Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

WAR has been declared on urban hunters...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    I'm confused, AV. Thought you had a pretty good understanding of how F&G works. WAR's statement only appears shocking to those who don't know how the state's management scheme's work.
    The state has always had the means to discriminate, for lack of a better word, against non local hunters when game pop's decline. When the time comes, the state asks for a "registration" hunt and that gives F&G all kinds of options in how to distribute the permits and what a hunter can and cannot do, with his kill. Here's some examples:
    Trophy Destruction. Since many urban hunters want their horns, this requirement disourages those types of hunters from hunting in the effected area. Has worked very well for unit 21 and 24 moose.
    Delayed Hunt. Permits are given out in specific areas at certain times before the hunt begins. Economics discourage non local hunters from coming to the area twice, once for the permit, once to hunt. Unit 23 moose is this way, tho there is still a 20 day resident season with antler restrictions.
    Quota hunts. F&G can set a quota on the number of animals killed in an area. Kill reporting times are required. Season is closed when quota is met or near being met.
    Limit permit numbers. In association with a quota, the state can limit the number of permits available for a particular registration hunt. Applicants will have to stand in line on a particular date, at a particular place, and permits are generally issued first come, first serve.
    Controlled use area. CUA's are another form of restriction available to the state to deter certain user groups from hunting in a certain area.
    I believe the state has had the ability to do registration hunts since statehood and so this is nothing new. WAR is correct and there really is no need to bring "rural preferance" to the state management system.
    You seem to think, AV, that Palin and WAR are out to get urban hunters. You can't see the forest for the 2 trees in front! It isn't Sarah and Wayne you need fear. When game pops go down and push comes to shove for access to the effected area, it won't be folks like WAR or Palin calling the shots really. It will be the little guys like me, who serve on the local advisory committee, and are calling for restrictions to keep you urban guys out. In my experience, F&G and the BoG listen when that time comes and the locals start to cry. FYI, the same thing will happen on the federal side, only us little guys can just plain call for closing fed lands to all except us who live in the area.
    Don't fear AV. These measures are meant to be temporary. Limiting harvest is supposed to help return an animal pop to it's former abundance and restrictions will be lifted if they do. I have been watching all these various rules and regs for some time here in unit 22. I believe for the most part, the system works well. I don't see any desire on state govt to exclude any one group other then what is necessary to protect the resource.
    Sometimes I think your a bigger pot stirrer than me, AV.
    I can't help being a lazy, dumb, weekend warrior.......I have a JOB!
    I have less friends now!!

    Comment


    • #17
      Rural V urban hunters

      I have lived both sides of this issue, 27 years rural Alaskan resident and 22 years urban resident of Alaska......The main difference between the two is Urban residents have to travel farther for their fish and game, and rural residents have to travel farther for their fish sticks and game boys......

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Captain T View Post
        I have lived both sides of this issue, 27 years rural Alaskan resident and 22 years urban resident of Alaska......The main difference between the two is Urban residents have to travel farther for their fish and game, and rural residents have to travel farther for their fish sticks and game boys......
        yep. well said.

        Comment


        • #19
          What WAR said....

          "Ross said there's no need to trample the state Constitution with an amendment allowing a rural subsistence preference on state land. Already, state regulations can be designed to limit urban hunters from participating in rural hunts. For example, in some cases, hunters may not be in an airplane for days before they're allowed to hunt, making for a costly and time-consuming trip for urban hunters,he said.

          Originally posted by martentrapper View Post
          I'm confused, AV. Thought you had a pretty good understanding of how F&G works. WAR's statement only appears shocking to those who don't know how the state's management scheme's work.
          What is trampling the state constitution is the implementation of a commercial hunting industry. Ross should know that but he is likely bought and paid for by the commercial hunting industry.

          Originally posted by martentrapper View Post
          The state has always had the means to discriminate, for lack of a better word, against non local hunters when game pop's decline. When the time comes, the state asks for a "registration" hunt and that gives F&G all kinds of options in how to distribute the permits and what a hunter can and cannot do, with his kill.
          Discriminate is a fine word. After all that is exactly what is done. But the discrimination must be justifiable in law.

          What is not justifiable is for the urban population of hunters to bear the burden of limits like, shorter seasons, bag limits, draws and other restrictions; yet the commmercial hunting industry is never a direct target of the F&G discrimination you speak of.

          If that industry is not THE target of the discrimination and the burden falls on the resident urban hunter then the discrimination wont stand up to the question of law.

          That industry should be targeted; discriminated against, before the game populations crash and especially BEFORE the urban resident population is further limited by shorter seasons, bag limits draws and other restrictions.

          WAR should know that. As should the legislature, the BOG and the department.

          Originally posted by martentrapper View Post
          Here's some examples:
          Trophy Destruction. Since many urban hunters want their horns, this requirement disourages those types of hunters from hunting in the effected area. Has worked very well for unit 21 and 24 moose.
          Delayed Hunt. Permits are given out in specific areas at certain times before the hunt begins. Economics discourage non local hunters from coming to the area twice, once for the permit, once to hunt. Unit 23 moose is this way, tho there is still a 20 day resident season with antler restrictions.
          Quota hunts. F&G can set a quota on the number of animals killed in an area. Kill reporting times are required. Season is closed when quota is met or near being met.
          Limit permit numbers. In association with a quota, the state can limit the number of permits available for a particular registration hunt. Applicants will have to stand in line on a particular date, at a particular place, and permits are generally issued first come, first serve.
          Controlled use area. CUA's are another form of restriction available to the state to deter certain user groups from hunting in a certain area.
          I believe the state has had the ability to do registration hunts since statehood and so this is nothing new.
          What we know is when one area gets these kinds of restriction it doesn't diminish the number of hunters....it just pressurizes areas not so limited and accelerates the need for more discrimination.

          All the while the commercial hunting industry does not stand down.

          Originally posted by martentrapper View Post
          WAR is correct and there really is no need to bring "rural preferance" to the state management system.
          There would be less reason to discriminate against urban resident hunters if WAR would advocate standing the commercial industry down instead of advocating as he did; to design regulations to limit urban hunters from participating in rural hunts......making for a costly and time-consuming trip for urban hunters.

          Originally posted by martentrapper View Post
          You seem to think, AV, that Palin and WAR are out to get urban hunters. You can't see the forest for the 2 trees in front! It isn't Sarah and Wayne you need fear.
          What I think MT is governorgirl and WAR are more or less on the payroll of the commercial hunting industry and afraid of native politics.

          They have an easy target in the urban hunter so they abuse their authority and discriminate against those who are less formidable.

          WAR and governorgirl don't scare me....WAR and governorgirl are scared of the natives and the commercial hunting industry lobby so they abuse the urban resident hunters.

          Originally posted by martentrapper View Post
          When game pops go down and push comes to shove for access to the effected area, it won't be folks like WAR or Palin calling the shots really. It will be the little guys like me, who serve on the local advisory committee, and are calling for restrictions to keep you urban guys out.
          Hmmm....maybe the A/Cs are owned by the commercial interest too.

          Originally posted by martentrapper View Post
          In my experience, F&G and the BoG listen when that time comes and the locals start to cry. FYI, the same thing will happen on the federal side, only us little guys can just plain call for closing fed lands to all except us who live in the area.
          Sounds a lot like WAR on the urban hunter.

          Originally posted by martentrapper View Post
          Don't fear AV. These measures are meant to be temporary. Limiting harvest is supposed to help return an animal pop to it's former abundance and restrictions will be lifted if they do. I have been watching all these various rules and regs for some time here in unit 22. I believe for the most part, the system works well. I don't see any desire on state govt to exclude any one group other then what is necessary to protect the resource.
          Thats the problem MT....the State and the A/C's and the BOG should reasonably find it very necessary to stand down the commercial hunting industry and limit all non-residents to not more than 10% of the opportunity....BEFORE it is necessary to discriminate against urban resident hunters.

          Originally posted by martentrapper View Post
          Sometimes I think your a bigger pot stirrer than me, AV.
          tips hat

          Comment


          • #20
            Well, look on the bright side. When the stock market really crashes, and the Alaska Permanent fund suspends payments, people will leave. When the Trans-Alaska pipeline which was designed to last 20 years, is shut down and dismantled because of erosion, people will leave. When the depression kicks in and there is 24% unemployment, people will leave. The 1918 flu pandemic killed 100% of the inhabitants of some of the villages. After the next pandemic people will not be hunting.

            We are no different than the wolves, over populated, and fighting each other as the food source diminished.

            With out cheap natural gas there will be "NO" electric or heat for the urban cities. Without cheap fuel the villages will disappear. If they can't make it on $7.45 per gallon fuel oil, they will not make it on $31.00 per gallon fuel. You say it can't happen....fuel oil was .09 "CENTS" a gallon when I was a young'in.

            Without cheap fuel the earth can support one billion humans, just as it did in 1889. The Human herd has overpopulated to "SEVEN" Billion humans, and doubling every 30 years.............."SIX" Billion (86%) will die.
            "Essential......to Prepping for Survival, is to be able to segregate, what you think will happen, from what you hope will happen, from what you fear will happen, from what is happening".

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Hopeak View Post
              Well, look on the bright side. When the stock market really crashes, and the Alaska Permanent fund suspends payments, people will leave. When the Trans-Alaska pipeline which was designed to last 20 years, is shut down and dismantled because of erosion, people will leave. When the depression kicks in and there is 24% unemployment, people will leave. The 1918 flu pandemic killed 100% of the inhabitants of some of the villages. After the next pandemic people will not be hunting.

              We are no different than the wolves, over populated, and fighting each other as the food source diminished.

              With out cheap natural gas there will be "NO" electric or heat for the urban cities. Without cheap fuel the villages will disappear. If they can't make it on $7.45 per gallon fuel oil, they will not make it on $31.00 per gallon fuel. You say it can't happen....fuel oil was .09 "CENTS" a gallon when I was a young'in.

              Without cheap fuel the earth can support one billion humans, just as it did in 1889. The Human herd has overpopulated to "SEVEN" Billion humans, and doubling every 30 years.............."SIX" Billion (86%) will die.

              Ain't you the bearer of good tidings?
              Chuck

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Hopeak View Post
                A worldwide Pandemic to cull the humans is the only probable solution.
                Can we start with mean folks who live in cabins, beside two creeks, on a mountain, in Alaska?

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Hopeak View Post
                  Well, look on the bright side. When the stock market really crashes, and the Alaska Permanent fund suspends payments, people will leave. When the Trans-Alaska pipeline which was designed to last 20 years, is shut down and dismantled because of erosion, people will leave. When the depression kicks in and there is 24% unemployment, people will leave. The 1918 flu pandemic killed 100% of the inhabitants of some of the villages. After the next pandemic people will not be hunting.

                  We are no different than the wolves, over populated, and fighting each other as the food source diminished.

                  With out cheap natural gas there will be "NO" electric or heat for the urban cities. Without cheap fuel the villages will disappear. If they can't make it on $7.45 per gallon fuel oil, they will not make it on $31.00 per gallon fuel. You say it can't happen....fuel oil was .09 "CENTS" a gallon when I was a young'in.

                  Without cheap fuel the earth can support one billion humans, just as it did in 1889. The Human herd has overpopulated to "SEVEN" Billion humans, and doubling every 30 years.............."SIX" Billion (86%) will die.
                  It's always good to have an optimist in the crowd to brighten things up and bring hope to all.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Palmer View Post
                    Can we start with mean folks who live in cabins, beside two creeks, on a mountain, in Alaska?
                    You can, but it will not change the net result. More "GOOOOODER to start reading about it. And not shoot the messenger cause you don't like the message........
                    "Essential......to Prepping for Survival, is to be able to segregate, what you think will happen, from what you hope will happen, from what you fear will happen, from what is happening".

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Politics aside, Hopeak, you have forsight.


                      I personlly invest in .22lr, it may end up being the best insurance I ever bought.
                      If you can't Kill it with a 30-06, you should Hide.:topjob:

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

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        From what im reading in the news, it doesn't appear the native community in general, is supportive of WAR.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by DEDWUF View Post
                          From what im reading in the news, it doesn't appear the native community in general, is supportive of WAR.
                          Could it possibly be because Mr. Ross is very supportive of equal protection of Alaska's people?
                          "96% of all Internet Quotes are suspect and the remaining 4% are fiction."
                          ~~Abraham Lincoln~~

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            I figured that SFW-A would support the changes in Unit 13. If I was the head of an organization and had a lodge located in the mountains just south of the AHTNA land holdings along the Denali HWY I would be very friendly toward them. Especially when my friendliness insured that they would support the opening of some trophy moose permits... Honestly I find it interesting that a piece of hunting property that was nearly useless as a high end trophy lodge due to permit restrictions was turned around within one year of being aquired by a certain founding member... I am not implying that anything illegal was done just that it is ......ummm....... interesting...

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Tell us more

                              Originally posted by LuJon View Post
                              I figured that SFW-A would support the changes in Unit 13. If I was the head of an organization and had a lodge located in the mountains just south of the AHTNA land holdings along the Denali HWY I would be very friendly toward them. Especially when my friendliness insured that they would support the opening of some trophy moose permits... Honestly I find it interesting that a piece of hunting property that was nearly useless as a high end trophy lodge due to permit restrictions was turned around within one year of being aquired by a certain founding member... I am not implying that anything illegal was done just that it is ......ummm....... interesting...
                              Yes very interesting. Tell us more, tell us more.

                              It's also interesting that SEW-A is permeating Alaska's Game Department and BOG process. And that the Community Harvest Permits were agreed upon at a closed door meeting before the BOG meeting.

                              There definitely seems to be some shenanigans going on. This needs to be looked at more closely. It needs to be investigated!
                              An opinion should be the result of thought, not a substitute for it.
                              - Jef Mallett

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Funny

                                When you read the ADN article on Ross's appointment the native community are up in arms! They are saying that this appointment supports urban hunters and not rural.......

                                If we were to build the road to Nome and then somewhere, turn right and cut a road to Bethel, then Dillingham, this would open up some new country and really tick off the environmental wacos!
                                sigpic
                                ALASKAN SEA-DUCTION
                                1988 M/Y Camargue YachtFisher
                                MMSI# 338131469
                                Blog: http://alaskanseaduction.blogspot.com/

                                Comment

                                Footer Adsense

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X