Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 108

Thread: Guess I wont be taking my family hunting

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Sitka
    Posts
    150

    Unhappy Guess I wont be taking my family hunting

    Over the next few years I have plans to take my father and brother hunting here in Unit 4. Well..this is new and makes me a little sad.

    "Brown bears, mountain goats, and sheep taken by
    nonresidents that are personally accompanied by
    resident relatives within the second-degree of kindred
    will count towards the bag limit of both the resident
    relative and the nonresident. Implementation of this is
    expected to occur between now and July 1, 2018, the
    exact implementation date will be noticed in the hunting
    regulations and other materials."

    Furthermore if they harvest a bear I am out of all every four year areas.

  2. #2
    Member BRWNBR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Big Lake
    Posts
    8,434

    Default

    Yup. One of the stupid regs they put into play. Wouldn't surprise me that one don't last real long. I'd get busy before that regulation is put into place!!
    Www.blackriverhunting.com
    Master guide 212

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Sitka
    Posts
    150

    Default

    I just sent out an e-mail. We are just going to have to push for this fall and next spring. The bummer is I have a plan for Kodiak the following year and this is going to really screw that plan if it goes into place sooner. I'll give up my dream trip to put my dad on a bear no big deal.. just makes me a little sad. I moved here to get away from the regulations in OR/WA. Looks like they followed me.

  4. #4

    Default

    yep you have the Alaska Professional Hunters Association (guides) for this change and the BOG who voted on this with incorrect data. even when the BOG was given the correct data, they did not want to change their vote. I believe only Pete P and Teresa S and Kip F were the only BOG member that voted against it. Nate T, Stosh H both guides and chair ted s sympathetic to guides voted for it Dave B also voted for it.
    The correct data presented to the BOG did not justified passing this proposal.

  5. #5
    Premium Member kasilofchrisn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Central Kenai Peninsula
    Posts
    4,886

    Default

    Personally I don't have a problem with this.
    I think we have had it pretty good with this law for a long time.
    What's the justification for leaving it as is?
    They can still hunt here sans guide. That's a pretty good deal IMHO.
    As our hunting opportunity in this state gets more and more crowded etc. this should help just a bit.

    Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk
    "The closer I get to nature the farther I am from idiots"

    "Fishing and Hunting are only an addiction if you're trying to quit"

  6. #6
    Member BRWNBR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Big Lake
    Posts
    8,434

    Default

    Alaska will turn into what you left, no matter where your from. Simple logic. More people going where there's less rules, creates more rules. Those of us who have been here a long time will attest to the changing culture and regulations. We will end up almost 100
    Percent drawing sooner or later. You think opportunity is getting tighter now, imagine what it'll be like for our grand children!
    Www.blackriverhunting.com
    Master guide 212

  7. #7

    Default

    [QUOTE=kasilofchrisn;1546441]Personally I don't have a problem with this.
    I think we have had it pretty good with this law for a long time.
    What's the justification for leaving it as is?
    They can still hunt here sans guide. That's a pretty good deal IMHO.
    As our hunting opportunity in this state gets more and more crowded etc. this should help just a bit.

    What do you base your comment on "As our hunting opportunity in this state gets more and more crowded etc. this should help just a bit"?
    this is the largest state in the union and we have the least amount of hunters per capita over all hunt opportunities, to include non-residents. if you had all the hunters out in the field in Alaska you would have less hunters per sq. mile than any other state.
    if you have the mind set that you will never see a hunter while you are hunting you'll have to be remote, there are plenty of places in Alaska, even sheep hunts.
    this was just the guide industry protecting their industry and potentially increasing their client base. there is no significant harvest of big game by second degree of kindred hunts. this was purely political!

  8. #8
    Premium Member kasilofchrisn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Central Kenai Peninsula
    Posts
    4,886

