Big Threat to Average Joes in Arizona

javihammer

Active Member
Messages
135
http://azgfd.net/artman/publish/New...-think-of-a-new-online-club-for-hunters.shtml

Here are the Commission Meeting notes from May where this insanity is further described, the minutes from April 11th also provides some details (page 14).

http://www.azgfd.gov/inside_azgfd/documents/CommissionMeetingMinutesMay2-32014.pdf

http://www.azgfd.gov/inside_azgfd/documents/20140411-12CommMtgMinutes.pdf

Well, the people that tried to bring Arizona hundreds of auction tags, worthless expos and premium pricing at the species level are at it again. Despite the clear direction from the public that premium pricing and diverting tags from the public draw is generally despised by most Arizona hunters. This crafty group is proposing a club you can sign up for through the new Arizona Game and Fish portal that is being built. This club would have different levels, each level providing increasingly more benefits for those willing to pay higher club fees. The portal would track your club membership and store it with your ?profile? information. I assume the website will serve up services commensurate with your profile, sort of a gatekeeper if you will. Unlike some clubs where you get a hat and a patch, the benefits of this club would provide options to club members unavailable to the unwashed masses of non-club but licensed Arizona hunters. Benefits like turning a tag back in and getting your bonus points back.

Surprisingly absent in the description was anything proposed to prevent someone from using their points to bonus up a group application and then surrendering their tag (while everyone else on the application hunts) and doing it again the next year and the next year. I guess if you are a platinum CLUB member the concerns and hunt opportunity of non-club members are of little concern. Screw em.

I can see a whole lot of bad coming out profile based services like what they are currently proposing. In an era where hunter recruitment is difficult, costs for gas and other items are increasing, tags and application fees are up. We now have a plan to add another layer of costs being proposed in order to ensure that hunters have a shot at the whole pie THEY ALREADY OWN. This idea manages to conflict with the North American Wildlife Model and chips away at our future hunter base at the same time, BRILLIANT! You cant make this stuff up.

Here are some other questions I have?

-How will the development of this new HOV lane for rich people be funded? Will any portion of the newly increased application fees go toward funding this garbage? It would be kind of sad if Average Joes are forced to tie their own noose.

-Will non club members be required to use the portal for necessary things like applying for the hunt draw, if so can they opt out of third parties obtaining their profile information? Will profile information be available for sale?

-What kind of business entity will this club be? Is it going to be another 501c3 living off the public dole by pilfering ?incentive? tags from regular decent draw hunters? If so, we already have enough of those.

-Is there a proposal in place to earn a higher club membership by doing things like helping out with a wildlife banquet? (Utah actually does this so it isn't a stupid question, they call their club the dedicated hunter program and it is a train wreck). If so, this would be like Average Joes being forced to tie their own noose and flipping the hangman some freebie tags for the privilege. Insult to injury I think they call it.

-Will this portal be developed independently for Arizona or will it be developed by a third party company that will develop it on top of existing code (that would inherit the bad design constraints and policies from some other state?..like maybe Utah).

-One of the benefits proposed was ?early draw results?. How will this be accomplished? I always felt like I was entitled to the earliest results AZGFD could provide. Part of my 13 bucks. Would additional time be added to non-club members in order to make club members feel special. If so, big thumbs down on that idea.

-Was the lack of any controls for someone bonusing up a group app and then surrendering their tags and getting their points back an oversight or by design? We already have an issue with people bonusing up other people on group applications, this would only seem to exacerbate the problem.

-Is there a specific financial need for a portal that nickel and dimes hunters? Just because there is technology to do it doesn't mean it is a good idea. I was looking at meeting agendas for the last few months there seems to be a lot of budget money being transferred and pleas for grant requests. I didn't see many signs of financial desperation.

-Why wasn?t this club membership idea killed earlier? Where is the common sense? Don?t we have people that are supposed to be advocating for public hunters?.what the heck? How did this big stinky turd get past them?

I could go on and on. If you think this is as bad an idea as I do you need to attend the public meetings about this. The meeting times and dates are in the first link above. The first meeting will be at the Game and Fish offices off of Carefree Highway tomorrow night (Thursday, June 26th) from 7-9 PM.

