There is an interesting article on the www.alaskadispatch.com website concerning the issues that grew out of the Pt. Hope caribou situation. Apparently the regional advisory council up there wants to change the definition of the word "edible meat" so that people can legally leave behind meat they deem to be inedible. Here is a short excerpt. You can read the entire article at this link.
I'm skeptical of this, at best. Any feedback from others out there? I'd be particularly interested in hearing from those that have lived in rural villages. Is there any validity to this at all?The Arctic Advisory Committee to the Alaska State Board of Game proposes changing the legal definition of the word "edible" so that hunters "are no longer forced to break the law." The Board of Game is scheduled to meet in Nome in November to discuss this and other proposals.
Under current law "people are legally required to salvage meat that is in fact inedible and could present a health risk to a person that consumes it," according to the committee, which includes a mix of North Slope Borough employees and residents.
Hunters are trained to look for swollen joints, abscesses, infection, parasites and other symptoms of disease, and to leave those animals behind, according to the committee. Its proposal states that hunters are taught to kill some animals for purposes other than hunting. One is humane killings to put severely wounded animals out of their misery. The other is killing sick animals to prevent the spread of disease.