Medred plan for predators doesn't cost Palin a dime
A good read at:
Medred plan for predators doesn't cost Palin a dime
A good read at:
Thanks for posting this, Leech. Medred echoed my sentiments pretty closely with this exerpt:
Good on him for writing this. I agree fully.Whatever happened to the good, old days when individual Alaskans took care of predator problems on their own?
Now we need the government to do it for us? We need state bureaucrats in helicopters to take out some wolves?
The prospectors and trappers of old would be embarrassed. I'm embarrassed.
On a side note, he also gets into the "earn a bull" idea that LuJon has been pushing here for a while. I know there are inherent problems with this idea in some areas, but I would support this over helicopters and such.
My favorite quote of the article:
"If hunters and trappers in the Interior are unable or unwilling to defend their food from the competition, they don't deserve to eat."
If there was a way that many of our "trappers" in south central and the interior around Fairbanks could get out there (I can think of quite a few right at this moment ) I am sure they would be happy to take care of it.
No amount of education can help those who want to remain permanently ignorant of facts, which includes those whom have been educated.
is that it is almost impossible for individuals to do enough predator control in certain areas that will really amount to anything. I trap an area and try to catch as many wolves as I can, but in reality, I can keep the #'s down, but I am never going to get the numbers low enough to see a big change in moose #'s. There are certain places that the state is simply going to have to get involved and do aerial wolf reduction with helicopters.
The state can only help itself also if it wants people to harvest predators by allowing the sale of bears and specifically tanned ones. Most people complain that they have enough bears as rugs and just don't want to shoot anymore as they have nothing to do with them.
About time we got a good read out of Craig.
Time to put your hunting money where your mouth is, Brian. Why don't you voluntarily refuse to take a moose or bou this fall if you don't get a bear this spring? Start the ball rolling.
I can't help being a lazy, dumb, weekend warrior.......I have a JOB!
I have less friends now!!
You going to shoot a spring grizz this year, or just a bunch of pregnant caribou?
If Craig is truly serious where was he when it was time to submit proposals to the BOG. And where was he when it was time to present testimony to the BOG. If Craig wants to grandstand he should do it where it does some good, at the BOG meetings.
As far as his idea: predator for food I'm for it.
to say that we should all do this, but how much of it is reality? How many of us/you have shot a wolf? I am a fortunate to get out and trap, but if I HAD to shoot a wolf, I could probably guarantee that I would fail. Now, we shoot "many" bears each spring, so surely take more than our share of those to help the moose calves.
Incidentally, the part of his article that I really like is the notion that we can take care of most predator control as hunters without the state doing it for us. I'm not sold on the "earn a bull" program, but it's worth considering in some cases/areas.
I'll add one thing here. I believe it was customary and traditional for men with planes to aerial hunt wolves from the 30's on and it is my view that certain individuals that live a certain type of lifestyle and want to hunt wolves from airplanes to should be allowed to do so.
I'm also for us, hunters & trappers, reducing predator numbers on our own. BUT, having said that I've yet to be lucky enough to see wolves in the wild. I'll shoot a blackie or three, I've seen any number of them-even in Anchorage.
I DO think that Medred's part about solving our predator problems ourselves is a little two-faced. What would he write if Anchoragites solved the brown bear problem in town ourselves?
A wise man said in a pissing contest everyone gets wet. If it wasn't for some of his past BS articles I might like him more. But, at least the liberals like him.
I think it's interesting how we use "predator control" programs to reduce black bear populations in order to increase moose populations (because we eat moose right?).
Under a predator control permit, one doesn't have to salvage the meat of a black bear. If we're not hungry enough to salvage the meat of a black bear, then why are we so concerned about the moose population?
I don't think the "earn-a-bull" (or earn-a-permit) idea would ever pass legal hurdles. I personally think the idea has merit as in getting the idea out there for hunters to do this, but the drawbacks in implementing it (if possible) far outweigh the benefits. For example, if we did this for Unit 16, all one has to do to earn a permit is fly out to a pre-set up bait camp and whack a bear or two. Isn't my idea of really "earning" it and ability to pay for that with transportation costs etc could also end up making it so only those with more money get permits down the line.
I think the state (and BOG) is very much responsible for some of the problems we face in continuing to imply that bear meat is no good by waiving salvage requirements, even in the interior where bears don't necessarily eat fish and where both grizzly and black bear meat is excellent and healthy table fare. I want to see bears viewed as a food resource instead of as vermin; maybe if they were we'd have more hunters out there trying to fill freezers with them.
What Northway said in his first post was dead-on in that trappers in the more remote locations can't do enough. But that doesn't mean they shouldn't do anything either, and I really tire of hearing villagers say "it's too expensive" to trap and ask the state to take care of it all. If I can fly in dog food at astronomical expense and trap with my dogteam then surely those with snowgos can do the same in the villages...it seems most just don't want to.
The key words in Northway's post to me were that he could never get the wolf numbers low enough to see a big change in moose #s. I think those big changes we seek via IM mandates are part of the problem really. I have a friend who traps in 20E who isn't too happy the state just came in and killed about the rest of the wolves left in that area...leaving him nothing to trap for a while in terms of wolves. Something else to consider, trumping the privileges of trappers for the benefit of hunters.
Chuck (Hiline), word at BOG meeting was that if Medred showed up there would be problems <grin>. We had asked ADN ahead of time if they were sending Craig or if he would show. They sent Hopkins.
Let's face it, most hunters don't want to really participate in the overall process; they just want more moose and caribou and sheep and goat to shoot. And they expect the state to provide those animals to them because they pay a measly $25 for a hunting license. And when there is some kind of perceived problem, hunters then demand all kinds of crazy things to make taking care of the problem much easier, like helicopter transport, waiving of meat salvage requirements...I think I'll submit a proposal asking for dancing girls too out in the field, gotta have more incentive by God to get "hunters" to participate <grin>.
"I think I'll submit a proposal asking for dancing girls too out in the field, gotta have more incentive by God to get "hunters" to participate"
LMAO Mark! Maybe throw in the wording for some "chilled kegs" also and we would have a serious proposal!
Yeah, I have drastically lost my wolf trapping endeavors for sure. It is a loss of income for me, but I can live with it for now.
I feel that most people are most interested in having the state do it for them, which we can refer back to the govt. doing everything for us. It is time that we hunters need to do our part in helping the predator population decrease. I think everyone is looking for the easy fix which there is not one.