Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 47

Thread: Petition

  1. #1
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    I am Valley trash.
    Posts
    589

    Default Petition

    Would you sign a petition that would:

    #1. Require that any proposals made to Board of Game be by a resident of Alaska?

    #2. That would require that guides for the following big game (Sheep, Goat, Brown Bear) be an Alaskan resident

  2. #2
    Member Roland on the River's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    1,690

    Default petition

    Yes, sounds right to me.

  3. #3
    New member akhunter02's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    682

    Default great idea

    lets get that one roll'n . Id be glad to help out with something like that, been a long time coming

  4. #4
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Chugiak, AK
    Posts
    694

    Default Yes, and add these two

    Also add the following:

    1. I also think you should have to be a guide to guide hunts and not an asst guide, how else do you know they are properlly trained?
    Most people book with guides and expect them to actually be guiding them, when 80% of the guides hire asst guides to do the work. With half of them being from outside.

    2. I also wish they would bring back outfitter licenses, as long as they dont do any guiding or guiding related work, like packing, skinning, ect.
    Why should it be illegal for a guy to rent you a 40 pound tent(when a transporter could) so you dont have to pay all the airlines fees for the gear(80 dollars each way or more when you switch airlines). It would also make things alot easier for everyone. Here is another example, I leave my home in Chugiak, I fly to Nome Alaska, I have to take a brand new lantern, a brand new cook stove, cause legally you cant ship these because they have had fuel in them, I have had more than one tank in my big coleman cookstove seized by the airlines.

    Makes you think why a nonresident can guide but not hunt. I think it is unconstitutional to exclude nonresidents actually. But, otherwise I would support it.

    Terry

  5. #5
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Fairbanks
    Posts
    49

    Default Guides

    I like it, but add in must spend 8 or more consectutive months every year in Alaska. Same requirements for collecting the PFD. I'd sign it and would get others to sign also....

  6. #6
    Member Queen of Kings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    559

    Default yes

    dang right
    2003 220 Hewescraft Sea Runner 115 Yam'y, Soft Top "Schmidt Happens"

  7. #7
    Member Phil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Liverpool, NY (a suburb of Syracuse)
    Posts
    494

    Default Here We Go Again

    I've started something like this before and always thought it too inflammatory to submit but - here goes. Yes, I'm a non-resident. I'm guessing that several of the replies came from people who were once non-residents. Yes, I plan to remain a non-resident of Alaska (plus 48 other states). I plan to remain a resident of New York and I hope to continue hunting in Alaska.

    Why is it that as soon as there is change, the non-resident is always blamed? Change in hunting/guiding has changed, is changing, and will continue to change. The most appropriate way to deal with that change (in my opinion) is to create the greatest hunting/guiding opportunities for the greatest number of people that the resource will support.
    What is needed is science, study, and hunters/guides who will look past their own benefit to create hunting/guiding opportunities.

    Are there any other non-residents who might support me???

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tv321 View Post
    Would you sign a petition that would:

    #1. Require that any proposals made to Board of Game be by a resident of Alaska?

    #2. That would require that guides for the following big game (Sheep, Goat, Brown Bear) be an Alaskan resident
    #1 Yep. I'm going to write my legislators and the "Outdoor Coalition" and request just that.

    #2 Not sure. Can RESIDENT ONLY guides meet the "demand" for guided services up here? I don't think they can. I would most likely sign it anyway though. BRWNBR, can you shed light on this?

    Phil: Don Schwandt, a non-res guide has proposed many changes to the BOG that would greatly diminish OPPORTUNITY for RESIDENTS to hunt in our own state; I think that's why people are peeved. His proposals for the 07 & 08 BOG meetings have been rather offensive and down-right selfish. I don't think anyone is trying to come off as anti-non-resident. My dad's a non-res and I don't want the BOG to make it impossible for him to afford or seriously curtail his ability to come up and hunt with me. I just think residents don't want any more Don Schwandts' proposals to curtail Alaska hunting to meet his financial needs.

    Tim

  9. #9
    Moderator LuJon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    11,415

    Default

    Got my pen ready!

