Good News for Arizona!!

Buzz:

I also don't apply for the early rifle or early Mzzld hunts. I agree with you though that 3200 is pretty crazy and prices out the average guy. Personally I think the prices are real fair right now as they are. We are still cheaper here in AZ then most states. Also you'll have just as good a chance to draw; if not a better one this year depending on you rpoints than I will. NV is over a $1000 already and I believe that the LE premium UT tags are $1000+ as well. Hopefully things don't get out of hand money wise. Not just in AZ but everywhere. Like I mentioned before I'm pretty sure a handful of Western States went up in price this year (none to bad from what I can tell).
 
Buzz,

Non resident Wyoming sheep tags are up to about $1,900 now and with the wilderness outfitter rule which includes most Wyoming sheep country, a Wyoming sheep hunt is an expensive proposition. Still no shortage of applicants however. Most other non resident sheep tags are 1K or more as well with slim draw odds. Goat and moose tags are equally expensive. Big rack elk hunts are just as rare and have equal demand to the less available species such as sheep. Is $1900 too much for a Wyoming sheep or goat tag? The money does go towards game management, so isn't that a good thing? Some of you guys brag about how many non resident hunts you can afford to apply for, and then whine when the anti gets too steep for you personally. So what is a fair price for everyone, rich and poor? What is a fair price for quality game management? What is a fair price for Resident vs non resident? BTW I do like when the resident price is linked proportionatly to the non res price.
 
BHR,

I think 1900 for a sheep tag is out of hand as well. If I were in charge, you'd likely pay around 1K in all states as a NR...same with goat and moose. As to the NR wilderness law, I'd vote against it in a minute, its just a welfare program for outfitters.

Oh, and like I said, I dont care if the early rut tags in AZ are 3200, I dont apply for them. My point is that the average guy should have a chance at a quality tag for a reasonable price.

Unlike you, I actually care about the average working guy. I have the means to pay the 3200 but choose not to out of principle.
 
Buzz,

I think $1,000 for a non resident tag is a lot of money to "the average working guy". I also think the dollars go to a good cause and most people serious about hunting will dig deep when it comes to purchasing a "quality" tag. I also don't believe from a number of your past comments, that you give a rats ass about the "average working guy" unless it fits into your agenda.
 
BHR, as usual you dont have a clue about what I stand for.

I dont think 1k for most people in todays world is unreasonable for animals like sheep that are costly to manage and a pretty limited resource. Its also pretty fair to note that most of the people applying for bighorn tags live in states that have bighorns, so they have a "cheap" tag in at least one state.

Oh, and last I checked its probably a lot easier for the "working guy" to come up with 1k for a tag versus 1900 or 3200. I guess you forgot how to add...

Coming up with a grand for a sheep tag is a piece of cake if you want it at all...I mean for Christ sake, you could shovel sidewalks after work and come up with that...
 
Buzz and Paul-

I would be interested to hear your opinions on my (CA) state in the way they manage their sheep allocations (I'll say how I feel afterwards). In CA's this year there are only 16 total tags, 2 of which that are put out for "auction."

The remaining 14 tags can be applied for by res and non-res alike at a "cost" of $285 for the resident and $500 for the non-resident if drawn.
 
Buzz,

I don't think you get my point. It's easy for you or I to say that $1,000 is reasonable for a non resident sheep tag. Neither of us have kids to raise. That $1000 shovelling money could find at least a dozen or more, more worthy causes than a non resident big rack hunt if we did. So what seems "fair" to you dosen't mean it's fair to everyone.

Based on years of your post, you do not give consideration to people who earn a living in fields that you have contempt for. I think I do have a clue for what you "stand" for.
 
Marv,

Based on the hunting politics of your state from past posts read, I can easily state that managing wildlife for hunting is no easy matter there. Part of me thinks that 2 auction tags for that kind of population is too many. Another part thinks that the dollars raised could help expand the herd, and based on some talks with California FNAWS guy's, some of your sheep herds are expanding and will allow for future expansion of opportunity. I also think dollars don't go very far in California compared with other states. I think the tag prices are low for non res. and allotment is too liberal. But mostly I don't think what I think should hold the same weight as what you think, after all it is your state, and your states wildlife.
 
I think I understand your point CJ ( :confused: ) but you do realize that some super wealthy a**holes would probably pay it and then what kinda chance would anyone have to get a lope tag? :D
 
BHR,

Having kids is a choice, if you choose that, well, you have to sacrifice or come up with some $$$ somewhere else to pay for your hunting habits.

NR tags are going to cost more, I just think staying reasonable to a majority is the best way to ensure that hunting doesnt become too commercialized and only for the top 1% of wage earners in the U.S.

