Arizona 10% cap on Nonresidents

Hope I don't turn into such a grumpy S.O.B. when I start collecting social security.

To hunt WY I don't have to hire a guide but I must find a resident to sign off for me AND hunt out of their camp? From your words a resident can sign off friends and family who are there to hunt with them.

BuzzH said:
Its strictly so that as a Resident I can hunt with out-of-state family and friends in wilderness areas.
Click to expand...

For NR's who do not have friends or family in the state then we would have to hire a guide or outfitter. Like I said before, sounds like a way to boost economy(which I see nothing wrong with) rather than heartfelt generosity that you are making it out to be.
 
I have been looking through my Hunter Ed stuff, somewhere I have some doc on the draw process and even remember seeing a spreadsheet on the tag breakdown. I will share it once, or if, I can find it.

Doesn't really matter anyway, we can slam each other all we want on these boards and it won't change a thing - G&F is going to do whatever the commision rules on. Here is a report from a guy on a local board that was at the last commission meeting. Instead of slamming each other we should be more worried about the 'Bunny Hugger' impact to all states.


"As I expected, there was a lot of time fighting off the anti-hunting groups today! Earth First had a lovely selection of FREAKS with piercings and mohawks, who looked like they hadn't bathed or changed clothes so far in April.... There were about a half dozen or so of them that were pretty antagonistic and made G&F very nervous about what types of militant stunts they might pull while they were there. Also in the house was the ever present representative from The Arizona Animal Defense League, or something like that, who is on a multi-year mission to diminish our lion hunting seasons.

She successfully had the lion hunt cut back last year by adding language about not hunting spotted kittens, or females with spotted kittens. Once that was passed, she continued on her long-term agenda and convinced the Department to recommend that lion season be closed for three months of the year to allow and encourage breeding/birthing. The Department actually recommended in their written recommendations that this should be done. I can't believe the Department is just marching down this path each year to slowly taking each of the next steps towards closing lion hunting just like Kalifornia.

She stood up and told that Commission that she appreciated this recommended season change, and that "it was a good start in the right direction" and that she would be "back next year to extend the closure for even a longer period of time. G&F seemed to have no problems with that whatsoever! I couldn't take anymore and asked to speak. I pointed out that we just couldn’t allow the anti-hunting groups to gain ground each and every year and expect that we are going to be able to stop them. I said that even with unlimited lion tags for all of history, Arizona continues to take about the same amount of lions each and every year for decades. That means to me that populations are stable, and management is working. Also, that the time period of the closure she was requesting only has a historical kill of only about 8 female lions per year, and many of those might not even be having kittens in any given year. The closure for three months to save probably a half-dozen or fewer female lions that might have kittens would have NO biological impact whatsoever, so why do it? This was not a decision based on any biological need. It is completely political. There was absolutely no science to support this change and therefore NO reason to give in to the anti-hunters!

For my comments, Commissioner Hernbrode berated me that “these groups love wildlife just as much as I do” and that I was “doing a disservice to these groups and myself “ by saying such things about them…. It did seem to spark some discussion among the commissioners, however, and although it kept looking like it could go either way (moreso that it would get passed!), and there were 4 or 5 votes taken before getting a majority, the commission eventually left the season alone for this year! We could VERY likely lose this one next year, though. Oh, and by the way, our new commissioner (who hasn't taken office yet) was sitting in the audience right along with the anti-hunters, talking and exchanging phone numbers with them..... She seriously scares me!

We lost the whitetail December permits issue. Two commissioners said that the $15,000 survey done by the ADA was not based in science, and really only represented the small minority of serious hunters that would take the time to take such a survey (6,500 respondents). Dick King, ABA liaison, asked why the Commission backed off on the changes to elk with a nearly identical survey and similar number of respondents, and the same Commissioner berated him as well! They never really answered his question.

WE DID WIN THE ARCHERY DEER season length issue however. Deer season will open around December 15 (a week earlier than originally recommended) and stay open until January 31!

