New Arizona Tag fee's

[AZ402]

http://www.azgfd.com/artman/uploads/fee_ceiling_table__11-10-04_.pdf

Not sure if this link will work. Non-residents can all email George Taulaman and say thanks for the new prices.

 

[Oak]

The list says "proposed ceiling." Does that mean those are what it's going to cost next year, or what the maximum they can raise the fees to? "Proposed" seems to imply that it's not official yet. ???

Oak

 

[AZ402]

It means the max that they'll raise it next year. Word is it'll be close to max unless something changes with the court ruling, I.E. senate bill 2978.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Still confused

I still don't understand what the point is to raise the non-resident fees so that only USO's clients (ie.. the super rich and too lazy to fill out the application) are the only ones who can afford the tags.

It seems like USO is WINNING big time in AZ.

It seems like AZGFD does not understand what the problem is, and does not understand how to solve the problem.

The AZ residents who just want to punish the average non-resident (ie... ME!) by raising the fees until I don't put in should be careful. As I spend $125 each year in applications (and get nothing but a preference point), which if I should quit applying, that $125 in fees will HAVE to be made up by the RESIDENTS!!!!

And would it solve anything if there were 10% more tags (ie... all the non-resident tag allocations were removed) as far as making AZ residents feel like they were going to draw? I can't imagine tags that are 1:20 odds suddenly changing to 1:18 odds of drawing would be that big of improvement.

I still think AZGFD needs to be very careful in their raising fees, as their "re-action" may be worse than their "inaction" was....

 

[AZ402]

A low percentage of USO clients will be able to afford the premium tags. Most of his clients are working guys like the rest of us. 1-18 is better than 1-20 in my book. It does suck, this will most likely start in other states as well. I'll be priced out or very limited to my non-res hunting applications as well.

 

[JoseCuervo]

So the AZ residents will have to fork over more $$$$ to fund AZGFD?

Is 1-18 better than 1-20 if your fees went up 30% for applications as a resident???

It still seems like the "problem" is not addressed. I can't see how the "problem" is that up to 10% of the tags will go to non-residents. It seems like the real problem is that too many residents apply for tags (making it difficult to draw), or the AZ residents don't pay enough for tags/applications to make up for the shortfall of the non-Residents.

I know Idaho is pretty dependent upon Non-Residents to pay a good chunk of F&G's budget, as the residents squawk at paying $28 for an Elk tag....

My guess is that I may end up sending more of my non-resident $$$$ to Wyoming, Montana, or Nevada and less to AZ. It will end up that the only people hunting AZ are the ones rich enough to hire guides as they won't care the extra $$$$$ for the increased tag. Joe Six-Pack is likely done in AZ if the maximum gets charged.

Hopefully there is some sanity in AZ, but who knows....

 

[BuzzH]

Reciprocal fees for AZ residents will be coming from a lot of Western States.

I've already heard rumors of WY heading that way.

I dont agree that only a small percentage of Taulmans clients will be able to afford the increased fees. If a hunter is willing to drop several grand on just the outfitting part, I doubt like hell the tag increase is going to slow them down.

Taulman is getting exactly what he wants in Arizona, and the residents are playing right into his hands. Good job guys! You sure are showing ol' Taulman who's boss.

 

[Delw]

Buzz
I dont believe the residents are playing into the hands of taulman. Yeah there were a few dipshits that went to the azg&f meeting and said raise the prices( these were people who dont have a clue). They did it for there own personal use and didnt think it out completely.Cause there stupid dipshits.
But then thats AZ for ya and the type of people we are getting in this ONCE great state.
AZG&F is really flunking on this proposal, shit you should have seen some of other stuff people were saying to do, it was a freaking joke.
I dont know what game and fish is thinking, ever since the lion fiasco game and fish here in az has done some pretty stupid shit..
Maybe its time to get rid of some of the board members from AZG&F.
I have heard that they are max caps, either way I dont like it. I am not going to pay that kinda money to hunt some stupid ass elk.
for the north rim deer I wont pay that much either. for antelope I will and for bighorn.
I kinda feel bad for the non res guys they are the one that will be taking the big hits.

Its going to be interesting to see what happends.

I guess I always can kill a few yotes and still fish.

Delw

 

[FLIPPER]

When do these new purposed prices go into effect?

Next year or are they still on the table and not passed yet?

If this is the case Del...I imagine you will not see me next season as planned.

Those fees are ridiculous. I could hunt one of the elk ranches here cheaper!

