Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 143

Thread: rural VS. urban

  1. #1
    Member akguy454's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    norh pole AK
    Posts
    228

    Default rural VS. urban

    put the gloves on and get ready don't post unless you have a strong chin cause I think it will get rough in hear. What is you take on it all?? Cause I don't get what is really bugging everyone. Subst. VS. harvt. What's the difference to you? and why is it such a touchy subject?

    Robbie

  2. #2

    Thumbs down

    The only problem I have with the system is that it is well...wrong. Hopefully the guy in the Black Robe will clear it up, soon. It sets apart the social classes of citizens. Urban being the Second Class Variety. Rural gets the Priority Allocation. Some don't have a problem and I acknowledge that. Don't agree with their position in the least. To even consider that one should be afforded Preference, Exclusive or Priveleged Allocation of Fish and Game, because of their Zip Code is IMO, is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
    "96% of all Internet Quotes are suspect and the remaining 4% are fiction."
    ~~Abraham Lincoln~~

  3. #3
    Member AKDoug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Talkeetna
    Posts
    5,592

    Default

    I've got a tough chin and I don't mind bringing my point up again.

    Granting rural preference is against the State Constitution. In my opinion it will be more devisive than what we currently have going on. Where do we draw the line at rural?

    Is Barrow more rural than Talkeetna even though they have more services than we do, but we can drive to more services? You can always fly out of Barrow and get there too.

    How is it that other roadside communities get federal subsistance rights when others don't?

    How is it that my neighbor, who is Alaska native and resided in Unit 13 from birth until her 30's and hunted caribou there her whole life, but is not a AHTNA member, got totally removed from the process when AHTNA was granted special privledges to get tags only for their members?

    No special rights, no special privledges, should be granted based on where you live. We are all Alaskans and should be treated equally. Game should be managed on a substainable level for all Alaskans.
    Bunny Boots and Bearcats: Utility Sled Mayhem

  4. #4
    Member cdubbin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    KP, the dingleberry of Alaska
    Posts
    1,548

    Default

    It's simple. In Alaska we have a situation in which, on the one hand, people with low incomes actually do live on the game they kill, and on the other hand, it's a destination for people from all over the world who have the means to spare no expense in pursuit of a once-in-a-lifetime hunt. Problematically, we just don't have enough wildlife to satisfy all these needs; we are not the Serengeti. Hopefully, all parties can practice compromise and what I like to call "being the bigger person" to resolve these problems to everyone's satisfaction. Barring that, we'll just hunt tourists
    " Gas boats are bad enough, autos are an invention of the devil, and airplanes are worse." ~Allen Hasselborg

  5. #5
    Member akguy454's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    norh pole AK
    Posts
    228

    Default

    Akres I understand your point, and agree. I don't know about unconstitutional. However how does that effect you, and what can be done about it? I started this thread just to have more knowledge of why this gets under peoples skin on both sides

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Akres View Post
    The only problem I have with the system is that it is well...wrong. Hopefully the guy in the Black Robe will clear it up, soon. It sets apart the social classes of citizens. Urban being the Second Class Variety. Rural gets the Priority Allocation. Some don't have a problem and I acknowledge that. Don't agree with their position in the least. To even consider that one should be afforded Preference, Exclusive or Priveleged Allocation of Fish and Game, because of their Zip Code is IMO, is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

    So I don't have a dog in this fight, I am done with hunting. So, my question is if it became totally equal playing field. What would be the net/net loss to Rural Hunters and Net/Net what would the urban hunter gain.......? Would urban hunters suddenly be allowed two moose.....? I think not.

  7. #7

    Default

    What grips my butt is the whole tier II point system. In 16B the majority of the permits go to hunters from unit 14 while a lot of us who live here can't get one because we don't have the history. I've lived out here for over 12 years and have never been able to hunt moose in my back yard. Unit 14 has a sport season why do they feel the need to take moose 75 miles from their home.
    I think there should be a local preference if you live in a tier II area then you should have first chance at the game.

    Check the attachment I compiled these numbers from ADFG tier II winner list from 2004 to 2008. This is just one moose hunt. These are just from the winners list I don't have a way to find the ones who live in 16B and applied but didn't get a permit.
    Last edited by hiline; 02-02-2010 at 19:34. Reason: My freakin' attachment won't show up
    Chuck

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Yukon Canada
    Posts
    1,228

    Default chin

    I have a good chin and tough skin and probably better since I dont live there!!
    But the answer to your question is simple, it not fair! It really is just that simple, how can the state give more or different rights to some based on where they live?? Dont give me the BS that because they need it for food it should they should get a better deal. All Alaskans have the same opportunity to live work wherever they want.
    Canada has been going through this for years, why should natives rights be different?? Yet in the next breath they will tell you they want to be treated as equals. Figure that one out!

  9. #9

    Default My take on this...

    Is this really a "state" question or does this refer to the "federal" side. As for the state side, the state constitutions says it can't have preference, therefore it doesn't. The issue is that fact that the fed's have came in and gave rural preference on federal land. So, I really don't see this as a STATE issue, but surely is a federal issue, thus all the heart burn over rural preference/subsistence. It is certainly a divisive issue that may never be settled. I seriously doubt that the feds are going to change anything, thus the situation that we have will continue on.

  10. #10

    Wink

    Quote Originally Posted by akguy454 View Post
    Akres I understand your point, and agree. I don't know about unconstitutional. However how does that effect you, and what can be done about it? I started this thread just to have more knowledge of why this gets under peoples skin on both sides
    There is much about it that affects me. I am of the opinion that Alaskan's are to be treated Equally. No exceptions. What can you do? Get smarter about it all. Fight it tooth and nail and don't settle for giving away your priveledges or your kids priveledges. Google up McDowell vs State of Alaska, for the answer to whether or not it is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Then Google up Ken Manning Vs State of Alaska for the current/ongoing court proceedings regarding the AHTNA Priority Allocation Community Hunt. Google up the history, all of it, in it's entirety about Alaska's Statehood Pact with the US. Then look at how it got all *******ized by our reps, in the name of OIL. ANILCA/ANSCA and a host of other little perks got through. Also look at 8A No Bid Contracts and who gets them. This speaks volumes of what Alaskan's are about these days and who is getting their palms greased. It's huge and Alaskan's are getting ripped off, daily.
    "96% of all Internet Quotes are suspect and the remaining 4% are fiction."
    ~~Abraham Lincoln~~

  11. #11

    Question

    Quote Originally Posted by northway View Post
    Is this really a "state" question or does this refer to the "federal" side. As for the state side, the state constitutions says it can't have preference, therefore it doesn't. The issue is that fact that the fed's have came in and gave rural preference on federal land. So, I really don't see this as a STATE issue, but surely is a federal issue, thus all the heart burn over rural preference/subsistence. It is certainly a divisive issue that may never be settled. I seriously doubt that the feds are going to change anything, thus the situation that we have will continue on.
    How then do you explain away the Community Harvest Hunts/Potlatch Hunts/All the Others? There are many and growing, all on State lands and in State regs. Don't let others on here cloud the issue, as they sometimes like to.
    "96% of all Internet Quotes are suspect and the remaining 4% are fiction."
    ~~Abraham Lincoln~~

  12. #12

    Default Ak Res..

    Thanks for pointing that out. That is a good example of it at the state level. Thanks for pointing that out.

  13. #13

    Angry

    Another aspect many/most refuse to address or even look at, is the different limits imposed, based solely on your Zip Code or stating that you can't take the meat home. On State, Private (spelled Corporate) and Federal Lands.
    "96% of all Internet Quotes are suspect and the remaining 4% are fiction."
    ~~Abraham Lincoln~~

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Yukon Canada
    Posts
    1,228

    Default point

    Akres I would call you post#10 a ten point round! Is there a standing 8 count in this brawl !
    Believe me I know you guys up there feel ! The squeaky wheel gets the grease!

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Yukon Canada
    Posts
    1,228

    Default meat

    Cant take the meat home?? Whats that about??

  16. #16

    Wink

    Quote Originally Posted by yukon254 View Post
    Cant take the meat home?? Whats that about??
    If you live outside the Unit boundries of some hunts, you can kill more than you can transport out of the Unit. It is a poorly disguised method of regulating Alaskan's out of a Local subsidized hunting opportunity. They also pull tricks like making you register in person at a hole in the wall office in a village, months ahead of the hunt. That way they are gambling on the fact that you won't go there twice, just to hunt once. Lots of sneaky deals go on that no one really wants to address publicly. They think they might get austrasized for speaking out against the wrongs.
    "96% of all Internet Quotes are suspect and the remaining 4% are fiction."
    ~~Abraham Lincoln~~

  17. #17
    Member kodiakrain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kodiak, Ak
    Posts
    3,175

    Default How about this swing?

    Not meant to offend but to open eyes a bit,

    Is it possible for everyone to admit that people CHOOSE to live in Urban areas because It Is Easier?

    While some CHOOSE to live closer to the woods because they are willing to forgo Ease of living (whether it is better paying job, more beautiful women, cheaper groceries, nobody plowing their roads,etc......) to be able to live closer to the wildlife of Alaska

    Is it right to give the easy guy the same access to the animals that live in the backyard of the guy who is taking 100knot winds on the chin in January??

    Don't tell me it isn't easier to live in the Valley... C'mon

    Yes, I do know it is more complicated than that but thought this might be fun to hear replies

  18. #18

    Wink

    I find living outside the city to be much much much easier. Those city folks have it tough and if anything, they should be given a special holiday for Opening Day of Moose Season. After all, they are the ones that pay for the rest of us to play.
    "96% of all Internet Quotes are suspect and the remaining 4% are fiction."
    ~~Abraham Lincoln~~

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,033

    Default equality

    Quote Originally Posted by Akres View Post
    There is much about it that affects me. I am of the opinion that Alaskan's are to be treated Equally. No exceptions. (
    OK let's start with infrastructure. Lets get all the villages up to par with the towns on the road system and power grid. Let's make sure that everywhere in the state gas prices and electric prices are the same. Lets make sure every home is connected to a modern sewage system. No more honey buckets or outhouses. Lets make sure all roads are paved and maintained equally. Heck, let's build a road system throughout the State so anyone can drive from their home to another area of the State to hunt when all the local hunts are ruined by an influx of hunters. Lets start forcing companies to open businesses in all the rural communities and create jobs so everybody in these communities can afford to travel anywhere in the State to do their hunting.

    I think you're on to something Akres.
    An opinion should be the result of thought, not a substitute for it.
    - Jef Mallett

  20. #20

    Default

    OK, What if it was illegal to remove Horns or Antlers or Hides from the field. Only meat could ever be removed. Taxidermy will be declared a terrorist act. You could photo the animal, take measurements, and a perfect plastic mount will be sent to you, for a fee. And said fee shall go into the Alaska Permanent Fund. Problem solved......Maybe

Page 1 of 8 123 ... 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
  •