They seem to be popular in AZ about now

[spectr17]

 

[russd]

talked to a guy today that hunted in new mexico a few years back, he said the uso would lock a chain across the roads from where they were hunting from? this was in a national forest. can this be true? that would be so wrong.

 

[Pa Ridge Runner]

I've hunted with George/USO 3 times. I support him,and couldn't care less what goes on as far as politics. Long as I get an elk tag. Life is way too short for me to worry about something I have no control over.
Here's to ya George! See you again in October!!!

 

[Coues]

Not so fast PA:

***************************************************************

The Arizona Game and Fish Commission on Aug. 14 analyzed a list of more than 20 ideas to protect resident hunting opportunities. The action came in response to a federal court ruling declaring unconstitutional Arizona's 10-percent cap on nonresident applicants for certain big game species.

The commission has directed the Game and Fish Department to begin drafting rule language and collecting public comment on nine of the 20 alternatives.

The alternatives before the public and the commission are:

* Award additional bonus points for continuous support. Also referred to as "loyalty points," these points would be awarded to people who have been applying for big game hunts or buying licenses consecutively for a designated period of time, for example, for five years.

* Award a conservation bonus point to individuals who participate in wildlife work projects. There are several variations of this proposal and the department has been directed to consolidate and refine a final proposal for public input.

* Charge up front for applications over the Internet, using electronic funds transfers instead of credit cards, or do away with the online application process altogether.

* Increase license and permit fees, which would require legislation.

* Require all big game drawing applicants to purchase a hunting license.

* Increase the draw application fees. This would require legislation.

* Increase the bonus point pass percentage from 10 percent to 20 percent, which would mean setting aside 20 percent of big game permits for individuals with the most bonus points.

* Create a nonresident set-aside based on capped percentages and conduct a separate nonresident draw for these tags.

* Create commercial and noncommercial big game tags, with 90 percent of the tags designated as noncommercial, available only to residents, and ten percent as commercial, available equally to residents and nonresidents. Another version of this proposal would change the law to completely eliminate commercialization of wildlife to permit reinstatement of the 10 percent nonresident cap.

 

[brut]

uso going to make it so that only the rich can afford to hunt. so much for the hunters who enjoy doing all the work theirselves.

 

[COHunter]

Yep......USO is gonna make hunting out of state really expensive. The US Supreme Court ruled in 1978 (Baldwin Case) that State's can charge more for Nonresidents to hunt because hunting is Recreation, not Commerce

Glad I live in Colorado, cause I don't need to hunt out of State with what we have here.

 

[widgnwhacker]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>

I support him,and couldn't care less what goes on as far as politics. Long as I get an elk tag[/b]

I hope you never get an AZ tag. We don't need clowns like you in our great state.

 

[Or/Elkster]

What is the uso sorry if i sound like a dufus but i have no clue

 

[EL CAZADOR]

Originally posted by Or/Elkster@Aug 24 2004, 11:21 PM
What is the uso sorry if i sound like a dufus but i have no clue

USO is an huge outfitter and sued the state of Arizona on the grounds that limiting the amount of tags for non-residients was unfair. They won, lost, and then won and now a tag that was already hard for residents to get is made even more difficult. The major debate is whether the game belongs to the state of Arizona therefore its residents and also the land on which the game roam - is it state land or federal? Touchy subject, I understand both sides . . .

http://www.jesseshunting.com/forums/index....showtopic=66758

*EDIT*

The legal grounds were based on whether or not the game belongs to AZ and its residents and also the "national" forests issue. The true motive is that the more non-resident tags awarded, the more out of state rich guys will use USO and the more money they make. The more tags USO gets, the more they sell. It will make it really hard for non-residents to get tags now.

 

[COHunter]

Actually he filed a lawsuit under the Commerce Clause. He felt that his clients were being unfairly discriminated against, from the making of money off the sale of the nonedible parts of Deer and Elk (antlers, hide's, teeth), which is BS because most people don't sell their animal parts.

I hope the state of AZ finds a way that will ruin his operation in their state. Hopefully the Commercial/Noncommercial tags will make it through Judge Broomfield.

 

[Hook]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>

The more tags USO gets, the more they sell. It will make it really hard for non-residents to get tags now.[/b]

I dont see how USO will get more money if AZ sells more tags. Anyone who puts in for tags without USO has the same chance of drawing as someone who uses USO to apply for a tag.

USO will not get any more tags than any other outfitter/guide service in AZ.

When I checked for a guide in AZ for my hunt, All the outfitters/guides I found cost the same as what USO was charging $3450. Their prices are not any higher than any other Outfitter/Guide out there.

The bottom line is that Elk hunting is AZ has become so popular that have non-resident hunters from 49 other states putting in for Elk tags in AZ. And that is huge numbers...

 

['Ike' @ HM]

It should be pointed out, that this is not the first time George T and crew went after a state....I believe NewMexico is the way it is, as far as outfitter tags and land owner permits because of him....He's now after Nevada and probably a few others....

Hey, but it's not a'greed' thing....He's doing it for us 'non-residents'.....Yea ok George!!!

 

[wmidbrook]

Yup, George is motivated by money alright and a belief he's doing the right thing.

That's one of the things that's so great about our American System, you can battle for what you believe in and affect changes in our legal system.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>

The US Supreme Court ruled in 1978 (Baldwin Case) that State's can charge more for Nonresidents to hunt because hunting is Recreation, not Commerce[/b]

I'd bet that USO v. AZ provides some backbone to override that precedent....that's truly the day I'm looking forward too.