26 replies [Last post]
Offline
Location: Colorado
Joined: 02/27/2003
Posts: 394
USO and your elk hunting rights.

Well, I think you're both right, but you're looking at it with different perspectives. Yes, this ruling will improve the rich man's chances of taking elk in Arizona. That will mean less for residents.

But rather-be-hunting, you seem to think this means the state will give ALL the tags to the richest non-residents and that is CLEARLY not the case. Residents will continue to have an advantage, and a fairly substantial one, just not as big of one as they have had in the most recent years.

All in all, this looks to me like a reasonable ruling. Residents still get to have a big advantage over non-residents, but the state has been told that it can't shut out non-residents completely.

Location: Utah
Joined: 02/24/2003
Posts: 596
USO and your elk hunting rights.

Don, the ruling says no one has an advantage and basically everyone has the same opportunity to draw a tag. That means residents and non-residents are drawn from the same barrell. So in theory if 50% of the total applicants are non-residents then about 50% of the tags should go to non-residents.

I think once word gets out that non-residents odds have gone way up everyone will start applying and we could have 70% of the total applicants be non-residents. Also residents fed up with whats going on will many will stop applying also skewing the res to non-res ratio. Remember there aren't that many tags to begin with. That would mean only about 30% of the tags go to residents. Before there was a non-resident cap and 90% of the tags went to residents. You do the math, your odds have just been cut into a third of what they used to be. Residents are already averaging 10-12 years to draw on points. Multiply your odds by 3 and you're looking a 30-36 years as a resident to draw a trophy elk tag. Heck even if it goes to 50%-50% then you're still looking at 20 or so years to draw a trophy tag in your own state. No, residents have lost all advantage in this ruling. You as a resident of Arizona have no advantage over someone in New York when it comes to drawing a trophy tag.

By the way USO has just filed a suit in Nevada and Montana. Lets start a pool and see who's state will be next.

Offline
Location: Colorado
Joined: 02/27/2003
Posts: 394
USO and your elk hunting rights.

Well, I've been doing some research on this, rather-be-hunting, and I think you're mistaken. The ruling was that the 10% cap was unconstitutional and could not be used. At this point the AZ G&FD has no other process ready to go, so they are simply drawing everybody equally FOR THIS YEAR. There is, however, nothing in the ruling that says a state MUST give equal treatment to residents and non-residents. As such, once the AZ G&FD gets their act together, there is no reason they can't continue to allocate more licenses to residents than non-residents.

Some relevant quotes from the ruling:

"a state has legitimate interests in preserving the health of its game populations and maintaining recreational hunting opportunities for its citizens."

"the state must demonstrate that the cap is narrowly tailored to its legitimate ends."

The essence of the ruling was that the 10% cap was unconstitutional because it was completely arbitrary. A cap based on any kind of non-arbitrary criteria would not be affected by this ruling.

What's more, this ruling came from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which is the most frequently over-ruled appeals court in this nation. Almost 75% of their rulings get over-turned! As such, this is far from over.

Location: Utah
Joined: 02/24/2003
Posts: 596
USO and your elk hunting rights.

Don, you're right they have no plan in effect YET. But I can tell you that how I expalined it is extacly what George Taulman of USO is suing for. I know this because I received an e-mail from him stating that excactly. And they will continue to go to court until thats what happens. Thats exactly why I'm against this. They want no distinction between res and non-res as far as drawing odds.

Arizona to not hurt their residents simply issued many more tags than it's management plan called for to temporarily appease the court ruling.

You need to understand the direction and the intentions of those involved and the implications it has.

If when its all said and done there is just a higher % allocated then no real big deal. But common sense tells me if the court is ruling that it's "unconstitutional to discriminate" against non-res's then the only logical thing that will satisfy them is everyone is thrown in the same barrel. I do get ahead of myself sometimes but essentially thats what the ruling is for now.

As you said Arizona did what they did for this year but they must come up with an alternate plan for future years. Arizona is tossing around making a non-res elk tag something like $2500 to keep the a limited number of people applying. Think about it. The only plan that will satisfy the court ruling is everyone in the same barrel.

It may be far from over but they way they want it is how I described it, trust me.

Offline
Location: Colorado
Joined: 02/27/2003
Posts: 394
USO and your elk hunting rights.

But the court did NOT rule that it is unconstitutional to discriminate against non-residents! They only ruled that it is unconstitutional to impose completely arbitrary caps. There is a VERY BIG DIFFERENCE!

I absolutely agree with you that a ruling that said a state is not allowed to distinguish between residents and non-residents when it came to hunting opportunities would be a very bad thing. That has not happened, though. Not even close. And I honestly do not believe it is EVER going to happen. This court ruling doesn't say anything like that.

A ruling that says a state can't impose completely arbitrary rules, for no better reason than "they feel like it," seems VERY fair and appropriate to me. THAT is what this ruling says!

Location: Utah
Joined: 02/24/2003
Posts: 596
USO and your elk hunting rights.

Here is Georges reply to my e-mail to him.

"Kris,

We never have suggested a 50/50 split for tags only a equal chance of
drawing. If 30 % of the applications are resident then approx. 30% of the
tags should go to residents.

You are wrong about who owns the wildlife, it does belong to everyone as a
renewable natural resource. The states are charged with the management,
and because of this decision, they cannot discriminate against other
Americans.

George
USO"

Location: Utah
Joined: 02/24/2003
Posts: 596
USO and your elk hunting rights.

Ok Don, so what does the ruling say? I mean as far as the future implications to drawing odds. Come on Don, sort through the legal mumbo jumbo and read what it actually says. If it doesn't say that then why did Primos, Realtree, and Christiansen Arms among others pull sponsorship. How I'm describing is it a nutshell what it says. If you can't have a cap what does that mean then Don? I'm not understanding your point.

If they can't arbitrarily impose a cap as they want, then how do they impose it? Trust me you're getting a different meaning from the ruling than everyone else I've spoken to.

Offline
Location: Colorado
Joined: 02/27/2003
Posts: 394
USO and your elk hunting rights.

I give up. If you can't see the difference between a completely arbitrary cap, and a cap based on some relevant criteria, then I don't know what to say. You believe what you want to.

Location: Utah
Joined: 02/24/2003
Posts: 596
USO and your elk hunting rights.

No I agree with that Don. Sorry for the confusion.

I'm trying to say the relevant criteria is (drumroll) 'the % of res vs. non-res applicants in the drawing.' Thats what I've been trying to tell you. If 70% of the applicants are non-res's then the cap is 70% and 70% goes to non-res's. That's it right there and why I'm against it.

Everyone and their dog will start applying via licensing agents like USO and drive the number of non-res applicants much higher. Residents wil get discouraged and not as many will apply. Skewing, as I said before, the percentage even more.

This of course will happen over the course of a few years but eventually the resident will be the minority driving odds in your own state through the roof.

To me thats basically everyone has the same odds. The way the court has it is just a fancy way of saying just that.

Offline
Location: Arizona
Joined: 04/08/2002
Posts: 99
USO and your elk hunting rights.

I've seen USO in action in northern AZ. this year, where they shot a bull elk on private property without the consent of the owner. What a shame.

Related Forum Threads You Might Like