Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: proposal 242

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

    Default proposal 242

    We have talked about this last year and it is back in this years proposals. This time submitted by the BOG. So it has a really good chance in passing unless you voice your concerns. I would like to have your input so I can relay them to the AC meeting this Wed.

    BOG submitted this and they want to establish special hunts for big game on military land and on some national/state land.

    Here is my take. I like the idea but only if it was on military land only. If you are going to allow such a hunt on federal /state land then I am not for it.

    I am not against the military ( i did 14 years and wife is still current active duty 19 yrs) I just think we are forgetting about the fireman, cops etc... by not including them on these hunts.

    Troy

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    1,131

    Smile 242 and 243

    Well I think that 242 and 243 are bad ideas. We already have enough land locked up in special permit areas or drawing areas. There are already provisions in the law for proxy hunting, hunting from a boat and hunting from a car in the game regulations. A proposal to allow shooting off your 4 wheeler might help, but a lotta guys do that anyway so.... And you are right, it would create a landslide cause there are tons of populations out there who deserve special hunts or hunting areas....
    I come home with an honestly earned feeling that something good has taken place. It makes no difference whether I got anything, it has to do with how the day was spent. Fred Bear

  3. #3
    Moderator LuJon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    11,415

    Default

    I am accross the board against any additional specialty permits! I can't read the prop from this internet connection so I am not sure its exact verbiage but suffice it to say I will not support any further subdivision of our state resources to fill some percieved need by any subsect user group. The only fair is fair! If we were talking about methods and means as mentioned above like allowing a crippled person to shoot from an ATV then I would consider it depending on enforcement expense and the departmental cost of running such a program.
    I am happy to be over here lending my expertise to help the war effort but I still wish that I could have thrown my hat in the ring for a seat on the Mat-SU Advisory Council!

    Someone has to stand up against the "feel good" measures that continue to be pushed through the BOG! I am proud that we as a people have this great capacity for empathy and the desire to help those less fortunate but dang it has to come to an end at some point!

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tv321 View Post
    We have talked about this last year and it is back in this years proposals. This time submitted by the BOG. So it has a really good chance in passing unless you voice your concerns. I would like to have your input so I can relay them to the AC meeting this Wed.

    BOG submitted this and they want to establish special hunts for big game on military land and on some national/state land.

    Here is my take. I like the idea but only if it was on military land only. If you are going to allow such a hunt on federal /state land then I am not for it.

    I am not against the military ( i did 14 years and wife is still current active duty 19 yrs) I just think we are forgetting about the fireman, cops etc... by not including them on these hunts.

    Troy
    Don't worry too much TV....all these "special use" or "special seasons" are going to be challenged soon.

    There is no biological reason for these regulations and there are no provisions in law for 'special use' by a category and class of 'users'.

    The BOG is outside of their authority (if it is not tied to a biological consideration it's outside their purview) to consider and establish regulations like:

    • bonus pts.
    • preference pts.
    • bow only
    • non-residents must be have a 'guide contract' to submit for draws

    and the list goes on.


  5. #5
    Member mit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Fairbanks
    Posts
    702

    Default

    Access should be equal for all...........
    Tim

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
  •