All other seasons for other species stayed as recommended, with little discussion at all. The only other minor changes of which I can think were to the junior deer permits and to the early October general hunts. The early general hunts had been recommended for lengthening from 4 to 10 days, but were pulled back to 6 days when approved. Juniors lost 300 doe permits on the Kiabab (taken down to 100 from 400), but the permits were later replaced with buck permits taken from other general hunts around the state."
 
😂


Ringer,

I agree, but to say that AZ Residents have to be "stingy" is because they dont get drawn...thats just plain selfish. I proved that WY provides a much more fair system that gives NR's a clear advantage over Residents. Even at that, 75% of the tags go to Residents.

I have no problem with only getting 10% of AZ tags, as long as NR's are guaranteed 10%. However, the "up to" cap is just plain greed on AZ residents part. They arent content with 90%...they need to cut into the NR tags as well. Montana does the same thing with sheep, moose, and goat and I disagree with that too.

I also find it odd that for all the Whiners in AZ...very few apply for out-of-state tags? They find it more fun to bitch about not drawing a strip deer tag or a unit 9 early rifle bull tag. Most can be hunting in Colorado for elk EVERY year within a days drive of anywhere in AZ....

Personally, I dont really care. I just enjoy pointing out the hypocracy of the AZ residents who begged all the NR's to write letters because "we all need to stick together as hunters and for the sake of AZ's wildlife" when their tits were in ringer with the USO lawsuit.

Sure did forget who helped them real, real, real fast...

They werent concerned about anyone but themselves and in hind-sight I should have been more concerned with MY hunting rights as a NR in Arizona. I should have looked out for my best interest and showed them the same compassion I'm now being showed...NONE.

They may have short memories...but I dont.
 
Trial153 said:
Alex !! I will take name that poster for 500

Alex:
Seems to me the Arizona residents are a bunch of whiney bastards that dont want NR to draw any tags.
Click to expand...
They were, 10% is the gold standard. WY has it about 65% correct, hopefully 100% correct here soon.

This will help get us there:


Treat NR's of Wyoming the same way I'm treated as a NR in surrounding states.
 
Last edited:
Trial153 said:
Buzz was whinny like a bitch eh!? I agree
Click to expand...
I reserve the right to a few things:

1. Changing my mind based on how abundance of wildlife has declined, along with opportunity.
2. Being a hypocrite like you and everyone else
3. Watching you complain how poorly you're treated by Residents


Carry on...
 
nochawk said:
When challenged in federal court, by outfitter George Taulman, the Commission's 10% nonresident cap rule was found to be unconstitutional. This almost eight year legal battle, at a cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars, ended with nonresidents being given equal status with residents in our hunt drawings.
Click to expand...
Any chance you can cite the judgment here? There's gotta be more to this story, because I haven't seen anything overturning Baldwin v. Montana Fish and Wildlife 436 U.S. 371 (1978), which would be the precedent the Federal court would have had to rely upon.
 
Elky Welky said:
Any chance you can cite the judgment here? There's gotta be more to this story, because I haven't seen anything overturning Baldwin v. Montana Fish and Wildlife 436 U.S. 371 (1978), which would be the precedent the Federal court would have had to rely upon.
Click to expand...
This is the response to the Taulman lawsuit:


The lawsuit was found in favor of Taulman/USO because of the Commerce Claus, IIRC. So, there was the response to that I provided the link to above.

The lawsuit caused Arizona to redraw a bunch of NR tags, @Greenhorn scored a great mule deer tag from that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

rustednuts
AZ Caps Nonresident OTC Deer
Replies
1
Views
838
Tyler1215
Tyler1215
A
Privatization kills both Resident and Nonresident DIY hunting opportunity
6 7 8
Replies
156
Views
8K
ImBillT
ImBillT
J
Gird your loins.
Replies
11
Views
1K
Jock Conyngham
J
Gerald Martin
Montana General Season Structure Proposal
47 48 49
Replies
964
Views
35K
Gerald Martin
Gerald Martin
COEngineer
Proposed Big Game Season Structure (BGSS) 2025-2029 - Colorado
2 3 4
Replies
73
Views
4K
Foldem
F

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
111,332
Messages
1,955,070
Members
35,129
Latest member
Otto247

Share this page

Back
Top