AZGFD/HUNTERS

[maddglasser]

What can we, the hunting public, do to help insure/ protect our hunting heritage? If there was a way to voice our concerns how and where would you it be? Face it, we are almost at a stale mate with the current politics. Please give me some ideas, no "they don't care" attitudes, just think about it and give me me some good answers, we may get our chance to represent ourselves, or have a word!
We ALL are responsible to fix this situation!
Travis

 

[Boskee]

LAST EDITED ON Jul-08-09 AT 10:36AM (MST)[p]It's difficult to effect change without numbers in todays world. For every pro there's a con and so on. I've addressed the commission on numerous instances and felt that most of my comments fell on deaf ears BUT there have been instances where the reverse is true. I've had written responses back from several of the commissioners and spoke to many of them voicing my concerns and why I would like them to approach some things in a different manner. By and large we must not lose sight of the fact that they are doing this UNPAID and for most of them to volunteer their time they must have some dedication to wildlife. Huntings heritage isn't being placed in jeopardy by just the commission or the department it's being placed in jeopardy by special interest groups with lobbyists and by sportsmen like you and me. FOR EXAMPLE We think nothing of letting our department try to protect our sheep and work to increase elk numbers but when it comes to baiting a little 80 lb. coues deer the opposition is fierce. No data, it's BS, they're taking away our rights, they're going to shut down the water holes, there's no study to prove it's beneficial etc. Now who do we as hunters sound like with those comments? Hell there's even a few guys threatening to sue them for PROTECTING THE RESOURCE from over harvest.

Don't we realize that a few hundred hunters shooting them over bait stations they're conditioned to go to may have as much an impact as bunch of mountain lions. Lest not we forget that in TX they bait for Mule deer too successfully. How about a few guide operations taking 20-30 bucks a year out of multiple stations over bait and then hunters taking a few hundred more? Now multiply that because successful methods catch on just like how we hunt for elk in the rut. We're in a drought and numbers aren't increasing period. But yet the department is all wet and we the untrained wildlife professors, the money happy, and the bone collectors always know more. Funny thing on this issue when the deer are hard to find the first people they'll blame will be the department and the commission when it was they who thought it prudent to propose the change. Yet we want to hunt as long as it doesn't influence our success, well there is a downside to that and it's fewer tags and some of us agree with that solution but yet the commission caved to the public pressure to hunt.

My point is this as you can see from the above there will never be a solution to please everyone but if we keep the resouces best interest at the forefront of what we want (even if we have to forego a little opportunity ourselves) we should win. The best way to approach the commission is by going to the meetings in numbers, writing letters and voicing your concerns. But a few dedicated people isn't going to be able to do it because they simply won't have the backing they need. The old guard that doesn't want change has a loud voice and the special interest groups will be there in force opposing you.

It's politics Travis and the new order that's a challenge to hunting everyday from within and from the opposing corner and there's no easy way to deal with it. Those that oppose what we do will fight you tooth and nail and they are well organized and well funded and well schooled in the political process and in some instances have the commissions ear and work with one goal in mind. The hunters all have their opinion, little organization, no money, and a completely disorganized approach to any issue. We are unable to concede anything to unite and fail to present an effective front because we only care about what we want not what the other guy wants and as such have lost the battle before we've stepped on the field. You have to have an offense to win any football game and a defense and a game plan. Hunters just have their own plan and that's why we are losing ground every day. We don't care about the other guys right to hunt we just want it to be the way it always was and want our luck to continue. Well some of those other guys long ago lost interest because they couldn't get drawn and took their money and their support and went elsewhere and hence our numbers dwindle again.

The department and the commission recognized the erosion and tried to put more people into the field. Many of those that hunt are unhappy with that solution so what other alternatives do we have? Balancing the opportunity in a better manner? Nope that couldn't possibly work because that would effect my hunting and that's unacceptable. You can't protect your heritage until you value the others guys right to hunt just as much as you value your own because individually you'll fail but united you will garner support and support changes things.

