Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 53

Thread: why is the aerial Kenai Peninsula wolf population control meeting in Barrow?

  1. #1
    Member mainer_in_ak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Delta Junction
    Posts
    4,078

    Default why is the aerial Kenai Peninsula wolf population control meeting in Barrow?

    Is this to keep out Kenai Peninsula residents and their voices or concerns out of the process? Why so far away?? Why do they have to vote all the way up there? It costs a lot of money to fly up there!?

    http://peninsulaclarion.com/news/2011-10-29/committee-backs-intensive-management-proposals#.TrMpgkOXu7s

    http://homertribune.com/2011/10/aerial-wolf-hunt-proposed-on-peninsula/



  2. #2
    Member homerdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    homer, alaska
    Posts
    3,922

    Default

    because the whole dam thing won't pass the sniff test.
    an incredible waste of money if it happens, and basically a welfare program for the few hunters who get to kill one of the moose that is not taken by a predator and therefor available for "reallocation to human harvest".
    15A is a moose population limited by habitat, and 15C is well within IM population numbers and has also been within IM harvest levels until the recent antler restriction. additionally, there is a stipulation in the AAC that states that a reduction in harvest that is "temporary in nature" is not cause for IM pred control.... and one of the other reasons this is an expensive boondoggle is that the state will be defending this ridiculous plan in court at significant cost, no doubt.... and saxby has already said that it is a loser.
    not only is this idea untenable and unfeasible, it is the height of fiscal irresposibility.
    funny that cora cambell was in homer the day of our AC meeting but didn't bother to drop by, and rossi made it to the soldotna meeting the next night... guess they didn't want to face any informed opposition... that would explain the meeting in barrow...

    http://homernews.com/stories/110211/news_hacv.shtml
    Alaska Board of Game 2015 tour... "Kicking the can down the road"
    http://www.alaskabackcountryhunters.org/

  3. #3
    Member AlpineEarl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Usually somewhere I don't want to be.
    Posts
    408

    Default

    It's so now Kenai residents will show up. It's far easier to push through an unpopular plan if nobody is there to object. The decision has already been made, public opinion is just an annoyance at this point. Rossi and Parnell cannot stand dissenting opinions. Another pathetic excuse for gonernance. A pox on the whole lot.

  4. #4
    Member Kotton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Anchorage ak
    Posts
    652

    Default

    Not much into the management of our game but should be...but thats a pretty smart move they made to keep the anti's from causing a ruckus like they usually try so they can hold up the court system's process just a bit longer...you can't drive your Subaru to barrow

    I know some of you will bash me from this post,but I remember seeing alot of big bulls just driving on the highway on the Kenai pen...Now your lucky to see a cow until you hit Ninilchik!!And I bet why that area holds some moose is because of the restrictive native land use,that helps on the hunting pressure and the good ol' boys no how to trap.

    I know we put a damper on moose,hopefully the new regs help in a couple of years but I no them wolves are not helping either,they no how to repopulate,so let's slow em down a wee bit

  5. #5
    Member cdubbin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    KP, the dingleberry of Alaska
    Posts
    1,749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kotton View Post
    Not much into the management of our game but should be...but thats a pretty smart move they made to keep the anti's from causing a ruckus like they usually try so they can hold up the court system's process just a bit longer...you can't drive your Subaru to barrow

    I know some of you will bash me from this post,but I remember seeing alot of big bulls just driving on the highway on the Kenai pen...Now your lucky to see a cow until you hit Ninilchik!!And I bet why that area holds some moose is because of the restrictive native land use,that helps on the hunting pressure and the good ol' boys no how to trap


    I know we put a damper on moose,hopefully the new regs help in a couple of years but I no them wolves are not helping either,they no how to repopulate,so let's slow em down a wee bit
    We have plenty of moose on the KP, wolves ain't just eating bulls, lol. We need people management, not predator management. The local bio conceded at
    the AC meeting that the habitat will not support any more moose, so a wolf hunt will likely result in a surplus cow hunt, which could drop the population
    below IM requirements. Who knows where it will end? A real can of worms, IMO.
    "– Gas boats are bad enough, autos are an invention of the devil, and airplanes are worse." ~Allen Hasselborg