  10. #10
    New member akhunter02's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    682

    Default Phil

    Quote Originally Posted by Phil View Post
    I've started something like this before and always thought it too inflammatory to submit but - here goes. Yes, I'm a non-resident. I'm guessing that several of the replies came from people who were once non-residents. Yes, I plan to remain a non-resident of Alaska (plus 48 other states). I plan to remain a resident of New York and I hope to continue hunting in Alaska.

    Why is it that as soon as there is change, the non-resident is always blamed? Change in hunting/guiding has changed, is changing, and will continue to change. The most appropriate way to deal with that change (in my opinion) is to create the greatest hunting/guiding opportunities for the greatest number of people that the resource will support.
    What is needed is science, study, and hunters/guides who will look past their own benefit to create hunting/guiding opportunities.

    Are there any other non-residents who might support me???
    Heres the thing, its not so much the proposed changes, its who is doing it. A non resident should not be allowed to propose changes to hunting regs.. That would be same as me proposing and lobbying for changes for NY, its up to each individual state and its residents to propose change

  11. #11
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    I am Valley trash.
    Posts
    589

    Default Phil

    We no longer have the resources to allow everyone to hunt. Until we do, Alaska residents could be considered first.

    We wouldn’t be having this discussion, if Commercial Fish & Fish was doing there job.

    My problem with the non-resident guides is this: The money spent by non-resident hunters needs to benefit Alaskan’s. If all guides were required to be Alaskan residents then the majority of the money would be spent in our communities, i.e... Taxidermist, meat processing, guide fees etc…

  12. #12

    Default Think about it a minute

    The federal constitution protects non-resident guides and the State can not prevent non-residents from obtaining a license if they meet the States other requirements. It has to do with commercial and economic opportunity.
    Even Attorney's can not get laws passed that "require" an attorney to be a resident of the State they practice in ..........so not a good battle.

    But; maybe the same thing could get accomplished to some extent by considering the root issue.

    At the State level and considering a public resource; commercial interests do not get in front of any or every other interest.

    Adoption of guide licensing regulation by the State (people) was never intended to be perverted so as to enable what has become "business as usual".

    A guide license is nothing more than a professional personal [individual] service license. Like a certified "message therapist license" there is always going to be a place for that kind of thing and it is protected, but the LICENSE is an individual license to practice a profession and does not authorize or grant rights to the person who holds the license to open up a parlor and hire "assistants" for personal benefit.

    An assistant guide license is NOT a professional personal license which grants rights to guide hunts; it specifically excludes professional rights. The intention of the State (people) in adopting regulations was to establish a training program to establish a person as qualifying as a professional.

    IMO; The most critical base line issue; the most straight forward issue to get resolved, that would have the most positive impact, (and in perpetuity) in the quickest amount of time and effect the least number of people is to challenge the notion that "Licensed guides" are acting legally (within the intent of resource regulations) when they book hunts, accept the booking of hunts, sign contracts to provide the guide service and do not guide the hunt.


  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Fairbanks, Alaska
    Posts
    579

    Default

    Yes, I would be more than glad to sign

  14. #14
    Member Phil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Liverpool, NY (a suburb of Syracuse)
    Posts
    494

    Default Non-Residents

    My special thanks to tccak71, akhunter02, & TV321 for their comments. I have no problem with the first part - BOG proposals being from residents. The second part - requiring all guides to be residents is probably unlawful.

    My problem is with "non-resident" bashing. Yes, the last year of hunting proposals has probably helped this round but the "non-resident bashing" goes back at least as far as the "old format forum" - probably further. If you check the archives you will find "ban all non-residents" & "require all non residents to hire guides for all species" to be fairly common.

    In 2007 it cosdt a resident $25 to buy a hunting license and a SMALL fee for certain animals. It cost me $85 for a hunting license and a "trophy fee" that is significant for EVERY big game animal I want to hunt. When residents go hunting, I expect the costs to be in the hundreds of dollars. When I go to Alaska to hunt my expenses are in the thousands of dollars (and I'm a cheapskate). Most of that money stays in Alaska. In fact, a lot of the money paid to non-resident guides stays in the state.

