Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 48

Thread: WAR has been declared on urban hunters...

  1. #1

    Default WAR has been declared on urban hunters...

    http://www.thearcticsounder.com/news/story/5414

    The state AG the BOG, the BGCSB and the commercial hunting industry and their lackeys are telling urban hunters clearly what is happening if any of you are paying attention......

    "Ross said there's no need to trample the state Constitution with an amendment allowing a rural subsistence preference on state land. Already, state regulations can be designed to limit urban hunters from participating in rural hunts. For example, in some cases, hunters may not be in an airplane for days before they're allowed to hunt, making for a costly and time-consuming trip for urban hunters, he said.

    Palin is playing politics with our constitution and our states rights and giving them over to the commercial hunting industry and the natives.

    I have about had my fill of AGs that ignore the constitution to accomplish a political agenda.

    This new cartel is going to bury joe hunter if we dont get organized. Thats a promise and even if we did get organized i doubt we could be organized and led well enough to ambush they plans. But I am going to try.


  2. #2
    Member BRWNBR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Big Lake
    Posts
    8,439

    Default

    i liked how you tossed commercial hunting into the mix of guys trying to oust urban hunters, that really bodes well towards your dislike of the guide industry...lump them in with the rest of the guys you dont' like.
    I think i'd rather deal with urban hunters than rural hunters...but i guess you get your facts somewhere else.
    Www.blackriverhunting.com
    Master guide 212

  3. #3

    Default

    [quote=BRWNBR;465529]i liked how you tossed commercial hunting into the mix of guys trying to oust urban hunters, that really bodes well towards your dislike of the guide industry...lump them in with the rest of the guys you dont' like.
    I think i'd rather deal with urban hunters than rural hunters...but i guess you get your facts somewhere else.[/quote}

    You might Jake, and so would I but your industry has sold out to the rural hunter...


    Hey... APHA, the State and AOC sided with the natives at the Noatak. They all agreed to limit urban hunters EVEN THOUGH THERE IS PLENTY OF GAME.

    Then along comes the BOG and does this community harvest thing. APHA, STATE AND AOC sided against urban hunters again.APHA is headquartered in CoopperCenter and no-chin lives there. AHTNA got the last two appointments to the BOG and the BGCSB. AHTNA is getting a butt pile more of land and the state is loosing a significant chunck to the feeds in 13.

    ANYBODY know where and how much land urban hunter is going to loose accesss to in the area/

    Then comes WAR with a statement like.....Dont worry Natives we wont need a constitutional ammendment we can just make it so hard and cost so much the urban hunters wont show up..OHH I am sure APHA and AOC willl be right there making sure urban hunters don't get screwed.

    WAR has been declared on the urban hunter and if it is not clear to you all by now an alliance has been formed against the urban hunter.


  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AVALANCHE View Post
    This new cartel is going to bury Joe hunter if we don't get organized. Thats a promise and even if we did get organized i doubt we could be organized and led well enough to ambush they plans. But I am going to try.

    The problem is TOO many JOE hunters......Too many urban Joe's and too many rural Joe's. Just too many Joe's PERIOD. AND guess what.........It is only going to get much worse, much, much worse. Was a time when we did not have so many people and you could harvest two of everything. And no closed season, no limit on some. Caribou was (5) Five in possession, and the only HARD rule was Don't gut them on the Highway. There was no lottery. Just 250,000 Alaskans, Now 750,000 Alaskans, and by 2030 there will be 1,500,000 Alaskans. Too many Joe Hunter's.

    Also was a time only the very, very, very wealthy came from America to hunt in Alaska, Now it is every working class Americans "Right" not a privilege, but a right and entitlement to hunt Alaska.

    As the United States Dollar continues to go into the crapper, and non-Americans can hunt here for free, because of the cheap dollar, you will see more and more fights for the Rights to the game. Add in that the picture taker's will demand more and more viewing sanctuaries.

    A worldwide Pandemic to cull the humans is the only probable solution. Otherwise enjoy what you got because you'll have less year after year, SORRY.

