Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 64

Thread: Same day airborn

  1. #1
    Member Bambistew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Chugiak
    Posts
    315

    Default Same day airborn

    I wanted to post this in the Ask a Trooper forum, but can't for some reason.

    The question I have, is say an outfitter has 2 planes at his beck and call. They have clients hunting every day, and planes flying every day looking for moose. At what point can the pilots inform the guides of what they've seen and not break the law?

    The reason I ask is because I was hunting in an area that had air traffic 2-3 times a day, I know they were spotting moose because we'd see them on occasion circle over moose we spotted. We know that they had clients out hunting every day, all day as well.


    To me this is morally and ethically wrong. Flying non-stop to find game for clients, or even yourself is about as lame as shooting animals in a pen. I mean when did hunting become shooting? IMO there two reason behind this chickenpoop way of hunting. Number 1 is fear of failure, number 2 is $$$. Hunters get so hung up on success they fail to see the satisfaction of actually hunting and being successful. Maybe I'm naive, but I haven't found the hunting in AK to require constant air surveillance to be successful.

    The 'easy way out' is slowly killing our sport.

  2. #2
    Member tyrex13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Anchorage/Soldotna
    Posts
    1,176

    Default

    Name names

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    64

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bambistew View Post
    I wanted to post this in the Ask a Trooper forum, but can't for some reason.

    The question I have, is say an outfitter has 2 planes at his beck and call. They have clients hunting every day, and planes flying every day looking for moose. At what point can the pilots inform the guides of what they've seen and not break the law?

    The reason I ask is because I was hunting in an area that had air traffic 2-3 times a day, I know they were spotting moose because we'd see them on occasion circle over moose we spotted. We know that they had clients out hunting every day, all day as well.


    To me this is morally and ethically wrong. Flying non-stop to find game for clients, or even yourself is about as lame as shooting animals in a pen. I mean when did hunting become shooting? IMO there two reason behind this chickenpoop way of hunting. Number 1 is fear of failure, number 2 is $$$. Hunters get so hung up on success they fail to see the satisfaction of actually hunting and being successful. Maybe I'm naive, but I haven't found the hunting in AK to require constant air surveillance to be successful.

    The 'easy way out' is slowly killing our sport.
    If this happened in my hunting area or if I saw this happening, I personally would be calling the troopers.... I do not believe this is an ethical way to hunt...period...

    This kind of behavior happens all to often....and should be reported...These guides may not get in trouble but untill the troopers start asking them questions and nosing around they will continue and most likely it will get worse....

    please call and report them....

    that is my opinion anyway.....

  4. #4
    Member Frostbitten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Alaska - I wasn't born here, but I got here as soon as I could!
    Posts
    3,279

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bambistew View Post
    I wanted to post this in the Ask a Trooper forum, but can't for some reason.

    The question I have, is say an outfitter has 2 planes at his beck and call. They have clients hunting every day, and planes flying every day looking for moose. At what point can the pilots inform the guides of what they've seen and not break the law?

    The reason I ask is because I was hunting in an area that had air traffic 2-3 times a day, I know they were spotting moose because we'd see them on occasion circle over moose we spotted. We know that they had clients out hunting every day, all day as well.


    To me this is morally and ethically wrong. Flying non-stop to find game for clients, or even yourself is about as lame as shooting animals in a pen. I mean when did hunting become shooting? IMO there two reason behind this chickenpoop way of hunting. Number 1 is fear of failure, number 2 is $$$. Hunters get so hung up on success they fail to see the satisfaction of actually hunting and being successful. Maybe I'm naive, but I haven't found the hunting in AK to require constant air surveillance to be successful.

    The 'easy way out' is slowly killing our sport.
    OK, let's put the shoe on the other foot. Is it ethical for a transporter to drop off caribou hunters near/in an area that they see numbers of caribou? I think you would be hard pressed to find a single caribou hunter that would be opposed to being dropped off near/in an area that they know has numbers of animals. Additionally, I would dare say it was unethical for a transporter to intentionally drop off hunters in a certain area specifically because they don't see animals there.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    64

    Default

    There is a difference here...Being dropped off and having someone spot from a plane on a daily basis is way different.....

    in my opinion.....