With the fairly new legislation conveying more power to the Commission a portal like this could fast track some really bad stuff for Average Joes if we have the wrong mix of Commissioners in the future. This is one of those cases where Average Joes need to roll off the couch and show-up to the meeting, the entitled antler crowd will certainly be there and they are squeaky wheels. Numbers matter and this is every bit the risk that expo auction tags and the premium pricing proposal was. The Arizona Game and Fish portal has no business providing an infrastructure that divides hunters and provides exclusive access to hunt opportunities that should be available to anyone willing to pay the time and monetary cost to acquire the tag.

Cheers,
Ryan
 
I wish I could be at the meetings, but I cannot. I sent my email in just now. Thanks for the heads up. Lets let them hear how stupid this is by our attendance, emails and phone calls.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-26-14 AT 09:29AM (MST)[p]>>Well, the people that tried to bring Arizona hundreds of auction tags, worthless expos and premium pricing at the species level are at it again.<<

Ryan,

I read through all of the pertinent parts of the linked docs and saw no involvement by Arizona Sportsmen for Wildlife Conservation. All I saw was presentations by AGFD employees.

So is your contention of Arizona Sportsmen for Wildlife Conservation involvement fact or speculation? If the former, please post the text that I might have missed or misread or other proof that connects the dots.

Thanks

Oh, and I'm wholly against the club proposal even though Jennifer Steward addressed many of the concens noted by you that would need to be handled. That's expecially so of the group application.


TONY MANDILE
48e63dfa482a34a9.jpg

How To Hunt Coues Deer
 
Although I am not in favor of a "club" where we would have to pay to get services that should already be provided. I like some of the things the dept is proposing. Some of the proposals are long overdue IMO.

I will also write & submit my opinions and suggestions.
 
Ryan there is nothing that I can see tying this into AZSFWC or any other group like the HB2072 tag grab. As you know I stood up and fought the Tag grab and will continue to do so. I have set up a meeting with Scott Lavin -- AZGFD to present his "Customer Portal proposal" next tuesday 6:00 pm at the Mesa AZGFD branch. I sure hope a few people show up to ask questions and help Scott. I have spoken with him and am sure he only wants to upgrade/make better the AZGFD website and add features that are of benefit to all us average joes. I cant answer all your questions, but think if you come to the meeting and present your concerns, you might find it is not as bad as you think. I think the concept is great for everyone, and it surely does not go agains the North American model of Wildlife conservation. call me if you want and we can discuss......... Thanks, Allen Taylor......
 
I haven't read it yet, but they are talking about set aside tags for guides to sell on another site. They are saying it contains a sentence buried in there that will allow guides to buy certain tags.

Again, I haven't read it yet.....take that for what it's worth.

Can someone post a link to the actual language of this proposal?
 
Follow the meeting minutes from above. There has been no mention of transferable tags specific to guides. There is a tag surrender option and the re issuance of those surrendered tags.


Reissuance of Surrendered Tags Department Options:

Issue to club member who would have been next in line to receive the tag

Issue to eligible applicant who would have been next in line to receive the tag

Issue through 1st come 1st serve

Destroy tag (do not attempt to re-issue)
.
Considerations for Rule:

Rule should be inclusive of options Department anticipates using

Rule does not require Department to exercise all options
.
Individual vs. Group Applications:

Reissuing a tag when more than one group applicant has a club
membership/tag surrender

option:
o
Group applicants have same random number
o
Department is likely to see tags surrendered on a single basis as opposed to groups of surrendered tags

Recommendation:
Tag offered to applicant a, then b, etc.
 
This one caught my eye.

"Proposed for Future Development:

- Exclusive sales or special offers (tie-in with guides/retailers); Legal and legislative process pending"
 
I have not been briefed on the specifics of this proposal.

I feel that the AZGFD is trying to better their services for the general public with out out of the box ideas. The entire social media thing has been creating a buzz within the department and they feel that they would like to tackle that. I believe they are trying to be as transparent as possible with their ideas and are genuinely looking for feedback.

I will attend the Mesa meeting along with the Sportsmen's Constituent Group and hearing what Scott Lavin from the AZGFD has to present. I look forward to seeing some more Az sportsmen there. After the meeting I will gladly give my two cents on the subject to those that cannot attend.

Again, everyone that has pertinent questions should attend and ask them directly and give feedback directly.

4678aec03a21ae00.jpg
 
I agree, this is a bad thing for average hunters. Its bad for hunting in general. Hunters already have a bad image in the media and this rich-man's grab will only make that worse.

Complaining here does little, get to the meetings and tell them your thoughts.
 