  5. #5

    Default World Wide Cull

    Hopeak, I like your idea of a world wide cull. When do we start? They would just end up regulating the h3ll out of that too and would be no fun in 2 years.
    Marc Theiler

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hopeak View Post
    The problem is TOO many JOE hunters......Too many urban Joe's and too many rural Joe's. Just too many Joe's PERIOD. AND guess what.........It is only going to get much worse, much, much worse. Was a time when we did not have so many people and you could harvest two of everything. And no closed season, no limit on some. Caribou was (5) Five in possession, and the only HARD rule was Don't gut them on the Highway. There was no lottery. Just 250,000 Alaskans, Now 750,000 Alaskans, and by 2030 there will be 1,500,000 Alaskans. Too many Joe Hunter's.

    Also was a time only the very, very, very wealthy came from America to hunt in Alaska, Now it is every working class Americans "Right" not a privilege, but a right and entitlement to hunt Alaska.
    I agree with you....it's time we put the commercial hunting and the commercial sport fishing business models to bed.

    Joe's don't need em.


  7. #7
    Member BRWNBR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Big Lake
    Posts
    8,439

    Default

    state don't need the money either right?, less just shut out non res, pay for everything ourselves (read 500 dollar moose tags) , go to drawing on everything( read limited resident joe access now) and beat this horse before they try to ride it again in 5 years when theres to many people and the game populations are in the toilet and its to late to bring them back.

    Its coming, writing has been on the wall for years, more and more people, less and less to go around, everybody whats "theirs" ahtna has figured out how to get it...play the race card...thats a hand that hasn't been beaten.

    I'm gonna go out on a limb (by the way...whos no-chin?) and say that if the guide concession goes thru, there could actually still be a commerical hunting industry WITH the 10 percent opp....it does provide a service, i know you hate it AV and think its from Obama or something...but theres a place for it.
    Www.blackriverhunting.com
    Master guide 212

  8. #8
    Member AlaskaTrueAdventure's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Paradise (Alaska)
    Posts
    1,543

    Talking WW Cull effort...

    I don't really mean to hijack a serious thread with humor, but the world wide cull could be accomplished with snares, human snares as opposed to bear snares.

    Jake...no chin is Robert F, APHA Exec Dir.

    (I'm sorry, I just could not stop myself.)

    Dennis
    Does this bear/human snare make me a big butt?

  9. #9
    Member BRWNBR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Big Lake
    Posts
    8,439

    Default

    you might need to permit some helicopters for this cull to and DONUGHTS!!!!
    Www.blackriverhunting.com
    Master guide 212

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BRWNBR View Post
    state don't need the money either right?, less just shut out non res, pay for everything ourselves (read 500 dollar moose tags) , go to drawing on everything( read limited resident joe access now) and beat this horse before they try to ride it again in 5 years when theres to many people and the game populations are in the toilet and its to late to bring them back.

    Its coming, writing has been on the wall for years, more and more people, less and less to go around, everybody whats "theirs" ahtna has figured out how to get it...play the race card...thats a hand that hasn't been beaten.

    I'm gonna go out on a limb (by the way...whos no-chin?) and say that if the guide concession goes thru, there could actually still be a commerical hunting industry WITH the 10 percent opp....it does provide a service, i know you hate it AV and think its from Obama or something...but theres a place for it.
    With a 10% opp in place we don't need no stikin concessions program. Besides that the state can not afford any more welfare programs for your industry.

    Matter of fact with the 10% opp in place guides should be able to 'guide' where ever and when ever they want.

    You're hunter has a tag.....you go where the tag is good.....no more of this 3 areas stuff and trading areas or subletting areas...


  11. #11
    Member bushrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Now residing in Fairbanks from the bush
    Posts
    4,363

    Default now now...

    ...let's not turn this into an anti-guide thing.

    Back to Ross' quote in the Sounder, to me that is a pretty controverisal statement to make about limiting or restricting urban hunters in rural areas. He's shooting himself in the foot really...no doubt AOC and the power they hold in either supporting him or not will mean a lot to many legislators. So if AOC supports him, are they agreeing that urban hunters can or should be limited by the state? Seems they advocate the opposite, total equality across the board on state lands.

