Arizona 10% cap on Nonresidents

[nochawk]

ARIZONA RESIDENT HUNTER ALERT



In January, Representative Jerry Weiers introduced legislation that would cap nonresidents at no more than 10% of the hunts in any drawing. Insuring resident hunters (ourselves and our children ) would have at least 90% of this states hunting opportunities. This legislation strengthens a new Commission rule that was adopted last winter.



This could be a tremendous gain for resident hunters!



This legislation has moved through the House of Representatives and Senate with incredibly strong support. In the next few days, it will be sent to the Governor for signing.



The only glitch in this process has been a split vote of the Arizona Game & Fish Commission. Three members of the five member Commission do not believe this legislation is necessary. Those three Commissioners, believe the Commission, and only the Commission, should have any say on legislation relating to hunting, fishing, wildlife management and more importantly, who gets to hunt. Unfortunately, on Tuesday these three Commissioners asked the Governor to veto HB2127.



The reason this legislation was developed in the first place, is because of the failure of an existing Commission rule that capped nonresidents at 10%.



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.



In the last two drawings (2004 & 2005), nonresidents have been drawing many of our most coveted permits. I some instances they are even drawing more permits in a unit than residents.



The only thing that saved resident hunt opportunities, was a ground swell of concern from hunters throughout the west, combined with the strong support of western federal legislators, who rose to our defense and passed

legislation in Congress, once again giving states clear authority to regulate hunting and fishing. President Bush quickly signed the legislation into law and the states were once again in control.



As I mentioned earlier the Commission quickly adopted a new rule capping nonresident hunters, and we commend them for their action; but this time, after the past fiasco, we want even more protection.



This is why we have asked for statutory protection and why Representative Weiers introduced HB 2127. The Legislature has strongly supported this additional protection. Now we must ask the Governor to do the same.



We have a window of no more than a week to get our support for HB 2127 to the Governor.



Below is the Governors web address and phone number.

If resident sportsmen want this legislation signed by the Governor, they need to let her know they support it. Please don't delay do this now.



Ask Her to SIGN HB 2127 and protect resident hunting opportunities.



If the Governor does not want to go against her Commission she could always just let HB2127 become law without her signature. What would be tragic for resident hunters, and incredibly hard to understand, is if she would choose to veto HB2127.



Governor Janet Napolitano's website, http://www.governor.state.az.us/

Then go to the left side of the home page to: Contact the Governor.



Governor's office number 602-542-4331



Please do not delay, contact the Governor immediately. Protect resident opportunity to hunt in Arizona.



In support of HB2127:



Arizona Antelope Foundation

Arizona Deer Association

Arizona Desert Bighorn Sheep Society

Arizona Elk Society

Mohave Sportsman Club

Yuma Valley Rod & Gun Club

and Others

 

[1_pointer]

Good for residents, bad for F&G funding.

 

[justdada]

And I hear they've made plans to raise the license fees over the next few years... Nothing like discouraging nonresident applicants!
I'm curious to know what the funding ratio is for the G&F's budget, between non-residents and residents.
Nothing like stirring hot coals, but does anyone happen to know?

 

[BuzzH]

I'd be more in favor of it if NR's were GUARANTEED 10% of the available tags.

 

[AZ402]

For the most part the 10% cap is reached in many units. It would make more sense to me if it were a straight cap instead of an "up to cap".

I don't think the AZGFD is trying to discourage NR hunters at all. There are several States that are just as tough and many that are much more expensive. There are obviously States that are easier to draw in and less expensive than AZ. Not many States are more coveted though.

The AZG&F department makes the majority of it's revenue from resident sportsman. NR hunters play a big part in all(Western States) G&F budgets but residents; out of the shear numbers, will out weigh NR contributions.

 

[Basser]

I'd be more in favor of it if NR's were GUARANTEED 10% of the available tags.

Of course you would.

 

[BuzzH]

I have nothing to gain for asking the gov. to not veto that bill...

NR's should be guaranteed 10% of the available tags, not limited to "up to 10%".

 

[danr55]

Buzz, Why should NR's be guaranteed anything, much less 10% of the tags? No one else is guaranteed anything.

 

[Washington Hunter]

I don't think there should be any guarantees either. Not that it really matters to me, as I probably will never apply in Arizona. But it seems a guaranteed 10% to non-residents could in some cases make the odds much better for certain hunts for the non-resident, and that doesn't seem right.

 

[BuzzH]

Danr, NR's arent guaranteed any tags...residents are guranteed 90+%.

Who cares if it gives NR's better odds...residents would still get 90%.

Seems to me the Arizona residents are a bunch of whiney bastards that dont want NR to draw any tags.

 

[Washington Hunter]

But Buzz, you are the one who said NR's should be guaranteed 10%. The point is the residents of Arizona are the ones who have made the sacrifices that have allowed their state to grow the trophy animals that it has become known for. If Arizona had OTC tags for residents like Wyoming does, the hunting wouldn't be good and nobody would want to hunt there.

