Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: What are we doing at the flats?

  1. #1
    New member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    11

    Default What are we doing at the flats?

    I have seen numerous discussions about the palmer hay flats, the new bridge, and proposed restrictions on ATV use on this site. I have hunted the flats for a few years now with friends and I feel I have made a very small footprint in this area, if any. I will not put names on here as I feel it is counterproductive in this setting, but the “improvements” I have seen (not including the bridge) and discussion with land managers were odd to say the least.

    The first point I would like to make is everyone needs to realize the difference between ATVers and hunters. I, as a hunter, utilize an ATV to access areas to recreate and put meat in my freezer and on my kid’s plates. I use the trail to transport gear and equipment to my hunting areas, and without the use of an ATV I am sure we would all be stacked up on the trail next to the bird watchers in what I call machine gun alley. The ATVers I talk about are over at Jim’s creek going 50 mph across the sand and mud, pushing the limits of their machines to see how fast they can go. These are generally different groups than the hunters you typically see on the flats. I don’t know one person that is excited about to the flats for a good ride, but I could be wrong…

    To address the topic of banning ATVs, I feel it is a drastic step to take and should only be taken as a last resort and carefully enacted with fact, not the opinion of the few. I have seen so many areas throughout the state restricted from ATV use pushing hunters out the back door and allowing other users to take precedence. If we step back and look, hunters are usually the ones active in preserving or protecting these lands. Other users are bystanders often reluctant to get involved with preservation projects or will not allow themselves to team up with hunters to compound their efforts.

    Hunters are putting food on their tables and have just as much right as a bird watcher or other users to access the resources of the state. Hunters have used the trail to get away from other users and access areas away from non-hunters. I have not seen the necessary effort put into addressing the trail concerns to agree with restricting ATV usage. I see efforts to address trails or areas used by non-hunters, but little to no efforts to address the most affected sections of trail to ensure less impact from ATV use. If we are going to restrict them, should we not take actions to lessen the impact before making this decision? The only effort to lesson ATV impact (that is noticeable) are the steaks depicting where the trail is. Have we looked at alternate routes or available protections for materials within the trail like the first mile or so?

    Here is where much of my opinion comes from: I was confronted on the flats (on my ATV) and had a discussion with individuals laying down the matting for the first mile or so of trail. I felt as though I was being reprimanded for recreating there, which is unacceptable in my opinion. My thoughts about the matting was not why this was being done, because the matting is beneficial both to the flats and to me as a hunter, but if the concerns are for the areas further out which are cut by the tide why are we not addressing them in the same or similar manner? Why are we not finding a solution instead of making more restrictions? During that discussion I asked how to volunteer my time and efforts into this project and was told it wasn’t necessary, more like I was not welcome. I know numerous people who have suggested solutions, but are treated as an outsider.

    The improvements made to the parking lot are nice, but remember we are talking about a recreational area we want to preserve, not make an amusement park… right? Talk about a nature center is amusing to me, as we talk about having little impact on the current status of the flats. What do you think will happen when we start building these structures and bringing in all these additional people? What environmental impact will they have on this area? When will you tell us we can’t hunt there anymore?

    I do appreciate all the efforts and time people have invested in this area, but I urge you to step back and look at the big picture. We all want to use this area for our own reasons, and we want it to remain accessible. Don’t push out people willing to help preserve the flats, invite us in and understand we are all passionate about this area.

  2. #2

    Default

    SO......do I understand that your poor, poor, poor children will starve to death with "No Food on their Plates" without the use of an ATV......???

    Idea.......sell the ATV and feed the children with the proceeds.

    For the record I do like ATV machines. I like them 20 miles from the nearest road with a trashed Transmission, and the owner looking at a Looooooong walk home.

    I like that the man with "Bait Station Permit # 50451" and Alaska Hunting Lic. # 1356219 who feels that "HE" is exempt from regulations, and "HE" can use his ATV to illegally enter the Chugach NATIONAL Forest, and remove (at least) some of his bait station crap. (Mile 5.3 Hope Road, Utility pole # 68).

    Sometimes when I talk or write my feelings........I am not clear about how I truly FEEL..............I Hate ATV's.





