Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Enemy of the State?

  1. #1
    Member tccak71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    2,174

    Angry Enemy of the State?

    If I may be so bold as to use a Murkowskiism, Don Schwandt should be labeled as an enemy of the state, or at least an enemy of its residents! I don’t think I have ever seen such selfish motives in his feeble attempts to conform Alaska’s game laws to his own personal, guided, out-of-state agenda.

    Where is his protector on this forum? Get Don on here to defend himself! How is this anything but selfish on his behalf?

    Survey of Don’s selfishness:

    Prop 11: Establish an alternate list for each hunt choice for sheep, goat, grizz, moose.

    Prop 12: Any person who applies for any of the following (sheep, goat, brown bear) is PROHIBITED from applying for any limited draw permits for ALL OTHER BIG GAME SPECIES in the state for that year.

    Prop 15: A person who draws a permit may only hunt the permit and not hunt the same species in any other game unit it.

    I was too p**sed to read through the rest of his proposals; time to do like HomerDave said and contact our legislators and have the law changed so non-residents can’t propose game laws.

    Had Don left an email address on his website I would have emailed him; the site he listed looks like it belongs to the webmaster.

    This isn't meant to be a personal attack, but I need a heck of alot more of an explanation than he provided in the proposals.

    Tim

  2. #2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tccak71 View Post
    If I may be so bold as to use a Murkowskiism, Don Schwandt should be labeled as an enemy of the state, or at least an enemy of its residents! I don’t think I have ever seen such selfish motives in his feeble attempts to conform Alaska’s game laws to his own personal, guided, out-of-state agenda.

    Where is his protector on this forum? Get Don on here to defend himself! How is this anything but selfish on his behalf?

    Survey of Don’s selfishness:

    Prop 11: Establish an alternate list for each hunt choice for sheep, goat, grizz, moose.

    Prop 12: Any person who applies for any of the following (sheep, goat, brown bear) is PROHIBITED from applying for any limited draw permits for ALL OTHER BIG GAME SPECIES in the state for that year.

    Prop 15: A person who draws a permit may only hunt the permit and not hunt the same species in any other game unit it.

    I was too p**sed to read through the rest of his proposals; time to do like HomerDave said and contact our legislators and have the law changed so non-residents can’t propose game laws.

    Had Don left an email address on his website I would have emailed him; the site he listed looks like it belongs to the webmaster.

    This isn't meant to be a personal attack, but I need a heck of alot more of an explanation than he provided in the proposals.

    Tim
    Agreeing with you.

    Regardless of who is introducing it we are on dangerous ground with all this permit, draw, allocation stuff.

    11. 12. 15. Are examples of how other States draw systems have evolved.

    Our State officials are looking at other State's Systems as examples of what Alaska should do.

    We can be sure the "officials" will be making their opinion known to the BOG too.

    These proposals might not fly individually; but the BOG has the ability to adopt whatever they think is best. They can do that based on the input our State officials provide them in the background; regardless of public testimony.

    Of course we know our State officials are not influenced by lobby's. Or on the other hand if you think they are influenced by lobby then it might be time to put together a lobby group that can compete with the special interest commercial hunting group.

    From my point of view it is getting worse; not better.


  3. #3
    Member ak_powder_monkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Eagle River/ Juneau
    Posts
    5,154

    Default

    I think people put in stupid reg change requests all the time, if you trust the BOG you wouldn't worry or care about them, because they are in fact stupid
    I choose to fly fish, not because its easy, but because its hard.

  4. #4
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    I am Valley trash.
    Posts
    589

    Default Something should be done!

    Unless we come up with better options, we (Alaskan residences) will see our hunting opportunities diminished.

    I for one think that the department of Commercial Fish & Fish wants out of the management of game and would rather manage people, thus the draw system.

    As passionate as some seem about GAME issues in this wonderful state, their passion ends there.

    Do we need to start a Petition?

    If so, I would sign it. Someone would need to write it and that someone should not be me. If you look at my past posts and you will understand.

    Let's make it happen! I also would sign a Petition that would require the guides for Sheep, Goat and Brown Bear must be an Alaskan resident.

  5. #5
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    112

    Default

    Don also has Proposal 68 which if passed would state that:

    "If you harvest a Dall sheep in any Unit either by harvest ticket or by a limited draw permit, It is one legal male sheep every 4 regulatory years.”

