Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Tok tag numbers cut for Residents

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

    Default Tok tag numbers cut for Residents

    It appears that the BOG approved the first portion of proposal 81, which included a full 10% of all sheep tags going to NR, instead of the "up to" 10%. Last I checked, NR made up about 5-6% of applicants for the Tok. So their draw chances basically doubled, and residents decreased.

    So next year you get to apply for 1 of 72 tags instead of 80 with an "up too" 10% going to NRs.

    http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/static-f/...ry_actions.pdf

    Funny how the BOG is willing to take away sheep hunting opportunity from residents and give it to NR, but not the other way around.

  2. #2
    Member kahahawai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    2,443

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bambistew View Post
    It appears that the BOG approved the first portion of proposal 81, which included a full 10% of all sheep tags going to NR, instead of the "up to" 10%. Last I checked, NR made up about 5-6% of applicants for the Tok. So their draw chances basically doubled, and residents decreased.

    So next year you get to apply for 1 of 72 tags instead of 80 with an "up too" 10% going to NRs.

    http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/static-f/...ry_actions.pdf

    Funny how the BOG is willing to take away sheep hunting opportunity from residents and give it to NR, but not the other way around.
    Wow! You just stirred up a hornets nest ...

  3. #3
    Member oakman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Eagle River, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    1,172

    Default

    Oh, I'm totally PISSED about this one. Going to start writing letters this weekend. What a crock!

  4. #4
    Member Vince's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Fairbanks most the time, Ancorage some of the time,& on the road Kicking Anti's all the time
    Posts
    8,989

    Default

    funny how the residents asked for many such things in many of thier props..... this is how the unit 14 ended up that way also.. and they removed the UP to language.. its 10%.... there were several other resident submitted props that didnt pass.. because it Would have hurt them MORE.. when the res typically gets 97% of the tags. and they asked for a 10% non res... crap like this happens when people are Not involved, and dont know whats really going on..
    Quote Originally Posted by Bambistew View Post
    It appears that the BOG approved the first portion of proposal 81, which included a full 10% of all sheep tags going to NR, instead of the "up to" 10%. Last I checked, NR made up about 5-6% of applicants for the Tok. So their draw chances basically doubled, and residents decreased.

    So next year you get to apply for 1 of 72 tags instead of 80 with an "up too" 10% going to NRs.

    http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/static-f/...ry_actions.pdf

    Funny how the BOG is willing to take away sheep hunting opportunity from residents and give it to NR, but not the other way around.
    "If you are on a continuous search to be offended, you will always find what you are looking for; even when it isn't there."

    meet on face book here

  5. #5
    Member Vince's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Fairbanks most the time, Ancorage some of the time,& on the road Kicking Anti's all the time
    Posts
    8,989

    Default

    and this one was INTENDED ... to be a boon for Residents family by the writer.. 10% non res.. with a percentage allocated for second degree kindred.. so no guides were needed.. you can thank a fellow AK hunter for it.
    "If you are on a continuous search to be offended, you will always find what you are looking for; even when it isn't there."

    meet on face book here

  6. #6
    Member homerdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    homer, alaska
    Posts
    3,922

    Default

    Aw, heck, what's the big deal?
    if HB 161 goes through we can all just bid on the new unrestricted governors tag SCI will auction... Might even get a 10 day jump on the season the way the bill is written. And SCI ( or whichever big org gets it) will get to keep all the money! How cool is that!!???



    I reckon an august 1st tag oughta bring in $500k or so.....
    Alaska Board of Game 2015 tour... "Kicking the can down the road"
    http://www.alaskabackcountryhunters.org/

  7. #7

    Default

    Might as well have a full on resident draw only, non-res harvest card season.

  8. #8
    Member BRWNBR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Big Lake
    Posts
    8,452

    Default

    Lol you sheep hunters are funny! Kodiak brown bear allocation to non res is about. 30%!! Be thankfull they only wanna hand out 10 percent to the money side of things. They have it set up on Kodiak so a guide can make a living with out worry of draw odds. More sheep areas could someday end up like that.
    Www.blackriverhunting.com
    Master guide 212

  9. #9
    Member tlingitwarrior's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    2,258

    Default

    Not to hijack the thread, but did anyone else notice how many non-residents drew the Unimak bear tag?
    In 1492 Native Americans discovered Columbus lost at sea
    _________________________________________________

    If I come across as an arrogant, know-it-all jerk, it's because I am

  10. #10
    Member AK Ray's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    South Central
    Posts
    2,541

    Default

    Proposal 81 was submitted by two TMA sheep guides. It should be no surprise as to its meaning for them and the results. The rest of the proposal not carried resolves some kind if guide-client agreement issue for the TMA. It would be great if the 50% of the 10% NR tags go to second degree kindred hunters, but it is unlikely that would pass. Why would a guide put that into their proposal?

    Since this proposal was carried forward in part during the Fairbanks meeting your letters and comments are way too late. You should have been writing letters in January. But as Vince stated resident hunters have been proposing 10% NR tags for years. Now that's happened. Be careful what you ask for Joe Public, you may get it.

  11. #11
    Member ramhunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    699

    Default

    [QUOTE=BRWNBR;1372900]Lol you sheep hunters are funny! Kodiak brown bear allocation to non res is about. 30%!! Be thankfull they only wanna hand out 10 percent to the money side of things. They have it set up on Kodiak so a guide can make a living with out worry of draw odds. More sheep areas could someday end up like that.[/QUOTE)

    I'm ok with the 10 percent to non-res, now if the rest of the state was 10 percent only to non-res! I wish the sheep hunting was as good as Kodiak bear hunting!
    "Mountains are not fair or unfair, they are just dangerous" ~ Reinhold Messner

  12. #12

    Default

    Kodiak guides who have refuge concessions are cutting a fat hog for sure, especially those with more than one area. Interesting how a second degree of kindred NR is pooled up with all the AK Residents for drawing tags, but a guided NR can be guaranteed a tag on the refuge if he/she has the money.
    I expect before my time on this earth is over the entire state of AK will be a drawing hunt for sheep. The change is for sure a step in the wrong direction for AK Residents. But if I lived in Nebraska I would be smiling.

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    anchorage alaska
    Posts
    83

    Default

    Yeah. The Unimak tag is almost %50 non-res. 11 of the 24 went non-resident. I about bit through my lip when I saw that.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,919

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Justin View Post
    I expect before my time on this earth is over the entire state of AK will be a drawing hunt for sheep. .
    Sadly I would expect to see that sooner then later

  15. #15
    Member BRWNBR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Big Lake
    Posts
    8,452

    Default

    Some of us have been saying it will go drawing long before parts of 14 and 13 even went. Where's next....
    Www.blackriverhunting.com
    Master guide 212

  16. #16
    Member AK Troutbum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Chugiak, AK.
    Posts
    1,526

    Default

    D*mn, you guy's are making me think about becoming a NR just so I can have a better chance of drawing tags. I have to make lite of it, otherwise I just get really pissed off.

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    907
    Posts
    255

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vince View Post
    funny how the residents asked for many such things in many of thier props.....
    It is not one bit funny.

    There should be a law passed that essentially states that ANYTIME the BOG is faced with limiting a hunt ALL non resident pressure must be removed from that hunt.

    Maybe (well...obviously to many of us now) residents are asking the wrong authority to limit non residents?

    Maybe residents should be asking a legislator to introduce a bill that would require the BOG to 'just do it' and see where that goes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Vince View Post
    this is how the unit 14 ended up that way also..
    The fact of the matter is guides and their NR hunters absolutely POUNDED 14 because the BOG let them and in the end the BOG fixed the Draw in 14 to favor of guides not residents. It's not like there we're not proposals put before the BOG long before things got bad. Just like what's happened at TMA and what is or will be happening every time the need to limit a hunt comes to the BOG table.

    The BOG pledges absolute allegiance to the special interests of guides. And, that's not funny.

    Quote Originally Posted by Vince View Post
    were several other resident submitted props that didnt pass.. because it Would have hurt them MORE.. .
    Right...residents are just too stupid to write a proposal but guides who write proposals (81) make sense to the BOG and then you want us to believe the BOG is doing us residents a favor. Now that right there is funny dude!

    Quote Originally Posted by Vince View Post
    crap like this happens when people are Not involved, and dont know whats really going on..
    WHAT??....we know whats going on. We're involved.

    The problem is:

    The BOG pledges absolute allegiance to the special interests of guides even when it's crystal clear residents are involved and/or at least know whats really going on.

    So yah, we're probably going to have to go to the legislature to bring the BOG into alignment with the law.

    btw...I'm not on a continuous search to be offended but spoutin off that the BOG is looking out for residents, that residents are too stupid to write a proposal and that the BOG is not in the business of protecting the special interests of the guide industry above all other interests AND then expect a person to believe your statements are not offensive....well...that is a little too much to ask especially given the condition of our resource issues and diminishing opportunities to harvest all prey species...statewide.

  18. #18

    Default

    [QUOTE=ramhunter;1373056]
    Quote Originally Posted by BRWNBR View Post
    Lol you sheep hunters are funny! Kodiak brown bear allocation to non res is about. 30%!! Be thankfull they only wanna hand out 10 percent to the money side of things. They have it set up on Kodiak so a guide can make a living with out worry of draw odds. More sheep areas could someday end up like that.[/QUOTE)

    I'm ok with the 10 percent to non-res, now if the rest of the state was 10 percent only to non-res! I wish the sheep hunting was as good as Kodiak bear hunting!
    I agree. A 10% allocation is fair and should be what is held across the state. Just to piss on anyone's day some more, there weren't 80 TMA picks this fall, there were 60. A reduction in sheep numbers and the fact that it is managed as a trophy hunt.

    And for the author's of this proposal, yes they are both guides, but they are some of the finest there are out there that ACTUALLY care about the resource. If you understood the whole issue of what is happening with guides, etc. this would make more sense and I am all for doing the 10% allocation for non-resident hunters. It should just be implemented across the state. A draw for non residents only.

  19. #19

    Default

    Its all about money! think about it how much revenue does a resident tag give back to the state, not much! But a non-res tag there are, guide fees, outfitter/transport fees and etc. into the mix and theres 10-30k everytime. Not only do guides benefit, but so does the state. I'm just saying if you want to change things get involved, all you have to do is go to advisory meetings voice your opinion, or go further and write a proposal to change worse thing that can happen is you get more eyes and ears involved in the situation. I looked over all of the proposals for this years changes, and there were only a handful of good proposals that had legitimate reasoning and data to reinforce there argument. FYI be precise and to the detail and have good instances or examples of why it would benefit everyone not just a small group of people.

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
  •