Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 25 of 25

Thread: Looks like RHAK is going public

  1. #21
    Member BRWNBR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Big Lake
    Posts
    9,772

    Default

    Mike I never said I didn't think turner was hiding anything. Just said that that article was pointed at him and getting him off the board by gaining public support. Nothing really to do with resident hunting issues....yet.

    Dropping the guide requirement will increase non resident hunting in Alaska. Which is backwards from what everyone is trying to do. The only reason a special interest group or individual would want MORE non res would be for establishing
    A bigger problem and getting the non res draw established.
    If you want less non resident in the field. Keep the guide requirement and limit their seasons so they aren't the same as residents. Make non res sheep season only in September, give residents the August portion to go out uncontested and kill the legal sheep first....simple fix. This isn't a huge complex issue. Unless we now have more issues than I was originally aware.
    Www.blackriverhunting.com
    Master guide 212

  2. #22
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Southcentral Alaska
    Posts
    567

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BRWNBR View Post
    If you want less non resident in the field. Keep the guide requirement and limit their seasons so they aren't the same as residents. Make non res sheep season only in September, give residents the August portion to go out uncontested and kill the legal sheep first....simple fix.
    This is actually a really good idea, assuming that residents are leaving as many "surplus" Rams on the mountain as we are led to believe. Let the largely incompetent or casual residents take a shot at the low hanging fruit early and then let the professionals come in afterwards and successfully find the smart rams that weren't easy for the locals to get.

    I think I sound snarkier than I mean to. It really is a good idea, if in fact the surplus exists that we are told exists. And, if that surplus doesn't exist, I would like to think that these fine outdoors men from the Lower-48 would still enjoy their half-month in the mountains as much as I do when I don't bag a trophy.

    When are you throwing your name in the hat for the BOG Jake?



    Although... I harvest Caribou meat in August and pretend to hunt sheep in September. Would this mean I need to get a new hobby for the fall?

    Also, I can not support using the guide requirement to limit non-res participation. If we only want so many non-res in the woods, we should only allow so many non-res in the woods. I'm ideologically opposed to limiting that population by allowing the wealthy hunters to come to Alaska while keeping the riffraff out.

  3. #23
    Forum Admin Brian M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Eagle River, AK
    Posts
    13,843

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BRWNBR View Post
    If you want less non resident in the field. Keep the guide requirement and limit their seasons so they aren't the same as residents. Make non res sheep season only in September, give residents the August portion to go out uncontested and kill the legal sheep first....simple fix. This isn't a huge complex issue. Unless we now have more issues than I was originally aware.
    Similar proposals have been made to the BOG. Unsurprisingly, all have been shot down.

  4. #24
    Member BRWNBR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Big Lake
    Posts
    9,772

    Default

    Of course they were shot down. APHA didn't submit them.ha Maybe this new RHAK
    Or whatever it is should get
    Together with APHA and talk some stuff out. Maybe try to find a common ground to submit a prop together? Save the guide industry and save the residents, address it as a common interest rather than a "your stupid and selfish".

    Put together s prop, email it to all the guides out there, get support that way instead of belittling people and an entire industry with a article.

    I can't run for the BOG. I make a living off Alaskas resources...conflict of interest. Lol
    Www.blackriverhunting.com
    Master guide 212

  5. #25
    Member oakman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Eagle River, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    1,269

    Default

    Exactly, wouldn't a resident hunter on the BOG have a conflict of interest when voting on proposals that would benefit residents?

    Quote Originally Posted by HikerDan View Post
    I don't agree that he has a conflict. Not within the context of the Board of Game, where conflict of interest is standard operating procedure. I don't say that to disparage any of the board members. They are who they are. It's up to the governors to appoint wise arbiters to the board, and governors don't generally do that. Rather, they appoint rent-seekers.

    Within that context Turner isn't any more conflicted than the next member.

    That said, he absolutely should have disclosed is association with the Nonresident Hunting Preservation Fund. Lesson learned I guess.

    I'm certainly not pleased with the composition of the BOG, and when we talk about "divisiveness" I think we have to recognize which user groups and interests are not represented on the BOG and we need to realize that being shut out of the deliberative process is as divisive as it gets.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

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
  •