Commission meeting for tag and license ceiling caps
Attendees:
There were 16 people at the meeting that were not part of the commission or the game and fish. This wasn’t a bad showing but I really thought that the hunters and anglers were more concerned about this price increase and felt that there would have been more people attending. Maybe there will be more at the Phoenix meeting on December 2nd at the La Quinta Inn located at 2510 W. Greenway Road at 6 P.M. There is another meeting in Tucson on December 1st and that meeting will be at The Arizona Game and Fish Region 5 Office located at 555 N. Greasewood at 6 P.M.
Presentation:
The presentation was a walkthrough of the information that you can read on the Game and Fish web site
http://www.azgfd.gov/artman/publish/documents/FeeCeilingIncreaseInformation.pdf
For the most part the department spokesperson was trying hard to justify the needs of these increases and he did make some very good points—such as; drought and the effects on fishing and hunting, bark beetles and the effect on over all recreation, and a myriad of different things that we are all aware of, i.e., the rising cost of doing business.
The spokesperson did mention the overwhelming cost of medicating the bighorn sheep in the Silver Bell Mountain region and he gave a total of $60,000 to $100,000 dollar loss to the game and fish. There was a question raised about litigation to recuperate the losses from the individual that released the goats that caused these problems and he answered that the department is looking into litigation at this time but did not know if and when they would have a settlement. He also said that this money came out of the game and fish fund, so, that is something that we are now paying for.
Q&A
Many of the hunters were concerned that the ceiling cap was too high and felt that the non-resident ceiling percentages should be at the same rate as the resident increase. You can find the proposed ceiling increases on the Arizona Game and Fish web site
http://www.azgfd.com/artman/uploads/fee_ceiling_table__11-10-04_.pdf Most of the people made comment that the last time the ceiling was raised, in 1998, that it didn’t take very long for the ceiling to be reached and now, they fear, that if the ceiling is raised as high as the proposal that they will not be able to hunt, or they will be limited to one species.
There were a few questions regarding youth hunts and I am pleased to announce that the game and fish will not be raising the license cap for the youth hunters. The next questing regarding the youth was about tag fee’s—the game and fish had not taken that into consideration—it was noted and it will be presented for further consideration.
There were a couple comments about people on fixed income, such as, single parents with hunting children, handicapped hunters who are disabled. These folks were very concerned about the increase and the reason is pretty obvious.
Non-resident hunters were hit on several times. Most of the comments were very similar to some that we have already read of the boards—“make em’ pay out the nose”, or, “why should the non-residents have the same chance as us to get a tag when we pay all of the bill?” type statements. The presenter informed us that 97% of all tags are distributed to resident hunters and the other 3% were for the non-resident. He didn’t really give a great answer as to why deer tags might go up to $50.00 for residents, which is over 2 times what it is now, and why the non-resident will only go as high as $200.00 which is only a $74.50 increase—you can do the math on the comparison of percentages.
All in all, that just about sums up what the questions were on the increases, however, there is more!
Premium hunts:
There were some talk about premium hunts and how they would determine how they would designate these hunts. The deer is pretty easy, anything north of the Colorado River will be a premium hunt, however, it wasn’t clear if the early Kiabab hunt will be a premium hunt, or, just the late hunts. The strip will be a premium buck hunt unit..
Elk is a whole different issue. The speaker couldn’t tell any of us what units, what seasons, or when these hunts will be issued. There was a question about the early muzzleloader hunters and the early archery hunts—the speaker said that he thought it would only be the early rifle bull hunts, but he wasn’t completely certain about that. It was asked how they would designate a unit as a premium unit when in almost every unit it was possible to tag a “premium bull”? He really didn’t have the answer to this question, other than the early bull hunt as mentioned above. —In defense of the game and fish, I believe that these are all just proposals and they are still testing the waters from the public on the outcome of these proposals.
In closing:
The main issue with the ceiling cap is the detriment to the heritage and the tradition of hunting. It was said that if the prices were to be raised too high that there would be a drop off of younger hunters, older hunters and hunters who are on a fixed income. I am not sure what the drop would be but I know it would make some folks think hard about putting in for a big game tag.
I would encourage all of you to look through these two links that I have posted and get real familiar with what is proposed. I would really like to see a lot more people attending the Phoenix meeting so you and all of your friends and hunting buddy’s can speak their minds about all of this. Without your voice there can not be any action—good or bad.
For what it is worth, my take on the proposals is that the game and fish paid out the nose on the law suit that they just went through, the drought is killing them because of habitat issues, and the cost to medicate the bighorns in the Silverbells. In fact, if you look at the “G&F Fund Revenue & Operating Costs” chart you will see a huge drop in 2003, just about the same time as the Silverbells, and the crux of the Montoya lawsuit—interesting isn’t it?? Even though we have been in a drought for at least 6 or 7 years 2002 was a money making year for the department—it begs to ask, what happened in 2003??
).