    Quote Originally Posted by dago View Post
    I have seen numerous discussions about the palmer hay flats, the new bridge, and proposed restrictions on ATV use on this site. I have hunted the flats for a few years now with friends and I feel I have made a very small footprint in this area, if any. I will not put names on here as I feel it is counterproductive in this setting, but the “improvements” I have seen (not including the bridge) and discussion with land managers were odd to say the least.

    The first point I would like to make is everyone needs to realize the difference between ATVers and hunters. I, as a hunter, utilize an ATV to access areas to recreate and put meat in my freezer and on my kid’s plates. I use the trail to transport gear and equipment to my hunting areas, and without the use of an ATV I am sure we would all be stacked up on the trail next to the bird watchers in what I call machine gun alley. The ATVers I talk about are over at Jim’s creek going 50 mph across the sand and mud, pushing the limits of their machines to see how fast they can go. These are generally different groups than the hunters you typically see on the flats. I don’t know one person that is excited about to the flats for a good ride, but I could be wrong…

    To address the topic of banning ATVs, I feel it is a drastic step to take and should only be taken as a last resort and carefully enacted with fact, not the opinion of the few. I have seen so many areas throughout the state restricted from ATV use pushing hunters out the back door and allowing other users to take precedence. If we step back and look, hunters are usually the ones active in preserving or protecting these lands. Other users are bystanders often reluctant to get involved with preservation projects or will not allow themselves to team up with hunters to compound their efforts.

    Hunters are putting food on their tables and have just as much right as a bird watcher or other users to access the resources of the state. Hunters have used the trail to get away from other users and access areas away from non-hunters. I have not seen the necessary effort put into addressing the trail concerns to agree with restricting ATV usage. I see efforts to address trails or areas used by non-hunters, but little to no efforts to address the most affected sections of trail to ensure less impact from ATV use. If we are going to restrict them, should we not take actions to lessen the impact before making this decision? The only effort to lesson ATV impact (that is noticeable) are the steaks depicting where the trail is. Have we looked at alternate routes or available protections for materials within the trail like the first mile or so?

    Here is where much of my opinion comes from: I was confronted on the flats (on my ATV) and had a discussion with individuals laying down the matting for the first mile or so of trail. I felt as though I was being reprimanded for recreating there, which is unacceptable in my opinion. My thoughts about the matting was not why this was being done, because the matting is beneficial both to the flats and to me as a hunter, but if the concerns are for the areas further out which are cut by the tide why are we not addressing them in the same or similar manner? Why are we not finding a solution instead of making more restrictions? During that discussion I asked how to volunteer my time and efforts into this project and was told it wasn’t necessary, more like I was not welcome. I know numerous people who have suggested solutions, but are treated as an outsider.

    The improvements made to the parking lot are nice, but remember we are talking about a recreational area we want to preserve, not make an amusement park… right? Talk about a nature center is amusing to me, as we talk about having little impact on the current status of the flats. What do you think will happen when we start building these structures and bringing in all these additional people? What environmental impact will they have on this area? When will you tell us we can’t hunt there anymore?

    I do appreciate all the efforts and time people have invested in this area, but I urge you to step back and look at the big picture. We all want to use this area for our own reasons, and we want it to remain accessible. Don’t push out people willing to help preserve the flats, invite us in and understand we are all passionate about this area.

  3. #3
    Member akblackdawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    1,456

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dago View Post
    I have seen numerous discussions about the palmer hay flats, the new bridge, and proposed restrictions on ATV use on this site. I have hunted the flats for a few years now with friends and I feel I have made a very small footprint in this area, if any. I will not put names on here as I feel it is counterproductive in this setting, but the “improvements” I have seen (not including the bridge) and discussion with land managers were odd to say the least.

