Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 27

Thread: "Trophy Value will be destroyed"

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Eagle River
    Posts
    134

    Default "Trophy Value will be destroyed"

    Can someone clarify what this means? I was looking over GMU 21 for a float hunt next summer and couldn't find a good explanation of this....
    Thanks.

  2. #2
    Member Bear74's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    83

    Default Have to cut the rack

    If you do not have a permit for the area Fish and Game takes half of the palm and keeps it.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Eagle River
    Posts
    134

    Default For what?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bear74 View Post
    If you do not have a permit for the area Fish and Game takes half of the palm and keeps it.
    Why wouldn't they just make you turn in the whole set? What good is one side of the antlers? Seems to me that you'd be kind of stupid to hunt there and not obain a permit. Then again I guess you could do a meat hunt but's that's a little farther out than I'd go just for meat....... Thanks.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    3,568

    Default

    Some people do not need a large rack on there wall.
    Even though it would be nice to hang up a huge moose rack I would be content with some very nice photos and great memories if I or someone in my family would score a trophy moose.
    Besides, they still taste great without the antlers.
    Tennessee

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Eagle River
    Posts
    134

    Default Agree Completely!

    However, I still don't see why they'd only want half of the antlers and not the whole set. Are you required to keep the other half?

    yea, I know, I'm beating this up........ I'm sure they use it for data analysis but to give up only half the set would just piss me off. If you want half of it then take it all....

  6. #6
    Member ak_powder_monkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Eagle River/ Juneau
    Posts
    5,154

    Default

    I'd bet it has to do with the fact that the antlers can be used for something. I'd assume that tradtionally natives didn't hand the antlers on their walls, but used them for something... that would explain why only half is takes... Just a guess though
    I choose to fly fish, not because its easy, but because its hard.

  7. #7
    Member jkb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Big Lake
    Posts
    1,466

    Default you can fix them

    You repair an antler that have been cut in half you cannot repair them if you only have half the antler. They want the trophy value completly destoyed.

  8. #8
    Member Joel Zadvorney's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Buffalo New York
    Posts
    49

    Default

    ..and years down the road someone can't enter the rack into B&C,SCI,P&Y and so on..

  9. #9
    Member JOAT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Soldotna, ALASKA since '78
    Posts
    3,720

    Default

    My old man has been hunting the Yukon River for years and up until just a couple years ago they would just cut through the palm of one side to "destroy the trophy value", but they didn't start taking the cut off piece until recently. Well, my dad's got a half-dozen sets of antlers hanging on the outside of his shop that he simply reattached the cut-off section. You can see it is stitched together, but who cares? I personnally don't understand the antler fascination and I've never mounted even a single antler set my entire life. And my dad used to go up there for a guaranteed meat hunt, so he wasn't looking for trophy racks either, but he still likes to bring them back and hang them up for whatever reason. He stopped going last year because his hunting party is getting up there in years and the costs involved with a Yukon river trip are through the roof anymore, plus the new regulations, yada, yada, yada...

    Anyway, they don't take "half" the rack, only about half the palm on one side. So you would still get to keep 3/4 of the rack. If all you want is the trophy rack, then you'll just have to get a trophy tag. Or you can take a number of pictures of the rack from several angles prior to the cutting. When you get back, have a taxidermist rebuild the missing part from your photos. It's not a complicated process.
    Winter is Coming...

    Go GeocacheAlaska!

  10. #10
    Member martentrapper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Fairbanks, Ak.
    Posts
    4,191

    Default

    Years ago, unit 21 had a good moose pop. and also lots of hunters. Alot of guys boated down the Yukon from the bridge to hunt various places in unit 21. Unfortunately, the moose pop declined. F&G had to decrease the number of hunters hunting in the unit. Since many of the guys coming into the unit from other areas were the EVIL "sport" hunters, the "trophy value destruction" was a way to discourage these sport hunters from hunting in 21. Local residents of 21 were the GOOD meat hunters so they didn't care if their antlers were cut. So much of the unit is now a registration hunt with trophy value destruction, or you win a drawing permit to be able to keep your whole antler.
    So trophy destruction is just one way to limit the number of guys who choose to hunt in a particular area.
    I can't help being a lazy, dumb, weekend warrior.......I have a JOB!
    I have less friends now!!

