View Poll Results: Modify Nelchina Tier II caribou hunt

Voters
45. You may not vote on this poll
  • No-Leave it as is

    6 13.33%
  • Yes-Allow multiple cows/calves/young bulls per household with drawing for big bulls

    5 11.11%
  • Yes-Leave as is but require antlers to be sawed off

    9 20.00%
  • Yes-Leave as is but establish drawing permit for big bulls

    10 22.22%
  • Yes-Leave as is but establish drawing permit for any caribou

    15 33.33%
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 22

Thread: Nelchina Caribou Poll

  1. #1
    Member Erik in AK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,990

    Default Nelchina Caribou Poll

    Folks,
    First off I wish to come clean with the admission that the Nelchina "subsistence" hunt has irritated me for a long time. No I am not jealous of those who participate. I could probably get a tag too if I bothered to apply. I feel that the Tier II system is jacked up in general with the Nelchina hunt being its poster child. My problem with this hunt is that its not a subsistence hunt. If it was then there wouldn't be the emphasis on big bulls. ADF&G has the data--the majority of Nelchina caribou taken are big racked, white maned, trophy bulls. In the mid 90's F&G biologists were begging Tier II permit holders to take cows because the herd was too big, overgrazing its range, and they were afraid it would crash. Nothing doing. The focus on bulls continued.

    This so-called "meat" hunt has long been nothing more than a "private" trophy hunt for long-time residents.

    This isn't a native vs white, or urban vs rural issue, at least not to me. Its about a select group "gaming the system".

    What I would like to see is Tier II hunters limited to cows, calves and immature bulls. To counter the argument that there's more meat on a big bull, I would borrow a page from the dipnetting regs. I would allow 1 caribou for the head-of-household plus one per every 2 or 3 family members. I would reserve the big bulls for a drawing permit(or permits).

    Failing that I would like to see a requirement to saw the antlers off the way it is for Tier II Koyukuk Moose.

    If Tier II hunters truly want caribou meat for the freezer then IMO they shouldn't have a problem with any of this. If there are howls of protest, then that would tend to confirm my suspicions.

    I am considering submitting a proposal and would like your feedback to gauge whether or not I should bother. Please do not let my opinion sway yours...if you disagree that's OK by me. I would like your opinion either way. The only way this very contentious hunt will ever be modified is if the politically motivated managers of our F&G resources feel there is sufficient public support.

    Thanks in advance
    Last edited by Erik in AK; 08-14-2006 at 00:53.

  2. #2

    Default

    Either make it a draw hunt or have those the draw Tier 2 tag cut the rack in half after they shoot one then that would take the trophy potential out of the hunt.

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

    Smile

    Our family hunts for the meat. We shoot the biggest animal we can because it has more steaks. If we manage to shoot a huge antlered bull I see no reason to have to cut the antlers up. Although I would not be overly troubled if we had to.
    Could be an interesting debate (this issue always is). Most of the thoughts stem around long time Alaskans who get the permits and those who have not yet accumulated the points to get a permit and want something changed so they can.
    Yes, we have a RV and I am one of the "ancients" as you stated before. I am 53. We drive it out to Eureka and head back with our ATV's. We go as a family and we have a great trip even if we strike out. After living here for 30 years I feel we have earned that right. Our family economic's as to what we own or not own should not have a bearing as to the permit process. I would guess that 99% of the Alaskans who get the permits are happy the way the system is. Those who do not get the permits want it changed so they can.
    I do not see a simple easy solution to make everyone happy.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    1,094

    Default Nelchina herd

    E:
    I donít like Tier II either, and would prefer an open or registration hunt with restrictions but I know most people wont go for that. I would wish for eliminating motorized access, bow only or shortened season or some combination which increases hunting opportunity while restricting harvest. Anything but drawings!!! They eliminate hunting opportunities and replace them with a game of chance I always lose. I am also with SW, we shoot the biggest animal allowed to get the most meat, but I have no use for caribou antlers.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    3,568

    Default

    I would also like to mention the scoring process does give more points to people living in more remote areas. So no matter how long residents live here rural residents do have an edge.

  6. #6
    webmaster Michael Strahan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 1999
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska
    Posts
    5,642

    Default Another option on Nelchina 'bou

    I voted for a draw for trophy bulls, but would like to combine that with forcing "subsistence" hunters to saw the antlers off. This keeps trophy hunters from using a subsistence draw for trophy hunting, while still giving the trophy folks a shot. This would also dump more money in the ADFG budget, with guided trophy hunters coming back to the area. I think this would be a "win-win" for the state of Alaska.

    I'd also like to see some restrictions on ATV use up there; perhaps make users attend a course in responsible ATV hunting practices, and a requirement to stick to established trails. Violators would be fined and have their tag pulled. Hard to enforce though. What constitutes an "established trail"? How many times does it have to be used to be considered "established"? Do we issue a trail map? Does the state start maintaining ATV trails up there? Where does the money come from for that? Lots of problems with the ATV thing. Something should be done though... a few bad apples are spoiling the whole thing.

    This is a huge resource sitting there which is mostly untapped commercially. I've long wondered why ADFG won't find a way to give the sport hunters a shot up there.

    -Mike
    LOST CREEK COMPANY: Specializing in Alaska hunt consultation and planning for do-it-yourself hunts, fully outfitted hunts, and guided hunts.
    CLICK HERE to send me a private message.
    Web Address: http://alaskaoutdoorssupersite.com/hunt-planner/
    Mob: 1 (907) 229-4501
    "Dream big, and dare to fail." -Norman Vaughan
    "I have climbed my mountain, but I must still live my life." - Tenzig Norgay

  7. #7

    Default

    Snowwolfe mentions that "those that can't get the permit want it changed so they can", your absolutely correct with that statement and I find it amusing that you say "99% of those that get the permit are happy with the way the system is......of course they are, they get a free caribou tag and only have to drive 2 hours to bag one, whats not to like about that?? Why should someone that has lived here for 30 years be given more opportunities than someone who has lived here for just a few? This is suppose to be a subsistance hunt but I don't see anything remotely close to a subsistance hunt here. Thats the big issue with this hunt that i see. Personally, i would perfer they make t a draw hunt and fair for all Alaskan's, not just for those that have lived here for X amount of years. Heck, i've lived here for 13 years but I know I will never get a permit just because of the way the system is set up. Oh well, until something changes i'll just have to do what everyone else does and spend the money to hunt somewhere else.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    3,568

    Default

    It used to be a draw hunt. They changed it to a "subsistence" hunt around 1990. Do people drawing the permits today need the meat? Probably not. I do not think it has even been a true subsistence hunt except for the occassional family who lives close to the herd and out in the bush.
    And if you think you only have to drive 2 hours to bag a caribou then you havent hunted there recently. We spent three weekends out in back of Eureka last year and only seen one caribou. We probably walked 5-7 miles a day.
    Best success is always to fly in.

  9. #9
    Forum Admin Brian M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Eagle River, AK
    Posts
    12,848

    Default

    I used to get the Tier II permit, but went through a 6-7 year dry spell when the herd numbers were down and some "proxy" hunters were abusing the system. With higher numbers and a retooled proxy program, I finally got a Nelchina tag again this year. Yeah, I'll probably shoot the biggest bull I can, but I'd be happy with a younger bull, especially since hunting time will be very limited for me this fall. That being said, I would accept it if the law were changed to require destruction of antlers. That really makes a lot of sense, especially if we want to designate this as subsistence. There isn't a lot of nutritional value in those antlers, so if that's what it takes to bring some legitimacy to this hunt, I'd support it.

    The idea of restricting the harvest to cows/young bulls wouldn't be a good approach biologically. As we all know, a single bull can impregnate many cows. If we turned to harvesting cows instead, the herd numbers would likely begin to fall and hunting opportunity (permit #'s) would decline. That wouldn't serve anyone's interests, regardless of your position on the issue. Cow hunts are bad management for the most part, unless herd numbers need to be controlled.

    On a final note, there is legitimacy to the practice of shooting a larger animal to get more meat. I know it seems fishy when people take large antlered bulls for subsistence purposes, but not all of us are out to game the system.

    (Really, going to a straight draw for that hunt, with increased motorized restrictions, would be the best for hunters at large.)

