Page 1 of 16 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 312

Thread: Greenies after the trails in Sutton (this will affect hunting in the area!)

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Sutton
    Posts
    24

    Default Greenies after the trails in Sutton (this will affect hunting in the area!)

    First post here folks but I thought I'd bring some disturbing news I learned this evening to everyone's attention. It seems the Sutton Community Council is in cahoots with some greenies and they want to turn the trail system in/around Sutton into an Eco Tourism area. I live in Sutton and needless to say am not happy at all with the situation. I guess they didn't get what they wanted at Knik so they've moved up the road to Sutton. From what I understand there has been a multimillion dollar grant awarded and there currently are crews out with GPSs mapping the trails in the area for this greenie push. I for one and not in favor for this and think it needs to be stopped in its tracks.

    Attached is a link to a pdf on the Sutton Community Councils website outlining this greenie vision.

    http://suttoncommunitycouncil.org/wp...s-2.4.2011.pdf

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    NorthWest Alaska
    Posts
    3,633

    Default

    I read the whole thing and saw nothing about hunting.......what actually struck me, is that this would benifit hunting with maintaining acsess and stopping further inroads/fences/pollution.

    Theres ALOT of eco-tourisim in the Arctic, and since Man is a Natural part of the landscape, Hunting is too.

    Cant you be Green and eat meat too?

    OK, prehapse I dont know something ( I actually know nothing at all).....is there a provision to stop or reduce Hunting when a trail is as gone Green.......????

    Im all for Conservation, not Preservation........
    If you can't Kill it with a 30-06, you should Hide.

    "Dam it all", The Beaver told me.....

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Sutton
    Posts
    24

    Default

    Agreed the pdf says nothing about hunting. However, per one of the community council members opposed to this they have hunting squarely in their sights. Regardless of whether they're directly after hunting or not I just can't see eco tourism and hunting co-existing peacefully.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    NorthWest Alaska
    Posts
    3,633

    Default

    Well, DSave , as a Hunter, I reccomend that you show those Greenies just how it Really is, and that a Man in his habitat is the apex predator

    Give 'em the truth weather they like it or not.
    If you can't Kill it with a 30-06, you should Hide.

    "Dam it all", The Beaver told me.....

  5. #5
    Member scott_rn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    power commuting twixt the valley and anchorage
    Posts
    803

    Default

    Dave,

    Is this document (proposal draft I assume), a response to the Wishbone Hill Coal Mine?

  6. #6

    Default

    I'm sorry that thing just reeks of anti-hunting. Just the use of the word "green" is enough to raise alarms.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Sutton
    Posts
    24

    Default

    I'm not sure if it's a response to the Wishbone Hill Mine Project or if they're just trying in Sutton what they failed to achieve at Knik/Jim Creek. The way I understand the current situation is 1) the Sutton Community Council has "postponed" any action on the matter 2) The outside group pushing this is continuing on laying the groundwork by mapping any and all trails in the area to include those on private property in an attempt to have the state recognize them as "public access" trails. After that is done the push will be made to ban any and all motorized use of the trails.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Sutton
    Posts
    24

    Default

    To be brutally honest they've already ruined the Anchorage bowl with their west coast wanna be utopia and I for one am not interested in them bringing their attitudes and lifestyle to the valley. We moved from Anchorage to Wasilla and now to Sutton to get away from those types.

  9. #9
    Moderator LuJon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    11,415

    Default

    Did this committee happen to at least get the Sutton sign with the strategically placed "L" removed?

    As far as the wishbone lake they have this awfully worded poll.

    Do you think the Sutton Community Council should take a stand on the Wishbone Hill Coal Project?
    It is obvious that they have a unilateral thought process because they think this is a yes or no question when it actually doesn't say what sort of a stand they are taking! There are two sides to the issue that one could "take a stand" on, for or against, but they don't seem to recognize that. It is funny because most of the time the folks with agenda's like these actually see themselves as somehow more "intelligent" than those of us who work hard and ride ATV's or hunt. They are so narrow minded that they can't grasp why someone would not agree with their viewpoint and the only thing that they can attribute it too is that the opposition must be stupid or incompetent.

  10. #10
    Member tccak71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    2,173

    Default

    They may not mention hunting but here's a clue to their "agenda:"

    Protect air, water, wildlife and land quality while reducing impacts to nearby properties
    from traffic, noise, pollution, lighting, etc.
    Protect recreation opportunities and enhance quality of life for Sutton residents
    Identify, protect and enhance the quantity and quality of the community's watersheds
    and groundwater; prevent degradation offish and wildlife habitat, vegetation and clean
    air resources.


    Just the first statement tells me they want to not allow motorized access and cease hunting. "Reduce impact from traffic, NOISE, etc...

    Reducing impact, would mean restricting access and hunting. Fancy terms like reduce and protect mean "eliminate and abolish" in greeneological terms in reference to hunting and motorized access. What authority does the Sutton Community Council have in actually implementing this on state land? Gotta continue to fist-fight any and all of the green agenda before we become Alaskafornia.

    Tim

    Tim

  11. #11
    Member sayak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Central peninsula, between the K-rivers
    Posts
    5,787

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tccak71 View Post
    Just the first statement tells me they want to not allow motorized access and cease hunting. "Reduce impact from traffic, NOISE, etc...

    Reducing impact, would mean restricting access and hunting. Fancy terms like reduce and protect mean "eliminate and abolish" in greeneological terms in reference to hunting and motorized access. What authority does the Sutton Community Council have in actually implementing this on state land? Gotta continue to fist-fight any and all of the green agenda before we become Alaskafornia.

    Tim

    Tim
    "greeneological": love it. Adding it to my lexicon.
    It doesn't take long after they arrive for those folks to start dictating how things should be does it?
    In my observation, they come up as tourists, fall in love with some part of Alaska, move here, then start agitating to make it like wherever they came from, gerally with complete disregard for whoever already lives there.
    I try to not hate anybody, but my feelings about these folks isn't ranked too high above thieves.

  12. #12
    Member pike_palace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    the 907
    Posts
    2,326

    Default

    You put a frog in boiling water and he will jump out. You put him in cold water, and slowly warm it up, he'll sit there and boil to death.

    The lesson: You let these greenies have a bit now, and they'll surely expand on it, killing any hunting or outdoors recreation that includes rifles, fishing poles, ATV's or archery.

    Oppose it NOW.
    "Ya can't stop a bad guy with a middle finger and a bag of quarters!!!!"- Ted Nugent.

  13. #13
    Member sayak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Central peninsula, between the K-rivers
    Posts
    5,787

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pike_palace View Post
    You put a frog in boiling water and he will jump out. You put him in cold water, and slowly warm it up, he'll sit there and boil to death.

    The lesson: You let these greenies have a bit now, and they'll surely expand on it, killing any hunting or outdoors recreation that includes rifles, fishing poles, ATV's or archery.

    Oppose it NOW.
    That is true. They work through slow, careful social change: a little at a time, incremental changes so as not to over-alarm the old guard. Give them an inch, and they will eventually take a mile.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    111

    Default

    Once these kind of people get one thing they want then they push harder. First its trails then you cant ride your atv then you cant hunt then you cant carry a gun. Just look at whats happening on the west coast (Cali, oregon, washington). Every year theres another place you cant hunt or ride your atv cause of these people. Theres million places you can go hike who needs trails. They need to get out of there house that was built out of wood from the trees they dont want to cut down and there car that polutes the air and hike where theres no trails.

  15. #15
    Member tccak71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    2,173

    Default

    So, Dave-n-AK, what's up? When do they meet? Will they accept public comments? Can we call, email, tar & feather anyone to prevent this hostile takeover?