  6. #6
    Member mainer_in_ak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Delta Junction
    Posts
    4,078

    Default

    Is there anything I can do to speak out against the barrow meeting? It just seems like the ultimate waste of money to do your business in secrecy away from the public eye. Does this meeting allow public attendance? Is that why it's so far away to keep people out?

  7. #7
    Member bushrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Now residing in Fairbanks from the bush
    Posts
    4,363

    Default

    At this point there is not much you can do, Michael. All BOG meetings allow public attendance. Not sure which ACs, if any, will decide to fly a representative to Barrow, but I'm hoping the Homer AC has someone willing to go and that they send him or her up there.

    But this is really getting out of line with the Board continuing to hear proposals out of cycle in other far-off regions, it is costing F&G a ton of money, costing Board support a ton of money, and it is a deliberate imo skewing of the public process put in place so that residents of a certain region have a real voice in it all. I have told Board members this, they seem to agree, but then it keeps happening. It just isn't right.

    Show up at the statewide meeting in Anch. in January to testify and give them an (respectful) earful. Write a letter to the editor of the paper (s).

  8. #8
    Member homerdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    homer, alaska
    Posts
    3,922

    Default

    not only is the Homer AC not sending anyone, but for the first time ever the bio's who wrote the pred control plan for thier region will not be in attendance either.
    so not only were they instructed by the BOG to write a proposal (not the way it is supposed to be...) and then told NOT to discuss it with the media or public (WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot, over!?) but they will not be at the meeting to defend thier proposal.
    you don't suppose that is because they were told to write an indefensible proposal that they don't believe in, basically against thier own best judgement, and couldn't both defend it and maintain proffesional integrity?.... just a theory
    Alaska Board of Game 2015 tour... "Kicking the can down the road"
    http://www.alaskabackcountryhunters.org/

  9. #9
    Member homerdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    homer, alaska
    Posts
    3,922

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by homerdave View Post
    not only is the Homer AC not sending anyone, but for the first time ever the bio's who wrote the pred control plan for thier region will not be in attendance either.
    so not only were they instructed by the BOG to write a proposal (not the way it is supposed to be...) and then told NOT to discuss it with the media or public (WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot, over!?) but they will not be at the meeting to defend thier proposal.
    you don't suppose that is because they were told to write an indefensible proposal that they don't believe in, basically against thier own best judgement, and couldn't both defend it and maintain proffesional integrity?.... just a theory
    just spoke to our bio, and the new plan is he will be going to barrow to present the proposal.
    however the feasibilty and operations plans have yet to be released, and it looks like they may just be handed to the board members at the meeting. how they will read 60+ pages and then make an informed decision beggers the imagination...
    Alaska Board of Game 2015 tour... "Kicking the can down the road"
    http://www.alaskabackcountryhunters.org/

  10. #10
    Supporting Member Amigo Will's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Wrangell
    Posts
    7,600

    Default

    Government will always be government no matter what it is called
    Now left only to be a turd in the forrest and the circle will be complete.Use me as I have used you

  11. #11
    Thewolfwatching
    Guest

    Default

    Will send rep when I can!

    Quote Originally Posted by cdubbin View Post
    We have plenty of moose on the KP, wolves ain't just eating bulls, lol. We need people management, not predator management. The local bio conceded at
    the AC meeting that the habitat will not support any more moose, so a wolf hunt will likely result in a surplus cow hunt, which could drop the population
    below IM requirements. Who knows where it will end? A real can of worms, IMO.