 

[Ithaca 37]

del, as you've told us before, there's nothing anyone can do about this kinda thing. We're all helpless to change any kind of government policy. What's going to happen is completely beyond any influence from the public. My advice is just to give up and let USO, the welfare ranchers and developers have Arizona. It's hopeless. It's not anyones fault for not getting involved in public issues. It was all going to happen anyway. Nothing anyone could ever have done about it.

 

[BuzzH]

I agree, hunters are the most complacent bunch I've ever seen. They talk the talk, but very, very, very few actually take the time to write letters, get involved, comment on their sport, etc. etc. etc. Even worse, most are so damn selfish they'd sell their souls as long as they "git thar elk".

I dont think hunters realize the influence they can have. I've seen guides/outfitters, ranchers, etc. run rough-shod over game and fish agencies and management all over the west. The reason is complacency by average sportsmen...and the ranchers, outfitters, etc. are organized and they flat get things accomplished in their favor. I give them credit for looking out for themselves, I'd just think that eventually the average sportsman would get tired of getting crapped on by these groups who dont represent their interests.

Its just easier to throw in the towel, as witnessed here.

 

[Delw]

Ithaca what the hell you rambling about.

Buzz.
BINGO

I agree, hunters are the most complacent bunch I've ever seen. They talk the talk, but very, very, very few actually take the time to write letters, get involved, comment on their sport, etc. etc. etc. Even worse, most are so damn selfish they'd sell their souls as long as they "git thar elk".

I agree with ya 100%


Delw

 

[Ithaca 37]

del, Go back and read the topic titled "A Sad day for hunters and wildlife"

"Ithaca its called progress.
I used to be able to drive 10 mins from the house hunt pigs. quail deer etc. I used to be able to walk across the street and hunt dove.
I live in the same house. as I did in 1982.
now there are houses all over.
beofre you start blaming bush on this you should blame the city in which you live in for giving tax incentives to big bussiness which draw in people which in turn make more houses and shopping malls.

Sorry but your way off on this.
Also back in the 60s you had more ranches these ranches also let most hunters hunt on thier land, now due to big population booms and people leaving trash all over and the closing of many ranches the gates are locked.

As far as the steelhead did they have the same dams back in the 60s?

it all has to do with the state growing not bush"

http://www.hunttalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11248&page=1


Del, what you're seeing in Arizona is PROGRESS. There's nothing you can do about it. Other people elect the Governor who appoints the F&G Commission that sets these prices and policies. You don't have any influence. Get used to it. Don't waste your time fighting progress.

 

[Delw]

Ithaca.
you got to come up with something than that. I dont play those games.
so if you want to take thing out of context an play it with someone who cares and will play your games

BTW it wasnt only game and fish that did this, it was mainly the hunters here thinking about themselves(they are the ones who gave the game and fish dept the ideas)., and its something entirly different.


Nice try though
Delw

 

[Ithaca 37]

del, Sounds like maybe some other hunters who knew a better way to handle the problem didn't get involved. The other side won. Live with it.

"Ithaca think of it this way,
you have 4 more years to whine and complain about bush "

Del, think of it this way; you have the rest of your life to whine and complain about USO and AZ F&G.

 

[Oak]

Here's an example from Sunday's paper of what hunter involvement can accomplish. This is regarding a topic I posted a couple of weeks ago about landowners trying to increase their share of tags in CO from 15% to 30%. Notice that the protest started as soon as hunters got wind of the proposal. They didn't wait for someone to make a decision before acting.


Plan to increase landowner tags stalls in tracks
By Charlie Meyers
Denver Post Staff Writer
Sunday, November 14, 2004

A proposed increase in landowner preference licenses for Colorado big game hunting has been shelved, at least for now.

"I made the decision we won't propose any changes to the legislative license status," Division of Wildlife director Bruce McCloskey said Friday. "Landowners agree with me on that decision not to push forward."

Landowner preference for deer, elk and antelope tags became the hottest topic in the recent history of Colorado wildlife when it was revealed on these pages late last month that the DOW had entered into discussions with representatives of the Colorado Cattleman's Association and the Farm Bureau, along with prominent ranchers.

Originally begun as discussion to ensure family-hunting rights in eastern Colorado, where an overwhelming preponderance of land is private, the campaign escalated into a proposal that would have guaranteed landowners statewide up to 30 percent of all limited licenses issued through the draw process. This included the heavily restricted game management units for which hunters now must wait as long as 15 years to draw a tag. Under the landowner proposal, a public hunter might never be able to obtain a permit in those areas.

