Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: BoG Meeting, Nome, Proposal 34

  1. #1
    Member martentrapper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Fairbanks, Ak.
    Posts
    4,191

    Default BoG Meeting, Nome, Proposal 34

    BoG tabled proposal 34 but on Friday, Dept of Law said salvage is in statute and not for BoG to change.
    For those of you who thought sure BoG would change definition, now you can speculate if Legislature will!!
    I can't help being a lazy, dumb, weekend warrior.......I have a JOB!
    I have less friends now!!

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

    Default

    Mike, thanks for the info, not sure I agree with DOL though as the Board regularly adjusts salvage requirements and says what parts a hunter must salvage.

    Gee, guess all that time we spent commenting on Prop 34 was moot,

  3. #3

    Question

    I have searched for the Statute the DOL has referenced and cannot find one that explicitly spells it out. Anyone have a link or statute number?
    "96% of all Internet Quotes are suspect and the remaining 4% are fiction."
    ~~Abraham Lincoln~~

  4. #4
    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

    AS 16.30.010. Wanton Waste of Big Game Animals and Wild Fowl.
    (a) It is a class A misdemeanor for a person who kills a big game animal or a species of wild fowl to fail intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, or with criminal negligence to salvage for human consumption the edible meat of the animal or fowl. {to include legally taken game, that has been harvested transported and disposed of at point of processing}
    (b) If a person is convicted of violating this section and in the course of that violation failed to salvage from a big game animal at least the hindquarters as far as the distal joint of the tibia-fibula (hock), the court shall impose a sentence of imprisonment of not less than thirty [seven] consecutive days for big game and seven consecutive days for small game and a fine of not less then $5000.00 [not less than $2,500.] for big game per instance, and $2500 for small game
    (c) The imposition or execution of the minimum sentence prescribed in (b) of this section may not be suspended under AS 12.55.080 or 12.55.085. The minimum sentence prescribed in (b) of this section may not be reduced.


    "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

  5. #5

    Wink

    Vince,
    I too saw that one and a couple of others. What I was sorta thinking that the DOL must have had more than that to hang their hat on. Maybe something that more clearly defined the term "Edible". I think this is what the proposal was all about in the first place.

    I am not a lawyer, but I would think the State Statutes fall short of offering a catch-all solution/answer to the proposal as written. The natives are not questioning the salvage of edible meat, they are questioning the fact of who determines and/what is edible, if I am reading it correctly. Seems to me that quite possibly the DOL/BOG took the easy way out on this and left themselves open for a lawsuit.
    "96% of all Internet Quotes are suspect and the remaining 4% are fiction."
    ~~Abraham Lincoln~~

  6. #6
    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 dont forget to look up codes also....

    Fish and Game
    Chapter 92 . Statewide Provisions
    Section 220. Salvage of game meat, furs, and hides
    5 AAC 92.220. Salvage of game meat, furs, and hides

    (a) Subject to additional requirements in 5 AAC 84 - 5 AAC 85, a person taking game shall salvage the following parts for human use:
    (1) the hide of a wolf, wolverine, coyote, fox, lynx, marten, mink, weasel, and land otter, and the hide or meat of a beaver, muskrat, ground squirrel, or marmot;
    (2) the hide and skull of a brown bear, except as provided in (5) of this section;
    (3) from January 1 through May 31, the hide, skull, and edible meat as defined in 5 AAC 92.990, and from June 1 through December 31, the hide and skull of a black bear taken in a game management unit in which sealing is required; in Unit 19(D) within the wolf predation control area described in 5 AAC 92.125(1) , the hide and skull of a black bear must be salvaged from January 1 through December 31; in Unit 19(D) outside of the wolf predation control area described in 5 AAC 92.125(1) , either the hide or the edible meat as defined in 5 AAC 92.990 must be salvaged from January 1 through December 31;
    (4) from January 1 through May 31, the edible meat, and from June 1 through December 31, either the hide, or the edible meat as defined in 5 AAC 92.990, of a black bear taken in any game management unit in which sealing is not required;
    (5) all edible meat of a brown bear taken under a subsistence registration permit in Unit 9(B), all drainages in Unit 9(E) that drain into the Pacific Ocean between Cape Kumliun and the border of Unit 9(D) and Unit 9(E), Unit 17, Unit 18, that portion of Units 19(A) and 19(B) downstream of and including the Aniak River drainage, Unit 21(D), Unit 22, all drainages in Unit 23 except for the Baldwin Peninsula north of the Arctic Circle, Unit 24, and Unit 26(A), shall be salvaged for human consumption; salvage of the hide or skull is optional.
    (b) A big game animal killed or injured by a vehicle is the property of the state. The operator of a motor vehicle that collides with a big game animal resulting in death or injury to the animal shall notify the State Troopers or division of fish and wildlife protection in the Department of Public Safety, as soon as possible.
    (c) Repealed 4/24/88.
    (d) A person taking game not listed in (a) of this section shall salvage for human consumption all edible meat, as defined in 5 AAC 92.990. In addition,
    (1) for moose and caribou taken before October 1 in Unit 9(B), Unit 17, Unit 18, those portions of Unit 19(A) within the Holitna/Hoholitna Controlled Use Area, Unit 19(B), and Unit 23, the edible meat of the front quarters and hindquarters must remain naturally attached to the bone until the meat is transported from the field or is processed for human consumption;
    (2) for caribou taken before October 1 in Unit 21(A), the edible meat of the front quarters and hindquarters must remain naturally attached to the bone until the meat has been transported from the field or is processed for human consumption;
    (3) for moose taken before October 1 in Units 21 and 24, and for caribou taken before October 1 in Unit 24, the edible meat of the front quarters, hindquarters, and ribs must remain naturally attached to the bone until the meat has been transported from the field or is processed for human consumption.
    (e) Antlers or horns may not be transported from the kill site until all edible meat salvaged in accordance with (d) of this section has been transported to the departure point from the field. However, antlers or horns may be transported simultaneously with the final load of edible meat salvaged.
    (f) Antlers or horns may not be transported from the field unless accompanied by all edible meat or unless possession of the meat has been transferred in accordance with 5 AAC 92.135.
    (g) Repealed 7/1/2002.
    (h) A game animal taken in violation of AS 16 or a regulation adopted under AS 16 is the property of the state.
    (i) A person who has wounded game shall make every reasonable effort to retrieve and salvage that game.
    History: Eff. 7/5/85, Register 95; am 4/24/88, Register 106; am 8/20/89, Register 111; am 8/10/91, Register 119; am 7/1/92, Register 122; add'l am 7/1/92, Register 122; am 5/5/93, Register 126; readopt 5/13/93, Register 126; am 7/7/94, Register 131; am 6/28/96, Register 138; am 7/26/97, Register 143; am 7/1/98, Register 146; add'l am 7/1/98, Register 146; am 7/1/2000, Register 154; am 7/1/2001, Register 158; am 8/22/2001, Register 159; am 7/1/2002, Register 162; 1st add'l am 7/1/2002, Register 162; 2nd add'l am 7/1/2002, Register 162; am 7/25/2002, Register 163; am 7/1/2004, Register 170
    Authority: AS 16.05.255
    AS 16.05.258
    AS 16.05.920
    AS 16.30.010
    "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

  7. #7

    Talking

    I persoanally believe that the State of Alaska's unwillingness to address the proposal as written, will be used extensively in the Federal Review being conducted as I type this. The response that the DOL/BOG has came up with, will absolutely nail down what the villagers want the Feds to look at and make determination for the State to adopt.

    Bottomline, if the State is not willing to define it, the Feds will. Who determines what is edible? What is edible? Seems to me, we have been living with the notion that "we all know it when we see it", but now that notion has been challenged and ultimately someone, be it the State or the Feds will spell it out. The action that the DOL/BOG has taken, leads me to believe they don't want to do it, and are leaving it for the Feds to do. This is also the jest of it, in what I have gotten from speaking with State "emloyees". It is a political football that everyone wants to keep passing off and none of them want to run the TD, lest the play be called back under further review.
    "96% of all Internet Quotes are suspect and the remaining 4% are fiction."
    ~~Abraham Lincoln~~

  8. #8
    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 can speculate all you want... the Feds do not own the game the state does... ALL of the game the feds allow or not hunting on there lands bag limits are state controlled.


    and with a 5-15 per day bag limit... #1 they are not being shorted any meat and the state says it is minimal effort to turn in suspected meat for analysis and then... GO GET MORE!!! nothing to it.. #2 if it is disieased... it should be reported for the health of the herd... not left to rot and fester the environment with pestilence
    "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

  9. #9

    Wink

    Quote Originally Posted by Vince View Post
    ALL of the game the feds allow or not hunting on there lands bag limits are state controlled.
    HUH??? "state controlled", no way. Managed///perhaps, but even that term, that has commonly been used, is suspect and a real stretch of the truth.

    Kodiak
    Nelchina
    Marine Mammals
    to name a few and illustrate the obvious, the list goes on, ad nausem.

    I don't think many are going to be real happy with the results/findings of the Federal Review being conducted.
    "96% of all Internet Quotes are suspect and the remaining 4% are fiction."
    ~~Abraham Lincoln~~

  10. #10
    Member bushrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Now residing in Fairbanks from the bush
    Posts
    4,363

    Default

    Maybe Mike or someone else can correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that DOL commented ahead of time when the proposal book was out, and before comments were due, whether or not a proposal was under the authority of the BOG or not. This saved a lot of us the frustration and effort of commenting on a proposal or not in the past, no sense really spending the time and energy researching it if it wasn't even under BOG authority to change.

    FYI, you can read our AK BHA comments on proposal 34 at this link:
    http://www.alaskabackcountryhunters....all%202009.pdf

    For the record, we tried to contact Kimberlee Beckmen, ADFG's veterinarian, on this, to get answers to some questions on diseases and if they could indeed spread (via predators and scavengers) if animals were simply shot and left in the field, but she said DOL advised she wasn't able to respond due to the ongoing court case. I also contacted the Director of the Division of Wildlife Conservation on this. Again, no real definitive answers. Biologists outside Alaska indicated that if animals thought to be diseased were shot and left in the field, predators and scavengers could still spread the disease, and the only way that kind of thing would stop the spread would be to burn the cacasses thoroughly. We were trying to find out definitively if, as the proposal stated, it was the practice in the past to shoot diseased animals and simply leave them, whether that actually worked to stop or slow the spread of disease.

    We did find several comments from Native elders throughout the Arctic, like the one we used in our comments, that basically said it was wrong to shoot animals and leave them.

  11. #11

    Default

    Customary and Traditional, doesn't mean Correct. The locals in this instance say that what they have been doing for thousands of years, is also the way they want to continue to do it. The State of Alaska has balked at the proposal. The Feds will review the State's position and in two months, tell the State how it is going to be.
    "96% of all Internet Quotes are suspect and the remaining 4% are fiction."
    ~~Abraham Lincoln~~

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
  •