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by isnarewolves View Post

    What do you base your comment on "As our hunting opportunity in this state gets more and more crowded etc. this should help just a bit"?
    this is the largest state in the union and we have the least amount of hunters per capita over all hunt opportunities, to include non-residents. if you had all the hunters out in the field in Alaska you would have less hunters per sq. mile than any other state.
    if you have the mind set that you will never see a hunter while you are hunting you'll have to be remote, there are plenty of places in Alaska, even sheep hunts.
    this was just the guide industry protecting their industry and potentially increasing their client base. there is no significant harvest of big game by second degree of kindred hunts. this was purely political!
    I live on the peninsula and have since 1997.
    Every year it seems hunting here is a bit more crowded or opportunities are lost. Closed seasons or moose going to 4 browtine etc.
    Brown bear being one rare exception.
    But why do we need to provide more hunting opportunities for our non resident relatives?
    Is this sort of thing common in other states?
    How does this benefit Alaska and Alaskans?
    If your relatives want to hunt here they still can it just means you give up one hunt for them.
    Doesn't mean you can't still hunt other species. Or hunt that species the following year.
    My sister and Bil live in Iowa yet I expect no special hunting privileges if I was to hunt deer or other species there just because they are relatives.
    Whats next should we allow second degree of kindred to dipnet?
    I don't expect complete solitude on road system hunts. But I don't want to see them get more crowded if we can help it.
    I'm not seeing some great benefit from the second degree of kindred and this still allows them to hunt sans guide a pretty good deal in my book.
    This doesn't really line the guides pocket as it still allows full hunting opportunities for residents relatives just at a small cost to a resident.
    Have you heard of anyone who's relatives booked with a guide due to this law?
    "The closer I get to nature the farther I am from idiots"

    "Fishing and Hunting are only an addiction if you're trying to quit"

  9. #9
    Member BRWNBR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Big Lake
    Posts
    8,434

    Default

    This rule does nothing for my client base.
    Alaska's issue is cost and access. Sure when you run the numbers for square miles blah blah we have a lot of it. A lot of it you can't get to and a lot of it you can't afford to get to. Which is by sheep crowding has been such a huge problem. Everyone goes as far as they can afford and that's where they all sit, assuming all areas are just as crowded.
    Areas with access are getting more and more crowded, no doubt. It will filter to other areas soon enough.
    Www.blackriverhunting.com
    Master guide 212

  10. #10
    Premium Member kasilofchrisn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Central Kenai Peninsula
    Posts
    4,886

    Default

    Are there other states that have hunting privileges of some kind for non resident relatives?
    Kind of hard subject to search so was curious if anybody knew of such a law in other states?
    "The closer I get to nature the farther I am from idiots"

    "Fishing and Hunting are only an addiction if you're trying to quit"

  11. #11

    Default

    I guess we need to define what is crowding? I guide in 20A, I have no issues with crowding. The still remains that 2nd. degree hunters do not impact any big game management plans. it just penalizes the resident's hunters opportunity.

  12. #12

    Default

    Instead of buggering up the barbecue with these mutual bag limit regs...which I agree are 100% politically driven...why couldn't the regs have been changed to simply limit the number(s) of first and second degree kin who can actually hunt with a resident relative each year? Or if the kin is successful at bagging one of the coveted Big 3, remove their eligibility to hunt that species for 5 years...or more.

  13. #13

    Default

    "opportunities are lost. Closed seasons or moose going to 4 browtine etc".

    If I remember correctly a lot of the peninsula is federal. the fed's do not believe in prey abundance. ie. uimak caribou.

    "But why do we need to provide more hunting opportunities for our non resident relatives"?
    We do not provide more non-resident relatives hunting opportunities. just this one. if your relative wants to hunt with you for brown bear, goat, or sheep they can be in your direct supervision and eliminate the guide requirement.(most residents taking a relative hunting for sheep, goats or brown bears have more experience than the assistant guide you get when your show up for your guided hunt)

    "How does this benefit Alaska and Alaskans"?
    You get to have and experience and a good time with your relative. under the old regulation the "resident" did not loose their opportunity to harvest. there is also the sale of a non-res. hunting license and tag. This benefits ADF&G and us residents.

    "it just means you give up one hunt for them"
    Exactly! you give up your "resident opportunity" when there is no biological concern.

    "Whats next should we allow second degree of kindred to dipnet"?
    No. that a statue that was enacted when we had rural priority in the state pre 89. it has motif since then, but it is to give resident more opportunity and to protect that opportunity.

    "Have you heard of anyone who's relatives booked with a guide due to this law"?
    No. Because this is the first year. but I do know of resident who have hired guides and I am one of them. Because it was cheaper to hire a guide to hunt Farewell bison than it was for me to DIY hunt. A lot cheaper. I also know of resident's relative's to hire guides. Again there is a reason to hire guides. Good guides with history in the area you want to hunt have great knowledge of the area, species, logistics, and supplies.

    I don't like this new regulation mainly because some residents will loose opportunity. For something that had no biological impact on our management plans. Lastly I never took a relative hunting.

  14. #14

    Default

    I'm not in the loop on this other than reading the regs and this thread, but my thought is that if these new second degree of kindred restrictions are in place, there should be restrictions on guides as well. It should be an across the board change, not just targeting one group. This seems discriminatory to me towards a certain user group that is probably a fraction of the non-resident hunters going after these three types of critters. If certain areas like Kodiak have move limits to two goats per season, and south west with 2 brown bears per season, what is the point in restricting people from going after them?