    And did AOC support the community harvest thing? I'm not sure on that. You got anything on that, Av?

  12. #12

    Default It's never been an anti-guide thing....

    with me BR.

    10% opportunity to non-residents, let them hire a guide if they want and where ever the non-resident drew a tag his guide is legal to guide him. That is fair and just for all and we don't have any need for another welfare program for the commercial hunting industry LIKE the state lands concession.

    Kind of like it used to be only with a limit on the 10% of opportunity offered by the state to take our resources.

    AOC did not oppose neither did SFW or APHA.

    AOC turned Manning's request down on filing an amicus brief with the court too.

    Yah....Ross really showed his colors there. The whole administration is against urban hunters now as it is the only group not represented; except by the CONSTITUTION.....and Ross, like Saxby is perfectly willing to go around it.


    Quote Originally Posted by bushrat View Post
    ...let's not turn this into an anti-guide thing.

    Back to Ross' quote in the Sounder, to me that is a pretty controverisal statement to make about limiting or restricting urban hunters in rural areas. He's shooting himself in the foot really...no doubt AOC and the power they hold in either supporting him or not will mean a lot to many legislators. So if AOC supports him, are they agreeing that urban hunters can or should be limited by the state? Seems they advocate the opposite, total equality across the board on state lands.

    And did AOC support the community harvest thing? I'm not sure on that. You got anything on that, Av?


  13. #13
    Member .338-06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,045

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AlaskaTrueAdventure View Post
    Does this bear/human snare make me a big butt?
    No, but it makes your butt look big.

  14. #14
    Member bushrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Now residing in Fairbanks from the bush
    Posts
    4,363

    Default Av, was just wanting to clarify...

    ...it wasn't an anti-guide thing, thanks.

    And to be fair, I don't think lack of opposition from any org on an issue indicates support. We all pick our battles and can only have so many irons in the fire at any one time. AOC has that subsistence dipnetting suit going now with CDA, could be a host of reasons they didn't jump in with Manning's suit.

    I suppose the proof will be in how much more damage Ross does inre "urban hunters" and if AOC supports him for AG. I am looking fwd to listening in on the confirmation hearings, should be quite the show. Not sure when those are just yet, will try to get a link up down the line when to listen in. Based on what Palin said about her new pick for AG running the Dept. of Fish and Game, I think we hunters should show a lot of interest in this one. She never said that about Colberg.

  15. #15

    Default

    Quoted from the Sounder article
    "I think that’s a more reasonable way of doing things than dividing Alaskans," Ross said. "I’m in favor of uniting Alaskans and we need to recognize that conditions in the Bush are different than conditions in town where we have grocery stores."
    He is right about that their many who depend on local resources. I compiled the tier II winners for TM565 from 2004 -2008. I can't say what other Tier II stats look like but the urban hunters aren't doing to bad here. Unit 16 winners are in blue unit 14 are in red.
    Attached Files Attached Files
    Last edited by hiline; 03-31-2009 at 21:02. Reason: Typo
    Chuck

  16. #16
    Member martentrapper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Fairbanks, Ak.
    Posts
    4,191

