It is seldom that one can boast about one's government but that is what this post is about. Now, to be honest Arizona Game and Fish act more like an advocacy group than a governmental agency. What a concept. Even though their task is to preserve and protect the wildlife and environment they seem to understand that Hunters, Fisherman, and outdoorsmen in general, are the source of funding for their work and are unapologetically on the hunters/fisherman/outdoorsmen's side. As a hunter in Arizona I feel like AZ G&F is my advocate.
First a little background. Arizona Game and Fish Department receives zero general fund tax dollars. Funding is primarily provided by the sale of hunting and fishing licenses, tags or stamps, and via a federal excise tax on firearms and ammunition. I understand that there is a Heritage Fund that is somewhat discretionary, but I don't understand what it is or if it is even a thing today.
In 2010 in response to local municipalities ignoring G&F's objections to removing large amounts of hunting areas by incorporation into cities, AZ G&F got passed into law preemption of all regulations limiting hunting within city limits. Cities were incorporating 10's of thousands of acres of uninhabited land into their cities and by existing city ordinance on discharging a firearm within the city were excluding it from hunting and management. The local municipalities ignored the requests of AZ G&F to come to an agreement on how to keep the land open for hunting and management but the municipalities position was that G&F couldn't do anything about it so they arrogantly declined to negotiate the issue. The state law was amended in 2010:
ARS §13-3107 and §13-3108 (NOTE: ARS 13-3107 HAS THE SAME PROVISIOINS AS 3108 BUT IS TITLED ‘UNLAWFUL DISCHARGE OF FIREARMS’.
13-3108. Firearms regulated by state; state preemption; injunction; civil penalty; cause of action; violation; classification; definition
…….
E. A political subdivision of this state shall not enact any ordinance, rule or regulation limiting the lawful taking of wildlife during an open season established by the Arizona game and fish commission unless the ordinance, rule or regulation is consistent with title 17 and rules and orders adopted by the Arizona game and fish commission. This subsection does not prevent a political subdivision from adopting an ordinance or rule restricting the discharge of a firearm within one-fourth mile of an occupied structure without the consent of the owner or occupant of the structure. For the purposes of this subsection:
1. "Occupied structure" means any building in which, at the time of the firearm's discharge, a reasonable person from the location where a firearm is discharged would expect a person to be present.
2. "Take" has the same meaning prescribed in section 17-101.
Now before you jump to any conclusions you have to understand the landscape in Arizona. Very close to large cities like Phoenix, Mesa, Tucson, or Flagstaff and their suburb communities, there are large unpopulated areas that are quite safe to hunt and have been for generations. Title 17, referenced in 13-3108, contains conventional restrictions on the discharge of a firearm safely like limitation within 1/4 mile of a structure and from or across a road. So the law doesn't allow a hunter to shoot dove from the corner of Main and Broadway right next to Grandma shopping for groceries at the local Food King. We have hunting units throughout the state that are the only areas you can hunt in. And Phoenix and Tucson are (mostly) not in a hunting unit. Those city limits are just too congested to allow hunting. There are also unit restrictions that outline specific areas within a unit that only shotgun or archery are allowed due to congestion or closures due to congestion. But those are G&F decisions and they don't close their mind to a municipalities concerns and are mindful of public safety.
Next, I don't remember the year when this change was made but I do remember when it happened. As the borders of the state became more dangerous due to human and drug trafficking the rules were changed to allow hunters to carry any weapon even if it wasn't appropriate for the species they were hunting. It used to be, like many states, that when you were bow hunting you were not allowed to carry a firearm. Today you can carry what you think you need. Just don't hunt a turkey with a rifle or shoot a deer/elk with a firearm during bow season.
A.R.S. 17-305
Possession of other weapons while hunting; violation; classification
A. The possession of legal weapons, devices, ammunition or magazines, which are not authorized to take wildlife, is not prohibited while hunting if the weapon or device is not used to take wildlife.
B. Taking wildlife by using a weapon, device, ammunition, or magazine that is not authorized to take wildlife is a class 1 misdemeanor.
Again, I don't remember the year, but I do remember when mufflers were allowed. Just plain common sense.
A.R.S. 17-251
Possession or use of a firearm silencer or muffler while hunting; definition
A. The commission shall not adopt or enforce any rule that prohibits the lawful possession or use of a firearm silencer or muffler, including for the taking of wildlife or while hunting.
B. This section does not limit the authority of the commission to prescribe the type and caliber of firearm or ammunition that may be used for taking wildlife.
C. For the purposes of this section, “firearm silencer or muffler” means any device that is designed, made or adapted to muffle the report of a firearm.
I'm sure there are many examples of states where the G&F department is just as dedicated to their mission as well as those that support their mission. Namely Hunters, Fisherman, and outdoorsmen.
First a little background. Arizona Game and Fish Department receives zero general fund tax dollars. Funding is primarily provided by the sale of hunting and fishing licenses, tags or stamps, and via a federal excise tax on firearms and ammunition. I understand that there is a Heritage Fund that is somewhat discretionary, but I don't understand what it is or if it is even a thing today.
In 2010 in response to local municipalities ignoring G&F's objections to removing large amounts of hunting areas by incorporation into cities, AZ G&F got passed into law preemption of all regulations limiting hunting within city limits. Cities were incorporating 10's of thousands of acres of uninhabited land into their cities and by existing city ordinance on discharging a firearm within the city were excluding it from hunting and management. The local municipalities ignored the requests of AZ G&F to come to an agreement on how to keep the land open for hunting and management but the municipalities position was that G&F couldn't do anything about it so they arrogantly declined to negotiate the issue. The state law was amended in 2010:
ARS §13-3107 and §13-3108 (NOTE: ARS 13-3107 HAS THE SAME PROVISIOINS AS 3108 BUT IS TITLED ‘UNLAWFUL DISCHARGE OF FIREARMS’.
13-3108. Firearms regulated by state; state preemption; injunction; civil penalty; cause of action; violation; classification; definition
…….
E. A political subdivision of this state shall not enact any ordinance, rule or regulation limiting the lawful taking of wildlife during an open season established by the Arizona game and fish commission unless the ordinance, rule or regulation is consistent with title 17 and rules and orders adopted by the Arizona game and fish commission. This subsection does not prevent a political subdivision from adopting an ordinance or rule restricting the discharge of a firearm within one-fourth mile of an occupied structure without the consent of the owner or occupant of the structure. For the purposes of this subsection:
1. "Occupied structure" means any building in which, at the time of the firearm's discharge, a reasonable person from the location where a firearm is discharged would expect a person to be present.
2. "Take" has the same meaning prescribed in section 17-101.
Now before you jump to any conclusions you have to understand the landscape in Arizona. Very close to large cities like Phoenix, Mesa, Tucson, or Flagstaff and their suburb communities, there are large unpopulated areas that are quite safe to hunt and have been for generations. Title 17, referenced in 13-3108, contains conventional restrictions on the discharge of a firearm safely like limitation within 1/4 mile of a structure and from or across a road. So the law doesn't allow a hunter to shoot dove from the corner of Main and Broadway right next to Grandma shopping for groceries at the local Food King. We have hunting units throughout the state that are the only areas you can hunt in. And Phoenix and Tucson are (mostly) not in a hunting unit. Those city limits are just too congested to allow hunting. There are also unit restrictions that outline specific areas within a unit that only shotgun or archery are allowed due to congestion or closures due to congestion. But those are G&F decisions and they don't close their mind to a municipalities concerns and are mindful of public safety.
Next, I don't remember the year when this change was made but I do remember when it happened. As the borders of the state became more dangerous due to human and drug trafficking the rules were changed to allow hunters to carry any weapon even if it wasn't appropriate for the species they were hunting. It used to be, like many states, that when you were bow hunting you were not allowed to carry a firearm. Today you can carry what you think you need. Just don't hunt a turkey with a rifle or shoot a deer/elk with a firearm during bow season.
A.R.S. 17-305
Possession of other weapons while hunting; violation; classification
A. The possession of legal weapons, devices, ammunition or magazines, which are not authorized to take wildlife, is not prohibited while hunting if the weapon or device is not used to take wildlife.
B. Taking wildlife by using a weapon, device, ammunition, or magazine that is not authorized to take wildlife is a class 1 misdemeanor.
Again, I don't remember the year, but I do remember when mufflers were allowed. Just plain common sense.
A.R.S. 17-251
Possession or use of a firearm silencer or muffler while hunting; definition
A. The commission shall not adopt or enforce any rule that prohibits the lawful possession or use of a firearm silencer or muffler, including for the taking of wildlife or while hunting.
B. This section does not limit the authority of the commission to prescribe the type and caliber of firearm or ammunition that may be used for taking wildlife.
C. For the purposes of this section, “firearm silencer or muffler” means any device that is designed, made or adapted to muffle the report of a firearm.
I'm sure there are many examples of states where the G&F department is just as dedicated to their mission as well as those that support their mission. Namely Hunters, Fisherman, and outdoorsmen.