    Below is some of the wording and my personal thoughts.

    ISSUE: "there is a significant increasing high demand of this stressed resource by users each year. The pressure needs to be limited" "Dall Sheep aren’t a maximum quantity harvest animal, but a high quality outdoor hunting experience for a once in a life time hunt"

    My thoughts: I appreciate his concern on the pressure on dall sheep hunting needing to be limited and would like to know if he intends to also limit the pressure by decreasing the number of clients he takes sheep hunting each year? Somehow given the price he is charging for these hunts I seriously doubt it.


    WHAT WILL HAPPEN IF NOTHING IS DONE? "The already very low sheep numbers will continue to decline from over harvesting. Additionally, hunting quality experience will continue to degrade. This will cause even greater conflicts then there already are amongst all user groups of this limited resource. Every year with more sheep hunters in the field the conflicts between users is getting worse and worse"

    My thoughts: I am not bashing guides at all because I know they are just like anything else in that there are good ones and bad ones. However the only “conflict” I have ever had in the field has been with guides who have stated to me that there are too many “locals” hunting in their area. I feel that the “locals” have just as much **** right to be in the mountains hunting sheep as the non-resident guide and his non-resident hunters do. I had this conversation in the Alaska range with a guide and my buddy had the same conversation with a guide in the brooks. Looking at the harvest statistics for the are I was hunting 32 residents killed sheep compared to 51 nr.

    WHO IS LIKELY TO SUFFER? Those who want to hunt sheep every year without regard to current sheep population conditions.

    My thoughts: So my desire to hunt sheep every year is somehow a desire to hunt without regard to current sheep population conditions yet his desire to take all of his clients on there “dream hunt” is somehow better for the sheep and the wildlife. So I should be sitting home for three years after I harvest my ram while he hunts them every year? If the average joe hunter must wait every four years than maybe he would be willing to only guide sheep hunters every four years. I am assuming, since his business address is in the lower 48, that he is a non-resident. I don’t want to sound anti-non resident but I don’t feel they should have much say on how the State regulates its game. Its hard for me to believe his true intentions are focused around sheep when he has so much at stake financially.

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

    Cool

    I'm going to write a letter to my senator and representative (neither seem to be sensative to outdoorsmen though, imo) and to all of the members of the outdoor coalition, even though they are not in my district. I just don't think non-res should have the ability to propose game management policies.

    Ward, I agree, I am not trying to sound anti-non-resident or anti-guide for that matter. I understand we need outside guides to meet the "demand" for hunters here and that some guides must guide in other states to make a living. I have a lot of respect for guides who try to make it financially on guiding alone; when I was younger I worked for an awesome guide (Greg Acord) who made his living this way. I just think this guy is taking it a bit far and something needs to change.

    Preservation of the OPPORTUNITY to hunt big game is paramount; a draw, 1:4 sheep, access restrictions will only discourage hunting and "hunter recruitment." I do realize that most of his and other proposals won't pass; I think last year roughly 15% of proposals were passed or amended. I agree w/what AKPM said in another thread; some of the proposals look like they're written by junior high students. Mat-Su advisory seems to be one of the only AC's to have reasonable and resident-minded, logical proposals on the table (I haven't read EVERY proposal yet).

    Like I said before, I am not attacking anyone. I'm just frustrated that it seems like hunters are getting it from every direction; KTUU slams us in Katmai, pred control is mistaken for hunting, and within our own ranks we have issues with res v. non-res, and military, guides,etc.. and we're suppose to be on the same team! Everyone has their own selfish interests I guess.

    Thanks for the venue to vent!

    Tim

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    North Pole
    Posts
    413

    Default

    Go to your local advisory commitee meetings and let you advisory commitee know how you feel. This is the way the system works. They are your voice with the Game Board. Check with your local F&G office to find when and where you advisory commitee meets.

  8. #8

    Default January 11 Deadline

    Provide written comments by jan 11 for inclusion in their packet. If enough people provide written comments against these proposals then it will get their attention.

    This is just a copy of the directions on how to comment.