    The first point I would like to make is everyone needs to realize the difference between ATVers and hunters. I, as a hunter, utilize an ATV to access areas to recreate and put meat in my freezer and on my kid’s plates. I use the trail to transport gear and equipment to my hunting areas, and without the use of an ATV I am sure we would all be stacked up on the trail next to the bird watchers in what I call machine gun alley. The ATVers I talk about are over at Jim’s creek going 50 mph across the sand and mud, pushing the limits of their machines to see how fast they can go. These are generally different groups than the hunters you typically see on the flats. I don’t know one person that is excited about to the flats for a good ride, but I could be wrong…

    To address the topic of banning ATVs, I feel it is a drastic step to take and should only be taken as a last resort and carefully enacted with fact, not the opinion of the few. I have seen so many areas throughout the state restricted from ATV use pushing hunters out the back door and allowing other users to take precedence. If we step back and look, hunters are usually the ones active in preserving or protecting these lands. Other users are bystanders often reluctant to get involved with preservation projects or will not allow themselves to team up with hunters to compound their efforts.

    Hunters are putting food on their tables and have just as much right as a bird watcher or other users to access the resources of the state. Hunters have used the trail to get away from other users and access areas away from non-hunters. I have not seen the necessary effort put into addressing the trail concerns to agree with restricting ATV usage. I see efforts to address trails or areas used by non-hunters, but little to no efforts to address the most affected sections of trail to ensure less impact from ATV use. If we are going to restrict them, should we not take actions to lessen the impact before making this decision? The only effort to lesson ATV impact (that is noticeable) are the steaks depicting where the trail is. Have we looked at alternate routes or available protections for materials within the trail like the first mile or so?

    Here is where much of my opinion comes from: I was confronted on the flats (on my ATV) and had a discussion with individuals laying down the matting for the first mile or so of trail. I felt as though I was being reprimanded for recreating there, which is unacceptable in my opinion. My thoughts about the matting was not why this was being done, because the matting is beneficial both to the flats and to me as a hunter, but if the concerns are for the areas further out which are cut by the tide why are we not addressing them in the same or similar manner? Why are we not finding a solution instead of making more restrictions? During that discussion I asked how to volunteer my time and efforts into this project and was told it wasn’t necessary, more like I was not welcome. I know numerous people who have suggested solutions, but are treated as an outsider.

    The improvements made to the parking lot are nice, but remember we are talking about a recreational area we want to preserve, not make an amusement park… right? Talk about a nature center is amusing to me, as we talk about having little impact on the current status of the flats. What do you think will happen when we start building these structures and bringing in all these additional people? What environmental impact will they have on this area? When will you tell us we can’t hunt there anymore?

    I do appreciate all the efforts and time people have invested in this area, but I urge you to step back and look at the big picture. We all want to use this area for our own reasons, and we want it to remain accessible. Don’t push out people willing to help preserve the flats, invite us in and understand we are all passionate about this area.

    Dago, you wrote a good statement, many feel the same way. But I suggest you go ahead and read some of the other posts on here, and some of the older posts from last winter/spring adressing many of your same concerns. Much of this is answered and easily found, just don't have time to reply fully now when the answers are at your fingertips on this forum. $500,000-700,000 is one answer to your question about why matting isn't all the way out, write a check and we will be putting it down. Most other things you address have been looked at and considered and discussed fully. Feel free to call if you want to talk about more of it. Bud
    Wasilla

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Wasilla, AK
    Posts
    321

    Default

    You are right maybe in one sense, that being that the feed the family argument is not the best one as most folks in urban areas are wage earners and able to feed their family. The best argument I feel against haters like you is the one of sportsmanship and the skills that should be preserved in humans that harvest a resource not only for food but to preserve hunting skills in an uncertain world. I eat what I hunt, but that is not why I go hunting, just simply to eat. I go waterfowl hunting to preserve one of Americans greatest heritage. Many of the greatest Americans that built this country (I know many liberals would rather that it was not built) were waterfowlers. In fact, some of the greatest environments for waterfowling just happen to be within a radius of 100 miles of Washington DC. I know politicians are sometimes not the greatest people and how some even get into the white house is really amazeing, 2008 may be a good example, but, by and large, luminaries from the business, political and sports world have been avid waterfowlers and many the greatest supporters of wetlands conservation. Being a sportsman teaches people to play fair, work hard and accomplish goals. To love waterfowl and the hunting of same is to love your country, the land, water and resources. I would propose to make this short that indeed the Greenpeace loons that attack and harass whaling ships from Japan were never taught sportsmanship.

  5. #5
    New member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    11

    Default

    It is amazing the one aspect of my comment which was commented on was the point that I feed my family what I harvest. I would hope everyone does this… I admit, my kids would not starve if I was unable to use at ATV, so get off your high horse and take your pack off AGL4now. Not every person respects the land, which includes non-hunters and hunters alike.

    One reason I felt I should comments is the lack of cooperation from all sides, but I do see some trying to take action and I will put in everything I can to help. I hope we all learn soon what we can do as a group before it is too late and the flats are useless. One pointer for you boat users who are sitting idly by, you are probably next. I assume someone has you in the back of their mind also as jets or mud motors will cause significant erosion to the same tidal areas and cuts being used to target ATV’s.

    Maybe we just allow regulation to save the flats, not actual hands on work by all the users… I’m sure it will work out to benefit everyone… right?

  6. #6
    Member DownEastah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Chugiak
    Posts
    322

    Default

    It's fun to read about preserving the tradition of hunting and being a sportsman. I believe both Lewis and Clark had Sportsman 800's to get them where they wanted to go. Sorry just find it funny that some would pull the traditional card when talking about using atv's. Iam sure our founding fathers would slap you across the face and tell you to stop being so **** lazy.

  7. #7
    Member AK375HH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    610

    Default

    I like using my ATV to haul the decoys out at cottonwood. It allows me to get out away from the people walking and believe it or not we bounce ducks back and forth because there is good distance between us. If they ban ATV's I will use my surface drive boat. Yes the surface drive does dig a nice drainage channel when I cross mud with it as well...people just want to blame the ATV's. When/If the time comes, I will debate it at a podium if possible. bickering back and forth on here doesn't seem to do much.
    It's not skybusting if you fold em'.

  8. #8
    Member AK375HH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    610

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DownEastah View Post
    It's fun to read about preserving the tradition of hunting and being a sportsman. I believe both Lewis and Clark had Sportsman 800's to get them where they wanted to go. Sorry just find it funny that some would pull the traditional card when talking about using atv's. Iam sure our founding fathers would slap you across the face and tell you to stop being so **** lazy.

    Oh because they walked in...No, Horses. a 60' barge, canoes, and pirogues.

    Air boats leave a ditch-like trail which can channel water when used in the same spot repeatedly, same as an ATV.
    It's not skybusting if you fold em'.

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AK375HH View Post

    Air boats leave a ditch-like trail which can channel water when used in the same spot repeatedly, same as an ATV.
    What do airboats have to do with Cottonwood?

  10. #10
    Member kwackkillncrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    chugiak, ak
    Posts
    1,035

    Default

    i miss swamp man
    I will never be a "Prostaffer" its not that I am not good enough
    but its because I refuse to pimp products for free.

  11. #11
    Member AK375HH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    610

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by extrema View Post
    What do airboats have to do with Cottonwood?
    The point of the statement was if we're worried about Atv damage. Let's put everything under the microscope as well. Airboats are plenty capable of creating canals.
    It's not skybusting if you fold em'.

  12. #12
    Member alaskabliss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    1,419

    Default

    Well this thread turned into a comedy show in a hurry!!!

    Here are some key points:

    Never use your children and a plate of food in any argument... Ever.
    Don't compare traditional hunting, that incudes an atv, as an argument.
    Don't use an atv for bear baiting near the Chugach national forest, more specificaly near utility pole# 68.
    If people are trying to ban atv's, use a surface drive and really tear the place up, and blame the atv's some more.

    I think the whole approach on this thread is wrong and maybe it needs a do over. Maybe look at the issues and bring some suggestions for them.
    Look at the whole picture and not focus on your kids dinner plate. And lets be honest, not many kids are really enjoying duck for dinner, let alone supplementing there food with it.

    Wouldn't it be cool if they took the $500-$700K and built a bunch of blinds on the flats that we could walk to? Furnished with a stove and dinner plates to cook fresh ducks for the kids?
    Ignorance is not Bliss, it's insanity

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
  •