Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: 52,000 Wolf signatures

  1. #1

    Default 52,000 Wolf signatures

    Heard from a guide friend that the Friends of Wolves have 52K signatures for a ballot iniative to put the wolf hunt issue to another public vote?

    If this is true what can we do?

    There seems to be enough traffic here to start are own signature drive?

    Do not want to see all the wolves dead! But this public wildlife flavor of the mointh BS has to stop!!!!

    I would bet not a single hunter in the bunch and all from urban areas with access to plenty of groceries stuffed full of hormones!

    Try and get a signature in the bush.

    Alaska needs solid biological F&G Decisions!

    Beware how you vote this year ask your Gov canidate where they stand.

    If true, Sad Day for Alaska's wildlife again

    Louie

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    2,071

    Default

    The problem is that the Alaska Constitution has a loophole that allows anybody in the US to come to Alaska and gather the signatures needed to bring an issue to the ballot. Several years ago a group of Alaskans brought to the ballot a Constitution amendment to close the loophole, but the voters voted NO on the amendment.

    As long as the Constitution allows it, the animal right groups will keep on interfering with wildlife management.

    Toni Knowles will make it even easier for environmentalists and bunny huggers. Lets keep that in mind.

  3. #3
    Member martentrapper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Fairbanks, Ak.
    Posts
    4,061

    Default

    Turning in signature books is only one of the first steps to getting an iniative on the ballot. The state now has to go thru the signatures, verify each one is from a REGISTERED voter, and count to see that there are the required number of signatures from each area. They can no longer get an iniative on the ballot by JUST standing at Anch. area big box stores.
    If this group actually has the required sigs and from the right areas, it will still be 2 years before we actually vote. I don't think the dept of elections has time to get the sigs validated to get the issue on this years ballot. I'm sure this group wants the next 2 years to spread their exagerated and deceiptful info to get the public riled.
    I can't help being a lazy, dumb, weekend warrior.......I have a JOB!
    I have less friends now!!

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    24

    Default

    I sign all those petitions that I can find. I sign them with the names of Fred Flintstone, Barney Rubble, etc. I figure that if they get enough bogus signatures, they will not have much credibility with the board of elections.

  5. #5

    Default petitions

    It is pathetice at best on how they LIE to the people to get signatures. They were telling people that bears are legally shot from the air. The is a total lie. In my mind, this type of petition should be rejected just because of the deceitful idealogy of these people. But that is only my opinion and it doesn't matter. I would suggest that people look at the authors of this petition and go against them. Particulary Nick Jans. I will no longer buy/read another thing he writes. I will make sure that I write Alaska magazine and let them know that I will no longer read their magazine as long as Nick is an author in it. It might not make a difference, but it will make me feel better!

  6. #6
    New member AKDSLDOG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Wasilla, Alaska/Las Vegas, Nevada
    Posts
    1,234

    Default

    MT, you are correct, the ballot would not be until 08'. Think real hard on this subject when you vote this november for GOV. Fony Knowles not only lean's twards the bunny huggers but he is "NOT" in favore of wolf and bear control.
    I will be going with the "new fresh start" with my vote. And yes ready to defend myself for that last statement. :-)

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    2,071

    Default

    I don't think that a 2-year period is required to bring an issue to the ballot. I could be wrong, but I believe that all is needed is a few months, or just enough time to collect the signatures and present them for verification. A State ballot issue may take a few months, but a local (borough) ballot measure only takes a couple of months. Signatures have been verified prior to ballot measures for a few years now.

    I signed the Tax Cap measure for the North Star Borough just a little over a month before it was passed by voters in October. What has to be taken into consideration is verifying the signatures, approval, and then time to print the ballot measure in the ballot for people to vote on. This could take anywhere from a couple of months to a year, but I could be wrong

    Regardless, the AK Constitution allows for signature collection from any person. Anybody from the lower-48 with enough money can pay minimum wage to Alaskans who want to do the work to collect the signatures, and that's completely legal. That's how we get the "pot" ballot measure, as well as the anti-bear baiting measure every now and then. These are lower-48 ballot measures that come to the ballot box with the help of a few Alaskans. Some of the animal right groups are international, while others are national, usually based in the lower-48.

  8. #8

    Default No Worries....

    Didn't the majority of Alaskan residents vote TWICE to ban public aerial wolf gunning in Alaska in the 90's and early 2000's? Who cares what the majority of Alaskan's desire? Our democratic system has been whacked under our recent republican leadership (?) as NO ONE has been able to counter the anti-predator rhetoric of the governor and his appointments to the Board of Game. Simply cast your "Republican or Die' vote to Sarah and wolves will die aplenty!

    "New fresh start".....pffff.

  9. #9
    Member AKDoug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Talkeetna
    Posts
    5,572

    Default

    The initiative petition came to my store a few weeks ago. A lady asked if she could stand in my entry way and collect signatures and I politely said no. She asked if she could stand out front...and I said sure since it was raining like hell and 36 degrees out. She decided not to take me up on the offer, but did debate the subject with myself and a couple customers that happened to be hunters and outdoorsmen. We were amazed at her lack of understanding of the issue and she also mentioned the shooting of bears from planes (??). Her information and her understanding of the subject of predator control was so off base that I gave her the Palme ADFG office phone number so she could call them and ask questions. Holy Cow was she off base.

    Then....her husband came back a few days later and asked me if HE could collect signatures and I once again said NO. He asked me how I could support the killing of ALL wolves. I laughed and said that in now way did I support the killing of ALL of anything and I would never support a wildlife law initiative because I don't believe in the public voting on wildlife management issues. Once again he mentioned that stupid shooting bears from planes issue...where do these guys get this stuff. Then he said he supported State employees shooting wolves from planes, but not private citizens? I asked why should we pay for it when there are guys willing to shoot wolves at a loss for us? He couldn't answer that.

    First class idiots.

  10. #10
    Member martentrapper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Fairbanks, Ak.
    Posts
    4,061

    Default

    Ray, this iniative is for a state law. Alaska only has state elections every 2 years. The state will not go to the expense of an out of cycle election just for one initiative. The next state election is in 08.
    I can't help being a lazy, dumb, weekend warrior.......I have a JOB!
    I have less friends now!!

  11. #11
    Member 8x57 Mauser's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Southeast Alaska
    Posts
    512

    Default Timelines

    State ballot initiatives work like this:

    You have one year from the time you get your signature books to collect enough valid signatures, or you have to start over.

    The legislature gets at least one full 121 day session between you submitting enough signatures and the issue going on the ballot. Then the initiative goes on the first statewide ballot. This gives the legislature a chance to pass a "substantially similar" measure, taking your initiative off the ballot.

    Thus, how long it takes to get an initiative on the ballot depends very much on whether you submit signatures in an even-numbered year or an odd-numbered year, and before or after the legislative session starts.

    This is all in the constitution's section on Initiative, Referendum, and Recall.

    Martentrapper is right, generally speaking. Although if a statewide special election were called for some reason, (think the 1999 advisory vote) it could grab the initiative, too.

  12. #12
    New member AKDSLDOG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Wasilla, Alaska/Las Vegas, Nevada
    Posts
    1,234

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by martentrapper View Post
    Ray, this iniative is for a state law. Alaska only has state elections every 2 years. The state will not go to the expense of an out of cycle election just for one initiative. The next state election is in 08.

    Bingo.

  13. #13
    Member stevelyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Fairbanksan in Aleutian Hell
    Posts
    1,316

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Muncho View Post
    Didn't the majority of Alaskan residents vote TWICE to ban public aerial wolf gunning in Alaska in the 90's and early 2000's? Who cares what the majority of Alaskan's desire? Our democratic system has been whacked under our recent republican leadership (?) as NO ONE has been able to counter the anti-predator rhetoric of the governor and his appointments to the Board of Game. Simply cast your "Republican or Die' vote to Sarah and wolves will die aplenty!

    "New fresh start".....pffff.
    Referendums voted on by an ignorant bunch of graduates from the Walt Disney School of Wildlife Management isn't the way to manage wildlife resources for sustainability.

    Look at what mobocracy wildlife management has done in places like California. They banned cougar hunting by referendum and now cougars are overunning their territory starting to eat the voters. That's just one example.

    Wildlife resource management needs to use science and local knowledge to manage, not feeeeelings.

