Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 34

Thread: Predatorís problem Guides requirement dropped

  1. #1

    Question Predatorís problem Guides requirement dropped

    Does anyone think the guiding requirement will ever go away for Griz / Brown Bear, in any GMUís like 20E or any other unit because of the over population of predators?

  2. #2
    webmaster Michael Strahan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 1999
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska
    Posts
    5,765

    Default Nope-

    Quote Originally Posted by Bernie1 View Post
    Does anyone think the guiding requirement will ever go away for Griz / Brown Bear, in any GMUís like 20E or any other unit because of the over population of predators?
    Bernie,

    Changing the guide requirement because bears are abundant suggests that the reason for the requirement is because bears are few. I don't believe that's why we have a guide requirement for brown bear, Dall sheep, or goat, therefore it would not be likely that this requirement will be dropped for the reasons you suggest.

    Just one man's opinion.

    I've heard a lot of discussion about this, and a few questions about why guides are required for these species. I've also read a LOT of speculation about this. But I wonder if anyone out there has the actual history on it? What were the original reasons why these requirements were put in place. Oh, I know we talk about safety and such. But what were the reasons at the time these restrictions were applied? Because if we know that, I believe we can intelligently discuss the issue in its proper context.

    -Mike
    LOST CREEK COMPANY: Specializing in Alaska hunt consultation and planning for do-it-yourself hunts, fully outfitted hunts, and guided hunts.
    CLICK HERE to send me a private message.
    Web Address: http://alaskaoutdoorssupersite.com/hunt-planner/
    Mob: 1 (907) 229-4501
    "Dream big, and dare to fail." -Norman Vaughan
    "I have climbed my mountain, but I must still live my life." - Tenzig Norgay

  3. #3

    Default safety only?

    Mike I hope you can see itís a lot more than a safety factor for us lower 48erís. But if it predation became an even bigger factor than it already is. I think a logical option would be to liberalize requirements and bag limits. I think itís in the beginning stages right now, or maybe thatís wishful thinking.

  4. #4
    Member BRWNBR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Big Lake
    Posts
    8,436

    Default

    i htink predation is becoming an excuse for action on some user groups parts, moose are bouncing back in unit 13 already, according to numbers so what we've done since that one guy who played govener pronouced NO-les is actually working.
    IF guide req has anything to do with game numbers, they'll leave the requirment in place, guides do more for an area that you'd imagine, anyone who has a vested intersest in a specific area and its animals will take care of it and nurture it along as best as they can. the one time DIY hunter really don't have much interest or knowledge in what they are stepping into, every year i hit the field, i've got a really good idea on what my game populations were like the year before, i see the winter kills or wolf kills, bear numbers, you name it, i've got my finger on the pulse so to speak of my area. Guides are a great tool, the problem people have with the guide requirment is usually one of two things....MONEY, or just wanting something they can't have at a price they can afford. If guides cheap no one would care if they had to hire one for a bear, a few might but the argument on the guide req wouldn't exsist i don't think.
    money this and money that....
    Www.blackriverhunting.com
    Master guide 212

  5. #5

    Default

    Brwnbr, you know money makes the world go around. HAHA!

    I was just wondering if anyone thinks it’s in the near future. I’m not bashing the system or guides.


    I thought things were getting worse, and some type of action was needed. Maybe I’m misinformed.

  6. #6
    Mark
    Guest

    Default

    In a unit targeted for intensive predator management, temporarily dropping the guide requirement on brown bears should be one of the tools used.

    Let's face it; Alaska holds 75% of this continent's brown bears. Non-residents want to hunt them, resident ungulate hunters want their densities in balance, and the cost of a guided hunt are extremely high.

    What's more, dropping the guiding requirement temporarily is much more politically savvy than measures like same day airborne or baiting.

  7. #7
    Member BRWNBR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Big Lake
    Posts
    8,436

    Default

    I'm gonna back this not just because i'm a guide but mostly since i see it from a differnt point of view. Dropping it because of politics would make us our own worst enemy.
    I think they haven't dropped it for a reason and i doubt money or saftey is it. Theres alot of aspects to shooting bears that you wont' understand your first day out, res or non res.
    I think probably they are avoiding alot of accidental shootings of bears that apear to be "threatening", or "it was huge!" i hear that all the time from clients looking at bears even though it might be a six footer, first bear they've seen, think its huge and then mom walks out...people hunting bears with no guides that have little or no experience would create some problems, and we've all gone over having some sorta test for guys who do have experience and the issues that brings up.
    I think fish and game will let the predator control plans they have now ride for a while to see if the changes they are looking for will happen, if they don't then they'll start to change things. But you won't want to go overboard on control and hit it with everything you've got, that might not be healthy either, slow consistant change i think is what they are after.
    Someday they may drop the req, i just don't think it'll be very soon.
    Www.blackriverhunting.com
    Master guide 212