    Default

    I'm confused, AV. Thought you had a pretty good understanding of how F&G works. WAR's statement only appears shocking to those who don't know how the state's management scheme's work.
    The state has always had the means to discriminate, for lack of a better word, against non local hunters when game pop's decline. When the time comes, the state asks for a "registration" hunt and that gives F&G all kinds of options in how to distribute the permits and what a hunter can and cannot do, with his kill. Here's some examples:
    Trophy Destruction. Since many urban hunters want their horns, this requirement disourages those types of hunters from hunting in the effected area. Has worked very well for unit 21 and 24 moose.
    Delayed Hunt. Permits are given out in specific areas at certain times before the hunt begins. Economics discourage non local hunters from coming to the area twice, once for the permit, once to hunt. Unit 23 moose is this way, tho there is still a 20 day resident season with antler restrictions.
    Quota hunts. F&G can set a quota on the number of animals killed in an area. Kill reporting times are required. Season is closed when quota is met or near being met.
    Limit permit numbers. In association with a quota, the state can limit the number of permits available for a particular registration hunt. Applicants will have to stand in line on a particular date, at a particular place, and permits are generally issued first come, first serve.
    Controlled use area. CUA's are another form of restriction available to the state to deter certain user groups from hunting in a certain area.
    I believe the state has had the ability to do registration hunts since statehood and so this is nothing new. WAR is correct and there really is no need to bring "rural preferance" to the state management system.
    You seem to think, AV, that Palin and WAR are out to get urban hunters. You can't see the forest for the 2 trees in front! It isn't Sarah and Wayne you need fear. When game pops go down and push comes to shove for access to the effected area, it won't be folks like WAR or Palin calling the shots really. It will be the little guys like me, who serve on the local advisory committee, and are calling for restrictions to keep you urban guys out. In my experience, F&G and the BoG listen when that time comes and the locals start to cry. FYI, the same thing will happen on the federal side, only us little guys can just plain call for closing fed lands to all except us who live in the area.
    Don't fear AV. These measures are meant to be temporary. Limiting harvest is supposed to help return an animal pop to it's former abundance and restrictions will be lifted if they do. I have been watching all these various rules and regs for some time here in unit 22. I believe for the most part, the system works well. I don't see any desire on state govt to exclude any one group other then what is necessary to protect the resource.
    Sometimes I think your a bigger pot stirrer than me, AV.
    I can't help being a lazy, dumb, weekend warrior.......I have a JOB!
    I have less friends now!!

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    607

    Default Rural V urban hunters

    I have lived both sides of this issue, 27 years rural Alaskan resident and 22 years urban resident of Alaska......The main difference between the two is Urban residents have to travel farther for their fish and game, and rural residents have to travel farther for their fish sticks and game boys......

  18. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain T View Post
    I have lived both sides of this issue, 27 years rural Alaskan resident and 22 years urban resident of Alaska......The main difference between the two is Urban residents have to travel farther for their fish and game, and rural residents have to travel farther for their fish sticks and game boys......
    yep. well said.


  19. #19

    Default What WAR said....

    "Ross said there's no need to trample the state Constitution with an amendment allowing a rural subsistence preference on state land. Already, state regulations can be designed to limit urban hunters from participating in rural hunts. For example, in some cases, hunters may not be in an airplane for days before they're allowed to hunt, making for a costly and time-consuming trip for urban hunters,he said.

    Quote Originally Posted by martentrapper View Post
    I'm confused, AV. Thought you had a pretty good understanding of how F&G works. WAR's statement only appears shocking to those who don't know how the state's management scheme's work.
    What is trampling the state constitution is the implementation of a commercial hunting industry. Ross should know that but he is likely bought and paid for by the commercial hunting industry.

    Quote Originally Posted by martentrapper View Post
    The state has always had the means to discriminate, for lack of a better word, against non local hunters when game pop's decline. When the time comes, the state asks for a "registration" hunt and that gives F&G all kinds of options in how to distribute the permits and what a hunter can and cannot do, with his kill.
    Discriminate is a fine word. After all that is exactly what is done. But the discrimination must be justifiable in law.

    What is not justifiable is for the urban population of hunters to bear the burden of limits like, shorter seasons, bag limits, draws and other restrictions; yet the commmercial hunting industry is never a direct target of the F&G discrimination you speak of.

    If that industry is not THE target of the discrimination and the burden falls on the resident urban hunter then the discrimination wont stand up to the question of law.

    That industry should be targeted; discriminated against, before the game populations crash and especially BEFORE the urban resident population is further limited by shorter seasons, bag limits draws and other restrictions.

    WAR should know that. As should the legislature, the BOG and the department.