The proposal met with a firestorm of protest that caused proponents to temporarily abandon the plan.

A new approach, McCloskey suggested, will be to put together a discussion group that includes landowners and sportsmen to produce an agreeable document to the 2006 session of the legislature.

What angers public hunters most is that landowner permits are issued as vouchers that can be transferred to the highest bidder. They often are sold to outfitters, who then parlay the tags into a service package worth many thousands of dollars. Equally noxious to public hunters is the tags may be used anywhere in the GMU, including public land. At a recent series of public meetings, crowds decried a creeping commercialization of the hunting process, ranging from landowner preference to Ranching for Wildlife to private-land-only licenses. Hunters angrily accused the DOW of fostering a system that increasingly squeezes them from licenses and access.

Responding to this most recent threat, they flooded the DOW, the Colorado Wildlife Commission and politicians with a wave of correspondence that, for now, stopped the preference push in its tracks.

 

[cfree]

LOL...3 months ago Elkgunner & Co. were best friends with Taulman and couldn't say enough about how he was victorious for all non-residents. How do you like him now? Wanna go back to the old way? Arizona has limited resources and if you want to shoot a world record bull you will now have to pay world record prices. Doesn't look like that victory for all non-residents anymore does it?

I do however feel bad for my non-resident friends who like to escape the cold and go javelina hunting in february especially since they never sided with USO, but that's life and maybe we will start tuna fishing out of cabo instead. Their tag and license fees went from about $180 to over $300 for a stinky javelina.

The meetings were open to all hunters, resident and non-resident. You could have flown down here to voice your opinion. Instead you gloated at your apparent new oppourtunities thanks to USO. Looks like reality just hit you upside the head because $3500 for a license and a tag is an awful lot just for a 50% chance at filling an early bull tag. Especially when that $3500 is all paid up front months in advance of the draw.

It appears my competition for that early bull tag and kaibab tag just went down..thanks USO (you miserable pricks)! I wonder if USO really wants or needs more tags than the 10% previously allotted. Now I am thinking they did this just to push the non-resident competition out because they had to know that the tag fee increases would be one of our (residents) options.

Feel free to rip me a new one, but even with the fee increases and the other proposals, I think residents have a better chance at drawing those premium hunts now considering $400 for a possible record bull was more appelaing than $3200 for non-residents, especially when it is paid up front months in advance. Sounds like some of the guys here won't be putting in anymore so my odds just got a little bit better.

 

[Ithaca 37]

Oak , Too bad it's impossible for hunters in Arizona to organize any efforts like the ones in CO.

What I'd really like to see in every state is hunters and fishermen becoming politically powerfull and united enough to actually elect the candidates who would be best for hunting and fishing.

Of course, if you read the posts by many here, they have other priorities. That's why they voted for Dubya and have been gloating about his victory, even though they claim to love hunting and fishing. Doesn't make sense, does it? They get upset about a small license increase, but it's OK to drill for oil in a wildlife refuge. It's OK to build dams that stop fish migrations. It's OK to destroy wildlife habitat in the name of "progress".

I have no sympathy at all for the hunters in AZ who whine about a license increase, but don't do anything to protect wildlife. I just don't want them coming to Idaho. We have too many like them here already.

 

[BuzzH]

cfree,

I hate what Taulman has done, I wrote letters to all their sponsors, etc. I've written letters to your entire commission, I've written the Game and Fish Director.

The problem is your state is choosing to punish the people who were, and still are, on your side about Taulman and his greed.

I dont want an equal chance at your tags, I just want to be able to afford a chance at the opportunity to apply, and if I get lucky draw someday. Why not just make trophy elk tags once-in-a-lifetime for NR hunters? Theres better ways than pricing out the average guy who has been there supporting your G&F from the beginning.

Your already stressed G&F Department is going to be needing additional funding as you're going to lose a lot of revenue. The sad part is, its just the wildlife that will suffer in the end.

Everyone is being greedy in this deal, Taulman and the Residents of Arizona, and thats the sad truth. As much as I would like to hunt AZ, it just isnt that good, to put up that kind of coin. I still may splurge for one coues deer tag, though.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Cfree,

Do you really think it is Taulman that is raising the fees for non-Residents??? Has AZ allowed him complete control??? I would tend to think it is the AZ Commission (on input from a bunch of AZ resdents) that is raising the fees. I just don't think that Taulman gets to set the fees charged by the state.

But, if you know how he gets to do that, please enlighten all of us.....

Taulman might be greedy, but as a corporation, that is his job..... The AZ residents appear to be the most greedy....