M16 it is called no choice if I could Hunt Africa on my own I would but the Gov does not allow it as far as I know and most PH's have areas that they controll for hunting kinda like the Yukon so you probably are not going to get on to hunt somewhere anyway.I want a to hunt Black Death so yes I will have to use a Guide. As for Texas you can have it we have larger bucks up in the midwest anyway I just love these hunting shows that show a 80lbs Buck with a 17 inch outside spread and on that little body it looks like it is 23 inches then brag about how big the deer in Texas are it is kinda funny.

It is called principal. If the government requires a guide or a PH you don't go. It's a simple as that. There's no such thing as being a little pregnant. Either you are or you aren't. Yes you have bigger deer in the Midwest. But the deer in Texas aren't all small. Different regions have different size deer. While a 17 inch deer may not be overly large it is not a bad deer. On an 80 pound deer that's pretty impressive. Oh by the way here's a picture of one of my Texas bucks that is 27 inches wide. Let's see yours.

M16:

USO is out to line their pockets at the expense of the ordinary hunter. Do you think that is okay?

I can tell you plenty of USO sponsors disagree with that position.

27inch deer I dont have one but I do have a 19inch with 14 inch G2's that was wild and none fenced he was also hunted by others. I also have a 20 inch 5x5 and lots of 17 to 18 inch deer all wild non guided and all hunted by others. Here is the one with 14 inch G2's


Here is the 20 inch 5X5

USO is different, in that they are the first to file a lawsuit. Why didn't the sponsors withdraw then? Because there was no flood of protest. Some were not even aware there was a lawsuit filed. Well, there is now. One sponsor told me that they are pulling out because the issue was not one of fairness, it is one of money. AZ has many options to cap nonresident rates, but all of them will hurt the middle class non-resident hunter.



What I find laughable, M16, is your belief that you can be the last one standing (hunting in North America). Once the ordinary Joe sees you as the only guy hunting, he will vote to outlaw hunting when it comes to a proposition issue. Why? Because he will remember you didn't give a crap about him. And you know what? There isn't a damn thing you will be able to do about it.



I am struggling a bit to see why you even waste your time here with the proletariat. I don't seem to recall you posting much on the African, New Zealand, and ROW sites. Surely you can afford to hunt there, right?



Oh, since you are so rich, why don't you offer to donate a plane ticket to huntofalifetime.org like I did. The link is right there on the big game forum. In fact, you should make it two, since you obviously can afford it. The only reason not to would be selfishness...unless you really couldn't afford to do it.

I don't like Barnes bullets anyway. They put alot of copper in my barrel when I shoot them. So I stopped using them and am all for the Boycott.

M16:

Forgive me. I thought I read that you had stated you were all for 15k elk licenses, didn't care about the "average Joe" etc.

My apologies. I must have read your posts wrong.

Anyway, I have to tie up a few "loose" ends. Have a good day.

There is a legal point that seems to be missing in this discussion.

Federal courts (and the US Supreme Court, by declining to review) have consistently been requiring States to issue permits (of any kind) to persons meeting the requirements of issuance, regardless of state of residence.

A lot of this case law came out of states (like New York and New Jersey) not allowing contractors, builders, etc. a license or permit to do business in that state, unless they lived there.

I understand the point (completely) about local hunters being shut out....that was the same point New York made about out-of-state contractors.

The courts have ruled consistantly that states must issue permits and licenses for business to individuals who meet the requirements.

To some of us hunting may "seem" different, but to a Federal judge, these permits appear to be just another transaction governed by the state.

The state has the right to say how many game animals (if any) are taken, but not as to who should get a permit based on where they live.

Garrett

AnotherAZhunter. M16 just doesn't get it. he is of the opinion that if he can afford a $15K license, then it's just Tango Sierra for those of us who can't.
I have no use for such individuals. May his sights always be off and may another hunter always beat him to the trophy he is stalking.
He says he's not rich, but rich is not a set figure. When I was working, I made a fairly decent salary. One of my son's in law makes a fairly large six figure salary. By my standard, he's quite wealthy. Maybe to M16, he'd be a pauper. It somewhat relative as to where you are on the pay scale.
I probably could have taken an expensive guided trip while I was working, maybe even to Africa for at least plains game. However, the needs of my family camr first. Any out of state trips I took were do it yourself on a budget. Some trips came out great and some were a bust. That's hunting, not play for pay Texas deer shooting.
Unfortunately, those with the big buck have ensured their pleasure and yours and my expense, and I deeply resent it.
Hunting may be a privilege, but M16 and his kind do not have the right to price everyone else out of the market.
Paul B.

I considered relocating to AZ - didn't do it because hunting seasons are too short and you have to draw tags for everything except bowhunting for deer - you even have to draw for a javelina tag.

Now here in TX, the hunting seasons for deer run from October (bow) through the Nov gun opening through mid January. And I don't have to draw for any of it, there is plenty of public land to hunt on (although admittedly the quality of trophy isn't as good . . . but it can be if you know what you're doing). And private land leases aren't necessarily "too pricey" - I've leased 2500 acres for about $0.75 per acre, and killed a darn nice buck on it.

To be sure, though, our Muley & Pronghorn seasons are shorter, of course. Javelina season in S TX never closes, though. And I haven't even mentioned free-ranging exotics like Axis or Blackbuck that run the canyons near my house.

In short, even though AZ has more game species and more public land, there is far less hunting opportunity in AZ than in TX.

Troy

Draws and short seasons are what come about when there are too many folks for too few critters of any one species. It comes down to the only way to conserve a resource while still providing as many hunting oppotunities as possible. That's the whole crux of the unlimited NR tag debate, which will lead to even fewer opportunites for residents. -TONY

I am new here and was browsing the comments in this forum. My interest peaked when I came across the Boycott Barnes Bullets subject line. I live in Idaho and have used Barnes for many years. I love this bullet. So I read on. I was intrigued that only Barnes was mentioned for "the Boycott". I wonder why. There seems to be many other manufacturers associated with USO. It makes me think other "less reliable" ammunition manufacturers are behind this. I also did some research and found that good old Arizona cuts off between 4% & 6% of what is supposed to be 10% for out of state hunters. Perhaps we should follow suit with Arizona in Idaho and do the same thing. We have many Arizona hunters come to Idaho to hunt. I also found out that New Mexico considered the same type of law Arizona has and a Arizona man filed suit in 1996 to keep their out of state % at around 22%. I see many comments about the greed of USO, but I also see greed in many of the comments from Arizonans. To keep hunting on Federal Land to themselves while they take advantage of other states. I suggest more facts be revealed and that decisions and comments be made to help hunting. I personally do not use a guide service, but I realize they are necessary in some venues. I just want to promote hunting. If we divide we are doomed. I suggest we boycott FORD. They despise hunting and those who participate in it. These people are our real enemies and if we are distracted and fight amongst ourselves we will no longer enjoy hunting and fishing.

Well spoken Rob. Thanks for your insight.

Yes that is the regs but I like to deal in facts. So how many were issued? Was it 10% or are we blowing more smoke where there is no fire? What magazines have you written for? I would like to read some of your articles as I am not familiar with your name. Hope to hear some facts from you soon. Also what about the other comments I had? Any comments?

Here are several threads to bring you up to speed. Feel free to read through them all, then take two aspirins and call me in the morning. -TONY

The Arizona non-resident quota unconstitutional

Next for Boycott - Jim Zumbo

Court Rules Arizona Non-Resident Draw Ilegal

Resident/NonResident Licences

My letter to BARNES...regarding Arizona/USO

And so the ball is rolling....

I went to the site and have the same information you have. However, I took another step and called the IF&G. Do you know how many out of state hunters applied for those permits. I'll bet you don't. I do. I suggest you do more than go to a web site when looking for information. As far as the other questions you once again blew smoke. Why did you pick on Barnes? I found nothing in the previous meanderings concerning why Barnes was singled out. I didn't find anything about who you write for either.

Thanks for all the updates. I still only see Barnes as being singled out.

Sure I do, 105 NRs applied for them. That's also on the web site; didn't even need to make a call. Yet they only received 15 permits, which is far from that 10% cap of all the permits available.



Perhaps there's some confusion in thinking the cap applies to the percentage of those who apply rather than up to 10% of the permits??



In one hunt, there were 60 permits and 31 NR apps. Under the rule, 6 NR could have received permits; only 2 NR got permits. That appears to be about 3% or so.

Quote:

---

Why did you pick on Barnes?

---

As I said in another message, read the other threads because you're confused as to who is doing or saying what. Pay special attention to those who INITIATE the threads, too.



Now, here's an interesting tidbit of WHY IDF&G put the UP TO 10% cap for moose in place. It's from 2001.



