• February 11, 2016

White Mountain Independent

Tip: Use advanced search for extended search features and options.

Hunters fall on different sides of Prop 109

Posted: Monday, November 1, 2010 5:00 am

It may be a voter initiative to make hunting and fishing a right in Arizona, but not all hunters agree that Proposition 109 is truly right for the state.

Subscription Required

An online service is needed to view this article in its entirety. You need an online service to view this article in its entirety.

Have an online subscription?

Login Now

Need an online subscription?



Choose an online service.

  • Discuss

Welcome to the discussion.


  • DBunker posted at 7:47 am on Mon, Nov 1, 2010.

    DBunker Posts: 2

    Jack Husted failed to mentio that four former AZ Game and Fish commissioners have come out against Prop 109, who say Prop 109 would do nothing to provide scientific wildlife management as it claims and that is an attempt by the Arizona Legislature to take control of wildlife and take away voting rights on wildlife issues.

    Of the four ex-commissioners, two are biologists, one at Northern Arizona University and other with a career with state wildlife agencies. Three are hunters and one is an angler.

    "There is nothing written nor implied in Proposition 109 ensuring that sound science will prevail in decisions about wildlife management - in fact, quite the opposite," said Woodin.

    "How can Prop 109 be in support of scientific management when it says that the legislature is vested with the ‘exclusive authority to enact laws to regulate the manner, methods or seasons for hunting, fishing and harvesting of wildlife or the use of traditional means and methods' or that ‘lawful public hunting and fishing shall be a preferred means of managing and controlling wildlife?'"

    In a news interview Woods said that Prop 109 is 'a lawyer's retirement dream.'

  • Stephen Wenger posted at 9:12 am on Mon, Nov 1, 2010.

    Stephen Wenger Posts: 42

    To put Mr Margheim's concerns into perspective, this is the concept of democracy versus republic. Those who remember history or have re-rad it recently may recall that our nation was explicitly founded as a republic, to limit sudden fluctuations and other abuses that may result from direct democracy - "rule of the mob."

    Arizona became a state at the height of the Progressive movement, which placed a great emphasis on the triad of initiative (voter-initiated ballot propositions), referendum (legislature-initiated ballot propositions) and recall. As a result, these have been strong features of our state constitution.

    Recall, however, that the Progressive movement was precisely the incarnation of the "living constitution" concept - that the stable rule of law envisioned by the Founders, with an intentionally cumbersome process to amend the federal constitution - had become outdated.

    I voted for 109, even though I am not and active hunter or angler. While seldom publicized, there is a historical string of environmental disasters resulting from emotionally engendered restrictions on hunting, including a short-lived ban on hunting deer on the Kaibab Rim, if I remember the correct side of the Grand Canyon. That ban soon resulted in an overpopulation of starving deer in the area and was subsequently rescinded. Fortuitously, it had not been implemented by initiative, as I recall.

    Others may vote based on preservation of the initiative concept. I am merely seeking to put that concept into perspective.

  • wes alderson posted at 2:03 pm on Mon, Nov 1, 2010.

    wes alderson Posts: 9935

    Gee, uh . . . if hunters are falling on BOTH sies, then one of them must have Been Dick Cheney or his buddy. Do Y'all hunt each other? Larry? Norris? you oughta know. -Wes.

  • E11ington posted at 2:15 pm on Mon, Nov 1, 2010.

    E11ington Posts: 1

    Prop 109 would help to guarantee AZ state Game and Fish can continue
    to manage our wildlife through hunting and fishing regulations. Without hunting and fishing licenses we would not have the open spaces now available. These funds are the only guaranteed monies that go towards conserving our wildlife and the habitat they need to exist.

    I am tired of emotional PETA propositions not based on science or fact getting passed and and leaving wildlife and forestry bureaus dealing with unbalanced aftermaths.

  • Jay posted at 8:26 am on Wed, Nov 3, 2010.

    Jay Posts: 1

    "Wannabe" politician, Jack Husted wants to turn wildlife management over to the
    Legislators----the Politicians---you know the same ones that spent our State Gov't
    into billions of dollars of unConstitutional, as in illegal, debt.


A subscription service is required to post comments.

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
  • 2 Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
  • 3 Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
  • 4 Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 5 Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 6 Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness acounts, the history behind an article.

Show Low, AZ

Current Conditions

Humidity: 20%
Winds: N at 6mph
Feels Like: 57°

Your Extended Forecast


High 58°/Low 27°


High 65°/Low 31°


High 65°/Low 29°
Mainly sunny


High 60°/Low 28°