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    499

    Default

    If anyone who says there are plenty of moose on the KP, go flying. Talk to people that have flown for the last 20 years and they will tell you there isn't near what there used to be for moose, even in 15C. Seeing cows along the highway is no indicator of what is out there for moose. The cows come down there for easy food and protection for bears and wolves. Don't believe me? The only place I see cows with calves are by the road near homes or in one of the towns on the KP. I flew a remote portion of 15C out of about 25 cows only one cow had a calf with it and they were getting chased by a brown bear. Not a good sign to me. I know a person on the southern peninsula that had a wolf try to take a full grown healthy adult cow in their backyard and would have succeeded in killing the moose if he didn't interrupt the process, and he lives by the road. Not a good sign when wolves are eating moose by the road means they have put a hurtin' to moose in areas off the road, because wild wolves hate people the most out of almost any animal.

    15C should have been an IM even with spike/fork 50 inch 3 brow tine regulations and Fish and Game is realizing that this year with sealing the horns. Preliminary harvests are 12 50 plus inchers in 15C down from the average yearly reported harvest of 30 to 40. That's 1/3 of what was normally reported and my guess is with honest reporting the total bull harvest even with old regs should be down 1/3 of what was reported as well.

    If the KP had a substantial brown bear hunt I don't think we would even need wolf control. But with basically no calves surviving because of predation, then the moose population is dropping every year because there is no recruitment. Need to save some adults to try to increase calf recruitment.

    As far as the Homer AC, I have no idea what you guys are thinking down there? Don't want wolf control yet you guys allow a cow hunt yearly even as moose numbers are on a downhill slide. Doesn't make sense to me. Blame it on browse? Go take a drive in the caribou hills all kinds of untouched moose browse that most doesn't show any evidence of heavy moose browsing. Besides a few non-hunting members of the public at the soldotna AC almost everyone at the meeting was in favor of wolf control, and most of the people there really wanted a brown bear hunt. I'm not a huge wolf control advocate myself, although I support it in this instance because of a serious lack of brown bear hunt opportunities. I personally believe brown bears are causing more harm to the moose population than any other factor on the KP.

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,520

    Default

    Not sure I want to get into this but saying predation is the cause of the moose decline to me is not very defensible given the other variables happening on the peninsula. We all know the quality of the habitat is less because the older succession stages are not as good browse. Second, the population of the peninsula has gone from 10,000 30 years ago to over 50,000 and we kill hundreds of moose on the road - that impacts recruitment. Next the bull/cow ratio is less than 10 bulls per 100 cows and thus first estrus calves are not being produced in previous numbers. Second estrus calves do not survive the winter as well because of less growing time before winter. Predation can factor into this but to jump to the wolves/brown bear issue is really a leap. I would also claim that black bears are probably more of an issue if predation is a factor at all. Also, poor habitat can impact reproductive success. While I am not a moose biologist these are pretty basic variables for a population of animals.

    So we now have AC's and a Board of Game that is very pro-hunting making scientific decisions without the data or knowledge to do so and thus they are violating a basic tenet of scientific game management - they are running on emotion. People should be asking ADF&G why they are not doing the basic life history studies to define some of these parameters and whether models they are using are valid from the data set. A good peer review of some of these issues and positions of ADF&G would be good before anyone acts.

    One example of lack of knowledge is the answer to the question of ' Just how many brown bears are on the peninsula and what is their distribution and age/sex structure? I know no one has that answer except maybe the investigators of a recent genetic study but they have not released any data.

  14. #14
    Thewolfwatching
    Guest

    Default

    I’d give you rep if I could.. but.. they aren’t running on emotion they’re running on da dollar…
    Quote Originally Posted by Nerka View Post
    Not sure I want to get into this but saying predation is the cause of the moose decline to me is not very defensible given the other variables happening on the peninsula. We all know the quality of the habitat is less because the older succession stages are not as good browse. Second, the population of the peninsula has gone from 10,000 30 years ago to over 50,000 and we kill hundreds of moose on the road - that impacts recruitment. Next the bull/cow ratio is less than 10 bulls per 100 cows and thus first estrus calves are not being produced in previous numbers. Second estrus calves do not survive the winter as well because of less growing time before winter. Predation can factor into this but to jump to the wolves/brown bear issue is really a leap. I would also claim that black bears are probably more of an issue if predation is a factor at all. Also, poor habitat can impact reproductive success. While I am not a moose biologist these are pretty basic variables for a population of animals.

