Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 54

Thread: Vote Yes on Ballot Measure 2

  1. #1
    Member Riptide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    88

    Default Vote Yes on Ballot Measure 2

    Our hunting traditions in Alaska have always benefited from a strong natural ecosystem. When we first arrived in this state the wild game populations were at an all time high. Since then we have slowly been losing ground. Artificial management of our wildlife resources has decimated the balance mother nature has created over hundreds of thousands of years. Now the BOG would like you to believe that they need to remove science based management in a last ditch effort to save your hunting traditions. Amazing. Give the BOG management of the mosquito's and they'll wipe them out in no time!!!!

    The truth is that the ADF&G has testified against aerial predator control programs at the 2006 Board of Game meetings. Yet, the incredible arrogance represented by the game board members, many of which are still active members, choose to overide the recomendation of the ADF&G. To overide the science based management of our resources. Sportsmen for Wildlife and Alaskan's for Profesional Wildlife Management seem to have amnesia about this FACT!

    Hey - You want to see the facts, including footage of the BOG overturning the ADF&G's recomendations - Go Here:

    http://current.com/items/88811075_en...l_wolf_hunting

    Vote Yes on Ballot Measure 2

  2. #2
    Moderator LuJon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    11,415

    Default

    I had an apiphany while whatching that bunch of rhetoric... I propose a bill in which the FDA takes all the potential cancer treatment drugs then allows the manufacturers to run comercials about the bennefits of their new drug then we can vote on which one gets approved! We can call it ballot box medicine!! I love it...
    The BOG is a great system and it may not allways go your way but you have a voice, get on an advisory counsel and lets keep our options open for how we manage our game! Lets keep the anti's shut out vote NO on Measure 2. If aerial predator control is not a viable option in a particular area or the science does not support it then lets stop it within the system that is there (our system) by pushing to have the predator management measures removed in that area.
    The video makes a point that I am a sport hunter based on where I live!! That is there big sell. Aparently even Native Alaskans that live in Anchorage and hunt on a sports license are the "enemy"... What a crock it makes a huge difference to my family financially if we can put a moose in the freezer in the fall, and we EAT IT ALL!!!
    Spike fork 50" (SF50) eliminates man as the predator decimating moose herds. It doesn't eliminate predation or weather from wiping out moose. There are some on this forum and in the ADF&G that believe that since a few extreme winters are to blame for low moose population then the reduction of predators is exempt as part of the solution. It doesn't make sense. Studying causes of the situation is important for prevention but it does nothing for recovery! Imagine if FEMA refused to provide aid durring/after a disaster but instead spent billions of dollars to study the cause of the hurricane while people starved and died of exposure. I could just see the FEMA director giving a speach about how the only way to fix the problem in New Orleans is to understand how it happened and stop the next hurricane from doing this sort of damage while the city burned unabated in the background...
    Do the studies to understand the problems in each region and establish a carrying capacity. Encourage habitat improvement and lets use common sense to resurect areas that have depleted resources! If the reduction of predators fits into the management scheme then lets use the most effective methods available to us! Eliminating effective measures for restoring game animals is not what is best for Alaskans (remote and urban alike)!!
    You may have missed it burried in all the mumbo jumbo but the video clearly states that predator control works for increasing game animals. Even the anti's can't deny that

  3. #3

    Default

    I like the way they chop and cut the video to get their point across. I was so digusted with the way the video was presented I shut it off after about 5 minutes. They didn't win over this voter and IMO, this video just fuels the fire for those who oppose ballet measure 2. It was almost like watching an Obama tv commercial.

  4. #4
    Moderator David Johnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1997
    Location
    Redding California
    Posts
    57

    Thumbs down I'll be voting NO on 2.

    I am going to vote against Proposition 2. In fact, if it were within my ability, I'd eliminate ballot propositions altogether because they seem to me to be more influenced by the slickest TV ads than by careful examination of issues, but that's another thread.

    Much of the moose abundance we appreciate in some parts of southcentral and interior Alaska is due to decades of careful predator management. It's not possible to achieve this kind of control over wolves by non-aerial methods, poison excepted, and I don't think we ought to go there. Allowing non-state employees to act as agents makes predator management over large areas possible given limited state budgets.

    As an observer of predator control programs in central Alaska in the 1970s and 1980s there is no question in my mind that they work, that they are important, and that they can be done in a way that is beneficial to both predator and prey populations.

    I understand that reasonable people may disagree on these things, but having seen first hand how it works, I am going to vote against ballot measures that limit the ability of the state to manage predators.

    David
    David M Johnson
    Anchorage, Alaska
    http://awildolivebranch.blogspot.com

  5. #5
    Mark
    Guest

    Default

    I will also vote no on Prop 2, just like I voted against all the previous ballot measures like it.

