Alaska unit 13 caribou closure

[VernAK]

^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^

 

[timekiller13]

Ain't happenin', Jasper. There isn't a senator or house member, nor future gubernatorial candidate, that would commit political suicide for that one.

Oh I know. But it just goes to show that no one really cares about game management. They only care about money.

 

[Atigun]

Oh I know. But it just goes to show that no one really cares about game management. They only care about money.

Non residents can come up and hunt wolves fairly cheap if they would like to help out with our game management in a bigger way.

 

[Mykolaivka887]

Oh I know. But it just goes to show that no one really cares about game management. They only care about money.

Not necessarily. The state legislature cares about game management for theie constituents. Why else would they have passed the I.M. law? They didn't pass it in order to increase the state budget.

 

[FranklinBluth]

Even if griz were only opened up to non residents in 13, 14, 16, and 20 that would help resident moose hunters a lot I'd think.

 

[timekiller13]

Not necessarily. The state legislature cares about game management for theie constituents. Why else would they have passed the I.M. law? They didn't pass it in order to increase the state budget.

No, it’s only caring about a certain (outspoken and influential) group of your constituents. Outfitter welfare is such a crock. Good outfitters don’t need welfare. And like I said, go to draw only for sheep/goat for NR and do it 90/10 and put a 10 year waiting period if successful. That would essentially make the tag OIL for NR anyways so most would still hire a guide.

I would find it hard to believe that the majority of Alaskan residents would be against allowing non-residents to kill a grizzly without a guide.

And my point is that if Alaskan residents truly care about their game populations then allowing non-resident hunters the chance to take out some grizzlies would be nothing but beneficial.

 

[Mykolaivka887]

And my point is that if Alaskan residents truly care about their game populations then allowing non-resident hunters the chance to take out some grizzlies would be nothing but beneficial.

Alaskans truly care about wildlife. Obviously you're not quite able to realize that and that's sad, but Alaskans truly do care about wildlife.

But to your point, nonresident hunters already "takeout" brown/grizzlies in Alaska and it is beneficial, but it'll never be the saving grace that you're trying to make it out to be.

Killing bears, even if you removed every one of them, isn't necessarily going to greatly influence ungulate populations, one way or the other. There's more going on in sub-arctic ecosystems than merely simple predation, especially in light of the Climate Change phenomena.

Also, just a sidebar here, but unlike whatever Lower-48 states you might have visited or foreign countries that you possibly have been to, the Alaska state government definitely DOES NOT cater to the recreational hunting guide industry. In fact, by all indications and solely based on past performances, the bureaucracy of Alaska is opposed to the guiding industry (lol).

 

[cubguy]

No, it’s only caring about a certain (outspoken and influential) group of your constituents. Outfitter welfare is such a crock. Good outfitters don’t need welfare. And like I said, go to draw only for sheep/goat for NR and do it 90/10 and put a 10 year waiting period if successful. That would essentially make the tag OIL for NR anyways so most would still hire a guide.

I would find it hard to believe that the majority of Alaskan residents would be against allowing non-residents to kill a grizzly without a guide.

And my point is that if Alaskan residents truly care about their game populations then allowing non-resident hunters the chance to take out some grizzlies would be nothing but beneficial.

I agree we need to stop the welfare! I think it’s crazy I can’t perform open heart surgery unless I go through years of school and spend a ton of money. It’s BS! What if I want to start a business pulling teeth? Nope! The man says I have to be a dentist which is damn near a doctor! The welfare has to end. I can wire, plumb and frame, why must I have to go through a rigorous process to do this! A plumber just cost me 185 an hour. Why can’t we all do what we want when we want it? Why do doctors, plumbers etc get so much welfare?

I used to think the requirement to go guided was a bunch of BS. Now I see that it’s helping protect what I love about AK. Especially in the increase of people and popularity of the state. I’m fact I’m in favor of more regulation at this point to address the problems as of late. Better to nip it in the bud now than address it later.

 

[Mykolaivka887]

This discussion we're now having strays away from the NCH thread title, but more stringent regulation aimed toward nonresident hunters and possibly even more legislative statutory authority in favor of resident hunters, would probably be a good thing, possibly.

However, regulations such as that which happened to Unit 19 sheep does absolutely nothing for the resource and is a highly irresponsible action/reaction. We definitely do not need more state regulations such as that. Absolutely absurd.

But, in relation to the NCH, the state's current subsistence law makes it difficult to regulate or provide opportunities for all Alaskans and nonresidents really don't stand a chance of being included. But a large part of that social dilemma is due to or caused by ANILCA.

 

[timekiller13]

You guys are missing my point. I’m actually advocating for MORE LIMITATIONS for non-resident hunters. It would be very simple to eliminate OTC and make species a draw only for non-resident. And if you eliminate the guide requirements, you would DECREASE the success rates of non-resident hunters, therefore allowing more animals to live.

Guided hunters are much more successful than DIY hunters. I’d venture to say a DIY non-resident sheep hunter has about a 10% shot at killing a legal ram. And that’s probably generous. I bet guided hunters success rates push 75%.

Also it would be a money making machine. Charge $50 or even $100 a pop to enter drawing for sheep and goat. I’d pay that in a skinny minute if I could go DIY and fail all on my own. I’ll never apply for sheep or goat in Alaska due to the guide requirements because I will not pay someone $30k to go hunt. Financially, I could afford to pay that right now. But I will not do it. But I would throw my name in the hat at $100 a year for the rest of my life for chance to try and do it on my own.

Hell, make all species outside of the predators draw only for non-res in Alaska. I’ll pay to play for chances to hunt on my own. I already apply for all species I’m allowed to apply for anyways.