    Quote Originally Posted by martentrapper View Post
    Here's some examples:
    Trophy Destruction. Since many urban hunters want their horns, this requirement disourages those types of hunters from hunting in the effected area. Has worked very well for unit 21 and 24 moose.
    Delayed Hunt. Permits are given out in specific areas at certain times before the hunt begins. Economics discourage non local hunters from coming to the area twice, once for the permit, once to hunt. Unit 23 moose is this way, tho there is still a 20 day resident season with antler restrictions.
    Quota hunts. F&G can set a quota on the number of animals killed in an area. Kill reporting times are required. Season is closed when quota is met or near being met.
    Limit permit numbers. In association with a quota, the state can limit the number of permits available for a particular registration hunt. Applicants will have to stand in line on a particular date, at a particular place, and permits are generally issued first come, first serve.
    Controlled use area. CUA's are another form of restriction available to the state to deter certain user groups from hunting in a certain area.
    I believe the state has had the ability to do registration hunts since statehood and so this is nothing new.
    What we know is when one area gets these kinds of restriction it doesn't diminish the number of hunters....it just pressurizes areas not so limited and accelerates the need for more discrimination.

    All the while the commercial hunting industry does not stand down.

    Quote Originally Posted by martentrapper View Post
    WAR is correct and there really is no need to bring "rural preferance" to the state management system.
    There would be less reason to discriminate against urban resident hunters if WAR would advocate standing the commercial industry down instead of advocating as he did; to design regulations to limit urban hunters from participating in rural hunts......making for a costly and time-consuming trip for urban hunters.

    Quote Originally Posted by martentrapper View Post
    You seem to think, AV, that Palin and WAR are out to get urban hunters. You can't see the forest for the 2 trees in front! It isn't Sarah and Wayne you need fear.
    What I think MT is governorgirl and WAR are more or less on the payroll of the commercial hunting industry and afraid of native politics.

    They have an easy target in the urban hunter so they abuse their authority and discriminate against those who are less formidable.

    WAR and governorgirl don't scare me....WAR and governorgirl are scared of the natives and the commercial hunting industry lobby so they abuse the urban resident hunters.

    Quote Originally Posted by martentrapper View Post
    When game pops go down and push comes to shove for access to the effected area, it won't be folks like WAR or Palin calling the shots really. It will be the little guys like me, who serve on the local advisory committee, and are calling for restrictions to keep you urban guys out.
    Hmmm....maybe the A/Cs are owned by the commercial interest too.

    Quote Originally Posted by martentrapper View Post
    In my experience, F&G and the BoG listen when that time comes and the locals start to cry. FYI, the same thing will happen on the federal side, only us little guys can just plain call for closing fed lands to all except us who live in the area.
    Sounds a lot like WAR on the urban hunter.

    Quote Originally Posted by martentrapper View Post
    Don't fear AV. These measures are meant to be temporary. Limiting harvest is supposed to help return an animal pop to it's former abundance and restrictions will be lifted if they do. I have been watching all these various rules and regs for some time here in unit 22. I believe for the most part, the system works well. I don't see any desire on state govt to exclude any one group other then what is necessary to protect the resource.
    Thats the problem MT....the State and the A/C's and the BOG should reasonably find it very necessary to stand down the commercial hunting industry and limit all non-residents to not more than 10% of the opportunity....BEFORE it is necessary to discriminate against urban resident hunters.

    Quote Originally Posted by martentrapper View Post
    Sometimes I think your a bigger pot stirrer than me, AV.
    tips hat


  20. #20

    Default

    Well, look on the bright side. When the stock market really crashes, and the Alaska Permanent fund suspends payments, people will leave. When the Trans-Alaska pipeline which was designed to last 20 years, is shut down and dismantled because of erosion, people will leave. When the depression kicks in and there is 24% unemployment, people will leave. The 1918 flu pandemic killed 100% of the inhabitants of some of the villages. After the next pandemic people will not be hunting.

    We are no different than the wolves, over populated, and fighting each other as the food source diminished.

    With out cheap natural gas there will be "NO" electric or heat for the urban cities. Without cheap fuel the villages will disappear. If they can't make it on $7.45 per gallon fuel oil, they will not make it on $31.00 per gallon fuel. You say it can't happen....fuel oil was .09 "CENTS" a gallon when I was a young'in.

    Without cheap fuel the earth can support one billion humans, just as it did in 1889. The Human herd has overpopulated to "SEVEN" Billion humans, and doubling every 30 years.............."SIX" Billion (86%) will die.

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
  •