No announcement yet.

Petition to Repeal Proposal 117 - 15C (Homer) Sea Duck Limit

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Petition to Repeal Proposal 117 - 15C (Homer) Sea Duck Limit

    Petition to Repeal Proposal 117 - 15C (Homer) Sea Duck Limit

    Some of you may know already, but the Board of Game has lowered Homer area sea duck limit to 2 per day and 4 in possession. This was done with out the support of the biologist or any data. The proposal was created by one person just not wanting people to shoot the bird in the area.

    Buck Brown is fighting back and needs our help. He has created a petition to present to the board of game shortly. What we are asking is for letters or signatures for the petition.

    What you can do -

    1) Write a letter addressed to the Board of Game and send it to Buck at Box 77, Seldovia AK 99663. He is collecting everything to present to the BOG.

    2) Sign the petition and mail to Buck.

    3) Visit this website - and sign the petition electrically. The first two have more of an impact, but I encourage you for the minimum of the online form. Please add some comments to the form of your own, this always has more impact.

    The fact that this proposal was passed is scary (you will know what I mean when you read the proposal). There was no scientific data or any user group input. Even if you do not use this area we as duck hunters need to stand together and help fellow hunters out.

    Here is the petition and for your knowledge of the events I have put the Original Proposal 117 and the Summary of changes by the Alaska Board of Game for regulatory year 2009-2010.

    Board of Game
    re: Petition to Repeal Proposal 117

    We, the undersigned, hereby support the petition to repeal proposal 117 5ACC 85.065. This proposal drastically reduced the number of sea ducks that can be harvest in Kachemak Bay. Resident hunters were dropped from 10 birds daily limit/20 in possession to 2 daily bag limit/ 4 in possession. We feel the original proposal said nothing about regulation changes such as bag limit reductions, and the public was mislead.

    The head state waterfowl biologist Tom Rothe writes, "The department has concluded that the sea duck harvest is not excessive in Kachemak Bay and Cook Inlet". His recommendation for proposal 117 was: "Do not adopt." Surveys from 1999 to 2003 show from 15,000 to 30,000 ducks wintering in Kachemak Bay.

    The Board of Game has made bag limits reductions to sea ducks in 1999 and 2001. State waterfowl biologists write: "The department does not have concerns that sea ducks are being over harvested and concludes that further restrictions to hunting will not provide conservation benefits to regional winter aggregations or populations of sea ducks." We believe that the biologist's conclusions should be validated by maintaining the previous bag limit.

    Dropping of the bag limit is not necessary and was pursued for an individual's personal benefit and was not based on any scientific necessity.


    So that all signing this Petition are Educated on the Topic -

    Original Proposal -

    PROPOSAL 117- 5 ACC 85.065. Hunting seasons and bag limits for small game. Modify the sea duck hunting season for Unit 15 as follows:

    Exploitation rates and thresholds of adundnace need to be maintained within easily accessible areas like Kackemak Bay.

    ISSUE: Localized depletion of sea duck species from guided hunting.

    WHAT WILL HAPPEN IF NOTHING IS DONE? Depleted areas cannot recover. Most of these ducks are not eaten or utilized.





    PROPOSED BY: Nancy Hillstrand

    Taken from -


    Summary of changes by the Alaska Board of Game for regulatory year 2009-2010.

    Unit 15C, Kachemak Bay, modify resident bag limits to 2 seaducks totla per day, 4 in possession (harlequin, long-tails, eiders-((except spectacled or Stellars')), scoters, common mergansers, and red-breasted mergansers) of any species. Modify nonresident bag limit to 2 seaducks total per day, 4 in possession (harlequin, long-tails, eiders-((except spectacled or Stellars')), scoters, common mergansers, and red-breasted mergansers) of any species, with no change to the season bag limit.

    Taken from -

  • #2
    How the hell does this get done without any body knowing about it??? I can't believe it!! Who the hell is running these boards ?? Are they all antes ?? We have to fight for every inch!


    • #3
      Signed the electronic petition and am currently working on one to send to Buck and I started thinking is the votes secret?? can we find out who voted for this thing?


