Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Ak Hunting News: Board Maintains Nelchina Subsistence Hunt

  1. #1

    Arrow Ak Hunting News: Board Maintains Nelchina Subsistence Hunt

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

    The Alaska Joint Board of Fisheries and Game has derailed a Mat-Su Advisory Committee proposal that would have created a GMU 13 non-subsistence area, according to the Anchorage Daily News.

    The proposal, if enacted into regulation would have allowed all Alaska hunters to have equal access to the caribou in a substantial portion of the Nelchina basin.

    The paper reported that the proposal was the subject of great concern in rural communities.

    Read the entire story 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 Flintlock's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    214

    Default Beating a dead horse, but...

    Isn't this an unconstitutional ruling?



    State of Alaska > Lieutenant Governor > Alaska Constitution > Article 1
    The Constitution of the State of Alaska
    Adopted by the Constitutional Convention February 5, 1956
    Ratified by the People of Alaska April 24, 1956
    Became Operative with the Formal Proclamation of Statehood January 3, 1959

    Article 1 - Declaration of Rights

    1. Inherent Rights

    This constitution is dedicated to the principles that all persons have a natural right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and the enjoyment of the rewards of their own industry; that all persons are equal and entitled to equal rights, opportunities, and protection under the law; and that all persons have corresponding obligations to the people and to the State.

    3. Common Use

    Wherever occurring in their natural state, fish, wildlife, and waters are reserved to the people for common use.

  3. #3
    Member tccak71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    2,175

    Cool

    I actually thought the proposal made sense. Why do Copper River and Cantwell residents need all of 13 for subsistence? I think this is the most reasonable proposal that has come about for quite some time. Most of 13 should be a draw. Now we maintain the status quo for less than 400 Copper Valley area residents? Unbelievable.

    Tim

  4. #4
    Mark
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tccak71 View Post
    I actually thought the proposal made sense. Why do Copper River and Cantwell residents need all of 13 for subsistence? I think this is the most reasonable proposal that has come about for quite some time. Most of 13 should be a draw. Now we maintain the status quo for less than 400 Copper Valley area residents? Unbelievable.......
    I agree. Just the spirit of the proposal made sense, even if the borders of the two zones were going to be the sticking point. The proposal itself even mentioned that borders can be adjusted.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    SwampView AK, Overlooking Mt. Mckinley and Points Beyond.
    Posts
    8,816

    Default

    I certainly hope we see more such proposals, in the future.

    It should raise awareness, and maybe someday the board will be forced to be fair.

    The defense of their decision was lame, and manipulative.

    "I see people concerned because they feel like their birthright is being ripped out from underneath them." -Cliff Judkins, game board chairman

    And this "Touchy Feely" creep is the Chairman? Gimme a Break.

    Smitty of the North
    Walk Slow, and Drink a Lotta Water.
    Has it ever occurred to you, that Nothing ever occurs to God? Adrien Rodgers.
    You can't out-give God.

  6. #6
    Member tccak71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    2,175

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Smitty of the North View Post
    The defense of their decision was lame, and manipulative.

    "I see people concerned because they feel like their birthright is being ripped out from underneath them." -Cliff Judkins, game board chairman

    And this "Touchy Feely" creep is the Chairman? Gimme a Break.

    Smitty of the North
    According to the ADN Judkins SUPPORTED the proposal! I was disappointed to see the rationale for the decision too. I was even more disheartened to see that the Mat-Su advisory probably won't re-submit the proposal in the spring.

    Tim

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tccak71 View Post
    According to the ADN Judkins SUPPORTED the proposal! I was disappointed to see the rationale for the decision too. I was even more disheartened to see that the Mat-Su advisory probably won't re-submit the proposal in the spring.

    Tim
    The reason for all the DoubleSpeak is that none of the participants or BOG Reps have a clue as to the real issues surrounding the debacle. None can stay focused on their position, because they are too concerned about how thier image will be veiwed. It is all about image with these people. As I said in an earlier post, regarding the proposal when Rod A was promoting it here on the forum; It lacked substance and facts. It did nothing to challenge the reasons for the area being ID'd a Subsistence Zone in the first place. It was doomed for failure from the start. Each of the individuals involved in the decision making role, think the historical aspect of the situation began when they themselves started becoming involved in the process. The only way to plot a course to where you want to go, is to know where you have been and where you are at now. People these days are to lazy or ignorant to do that.
    It is here to stay. Sad but that is the way it is. Too many liberal minds in our society today.

  8. #8
    Mark
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Akres View Post
    ......It is here to stay. Sad but that is the way it is. Too many liberal minds in our society today.
    It may be here for a long time (long past my lifetime, perhaps), but nothing lasts forever..........

  9. #9
    Sponsor Becky99588's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Glennallen, AK
    Posts
    120

    Default anybody else there?

    I reviewed the proposal, attended all the public testimony, the board committee hearing, and the board ruling. The Board of Game members Judkins, Spraker, Somerville and Burley all supported moving forward with this proposal at least at the discussion level (they couldn't adopt it at this meeting, just vote to send it forward to be discussed again at the next joint boards meeting as a possible solution to the Nelchina caribou hunt problem). Grussendorf and Johnson voted to kill it. Bell was absent. The Board of Fish members really didn't know much about the Unit 13 debate, and they got a less than complete review of the facts from Div. of Subsistence, F&G. They really didn't present data appropriate for the outlined area, nor did they have any newer subsistence data than a 1987 study, so the Board of Fish was fairly comfortable leaving all of Unit 13 a subsistence area - so they killed it. It couldn't be forwarded without majority support from both boards.

    This issue will likey come up again at the next joint boards meeting, put forth by somebody - however, instead of meeting every 2 years, they've been meeting every 10 years so who knows when this will even be an option again.

    Unfortunately there's no easy way to fix the tier II problems right now. However, the current Board of Game has been trying hard to look into new possibilities to either shrink the permits going to tier II, or to make the tier II permits more equitable for all Alaskans (hence our constitutional mandate). Several of the members have been heavily involved with the state's subsistence issue since the early 1980s, and they know all the history, all the legal rulings, and all the side-boards they can operate between. All these past things have left them a fairly narrow ledge to operate on.

    The little comments the paper printed were rather inconsequential, and though they may have been to appease particular audience members, they were not important in the big picture of the meeting.
    Hunt with your kids, not for your kids

  10. #10
    Member AKBassking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    SE Alaska-Summer Columbia River-Winter
    Posts
    2,007

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Flintlock View Post
    Isn't this an unconstitutional ruling?



    State of Alaska > Lieutenant Governor > Alaska Constitution > Article 1
    The Constitution of the State of Alaska
    Adopted by the Constitutional Convention February 5, 1956
    Ratified by the People of Alaska April 24, 1956
    Became Operative with the Formal Proclamation of Statehood January 3, 1959

    Article 1 - Declaration of Rights

    1. Inherent Rights

    This constitution is dedicated to the principles that all persons have a natural right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and the enjoyment of the rewards of their own industry; that all persons are equal and entitled to equal rights, opportunities, and protection under the law; and that all persons have corresponding obligations to the people and to the State.

    3. Common Use

    Wherever occurring in their natural state, fish, wildlife, and waters are reserved to the people for common use.

    Enough said! Get rid of Tier II. If you want a permit and live in the area go see the Feds!

    ALASKAN SEA-DUCTION
    1988 M/Y Camargue YachtFisher
    MMSI# 338131469
    Blog: http://alaskanseaduction.blogspot.com/

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
  •