Then you have the issue within the department where they positively know that what you propose won't work because they have the statistics to prove it. Well statistically I have seen more individuals redrawn in some cases multiple times to hunt in the last decade as residents and nonresidents that defy all the numerology in the world but yet it continues to happen and none of them are geniuses. So we either have an abundance of poaching going on or they may be redrawing tags with a little more frequency than the department cares to acknowledge. One things for sure when you have nonresidents on the covers of hunting magazines and in numerous articles that had a tag for the same species 2-5 years earlier when most residents go without, that should almost be impossible given the large draw pool, but yet it continues to happen. These guys will fight you tooth and nail because the systems working for them just fine in spite of the numerology that says it's impossible.

Protection, heritage, apathy and opportunity all are more innertwined than most would care to believe but yet they all lie at the root of the priviledge you wish to preserve. Today's hunters aren't good at giving up opportunity to preserve anything let alone their future. It's a generational thing because those that came before us understood the concept well enough to pass it on to us, it's just gotten misplaced in todays world of the must haves and the wannabes and the me first generation whether we like it or not. It's the most important thing we can do but it will be a difficult climb when some will only look upon it as a barrier to their opportunity. Most simply can't understand that their opportunity is clearly what's at stake here, but hey what could be wrong, I got my tag in the mail.

 

[maddglasser]

Boskee,
Do you feel as an individual, group of individuals, it would be a good idea to try for a "town hall" type of Q&A? I know we are all invited to commission meetings, but many people simply clam up at this type of forum. There are many great points, some I agree with and others I don't, being brought up on forums as these. All the different groups (ADA,ADBSS, Elk Foundation and others) are represented. We all belong to 1 organization that should be working together, the hunters of Arizona. We have massive numbers, but we do not work together for many reasons.
The attitude " it doesn't matter what I say, I'm only one person." Or the "They don't want to hear me." And some people really have no interest, ya that one kinda shocks me too!
But if G&F was to allow 1 or even more, depends on the outcome, open forums, for the general hunting public to attend (all the license holders), would you agree this would be a beginning to opening the lines of communication. Once the communication is open, we can work collectively to cure some problems on all sides.

 

[Bates7]

That's a great idea MADD. Town halls work very well. It is because they are so intimate.

 

[krp]

I honestly believe we are looking at the answer. Our society and lives are being changed by public opinion driven by 'Blogs', if that's the correct term, not reason and logic. We have to adapt to this style of getting the message out. It's telling how fast a responce we received from the dept when we took the issue to the public on these websites concerning the A/B tags and price increases. I again want to thank Mr. Wakeling for answering in a timely manner.

We need to expand on this. If untruthfulness can change our country because of the power of ?Blogging'. Then maybe the truth will regain it's power doing the same.

I can see in the near future a dedicated blogging site for G&F issues in this state that the hunting public can express themselves from their computers on issues, polls constructed by anyone on any issue and even petitions to take to the Legislature. We can sway public opinion also, took us this long to see it. I can see this expanding to emailing alerts to all licensed hunters in a data base and putting real political pressure right back on. We will not be ?onesided? by the G&F political spin machine anymore. This case here wasn?t spin, just some info added without explanation, a learning experience.

The power of a blogging site is that everyone can see what others are feeling about an issue and can discuss it together. There will never be total agreement but it is evident how the majority feel. Just having an email response doesn't allow everyone to see what other?s are saying and the political spinners can cherry pick the responses that suit them. Giving a few minutes at a commission meeting doesn't get the back and forth for new ideas to develop.

In the past we have went through channels individually or in specialized groups and therefore separated and defeated. We?ve tried the reasonable and logical responses to the political spin and propaganda shoved our way and feel frustrated and powerless. We can only sit around dumbfounded for so long before we realize we can use the same tactics that are changing our country and state to our advantage.

If I was the G&F, I would be the first to add this to my site. Not that you will be able to control the responses, but it would be a win politically, it's coming one way or another.

Kent

 

[maddglasser]

GREAT POST Kent. I have talked to a few in the G&F about this, I believe they are willing to listen and explain some of these issues. If we all can see all sides it will help for better understanding by all. I will continue to get ideas, after we get the ideas, why don't we vote, all of these hunting forums, and submit the most popular meens?

 

[Boskee]

LAST EDITED ON Jul-08-09 AT 12:42PM (MST)[p]Travis I think that's a great idea. The commission and the department has grown tired of listening to the same people (even though they're better informed than most) on the subjects. The other issue is that the organizations seem to want to protect their own interests (not wrong)and then there is the issue where the hunting community is divided by weapons types. The AZSFW is a great group but champions their own causes like any organization (not saying that's wrong by any means) but they have some high rollers in there that want what they want and most individuals with money usually have a agenda associated with their wallets in some fashion (not necessarily wrong either) but it comes with the territory. The average sportsman really has no voice and when those among us tried to represent them to some extent were in a minority and it was felt we didn't represent the majority's viewpoints. The previous town hall work meeting with Steve Farrell the department were a bust as far as I'm concerned because they went after those items they felt were important. A sportsman's group representing all weapons types with a sense of direction could be a refreshing change and may actually carry a little clout. If not you get some petitions signed by voters and taxpayers and their impression will change "muy rapido" because a voting block of individuals carries some clout.

Don't interpret any of these groups as being wrong because their intent is good but I think the commission and the department view them as advisaries when they have a difference of opinion. It wouldn't be a bad idea to have a commissioner or two come to a couple of them to see how the masses really feel. Not all our commissioners are closed minded by any means in fact they may welcome the invite. Change never comes easy and there will always be opposition to it in any form but change can make all the difference in the world if given a chance. Perception is reality and as far as the way the department and the commission are percieved by the public on some issues it's broken. There is a new skipper at the helm (the department) thats about a fair a guy as any we've ever encountered and we'll soon have a commission made up of newer individuals so new ideas will be percieved in a different manner. Sometimes that's all you need but we need some open minds within the department too that are actually willing to listen to ideas and judge them on their merits without fear of reprisal from above. Then and only then will the process work in the manner in which it was designed.

Kent they read most of these sites to see what's being posted currently but we still need to be able to keep an open dialogue as you suggest and there's no better way to let the commission know how the public feels then to meet them face to face and let them know. These people don't have the time to read these blogs and if left to only the department some issues can be misinterpreted and/or omitted in the process. They have the answers to most of the questions we pose on these forums at the meeting on some issue and then they put their spin on them in some fashion to meet the directive in some cases. Brian's a class act for sure but understand this he's a soldier and when a general gives him an order he will obey or his careers put in harms way.

 

[maddglasser]

LAST EDITED ON Jul-08-09 AT 01:10PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Jul-08-09 AT 01:04?PM (MST)

Man that is great info, and a great view! Whatever we can ALL decide I think is the direction we need to be looking, no special interest, no back door ideas, just us as a group, a big group!

The problem with organizations is they have a perceived intention, or at least a narrow field of intentions, so many people feel their concerns are not being voiced, as stated by Kent and you Boskee. I feel with people like you guys and all the others that are out there, a sound, responsible, well calculated attempt can be made to address as many of these problems as possible.

Would an online petition for a "blog" type forum on the AZGFD website, or "town hall" meeting be the answer to get started? I am happy to see we can all work to reach a goal, a common goal that is not about money, rather representation.

I understand change is difficult, for us and AZGFD. But if we can approach this, not as opposition, but as a solution I believe we can make our points. I guess the only change would be is we will not be complaining about not having representation, we, the public, will be the representation. We can ALL be held accountable for our actions when this is done. Accountability, there a fresh new idea!

 

[azoutback]

I will give a brief summory of how I feel. We should manage for the game we hunt. Not try to make everyone happy. Would I like to hunt deer in 12a every year? Yes, but the health of the herd is more important than me or anyone else hunting when they want. Tag numbers need to be cut in most units. More units need to focus on deer instead of elk. Unit 9 used to be a trophy mule deer unit. My family has killed alot of big muleys from 9. The habitat is perfect for mule deer, but elk took over. There A are plenty of units in az that could be made into trophy elk units with the right management. 6a,4b,4a just to name a few. What we dont have is enough quality mule deer units in our state.The south rim of the grand canyon should in my opinion be managed for muleys the same way the north rim is. The habitat is similar, and the geneticts are there. Still plenty of units left for managing trophy elk.

 

[Bura Nut]

I agree with most everything that has been said. I especially agree with the thought that the Commission at times feels like those in the conservation groups are the "Adversary" when that isnt the case. I think a blog forum in some format that allows the public to respond would definitely be of benefit. Some hard questions can be asked and responses given. Maybe there can be some "volunteers" that ride with game officers or sit in some of their meetings to understand what they go through. The reverse would be AZGFD employees volunteering their time to help on fundraisers, projects etc.......we are all in this together......... Thanks, Allen Taylor......

 

[tooele]

Actually, I disagree that it takes numbers to make changes. Small groups can have huge impacts. Look at same sex marriage, a very vocal minority has made sweeping changes. Look at how such small groups like Peta affect numerous regulations. Look at minorities with affermative action. There are several ways to make changes or preserve our hunting rights. It doesn't hurt to sit around in meetings etc, but the real keys are this: This is how the small group of antihunters have had such an impact on hunting. In the past hunting was such an important affair school was even released for the opening of the hunt. So this is what they did 1. Media, Media Media !!! Cartoons such as Bambi, they focused on media icons, who then subtly, put anti-hunting images, ideas all over the media. 2. Have laws passed via sympathetic legislators that protect or legislate what you want to happen, if it doesn't work, just keep at it, until the sleepy majority eventually doesn't even know they have been fleeced 3. If legislation doesn't work, then persistent lawsuits. Eventually, sympathetic judges will overcome any short falls with the legislation. There is the key to protecting your hunting heritage. Not a pretty business, but a proven formula.
T

 

[maddglasser]

You are correct, it does not take large numbers of organized people, but, large numbers of individuals speaking on their OWN behalf, this will consistently put pressure on every anti, gov't and special interest group out there.

We must first decide how to unite as individuals. Not to form yet another name of some narrow goaled org., but to approach this and all situations with the utmost in diplomacy, knowledge and impact. When this small step is complete we can begin expressing points of concern, we all have them. In this type of setting, individuals will be able to take up the fight at will. This approach will not lead to any assumption of special interest, in fact, it will push the special interest into a separate category.

As far as lawsuits go, for every one you will win, G&F will only respond by much of the same as present day, IMO. For every dollar they loose, we also lose it as sportsman for OUR state. The current politics are evidence of this, example: USO!

This topic should be viewed as a "brainstorm" of sorts. A way to pick effective avenues to our goal, each individuals goal, a more fairly represented governing body to govern OUR wildlife.

 

[chainsaw]

If you are talking about nationally then get OBAMA the He!! out of office, if it is Locally, then give back the potion of funds from the Lottery that the AZG&F was receiving before our piss ant X Governor took away for her pet project

 

[maddglasser]

I agree on both!

 

[quest]

plus 1 ya baby

 

[quest]

In regards to my earlier post, I would think it to be a high priority becoming more educated by surrounding ourselves around well informed people in our group. Let's get everyone on board on the issues! We could start by continuing the use of this forum. An example of this is when I went to a public meeting here in Mesa for the input of Arizona's hunt guidelines. I was a little amazed to see hardly any one there, maybe 5 people tops. Now mind you I don't have enough knowledge of the issues to represent myself (on my own issues) let alone someone else?s views. Regardless, I tried to do my best with what little information I had received from topics here on this website. Now mind you the (G&F) were well rehearsed on the subjects discussed and any attempt on my part in asking a question as to why on a given topic?They always had an answer of which I could not debate due to lack of information. Game and Fish were always set in their position, no matter the topic. Therefore if we want to debate with them then we'll need to know our facts and receive any & all information on where our deer herds are and how their doing! I would like to be part of the solution and I believe there are others out there that feel the same way I do. So if you have useful info to contribute, please do so and share!

Quest