    I'd need to hear a pretty good argument from the folks trying to implement this to even consider supporting it.

  15. #15
    Member Bambistew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Chugiak
    Posts
    315

    Default

    While you may share the bag limit on the animal for that year, if you didn't kill it and tag it, I don't think it counts toward your 1:4 limit. I believe this was a question that the BOG discussed, it may be in the transcript/recording. I think it needs to be clarified in the regs.

    Montana has a special regulation for non-resident with resident relatives. Two separate license, one for NR who used to live there and still have immediate family there (called Come Home to Hunt), and a permit for those who where born and raised , and still have family there (Montana Native License). The prior has a quota of 1000 elk/deer (IIRC) tags the later is OTC, unlimited for deer/elk. The prior is the same going price as a draw NR tag, the later is 1/2 the NR cost. This is the only NR relative tag I know of. Its highly contentious with residents as well. When it was originally adopted the Native license was 3x the resident cost. So a deer tag was $48 or something and elk was $60.

    If you think Alaska residents whine about NR, take a trip down south. You'll get egged at the trailhead if you have out-of-state plates.

  16. #16
    Member willphish4food's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Willow, AK
    Posts
    3,354

    Default

    If your non resident kin wants to hunt sheep, bear or goat, tell them to become a guide. Then they can retain their residency elsewhere and be able to guide as many other non residents to these species as the season allows. Likely as not, the guide they work for will put them under contract to shoot any of these species, too, at a very highly reduced cost. Pretty neat, huh?

    Personally, if a were coming to a hunt in Alaska, I'd appreciate a guide who could share stories of hunting Alaska game, in Alaska, around the campfire. Its got to be a bit of a bummer for nonresidents who end up with a nonresident guide getting to hear nothing but his deer hunting stories from down south.

  17. #17
    Member BRWNBR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Big Lake
    Posts
    8,434

    Default

    Believe it or not, I've had clients who scarfed down dinner and ran straight to the sleeping bag and would yell at me from their tent that it was story time! I went in the tent and they had a bucket set up for me to sit on and tell Alaska hunting stories. That happened every night for the duration of the hunt. They loved their story time!

    Ps,
    I won't guide a resident/next of kin Please don't call me. Lol did it once and got burned.
    Www.blackriverhunting.com
    Master guide 212

  18. #18
    Member willphish4food's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Willow, AK
    Posts
    3,354

    Default

    I really think the regulation is bad. It eliminates the possibility of a family hunt. If the resident has a brother and dad nonresidents, for instance, and they wanted to do a family sheep hunt, they could only shoot one sheep. And since most sheep hunts require airfare, you are now paying airfare for 3 people and gear for the possibility of only one sheep. You could try comboing the hunt up with bear or caribou, but your party would still be able to shoot only 1 sheep.

    This reg did nothing to protect game populations, and very little toward boosting guide bookings, but it did destroy a very long tradition of hunting. If anything, it will skew the ration of resident/non resident hunters even more, as many residents won't want to spend the airfare on a hunt to just be an observer, and lose their own tag for the year. I think the board outdid itself on this one; preserving traditional hunting is supposed to be one of its goals.

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    135

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by willphish4food View Post
    I really think the regulation is bad. It eliminates the possibility of a family hunt. If the resident has a brother and dad nonresidents, for instance, and they wanted to do a family sheep hunt, they could only shoot one sheep. And since most sheep hunts require airfare, you are now paying airfare for 3 people and gear for the possibility of only one sheep. You could try comboing the hunt up with bear or caribou, but your party would still be able to shoot only 1 sheep.

    This reg did nothing to protect game populations, and very little toward boosting guide bookings, but it did destroy a very long tradition of hunting. If anything, it will skew the ration of resident/non resident hunters even more, as many residents won't want to spend the airfare on a hunt to just be an observer, and lose their own tag for the year. I think the board outdid itself on this one; preserving traditional hunting is supposed to be one of its goals.
    You shouldn't have used the all holy than JC himself sheep for your example. Only God himself and residents get claim to those

    Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

  20. #20

    Default

    Kasilofchrisn,
    Do you have to hire a guide or have your 2nd degree resident kin with you to hunt any species in Iowa? No. Apple's to Buicks comparison dude.

    This is incredibly asinine and I'm very willing to help however I can to keep this from being implemented. I'm taking the Alaska Bar in 3 weeks, and fingers crossed should be ready to be all formal and official in the courts by October if anybody knows of a group trying to fight this, or that is interested in fighting it.

Page 1 of 6 123 ... 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
  •