    -Brian

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Snowwolfe
    It used to be a draw hunt. They changed it to a "subsistence" hunt around 1990. Do people drawing the permits today need the meat? Probably not. I do not think it has even been a true subsistence hunt except for the occassional family who lives close to the herd and out in the bush.
    And if you think you only have to drive 2 hours to bag a caribou then you havent hunted there recently. We spent three weekends out in back of Eureka last year and only seen one caribou. We probably walked 5-7 miles a day.
    Best success is always to fly in.
    2 hour drive from Eagle River and yes, i have been there several times this year. The atv ride in is fun and I have yet to see anyone walk to get their caribou. People put in for draws because they are either A) close to home B) trophy potential is high C) less competition or D) limited species (bison, musk ox). I dont' have a problem with subsistance as long as it's done the right way which the Nelchina is not.

  11. #11
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    268

    Default You can't eat horns.....

    I've been here 26 years but won't get a tier II permit because A) I live in Eagle River and B) I answer the questions honestly.

    When I used to get permits I harvested the first caribou I saw and they were cows or small bulls, never did shoot a decent bull and I really didn't care

    Why does a resident of Glennallen (not to pick on Glennallen) with an airplane or $100K motor home qualify for a "subsistence" preference ?

    The other red herring in the whole thing are the people who find some 80YO widow who doesn't even know where Nelchina is.........get her to fill out a permit application and then go enjoy a nice "proxy" trophy hunt.....

    The whole program is a joke and needs to be fixed

    One good first step would be to make it illegal to bring the horns out of the field........saw them into 4 pieces or better yet BRING them out and donnate them to Fish & Game so they can sell them to a carver or tourist shop or whatever.......

  12. #12
    Forum Admin Brian M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Eagle River, AK
    Posts
    12,848

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AKCheese
    I've been here 26 years but won't get a tier II permit because A) I live in Eagle River and B) I answer the questions honestly.


    The other red herring in the whole thing are the people who find some 80YO widow who doesn't even know where Nelchina is.........get her to fill out a permit application and then go enjoy a nice "proxy" trophy hunt.....

    AKCheese - I know you weren't directing that at anyone in particular, but I'll tell you that I've lived in Eagle River for 28 years and I answer all of the questions honestly, and I got a permit this year for the first time in many. Maybe you're only a year or two out from qualifying.

    As for the proxy issue, take a look at the changes in the regulations this year. They have largely addressed the issue that you address. Now the proxy hunter must also be a Tier II permit holder and they must destroy the trophy value of both sets of antlers. It may not be perfect, but it's certainly a step in the right direction.

    -Brian

  13. #13

    Default Nelchina Tier 2

    Here we go again, always makes for good conversation with my friends that don't get these tags. Let's remember the history here first:

    - The hunt was originally an open hunt until the early 1970's when it closed completely due to years of mismanagement/lack of enforcement. Sadly many of the reasons were slob hunting/tag exceeding by newcomers and (unfortunately) many transient miltary personnel when Alaska was the in between point from Vietnam to the Lower 48. This is what also hurt our fisheries (think of salmon being caught and left on the banks of Ship Creek to rot), and can really be chalked up to the time necessary for the State to fully implement it's management strategy over the previous (before Statehood) Federal one. After a few years of closure, it then changed into a draw hunt before in the late 1980's into the current Subsistence format.
    - The whole subsistence mess was court driven and F & G simply played the hand that was (unfairly) dealt them. You can also blame Tony Knowles for lying about pursuing the whole Katie John challenge in court and NOT!; remember that this fall.
    - You cannot biologically harvest only cows and young bulls, even though I may prefer their meat-although you do get more off of a large bull as others noted.
    - Finally, F & G has tweaked the Tier 2 system over the years to try to control or eliminate situations such as roomates and proxy from the "household member" definitions.

    So where do you go from here? I don't have any answers short of tweaking and pursuing through the courts to the highest level the whole subsistence mess, but I certainly vehemntly disagree with the "untapped commercial resource" position. The last thing we need in our state is more guides serving tourists (whom I cant personnally blame) of any kind competing on a limited stagnent road/trail system. Who do you think would have the most success? Hell, they can't even limit the number of guides on the Kenai River,yet can skirt the issue through lawyerly regulations, so pardon me for not trusting the industry to do the right thing.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    3,568

    Default

    AKCheese,
    Last year was the first time wife and I received a permit in about 7 years. Within another year or two you should be in the running as long as they do not reduce the number of permits. Not sure how they do the scoring but our son was born here and he is 18 and he has never received one yet.
    Enjoy!
    Have any of you scored yet this year? We havent been over yet this year but may pop over to Eureka next week once we get silver fishing out of our blood.