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Girdwood
    Posts
    1,123

    Default

    I'm no expert but the situation seems little different than hunters sharing their stories or recanting their stories on CB's, phone, or texts. IMO, it depends on the time frame between when the guide/hunter hears the information and when the hunter pulls the trigger.

    If the hunter is told that a moose is a half mile away (by text, phone call, in person by the pilot) they stalk it the same day and shoot it ... then illegal.

    If they are told about the moose.... but pursue it the next day, and shoot it ... then legal.

  7. #7
    Member hoose35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Soldotna, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    2,890

    Default

    IMO this is not legal. Here is the scenario I am seeing, though it might be hard to prove. A pilot drops off a guide and client. The next day the pilot transports someone else into the field but informs the guide he dropped off the day before the location of a bull he spotted that day. The guide and client take that moose. That has got to be same day airborne. Total B.S. but I am sure it happens and would be hard to prove, I would think. Some people have no integrity.
    Responsible Conservation > Political Allocation

  8. #8
    Member Frostbitten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Alaska - I wasn't born here, but I got here as soon as I could!
    Posts
    3,279

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ak_grizz View Post
    There is a difference here...Being dropped off and having someone spot from a plane on a daily basis is way different.....

    in my opinion.....
    Maybe, maybe not. The air services/transporters fly out there everyday, and I can promise you that they are constantly "flying around" looking for critters...for the purpose of putting hunters in promising areas.

    True in that if the sole reason for launching the plane is to spot game and relay the position to the hunters on the ground, that's pretty blatant.

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wet eNuf View Post
    I'm no expert but the situation seems little different than hunters sharing their stories or recanting their stories on CB's, phone, or texts. IMO, it depends on the time frame between when the guide/hunter hears the information and when the hunter pulls the trigger.

    If the hunter is told that a moose is a half mile away (by text, phone call, in person by the pilot) they stalk it the same day and shoot it ... then illegal.

    If they are told about the moose.... but pursue it the next day, and shoot it ... then legal.
    I disagree with the phone/text/etc... part. It is clear that electronic communications can not be used to assist hunting, no matter what the time lag is. That is totally different from same day airborne.

    Regarding same day airborne, you have to look at the specific cases. If the pilot and or client spot something from the plane and/or pass on that information to another, nobody involved can shoot that day. Just because the same pilot might see something the next day doesn't mean that the clients they dropped off they day/week before can't hunt that day as long as they did not get any information from the pilot. This is where the harder to prove part comes in as far as whether the clients on the ground are watching for that plane to circle somewhere to know where to go? If that were the case, then illegal.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Girdwood
    Posts
    1,123

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hoose35 View Post
    IMO this is not legal. Here is the scenario I am seeing, though it might be hard to prove. A pilot drops off a guide and client. The next day the pilot transports someone else into the field but informs the guide he dropped off the day before the location of a bull he spotted that day. The guide and client take that moose. That has got to be same day airborne. Total B.S. but I am sure it happens and would be hard to prove, I would think. Some people have no integrity.
    Lets pretend someone on the boards posts up stories about loads of bears in an area. A hunter sees the post, drives down the next morning ... pursues and harvests a bear in the area. Compare that to ... someone saw the post on the forum on the same day that they pursued the alleged critter(s) and then shot a critter.

    I've heard of camps stop hunting after the plane flies in with other hunters to avoid accusations of hunting same day airborne. They may have other guides/hunters in the field though ... that may not be privy to the pilots info. Yeah sure, they may get the info at dinner later.

    With the OP's observations, If the OP would disclose the location, plane numbers to the F&G, I'm sure the F&G would send out hunters to this guide service next season and check for improper practices.

  11. #11
    Member dkwarthog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Mat-Su
    Posts
    2,150

    Default

    I agree 1000% with the OP..... Chickenspit guides pillaging the resource for a buck and lazy locals out "road hunting" by airplane. What really chaps my rear is that they do it in places nearby to civilization which puts them in direct competition with local meat hunters out on foot trying to put some food in their familys freezer. Disgraceful and immoral in my book..

