A sad day for hunters and wildlife

[Delw]

Buzz
I chose not to shoot a bull, I dont really like the meat and I am only throphy hunting anyhow. I just wanted a big one for the wall, Hunting elk in AZ is just to easy for anybull the grounds all flat pretty much its not like hunting up north in other states. however one could have scored around 280-290 a few in the low 300's and one possibly around 330. Stan got some nice vid of a small 300 bull 20-30 yards from us.

Your right we cant support the OTC tags we will never be able to. one reason is there is a hell of alot of hunters and very few areas to hunt elk. Not due to house's and cities but mainly due to the landscape and terrain they live in, in this state. The houses and cities are coming pretty quick too.
OTC deer tags we could support( we do on archery), But that is if people would spread out to hunt. if we had over the counter deer tags everyone and there brother would be in the high country only, the desert deer would never get hunted, there would be only a very few people hunting deer in the deserts. But now with the population of hunters in this state we could never do OTC tags and the OTC tags for archery in the next few years will soon go away as well. this is all due to the amount of hunters that are hunting now.


One reason you dont find easly accessed areas to hunt with alot of animals is due to the fact everyone and there brother liked to hunt off roads. it has alot to do with the population of hunters . Its not that the roads effect the elk or deer its that people are just to damn lazy to get out of there vehicles to hunt.

Ive hunted washington and co and seen how many people have hunt there too, if you got off the roads more than a mile you would only see a few people if that.

You can build roads and log it wont effect the elk and deer like you guys claim as long as you keep the hunters off the roads. foot or horse access only? locked gates?

One other thing maybe its about time other states start using a drawing for there hunting no more OTC. its not because of the roads its because there are just to many hunters. There are alot more hunters now then there was 10-20 years ago. less country to hunt(due to the urban areas growing).
Here in AZ our antelope are taking a big hit, not because of ranchs or roads but because of all the property being sold to little 40 acre lots, housing tracks etc. the only things that are saving the antelope right now are the few ranches that are left and the NF. once those old ranchers die there kids will take the land and sell it to housing tracks.

Heck even in AZ there are more people hunting than ever before. used to be able to bow hunt in alot of areas and not see anyone, now you run into people all over the place.
Its a population growth.

Sorry but I still say Bush is not to blame for the deer and elk decline.

you guys make some good points but you also dont look at the whole picture.
The federal GOV is not to blame all the time, the city and state GOVs are to blame, and alot of the land deals are from schools districts as well.

Sorry guys but your living in a fantasy world. its been going down the tubes for the last 20 years, as long as cities can buy land to develope your just not going to have it your way. Its all due to population growth. so your just going to have to deal with it.
I dont like it either but its a fact of life.


Delw

 

[snake river rufus]

Originally posted by Ithaca 37:
Interesting comments. I don't suppose any of you will ever be doing anything to try to save wildlife habitat from Dubya's schemes. Do you actually think wildlife is better off now than it was 4 years ago? Get your heads outta your ass and take a look at what's happening to habitat under the Dubya/Halliburton administration! Now's the time you should be getting off your asses and doing something to defend wildlife and the future of hunting and fishing.

Listen , don't presume to suppose what I or anyone else is doing to preserve our habitat- you're not the man for the job! In my part of the country the wildlife IS better off than 4 years ago.The opportunity to hunt on federal wetlands IS IS greater than than under clintons watch.


Easy Srr

[ 11-04-2004, 09:31: Message edited by: Delw ]

 

[AZ402]

Here is why AZ won't have a 14 day OTC elk hunt. We only have pre-hunt heard of 35-40,000 elk. Unlike WY,MT,ID,CO,OR which are or close to 100K+ plus elk. We don't have near the carrying capacity like the northern states do. Due to that AZ has to manage for quaility not quanity.

I will say that Delw passed on bulls bigger than most have taken on this board........Stan

 

[BHR]

Check out Buzz's "Kilt me another elk" post from last year. What a blowhard! Buzz you and It really can't see the big picture from your narrow view point. Reread Marlands post please. It is simple and to the point.

Paul

 

[Tom]

If we wanted to just manage for big animals, we'd restrict the tags and the access more and only shoot older animals. If we want to manage for a bunch of happy hunters with some meat and some antlers sometimes, then we have more tags and more access and shoot animals when they are younger.

Those are two different management styles, isn't that what's going on there?

Bush is increasing the waterfowl wetlands in the US, he was receptive to that change in policy, so that's one good thing.

Its the hunting pressure from the access provided by the roads, more than the roads, that causes a problem, as I see it. Hell, just lobby for walk in hunting only on roads and for more plants to be planted desireable and good for quail, elk, or mule deer on each roadside. For every tree cut, plant more, that is a simple way to improve the habitat, is it not? Isn't that a possitive solution / approach to lobby for, if you care about the wildlife habitat and hence, the wildlife.

Remember Johny Appleseed, why don't we start a hunter Johny Appleseed movement. We all plant some good plants on scouting and hunting trips.