    PLEASE READ CAREFULLY
    DEAR REVIEWER: November, 2007
    The Alaska Board of Game will consider the attached book of regulatory proposals at its statewide regulations meeting to be held January 25-28, 2008 at the Coast International Inn, Anchorage, Alaska. The proposals generally concern changes to regulations governing statewide regulations “B” cycle. Members of the public, organizations, advisory committees, and staff submitted these proposals, which are published essentially as they were received.
    *Note: Some of the proposals contained in this booklet are specific to a Game Management Unit and are not statewide in their regulatory intent. Generally, the purpose of a statewide Board of Game meeting is to consider proposals that apply uniformly across Alaska once adopted, changed or eliminated. Therefore, it is likely that the department will recommend to the Board of Game that some or all of the proposals that have a unit-specific reference be deferred to a subsequent regional meeting for consideration.
    The proposals are presented as brief statements summarizing the intended regulatory changes. In cases where confusion might arise or where the regulation is complex, proposed changes are also indicated in legal format. In this format, bolded and underlined words are additions to the regulation text, and capitalized words or letters in square brackets [XXXX] are deletions from the regulation text.
    You are encouraged to read all proposals presented in this book. Some regulations have statewide application and some regulations may affect other regions of the state. Also, some proposals recommend changes to multiple areas or regions.
    The proposals are set forth in the Table of Contents, which is not in roadmap order for the meeting. Prior to the meeting, the board will generate and make available to the public the order of proposals to be deliberated by the board, also known as the “roadmap.” The roadmap may be changed up to and during the meeting.
    Before taking action on these proposed changes to the regulations, the board would like your written comments and/or oral testimony on any effects the proposed changes would have on your activities.
    After reviewing the proposals, please send written comments to:
    ATTN: BOG COMMENTS
    Alaska Department of Fish and Game
    Boards Support Section
    P.O. Box 115526
    Juneau, AK 99811-5526
    Fax: 907-465-6094
    Public comment, in combination with Advisory Committee comments and ADF&G staff presentations, provide the Board of Game with useful biological and socioeconomic data to form i
    decisions. Comments may be submitted at any time until the public testimony period for that proposal and/or its subject matter is closed at the meeting and the board begins deliberations. As a practical matter, you are encouraged to mail or fax your written comments to the above Juneau address no later than 5:00 p.m. on Friday, January 11, 2008 to ensure inclusion in the board workbook. All comments received after that time will be presented to board members at the time of the meeting, but may not be printed in the board workbook. Written comments will also be accepted during the board meeting and public testimony during the public testimony portion of the meeting is always appreciated. Written comments become public documents.

    When providing written comments on the proposals in this proposal book, please consider the following tips to help ensure board members and the public more fully understand recommendations to the board:
    Timely Submission: Submit written comments by fax or mail at least two weeks prior to the meeting. Comments received at least two weeks prior to the meeting are printed and cross referenced in the board members’ workbooks. Written comments received after the two-week period will be included in the workbooks as “record copies” and are not cross referenced. Materials received during the meeting also are not cross referenced. If you provide written comments during a board meeting, submit 20 copies to Board Support Section staff, who will distribute your written comments to board members. If including graphs or charts, please indicate the source.
    List the Proposal Number: Written comments should indicate the proposal number(s) to which the comments apply. Written comments should specifically state “support” or “opposition” to the proposal(s). This will help ensure written comments are correctly noted for the board members. If the comments support a modification in the proposal, please indicate “support as amended” and provide a preferred amendment in writing.
    Do Not Use Separate Pages When Commenting on Separate Proposals: If making comments on more than one proposal, please do not use separate pieces of paper. Simply begin the next set of written comments by listing the next proposal number.
    Provide an Explanation: Please briefly explain why you are in support or opposition of the proposal. Board actions are based on a complete review of the facts involved in each proposal, not a mere calculation of comments for or against a proposal. Advisory committees and other groups also need to explain the rationale behind recommendations. Minority viewpoints from an advisory committee should be noted in advisory committee minutes along with the majority recommendation. The board benefits greatly from understanding the pro and cons of each issue. A brief description consisting of a couple of sentences is sufficient.
    Write Clearly: Comments will be photocopied so please use 8 1/2" x 11" paper and leave reasonable margins on all sides, allowing for hole punches. Whether typed or handwritten, use dark ink and write legibly.
    Use the Correct Address or Fax Number: Mail written comments to Board of Game Comments, ADF&G, P.O. Box 115526, Juneau, AK 99811-5526; fax them to
    907-465-6094; or deliver them to a Regional Boards Support Section Office.

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
  •