View Poll Results: Have you sent your opposition letters for Props 193 & 194?

Voters
22. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, Nancy H. is out of control and I vehemently oppose her method to control public resources.

    13 59.09%
  • I will soon, now where’s that public comment template letter…

    5 22.73%
  • No, agree with Nancy that she deserves a wildlife refuge in front of her home.

    4 18.18%
Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 89

Thread: Have you sent your opposition letters for Props 193 & 194?

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Juneau, AK
    Posts
    216

    Exclamation Have you sent your opposition letters for Props 193 & 194?

    I’ve created this poll to keep these two important topics in the spot light. Here’s the original post: http://forums.outdoorsdirectory.com/...193-from-Nancy

    I don’t live in Kachemak Bay, but this attempt by a single property owner to usurp control from the rest of the residents of Alaska is too dangerous to allow to pass. Her methods could be replicated by any activist across the state to severely limit waterfowl hunting by law abiding citizens. Are you listening JUNEAU?! This is a big deal. She has no proof, cites no scientific evidence and one of her main reasons (wanton waste by guides and clients) is an enforcement issue that should be reported to the state troopers!

    I’ve also attached a template letter so no one has an excuse to not voice their opposition. Oppose Proposals 193 & 194 Letter.doc Let me know if you have any formatting questions with this file. It has a header.

    There are a couple deadlines for public comment for the meeting. March 11th is the deadline to submit up to 100 page documents and to be included in the departments report to the board of game. You can still submit documents up to 10 pages in length right up to the night of the meeting and the members will take those into account as well. The meeting is scheduled for March 26-29th at the Coast International Inn in Anchorage.

    Here’s more information http://www.boards.adfg.state.ak.us/g...tinfo/gcal.php

    Erich

  2. #2

    Default

    thans erich for the info for everyone. for those that think nancy should have sadie cove for her own refuge doesnt know her very well. this wont stop her from trying to control and manipulate our resources for her liking. this would only empower her and make her believe she can control the system. the waterfowl biologists look at the big picture and so should we. this isnt about her...

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Chugiak, Alaska
    Posts
    319

    Default

    Enrich, Thanks for the poll and the opposion letter doc. Giving in to any of the anti hunt group is always a mistake. When you give and inch they will push for another mile. There are plenty of ducks in the K-Bay system and having hunted there the past 2 years I can attest that there are one heck of alot of Golden Eyes. I vote we look at getting the limit increased to 12 per day. Lets banned together to block Nancy and prop 193 & 194 Vote on the poll and send your letters guys. Duckdon

  4. #4

    Default

    You need to get written comments sent to the BOG support you can get a copy of all proposal HERE for the spring 2011 BOG meeting.
    Chuck

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Juneau, AK
    Posts
    216

    Default

    Here's the link Hiline posted: http://www.boards.adfg.state.ak.us/g...book-FINAL.pdf

    Erich

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Juneau, AK
    Posts
    216

    Default

    Your welcome Duckdon,

    I agree with you that individuals and groups seeking to limit hunters access and opportunities will take a mile of you give them an inch. Hunters are at a disadvantage when it comes to this type of activism. We tend to be busy people with work, family and our hobbies and we have better things to do than sit around scheming how to get the rules rewritten to serve our interest. Forums like this are vital to get the word out to build a united voice.

    Erich

  7. #7
    New member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    8

    Default nice work

    Erich 870-
    It took me a while to find your post, but I applaud your efforts to organize duck hunters here to oppose props 193 and 194. I'll compose a solid opposition letter to the BOG over the upcoming days. I also suggest posting relevant info on the new thread re. these proposals.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Chugiak, Alaska
    Posts
    319

    Default

    Erich My wife and I faxed our oppsition letters in today. I also sent your details to some hunting buddies. Thanks for the assist Duckdon

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Juneau, AK
    Posts
    216

    Default

    Great guys! I need to have my wife send a letter too. I didn't think of that!

    Erich

  10. #10
    New member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    8

    Default ideas for prop 194 opposition letters

    Here are some thoughts you may or may not care to include in your opposition letter to Prop 194. Additionally, see my recent post in the thread for Prop 193 if you would like ideas for comments that could be included in opposition letters for that prop.

    As currently written, Proposal 194 is unclear as to specifically how management regulations should be changed. No evidence is provided in Proposal 194 for claims made regarding commercialized and sport hunting including that these activities are leading to localized depletion of resources and are a source of excessive crippling and wanton waste. Furthermore, Proposal 194 clearly states that this proposal has been submitted to benefit private landowners (i.e. "Landowners like me will benefit because possibly the rafts of birds that were depleted for 18 years ago by commercial guided hunting parties in front of my home will be allowed to grow back in the remote bay I have lived in for the past 32 years and I will once again be able to see them, hear them, and enjoy them in my front yard which is why I live remote") despite the fact that the wildlife resources of Alaska are public and are to be managed for the common good. The idea of developing separate waterfowl hunting regulations for guided sport hunting should perhaps be reviewed in a future proposal that specifically outlines how regulations should be changed; however, as currently written Proposal 194 sets a dangerous precedent for management of public resources for the benefit of local landowners.

  11. #11

    Default

    she also has the homer a/c by the balls. a few years back she had them voting to outlaw firearms in sadie cove, and almost got it passed by that a/c.

  12. #12
    Member Alaska Gray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    4,925

    Default

    turned my letter in last week!!!!
    She will have her hands full this year.
    Living the Alaskan Dream
    Gary Keller
    Anchorage, AK

  13. #13
    Member homerdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    homer, alaska
    Posts
    3,922

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bucksducks View Post
    she also has the homer a/c by the balls. a few years back she had them voting to outlaw firearms in sadie cove, and almost got it passed by that a/c.
    REALLY!!
    thats news to me (both the "by the balls" statement and the alleged proposal), and ive been on the AC for 8 years or so....
    i've seen nancy at a couple meetings, but never you... maybe i missed that meeting?
    we will be addressing BOG proposals at our next meeting, on the 8th.
    see you there?
    Alaska Board of Game 2015 tour... "Kicking the can down the road"
    http://www.alaskabackcountryhunters.org/

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    south of the AC
    Posts
    194

    Default

    Erich;
    Really??? 17 people in a poll worded to slant the out come is supposed to mean something??

    How much time have you spent in K Bay? You live in Juneau and want to tell us all about the Homer area????? Here are some facts for those of you reading this thread. Nancy is NOT an anti hunter and does NOT want to shut down all duck hunting. Nancy has the benifit of living here a long time and seeing first hand what goes on in the area. Nancy HAS done the research and DOES site scientific evidence. If you will read ALL of the prop it does make sense and is in line with other area bag limits. Nancy IS greedy in that she wants to not have the ducks significantly reduced or even extripated here. Nancy does not hunt ducks, she does like to bird watch and I wouldn't bother her to much if you see her walking the beach, one of her favorite things to carry on her beach walks is a 45/70. Another fact, BUCKS4DUCKS will and does lie to you and on here and is self serving in his interest, as is his buddy Chen, both of them are guides for duck hunting.


    Read the props ALL the way thru and do some reasearch on your own and THINK about it instead of being reactive and jumping to conclusions that the conflict of interest people and the uneducated are putting out there.

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Juneau, AK
    Posts
    216

    Default

    Saltwatertom,

    Please find my response to your post in [red] below:

    Quote Originally Posted by saltwatertom View Post
    Erich;
    Really??? 17 people in a poll worded to slant the out come is supposed to mean something?? [There is nothing scientific about my poll, it is intended to motivate fellow duck hunters to stand up for public access in K Bay and around the state]