Nut, what's your job? Maybe I'll know somebody that needs something like that or is one and they can say if there's something good happening here. I'd hate for you to move to China.

We have rice fields in Texas, that's why there's 2 million ducks and geese that winter here. Are you a rice farmer, is that why you're thinking of China? We've got rice fields down here.

 

[Ten Bears]

After all the info we've had here about the effects of roads on elk you still think roads don't have a negative effect on elk!

We have higher road densities then 7 years ago and twice the elk populaiton as 7 years ago. BUZZ, road density and hunter density have impacts on populations, but what you fail to accept is that not everyone want the same animal nor hunt that you do. That is what makes us individuals, and I have to say the best thing about being me, is that I don't have to be you.

While I wouldn't pass up a shot at a big buck or bull, that is not what I'm hunting for when I go out.

Good post NEMONT, well said.

 

[cjcj]

Buzz,Ithaca..If you think John Kerry would have made a Major differance than Bush.[on wildlife].I think your just fooling yourselves....which by the way was the original intent of this thread.

 

[Delw]

Nut
machine shop jogs are going to china and mexico due to the fact that we have 2 high of prices. Union shops are the worse and the unions are putting them selves out of the market.
Ive done work for people who normally send to china and mexico. Motorola.

The aerospace industry has slowly been coming back, this had nothing to do with china or mexico or even bush. it had mostly due to 911.

If you want to blame someone for work going to china blame the corporations like GE, Boeing Honeywell pratt and whitney.
G.E. was the first to make thier suppliers build shops in mexico. when I say make I mean the forced shops with over x amount of people to build a place in mexico and send x amount of thier work there.
This had nothing to do with bush and everything to do with making more money. the car industry is the same way. SWhops here in the valley before 911 that did GE work had to build places in mexico, motarolla had been using mexico and china for years.

Its all about profits not politics.

Since the 1990s the manufacturing industry has been getting hit hard. Honeywell before it merged with Garret was requiering cells and partners. it was some idea that one of the local higher ups in garret had to make things more efficiant. well it didnt work. But osme of the ideas were kept in place. We went from having 100 parts in stock as extras( in all phases of production) to a just in time policy. this was good for garrett but bad for machine shops. it litterally cut the machine shops in half just in AZ alone.
Ive seen buyers at garrett give part orders to machine shops just so they would get Kick backs from the machine shop( I Ran one of those shops before I quit and started my own business)
these parts were basically ran than thrown on the shelf at garret only never to be used.
Another reason they went to just in time parts was due to the fact that they started updateing and redesigning the older APU'S (auxzillary power units). with the constant redesign of these units extra parts were just a waste.

A big design change was the use of injected materials like plastics, they could inject these plastics and get rid of 80% of there machine work not to mention cut the price down 80% so machine shops where hit hard again.
Then there is the new way of castings, they can make a casting now that is just as perfect as a bunch of machine parts put to gether and even stronger and lighter which in turns saves them alot of money.
The old machine shops are going by the wayside, we will always be needing them but there not going to be the money makers like they have been in the past.

its all about technology.

Delw

 

[Ten Bears]

And waht part of that is from NAFTA? Who signed that?????

 

[JohnSWA]

Not to burst your bubble, TB, but the first Bush introduced the NAFTA and Clinton sold it.

 

[Muledeer4me]

LMAO, Ithaca how would John Kerry be better for sportsman?
Dont forget he back's the animal rights groups and anti-firearm groups.
Are you willing to trade your firearms for a camera? Your meat for veggie's?

Quote from Nut.
"Sorta pointless since they seem to not understand what point you are trying to make."

Nut, we understand right where Ithaca stand's and the groups he back's.
Dont forget many of us live in the same State and some of us very close to or in the same city.

Most of us have said we understand that we have problem's but we do not see it throught the same eyes Ithaca uses.Thank God!
We have said time and time again that there are groups out there working for good change's,has Ithaca admitted that?
NO all he can post is name calling and the sky if falling and how fat other people ass is LOL
Does that really sound like a leader to you??? Or someone that really want's to help??????
He is great at telling everyone how much they don't do ,but it's been proven that he doesn't have a freaking clue as to what or how much other people are doing to help wildlife and he doesn't care.
All he know's is that it isn't HIS WAY so it cant be good.
What a joke.
Those of us that live here understand all to well what position he take's and we know that it isn't the same take that most of the State has.

Or the nation according to the election.

Nut ,I feel for you if the job market sucks in your area, all I can say is that we have not felt that in the trade Steve and I have been in.
The only way Ithaca would be happy is if the UN ran everything and we all joined him in supporting the demacrat's and hosting Michael Moore film fests .


Far from being sad,everyone I know has been on cloud nine after seeing the results of the election and knowing that we get four more year's under a presedent that has moral fiber and a backbone to support it .



quote:
"Its no damn wonder some people can draw the best tags in their home states and still fail to kill an animal or at best wack a guppie from the road..."

It's about being out there with (yes Buzz)the little resource gobbler's ,it has never been about killing the biggest trophy animals.
More power to you guys that want to hunt like that.
Some of us look at it from a family stand point,as in can the whole family be involved,how easy is the access (more so when they were real small),how much game will they see,how much will it cost and how far is it,not everyone has a paid vacation or can take that much time off.
I know to some of you that don't hunt with your young kid's its no big deal but when you are trying to raise your kids and grandkids to love the outdoors you have to look at it from another point of view.

We now have four weeks of paid vacation and the money to take long wilderness trips, we still hunt closer to home so we can involve the grandkids,yes we shoot smaller animals but I wouldn't trade it for all the wilderness in the world.
Go Bush .

 

[MattK]

What part of that has to do with GW's policy of opening public lands to oil exploration, gas lines, and logging...

It seems to me, GW has a policy of destroying public lands for industry (especially oil). I wonder who the major contributors to his campaign have been (since his home state was Texas)? I wonder if he is lobbied heavier by enviromentalists trying to save the environment or from the oil, mining, logging who really don't care about anything but the bottom line profits. I guarantee they don't care about your hunting areas or the environment.

I don't know how anyone can be a hunter without being a conservationist.

 

[Tom]

We have a lot of oil wells and gas wells and we have about 4 million whitetail. We have logging in the east Texas forests. There are lots of other game here too.

How do you fuel your vehicle? How do you warm your home? Why not stop using fuel for that and conserve a little more? Walk to work, where a jacket in the house.

 

[danr55]

I believe that there are some facts that everyone needs to realize. In 150 years, the population of world will be approx. 4 times what it is today. Land, any land, will be at a premium. Urban sprawl will be so far beyond anything we can imagine that these arguements are pointless. I would venture to say that the only "open land" will be in the national parks and hunting will be a thing of the past. I don't see any way to change what's going to happen unless someone figures out a way to stop people from having kids. If people continue as they are, in 150 years, for every couple you see today, there will be 128 people. Since we all admit that people and their needs take priority over animals and thier needs, then animals will lose to make room for people.

Ithica, if you want something to worry about, try that. Starting in 2023 the population of the world with double every 47.6 years. There is nothing that Bush or Kerry or anyone else can do about it. Unless Mom Nature jumps in and disperses the human equivalent of blue tongue, we'll be stackin' them up one on top the other in a few years. So how do you stop that?

 

[Tom]

There was a link I posted in another thread that had the earth population peaking out at 10 billion at about 2050. As the poor nations get more industrialized they stop having so many babies.

We could have high rise hunting. Elk on the 10th floor, mule deer on the 8th, etc. No fence though, if they want to jump out of the building, its ok, preserves "free" chase ideas then. Anything that falls out, goes to the meat market asap. We could do it that way, unless Bush fixes it in the next 4 years first.

 

[BHR]

MattK,

Have you been nibbling on Michael Morons fermunder cheese?

Paul

 

[MattK]

BHR- I've been eating the cheese as much as you have been chewing on Rush Limbaugh's "treats".

Matt

 

[Nut]

I made my statement to show what has been happening in Ohio. It hasnt been good for skilled workers in some trades. Many of the job shops closed and now few jobs are to be had by many unemployed. The companies that I used to do work for left. I havent worked in a union place in over 10 years. The losses have been non-union job shops also. There is only about 1/3 of the shops there used to be.

Yes , profit is a factor. There also is the factor of being encouraged by the government to do this. There also is the factor of the "so what attitude" by the current admnistration.(
It stood around and bragged about the McDondalds or part-time Wal-Mart jobs that was created.
Now if I was a logger,miner,oil worker and road construction worker then you guys would be up in arms. )
It is easier said than done to pick up your life and move and I am trying to do that. Especially when you are worse off than you was 4 years ago.

Nuff said bout that

Back to the thread LOL

I agree with Ithaca.

 

[danr55]

Fred, I can't speak for any organization but the one I work for. I know that our company has moved most of the skilled jobs to places like Atlanta, Huntsville, Macon, Mesa and the like. The reason? $$$ with a capitol M.. The work that was in PHiladelphia, the was controlled by the unions was running at an overhead burden rate of almost $122.50/hour. We were forced to hire separate people to clean restrooms vs. those that clean lobbies vs. those that clean up outside. There were forklift drivers who did nothing but drive forklifts, and pallet handlers who did nothing but handle pallets. A machinst could not do his own set-up because there were senior set-up machinists who did nothing but set-ups. If there were no set-ups to do, they sat around with thier thumbs in the butts and drank coffee at a rate of $23.00/hour. Unions kept all of those people employed until the company found out they could do the same work in Macon for less than 1/2 that rate. So I can say that in my opinion, the demise of the US manufacturing capability is largely the result of unionism and it's control exercised over industry. It just doesn't make sense to pay $100.00/hour for something you can get done for $48.00/hour. Not when your customers are all driving you for lower prices and a smaller profit margin. 'nuff said..

As for Ithica,, THE SKY IS NOT FALLING ... TODAY!

 

[Nut]

Our rate is $45 per hour and it was the same at the other shop 4 years ago.