 

[Mykolaivka887]

You guys are missing my point. I’m actually advocating for MORE LIMITATIONS for non-resident hunters. It would be very simple to eliminate OTC and make species a draw only for non-resident. And if you eliminate the guide requirements, you would DECREASE the success rates of non-resident hunters, therefore allowing more animals to live.

Guided hunters are much more successful than DIY hunters. I’d venture to say a DIY non-resident sheep hunter has about a 10% shot at killing a legal ram. And that’s probably generous. I bet guided hunters success rates push 75%.

Also it would be a money making machine. Charge $50 or even $100 a pop to enter drawing for sheep and goat. I’d pay that in a skinny minute if I could go DIY and fail all on my own. I’ll never apply for sheep or goat in Alaska due to the guide requirements because I will not pay someone $30k to go hunt. Financially, I could afford to pay that right now. But I will not do it. But I would throw my name in the hat at $100 a year for the rest of my life for chance to try and do it on my own.

Hell, make all species outside of the predators draw only for non-res in Alaska. I’ll pay to play for chances to hunt on my own. I already apply for all species I’m allowed to apply for anyways.

Yes, the legislature has heard all your arguments and there's no support from the constituency. However, you're invited to come to Alaska and spend a couple years or more, lobbying your cause to the legislature and various state agencies.

 

[william schmaltz]

There is no doubt in my mind that if you polled the general hunting public in Alaska, the majority would agree with what timekiller is suggesting. It's a similar system I've suggested (knowing it's DOA) for years. Talk to your average hunter in the state, and most are completely on board with NR quotas for the big 3 and sending them to draw to make money. May as well can that ridiculous must be guided law too and 50x the applicants. The income the state would make off that system would dwarf whatever the guide industry claims to do for the department. The good guides are still selling hunts outside the must be guided species; and they would have no problem still selling big 3 hunts under that system.

What happens in Junea (or Washington) is hardly dictated by the constituents. I can't imagine the level of willful blindness it must take to think otherwise. The one thing that is correct is that these regulations are not dictated by money based off of tag sales. The AK model is a great example of eliminating biases based on the financial outfall of tag sales. But it's no doubt influenced by a different color of money in the form of lobbyist.

I can hardly think of an example where the constituents' voices are heard over lobby $$ or bottom-line budget enhancers (commercial exploitation) when it comes to the way AK handles its natural resources. You think the majority of Alaskans agree with the way Chinook are being handled? We're going to have to go to zero returns before the commercial users are throttled back there. Maybe not even then, but the way things are trending, we're going to find out soon. Yet when it's time for new BOF members, it will be commercial representation chosen by the governor and passed through by the legislature. Funny how that works. Something like 70% of Alaskans are against Pebble, yet it took the feds to step up and shut that down. Where were our politicians that are so concerned about the consituents on that one? Wonder why so many in Juneau are still on board with Pebble even though 70% of us are against it.........

What happened in GMU 19C is indeed a travesty. It will have zero biological effect. At the same time, a similar proposal as above was presented for quotas in 19C and was laughed out of the BOG meeting room a few years ago and yet here we are. Maybe based off that situation, it's high time some of these conversations are had.

Anyways, to keep things somewhat related to the OP, there is a meeting on July 20th at 3:30 to discuss sending a letter to the FSB in regard to the Nelchina caribou hunt. During that same meeting, a board committee will be formed to make recommendations to the BOG about 19C Dall Sheep. The kicking the can down the road tour has finally ended, all it took was to restrict commercial users one time.

 

[Mykolaivka887]

I don't think the Dept of Interior is going to side with the State on NCH surpluses. Time will tell, but I'm pretty sure the DOI is going to continue with their hunt.

 

[Ecampbell25]

If you want to hunt them without a guide you need to do what I had to do…

Move up to Alaska and become a resident…

Or hit the lottery ….

 

[Alaska92]

It’s time to severely restrict non-resident guides and non-resident hunters in this state. It’s been a free for all for too long. Guides in Alaska should have to be a resident and non-resident hunters should have a strictly limited and expensive draw system for all species. With the invention of the Internet and the information readily available now, this state appears to headed in a bad direction in regards to its game. Numbers are depleted for a variety of species statewide. Alaska marketing to outsiders has certainly got to be at an all time high. Something has to give.

 

[Alaska92]

I think this is a great idea.

I will never come to Alaska just to shoot a grizzly bear because Im not paying a guide 20-30k do that.

Remove the outfitter welfare off of goat, sheep and brown/grizzly bear.

Make all goat and sheep draw only for non-resident and if you draw you wait 10 years before you can enter again. Guided or DIY dealers choice if you draw.

Make brown/grizzly/black bear tag that’s a reduced price add on if you possess another tag for a different species (for example, got Moose tag add on black bear for $50 or grizzly for $100). Make wolf tags free as add on license.

To keep the guides happy, continue to have Kodiak brown bear and the handful of other “destination” brown bear areas be guided only. And as much as I hate to say it, allocate a percentage of goat/sheep tags to “outfitter” pool, like New Mexico does.

Easy way to get some predator management. I’ve heard countless stories of non-resident, non-guided hunters have opportunities to harvest grizzlies as an incidental while hunting other species, but couldn’t. Just think of even 25% of those people would take out a predator??

Make sheep once in a lifetime for non-residents like just about every other state in the union.

 

[Ecampbell25]

Make sheep once in a lifetime for non-residents like just about every other state in the union.

I agree 100% with this. There’s nothing left on the bone for us residents that depend on the meat to get us through the winters.

Something does need to give…. But I highly doubt things will change until it’s too late…