    So we now have AC's and a Board of Game that is very pro-hunting making scientific decisions without the data or knowledge to do so and thus they are violating a basic tenet of scientific game management - they are running on emotion. People should be asking ADF&G why they are not doing the basic life history studies to define some of these parameters and whether models they are using are valid from the data set. A good peer review of some of these issues and positions of ADF&G would be good before anyone acts.

    One example of lack of knowledge is the answer to the question of ' Just how many brown bears are on the peninsula and what is their distribution and age/sex structure? I know no one has that answer except maybe the investigators of a recent genetic study but they have not released any data.

  15. #15
    Member homerdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    homer, alaska
    Posts
    3,922

    Default

    33OD...
    15C has good numbers of moose, just. Few bulls. IM goals for population have been met every year since they were established. right now the population is at 2900, with a IM goal of 2500-3500. IM harvest levels have been met every year until last year, when emergency antler restriction were put in place. With the reduction in hunter effort we may see those regs lifted sooner than first thought.
    Your point about the sealing of antlers making for a reduction in legal moose is a good one, funny how the 50"+ harvest fell off so hard, eh?
    My buddy Tom is a flight instructor, and flies for kicks as or more often than most pilots, and he has been seeing more mid-size bulls this year post season than recent years, and plenty of cows.
    Our poor bull:cow ratio has more to do with overhunting than anything else, didn't you mention the population on the kenai quintupling?
    And you say "drive" out to the caribou hills. You know you didn't used to be able to do that. Much easier to get out ther with today's wheeler than it used to be. Increased access equals increased harvest.
    Another factor ignored by many is how wonderful snow machine trails are for wolves to travel on, and it seems that folks like to put them in right up the river where the moose winter.... Then they point out " well, every time I go snowmachining I see wolf kills" well duh!
    Maybe close the anchor river critical habitat area to snow machines if you want to save some moose, huh?
    Continued antler restrictions combined with additional cow hunts will be the quickest way to increase our bull:cow ratio and stay within IM goals.
    And as far as brown bear hunting on the KP did you realize there are 60 tags this year? And more than half (37) in the area from sterling to the head of Kachemak bay?
    That's DB309. Hunters should do their own control. Shoot a wolf, put in for brown bear, eat a few black bears, but don't go crying to the state.
    Alaska Board of Game 2015 tour... "Kicking the can down the road"
    http://www.alaskabackcountryhunters.org/

  16. #16
    Member MaximumPenetration's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    374

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nerka View Post
    Not sure I want to get into this but saying predation is the cause of the moose decline to me is not very defensible given the other variables happening on the peninsula. We all know the quality of the habitat is less because the older succession stages are not as good browse. Second, the population of the peninsula has gone from 10,000 30 years ago to over 50,000 and we kill hundreds of moose on the road - that impacts recruitment. Next the bull/cow ratio is less than 10 bulls per 100 cows and thus first estrus calves are not being produced in previous numbers. Second estrus calves do not survive the winter as well because of less growing time before winter. Predation can factor into this but to jump to the wolves/brown bear issue is really a leap. I would also claim that black bears are probably more of an issue if predation is a factor at all. Also, poor habitat can impact reproductive success. While I am not a moose biologist these are pretty basic variables for a population of animals.

    So we now have AC's and a Board of Game that is very pro-hunting making scientific decisions without the data or knowledge to do so and thus they are violating a basic tenet of scientific game management - they are running on emotion. People should be asking ADF&G why they are not doing the basic life history studies to define some of these parameters and whether models they are using are valid from the data set. A good peer review of some of these issues and positions of ADF&G would be good before anyone acts.