  11. #11
    Member oakman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Eagle River, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    1,172

    Default

    There were a few guides working this area that hit it pretty hard for a few years in a row only gunning for the very big moose. They were after big racks and nothing else. Next thing you know there are restrictions on getting in and out of this area, taking only the meat and no trophy, etc.

    You can thank some greedy people for these problems.

  12. #12
    Member martentrapper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Fairbanks, Ak.
    Posts
    4,191

    Default

    As much as some would like to believe what Oakman says, it just ain't so. There are guides all over Alaska. The trophy value destruction is a method to limit the number of hunters in an area. Just cuz a few guides take clients into an area doesn't mean it will get a trophy destruction requirement. If unit 21 gets back to better moose numbers, the requirement will most likely go away.
    I can't help being a lazy, dumb, weekend warrior.......I have a JOB!
    I have less friends now!!

  13. #13

    Default

    I disagree martentrapper, I truly believe the half antler restriction is simply to keep the guides out of there. No one is gonna pay the $8,000-$15,000 guide fees to hunt for a half a rack. If I understand the stories I have heard about 21 it was in fact guides (one in particular) that desicrated the trophy bulls in that area and this is the follow up damage control. Only lfolks who dont live to far from the unit particularly natives are gonna hunt there for a half a rack or just the meat itself. Not saying I am against the restriction, in fact it serves the purpose, to let the moose numbers go up, buls specifically.

  14. #14
    Member lab man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fairbanks
    Posts
    551

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oakman View Post
    There were a few guides working this area that hit it pretty hard for a few years in a row only gunning for the very big moose. They were after big racks and nothing else. Next thing you know there are restrictions on getting in and out of this area, taking only the meat and no trophy, etc.

    You can thank some greedy people for these problems.
    Can't agree with you there. You're speaking of one area, but these restrictions encompass hundreds and hundreds of miles. The Koyukuk and Nowitna rivers are the main drainages where these antler restrictions are in effect. The restrictions were first placed on the Koyukuk, and then the Novi because of the pure number of hunters, not just because of greedy guides.

    My family and friends hunt one or the other river every fall, and we have seen both moose numbers, and numbers of hunters fall dramatically over the last 7 years or so. During the first couple years after the new law on the Koyukuk went into effect, the number of hunters fell 50%. I'd say thats a good thing. I watched the bull population on the Novi go down until we were barely seeing any moose, but we'd run into hunting camps all over. I was on the Novi a year ago, and am happy to report that I didn't see too many hunter, but I didn't see many moose either. I love those rivers, and while it hurts to cut the antlers of big bulls, I'm willing to it if that action is going to preserve these great spots

    You can thank the hundreds of hunters looking for the trip of a lifetime for the restrictions, not just a few people.

  15. #15
    Member oakman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Eagle River, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    1,172

    Default

    So the CUA in there isn't for outsiders looking for HUGE moose? Then why the aircraft transport restriction? Then why the trophy value destruction? This is because people (lots of guided hunts) came in there for a few years, over hunted the area for the big bulls, and put a hurtin on the moose population. Fish & Game sees this as well. Now with the new restrictions you say there are fewer hunters...I wonder why? Those new regulations pretty much say if you don't live here you can't hunt here.