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Girdwood
    Posts
    1,123

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by anchskier View Post
    I disagree with the phone/text/etc... part. It is clear that electronic communications can not be used to assist hunting, no matter what the time lag is.
    As one could infer - perhaps someone benefited from a post to the forum that originated two years ago, and that communication assisted them with a recent trip. I wonder what the Alaska statute actually says ... but will leave the discussion on the importance of the time lag and electronic communication to the F&G. If I was a hunter that was being prosecuted under such stringent interpretation, I'd hope you weren't on the jury.

    I'm not going to argue that the regulations are wrong, or your interpretation is incorrect.... but I do have to shake my head in disbelief as the language in the regulations seems to be another example of what I term "hunting game by flossing" regulation.

    Qualitatively, I doubt the F&G would prosecute a hunter that received communications from someone the day before they hunted and killed a moose as it would make sense that the benefit of communications would reset on a day by day basis (similarly to same day airborne) thus allowing the animal opportunity to flee/hide in the area or a reasonable sense of fair chase.

  13. #13
    Moderator bkmail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Palmer, AK.
    Posts
    4,115

    Default

    Going to have to agree with Frostbitten here....as he has made some valid points.
    Talon air in Soldotna flys hunters out for moose each fall, unguided hunts. However, they are not randomly dropping clients off where it's convenient, they are putting them on moose they have been watching all summer. They also drop caribou hunters off in front of the migration and will move you if the animals alter their path to put the hunter in front of the herd again.
    I wouldn't convict the guy the OP accuses of just yet, there may be more to the story. Could the air service be sightseeing on their way out with customers and he's just showing off the one that got away, or giving them a look at the country they have been hiking in all week. Who's to say?!
    There have been immoral guides that have been convicted of herding game with a plane, thats wrong in my opinion. But to use a plane to spot game is no different than using a spotting scope to glass across the mountain. Your scouting, not shooting from the plane. Does it give you an advantage, thats arguable for each scenario.
    My thoughts,
    BK

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Girdwood
    Posts
    1,123

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dkwarthog View Post
    I agree 1000% with the OP..... Chickenspit guides pillaging the resource for a buck and lazy locals out "road hunting" by airplane. What really chaps my rear is that they do it in places nearby to civilization which puts them in direct competition with local meat hunters out on foot trying to put some food in their familys freezer. Disgraceful and immoral in my book..
    When I hunt an area, have limited success, and see an airplane - I think to myself ... should've had "so and so" fly the area and do some scouting for me before my trip. But with caribou, bear, and moose in the freezer ... I've done pretty well without that service, despite pulling the trigger only one time.

    The OP just said the guide was in the area, but did not indicate whether any game was even taken. The OP further discussed a scenario (insinuates) where the guide may have been doing things that were illegal... which may have not been the case. Again, no discussion of any game actually being taken by the guide or the guided parties or lazy locals using airplanes to essentially same day airborne road hunt.

  15. #15
    Member muskeg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Hollis
    Posts
    963

    Default

    The Guide Law says:

    12 AAC 75.340. PROFESSIONAL ETHICS STANDARDS FOR GUIDES.

    (d) Field craft standards. All classes of guides shall

    (8) avoid using an aircraft in any manner to spot big game for the purpose of taking a specific animal,
    unless specifically authorized under statute or regulation;

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Girdwood
    Posts
    1,123

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by muskeg View Post
    The Guide Law says:

    12 AAC 75.340. PROFESSIONAL ETHICS STANDARDS FOR GUIDES.

    (d) Field craft standards. All classes of guides shall

    (8) avoid using an aircraft in any manner to spot big game for the purpose of taking a specific animal,
    unless specifically authorized under statute or regulation;
    While the language may seem pretty clear to you ... it's pretty vague to me, aka more "hunting game by flossing" regulation.
    Again, the OP said planes were flying by the area circling moose. No mention in the OP of the actual guide and guided hunters hunting these same specific critters, no mention of game down.