Well, I appreciate everyone's input. Especially Allen and Hector who I trust a bunch. I did attend the meeting at Phoenix HQ last week and I came away with some strong impressions. I apologize for not providing my notes earlier, been pretty busy since last week.

- The portal concept isn't all bad. The current website is old and the portal does present some risk but Scott and the programmer assured us that profile and personal information would not be for sale to third parties.

- As far as the club concept, noone that attended the Phoenix HQ meeting liked it. Scott Lavin said the club concept would support the bundled services flexibility granted to the Commission as well as make the programming effort easier. If I understood correctly, Scott said offering the service as standalone would not align with bundled services power of the Commission and would be more expensive to code. Even if it is easy to implement people don't seem to want a club. I would have thought the input about premium pricing on the front end last year would have given AZGFD a hint that providing extra opportunity to rich guys on the back end for a fee isn't popular in Arizona. Regular Joe's would generally prefer to pay 5-10 bucks more than open a door for private interests to skim the tag pool that they have decades of time invested in.

- One of the first things Scott Lavin opened the meeting with was to say the club concept was optional and non-club members wouldn't be impacted. He made that comment multiple times throughout the meeting. Each time he said it I got irritated. The proposal as presented said club members would get sole crack at surrendered tags. He also mentioned that club members would be eligible to keep their points if they surrender their tag fee, are of a certain club status and surrender their tag to a qualified 501c3 group. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to see this would open a pipeline for some very good tags for 501c3 groups that may use a private tag broker to market these tags to the "I feel entitled but I cannot afford a Governor tag crowd". We are talking about a huge pool of tags potentially, great tags. I can see tag recruiters scouring the successful applicant list looking for "donations". Bottom line, THIS CONCEPT WOULD IMPACT NON CLUB MEMBERS, FEWER TAGS AVAILABLE IN THE PUBLIC DRAW IS AN IMPACT TO NON CLUB MEMBERS.

- Tony, I looked and I have never read a response from Jennifer Stewart addressing my concerns about group bonus point averaging. I even re-read a long thread I posted a few months ago and didn't see anything. I certainly may have missed it, if you have access I would appreciate it I you could add to this thread. That isn't a challenge, I genuinely feel I could have overlooked it. And Tony, as for AZSFWC, I never mentioned that group in this thread, YOU DID. By the way, were you at the meeting at headquarters last week?

I stand by my original call that this is a back door attempt to put more public tags under the control of many of the people that coordinated the HB2072 thing. This is smarter, and more creative but will accomplish the same ugly results. Entitlement programs are tough to stop so guys need to attend these meetings and share their thoughts. Scott Lavin mentioned that there would be a meeting with the Yuma Rodd and Gun Club (sorry, working from memory, I know I hacked it). He said it could include nearly 100 people, those Yuma guys don't take much crap so I am hoping they open the floodgates on this bad idea. I encourage everyone that attends these meetings to post their notes on a public forum somewhere so that the voice of constituents is captured and can stand against the sales pitch of the special interests.

Cheers, Ryan
 
"non-club members wouldn't be impacted"

Sorry, I have my doubts about that. Take the proposal for early access to draw results for club members. Doe that mean that they will just withhold the results beyond when they are finished with the process for the scum that don't belong to the club? Must be the case if some can get them sooner.

OK, here is a scenario for the tag return. Say I've got max points for elk. I can get drawn for a trophy rifle hunt any year. I get an early unit 10 bull tag. Mr. X pays me $5000 cash under the table to "donate" the tag to a specific 501C3. Said 501C3 sells the tag to Mr. X or his wife or son or ??? for another $5000. I get my bonus points back plus the point as if I was not drawn. Next year, by definition I'm at the top of the heap again so I get an early rifle bull tag in unit 23. Wash rinse and repeat, over and over for years.

This thing has a smell to it that will be hard to cover up.
 
They should have an approved list of 501c groups that are eligible.

The groups that take sick kids on hunts as an example. Not just any "wildlife" group should qualify.

It should also be a rule that once the tag is donated, it cannot be raffled or auctioned or sold. It must be issued in accordance with the 501c by-laws.

We already allow tag donations, you just can't keep your points.
 
It would be a shame to see Arizona be the last domino to fall to big game tag exploitation. Since I began applying in 10 western states in 1996, AZ is the only one that has not bait-n-switched nonresidents to devalue their points in some manner.

***********************************
Member RMEF, Pope & Young Club, NRA, UWC & DP Hate Club
 
Just read all the minutes. This proposal seems ripe for abuse of tags & points. Crafted as a back door, low profile method of bending over deserving sportsmen.

***********************************
Member RMEF, Pope & Young Club, NRA, UWC & DP Hate Club
 
Zim/Javihammer et all. I have been to 2 meetings and dont feel like AZGFD is trying to do anything funny. They are still in the infancy stage asking advice from us the customers. Go over to www.coueswhitetail.com under the "whats new with AZGFD" forum and there is a big long thread on what people have experienced at the last two meetings. Scott Lavin from AZGFD is open for any and all suggestions. I am watching this closely so there isnt some back door problems like HB2072. Sure wish we could get more sportsmen at the meetings to express how they feel. At the meeting July 1st in Mesa there were 9 of us total. We need to speak up and express what we want, not sit back and ##### amongst each other............ Thanks, Allen Taylor......
 
In the last 18 years I have seen many legislators & F&G's devise every which way to devalue points. But this one is extremely unique, and indirect. Trickle down effect?

***********************************
Member RMEF, Pope & Young Club, NRA, UWC & DP Hate Club
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-03-14 AT 10:50AM (MST)[p]If G&F wants to do a surrender tag thing, then do it!

They need to come up with guide lines and a proposal specifically for that, to present to sportsman.

There is no way in **** that it should have anything to do with a hunting club with special priority to members first crap



If they want a touchy/feely club so hunters can intermingle and get special discounts at retailers / guides, then do it right.

A club giving its paid members access to something hunting or tag related that should be free for everyone,isn't going to go down well with 90% of Az hunters

Here we go again !
 
>>That isn't a challenge, I genuinely feel I could have overlooked it. And Tony, as for AZSFWC, I never mentioned that group in this thread, YOU DID.<<

Yup, I mentioned it specifically because of the two excerpts from your message below. I'm sure you recall that AZSFWC was the "people" and "group" involved with your same concerns included in the HB2072 tag grab. Of course, if that isn't the case, than I'm curious to know just who are these "people" and "group" referred to below:.

>>Well, the PEOPLE that tried to bring Arizona hundreds of auction tags, worthless expos and premium pricing at the species level are at it again.

This crafty GROUP is proposing a club you can sign up for through the new Arizona Game and Fish portal that is being built.<<


And I don't attend the meetings because I get information and provide input straight from the horse's mouth, so to speak thru a direct pipeline with several principles at the AGFD.

For example, I'm making a suggestion to the rules committee that someone whose app is rejected because of a CC issue or other error still retain their loyalty point if they have one.

Why? Because in reality they did apply as required for the point and paid the fee, which isn't refunded, to do so. And they should also get a bonus point for the same reason, just as if they bought one only. Thus, not getting in the drawing and not getting a tag are enough punishment.

As for Stewart, in her very first mention of the group tag,she floated it as an idea that would need tweaking, i.e. rules implemented to provide proper control. IOW, NOTHING -- as in nada, nil, zero -- has been etched in stone yet.



TONY MANDILE
48e63dfa482a34a9.jpg

How To Hunt Coues Deer
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-03-14 AT 02:56PM (MST)[p]Allen,
Thanks for the link to coueswhitetail, I went out there a several times for information on this issue and overlooked it every time. I feel a ton better reading the notes from the A-Team (you, Kent, Hector, Swivel, Stan....and several others I am forgetting to mention).

Just for clarification, I think we have a great game department in Arizona, but great departments even let a stinker in once in a while. Especially when one of our only lines of defense is a five person Game Commission. Scott Lavin seems to have adjusted his presentation since the first meeting so I applaud him for that.

Tony,
If I wanted to name names I would, the fact that I didn't was deliberate. Most wildlife groups are full of great people, SOME groups have people that are in it for their own personal and financial interests. I have a problem with bad people and bad ideas, not necessarily groups. The people that were in AZSFW didn't go anywhere, they still occupy control positions in Arizona wildlife even though their group is dead.

As for your idea to reinstate loyalty points for rejected credit cards, I like it. I was impacted once and the pain of losing my loyalty point hurt. Thanks for submitting that idea, if you were to poll people I think most would support it.

As for my concern about group bonus point averaging and proxy applicants, it still isn't clear to me whether you saw a response from Jennifer beyond "we are looking into it". If that is the latest status it hardly addresses my concern about the current problem and potential impacts if the tag surrender idea were to worm through. As for your suggestion that I just drop the issue, I lack sufficient information to do so at this point.

Take care,
Ryan
 
I hate this idea. It is bad for me because I make less than $150K. It's bad for hunting because it turns into a rich man's sport. get to the meetings or email [email protected] to let them know how you feel.
 
I still don't understand this tag surrender idea. None of my friends and colleagues would make use of it and I do not agree with it. When the HB2072 (the bill asking for hundreds of tags to establish an expo in Arizona) issue was in play there was a large critter group that shared leadership with AZSFW (AZSFW was the group that helped draft the bill). This critter group refused to provide a position statement standing against HB2072 or renounce membership to AZSFW. Based on notes from one of the meetings on coueswhitetail, it sounds like a member from that same group provided the research and presentation that suggested Arizona hunters would want a tag surrender program.

How they determined Arizona hunters wanted a tag surrender option and whether it used actual input from Arizona resident hunters I have no idea. I can see why people that can afford to apply in many states every year would want it for scheduling or antler growth issues but it isn't clear if the majority of hunters without these scheduling issues and that contribute the bulk of the development budget would actually want it. Supposedly the research suggested that only one quarter on one percent of all tags would be surrendered. That seems understated to me.

But lets assume that the one quarter of one percent estimate is correct for a minute. Just for antelope, elk and deer we are talking about 186 tags. Here is the breakdown.

deer muzzy rifle 43284 0% 108.21
deer archery 286 0.0025 0.715
deer youth 2335 0.0025 5.8375

114.7625

antelope rifle/muzzy 517 0.0025 1.2925
archery 72 0.0025 0.18

1.4725

elk general 21042 0.0025 52.605
juniors only 1137 0.0025 2.8425
archery 5840 0.0025 14.6
champ 45 0.0025 0.1125

70.16

total 186.395


Curiously, there also happens to be a 501c3 group that seems uniquely positioned to distribute surrendered tags, it was founded by some of the same people that pitched HB2072. According to the website, their mission statement is ?to offer outdoor experiences to young people diagnosed with life threatening illnesses, children of fallen heroes and children with disabilities.? Back in April of this year Governor Brewer signed Arizona House bill 2303 which allows the transfer of a tag to a service member with a service connected disability. The new language for AR 17-332 as modified by HB2303 matches almost exactly the mission statement of this group, here is a link http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/51leg/2r/bills/hb2303h.pdf..

What would happen if only one 501c3 group were to qualify to receive surrendered tags or contracted as the distribution point for groups like HOAL and Wounded Warriors? What would happen if only one group got nearly all of the 186+ tags (the actual number could be much higher) surrendered and couldn't find enough wounded warriors, or terminally ill or disabled youth? What would happen to the leftover tags? Could ARS 17-332 be amended to allow those tags to be auctioned to healthy non-military adults? Does the AZGFD Commission already have the power to authorize this based on the new language on ARS 17-332? Could the AZGFD Commission be forced into a situation where these tags would have to be marketed in such an instance? If there were enough tags left over would they call this side market an expo?

Bottom line, the tag surrender idea is loaded with problems. Will there be enough sick kids and veterans to use them, snd will the pool of surrendered resident and non-resident tags align with the residency pool of recipients (Arizona caps non-residents at 10%)? Especially if the surrender period is very close to hunt date. Will there be enough volunteers and lead time to evenly assist nearly 200 people? Will the type of tags surrendered align with the physical capabilities and skills of the recipients? Will this be a once in a lifetime opportunity for recipients or will the same people hunt every year? How will tags be allocated, would a surrendered 13B muley tag be treated the same as a southern Arizona coues tag?..how would priority be established? Couple that with all of the other issues that come with tag surrenders on group applications and proxy applicants and the whole thing is one big loophole asking to be abused. I can also think of many scenarios that would allow the control of these tags to open the door for things that look a whole lot like landowner tags. Right now AZGFD has the power to cut tags in units with landowners that restrict reasonable access to hunters. Would AZGFD have that same leverage if a private landowner flipped a few opportunities to some kids and veterans and crapped on everyone else, it would be a PR problem.

As the son and grandson of military veterans, and the father of a child with a significant disability I am very sensitive to this. My disabled son is too young to hunt but when he is I hardly believe he would feel he deserves a spot at the front of the line every year. Consideration and accommodation for his disability WHEN he draws a tag would be reasonable but additional hunt opportunities outside of the pre-established CHAMP seasons doesn't make sense to me.

