by another sportsman on how the allocation is state to residents vs. non-residents on limited big game licenses.
Resident Non-Resident
Colorado 60% 40%
Utah 90% 10%
New Mexico 78% 22% of which guided is 12%
In Colorado the 60/40 is after the landowners get their 15%, applicable in all deer units, all antelope units, and 30 of the elk units. The reason why not all elk units afford the landowner preference is that the units have to be limited in all rifle seasons to qualify. Some have a limited first elk only season and then two over the counter seasons. Landowners would not have any preference then.
Hope that helps.
Resident Non-Resident
Colorado 60% 40%
Utah 90% 10%
New Mexico 78% 22% of which guided is 12%
In Colorado the 60/40 is after the landowners get their 15%, applicable in all deer units, all antelope units, and 30 of the elk units. The reason why not all elk units afford the landowner preference is that the units have to be limited in all rifle seasons to qualify. Some have a limited first elk only season and then two over the counter seasons. Landowners would not have any preference then.
Hope that helps.