    How much time have you spent in K Bay? [Have not had the good fortune to visit yet] You live in Juneau and want to tell us all about the Homer area????? [I've never tried to assert any knowledge of the Homer area] Here are some facts for those of you reading this thread. Nancy is NOT an anti hunter and does NOT want to shut down all duck hunting. [Nancy wants to limit legal use by the public, on public land and that is unacceptable to me] Nancy has the benifit of living here a long time and seeing first hand what goes on in the area. [I don't care how long she's lived there, also Nancy may very well see guides wasting game. If that is so, she should be calling the state troopers to report the crime. If they do nothing to enforce the law, she should be calling the Attorney Generals office] Nancy HAS done the research and DOES site scientific evidence. [This sentience is laughable, see the proposal, in its entirety below] If you will read ALL of the prop it does make sense and is in line with other area bag limits. [Once again, see below, her proposal is embarrassing to read for its LACK of evidence and blatant self serving motives] Nancy IS greedy in that she wants to not have the ducks significantly reduced or even extripated here. Nancy does not hunt ducks, she does like to bird watch and I wouldn't bother her to much if you see her walking the beach, one of her favorite things to carry on her beach walks is a 45/70. [There has been ample data shared on this subject to the fact that the ducks in and around Homer are under no more pressure than ducks in Anchorage and Juneau. Furthermore, a duck hunter has just as much right to hunt ducks on public land as a bird watcher has to use public land. Nancy has no right to create a bird watching preserve in front of her home. If her attempts are not stopped, others will copy her tactics and I won't stand for that!] Another fact, BUCKS4DUCKS will and does lie to you and on here and is self serving in his interest, as is his buddy Chen, both of them are guides for duck hunting. [All of my comments have been based on Nancy's proposal, see below. Your beef with Bucks4ducks and Chen are not important to me]


    Read the props ALL the way thru and do some reasearch on your own and THINK about it instead of being reactive and jumping to conclusions that the conflict of interest people and the uneducated are putting out there. [See below for Nancy's complete proposal]


    [page 237]
    PROPOSAL 194 - 5 AAC 85.065. Hunting seasons and bag limits for small game. Change the regulations for waterfowl in Region II and Region IV.

    I would like to see a framework in our regulations where if there is a conflict between users of the resource, declining species, or localized depletion, that separate hunting regulations can be applied to commercialized guided bird hunting for profit and sport so that those who are hunting for food in their areas will not be impacted by regulation changes.

    ISSUE: Commercialized migratory or resident bird hunting for profit and sport, removing the biomass bay by bay along coastlines and in front of people's homes, creating localized depletions where the average Alaskan going out hunting for food would not have this impact and should not have to pay with restrictions when they are not the cause of the problems.

    WHAT WILL HAPPEN IF NOTHING IS DONE?

    WILL THE QUALITY OF THE RESOURCE HARVESTED OR THE PRODUCTS PRODUCED BE IMPROVED?

    WHO IS LIKELY TO BENEFIT? Everyone, especially Alaskan waterfowl hunters who hunt for food since the resource won't be wasted, flocks will be allowed to grow back in depleted bays. Birds won't be in such a froth from being chased around by shooters who really do not understand the tradition of water-fowling. Everyone will also benefit because I will be able to stop putting in these proposals trying to find solutions. Landowners like me will benefit because

    [page 238]
    possibly the rafts of birds that were depleted for 18 years ago by commercial guided hunting parties in front of my home will be allowed to grow back in the remote bay I have lived in for the past 32 years and I will once again be able to see them, hear them, and enjoy them in my front yard which is why I live remote.

    WHO IS LIKELY TO SUFFER? No one. Logical regulations separate from the local water-fowler will address the special needs for commercial guided sport hunting like trophy hunting and sport shooting. It will not cut off opportunity, it will simply provide a more sane hunt that addresses the problems caused by money motivated or cast and blast hunting that causes wanton waste, excessive crippling and depletion of birds.

    OTHER SOLUTIONS CONSIDERED:

    PROPOSED BY: Nancy Hillstrand

    LOG NUMBER: EG110910204

    Complete document: http://www.boards.adfg.state.ak.us/g...book-FINAL.pdf

    Erich

  16. #16
    Member homerdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    homer, alaska
    Posts
    3,922

    Default

    [Nancy wants to limit legal use by the public, on public land and that is unacceptable to me]

    so using this rationale, ANYBODY who proposes ANY regulation that would reduce or limit ANY hunting or fishing in ANY way is going to be unacceptable to you.
    well, heres the deal... the way the regulatory process is set up here that is the way laws change.
    this is not an attempt to "limit legal use", but to change what is legal.
    look forward to seeing you at the meeting, too.
    Alaska Board of Game 2015 tour... "Kicking the can down the road"
    http://www.alaskabackcountryhunters.org/

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    south of the AC
    Posts
    194

    Default

    Erich;

    I'm sorry, my post wasn't really for you or for you to respond to, it was/is meant for others who may read this thread and are able to think and figure things out in a rational way so we can have a sustainable future for our wildlife and habitat.

