Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 37

Thread: Moose Management for 13, 14 & 16

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    690

    Default Moose Management for 13, 14 & 16

    I know that this is Mr. Rosi's first year and I'm not going to say anything bad about his efforts thus far because I simply do not know the details of the managment plan(s) for the state and the various units.

    That being said; where is there an available resource to view such data? I'd like to see a repository available to the general public that is easy to read and does not leave information to decipher. I've not been overly enthused to research the fishing items I'm so passionate about because there is not a fact sheet; the reports are filled with the all the neccessary data used to compile them and for that I'm grateful but I think there should be a summary at the end/beginning of each to go off of first and then research the details in the reports if desired. Since I'm beginning to be as much of a hunter as I'm a fisher; this doubles the frustration of research and information gathering... JMO.

    As for the moose management; I spoke with a fella this weekend and in the unit that were in he claimed that there used to be moose everywhere before the 50" and brow tine restriction came into effect. He said that the only things you could hunt were the spikes and forks and it was no problem becuase they were plentiful; that was back in 1983.

    I would like to know what everyone thinks of a possible new proposal:
    To restrict the brow tine and 50" in units 13, 14 & 16 since they get the bulk of the hunting pressure. Letting the larger bulls proliferate would allow for higher populations since the spikes and paddle horns have a great deal of difficulty and mostly just don't succeed in rounding up a harem; let alone mate during the rut.

    I witnessed it first hand; a small paddle chasing 6 different cows with ALL of them running away from him. On other occassions, I've seen larger bulls with more impressive head gear have cows willingly walk up to them.

    Another justification to revert to the older days is that we have altered the genetics by targeting the 3 & 4 brow tine bulls. Like any other animal on earth, the genetics determine the rack and when you take out the contributors to the gene pool it dries up.

    My rough idea is to allow a draw permit for the larger bulls and try out the spike/fork (with the fork restriction allowing a third tine) for the next three years and see how the moose populations do in the high pressure areas like Knik, Boulder Creek and Hick's Creek (Pinnochle Trail). The bulk of us are not trophy hunters and are just looking fill our feezer anyway and smaller moose will do that quite well. I, as well as others, agree that the larger bulls just do not taste as well and we prefer the smaller spike/forks.

    Any input is welcome; any bashing is not. Let's keep this on a polite discussionary level if you please.
    "He who is slow to anger is better than the mighty, and he who rules his spirit is better than he who takes a city." ~ Proverbs 16:32

  2. #2
    Member bushrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Now residing in Fairbanks from the bush
    Posts
    4,363

    Default

    Robb, your best bet to become more informed and discuss your proposal idea would be to talk with the area biologists for those units. For unit 13 you could get ahold of Bob Tobey or Becky Schwanke in Glenallen. For the other units Tony Kavalok or Gino Delfrate in Palmer. I don't have their phone #s offhand.

    You can view the mgmt reports online. Typically they are a few years behind. But in the mgmt reports you can read the mgmt objectives for the various units:
    http://wildlife.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=pubs.mgt

    Best,

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    40

    Default

    While hunting pressure is high in those areas it also should be noted that after then and through the Tony K administartion the there was NO preditor controll of any kind. Sad to say just bad management. All one has to look at the the country of Norway. They kill more moose each year than we have in this whole state. And they do not even come close to land size of AK. Why...preditors are controlled and not the hunters. You can not just shoot the big boys or the youngins. Eigher way you will make the herd unbalanced. I say manage like the state constitution says for abundance, and stop playing politics with greenies and do what is best for Alaskans.

  4. #4
    Supporting Member Amigo Will's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Wrangell
    Posts
    7,600

    Default

    I would like to see a big change in everything.Something like aug 15 or Sept 1 everything opens up with-in a hundred miles of your home area Then say sept 15 you can hunt everywhere but if you hunt over a hundred miles from home area you have to wait till the next day to hunt after use of any motorized travel.This means not just planes but boats, wheelers, sno-gos ect.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    40

    Default

    Again your not doing anything for the game. That is HUNTER control. And only looking out for yourself because of where your zip code is. Hunter control does not WORK...And the last time I checked this was still a FREE counrty.... well maybe not sure tomorow.

  6. #6
    Supporting Member Amigo Will's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Wrangell
    Posts
    7,600

    Default

    Humans is all you can realy control and I believe most biologist and fish and game agree.

  7. #7
    Member dkwarthog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Mat-Su
    Posts
    2,150

    Default

    Will, That is an interesting proposal and I think it has merit, at least it's worth discussion. Not sure it is practical enforcement-wise, but would definantly take some pressure off hard hit areas and give locals a chance to hunt before the crowds hit. Personally it would be great for my family, but I'm not sure how I would feel about it in a general sense (i.e. rural preference, etc)



    Definantly would get alot of folks dander up, though... some would say your even stirring the pot....

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    40

    Default

    Thats is Obama style of management. Lets take from those and give to others. What ever happend to our consitution????? Please show me anywhere where only manageing the hunter is working. It does not work at all, never has and never will.

  9. #9
    Member Vince's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Fairbanks most the time, Ancorage some of the time,& on the road Kicking Anti's all the time
    Posts
    8,989

    Default

    you have to deside if you want a moose or a RACK... managment is primarly set for meat harvest at this point less for antler.

    antler harvest is what has led to many of the regs we have now.

    the majority of folks want meat on the table. and care less about racks on the wall. i have a really good friend that i love to hunt with but when he says i only want the rack i could kick him in the nuts and tumble him off the mtn..
    "If you are on a continuous search to be offended, you will always find what you are looking for; even when it isn't there."

    meet on face book here

  10. #10
    Member dkwarthog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Mat-Su
    Posts
    2,150

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by garyb View Post
    Please show me anywhere where only manageing the hunter is working. It does not work at all, never has and never will.

    Off the top of my head one example would be goats in the kenai. Used to be a free for all and is now regulated with draw permits. The reason was not 4 legged predators it was the 2 legged ones from what I understand.

    I guess we should manage eagles and avalanches instead of hunters...

  11. #11
    Supporting Member Amigo Will's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Wrangell
    Posts
    7,600

    Default

    No animal has ever been saved by management of the animal.All have been saved by management of the people. We can see some of this at work now with black bear hunting in units 1 and 2. On the flip side over management of hunters causes states to have to feed elk in the winter and the game in Yellowstone to over flow its boundry.What I'm saying is not new as many of the first ten master guides whom also worked as game officers were talking about this in the fifties.They knew the user population from found oil would overwelm the resouces. You can figure for each new job in Alaska ten more people will move here with half as users without giveing

  12. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Amigo Will View Post
    No animal has ever been saved by management of the animal.All have been saved by management of the people. We can see some of this at work now with black bear hunting in units 1 and 2. On the flip side over management of hunters causes states to have to feed elk in the winter and the game in Yellowstone to over flow its boundry.What I'm saying is not new as many of the first ten master guides whom also worked as game officers were talking about this in the fifties.They knew the user population from found oil would overwelm the resouces. You can figure for each new job in Alaska ten more people will move here with half as users without giveing
    People "management" may not solve all the issues - but - does take care of about 95% of them.
    Joe (Ak)

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    2 mi east of 'Halfmoon creek"
    Posts
    831

    Default

    Join a AC, listen in at BOG meeting, get info from 'local biologists', etc....

    Its easy to submit a proposal to the BOG. Thats simple.

    Getting a proposal passed, for a sub-unit or portion of one, with 'biological
    reasoning' and with common sense 'laced' thru the proposal, is not an easy task.
    'Talk' of making change in 3 units..... is,,, well, like wanting to fly a jet without
    any prior training. IMO

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    690

    Default OK

    Quote Originally Posted by DEDWUF View Post
    Join a AC, listen in at BOG meeting, get info from 'local biologists', etc....

    Its easy to submit a proposal to the BOG. Thats simple.

    Getting a proposal passed, for a sub-unit or portion of one, with 'biological
    reasoning' and with common sense 'laced' thru the proposal, is not an easy task.
    'Talk' of making change in 3 units..... is,,, well, like wanting to fly a jet without
    any prior training. IMO
    I'm already a member of the Matanuska Advisory Committee and am going to talk to the biologists about it; this is a thread to discuss the possible variations to make the concept feasable by getting POSITIVE feedback from everyone.
    Come fly with me and we'll talk about it.



    The reason I picked these units and did NOT include 6, 7 & 15 is that the numbers are not known to me as is the fact that I've never really hunted those units. Which is another way of saying that I'd like to hear feedback from the folks in those units to attain a better perspective on the management needs for them as well. Maybe we have a state wide need for a complete over-haul and its going to start at the grass-roots with our AC's. I joined the AC with the purpose of being a positive force for managment of our resources and its users. I am making an effort here and am just asking feedback; brainstorming is the typical route for answers to concieved issues and I would just like some positive diaglogue.

    I can remember when I was a child in Homer, moose were abundant; bears were not. Wolves were an issue (they always have been and always will); the commercial fishing had some bumps but overall it was still a good way to make a living. I would like nothing more than to have my grand children and great grand children experience the Alaska that I grew up in (well, as far as resource availability anyway).

    Other units please chime in; I know for a fact that antler management is a failed concept because we are having to go into the far reaches of the interior like Galena and Tok to successfully harvest large moose. There are some exceptions locally but they are just that, exceptions.
    "He who is slow to anger is better than the mighty, and he who rules his spirit is better than he who takes a city." ~ Proverbs 16:32

  15. #15
    Member BRWNBR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Big Lake
    Posts
    8,437

    Default

    drawing accross the board...any bull, limited tags. that'd help the moose and limit the people....
    this is coming guys....
    Www.blackriverhunting.com
    Master guide 212

  16. #16
    Member Matt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    3,410

    Default

    They say hunters only take 5% of the moose that are killed every year. The other 95% is from other predators and such. If true, then why antler restrictions at all?

  17. #17
    Member BRWNBR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Big Lake
    Posts
    8,437

    Default

    trophy managment....
    Www.blackriverhunting.com
    Master guide 212

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    2 mi east of 'Halfmoon creek"
    Posts
    831

    Default

    B. C. Robb,

    Good joining the AC.

    A suggestion,

    Talk with Ted Spraker, bio and BOG member,
    ask him about antler configuration and genetics.

    Could possibly help in gaining/understanding genetic info.


    No offense, I'm very 'picky' with who I fly with.

  19. #19
    Member Erik in AK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    2,008

    Default

    Spike-fork or 50" isn't just about trophies.

    With moose, natural mortality is on an inverse Bell Curve of sorts. The younger the animal, the higher the probability it will be killed. Once they've survived their first winter their mortality rapidly decreases until they reach "old" age. On average, bulls are in their prime breeding years from about 6 to 8 years old they decline quickly and while they can live up to 15 or 16 years in the wild, they usually succumb to winter or predators around 11 or 12 years old.

    Cows reach sexual maturity at 18 months and are typically ready to be bred in their second autumn. They remain in the breeding pool until age 9 or 10, and like bulls usually die around 11 and 12.

    By limiting hunting pressure to the youngest and oldest bulls, managers are protecting the bulk of the bull stock. The assumption by managers is that most of the mature bulls in a given area will survive the hunting season. By preserving a significant number of mature bulls to do the breeding, immature and sub-prime bulls are kept in check and don't waste themselves during the rut, allowing them to better survive the winter.

    It's not a perfect system but it does work pretty well.
    As far as the comments about managing people vs game. People are the greatest variable in the equation. We don't tend to exercise self-control when it comes to killing game, and the evidence of that is plentiful.

    If Alaska's moose hunters want more opportunity to take moose meat home in the most popular GMUs (13, 14, 16, 20), then we need to pressure the decision makers to a few things.

    #1 Improve the habitat. The number of moose in a given area is dictated largely by the availability of browse...willows and young birch. These species are regenerated most effectively through fire. Fire is not practical in some areas such as 16B due to the number of cabins/homes in the area so other methods would be required.

    #2 Improve access. More and better trails with bridges over creeks and bogs. Having hundreds of thousands of acres of prime moose habitat is pointless if hunters cannot reasonably get to the moose, or get them out.

    #3 Liberalize the killing of predators. Increase bag limits, lower tag fees for non-residents. Possibly offer bounties.

    #4 Taking more cows and calves. IF the first 3 things were to happen then we, as residents, have a responsibility to maintain healthy bull/cow ratios and that means killing cows and calves to prevent population explosions and the crashes that always follow them.

    #5 Consider imposing higher fees upon ourselves to pay for such intensive management.

  20. #20
    Member hoose35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Soldotna, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    2,891

    Default

    My proposal is keep the spike fork, 3 or 4 brow tine, 50" rule, however if a hunter takes a 3 or 4 brow tine or 50" moose, he is not eligible to take another 3 or 4 brow tine or 50" moose the following year, he could only take a spike fork, or if he won a drawing permit he could fill that tag with whatever moose was allowed. I think this would help keep people from trophy hunting year after year, but also allowing them to get some meat, if that is their true intention of hunting.

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •