AZ Commission Mtg. today

[Bura Nut]

LAST EDITED ON Jul-16-04 AT 05:48PM (MST)[p]AZ had a commission meeting today at 12:00 that ended around 3:00. Basically after alot of good ideas brought from the hunters and political talk from the Commissioners, we are screwed as residents. The commissioners are meeting via telephone with the judge ( same judge who made the ruling in favor of USO outfitters wanting the 10% cap for non-residents lifted in AZ so USO can get even more tags and guide for elk and Kaibab/Strip deer that have been managed and financially supported by primarily the residents of AZ.) Along with AZGFD commissioners the Assit. Attorney Gen of AZ will meet and discuss Monday July 19th at 10:00 am action plans AZGFD will take to fix the current res/non-res lottery system so it is not "Discriminating" against non-residents. I hope everyone realizes this is not going to affect AZ only. I know that Nevada has been filed against two or three days ago by USO and that today USO filed in Wy. and Montana so the story goes. Long story short, the existing draw "dilema" for this year will probably be fixed by lifting the 10% cap and doing a "Re-Draw" for everyone including residents for Elk and Deer north of the river. The best solution for AZ residents and other western states will unfortunately be to raise the price of tags so they become un-affordable for the average joe beginning next year. MAKE SURE YOU DONT THINK I BELIVE THAT IS THE MORALLY CORRECT DECISION, BUT OUR POLITICIANS WILL HAVE TO MOVE THAT WAY TO APPEASE THE MAJORITY IN MY OPINION. The AZGFD commissioners will then have a "Public Meeting" at 12:00 that same day, Monday July 19th to discuss what they talked with the Judge about earlier. I guess my general message is to ask ourselves if what just happened in AZ is what you want to happen in Utah, Colorado, Wyoming, Montana etc. etc..??????? Somehow some way Residents of each state should have a bit of a preference over non-residents who dont financially support the states deer/elk herds through cash or donating time/effort to a non-profit cause. There now is a "Precedent" set by this court case where every state will have to change their tag purchase/draw requirements so they dont "discriminate" using draw caps for non-residents. This issue is not over but has a huge Hill to climb and I hope everyone starts the networking process of ensuring their voice is heard to their own state agency's and Pro-hunting organizations that can provide the financial resources to battle this............Allen Taylor...........

 

[HullinPhx]

Great Post!!! Thanks for the info.

 

[Snapshot]

Maybe all of these states Game & Fish Departments can join forces and overcome this court ruling to the benefit of each states resident hunters. I feel every hunter that applies out of state should get a crack at a good tag now and again, but the system needs to benefit the residents first.

 

[Gamekiller]

Guys, the current laws in "most all" western states were set up to give a majority of tags to the residents. I do disagree with Taulman going after all of the other states as I think he is causing a mess; however, whether Arizona resident want to admit it or not, the current system is flawed, and worse than all other western states with the exception of Oregon, which in my humble opinion "should" be attacked by Taulman. I have seen several other posts saying that there are not enough non-residents applying to meet the 10% cap, this is BS... Garth Carters publication reaches thousands of non-residents, and I will flat out guarantee thousands put in for the 50 or so non-resident deer permits north of the river. The problem lies again in the fact that Arizona would'nt simply set a number of tags aside (10-20%) and let the non-residents fight it out over them, as is done is most all western states. I truly believe if this had been done, this suit would not have taken place. Taulman I do believe is wrong in going after the other states at this time, for I believe most of the other states are fair. Raising tag prices is not the answer either.. Look at the odds for Nevada tags, premium Utah tags, etc... They have been raised way above resident fees and the odds are still getting worse and worse. More people have the money to fork out than you think, and as publications like Carters start to attract more Eastern guys with dough, watch what happens to odds regardless of whether they are allowed to use credit cards or not.... I feel your pain Arizona, but like I said before, many non-residents have been harping on your commissioners for years to make it fair and noone listened, noone returned calls, or e-mails.... Sorry for the long post.

 

[stanley]

Thanks for the update Allen!

I didn't end up making it to the meeting because on my way there, my Yukon was TOTALED on the 101. (Apologies to anyone stuck in the traffic jam behind the mess ;-) ) Traffic stopped in front of me, and just as I thanked myself for being able to stop in time, a Dodge Ram rear-ended me at high speed. The DPS estimated he was traveling approx. 60mph at the time of impact, so needless to say there was quite a bit of damage. The impact drove me into the Expedition in front of me, basically turning my truck into an accordion! Thank god everyone was wearing their seat belts!

I'm pretty bummed that I missed the meeting, but I'm glad there was a good turnout of local sportsman.

See you Weds!

S.

