Reid's bill was signed by Dubya!

[ringer]

After almost unanimous approval from congress the President signed the bill yesterday. The bill specifically defines the commerce clause as NOT applying to wildlife. USO and Taulman have lost the war and no judge can mess with it again as the definition of the commerce clause is exclusive to the legislative branch.

Thanks to all that were active in support of the legislation. I am hoping we learn from the ordeal and work together to support the herds and habitat both financially and politically. Good luck in the draws.

 

[noharleyyet]

What! A positive post a about the President and the majority legislative branches? You're asking for it Ringer.

 

[BuzzH]

This is the only thing that Shrub has done thats positive for hunters in his entire political career...dont expect anything more out of him, I'm sure he's tired.

 

[noharleyyet]

HAHa...thanks for that Buzz, I know how hard that was for you. Your's was the response I was hoping for.

The main thing I have against George is that he left us with Rick Perry for a joke of a governor.

 

[Washington Hunter]

I bet some of Bush's Texan buddies aren't real happy with him!

 

[noharleyyet]

I bet some of Bush's Texan buddies aren't real happy with him!

WH, can you clairfy? I assume you mean the wealthy Texas hunter who might possibly be a client of a USO type outfitter.

 

[Washington Hunter]

NHY, yes of course that's what I mean. Sorry didn't mean to offend you! I just have a feeling that with the mentality of many Texans, and Bush being one of the wealthy ones, that he may actually support Taulman and his agenda, if it weren't for the negative consequences he might face if he were to refuse to sign the bill. Can't you see Bush supporting the idea that hunting should only be for the wealthy?

 

[cjcj]

Like him or not...That is great news...Fantastic news......Puts the screws to U.S.O. looks like a major victory for the "average' middle class hunter. yea baby.

 

[noharleyyet]

Honestly, no offense taken WH, and I fully understand your perspective, but speculating that he signed it for fear of political backlash or saying he's for hunting for the wealthy only seems a bit of an overstatement.
I think he should get a little credit for signing a good bill...that's all.

As long as people like Taulman, landowners, and state game officials hear money talking, the diy fairchase hunters from any state are going to have a battle.

 

[Washington Hunter]

NHY, I agree. I just can't help but wonder how Bush really feels about the issue. (because supposedly he is a hunter)

 

[Tom]

WH, nobody in Texas, not one, believes hunting should only be for the rich. You're so confused. There has been private land and public land here from the beginning, it shouldn't be so hard to understand.

 

[noharleyyet]

I don't believe he spends much time pondering sportsmens' issues though WH. Yes, he hunts, and catches a lotta crap for it too.

 

[Washington Hunter]

Come on Tom. There has to be at least one person in Texas who thinks he has as much right to hunt in Arizona as a resident of Arizona. If you ever look at the Accurate Reloading big game forum you will see quite a few fellows from Texas (and other states as well) who feel they have as much right to hunt in Arizona (or Nevada) as a resident does. And of course we all know that if states are not allowed to give residents preference over non-residents, the states will be forced to raise the price of tags so high that only the very wealthy non-residents can afford to hunt there. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you of the opinion that you should have an equal chance at drawing a tag in Arizona as a resident does, simply because much of the land is federal land? Ok, that's what I thought.

 

[noharleyyet]

I have no problem with state residents being preferred over non residents...that's why I'm happy to draw the limiteds, buy leftovers, or buy the low chance over the counter tags at the non-res. prices...and consider myself fortunate to have the opportunity.
The exhorbitant trespass fees, jacked up landowner tags, and money bags hunter w/5 guides/callers/sherpas/etc. are here to stay...USO or not.

 

[AZ402]

It would be nice if AZ could put their non-resident quota into effect for this upcoming draw. I doubt it will but there is always hope..............

 

[Tom]

WH, you're very twisted too, at least your take on this issue, I mean. Show me a thread for the accurate ammo group, we know the threads where we've discussed it here.

I think proportional allocation for federal land %, state land %, and private land % is a sound method, but I'm no state or federal manager. I think the tags should be a percentage of income, something like that. We need more tag money, for improving the habitat, before all the mule deer die off, to get more elk off the winter doling out of food. The tag fee seems the place to get it, those with a tag are as close to getting an animal as anyone, right now. Does that make sense to you?

I remember once you said it should be 90%, 10% with no argument to justify the numbers. So, I guess it would be 90 10 for you, no matter what. If the state is 10% federal land or 80% federal land. Would that change your allocation, if you were a state or federal manager?

 

[AZ402]

Tom you can hunt your Federal land here in AZ everyday. All you need is your $113.50 non-resident hunting license.

 

[Nemont]

What on earth does federal lands have to do with tag allocations?

Nemont

 

[AZ402]

Exactly Nemont.............

 

[Nemont]

I think proportional allocation for federal land %, state land %, and private land % is a sound method, but I'm no state or federal manager.

So you no land manager but you know how to allocate game tags. Have you ever looked at the percentage of federal lands in the Western States?

Percentage of Federal public lands

Washington: 27 percent;

Montana: 28 percent;

New Mexico: 34 percent;

Colorado: 36 percent;

Arizona: 45 percent;

California: 47 percent;

Wyoming: 50 percent;

Oregon: 60 percent;

Idaho: 62 percent;

Nevada lands are a whopping 93 percent federally owned.

None of those percentages have a thing to do with tag allocations. Or good game management. You have the same access to Federal lands as I do.

Nemont