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BRWNBR View Post
    i htink predation is becoming an excuse for action on some user groups parts, moose are bouncing back in unit 13 already, according to numbers so what we've done since that one guy who played govener pronouced NO-les is actually working.
    IF guide req has anything to do with game numbers, they'll leave the requirment in place, guides do more for an area that you'd imagine, anyone who has a vested intersest in a specific area and its animals will take care of it and nurture it along as best as they can. the one time DIY hunter really don't have much interest or knowledge in what they are stepping into, every year i hit the field, i've got a really good idea on what my game populations were like the year before, i see the winter kills or wolf kills, bear numbers, you name it, i've got my finger on the pulse so to speak of my area. Guides are a great tool, the problem people have with the guide requirment is usually one of two things....MONEY, or just wanting something they can't have at a price they can afford. If guides cheap no one would care if they had to hire one for a bear, a few might but the argument on the guide req wouldn't exsist i don't think.
    money this and money that....
    bbear,
    Not to put you on the spot, but I seriously question the statement, that guides have their finger on the pulse of the units they guide. Judging from your posts and other guides post, it seems they spend most winters at home, and pretty much go to their areas when it is time to guide. Not many winter on Kodiak or in the interior. Locals have a much better understanding of current situations, than those licensed to guide in their areas. As discussed before, the requirement for guides was lobbied by a few self serving guides, and I was a part of the discussions from the side lines. It was a very dark period of my guiding days and I voiced opposition to the notion. It truly was all about money, yet some of the reason used included safety, limiting the numbers of non-res hunters, maintaining economic stability of the guide industry and of course sustaining "trophy" class animals. Some of the older Hunting Fraternities supported the requirement and the requirement was phased in for different species at a time. They have not stopped on this and it is their desire to make the requirement all inclusive for all big game hunting. Many other countries already do this and these examples are always used to validate their reasoning. It makes me ill to recall the entire mess.

  9. #9
    Mark
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Akres View Post
    .....Some of the older Hunting Fraternities supported the requirement and the requirement was phased in for different species at a time. They have not stopped on this and it is their desire to make the requirement all inclusive for all big game hunting. Many other countries already do this and these examples are always used to validate their reasoning........
    We've heard this recently with non-residents and moose, and the justification was openly stated that it's becoming more competitive and a guiding requirement would lower the number of non-residents competiting for the resource.

    If that is good justification, the opposite should be true; when there are too many brown bears, you can increase the harvest by dropping the guiding requirement on that species.

    It's not like there are demands to do so statewide. That would be both unreasonable and unwise. There are just a few GMUs or sub-units where this would be even feasible. Unit 13 and Unit 20E are the best examples. Both are officially managed intensively with predator reduction as a goal, both are accessible from the highway systems, and they do not require expensive and logistically difficult flying (which guides are set up to provide). Access vehicles like pickups, motorhomes, ATVs, etc. are available for rent in Anchorage and Mat-Su. DIY hunts are very possible, and for a fraction of the cost of a guided hunt.

    And those non-residents who want the services and higher success rates that guides offer and who can afford it can still take that option.

    Non-guided brown bear hunts for non-residents can even be conducted on a limited basis with drawing permits.

  10. #10

    Default

    [QUOTE=Mark;8019

    Non-guided brown bear hunts for non-residents can even be conducted on a limited basis with drawing permits.[/QUOTE]

    Mark,
    Unfortunately, NO they can't. This guide requirement is LAW, not regulation and will never be reversed. That is the trouble with making laws, one never knows what the future will look like. This is one law that needs to be reversed with Ballot Box Biology if necessary. The politico's are never going to take the measure on. It would take a united front from the thousands of hunters in Alaska. I hold little hope that this will ever become a reality, as too many of them are simply trying to hold on to their little piece of the pie and don't want to draw attention to their little stronghold. I can relate to their plight, but recognize their decision to remain silent will result in them losing everything they cherish about hunting. It is rapidly becoming a rich man's game, tradition is going away at an astonishing rate.

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Deep in Hllary country NY
    Posts
    446

    Wink Good Question! Bernie1

    I can tell you this as one who lives in the lower 48, i"m ready to blow a portion of my monthly pension check on a draw should the guide requirement change! And i"ll take a guess that i"m not alone at all, because for many this is the only way that, this dream can happen. If F&G are not getting the numbers down in problem areas something has to give. The guides want one thing, the bear viewers another, hunters, res., and non res. are split and more bears, like wolves become pests due to their numbers. How many bear rugs do some folks need? As a DIY hunter I would be thrilled with ONE with a nice coat, I could care less about skull size,ect. If getting a record book bear were a driving force with me you can be sure I would try to go guided. As a visitor to Alaska I would not have the time, or money to pass on most bears in order to find a monster. Might just be that change is in the air, and as a hunter I"ll be happy with just the chance ! Bill
    ; for them that honour me I will honour, and they that despise me shall be lightly esteemed. 1 SAMUEL 2;30

  12. #12
    Mark
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Akres View Post
    Non-guided brown bear hunts for non-residents can even be conducted on a limited basis with drawing permits.
    Mark,
    Unfortunately, NO they can't. This guide requirement is LAW, not regulation and will never be reversed.
    You're right; guide requirements are law: AS 16.05.407.

    And you might be correct in that it might be more difficult to reverse or alter.

