unfair advantage

[chef viktor]

It is my opinion as both a rifle hunter and bow hunter that the mileage you have to walk from the roads need to be the same. It is not a fair or correct situation to require rifle hunters to have to hike 5 miles on the haul road yet bow hunters do not. Bow hunters are just as fit and capable of walking as rifle hunters, why do they give us special rights? I agree with a set bow season but do not agree that we do not have to hunt as hard as the rifle hunters especially off of the haul road. I am just as capable of hiking and stalking as the rifle guys why treat me different! Chef

 

[ucohokie]

It's a safety and management issue

It's a safety and management issue

The restriction is too weed out lazy and thus by deduction less ethical hunters. In theory, to successfully harvest a animal with bow on a ground level stalk you have to practice your shooting and stalking skills well beyond the effort it takes zeroing a rifle, shooting box a shells to tighten your groups and stalking within 200-300 yds of an animal. If you could shoot just off the road, the place would be a gun range (potentially with flared tempers, and questionable who shot my bou ethics) and the caribou harvest would be considerably higher. Reference lower 48 whitetail harvests for comparison. Generally bowhunters only amount to a 10-20% take of the annual harvest (over typically 2-3 month seasons) while firearm hunters take the lions share in a season that rarely exceeds 9-14 days (muzzleloaders are the exception, they usually get a month). Increased caribou harvest would translate to increased management and reduced hunter opportunity. In an effort to balance out these issue, the state gives you a choice:

Take the "harder" weapon, but the "easier" walk or
Take the "harder" walk, but the "easier" weapon

If you look at it from that viewpoint, you can see the corridor as a compromise designed to maximize hunting opportunity.

 

[sean77]

So walk the five with your Bow!! The corridor has nothing to do with bow hunting being harder. I've done both hunts and I will never make that hike again unless I have to.

 

[crossfoxAK]

ucohoky has the right idea.

ucohoky has the right idea.

I would agree With the gentleman that responded to this. If they did not have a bow harvest in the corridor, the caribou population would drastically rise. Hardly anyone would want to pack a caribou out 5 miles. If you opened it to rifle hunters, everyone and there brother would hunt the haul road. If it is bugging you that much, bring your issue up to the fish and game board.

 

[Daveinthebush]

Multiple Use Area

Multiple Use Area

It may also be due to the multiple use of the area. You have hikers, sight seeing, commercial travel, photographers and researchers using the area. the five mile zone is probably one of public safety.

 

[Kay9Cop]

As I understand it (and don't ask me where I heard/read this because I don't remember), the corridor was put into place because of the easy access to the caribou and the ability of the public to see the kills. Tourism up the Haul Road during the summer and fall is pretty high. The federal government didn't want the public to see caribou being slaughtered. It's easy enough to shoot one with a bow if the heard is in. Could you imagine if you had a rifle and could shoot just off the road? However, the herd did need to be managed so bow hunting was allowed. The logic was the harvest would be lower so it wouldn't look like hunters were after buffalo in the old west.

Other tertiary reasons were: safety of the trucks travelling the road (protection from stray bullets), the remoteness and inability to control a limited season (draw or registration permits with limited harvest), and maintenance of the herd level for subsitence hunters (the herd hadn't seen heavy hunting pressure until the Haul Road was opened and small changes can have dramatic effects on heard movements and levels).

 

[gil]

Equal

Equal

Then in the same sense of equality then lets make it fair by having all hunters take land navigation courses, gun and bow qualification proficiency test alike, mark all bullets with hunter number to track those that got away, and any other restrictions that have been applied in the past to archery hunters. As others have stated there are advantages to being a bow hunter but no less if not more restrictions other than walking. Perhaps you should also consider that not every hunter goes up to the haul road and stands on the edge of the driven surface to shoot a caribou and then loads it in their vehicle to haul home. Even archery hunters walk and stalk, for more hours than a gun hunter puts in on a five mile walk. We will never be able to please everyone, just remember that it is your choice to hunt archery or gun. There are numerous reasons that weapons selection has gone into the process for areas and limitations of travel and distance. The 5 mile corridor is more of preservation and limiting tool for the herd than overall safety I believe, due to overhunting with an ease in the restriction could be detrimental to the local human populace. Individual choice to hunt with bow or gun is just that individual so placing emphasis on being fair or equal is ridiculous. Ok enough venting from a gun / archery hunter.

 

[Vance in AK]

As someone else already stated, most bowhunters will make MANY stalks for every bull they get in the corridor. Rifles would make it a slaughter zone.

 

[AK145]

3 Reasons...

3 Reasons...

come to mind for me. One would be the safety issue for the pipeline and for traffic on the road. I wonder how long it would take for someone to punch a hole in the pipline?

The other reason is certainly that I'm sure it was taken into consideration when these regulations were put into place that it would be a slaughter on the slope if rifles could be shot from the road. This state is not too far removed from similar hunts that occurred from the road on the Taylor highway for example where tons of caribou were taken from the road. I'm sure people are worried about people lined up on the road while a herd of say 1000 caribou try and cross the road and the shooting begins.

The effects on tourism may not have been in the mix when the law was passed, but I'm sure it is now. It was not until about 1994 or so that the major tour companies started driving to Deadhorse, could be wrong there but I think that is about right. I think the effect on tourism would the third of 3 concerns.

I have opinions both ways. Part of me thinks it should be open with equal access, but on the other hand I would worry about about the scenario I mentioned above. I believe one state senator tried to push through a bill that would have opened the corrider to rifle hunting, but i dont think it made it out either the senate as a whole or committee...not sure though.

 

[chef viktor]

un fair restriction

un fair restriction

Like an earlier post said make EVERYONE hike the 5 miles and not just the rifle hunters. This would be fair. Or lower the limit to two miles but any way make it the same for everyone HIKE

 

[akhunter02]

Make the change

Make the change

Hey Chef, Why dont you just take up bow hunting? seems like a very simple solution to me

 

[sean77]

Hey Chef, Why dont you just take up bow hunting? seems like a very simple solution to me

Or hunt in an area FARE for everyone....Oh and when you do let me know where it is.

 

[fold308]

life isnt fair

life isnt fair

just open it up for rifles within 5 miles and let a few stray bullets put some 30 cal holes in the pipe line all because its not fair, oil and tundra great combo, should all archery only hunts get shut down and make everything any weapon hunts, it isnt fair? unbelievable