On January 18th the Idaho Fish and Game Commission voted unanimously "to allow nonresidents to apply for moose permits in the controlled hunt drawings." The story behind it demonstrates the resident versus nonresident hunter conflict and how our democratic system deals with it. Nonresidents will finally be able to draw up to 10 percent of available permits. They have not been able to even apply before. This year permits for antlered moose will total 1,003, up from 888 last year. Antlerless permits will total 147, up from 123. The Idaho Fish and Game Department (IFG) news release states that up to 115 of the total could go to nonresidents. Simultaneously, the IFG increased the total number of tags by more than 10 percent, 139 more tags, so residents will have a greater draw too. The draw had been 1,011 and will be 1,150, which is 139 new tags with only 115 going to nonresidents. The 10 percent rule that limits the issuance of controlled hunt permits to nonresidents has been a longstanding rule for other species and was not created just for moose.



Nonresidents will be charged $1,514.50 for the new tag, permit and application fees as well as $128.50 for a general hunting license. All but the $128.50 is refunded if the nonresident does not draw.





Read the rest of it HERE

< !--color-->

When all of this broke United States Outfitters pulled their sponsors list off of their website. Barnes Bullets was on the list as you see below:



Here is a list of sponsors form USO's website. Start e-mailing

http://www.realtree.com/contact/index.tpl



http://www.swarovskioptik.at/english/kontact_us/index.asp?cat=Contact



http://www.barnesbullets.com/contact.php



http://www.crookedhorn.com/



http://www.knightrifles.com/ContactUs



http://www.primos.com/contact_us.php?who=customerservice

As has been stated Primos and RealTree have pulled their sponsorship of USO, if you look at MonsterMuleys or TheBowsite you can see their letters posted their.



Below is the Misinformed and twisted article in Outdoor life. Facts really dont matter hto these folks.



Courts Settle Arizona Tag Dispute

By Will Snyder



Non-residents have better chance with new system



July 2004



Non-resident hunters wanting to pursue elk and deer in Arizona just got a boost in permit numbers, but not without using the courts to advance the cause. Who would have thought that outdoorsmen would cite constitutional amendments as a reason to increase their chances for a tag?



Such was the case, though, when Judge Robert Broomfield deemed the 10 percent cap for non-resident big game tags to be violation of interstate commerce laws. In his ruling, Broomfield mandated that the cap immediately be dropped. This will put non-residents in the same lottery as locals. Entrants are competing for 38,000 deer tags and 22,000 elk tags.



Under the old system, Arizona residents were able to take a 90 percent share, leaving out-of-state hunters clamoring for a handful of licenses. Outfitters are pleased with the decision as it means for opportunities for guided hunts, which helps to stabilize a shaky business.



Coues

I did find this line a bit untrue, misleading or however one would state it. I understand what youve stated about the rest though.

"Who would have thought that outdoorsmen would cite constitutional amendments as a reason to increase their chances for a tag?"

Coues
Derrick

Yup, that line is also off the mark a bit. -TONY

Arizona is in the habit of making mistakes and then not accounting for them-as in: Another Big Issue is the Department made a mistake on the non resident Big Horn
Sheep tag draw. Non residents received 16 tags and were only supposed to receive a maximum
of 8. The Department will seek advice on how to handle this bad situation and will be
instructed by the commission as how to handle this. There are possible legality issues
involved if they try to take back 8 of the tags from the non- residents and give them to
residents. Evidently the 10 % filter was not turned on to catch this oversight.

Just received an email from The Outdoor Channel-

Dear friends and viewers,

Recently there has been a court ruling that affects the issuance of big
game tags in Arizona. The Outdoor Channel has received a considerable
number of e-mails in which we are accused of "supporting" George Taulman
(and USO) or being an actual business partner of his. To be clear, The
Outdoor Channel DOES NOT "support" George Taulman or his company nor do
we condone his actions. We are not now nor have we ever been a business
partner of George Taulman or USO.

As with the many independent producers we deal with, he has contracted
with us to air his television program beginning this October. This is a
legal and binding contract. When we entered into this contract last
spring, we were not aware of his pending court action.

Therefore, we have requested that our legal counsel conduct a review of
our contractual obligations to Mr. Taulman.


Best regards,

Jake Hartwick
Executive Vice President
The Outdoor Channel

Sounds like The Outdoor Channel is looking at dumping those guys. Too bad, so sad. Let the market ride. I love capitalism.