      • #4
        Oh, well after a little digging I found out that this lady is a business owner, owns large tracts of land and is Johnathan Hillstrands mom, you may have seen him on Deadliest Catch as the Captain of the Time Bandit.

        So this makes a little more sense why such a BS proposal got passed.


        • #5
          petition signed...


          • #6
            I sent the electronic petition, now do we print the same form, sign and mail to the Seldovia address?


            • #7
              If you signed the electronic petition, you do not have to print out the one below and send to Buck. If you would like, send a letter directed to the BOG to Buck and he'll forward them to the appropriate sources.

              Nancy Hillstrand is a former marine biologist, mother of the Hillstrand Brothers from the Time Bandit, and is the owner of Coal Point Seafood.

              On a side note:
              I've heard really good things about Ed's Smokehouse and Fish processing, I think my buddies and I will be trying that place out this summer.


              • #8
                Thanks for the information for the petition, it is signed and confirmed.

                Thanks Alot


                • #9
                  don't pick the wrong target, guys....

                  Nancy is NOT the mother of the hillstrand bros., although she was married to their father. john (sr.) was a big hunter, and until his death regularly took members of the coal point crew hunting (on his penny) across the inlet. nancy is not an "anti". coal point seafoods is an important business in this community, and employs a lot of people. she is good to her employees and pays them well. there is no reason to make this personal against her, gripe at the BOG if you need to.
                  the homer AC "took no action" because the proposal was so poorly worded as to be meaningless. this is just another example of how you can comment on a proposal as it is written, but the BOG can re-write it and pass it with no further opportunity for comment. :eek:
                  Alaska Board of Game 2015 tour... "Kicking the can down the road"


                  • #10
                    So, you're saying the proposal she wrote was actually rewritten by the BOG?? What was her original proposal then?? What proof do you have and why would you hold back on this information?

                    I talked to the executive director of the BOG and she was very helpful and provided me alot of information that I was able to dig up on their archived website. Her handwritten proposal is exactly the same as the one on this forum so I don't really see where your coming from and your motive for trying to protect her if your a hunter.

                    Not a duck hunter fine, but any attack on any hunting group is an attack on ALL HUNTERS..


                    • #11
                      the proposal is in post #1

                      as written...
                      "Exploitation rates and thresholds of abundance need to be maintained within easily accessible areas like Kachemak Bay."
                      nowhere does this say "change bag limit to 2 per day"... as a matter of fact, it doesn't say ANYTHING about what should be done... and as such was a terribly written proposal that in our estimation had little or no chance of being acted upon. the BOG took it upon themselves to write an actual enactable proposal, and for some reason they settled on 2/day. 4/ in possession....

                      now i am NOT speaking for the AC here, but if guided seaduck hunting were not a factor, i suspect that the seaduck take in kachemak bay would be a LOT less than it is... and perhaps there would be no issue with potential over harvest.

                      as for the science to support conservation, here is a quote on seaduck biology from a PhD working on eider, whom i contacted to get some info on the issue:
                      "Seaducks are an exception to the general pattern of low winter philopatry
                      and male-biased dispersal characteristic of other ducks. Both harlequin
                      and goldeneyes exhibit very high winter site fidelity, higher than seen
                      for most other waterfowl in North America. Harlequins have homing rates in
                      excess of 92% to specific sites on Montague Island and western Prince
                      William Sound suggesting that wintering aggregations may be
                      demographically independent. Therefore the possibility does exist that
                      wintering aggregations could be locally extirpated".

                      as hunters and conservationists in the roosevelt ideal, we (as hunters) should first and foremost be concerned with the preservation of the resources we utilize, and in this instance it seems to me that increased pressure on a population that is susceptible to local extirpation should trump commercial exploitation.

                      i am not saying that the limit should be reduced to 2, but i am saying we should look to the pressures that have resulted in this regulation, and not ignore them when we seek to have the decision revoked or amended.

                      should there be a non-resident reduction?

                      would 5/day, 10/possession be reasonable?

                      should a guided hunters have priority over locals?

                      these are all valid questions, and should be considered in the search for a more equitable regulation...

                      (and for the record, i don't hunt ducks, but i taxi quite a few duck hunters every fall...)
                      Alaska Board of Game 2015 tour... "Kicking the can down the road"


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by homerdave View Post
                        should there be a non-resident reduction?...)
                        There already is a reduction for non-residents in the books for sea ducks

                        Originally posted by homerdave View Post
                        would 5/day, 10/possession be reasonable?...)
                        it is already broken down by species and could be handled in that manner if there is a convservation concern.

                        Originally posted by homerdave View Post
                        should a guided hunters have priority over locals?...)
                        Where did that come from? How many guides are in the areas that are actively guiding and not just registered? No one should have priority over anyone. Birds are Federal.

                        Originally posted by homerdave View Post
                        (and for the record, i don't hunt ducks, but i taxi quite a few duck hunters every fall...)
                        Do you taxi locals or non-residents? How many people are hunting the area? What is the Departments take on all of this?

                        Lots of questions, I don't know if there were addressed at the BOG by the department or not. But with this new regulation they were succeful at eliminating any guiding industry there. I bet your taxi service will greatly suffer due to this regulation.


                        • #13
                          As a side question for homerdave, was Nancy at the BOG meeting pushing her proposal to limit sea ducks? From my understanding she was there making comments on her proposal. So it is not like BOG just decided to right up a reg, it was advised by her personally at the meeting.

                          If you think she was not happy with the boards decision have her write a letter and sign the petition, else she is happy with what the BOG did. An anti hunter or not she made the decision to enter the proposal, which had no scientific data. As the head waterfowl biologist of Alaska also said in the petition, Tom Rothe. The small effect the hunters have in the winter season is very small. There is studies showing this not only in our state buy many areas.

                          And as yukon mentioned. There are different resident/non-resident limits. Non-residents can only take 4 ducks of each species a season. If anything is hurting the population it is us residents who can take 6 of each species a day. We do more damage everyday and have easier access than non-residents. I do not think the commercial outfits are over benefiting from the resource.


                          • #14
                            most of the hunters i taxi are alaskans, and they primarily target puddle ducks, not sea ducks.

                            as far as i know, there are no stringent requirements for small game guiding, and i don't know if a person guiding duck hunters has to register at all.

                            duck hunters are not a big enough percent of my business to make a difference in my bottom line.

                            as far as giving priority to guided hunters, if just a few guides are responsible (through their service) for the lion's share of a harvested resource, then aren't they being given a priority if they successfully campaign to have a BOG decision overturned and overly generous limits reinstated?

                            (for that matter, if a big game guide takes 15-20 bears EVERY YEAR in an area you or i can only take 1 every 4 years isn't that giving a guide priority over you and me?)

                            nancy was at the meeting, and as far as i know she simply gave her testimony during the public comment session, presented her information, and went home. she didn't meet with the board members elsewhere, nor did she make any specific requests. she simply asked, as she has at nearly every BOG meeting for years, that the board consider doing something to address what she sees as an issue. her information was current and valid, and specific to the species of concern. apparently the BOG considered the data and made their decision based on that.
                            Alaska Board of Game 2015 tour... "Kicking the can down the road"


                            • #15
                              First and foremost, any hunter worth his salt is concerned about conservation and wanton waste more than anything.
                              Second I think you are missing the point homerdave, there is no threat to the current waterfowl population in Kachemak Bay. Per USFWS sea-duck joint venture program and the AK's waterfowl Biologist.

                              So if poaching and wanton waste is the problem then reducing the bag limit is going to stop the poachers?? Thats like saying taking guns away from the law abiding citizen is going to stop crime.

                              Prosecute those poachers under the current laws, but reducing bag limits to solve the problem sounds like some leaf licker tactic to reduce hunter #'s.

                              I am still waiting to see the new proposal regarding caribou hunting. After last summers massacre they should reduce the bag limits to ward off wanton wast of game!!!!!


                              Footer Adsense