:-(

 

[Chef]

Stanley,
Glad to hear you were okay...THAT WAS YOU???!!!
Traffic was backed up for miles! I cought the tail end of clean up as I was heading back to Chandler from the meeting.

Like I stated in another post, there were quite a bit of sportsmen there. Obviously a lot of people gave up their lunch hour to attend. It was hot and it was humid.

Chef
"I Love Animals...They're Delicious!"

 

[Nofear4]

No one has mentioned New Mexico, home of USO outfitters, don't they also have a 10% Cap??? I haven't seen it mentioned any where, is anyone sueing NM? Maybe USO will be happy if we get the NonResident Cap raised in their own back yards and flood NM with out of state hunters too!! Send some of the AZ Out of Staters to NM to battle USO guides there! Bummer!

nofear4

 

[BSHunter]

nofear4, I agree with you, but I don't think those outfitters from N.M. are that worried about that, due to the fact that with thier high dollar clients they can buy up the Land Owner tags that they want. Az. does not give land owner tags. Maybe N.M. should be forced to cap the price a land owner can charge for thier land owner tags so the average Joe could afford them, that would really piss them off.

 

[nfoley]

Gamekiller,
Before you start slamming Arzizona's method of dealing with NR I think you need to understand the process a little better and think about it. Mandating nonresidents to receive 10% of tags is not a reasonable idea. CAPPING at 10% makes sense.

Situation One: A given elk hunt has relatively few NR putting in and many more residents. Under your idea/plan, 10% is guaranteed to go to the nonresidents - even if less than 10% apply. This is not fair to residents, and doesn't make sense.
So you say MANY more than 10% apply.
Okay, now we have...

Situation Two: Many NR have put in for the elk hunt, and these NR have the SAME chance of drawing as a resident UNTIL the 10% cap is met. And now 10% have been given to NR, thus NO NEED FOR A MANDATORY 10% OF THE TAGS ALLOCATED TO NR!!!

So explain to me how a GUARANTEED 10% is more fair than a cap now that you have read this.

I personally love to hunt in many states, and am in favor of a fair system which favors residents in all western states. I have no problem knowing my chances of getting the premium tags in other states are very low. And how many western states with the quality of elk hunting we have offer basically a $10,000 hunt for the price of $371?
I also think MOST nonresidents respect the right of a state to give preference to the resident hunters. Unfortunately a vocal minority (as is always the case) is making everything worse for everyone.
Nils

 

[SMOKESTICK]

Perhaps the solution isn't to further increase non-resident license fees but to increase the amount a non-resident outfitter pays for their license to operate.

New laws could be writen to require that the outfitter be a resident of only one state just as with purchasing a hunting license. In addition, the outfitter must reside within that state for most, if not all of the entire year.

Some states currently don't require outfitters to be licensed. Perhaps this too should be addressed.

The bottom line is I am glad to hear that Sportsmen attended the meeting (except the gentleman which met new friends while en route to the meeting; glad to hear that no one was hurt). If this doesn't cause Sportsmen to wake up and realize how badly we need to be organized and united I'm not sure anything else will. The USO lawsuit stands to drastically alter the way in which states have managed wildlife for close to a century. AZ's system may be flawed but what is taking place now is an all out assault on states rights and abilities to manage wildlife. As a resident of Wyoming, I am very concerned about the potential impacts this could bring to my state. Since Wyoming has very few residents (the fewest in the union), any changes could dramatically affect Wyoming's residents and severely impact our ability to hunt. Imagine if Wyoming (or your state) were forced to distribute hunting & fishing licenses on an equal basis. Those states with the highest population densities (predominantly Eastern states) could overwhelm those with the lowest population densities (predominantly Western states). Furthermore, this will further reduce the connectivity of rural communities with land based practices; ie) hunting, fishing, etc. Urban areas also tend to higher rates of income than rural areas. Those of you that have mentioned that hunting is rapidly becoming a rich man's sport should be all over this.

If your state doesn't have an organized body of Sportsmen you had better get organized. I have a bias towards Sportsmen for Fish & Wildlife (SFW) as I have seen what can happen when you build an organization which empowers local Sportsmen and women. SFW is building an Association of States rather than another National organization. Why? Because Sportsmen need to be involved in the political process. We have great groups like the NRA which have helped us maintain our second ammendment rights. However, what use will we have for guns if we can no longer hunt? Sure we will be able to use them for protection, but without hunting it becomes more difficult to justify gun ownership. I believe this is the main basis for the anti-hunting movement. I proudly support the NRA, but we need something to protect our hunting heritage. Whether you agree with SFW's model or not get organized and get involved. As I have said before, United We Stand, Divided We Fall.