 

[BuzzH]

WH,

You're clueless...simple math escapes you...I'll type slow so you understand.

First of all, I dont think AZ residents or NR's should be allowed to buy OTC tags. Not sure where you came up with that, wasnt even a thought.

Now, back to the real discussion and I'll use an example.

If a unit in AZ has 100 tags available...right off the top 90 are going to residents, no NR has a chance at those 90 tags. With a "not to exceed 10%" cap, the tags that are left, in this case 10 (I'll do the math for you 100-90=10) NR's are still competing with residents for those tags. Its very likely that residents will draw a percentage of (or even ALL) the remaining 10 tags. Meaning NR's will most likely be getting less than 10% of the tags or possibly not a single tag.

Thats why NR's should be guaranteed 10% of the tags, not "limited to" 10%.

Maybe Taulman was fighting for the right team....

 

[Washington Hunter]

Buzz, you are clueless, IMO, but I thought I'd try to keep that to myself. If you choose to insult me every time I give my opinion on something, then I guess maybe I should start doing the same to you, you dumbass.

I understand your math, but the idea that any percentage of tags should be guaranteed to NR's is wrong. I mentioned OTC tags because if Arizona residents could buy OTC tags (like Wyoming) rather than having to draw out of a limited number of permits then there wouldn't be near the numbers of animals they have now. And yes, I realize Arizona is totally different than states like Wyoming and Montana, in that it is more of an open desert environment that can't support a high density of animals. But the points is, the residents in Arizona cannot hunt every year for every big game animal, every year, like you do in Wyoming. And yes, I realize you know that, but if it's ok with you, I am trying to explain my point of view;if you don't agree feel free to call me more names. So the residents have sacrificed, as I said before, they should get priority. It could be worse, they could be like Oregon and have a 5% limit and then give half of the 5% to outfitters for their clients so the do it yourself hunters are really limited to only 2.5%.

Sounds to me like you should have been on Taulman's side.

 

[danr55]

Buzz, Let me rephrase the question. Why should nonresidents be guaranteed any tags? What makes them special that they should be allotted tags in Arizona where there are more hunters than there are tags available already. What state in the union, with the ratio of resident hunters to allotted tags, guarantees tags to nonresidents if residents apply for them?

 

[BuzzH]

Danr,

Wyoming...25% of all available permits guaranteed to NR's...sheep, moose, goat, elk, deer, antelope, turkey.

Montana...17,000 Deer/elk combo licenses guaranteed. Another 6,000 guaranteed deer combo licenses.

Idaho....OTC first come first serve guaranteed tags for deer, elk, bear,lion.

Is that enough examples of guaranteed NR tags...or is that adequate to illustrate the whiney, selfish Arizona Residents?

We can discuss NM, Iowa, the Dakotas...etc. etc. etc.

WH,

You need to visit AZ, animal densities are high in many areas.

Also, explain how NR's getting 10% and Residents getting 90% is not giving them priority.

 

[Delw]

Dan I agree with buzz on a guarenteed 10%.to non res, I wouldnt have a problem wth 20% the only reason I would have a problem with more than 20% is cause I am selfish and I want to get drawn in the state I live in so I could hunt once in a while.

to answer your question so we have the oppertunity to hunt in their states where there is a draw. we shut them out I guarentee you they will shut us out.

Nevada is one state that guarentees tags to non residents I believe.

Delw

 

[Basser]

With the ten percent cap NR's are trying their luck in the lottery just like residents. Most units don't reach the ten percent cap so it really isn't an issue....fair is fair in those situations. For the tropy hunts NR's might or might not hit that cap since a lot of them only put in for those trophy hunts and have accrued bonus points. If you were to guaruntee ten percent NR's then in most of the units and hunts the residents will have less of an opportunity to draw tags.

IMO, I think I should draw an AZ tag before you. I was born and raised in AZ and have been putting in for the last 7 years and have yet to hunt elk in my home state. I put in for bull tags but not in the trophy units. Hell I haven't even drawn a deer tag. Couple years ago a I drew a spring turkey tag but that has been the only one.

 

[Basser]

or is that adequate to illustrate the whiney, selfish Arizona Residents?

QUOTE]

Sounds like the pot calling the kettle black

 

[BuzzH]

Del,

Thanks for the logical thought.

Like I said, selfish, whiney, and definately bastards.

I should have supported Taulman.

I think I should be able to hunt sheep in Montana where I was born, but I sure wouldnt be whining if NR were guarnateed 10% of the tags. I live in Wyoming, and I'm not upset that it takes a NR only 3-5 years to draw a bull moose tag while it takes a resident 7-10 years. I also dont mind the fact that NR's also have way better odds of drawing sheep and goat tags there either...or premium bull elk permits...or good antelope tags...or trophy deer tags....

I guess, when it boils right down to it...we can sure see who the selfish pricks are in hurry though...

 

[BuzzH]

Basser,

I have an idea...blow it out your selfish ass.

The state I live in gives NR's 25% of all tags.

Not exactly the pot calling the kettle black.