  16. #16
    Member lab man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fairbanks
    Posts
    551

    Default

    While there may be others, the only area that prohibits the use of aircraft that I am aware of is the Koyukuk National Wildlife Refuge. I didn't say guides didn't play any part in the antler restrictions, but they were hardly the only ones to hunt the rivers. For most people, not just out of state hunters, spending all that time and money to go to these remote places just to have their trophy antlers cut doesn't make sense. So if you live here, you still pretty much can't hunt. With my time spent out in these areas, I have never met a guide, but I have done most of my hunting after the antler restrictions were in place. My point is that these restrictions were put in place to target EVERYONE who wants to harvest HUGE moose.

  17. #17
    Member JOAT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Soldotna, ALASKA since '78
    Posts
    3,720

    Default Stop trying to blame the guides for everything

    I personally know 8 people from the Kenai area who have gone to the Koyukuk every fall for the last decade. That is something like 1500 road miles of towing two boat trailers up to the Yukon then the boat run down the river to the hunting grounds. While they do bring the antlers back out, even after they started cutting them, these guys go up there for the meat and the joy of the hunt. So don't try to tell us that this area is a "locals only" area just because you can't take out an intact rack without a trophy tag. That is just stupid... antlers are not that important to many hunters.

    And if you take a look around the Kenai Peninsula and the lack of harvestable moose we have, you would understand why we have people who will travel so far away to find meat. The Kenai is not hunted by guides at all. This is a locals hunt which has been desimated by "local meat hunters" and the metropolis of Anchorage for decades since we are on the road system. In fact, I'm having a hard time thinking of anyone I know who has gotten a moose locally in the last couple seasons. So we must go elsewhere to hunt. It's local pressure, not guide pressure.
    Winter is Coming...

    Go GeocacheAlaska!

  18. #18

    Default It seems like

    Fish and Game is now trying to draw a line between sport "meat hunters" and sport "trophy hunters". If hunter numbers need to be kept down it should just go to a plain draw hunt. Isn't it bad enuf we have subsistence vs. sport hunters in this state. Now were gonna make subsistence vs. sport meat hunters vs. sport trophy hunters. Either the population can safely handle a specified harvest or it can't. Antler cutting seems ridiculous.

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    FAI
    Posts
    2,294

    Default subsistence vs sport

    Labman, Martentrapper, and JOAT are correct in everything they have said. I have been hitting the Yukon, and specifically the Nowitna and Koyukuk rivers, and have seen changes since 1980.
    Guides are not the primary takers of moose on either river. The general public is. We started going to the Novi first as it offered great opportunities for lots of moose, and big antlers. The word spread, and hunter numbers grew. So did the number of moose taken. We started heading down to the Koyukuk for the same reasons mentioned above. The same thing happened again.
    I know guides on both rivers. They are guys that had been there long before most of us even new of the rivers. Really bad form gentlemen to lay blame on all of them. You all should know better.
    The registration hunts are managed as subsistence hunts. It doesn't matter where a hunter lives, we all hunt by the same rules. On the Koyukuk that means bringing out the head as well as the rest of the meat on the bone. I have to disagree with Bearman on this one. I am treated the same as the folks from Galena, Koyukuk, or Huslia and operate under the same regulations.
    If anybody has a reason to be bitter about the current regulations, you would think it would be an 11 year old boy who just shot a 63" bull and watched his dad cut the antlers in half. And to add to it, a member of the party had offered that boy his trophy tag so he could keep the antlers in tact. No, I don't want to hear anything about that being illegal or unethical. But that boy, now a young man, has very articulately, and very maturely offered his perceptions about those same regulations and what they may mean to continued hunting in those areas. I was proud of him at 11, and I am even more so at 17.

  20. #20

    Default Registration

    hunts are not subsistence hunts. Subsistence having priority over sport hunting. Are you suggesting that if your a meat hunter you have priority over a trophy hunter. That's a joke. In your post you said your driving from kenai then getting in your boat at the bridge. With all that gas money you spent you easily could have bought your meat at fred's and probably saved money in the process. Don't try to put yourself in the same basket as subsistence because your not even close. Fish and game shouldn't be in the business of deciding who gets to hunt for what reasons. Either their is a huntable population or not.

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •