fatrooster
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 4,187
To make a long story short, USO sued on the grounds that Arizona was discriminating against nonresidents because they were not being given a fair chance or even chance as compared with residents to draw tags. Why didn't they complain about having to pay more for an out of state tag or hunting liscense than a resident has to pay? And what is the deal on a price increase for tags? Like many people said in another post the increase is only going to change the class of hunters who can afford to put in for tags and discriminates against the poor working man. I understand that some of you feel (as I feel) that it is only fair that a nonresident should pay more for a tag. But that will not solve the problem with uso. USO wants rich people to get the tags. Rich people are more apt to use a guide. All that Arizona is doing is putting the squeeze on the poor man. Therefore putting a precedence on increasing fees whenever a problem arises. Oh yeah, and Az is gonna make more money also.
In my opinion I feel that the use of Guides and Outfitters is discriminatory against the poor man. I myself have considered using a guide or outfitter in the past and still am thinking about using one if I ever get an Elk tag in Nevada. But lets think about it. We complain about Taulman being driven by the prospect of making more money (which I agree) rather than truley wanting to give nonresidents a fair chance in obtaining tags. But we ourselves are guilty of selling our game and allowing profits to be made by the selling of game. We've allowed outfitters and guides to lead people to the taking of game for profits forever. We've allowed the sale of antlers to the highest bidder for a long time. This precedence was set before we were ever born so we've never thought much of it. But what George Taulman is doing is just trying to cut himself a bigger piece of the pie. I would like to see outfitting and guiding stopped. Where is Georgie gonna be if he cannot run his business at all. And better yet, where is our game going to be. Many guides are out there all year long watching the game and finding all of thier hiding spots. When a client comes along they drive or walk them up to thier quarry and point it out and say shoot him. I realize that not all hunts are carried out this way and that many guides and outfitters actually take a client on a real hunt. But many times a client can choose which deer or elk he wants from a video before he ever goes out into the field. Again, I ask where would our game be if every one had to go out and find his or her owne animal. Our population of trophies and game in general would be that much better off. Everybody would have the same EQUAL chance at getting out there and finding thier owne game. I personally would love to be a guide doing what I love to do and helping people fullfill thier dream of harvesting a trophy animal. I would love to have a certain number of tags allotted to me as a guide or landowner so that I could sell them to the public at my owne designated price. But then I would be selling what I love. The wildlife. I have friends who are guides and outfitters. I have friends who are landowners. Sometimes I wish I could be doing what they are doing just so I could be around hunting all of the time. But what is a trophy if you did not find it yourself? I'm sure a few people will get mad at me for voicing my opinion and I'm sure there are other opinions on what is fair and not fair and I will be glad to hear them. But what in the hell does "Fair Chase" really mean?
I would like to see Nevada lead the way in banning guides and outfitters. George Taulman did something out of the ordinary that we thought would never happen. He shocked us all when he won. Let Nevada do something to shock ole George. Nevada already is the only state which has legalized brothels and it leads the U.S. in the gambling industry. Let Nevada be the first to stop the selling of game and game parts. But if Arizona wants to do it first then thats allright with me.
I realize that exceptions should be made for the handicapped and others. And I like the idea of the govenors tags to raise money for wildlife.
So I've said what I wanted to say for awhile. Lets hear your comments. fatrooster.
P.S. I know that many people make a living by guiding and that many people make some nice money selling antlers. But if we really cared about our wildlife then we would not be making a profit from our game. We are all guilty by partaking in these practices or by just allowing it to happen. fatrooster.
In my opinion I feel that the use of Guides and Outfitters is discriminatory against the poor man. I myself have considered using a guide or outfitter in the past and still am thinking about using one if I ever get an Elk tag in Nevada. But lets think about it. We complain about Taulman being driven by the prospect of making more money (which I agree) rather than truley wanting to give nonresidents a fair chance in obtaining tags. But we ourselves are guilty of selling our game and allowing profits to be made by the selling of game. We've allowed outfitters and guides to lead people to the taking of game for profits forever. We've allowed the sale of antlers to the highest bidder for a long time. This precedence was set before we were ever born so we've never thought much of it. But what George Taulman is doing is just trying to cut himself a bigger piece of the pie. I would like to see outfitting and guiding stopped. Where is Georgie gonna be if he cannot run his business at all. And better yet, where is our game going to be. Many guides are out there all year long watching the game and finding all of thier hiding spots. When a client comes along they drive or walk them up to thier quarry and point it out and say shoot him. I realize that not all hunts are carried out this way and that many guides and outfitters actually take a client on a real hunt. But many times a client can choose which deer or elk he wants from a video before he ever goes out into the field. Again, I ask where would our game be if every one had to go out and find his or her owne animal. Our population of trophies and game in general would be that much better off. Everybody would have the same EQUAL chance at getting out there and finding thier owne game. I personally would love to be a guide doing what I love to do and helping people fullfill thier dream of harvesting a trophy animal. I would love to have a certain number of tags allotted to me as a guide or landowner so that I could sell them to the public at my owne designated price. But then I would be selling what I love. The wildlife. I have friends who are guides and outfitters. I have friends who are landowners. Sometimes I wish I could be doing what they are doing just so I could be around hunting all of the time. But what is a trophy if you did not find it yourself? I'm sure a few people will get mad at me for voicing my opinion and I'm sure there are other opinions on what is fair and not fair and I will be glad to hear them. But what in the hell does "Fair Chase" really mean?
I would like to see Nevada lead the way in banning guides and outfitters. George Taulman did something out of the ordinary that we thought would never happen. He shocked us all when he won. Let Nevada do something to shock ole George. Nevada already is the only state which has legalized brothels and it leads the U.S. in the gambling industry. Let Nevada be the first to stop the selling of game and game parts. But if Arizona wants to do it first then thats allright with me.
I realize that exceptions should be made for the handicapped and others. And I like the idea of the govenors tags to raise money for wildlife.
So I've said what I wanted to say for awhile. Lets hear your comments. fatrooster.
P.S. I know that many people make a living by guiding and that many people make some nice money selling antlers. But if we really cared about our wildlife then we would not be making a profit from our game. We are all guilty by partaking in these practices or by just allowing it to happen. fatrooster.