    Tim

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    55

    Default

    I'm not expressing support for either side of this situation, and I certaintly would not want to lose the opportunity to hunt that area, however, I am disturbed by the clear attitude of fear and hostility expressed towards "greenies" in these posts. Hunters and "greenies" share some of the same goals, perhaps we should focus on working with and modifying their agenda, rather than alarming over them? James

  17. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jjwillac View Post
    I'm not expressing support for either side of this situation, and I certaintly would not want to lose the opportunity to hunt that area, however, I am disturbed by the clear attitude of fear and hostility expressed towards "greenies" in these posts. Hunters and "greenies" share some of the same goals, perhaps we should focus on working with and modifying their agenda, rather than alarming over them? James
    I agree with James. I'm not supporting either side (infact I would probably support the atv group even though I don't have one) but the hostility and the rudenuss in this thread makes the "greenies" as everybody refers to them look better. If you want to get your point across to the general public use a tone that both sides can agree with. Calling people greenies and insulting them will not make them see your point at all for access.

  18. #18
    Member tyrex13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Anchorage/Soldotna
    Posts
    1,176

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jjwillac View Post
    I'm not expressing support for either side of this situation, and I certaintly would not want to lose the opportunity to hunt that area, however, I am disturbed by the clear attitude of fear and hostility expressed towards "greenies" in these posts. Hunters and "greenies" share some of the same goals, perhaps we should focus on working with and modifying their agenda, rather than alarming over them? James
    Alaskan hunters and lower 48 greenies most certainly do not share the same goals, of that I can assure you. Greenies sole mission is to shut down access to the state, if they had their way we wouldn't have any roads at all. Since they can't do that, they take over old mining roads and 4x4 trails that have been used by hunters and others for decades and have them gated off and designated as XC ski trails and Mt. Bike trails. I could list a dozen areas off the top of my head where a guy used to be able to take his 4 wheeler or 4x4 when I was a kid that are not shut off to all motorized access. Can you name one area where an area used to be shut off to motorized access and now is open to 4 wheelers and 4x4's?

    Hiking and biking only areas are great, but we have more than enough of them in this huge state. Time to start looking for places to open up new motorized access instead of the other way around.

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Sutton
    Posts
    24

    Default



    In response to those questioning the tone of this thread. Playing nice with these folks under the auspices of "tolerance" or "political correctness" has resulted in erosion of the values that made this country great.
    I realize its a bit off subject but playing by those rules has resulted in youth sports not keeping score, grading scales in schools being dumbed down to protect feelings, etc.


    To answer the question of the next meeting to address this in front of the council. They've already met in March and have not published a date/time for April as of yet. I emailed them today @ suttoncommunitycouncil@gmail.com asking for more information regarding the behind the scenes work that is ongoing. I'll pass the word when I hear back. If by chance I don't then I'll contact the council members directly by telephone.

  20. #20
    Moderator LuJon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    11,415

    Default

    At the end of the day it is theft and I don't care for thieves. In this case it isn't money or a car it is access to an area. When you have repeatedly had your access stolen it is only reasonable to be upset when you see someone working to steal from you again. I have never once fought to end hiking, biking or skiing from any portion of this state yet some that prefer those methods of entertainment are actively working to take away my rights to do what I enjoy and have been doing for decades. They already have the entirety of the Chugach from the Knik river to Turnigan arm plus countless square miles of Fed land in the Kenai mts. The closest area for people to rid ATV's to Achorage is the North side of Knik River in the KRPUA and that has been under fire by the "greenies" for years. Now one of the best areas with the most potential to support a truly great ATV and snowmachine trail system is being targeted. I can guarantee that the day the "Sutton" area falls is the day that the same movement slides north a bit to Eureka.

    Talk about not being able to see the forest for the trees, those guys are trying to build a "green belt" in the middle of the woods! What they need to do is just pick a direction and walk! There is TONS of untouched wilderness with no ATV traffic. The real issue is that many (most) of these guys are afraid of the woods and need a well marked trail for them to feel safe walking in the wilderness. I hike a lot when I am home. I look for areas without a trail or only walk up them to get to a place to start hiking then I set off. The bears, sheep, caribou and moose have made millions of trails that will take you anywhere you want to go they just might not be that comfortable in your Birkenstocks...

Page 1 of 16 12311 ... 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
  •