    But if it is more politically attractive than same-day-airborne and/or baiting, it can be used as an alternative or negotiating fodder when the anti-everything folks point out the problems with the options repeatedly offered.

    As can be seen in the link to the Alaska Statute above, paragraphs c and e have already been repealed in 1986 and 1989.

    That is the trouble with making laws, one never knows what the future will look like. This is one law that needs to be reversed with Ballot Box Biology if necessary.
    I don't think you'll get it reversed. The guiding industry will fight it with all they've got, and such a massive move would likely be opposed by many in the legislature as well as many in the public.

    But modifying it to allow the Board to implement non-resident hunting in intensively managed GMUs?

    Maybe............

    The politico's are never going to take the measure on. It would take a united front from the thousands of hunters in Alaska. I hold little hope that this will ever become a reality, as too many of them are simply trying to hold on to their little piece of the pie and don't want to draw attention to their little stronghold.
    I agree to a great extent, and that's why I continually point out that we're shooting ourselves in the foot as a community. Individual desires or sub-group competition ("rural", "urban", guiding industry, resident, non-resident, etc) are resulting in self-destruction.

  13. #13
    Member dwhunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Texas/Alaska
    Posts
    468

    Default

    Have to agree entirely, unless we as hunters group together for the overall good nothing will change, other groups have financial incentive to organize, lobby etc for what they want and that is something we have not done.

    Unless folks are willing to stand up and get involved for the better good of our sport, the animals etc those with the most money and lobbyists will ALWAYS win. When a group is organized they can claim a certain amount of members, voters etc that any decision will impact, these members translate into voters, potential reelection support etc.


    Doug

  14. #14
    New member akhunter02's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    682

    Default hopes

    One can only dream, and this one is a big pipe dream, its never going to happen for many reasons. 1) The polititions who are the only ones that can make the change will not want to get envolved, 2) the guiding industry will fight it tooth and nail, 3) there will not be enough resident hunters backing it, 4) and then there will be the preception that Alaska wants to shoot a ton of bears for the only reason of providing more moose and caribou for hunters.

    This is one of those things that will always be with us

  15. #15
    Member dwhunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Texas/Alaska
    Posts
    468

    Default

    "1) The polititions who are the only ones that can make the change will not want to get envolved"

    You have to make them get involved and that takes a group of supporters behind you.

    "the guiding industry will fight it tooth and nail"

    So what, this happens daily between competing organizations with different ideas. This might even invite a chance at working together for the good of everyone.

    "and then there will be the preception that Alaska wants to shoot a ton of bears for the only reason of providing more moose and caribou for hunters."

    Argue that with factual information



    Doug

  16. #16
    New member akhunter02's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    682

    Default Mark my words

    you wont see any of that happen, we cant even agree on Subsitance, nothing is going to change for that very reason. Not enough residents will support that to force polititions to ack. With out the support of the majority of us Alaskans it will never happen, and you will never get that kind of support.

  17. #17
    Member BRWNBR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Big Lake
    Posts
    8,436

    Default

    akres, not much point in spending the winter in my bear area...bears aren't out, i'm there from may till september, bears come out and bears den up, sheep move into different grounds for wintering and i don't have moose or caribou to hunt. kodiak bears den up for the most part and travel so much that those critters you aren't gonna have the "pulse" figured out, the guide areas are so small you'll be hunting pretty local on every trip.

    What i was getting at apears to have been skewed a bit by perception, i wasn't saying anythig about locals, we were discussing non res not needing a guide, i would assume that they are not locals...most locals don't go to where the guides hunt, very very very very few locals will ever see the ground i hunt on, no fourwheeler trail, moose or caribou, so no reason for them to be there unless they jsut want a bear. Just because a local lives in a unit, don't mean they know about the game thats 50 miles behind their house, or even that they've ever seen it!

    Year after year, i see my area and the animals in it, i map where i harvest game and see trends thru the HUNTING SEASON, i see my numbers start to drop i change what i do, i see them rise, i change what i do, thats what i meant by pulse..not that i live there year round with radio collars on everything monitoring den activity.

    Then again mabye its just about money after all....if it is, i'm not seeing it.
    Www.blackriverhunting.com
    Master guide 212

  18. #18

    Default

    Okay,who wants the change?
    And then are you resident or non-resident?
    Me,I say no the change and I am a resident.
    Not trying to make an argrument just a question.

  19. #19
    Mark
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by akhunter02 View Post
    you wont see any of that happen, we cant even agree on Subsitance....
    But, amazingly, it appears that nearly everybody within the hunting community in Alaska ("urban", "rural", guides, subsistence folks) agree that there are too many predators in many areas.

    Amazing..............

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Springfield Missouri
    Posts
    139

    Default

    I also agree that the Laws will never change. I sure wish they would. I believe it is a more safety and money issue with the politicians. My main gripe is I can go sacrifice my life in a war for this country and the country includes Alaska, DO I need a guide to do that? NO, then why in the world can't I make the decision on weather or not I would want to hunt grizzly or brown bear on my own. They could always put a stipulation on 2 people for non resident hunters, That way they have back up. I would like to see a draw for non residents. But I don't think it will ever happen

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •