This ought to stir up some emotions

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • akfishfool
    replied
    This was all covered at the ac meeting last night. The bison hold up is being caused by the feds and the esa. without a 10j rule covering us the feds will never allow us to hunt them. We need the exception in order to guarantee hunting rights in the future. We cannot trust the feds to leave it alone everyone should know that by now.

    The feds do not what to grant the exception because of the fear of what is being done with wolves in yellowstone being done here. They don't want more law suits from the anti groups. the anti groups will sue nomatter what we do so stop living in fear of them. we are having trouble right now do to the 10j issue and getting final authorization for a site to release them. According to F&G we were offered an exemption but only if it contained no language about future hunting.

    The innoko ( sorry about spelling) is the only place we have a chance to release them right now do to oil/gas resource issues. Minto flats was a better choice and is state land with great access, but Doyon fought it, same with yukon flats. the herd is growing and will soon be out of room down in portage.

    The bison cannot be released anywhere near the plains bison, because they are a distinct species and disease free and need to stay that way.

    We need to release some of the bison now, or we will start to loose some. F&G plans to continue fighting to release more herds after the initial release, and that could mean places like minto and yukon in the future. But right now they are out of space. After this years calves (over thirty) we will have to separate the bulls and cows to prevent anymore calves due to space constraints.

    Better to fight for a place to do any release now so we can continue to let them breed and grow, then let them stagnate. It may not be ideal, but "it is " better than nothing, and nothing "is" our alternative right now. I would rather fight for this for my kids to have a chance than nothing at all.

    As far as whether or not there is some native subsistence take, if the alternative is nobody gets anything, than is it really an issue for us to be dragged down by? Address it yes, but we already have enough what if situations lets not create more.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dr.No
    replied
    Dude, I give up. As a hunter you have no downside to this. Even if you aren't able to hunt the bison, other hunting opportunities would remain unchanged. Yet you would rather not even have the chance. Kinda like not wanting to make more money because you'd have to pay more in taxes...doesn't make sense.

    Leave a comment:


  • tccak71
    replied
    Not when the definitive nothing will lead to loss of hunting privileges in an area due the ESA listing of a species. You put too much faith in ESA and environmentalists. The cutthroat non-profit enviro groups WILL sue, guaranteed; unlike your hypothetical egg example, replace MIGHT with guaranteed. Its a matter of WHEN not if they'll sue. At a time when our governor is fighting the feds on a host of issues, we don't need to fight them on a problem we'll be creating ourselves by releasing these bison. Jmho.

    Tim

    Leave a comment:


  • Dr.No
    replied
    Originally posted by tccak71 View Post
    I read Dr. No's articles and these statements scare me:

    "Through conservation efforts and management in Canada, the population of 300 has grown to over 4,000 disease-free animals, with a total of about 10,000 animals in the wild."
    "USFWS is completing a status review and may downlist or delist wood bison based on the substantial improvement in their status since they were listed as endangered about 40 years ago."

    So they get delisted, unlisted, ratcheted down to threatened-whatever. If they're delisted, can't the whack-jobs sue and get them re-listed with a brand new endangered status for ANOTHER 40 years? Sorry, but ESA and EPA make my blood boil. I'd like to see both abolished, personally. These animals don't seem like they're worth the energy to fight the court battles ($$$$$) and feds to re-intro them. Euthanized them or give them back to Canada. Steak 'em up and I'd try them too.

    Tim

    Tim
    I believe the short answer is that animals on state land would not be eligible for (re)listing and animals on federal land would face this scenario you propose, depending on what land they were on. But the argument you make doesn't seem rational. To summarize: because animals might be come delisted at some point in the future (i.e. numbers have grown), you're worried that at that point, environmentalists may sue to keep the animals on the ESL. Thus, the solution is to either (1) immediately euthanize all animals scheduled for release or (2) send them back to Canada.

    I understand the govt makes your blood boil; but let's think about it like this. Let's say the govt is trying to give you an egg. Using your logic, what we should be doing is taking the egg, smashing it on the ground and saying "F-you! I know I like eggs, but you might try and take it from me some day!"

    I seriously can't figure out the downside to Woodland Bison re-introduction. You may or may not have a chance to hunt them in Alaska in the future. You currently will never have that chance in Alaska. Isn't the tangible possibility of something better than a definitive nothing?

    Leave a comment:


  • tailwind
    replied
    I'd rather the state spend the money on promoting wildlife than some of the other stupid sh*t they do.
    I really love ruffed grouse hunting, their numbers have blown up in recent years. Wasn't that the same sort of thing?

    Leave a comment:


  • tccak71
    replied
    I read Dr. No's articles and these statements scare me:

    "Through conservation efforts and management in Canada, the population of 300 has grown to over 4,000 disease-free animals, with a total of about 10,000 animals in the wild."
    "USFWS is completing a status review and may downlist or delist wood bison based on the substantial improvement in their status since they were listed as endangered about 40 years ago."

    So they get delisted, unlisted, ratcheted down to threatened-whatever. If they're delisted, can't the whack-jobs sue and get them re-listed with a brand new endangered status for ANOTHER 40 years? Sorry, but ESA and EPA make my blood boil. I'd like to see both abolished, personally. These animals don't seem like they're worth the energy to fight the court battles ($$$$$) and feds to re-intro them. Euthanized them or give them back to Canada. Steak 'em up and I'd try them too.

    Tim

    Tim

    Leave a comment:


  • tccak71
    replied
    This is just a bad idea. Guaranteed in a year or two after their release a few will be killed for subsistence and the numbers will drop and Center for Bio-BS will be in court. This isn't good. Give 'em back to Canada, we can do without one more headache/fight with the feds.

    http://www.adn.com/2011/04/04/179224...e-delayed.html


    Tim

    Leave a comment:


  • Dr.No
    replied
    Originally posted by bushrat View Post
    Dr No,

    The way I understand it, if the wood bison are on any USFWS Refuge (or Park/Preserve) lands, such as the Yukon Flats, their "threatened" status, even with the special ESA rules and agreement with the state, requires federal consultation with FWS over issues like hunting those animals that would remove some from the population.

    On any other lands, like in Minto Flats, we would not need to undergo consultation with feds, basically the state would manage those animals according to the agreement in place, which would eventually allow them to be hunted.

    Best,
    Thanks for the clarification. For those of you who find the process unclear, please re-read (or read) the documents and post your questions. I'm sure others would be willing to help you gain a better understanding.

    Leave a comment:


  • lab man
    replied
    Originally posted by Rock_skipper View Post
    Labman post 22, why does that bother you, would you rather see them killed and nobody wins, you guys kill me. There is a chance another Delta herd could be born, but it won't have a chance if people ar'nt behind it. Hey vote against it and you will never know what could have been.
    It bothers me because I don't see a reason for hunting preferences to be given to a specific group of people. As a re-introduced species, I think all Alaskans should get an equal shot at them.

    Leave a comment:


  • Marc Taylor
    replied
    This whole process is clear as mud. We're setting our grandchildren up to hunt bison, but of course by that time our grandchildren will be too broke to afford the trip to hunt bison.

    I don't mind shooting game animals for meat, but I detest the thought of penned-up game animals. Just let the **** things GO.

    SOMEWHERE.

    Taylor

    Leave a comment:


  • bushrat
    replied
    Dr No,

    The way I understand it, if the wood bison are on any USFWS Refuge (or Park/Preserve) lands, such as the Yukon Flats, their "threatened" status, even with the special ESA rules and agreement with the state, requires federal consultation with FWS over issues like hunting those animals that would remove some from the population.

    On any other lands, like in Minto Flats, we would not need to undergo consultation with feds, basically the state would manage those animals according to the agreement in place, which would eventually allow them to be hunted.

    Best,

    Leave a comment:


  • Dr.No
    replied
    My question is to Bushrat -- The document stated the following:

    "Wood bison would be treated as 'proposed for listing' on all lands other than National Park and National Wildlife Refuge lands, where they would be treated as threatened."

    So if they wandered into the Yukon Flats area, they would be treated as 'threatened'? I get that may be one of the motivations for wanting to release them in Minto Flats area...Anyways, just curious.

    Leave a comment:


  • bushrat
    replied
    Jeff, and Travelers...there is no real comparison here to the lower48 wolf issue

    First, I know that links provided here are often not viewed, but I really encourage everyone with concerns about the ESA listing and wood bison reintroduction to check out this paper that ADFG put out two years ago to address the (similar) concerns that Doyon and Gov Palin were touting:
    http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/static/sp...esa_2_4_09.pdf

    Secondly, as to how this wood bison reintroduction and the special rule that would cover it relates to the wolf reintroduction in the lower 48, the bottom line is that the two issues are not analgous, for several reasons that I would think would be pretty clear.

    And Jeff, this project and where we stand right now with confirmed disease-free herd of wood bison at the conservation center here in Alaska, is the absolute farthest thing from a "rushed" endeavor. I have been on the sidelines for a while now while all this has been going on, I've even communicated directly with Dept of Interior on some aspects of it for our org. The feds haven't moved as fast as we'd hoped, either, to reclassify wood bison from endangered to threatened status. But that has now happened and as the Department clearly states in that pdf file link I posted above, neither the Dept or the State of Alaska is going to reintroduce wood bison until the formal agreements and rulings are in place and there is absolutely no threat of these animals having any impacts on development or land use.

    Look, I am not saying here that I agree with everything in the ESA or how it has been used in the past. I get that people naturally have valid concerns here about reintroduction of bison in Alaska under any ESA ruling. But what I don't get, honestly, is how even after F&G has spent years now addressing those concerns, and years of public meetings, the outcome of which was overwhelming broad support from the hunting and local communities...that we are still getting such pushback from hunters like Rep Dick, and some here, against this project.

    All these concerns have been addressed. It now comes down to people either believing or not believing in this workable framework for reintroduction. By all means, also feel free to speak with Bob Stephenson or Randy Rogers at ADFG about this. They are the lead guys and can answer all your questions and speak to any concerns.
    Selah,

    Leave a comment:


  • Ak River Rat
    replied
    I'm hoping somebody can provide some insight:
    Is there currently any type of a rural subsistence priority on any of the bison herds currently in AK?
    And:
    Why would anybody expect to ever gain a rural subsistence priority on an animal introduced by the State, or, why does anybody think that a rural subsistence priority for Woods Bison, or an other introduced specie would be ok?
    Don't read between the lines. I am not against the project. I am also not arguing subsistence as it is today. I'm just wondering what the long term holds.
    ARR

    Leave a comment:


  • travelers
    replied
    Originally posted by Jeff Shannon View Post
    You guys have a lot of faith in the ESA, and you sure put a whole lot of trust in the anti-hunting, eco-nazi groups like Defenders of Wildlife. Sure a 10j listing helps, but that is by no means a slam dunk. Just look at the wolf re-introduction in the northern Rockies if you want a perfect example of how it can turn into a train wreck. They're a 10j, non-essential, experimental population. They reached their de-listing threshold a decade ago, and their current population is 6 times the original de-listing population. Yet they're still listed on the ESA because groups like Defenders of Wildlife, Center for Biological Diversity, HSUS, and a whole heap of other bunny huggers will sue to no end to keep any species listed that they can. They'll say it won't be a problem, until the gates open up and the animals get turned loose, and then the lawsuits are on. Right now the State of Alaska holds all of the cards, and there's no reason to give an opportunity for another lower 48 wolf fiasco. I'd like to see wood bison released as much as anyone, and I'd really like to see them go to the Yukon Flats because that's where they have the best potential, but rushing them out while they're still listed is a really bad idea...unless you're an attorney looking for employment.
    +10
    I live in an area that has more ESA listing than you can shake a stick at.
    I could go on for hours on the horrors of the ESA................Been to all the meetings........Listened to all the BS...
    Critical habitat .........Designated critical habitat...........Emergency listing.........these are the things that will bite you in the *****............Good luck with your fight, we've lost it here..............

    Leave a comment:

Footer Ad Module 300 x 300

Collapse

Footer Adsense

Collapse
Working...
X