    I think the referendums are worded in an offensive manner by the eco-nazis to get a predetermined outcome. Look at the level of deceit the signature gathers stoop to to get the required signatures.
    Now what ?

  14. #14
    Member tccak71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    2,114

    Default Wolf Control

    My opinion on the subject is that its the folks living in the urban areas that vote for this nonsense. I couldn't imagine anyone in rural Alaska supporting this measure. I hope it is defeated.

    I agree, the signature gatherers' are a bunch of uninformed liars and cheats. Maybe there should be another initiative to outlaw ballot box biology.

    Tim

  15. #15
    Member bushrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Now residing in Fairbanks from the bush
    Posts
    4,288

    Default

    Ballot-box biology isn't the answer, for sure.

    I think it's important that we realize, however, that much of our wildlife management today actually is ballot-box biology, just in another form. When legislators are able to pass bills relating to wildlife management, and even drastically change our Alaska statutes that govern how we manage our fish and game, we are very close to the same type of thing. Many here love Intensive Management Law. I personally think it's not in the best interests of long-term wildlife managment. But the precedent is set. Someday we'll probably have a democrat-controlled legislature and a dem governor. What's to stop them from passing a law that runs contrary to IM law, and forces our biologists and managers to manage for low-density "natural" populations of ungulates? After all, the voters will have voted them into office, and it's those same voters using that ballot box to elect representatives who determine how we manage our game. That's crazy. I don't want repub or dem or independent voters deciding how we manage our game. I want trained professionals to do that based on our state constitution that mandates sustained yields over time.

    Here's my grandiose plans: A bi-partisan appointed Board of Game, with a mandate that one member must be a non-consumptive user and represent wildlife viewers. A return of the habitat division to ADFG, where it will remain in perpetuity. A repeal of IM law. After that, no further draconian changes to our Title 16 statutes without a two-thirds majority vote of our legislature. Give more weight to the opinions of seasoned area biologists as to what's best for our wildlife populations over the LONG TERM, than we do to pro-hunting (or anti-hunting) lobbies.

    I say all this in full recognition of how close we could have come to passage of a bill last session that would have mandated "one-third" harvests of ungulate populations annually and "maximum carrying capacity of the habitat population." Anyone at all immersed in wildlife management knows that is INSANE! Yet AOC supported this, testified in support of it in fact. Even compromise on this in a bill next session may be crazy. We can't mandate Title 16 changes and force biologists and managers to manage our game in ways that go against everything they've been taught. We have to be careful. We have to use common sense. We have to stop going to extremes. Predator control by the public may at times be warranted. By going to extremes, as we now are in some places, it has repercussions all down the line, from recruiting new bios to work for ADFG to the public turning against hunters and hunting. Many more moose and caribou may be available after these pred-control programs, yet few are overly concerned with the dramatic increase in hunters this will bring, and the repercussions of that.

    My two bucks <grin>.
    Mark

  16. #16

    Default ...it's happening everywhere...

    ..,being currently a Michigan resident, suggesting anything specific regarding this situation facing Alaska residents isn't my place, but i will comment that this type of legislation sponsored by special interest groups is happening everywhere...this year in MI we have to deal with a resolution to ban dove hunting that would, if approved by the voters, lay the groundwork for furthur such bans...in my old stomping grounds, Wyoming, they are battling over wolf control on a much smaller basis...read the magazine, pick a state, the liberal/politically correct groups don't want you to hunt you animal!

    ...whatever your sympathies or sentiments, we all need to be extremely careful and aware when issues like these arive...the foot in the door principle is a primary political tool these days....

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    2,071

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by martentrapper View Post
    Ray, this iniative is for a state law. Alaska only has state elections every 2 years. The state will not go to the expense of an out of cycle election just for one initiative. The next state election is in 08.

    I understand the process. What I said is that only a few months are required before voting for ballot measures (time for signature verification, approval, followed by ballot printing).

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    2,071

    Default

    bushrat:

    The best plan is the one allowed by the Alaska Constitution. If that plan is followed, then there would not be arguments. Even somewhat "liberal" Canada has more cojones than us when it comes to wolf control. I remember a few years ago when wolf control was taking place in the Canadian Yukon. Back then a group of animal rights group tried to rent an airplane to fly there to oppose the plan taking place, and the Canadian air companies refused to fly them in.

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
  •