    Considering all of these factors, every state (not just Alaska) needs to treat their non-resident outdoors persons with care.

    Just so you won't think its Alaska only, my hunting licenses in WY have increased by 73% since 2001.

  15. #15
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Chugiak, AK
    Posts
    694

    Default Not trying to slam non-residents

    We are not trying to slam Non-residents, but the way I see it for an individual to submit a proposal(change the law) you should have to be a legal voter in the state. Would be like me going to Michigan were my mom lives and make a proposal to lower the speed limit to 45MPH on the highways. Might effect me one week a year, were all resident would be effected on a daily basis.


    Terry

  16. #16

    Default

    What makes no sense to me is the fact that a non-resident guide can guide other hunters to sheep, goats and brown bear but can't hunt them on his own. I wonder why that is? As for the petition, i'd be happy to sign though I don't think they will cahnge the second proposal, to many legality issues IMO.

  17. #17

    Default From the AK State Department of Law.

    Quote Originally Posted by AkHunter45 View Post
    What makes no sense to me is the fact that a non-resident guide can guide other hunters to sheep, goats and brown bear but can't hunt them on his own. I wonder why that is? As for the petition, i'd be happy to sign though I don't think they will cahnge the second proposal, to many legality issues IMO.
    http://www.law.state.ak.us/pdf/opinions/883020011.pdf




    It is a "dated" document but will shed some light on the subject.........to what extent guides (commercial hunting) and ["the Department of Law has adopted legal interpretations that avoid the constitutional questions,"] are willing to go to put NON resident recreational hunters (GUIDES) interest ahead of every other interest.


  18. #18

    Default

    So what I gather from that document is that some assistant non resident guides in the past were using that license to hunt up here as a "resident", interesting stuff.

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AkHunter45 View Post
    So what I gather from that document is that some assistant non resident guides in the past were using that license to hunt up here as a "resident", interesting stuff.
    Yah, interesting stuff. When the State (residents hunters) wanted to close the loophole.........and in closing the loophole the State "avoided" the constitutional questions. What does that mean? Was/is the State violating the constitutional by "avoiding" the constitutional question. Why would they do that? To PROTECT THE COMMERCIAL HUNTING BUSINESS? surely not

    Makes you wonder........are Nonresidents-next of kin regulations unconstitutional or nonresidents must be guided is unconstitutional or requiring nonresident guides to be guided to hunt is that unconstitutional.

    It makes you wonder; are the commercial recreational hunting/guiding regulations; as implemented even or at all in compliance with constitutional law?

    I am fairly sure; we have some serious problems created by self serving guides and the department of State law is not going to fix them.

    Residents don't seem to want to do it either.

    I predict; sometime in the pretty near future (one or two years) the courts will do it for us.

    Cheers.


  20. #20
    Member BRWNBR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Big Lake
    Posts
    8,437

    Default

    Tim, i do think alaska resident guides could handle the guide industry on their own, if you for some strange reason saw non res guides disapear, some residents would step up and fill voids.

    Also a non res assitant guide OR registered guide cannot guide themselves, I've called and asked about this before, it must be a contracted hunt and you cannot contract yourself. In addition a guide cannot hunt big game with a client in the field either. I actually guided a non res asst guide on a mt goat hunt once, because he couldn't guide him self.

    Asst guides be them non res or res always will have the issue of being "knowledgeable" some are great great guides, wtih decades of experience who choose to stay asst rahter than go registered to avoid the costs (450 every other year for res reg guides). But big outfitts love asst guides because they pay them asst guide wages, saving money and more eager workers easy to find cheaper help...business.

    What some folks are saying abut guides being the only ones who can guide is great, won't ever happen but its a great thought. If they would just limit the amount of asst/reg guides a contracting guide could hire, you'd see contracting guides being more selective with who they hired, they'd have to have quality guides to keep in business. When you can only run 4 clients at at time instead of 14 your gonna be more carefull what you do with those clients.
    Www.blackriverhunting.com
    Master guide 212

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
  •