Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Ak Hunting News: Board to Tackle Nelchina NonSubsistence Area Proposal

  1. #1

    Arrow Ak Hunting News: Board to Tackle Nelchina NonSubsistence Area Proposal

    This news clip is from Alaska Hunting News. Discussion is welcome. This news feed is robot generated.

    The Alaska Board of Game will consider today eliminating or sending forward a proposal by the Mat-Su Fish & Game Advisory Committee. The proposal will not be decided today, but the Board can decide to keep it or eliminate it from consideration at a 2008 meeting.

    The proposal would designate a substantial portion of the Nelchina Basin as a non-subsistence area, which would allow all Alaskans an equal opportunity to participate in hunting caribou in the desirable area.

    The Anchorage Daily News reports that "The proposal has many Alaska Natives and residents of a few Copper River basin communities in an uproar over their subsistence privileges."

    Read the entire article in the Anchorage Daily News. >>>


    We welcome news tips that are useful to the community. Please send tips and links to complete stories by email to webmaster@outdoorsdirectory.com.

  2. #2
    Member ak_powder_monkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Eagle River/ Juneau
    Posts
    5,154

    Default

    why on earth are people who live there angry (I mean other than being told they can't harvest their traditional food source), I'm sure they don't have much chance at getting permits anyway.
    I choose to fly fish, not because its easy, but because its hard.

  3. #3
    Forum Admin Brian M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Eagle River, AK
    Posts
    13,391

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ak_powder_monkey View Post
    why on earth are people who live there angry (I mean other than being told they can't harvest their traditional food source), I'm sure they don't have much chance at getting permits anyway.
    What do you mean that "they don't have much chance at getting permits"? If it is their traditional food source (meaning they can claim a lot of years of using unit 13 food sources), then they most certainly will get a permit every year under the current system. In addition, they can each get 2 permits from the federal government for hunting on federal lands.

    I sincerely hope this hunt goes to a draw, and I say that as someone who gets a Tier II tag about 50% time.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    2 mi east of 'Halfmoon creek"
    Posts
    831

    Default Correct me

    if I'm wrong, but don't most of the permits go to the Anchorage-Mat-su areas?

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    1,131

    Smile Good proposal

    I think the main people opposed to this would be the native tribes. But, after seeing all the land along the Denali Highway claimed by the AHTNA and Cantwell tribes as private lands I think that they can no longer say that they need a subsistence privileges. They now have vast hunting preserves where only they can hunt. So if they now have their "traditional" hunting lands as their private hunting preserve then they no longer need the tier II preference for the entire Nelchina basin in my opinion.
    I come home with an honestly earned feeling that something good has taken place. It makes no difference whether I got anything, it has to do with how the day was spent. Fred Bear

  6. #6
    Member Matt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    3,410

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Newsbot View Post
    This news clip is from Alaska Hunting News. Discussion is welcome. This news feed is robot generated.
    The Anchorage Daily News reports that "The proposal has many Alaska Natives and residents of a few Copper River basin communities in an uproar over their subsistence privileges."[/I]
    Someone put a bag over these people's head, please.

  7. #7
    Mark
    Guest

    Default

    I found this portion of the proposal most interesting:

    ....DEPARTMENT COMMENTS:

    The department is NEUTRAL on this proposal.
    As described in the proposal, the Parks, Glenn, and Richardson highways would be used to
    define boundaries of the nonsubsistence area in GMU 13.
    Relatively small portions of GMUs
    13A, 13B, and 13E are consequently left out of the nonsubsistence area. The highways also
    bisect many GMU 13 communities whose residents hunt and fish within the proposed area. If the
    Board advances the proposal for further consideration, the board might consider options for
    adjusting the boundaries of the proposed area to reflect GMU subunit boundaries to conform
    more closely with the structure of current hunting regulations.
    Even though this modification
    would use GMU boundaries, it also would apply to subsistence fishing in the area. Existing
    subsistence fisheries are within this proposed nonsubsistence area.
    The department will prepare a report summarizes available information for the 12 factors,
    modeled after the report that was prepared for the 1992 Joint Board meeting. The department
    recommends that the Board review this information to determine if significant changes have
    occurred since the present nonsubsistence areas were established in 1992 to justify further public
    review and department analysis prior to regulatory action at a second meeting to be scheduled in
    2008.....
    This may happen. If it does, the non-subsistence areas would likely be allotted a certain number of drawing permits, and the number of Tier II permits would likely decrease dramatically and proportionally, but I suspect the Tier II hunt would likely not be done away with entirely.

    It sounds more fair, but we can be assured that there will be no shortage of people crying.

  8. #8
    Member tccak71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    2,174

    Cool

    Ahtna Indians have it in for hunters in 13. They proposed eliminating the general season for moose in 13 and want it for their own. I'd have to see a map before I jump on board with Sollybug. But the Natives DO own land in both areas and have access to Federal permits, I don't feel sorry for them.

    Tim

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Valley trash.....and proud of it.
    Posts
    813

    Default

    I hope it does happen, that way I dont have to drive all the way to chicken to see utter chaos. <grins>

  10. #10
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Eagle River
    Posts
    98

    Default

    I think it would be great if the current points system included negative points awarded to those who won a teir II permit but didn't hunt the previous year. If they won a permit but didn't hunt for 2-3 years in a row, the negative points would increase until they end up without a permit. Food for thought...

  11. #11
    Member shphtr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Chugiak
    Posts
    1,376

    Default Imho......

    it's just a matter of time. Very few (if any) of the "subsistence hunters" are true "traditional subsistence hunters" what with MODERN high power rifles, MODERN transportation/4 wheelers, MODERN optics, MODERN cash economy, MODERN __________ you fill in the blank - well, you get the idea. To me it seems intuitive that "traditional subsistence hunting" is an anachronism - so I have to say: "The king has no cloths!"

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
  •