    One example of lack of knowledge is the answer to the question of ' Just how many brown bears are on the peninsula and what is their distribution and age/sex structure? I know no one has that answer except maybe the investigators of a recent genetic study but they have not released any data.
    Nerka,

    I realize you're a self proclaimed expert on salmon runs on the peninsula, but don't pretend to know much about the moose population on the KP unless you acknowledge there are 5000 times as many brown bears as fish and game admits.

    I've talked extensively to people that spend the majority o their summers around Tustamena lake and Caribou hills. These people can tell you our situation, and it's bleak. They tell fish and game until their blue in the face and the phony biologists disregard their comments.

    I personally know several people that illegally "ventilate" multiple brown bears every year (illegal yet very moral and right), yet the numbers keep growing. Maybe mauled and dead children in neighborhoods out in kasilof and funny river will open the eyes of the game managers.
    An unarmed man is subject, an armed man is a citizen.

  17. #17
    Thewolfwatching
    Guest

    Default

    Well, when there are no more wolves to kill they have to blame the bears.. 48 states already have the stats… Are we really that far behind?
    Instead of looking at the simple point of, “WOW, there’s a lot of bears.” Try looking at WHY there’s a lot of bears…or coyotes or golden eagles etc… Not rocket science by any means…

  18. #18
    Member bushrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Now residing in Fairbanks from the bush
    Posts
    4,363

    Default Condoning illegal brown bear harvests? Pshaw

    MaximumPenetration,

    Much of your last post was pretty disturbing. Especially this:
    Quote Originally Posted by MaximumPenetration
    I personally know several people that illegally "ventilate" multiple brown bears every year (illegal yet very moral and right),....
    Not who we are here, don't want anyone reading this to think that. Illegally shooting (or "ventilating") brown bears every year is not moral or right.

    You also claim that there are "
    5000 times as many brown bears as fish and game admits." Sheesh, if F&G said there are 5 brown bears, that means - according to your claim - there are 25, 000 (twenty-five thousand) bears. If F&G posits 100 bears, you're saying the reality is 500,000 (five-hundred thousand) brown bears.

    Pshaw.

    Agree or disagree with the proposed wolf-control plan on the Kenai, let's not go down this road, conflating facts with fiction, condoning illegal behavior.



  19. #19
    Member MaximumPenetration's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    374

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bushrat View Post
    [SIZE=4][FONT=times new roman]MaximumPenetration,

    Much of your last post was pretty disturbing. Especially this:


    Not who we are here, don't want anyone reading this to think that. Illegally shooting (or "ventilating") brown bears every year is not moral or right.

    You also claim that there are "
    5000 times as many brown bears as fish and game admits." Sheesh, if F&G said there are 5 brown bears, that means - according to your claim - there are 25, 000 (twenty-five thousand) bears. If F&G posits 100 bears, you're saying the reality is 500,000 (five-hundred thousand) brown bears.

    Pshaw.

    Agree or disagree with the proposed wolf-control plan on the Kenai, let's not go down this road, conflating facts with fiction, condoning illegal behavior.


    Bushrat,

    I've been following this thread for a while. I support aerial wolf hunting. I chimed in about bears in response to other people. And the number 5000 was hyperbole, obviously. The point is that we have way more bears than they'll admit, and nobody can tell me why they won't do something about it.

    And yes, killing every brown bear that a person can get a shot at is MORAL and RIGHT. Brown bears are disgusting creatures. When a mature male of a species will murder its own offspring so the female will go into heat, it is a creature not worthy of existence.
    An unarmed man is subject, an armed man is a citizen.

  20. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MaximumPenetration View Post
    Brown bears are disgusting creatures...it is a creature not worthy of existence.
    WOW. Unbelievable.

Page 1 of 3 123 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
  •