Sorry your pea-brain cant comprehend that.
 
Choice or no choice, I would bet that if you let the "majority" decide what is a fair price for a non resident tag, it would come in well below $1000. How about just leaving it up to the states to decide what is reasonable. If they try to jack it up too much it could come back to bite them. Like Ringer said, there are other options out there. Didn't Idaho raise their non res deer and elk tags right after a big winter die off in the 90's, and then had a real struggle selling tags for years to follow?

And what is "too comercialized"? $10,000 + private ranch elk hunts in Montana? $3,200 for a premium Arizona elk tag sounds to me like a deal compared to that. Should we lobby Canada into keeping their hunts affordable so that the average guy can go there to hunt as well?
 
Marv,

An additional thought. It's going to be difficult to expand your huntable sheep population if your state is going to continue raising sheep as cat food. I understand that is the number one reason the populations are not improving. I think your resources would be best spent on tackling that issue first. I know it's an up hill battle, but it can be won if you put your best effort into it.
 
Well "my thoughts" on the Bighorn issue, and mind you I'm no big time sheep hunter (in fact I've only began to apply the last few years) are this-

First and foremost I think that the price for the NR is way too cheap and(probably too cheap for the resident as well given the small number of tags)
I not so sure that NR's should even be allowed to apply for such a small number of tags even though they have to poney up about $108 (non-refundable) for an NR license to enter the draw. I seriously doubt, however, they are rushing out to some to Kaliy for a sheep hunt.

It will take some effort to even raise these fees since they are part of the CA Fish and Game code (section 4902c): c) The fee for a license tag to take a Nelson bighorn ram may be determined by the commission, but shall not exceed five hundred dollars ($500).

The auction tags kind of bother me as well. Granted they serve as a fundraiser but I have a problem with the whole deep pockets philosophy surrounding buying a tag that is so limited for others and "selling" what amount to 13% of the tag is a bit much IMHO. I also wonder (and perhaps those in this line of work, Cali's brother perhaps, can set me straight here) how much of an "impact" does the selling of one $50-60K sheep tag play into a Dept. with a $320M budget? I believe the record for a purchase was like in 1998 when a tag went for $150K but even then what does that "purchase" in the way of sheep management? I know that code dictates that these incremental monies be used directly for sheep through the preservation fund (and can't just be used to augment that species budget).

Thirdly, and this is what bothers me the most regarding our sheep management in this state: from what everything I read and understand about the population- most of what we are "expanding" is just going to feed the local lion population. I've even seen an agency "goal" of attempting to collar EVERY mountain lion they can that inhabit the sheep range (these are mainly Sierra bighorns less so Nelsons) so that they can get more data on the DECREASING populations due to lion depredation. WTF?? And we still can't hunt lions in this state even though their population by some estimates is considerably larger than the sheep population they are preying on and we are selling tags for?? I'm ALL for expansion of huntable populations of sheep but not in providing a four hoved buffet for stinking cats.

Oh well, soap-box relinquished and don't know if I made any sense anywhooo! :cool:
 
MarvB- Aren't the California Mountain Lion a Special Protected Mammal? This may be the reason they cannot be hunted in California. (they are more protected than the Bighorn or at least equally protected). You probably know more about this than I do.
 
Marv ,
I understand your frustration , California has so much great bighorn habitat , but they're expansion is limited by a majority of uninformed/misinformed bunny-hugging flathead registered voters who have never even seen a mt. lion !
I saw a show on animal planet , I think it was Darryl Hannah , she said that 90% of a mt. lions diet was insects and rodents !!! You cannot reason with people who are this clueless , but they have more influence than a professional biologist when it comes to the voters .
All you can do is remember the three S's ; shoot , shovel and shut-up .
 
WH- for $10k, I would Look around A LOT before doing any of the S's. Just think of the hunting you could do in others states for $10k. The cost/ benefit is not in the favor of doing the 3 S's IMHO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

cheeser
House of Representatives votes to remove gray wolves from endangered species list
2
Replies
35
Views
3K
ismith
ismith
Hammsolo
Washington Wolf Policy Comments
Replies
2
Views
1K
bigwhale
B
Ben Lamb
Montana Legislature - 1 month until the Show
3 4 5
Replies
98
Views
12K
sacountry
sacountry
atlas
Judge orders new work on Bitterroot grizzly plan
2
Replies
29
Views
4K
atlas
atlas
W
WI ELK, the story of a once in a lifetime hunt
6 7 8
Replies
153
Views
18K
2rocky
2rocky

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
113,603
Messages
2,026,465
Members
36,243
Latest member
asgmiami1

Share this page

Back
Top