Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Conservation

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Fricking Texas - temporary
    Posts
    336

    Unhappy Conservation

    Lately I've read a lot about all the wolf - human interaction on Ft Richardson and would have to say that we should have seen it coming. It is a good area, plenty of game and cover, tightly regulated, and wolves are not on the "things to hunt" on Ft Rich. Recently, after the re-introduction of wolves into Yellowstone National Park, Montana and Wyoming the elk numbers have declined in part to wolf kills, which make wolf advocates happy, but elk hunters left fuming. North American whitetail deer were in peril in the early 1900's and now have a strong population coast to coast.

    My whole point to this wolf/human controversy is that without regulation (controlled harvesting) then some populations rise and others struggle. We as hunters should be commended for taking part in the conservation and propagation of species. We are doing a lot more than just bringing home dinner, we are ensuring dinner for the next generations. I wish the anti-hunters out there could figure out that by hunting animals in a controlled manner, our smart game biologists should be able to keep the delicate predator/prey balance perpetuating.

    I was just wondering if I am the only one not scratching my head as to why all these attacks are happening. It seems clear as spring water to me.

    Seeing wolves is not the easiest thing to do, but now I guess all one has to do is go jogging with little Fido on the back of Ft Richardson. Oh, did I mention that the Post has actually closed certain areas on Ft Rich to access because of the wolf attacks? There goes my ice-fishing spot this year... All we need is a little permission and my varmit-getter , then joggers could jog and I could ice fish.

  2. #2
    Member JOAT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Soldotna, ALASKA since '78
    Posts
    3,720

    Default

    You're right and you're not alone in your thinking. I believe most rural folks and those who practice the hunter/gatherer lifestyle know that humans have the ability to manage nature to maintain that balance. Left unchecked, nature goes through huge food cycle swings. Nature is cruel. We once participated in the apex predator role and overharvested ourselves, but we have learned through science how this balance works. We have the technology and knowledge to keep populations of most species in the range that the land can support while still allowing us to harvest a portion. While many hunters think that portion is too small and most "blue city" folks think that is too large, there is good science behind the numbers. Politics has no place in game management. That is the hurdle we must get over.
    Winter is Coming...

    Go GeocacheAlaska!

  3. #3

    Default just my thoughts

    It is a shame that it has come to this, I would consider PETA to be similar to the Jihadists of the middle easts, they think that they are right and nothing will change their minds--and some are willing to die for their beliefs. I am not saying that every animal lover is a psycho, just like not every muslim is a jihadist.

    As far as hunting on post for wolves, it could happen, but the right person/people/group would have to sell it effectively to the post commander, as it is his/her butt on the line if something goes wrong. He has a tight leash, because one mistake by someone else could cost them their career, no matter how good their intentions.

    I remember a morning a couple years ago right before the ski area where you can hike in off to the right and up the mtn, I watched a brown bear and a wolf standoff for the wolf's kill, wish I could have video taped it!

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    215

    Default

    I hope what I'm hearing isn't the idea that we're better off without predators simply because they decrease harvest success rates?

    I for one strongly believe that predator populations have their place in the wilderness. I like hunting coyotes, wolves, and bears, and I would never want to live somewhere that was devoid of their presence.

    For me, the whole experience of hunting is an adventure. Part of that adventure comes with the knowledge that there are still dangerous animals around. The wilderness would just seem tame without predators. No matter what critter I'm after; If I'm hunting moose, caribou, sheep, deer, or elk, I still want to know wolves and bears are around.

    Predator populations should be managed like other game animals - through hunting backed by sound, unbiased scientific research with the aim of acheiving sustainable populations.

  5. #5
    Member AKBassking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    SE Alaska-Summer Columbia River-Winter
    Posts
    2,007

    Arrow Remember California?

    It occurred to me that the same has happened in California with regards to the mountain lions. They banned hunting of them.

    The Anchorage area has become a cess pool of Environmental Waco Terrorists. They have and continue to adopt these Waco's ideas and methods.

    If there was another 64 earthquake and Anchorage fell into the ocean, it would not be missed. In fact, it may, in the long run, benefit Alaska.

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

  6. #6
    Member JOAT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Soldotna, ALASKA since '78
    Posts
    3,720

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gobblinfool View Post
    As far as hunting on post for wolves, it could happen, but the right person/people/group would have to sell it effectively to the post commander, as it is his/her butt on the line if something goes wrong. He has a tight leash, because one mistake by someone else could cost them their career, no matter how good their intentions.
    And, now that the wolf issue is well known, how much flak do you think he will take when this pack finally does take down a human? In the risk-benefit analysis, it makes much more sense to address the wolves by retraining them now.

    I've already posted this in another of the many threads on the wolves, but we need not take out all the wolves, just the leadership. By removing the leader, the pack will have to elect new management and may follow a different course of action. This has been effective in other packs and by one account was effective with this very pack several years ago.
    Winter is Coming...

    Go GeocacheAlaska!

  7. #7
    Member AKRDGRUNNER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    147

    Default Food for Thought

    Although military installations have input to the state about hunting, one must know that the state owns the animals and they are governing authority of hunting and fishing on military lands the same as other state lands. Anything that is done or can be done is dictated by ADF&G and the game boards, the installations provide input only. Access is determined by the installation's commanders.

  8. #8
    Member AKBassking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    SE Alaska-Summer Columbia River-Winter
    Posts
    2,007

    Default Really?

    Quote Originally Posted by AKRDGRUNNER View Post
    Although military installations have input to the state about hunting, one must know that the state owns the animals and they are governing authority of hunting and fishing on military lands the same as other state lands. Anything that is done or can be done is dictated by ADF&G and the game boards, the installations provide input only. Access is determined by the installation's commanders.

    Then why does Ft. Richardson and Ft. Wainwright have their own game warden?

    ADFG have no authority on federal lands. This is why I am for taking on USFWS for control of our fish and game.

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

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,956

    Default

    Bassking, I don't know where you get your information but the State Troopers and Fish and Game do indeed have jurisdiction on military lands. The bases and forts have their own game wardens because of the amount of activity on military lands. I was a conservation agent on Elmendorf. We were trained by the troopers, worked with them to enforce STATE fish and game regulations on base, and followed state regulations. When Elmendorf wanted to expand the moose harvest a few years ago, they base had to petition fish and game and the BoG to do it.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Fricking Texas - temporary
    Posts
    336

    Default some wolves are OK

    I definately don't think we need to terminate the wolf population anywhere and unbalance the delicate predator-prey equation, but I do think that they need haltered a bit so I can go ice-fishing at my favorite lake. I love seeing wolves in the wild, and I'd love even more to see their population controlled. I hope they get it figured out before the ice gets too thin...

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
  •