Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 45

Thread: Ak Hunting News: Channel 2 Says It Is Not Guilty In Hunter Harassment Charge

  1. #1

    Arrow Ak Hunting News: Channel 2 Says It Is Not Guilty In Hunter Harassment Charge

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

    Anchorage Channel 2 TV has responded with a "not guilty" to charges that it interfered with a lawful hunt in the Katmai Preserve. Charges of hunter harassment have been filed with the Alaska Wildlife Troopers against a Channel 2 news team as a result of a filmed news story of a bear hunt now being shown on YouTube.

    Channel 2 News says it "took no editorial stance in its coverage and presented opinions from the hunting guide, Alaska Fish and Game, the National Park Service, and a group of people opposed to the hunt, whom we accompanied to the Preserve."

    The organization also responded to the criticism that accompanying those who opposed the hunt was an editorial decision in itself, by writing "we have never been provided the opportunity to witness such a hunting trip with a guide, and once in the area, we provided every opportunity for the hunters and their guides to explain their perspective."

    Channel 2 also said that the hunters involved were very aggressive, threatening, armed and intimidating to their crew.


    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
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    690

    Default Give 'em what they deserve.

    They DID interfere.
    "He who is slow to anger is better than the mighty, and he who rules his spirit is better than he who takes a city." ~ Proverbs 16:32

  3. #3
    Member tccak71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    2,174

    Default

    Here's John Tracy's response.

    http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=7185964

    I believe they did interfere with the hunt. The guide/client had a diminished experience (and an expensive one at that) when KTUU decided to side with the anti's and make a story where, in my opinon, one really doesn't exist. KTUU was there to stir up sh*t.

    Tim

  4. #4
    New member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    13

    Default My resonse to Mr. Tracy's prepared statement:

    Mr. Tracy, I'd like to comment on your prepared statement concerning the hunter harassment investigation of your newspeople at the Katmai preserve. An uninvited film crew would be harassing. I don't think you would like a film crew at your backyard BBQ. Sport hunting is constantly assaulted by the media, when your crew showed up to a hunt area uninvited and accompanied by people opposed to hunting, the hunters involved took the "bait." These men were within their rights to be upset. Poor Polly Purebread was scared of the armed and intimidating hunters. Quite a script, you had to know all hunters encountered were not going to be happy. Obviously, your crew chose to stay when asked to leave. Asking them not to film would be wasted breath. Your crew did not report news, it created it. Not your job as an ethical journalist.

    The "holier than thou" response provided to the hunter harassment investigation is expected. The decision to send a crew to Katmai was born to harass hunters. That decision maker should face conspiracy charges. Did your news team ever consider contacting outfitters who conduct bear hunts in Katmai? Maybe you did, I doubt it. The footage your crew obtained could have been free of harassment utilizing this method. Your station would have the footage of a Katmai bear hunt which would have to stand on it's own merit. Instead, "Geraldo" style journalism was employed. Tsk, Tsk, Tsk.

    In closing, your news group probably won't get charged with hunter harassment but certainly violated the spirit of the law. Confronting people engaged in perfectly legal activities is the stations policy? How rude. Dan Parizek

  5. #5
    Member MARV1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Kotlik
    Posts
    640

    Default

    Haha, was something else to watch, easy score for the hunters though. Did Channel2 News scare the bear away? NO. Did they preven the hunters from scoring their bears? NO.
    But something funny I saw, guy shot the bear with a bow/arrow and then there was a follow-up shot with a rifle to kill the bear. Now that is unethical IMHO. I have no problem with hunters shooting/killing bears. But how it was done should be the problem. You guys talk about making quick ethical kills so was it ethical that the bear was shot with a bow?
    The emphasis is on accuracy, not power!

  6. #6
    Member tccak71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    2,174

    Default

    Guides usually take follow up shots on dangerous game. What's the big deal? I don't think that is a restricted weapons hunt. Remember, it wasn't a crossbow as reported by ADN.

    Swivelhead:
    I'm going to write 'ole John Tracy a little note too. He provided a predictable cookie-cutter response to the allegations. They were in the wrong.

    Tim

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    690

    Default Conjecture to feed the fire...

    Quote Originally Posted by MARV1 View Post
    Haha, was something else to watch, easy score for the hunters though. Did Channel2 News scare the bear away? NO. Did they preven the hunters from scoring their bears? NO.
    But something funny I saw, guy shot the bear with a bow/arrow and then there was a follow-up shot with a rifle to kill the bear. Now that is unethical IMHO. I have no problem with hunters shooting/killing bears. But how it was done should be the problem. You guys talk about making quick ethical kills so was it ethical that the bear was shot with a bow?
    I'm just taking a stab in the dark here; but I watched the original news cast (I was a loyal channel 2 watcher until that night) and from the footage, the bear was shot at close range with the bow hunter, the film crew's position was in a less than desireable spot for an angry brownie that just got darted... I'm guessing that the guide dropped the bear with the rifle shots to save the mess of explaining why there was a couple of news people spread out all over the grass. That guide probably saved Ms. Baldino's butt along with her camera man...

    As for the aggressiveness of the hunters when they came to the news camp with rifles in hand, they could have been more diplomatic; but I can understand their frustration. As for the guns... DUH! You're in bear country with an obvious presence of bears. Although they are pretty used to humans you can take a lesson from Timmy Treadwell about the unpredictability of a bruin no matter how habituated they are. Channel 2; you could have got your story without the expense of other people's hunt being ruined. You could have filmed from a safe distance and still got your point across. This was yet another unecessary, sensationlized attempt at ratings at someone else's expense. You should be ashamed of yourselves and apologize.
    "He who is slow to anger is better than the mighty, and he who rules his spirit is better than he who takes a city." ~ Proverbs 16:32

  8. #8
    Member Bear Buster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    EAGLE RIVER, ALASKA
    Posts
    461

    Default Fine Them!

    Another Liberal anti-hunter group up there at the channel 2 news station....but dah.... we already knew that.
    Fine the liberals to teach them a lesson!

  9. #9
    Member Bear Buster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    EAGLE RIVER, ALASKA
    Posts
    461

    Default This about sums it up

    In conclusion, it is perhaps ironic that Ms. Baldino reports the most aggressive and unpredictable animals she encountered during her two-day stay were not the dozens of bears surrounding camp and literally just yards away, but rather the hunters themselves.
    John Tracy, News Director
    Channel 2 News/KTUU-TV
    This about sums up what they were after to begin with!

  10. #10
    New member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    13

    Default Bear Buster......you nailed it!

    Without using unnecessary words (like me) you've pointed out the essence of their quest.

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    1,131

    Angry channel 2

    Boy talk about antihunters, Channel 2 news clearly is. Rather than trying to report both sides of news or stay somewhat objective they are calling hunters "animals" in the news. I hope they are charged to the fullest extent of the law in both criminally and civil court. If camping next to, following, filming and putting someones personal hunt on nationwide internet and statewide news is not hunter harassment then there is no such thing. Peta would have free rain to interfere with all hunting and trapping activities. I think its pretty important that wildlife officials follow through with the charges and trial.
    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

  12. #12
    Member Bear Buster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    EAGLE RIVER, ALASKA
    Posts
    461

    Default

    They won't......They don't want to be channel 2's next target!

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Anchrage, Ak
    Posts
    33

    Default Filming Permit

    I don't know the law, but didn't larry get in trouble for filming without a permit on state, federal land. Does channel 2 fall under that category????
    I'm just wondering?

  14. #14
    Member Chisana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Juneau, Alaska
    Posts
    1,439

    Default

    Tonight a Trooper was on Channel 2 and said that the TV crew did nothing illegal and would not be charged.

  15. #15
    Member Bear Buster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    EAGLE RIVER, ALASKA
    Posts
    461

    Default there's a surprise!

    Quote Originally Posted by Chisana View Post
    Tonight a Trooper was on Channel 2 and said that the TV crew did nothing illegal and would not be charged.
    WOW.....There's a surprise!

  16. #16

    Default

    Cant say channel 2 hasnt done worse, but its right up there (Anyone remember the moose trampeling video?)..... They were in the wrong to film, I hope the recieve plenty of fines and are sued, however I doubt that will stop them from future wrongs. With great power comes great problems, and a television is a great power.

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    SwampView AK, Overlooking Mt. Mckinley and Points Beyond.
    Posts
    8,815

    Default My email to John Tracy

    John Tracy:
    I am really P Oed about your recent harassment of the Bear Hunters in Katmai.

    I have read your response to the charges, and you convict yourself. Evidence of interference, and your anti-hunting attitude is apparent, in what you say, in your defense.

    You were there with the obvious intent to harass, and demean the bear hunters.
    You were asked to leave, but chose not to do so.
    You exhibited no ethics whatsoever in your coverage, filming etc.
    And now, you want to act like you're the victim.

    Because you are a member of the Media, perhaps you will be allowed to lie out of this, but I assure you that I'm not gonna watch Channel 2 again, and I will let other people know about this too.

    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.

  18. #18

    Default

    How can you accurately report a story if bias runs through your veins?

  19. #19
    Moderator Alaskacanoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Sterling
    Posts
    1,450

    Default Maria Downey replies

    I sent an email to Maria Downey, along with a similar one to Ms. Baldino.
    This is what I got back from Maria Downey today.
    My email to Maria is posted also here, below Maria's response to me.
    ......


    "Thanks for your feedback Max.. I appreciate you taking the time to let us know how you feel. Meg was also concerned it would look onesided since the hunters and their guide would not talk on camera. She repeatedly asked them
    to go on camera and they refused... .in fact they were very aggressive and rude. However, the owner of the
    guide service was reasonable and did provide the written statement which we aired... Unfortunately even though that was included the fact that it wasn't an on camera interview
    makes it look "uneven" . Once again Meg offered
    him airtime repeatedly.
    As for the biologist... the story actually contained more of
    his interview that the others. I think the story made it clear
    he was in support of the hunt. However, the same biologists that approved the hunt were appauled after they saw the video of "the hunt". They said they didn't have this type of "hunt" in mind.. no stalking .. no fair chase just simply walking up to a bear that was clearly habituated to humans.
    I just want to make it clear Max that we don't go into stories planning to cover one side or the other.. our stories are richer with all sides of a story but if they refuse to go on camera there's not much we can do. We're not going to
    kill a story because one side won't talk... they had an
    opportunity and refused.
    Thanks again for your feedback and please feel free to
    give us feedback anytime a story concerns you... that's how we know what our viewers are thinking.
    Sincerely,
    Maria Downey"
    -----
    To: mdowney@ktuu.com
    Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2007 2:07 PM
    Subject: Bear hunt 9C


    Maria,
    The Bear hunt story was a display of complete Bias on the part of not only the reporter, but the producers and directors at channel 2.
    I am not a Bear hunter myself, and desire that places be set aside for viewing etc.
    My point is that your news team attempted to show and succeeded in showing a sided story.
    Your reported traveled with a Anti hunting biologist that may well as be Timothy Treadwell's brother, and a company that makes a living off of showing people from outside Alaska bears.
    The attempt to tell the story from the fish and game side, or the hunter side was poorly lit for them, as they were put in the position of explanation and defense of the legal hunt.
    Very poor reporting and bias.
    Max Finch
    Sterling Alaska
    P.S.
    Our summer business is also doing bear viewing trips
    http://www.alaskacanoetrips.com/BearViewing.html
    Just because we provide bear viewing trips does not mean we second guess the Board of Game and the Biologists that help to manage our states game policies.
    You guys should be embarrassed
    When you come to a fork in the trail, take it!

    Rentals for Canoes, Kayaks, Rafts, boats serving the Kenai canoe trail system and the Kenai river for over 15 years. www.alaskacanoetrips.com

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    1,283

    Default

    It doesnt take a very smart person to interprate channel 2's response and the underlying sentiment.

Page 1 of 3 123 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
  •