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Valley trash.....and proud of it.
    Posts
    813

    Default

    I'm in a decent mood, so I'm not even gonna get into this one. I like everybody here so I'll keep the pot stirring for the other websites....lol

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    3,394

    Default

    If you want to shoot a big bull up there, then you should have to draw a permit for it. That's my opinion.

  17. #17
    Member Kurt S's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    168

    Default

    Bwake, good recap on the history. I would also point out the 10,000 permit hand out in Palmer in the 80ís, and the bulls only on some permits in the early half, cows in the second depending on your luck of the draw. There were also some attempts with musket hunters before the main season. And donít forget the Federal program.

    My opinion is there have been numerous attempts at managing this herd and frankly I think the present system is working the best. The hay days of the 70ís where anyone could hunt the herd, a limit up to 7 animals per hunter was a recipe for disaster, which it turned out to be. Not only was there a lot of abuse, but thousands of animals was left to rot in the hills. I was there, I saw it! The drawing years were a mixed bag, itís not an easy herd to manage year to year as some of us know. With the present system, they give out x number of permits and can and do shut off the hunt when they reach y which is much lower than x. The can play with cow and bull ratios during the season and cut one or the other off to keep the ratio in check.

    There is a story behind every face that you meet out in the field, youíd probably be surprised.

    As for me, I have hunted that herd since the 50ís. We didnít have Safewayís in Northway, and it was pretty much the only fresh meat we got. **** on a shingle from a can wasnít meat! My family has hunted game from that area for 47 yrs and counting and Iíll be quite frank, I think Iíve earned my spot on the list. Is it fair? Obviously not in some peoples eyes, but consider this; as the years tick by, the top of that list drops off and is filled in by the next generation and that will continue for as long as the program is allowed to exist. You have a much better shot at making that list than you do in any draw that I know of and your time will come. Us old timers with history will die, move, and get too old to hunt, or just drink our prune juice at some point. If you look at the scores over the years, itís dropping faster than you would think. It used to be a 70 score was high, now weíre down in the 60ís, in just a few short years. I have heard that if you donít put in every year, you wonít get drawn the first year after you do, but will be in line the following. I also believe there is a sub drawing if they need to fill out the number of permits and there are a bunch tied with equal scores on down. This would explain why some years you get one, some you donít if you are down the list on points.

    The argument of a trophy hunt for the few is not the majority, and I would guess itís a rather small percentage. None of the caribou I have taken would make the record book so I donít buy that argument. What you camp in doesnít make an argument either, just how far would you take that line, value of gun, age of your boots, make of your pick-em-up truck?
    No system is perfect in everyoneís eyes, not the permanent fund, the resident land preference, the longevity bonus, the homestead program or the state land lotteryÖ.thatís just life.

    Kurt

  18. #18

    Default Well said Kurt

    Kurt I'm with you 101%, well said. I myself am a lifetime Alaskan who has hunted the herd. I drew a tag this year, however I have not always drawn a tag. When I did not draw I did not grumble or gripe about the system but know that my time will come again, and may possible go again. I say leave it as is.

  19. #19
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    106

    Default Whats in a name..

    Contentious issues, like this one, occur when the actual purpose for each hunt is not clearly identified. What Alaska names our hunts should help people understand why they can or cannot hunt. I would support a board proposal aimed at matching the name of each hunt with the expected outcome. Since Board appointee decisions are proportionally political; and adfg area managers are tasked with maintaining the resource; our challenge will be creating a submission that addresses multiple interests. We need support from both of these groups and the public. Such a proposal may help relieve some of the pressure both the Board and the Managers feel. Today, our politicos, tend to lean toward making voters happy, their positional perspective may tell them "letís make sure the power based constituents are happy with the boss". The biological facts of the case are something like: how to allow caribou harvests while ensuring long term health of the herd. Left strictly to the biologists, they would probably sort through mounds of data, do a study, and then describe, in detail, which caribou you could hunt based on those least likely to impact next years caribou population. Balancing these two interests with public sentiment inside the proposal would help ensure support. The last group, us, poses the most difficulty. With the emotions involved, can the public come together to exhibit widespread support for the proposal?

  20. #20

    Default

    What happened to the poll?? Seems that some of the #'s have changed since I checked it last.

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
  •