  6. #6
    Member mit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Fairbanks
    Posts
    702

    Default

    Yep I tired of hearing about save the wolves! Vote no! and exterminate them all!
    Tim

  7. #7
    Member bushrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Now residing in Fairbanks from the bush
    Posts
    4,363

    Default Aerial shooting of grizzlies?

    How do ya'll feel about the aerial shooting of grizzly bears as part of any future pred-control program? If this initiative only had to do with aerial shooting of grizzlies, would you vote in favor of it?

    Inre the "science," Region III ADFG has a position on aerial shooting of grizzlies saying the Dept. does not support it as a part of any control plan. This differs from what Juneau ADFG management staff has said.

    Separating the science from the politics is pretty darn hard <grin>. I will say one thing; what I am seeing come out of Alaskans for Professional Wildlife Management is the worst sort of propaganda...and if that's the route they are gonna take it is pretty sad.

  8. #8

    Default

    Aerial shooting of grizzlies??? No way, thats one of the dumbest ideas of predator control i've heard yet.

  9. #9
    Member Matt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    3,410

    Default

    I'll be voting NO.

  10. #10

    Default I will take it a step further.....

    Quote Originally Posted by bushrat View Post
    How do ya'll feel about the aerial shooting of grizzly bears as part of any future pred-control program?

    How do ya'll feel about guides selling same day airborne hunts for bears calling it predator-control; not hunting.

    "Same day airborne" hunting for bears is now legal as a commercial business for guides through the bills introduced this last legislative session and the SFW-A 16b project this spring tested the tolerance of the people to authorize the State to delegate predator control to the commercial hunting industry.

    Predator control bills, intensive management and the wildlife assets bills this year redefined commercial hunting into predator control opening the way to a new same day airborne commercial bear hunting business for guides.

    All the commercial hunting guide industry needs now is the aerial shooting "permission" ballot measure 2 hopes to stop or the commercial hunting industry will be 'selling' airborne hunts for bears too.

    We need predator control but we don't to commercialize and broaden the impact commercial hunting has on the culture of "hunting" and the character of our wildlife management system.

    I will vote NO and find other ways to support efforts to reign in the commercial hunting industry.


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

    Default

    It doesn't bother me in any moral way. I don't see the need for it because bears are easier to pattern than wolves and are just plain easier to hunt due to their smaller indevidual territory. I don't see a reaon to outlaw it as a last resort measure if by some chance there was such an overwhelming influx that it decimated the local ungulate herds.

  12. #12
    Mark
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bushrat View Post
    How do ya'll feel about the aerial shooting of grizzly bears as part of any future pred-control program?....
    I feel that it's completely unnecessary.

    Just open brown bear hunting in the appropriate GMUs where intensive management is declared to non-residents with no guide requirement and open to baiting.

    The numbers would reach the desired populations within two years.

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Chugiak, AK
    Posts
    40

    Default No on Prop 2

    I've about had it with ballot box wildlife management, particularly when a good share of it originates out of state or funded primarily out of state. Too many ballot proposals have already restricted our hunting heritage or made us spend precious time or resources to defend our heritage. We see more ballot box proposals with each election. We need wildlife management in the hands of professionals. Eliminating ballot box management is a start, then we need to make sure we get our elected officials to put the right professionals in place to ensure proper management.

  14. #14
    Member ripnlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Eagle River
    Posts
    291

    Default hooaahhhh!!!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by RLK7 View Post
    I've about had it with ballot box wildlife management, particularly when a good share of it originates out of state or funded primarily out of state. Too many ballot proposals have already restricted our hunting heritage or made us spend precious time or resources to defend our heritage. We see more ballot box proposals with each election. We need wildlife management in the hands of professionals. Eliminating ballot box management is a start, then we need to make sure we get our elected officials to put the right professionals in place to ensure proper management.

    coulndt have said it better myself. There is a reason we have wildlife management professionals; I am talking about the people that do this management for a living(with supporting data), not the groups that "let nature take its course".

  15. #15

    Default Agreed, voting no

    Let the state help produce some game!
    Mike
    Mike
    www.alaskaatvclub.org
    There is a faster way off the mountain, might hurt a little though.

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    2 mi east of 'Halfmoon creek"
    Posts
    831

    Default Prop 2

    DOESN'T only have to do with shooting grizzlies, and some of the "side- track speculators" would like to slip this thought in your mind. Myself I don't want to lose any chance of losing predator control, especially when it comes to wolves. My vote will be NO on prop 2.
    Myself I could spend all day and night speculating and/or theorizing on prop 2, and could create doubt and confusion on prop 2 for many of the readers of this forum. But I'm not that type of guy.

  17. #17
    Member Riptide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    88

    Default Don't confuse the issue?

    Quote Originally Posted by RLK7 View Post
    I've about had it with ballot box wildlife management, particularly when a good share of it originates out of state or funded primarily out of state. Too many ballot proposals have already restricted our hunting heritage or made us spend precious time or resources to defend our heritage. We see more ballot box proposals with each election. We need wildlife management in the hands of professionals. Eliminating ballot box management is a start, then we need to make sure we get our elected officials to put the right professionals in place to ensure proper management.
    You guys all seem to run for the hills in regards to the fact that I started the thread to emphasize that the BOG will ignore the science and the recomendation of the ADF&G. Its PROVEN! Yes, they want to add not only bears but wolverines to the list of animals they can allow aerial gunning. The proof they ignore the science and the ADF&G is in the video link. Convienant science is all the BOG wants - not the truth. They have a radical adjenda. Why do you avoid that fact? The hunting community should demand science based predator management and the BOG is not providing that. Too bad I had to link to an ANTI just to find the actual footage for you. Pro hunting groups avoid the facts of what we are dealing with.

    And one other fact, Alaskans, yes only registered voters in Alaska, voted aerial predator control out of exitstence - TWICE. Nobody from the lower 48 voted on those ballots! The voters of ALASKA have also approved by state wide vote that ballot box initiatives are appropriate for setting wildlife management policy. Public Policy should be inthe hands of the public. Alaskan's did not vote wolf control out of existence, just aerial predator control with citezen gunners. So quit confusing the facts. Alaska is pro predator control when its combined with solid science and is administered by the ADF&G. Why the BOG does not push for programs we all can support is a mystery to me. HEaven knows the ADF&G could make good use of several helicopters for a wide variety of programs that would benefit the hunters in Alaska - INCLUDING ENFORCEMENT! At a time when the state is flush with cash the hunting community should demand that the legislature fund the ADF&G at a level that allows them to do their job to the fullest. Providing top notch science and handling any aerial gunning by the most effective means, with solid shooting platform choppers and top notch state employee gunners. Then, nobody would have to deal with this crap!

  18. #18
    Mark
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
    ......the BOG will ignore the science and the recomendation of the ADF&G. Its PROVEN! Yes, they want to add not only bears but wolverines to the list of animals they can allow aerial gunning.....
    Reference, please.

    .....The hunting community should demand science based predator management and the BOG is not providing that.....
    The ADFG has provided more than enough biological documentation to support the current predator control program. Just a portion of it can be found here.

    .....The voters of ALASKA have also approved by state wide vote that ballot box initiatives are appropriate for setting wildlife management policy.....
    Reference, please.

    .....Why the BOG does not push for programs we all can support is a mystery to me.....
    You've got to be kidding? Right?

    Everybody on the same page?

    What are you smoking?

  19. #19

    Default

    http://newsminer.com/news/2008/jul/0...d-recovers-af/


    Vote NO on Measure 2

    Aerial Predator Control Saves Caribou Herd

    A recent article in the Fairbanks Daily News Miner reported that an aerial predator control operation last month saved a Southern Alaska Peninsula herd of caribou from extinction. In the last 6 years, the herd's numbers dwindled from 4,100 to 600. Biologists' main concern for the future of the herd stems from the fact that there has been only 6 surviving calves in the last 2 years.

    Since the late May/early June aerial operation, 283 calves have survived their first two weeks of life, the time when they are most susceptible to predator attacks. According to Bruce Bartley of the Department of Fish and Game, "That pretty much leaves predation" as the reason for the suffering numbers of caribou.

    Read the full story here: "Southern Alaska Peninsula Caribou Herd recovers after aerial wolf control"


    Your Support

    The August 26 election is only 46 days away! To compete with the well-funded and out-of-state groups that are trying to ban aerial predator control, we will need your support.

    Here are four ways you can help:

    1.) Vote "No" on Measure 2 and encourage your friends to do the same.

    2.) Forward this email to your friends, family, and co-workers using the box at the bottom of this email. If you can, give us your mailing lists and we will include them in these updates.

    3.) Write a letter to your local newspaper! Click here for key facts to include and the email address of your newspaper.

    4.) Donate! No matter how small, a donation will allow Alaskans for Professional Wildlife Management to effectively defeat Measure 2.


    For more information, visit the Take Action section of our website.

    Questions? Email info@protectmoose.com.


    www.ProtectMoose.comPaid for by Alaskans for Professional Wildlife Management, P.O. Box 4053, Palmer, AK 99645

  20. #20
    Mark
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pa18tony View Post
    ......A recent article in the Fairbanks Daily News Miner reported that an aerial predator control operation last month saved a Southern Alaska Peninsula herd of caribou from extinction. In the last 6 years, the herd's numbers dwindled from 4,100 to 600. Biologists' main concern for the future of the herd stems from the fact that there has been only 6 surviving calves in the last 2 years.

    Since the late May/early June aerial operation, 283 calves have survived their first two weeks of life, the time when they are most susceptible to predator attacks. According to Bruce Bartley of the Department of Fish and Game, "That pretty much leaves predation" as the reason for the suffering numbers of caribou......
    Excellent article. Thanks for that link.

    I must have missed the Anchorage Daily News article telling us of this important situation.................

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

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
  •