We cannot let the emotional response to kids and veterans cloud our vision and common sense. I would hate to think we are opening the door for military and sick kids to lure people into side markets for commercial interests? If so, that isn't what a 501c3 non-profit is supposed to be doing and would be pretty twisted. There is no room in Arizona for tag brokers, middlemen or landowner tags. Even if those brokers are working as or on behalf of non-profits. Arizona hunters didn't support an expo with tags skimmed by legislation (HB2072) and they won't support a thinly veiled banquet acting as an expo to market tags acquired through some half-baked surrender program where the nominal cost in dollars and zero cost in time hardly qualifies as a tag donation.

Arizona hunters need to let the Commissioners know ASAP that there is no support in Arizona for a tag surrender program. Here is a link to the contact info for the Commissioners. There is a blue ?contact me? option after the description for each, click it and it will open a form to contact them.

http://www.azgfd.gov/inside_azgfd/commission_members.shtml

A better option would be to show up to the meetings, share your thoughts, take notes and post your notes on a public forum. Coueswhitetail has a pretty extensive thread on this but you could post it anywhere. Here are the dates for the next meetings on this, THERE IS A MEETING TONIGHT AT BASSPRO.

July 8, 7?9 p.m. in Mesa
Bass Pro Shops
1133 N. Dobson Road

July 15, 7?9 p.m. in Flagstaff
AZGFD Regional Office
3500 S. Lake Mary Road

July 17, 7?9 p.m. in Tucson
International Wildlife Museum
4800 W. Gates Pass Road

July 22, 7?9 p.m. in Glendale
Cabela?s
9380 W. Glendale Ave.

July 24, 7?9 p.m. in Payson
Majestic Mountain Inn
602 E. Highway 260

take care,
Ryan
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-08-14 AT 08:20PM (MST)[p]I have no problem with tag surrender and keeping points provided the surrender applies to single applicants only and the tag goes to the next guy in line. Surrender to an Org with point retention is a bad idea, regardless of the ORG.




edit for clarity
 
Ryan, I dont see any "tagbroker", "landowner tags" or any other "middleman" scenarios being played out. I personally have sat with Scott Lavin-AZGFD privately and in a public meetings. As you know, I have been AGAINST any special "Deals" for anyone, I want to keep our whole system fair and following with the principals of North American Model of Wildlife Conservation. This whole process is being driven by the Commissioners, not some group like ADA or AZSFW. The tag surender and portal concepts are fluid/ever changing based on the input Scott recieves from US the Constituents. I will stay involved with this whole thing and give input on the "rule making" to ensure this does not turn into a way for people to take advantage of "Average Joes". Hopefully tonight at Bass Pro alot of people show up and express thoughts/suggestions. ......Ryan, you can call me or Hector anytime to discuss this subject or any other.,...... Thanks, Allen Taylor......
 
Last year all commissioners were against premium tags,now they want more money and this is their way!!!!!It would have been a lot better off just to put 12 and 13 units in the premium tag allotment,and the early bull tags.Every other western state has them,it cost me a lot more to get a 16a elk tag in N.Mex than a 7 tag up north.This way they don't need or have to listen to the hunters,they just vote and its in!!All the time that I and others have put in to going to GFD meetings and nothing good ever happens---much.Last year I and others told Brian that WAAAAAYYYY to many deer tags in the southern units--a couple took a 100 or 50 out- progress?????It comes slow in AZ.600 late bull tags in 10 WOW if I wanted to be in an area with that many 30 cal rifles I would go back to Iraq,how can you get much out of a hunt when 15 or 20 guys are after the same un broken bull!!!!This will happen if the board wants it with or without us!!!!
 
I agree Wapiti Bob points must be lost like any other applicant who draws a tag, and I think they need to take it further in that any individual is only allowed one signed over tag in a lifetime ( not per specie one total). You have to make them lose the points or they'll play the game until they draw the tag they want signing over 1st& 2nd choice tags playing the system to their advantage. No loop holes insures a fair draw for everyone and you can still get the kids involved with a one tag sign over limit so as to not allow them to exploit that. Nobody deserves as many as 5 applications to draw a tag as opposed to a normal applicants single application per specie because of economic advantage. You have to balance things across the board and get as many in the field as possible.

Just my $.02 thanks for representing us!
 
If ya can't hunt the tag after you have drawn why do ya have to 'donate it' to some Con Org Group to $ell?

Why can't ya return it for lose of fee but get a point like so many other states?

$FWAZ can change it's name...


BUT----


If ya put a suit on a Monkey is it not still a Monkey?

Robb
 
Looking back over my 37 years of hunting I can think of 3 times when I wasn't able to go on a planned Big Game hunt. It sure would have been nice to be able to surrender the tag and keep my points. One time was before they even gave points and one time was less than a week before the hunt, so not sure much could have been done. The time that really hurt was when I wrote down the wrong hunt number for a deer hunt and used 8 points on a hunt that was easily drawn with 1 or 2 points. Didn't even go on the hunt becuse dates conflicted with work schedule. It would have been nice to surrender the tag and let someone else go and me not lose my points.

Six or Seven years ago my sister tore the ligaments in here kneetwo weeks before her hunt started. She ended up having surgery the Tuesday before her hunt. She let her 5B rifle antelope tag go to waste because she couldn't go. All I'm trying to say is, stuff happens.

I like the idea of being able to surrender a tag but see where there could be abuse. That is why I like:

1. each person could only surrender once per species,

2. at least a two week notice but one month would be better.
** Archery deer draw hunters would be one week notice since they have so little time between recieving tag and their hunt starting.

3. Tags should go to next person in line.

4. The person that forfeits a tag loses that years bonus point and tag fee but not loyalty point.
***For the life of me I can't figure out why so many people want to punish someone for forfieting their tag. Nobody is hurt, the dept makes more money because next person in line has to buy a tag. Which by the way, new tag holder would lose their points if they accepted a tag.

Make it a one time deal per spieces and move on. It is a win win as far as I'm concerned. One less wasted tag and an opportunity for another hunter to hunt. I also appreciate the fact the dept. is considering ways in which to be more user friendly.

Good luck to everyone that applied.

My .02 cents
John
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-08-14 AT 08:23PM (MST)[p]Boskee, I'm for keeping your points with tag surrender provided the conditions I mentioned are met. Pretty much the Utah model but for single applicants only. No person in a party should be able to surrender a tag.
I'm not for point retention, with a tag surrender, if the tag can go to anyone other than the next in line.
 
Wapati thanks and I agree with you to a large extent.

This isn't directed at you just FYI. There has to be safeguards in place and forfeiture of some points is a preventive measure to keep the abusers in check. These things always wind up with unintended consequences on down the road. If a guy with $$$ figures out something that will work to his advantage they'll take it and use their wealth to leverage things.

That's why we have kids that have 5 applications in the draw on one specie and the hard working guy has 1. We as sportsmen have to limit things in such a manner to keep things fair. Those of you that think your kid deserves 5 chances as opposed to another guy only getting one aren't too concerned about the other guy and that's exactly why we're losing folks in the sport. Put a one tag per lifetime sign over provision in there and we helped get a kid interested yet didn't allow the advantage to continue for a decade and magnify it over several species.

The department has done some very good things to help kids get into hunting at a lower price point, more junior hunts, and we have several tags they can buy OTC to keep the interest alive. This is a win win for us as far as I'm concerned on all fronts.

We also have to remember the guys sitting at home year after year are just big kids too and they want to hunt. We need to look at ways to make sure we keep things fair so they keep their interest too. Tag prices remain reasonable as long as we have more applicants and the department has more funding to manage our resources.

We've had a shrinking pool of opportunity from our glory days and more crowded hunts don't keep sportsmen happy, but is a necessary evil of more limited resources. But guys drawing tags for some species back to back to back isn't the solution to the issue either. That guy is hunting for far less than the guy who has to sit there and wait 6-8 years for his elk tag and they're putting in for the same units. Well luck of the draw is good in many cases and seems fair some are far luckier than others, and yet many watch as Joe loads up his truck year after year and goes hunting while Bob sits at home and still opened his wallet up to sit at home. It's easy to see after a few cycles with no tags Bob gives up hunting and in that scenario we all lose. We not only lost a source of funding for our sport we lost an advocate of what we love to do. Last I looked we weren't raising eyebrows with tons of support to oppose the dark forces that want to stop us.

Losing Bob in the big picture may have some of those unintended consequences I talked about because Bob may have small kids or may introduce others to hunting if he participates. If not he'll take his discretionary income and his support and find something else to do. In that case we lost far more than one tag will cost us in the end, we lost our means, our way and our future.

WE as hunters can't let our love of our own opportunity, create a situation where we put our most valuable resource a fellow hunter, on the other side of that "NO HUNTING" posted fence, that eventually leads to our own demise.
 
Boskee I agree that a guy sitting out will quit.We need a system that is like Nev.draw a early bull tag or a 13-12 deer tag and you have a couple years out,you could still apply for points just not the tag.When I was younger here in Az. you had to wait 3 year after you drew an elk tag.I know that g&f does not like or want this,as they have shot it down in all the state meeting when it has been brought up???
 
Good meeting at Bass Pro last night. Same agenda as in previous meetings, with Scott reviewing the planned portal upgrade and enhanced bundled service concept. The floor was then open for questions, feedback and brainstorming with those in attendance.

The same theme of concerns for the tag surrender idea came-up (equity, controls to keep people from gaming the system, etc...), and of course the G&F folks in the room took notice. There were also some interesting ideas shared about the types of enhanced services might be considered valuable to sportsmen (targeted news, detailed draw odds information, etc....).

Overall, the meeting was positive with many ideas shared.

I would encourage all to try to make it to one of these meetings if possible!

Stan
 
The only way to ensure Bob gets the tag is to make every tag OIL. You then would need to tie the tag quotas to the number of applicants to ensure Bob draws before he dies. You then need to ensure Bob draws before the new guy that comes into the system next year, which is where points come in. But we know that points ensure those coming in late may never draw and we're back to square one and how do you give everybody a tag. Wait periods are pretty much a feel good exercise and aren't long enough to do any good. The UT 5 year wait period I'm on doesn't change odds more than a single percentage point.
Bob needs to understand that tags are a limited quantity and that hunting any species he so desires isn't a right and nobody promised him anything. If everybody got a tag there wouldn't be anything left to hunt.
Bob can hunt Deer, Antelope, and Elk every year if he chooses. If he needs more money then he needs to change is economic situation. It's no different than purchasing any other product or service.
 
Bob waiting periods take out the guys that draw back to back tags,and drop the number of apps in that unit.Back in the 90's I drew 6 archery bull tags while a couple of my buds never drew one and a couple were back to back to back.When I tried for 15 years to draw a 13 deer tag I helped guys that had 3to 5 tags in that time frame,don't tell me that sitting out does not help the % draw rate!!!!65 hunters will draw 13b tags this year,most will put in next year again if they had to wait say 3 years that 195 less apps in the draw!!12a west early would be 1500 less apps,way better chances now!!!!!
 
Wapati no disrespect intended it's a difficult issue and you're 100% right not enough opportunity to go around.
 
Boskee, we're good.

The updated odds reports have been ongoing for years. I've been talking with Amber about them since 2009 and she's asked for them repeatedly and has been shot down every time. They'll get done regardless of the portal but it may be 2016 before it happens.
 
Waiting periods are a joke. It's simple math. Taking a few hundred people out of the pool does almost nothing to up your odds.

It does keep people from whining about guys drawing back to back. But those same people would whine if the same guy drew the first time he applied after his waiting period was over.
 
Not too sure who average joes are and if they are even threatened but I noticed there is a meeting tonight at Cabelas to discuss this topic with G&F. Time is 7-9 and is usually in the upstairs conference room in back by bargain cave.

BTW, I agree with Heffe. Waiting periods do virtually nothing to improve odds and has been proven multiple times. I like AZ's draw because every year you know you at least have a chance to draw. If you make it mandatory that people have to wait they will take up a new hobby or past time. If the dept. is worried about hunter retention this would be a killer.

Don't mess with something if it isn't broke.
 

Arizona Hunting Guides & Outfitters

SilverGrand Outfitters

Offering mule deer, elk, antelope, bighorn sheep, javelina, and turkey hunts in Nevada and Arizona.

Arizona Elk Outfitters

Offering the serious hunter a chance to hunt trophy animals in the great Southwest.

A3 Trophy Hunts

An Arizona Outfitter specializing in the harvest of World Class big game of all species.

Arizona Strip Guides

Highly experienced and highly dedicated team of hardworking professional Arizona Strip mule deer guides.

Urge 2 Hunt

THE premier hunts in Arizona for trophy elk, mule deer, couse deer and javelina.

Shadow Valley Outfitters

AZ Strip and Kaibab mule deer, big bulls during the rut, spot-n-stalk pronghorn and coues deer hunts.

Back
Top Bottom