    On the positive, I recall a moose hunting show on TV (think filmed near Cordova), where the guide flew the guests into camp from a different direction than they had planned to hunt. I wondered why ... but in hindsight - that guide seemed to be trying to avoid any perception of using a plane to possibly see quarry and comply with the posted ethics.

  17. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wet eNuf View Post
    As one could infer - perhaps someone benefited from a post to the forum that originated two years ago, and that communication assisted them with a recent trip. I wonder what the Alaska statute actually says ... but will leave the discussion on the importance of the time lag and electronic communication to the F&G. If I was a hunter that was being prosecuted under such stringent interpretation, I'd hope you weren't on the jury.

    I'm not going to argue that the regulations are wrong, or your interpretation is incorrect.... but I do have to shake my head in disbelief as the language in the regulations seems to be another example of what I term "hunting game by flossing" regulation.

    Qualitatively, I doubt the F&G would prosecute a hunter that received communications from someone the day before they hunted and killed a moose as it would make sense that the benefit of communications would reset on a day by day basis (similarly to same day airborne) thus allowing the animal opportunity to flee/hide in the area or a reasonable sense of fair chase.
    Just to clarify, nothing in the regs refer to online posts as you mentioned. The regs specifically address radio and cellular and sattelite telephone communications (pg. 18).

    I agree that it would most likely not be an issue after a reasonable time, but that timeline is not stated. In most cases, I think you would be correct that the next day would be a whole new thing. Technically though, the regs say "...they may not be used to aid in taking of game." It is up to you whether you want to gamble on what makes sense to you versus what makes sense to an officer/judge/jury. I do see this a completely different thing than the same day airborne, although someone could double up and have a person fly over and call down to them using a radio or phone and they could really rack up the violations quickly...

  18. #18
    Member tyrex13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Anchorage/Soldotna
    Posts
    1,176

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by muskeg View Post
    The Guide Law says:

    12 AAC 75.340. PROFESSIONAL ETHICS STANDARDS FOR GUIDES.

    (d) Field craft standards. All classes of guides shall

    (8) avoid using an aircraft in any manner to spot big game for the purpose of taking a specific animal,
    unless specifically authorized under statute or regulation;
    Well there you go then... Thanks for this info

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    64

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wet eNuf View Post
    While the language may seem pretty clear to you ... it's pretty vague to me, aka more "hunting game by flossing" regulation.
    Again, the OP said planes were flying by the area circling moose. No mention in the OP of the actual guide and guided hunters hunting these same specific critters, no mention of game down.

    On the positive, I recall a moose hunting show on TV (think filmed near Cordova), where the guide flew the guests into camp from a different direction than they had planned to hunt. I wondered why ... but in hindsight - that guide seemed to be trying to avoid any perception of using a plane to possibly see quarry and comply with the posted ethics.
    The difference here is that a guide or guides are using planes to spot game and persue them same day. Now this is a percieved acusation and if true is not moral and is illegal. Let me give you a scenerio here...

    I am on a ridge glassing for hours and days not seeing anything much at all but am a dedicated hunter when a random plane lands behind me in the field... I run over to make sure everything is ok and the pilot says hey I've seen you sitting on this ridge and I wanted to tell you there is a monster bull just north of where you are.....

    Now you finish the story....

    Another scenerio is you have a buddy with a plane and he says hey lets go fly the area you are going to hunt tommorow...
    Is this unethical??? I say no to this scenerio..

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Girdwood
    Posts
    1,123

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by anchskier View Post
    Just to clarify, nothing in the regs refer to online posts as you mentioned. The regs specifically address radio and cellular and sattelite telephone communications (pg. 18).
    I see your point and it begs the question "why do the regs disallow cell phones but yet say nothing about land based phone lines." I had assumed land based lines were illegal ... but perhaps they are indeed legal.

    Qualitatively, there can be little difference in the effectiveness of communications whether received via cell phone, radio, internet, forum, email, text.. I would hate to have to pay an attorney to argue with the courts as to the correct interpretation.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... 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
  •