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Juneau, AK
    Posts
    216

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by saltwatertom View Post
    Erich;

    I'm sorry, my post wasn't really for you or for you to respond to, it was/is meant for others who may read this thread and are able to think and figure things out in a rational way so we can have a sustainable future for our wildlife and habitat.
    I hope you can understand how I construed your post to be intended for me, given the fact that you directed it to me by name...

    You bring up an important point about the sustainability of our wildlife. Ducks are migratory animals, waterfowl are constantly moving around and birds shot by hunters are replaced by new ones all season long. Birds do learn where pressure is, so they may stay outside of heavly hunted areas, but just becuase fewer birds are seen in one area, does not mean the whole population is crashing. Waterfowl are currently and should continue to be managed regonally, not by individual bays.

    Quote Originally Posted by homerdave View Post
    [Nancy wants to limit legal use by the public, on public land and that is unacceptable to me]

    so using this rationale, ANYBODY who proposes ANY regulation that would reduce or limit ANY hunting or fishing in ANY way is going to be unacceptable to you.
    well, heres the deal... the way the regulatory process is set up here that is the way laws change.
    this is not an attempt to "limit legal use", but to change what is legal.
    look forward to seeing you at the meeting, too.
    Absolutely not, if someone proposes reducing the limits based on sound scientific research and quantifiable data, then I would support it completely. The limits on Dusky Geese in Cordova (and OR/WA) is a great example.

    I also have no problem with the way the regulatory process works. THANK GOD this process is managed at a statewide level and we were alerted to its misuse by Nancy!

    I've said it before, but I'll repeat it. To write a proposal to create your own bird sanctuary in front of your home is wholly improper and anyone who believes in the system and wants to see it stay objective, impartial, and scientifically based should also oppose her method for these reasons. It's that simple! She cannot be allowed to severly limit a ligitimate use of state property for her own benifit.

    Erich

  19. #19
    Member Alaska Gray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    4,925

    Default

    The problem I have with 194
    "clearly states that this proposal has been submitted to benefit private landowners (i.e. "Landowners like me will benefit because possibly the rafts of birds that were depleted for 18 years ago by commercial guided hunting parties in front of my home will be allowed to grow back in the remote bay I have lived in for the past 32 years and I will once again be able to see them, hear them, and enjoy them in my front yard which is why I live remote") despite the fact that the wildlife resources of Alaska are public and are to be managed for the common good. This proposal can not pass. This will cause further land owners submitting proposals like this to gain exclusive rights to waters and woods."

    Also wanton and waste no data on this Trooper issue if this is really happening to the degree she claims. Has it been reported?

    excessive crippling again no data.....

    depletion of of birds??????? OK here is a ball buster and killer on this statemenet

    ADF&G waterfowl biologist Tom Rothe said in his analysis: “The department has concluded that Sea Duck harvest in Kachemak Bay and Cook Inlet is not excessive.” Further that the department “does not have any concerns that Sea Ducks are being over harvested and concluded that further restrictions to hunting will not provide conservation benefits to regional winter aggregations to populations of Sea Ducks.” Rothe wrote guided hunting is not creating undue harvest, guiding is providing better quality public access to this specialized hunting.” Surveys from 1999 to 2003 show from 15,000 to 30,000 ducks wintering in Kachemak Bay.
    Living the Alaskan Dream
    Gary Keller
    Anchorage, AK

  20. #20
    Member Alaska Gray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    4,925

    Default

    If there is a problm with depletion then I'm all for managing them, but you can't tell me that the Golden eye is depleting.. I can not believe how many I have seen the past two years. More then any other sea ducks.
    Living the Alaskan Dream
    Gary Keller
    Anchorage, AK

Page 1 of 5 123 ... 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
  •