Hold on to your GMU 23/26A Shorts boys

Joined
Nov 3, 2017
Messages
1,471
Location
AK
I bet if the state got rid of some of their idiotic requirements there would be more support to stop stuff like this?

Maybe if residents fought to help get rid of the idiotic requirements there would be more support?

After seeing how states discriminate I am not surprised to see discrimination within the state. I also am not surprised when there isn’t a big non res rally to help fight that discrimination.

Good luck in your fight.
Wasn't asking for it. Seeking assistance from people who only show up where there is something for them in return doesn't fall in the category of relationships I tend to pursue.

I just submitted my North Dakota deer lottery paperwork the other day. Saw my pile of Antelope preference points molding away in my dashboard that they won't let me use b/c it's closed to NR hunters. Can you please fight so I can use my points? I also spent two years trapping and collaring ND lions and then spent countless months hiking into kills sites. All for a population that now I'm not allowed to hunt. You busy fighting for us NRs to hunt lions? Did A LOT of moose work there too, sure would be nice to hunt them. Also would be nice to hunt an elk at the family farm. You fighting the good fight for me? I wouldn't expect you to. I'm glad you guys have exclusive access to some of them awesome hunts. ND can be a real shit hole and the people that put up with the 6 months of hell deserve something in return; much like Alaskans or any other state for that matter.

Have a good one and best of luck in your continued pursuit of your "this land is your land, this land is my land" socialistic interstate hunting "rights"
 
OP
L

Larry Bartlett

WKR
Rokslide Sponsor
Joined
Feb 13, 2013
Messages
1,511
too early to tell. By law, unless challenged by the state and overturned in court, the closure remains through 2023 season for non-locals.
 
Joined
Oct 3, 2017
Messages
1,023
Location
Too far east
You're saying Alaskans are guilty of wanton waste? They just go out to kill bou, and leave it for the bears and not for their own future generations ?
I can't imagine any normal person doing that indiscriminately.
 
OP
L

Larry Bartlett

WKR
Rokslide Sponsor
Joined
Feb 13, 2013
Messages
1,511
Z987K, Yes as you stated is true but the NWRAC requested the closure initially for COVID-19 fears, but FSB coached them to change their reasonings to give them a better chance of approving a closure. So they tossed up aircraft harassment and herd dynamic reactions to non-locals hunting in august and september, which they believed but have never proved to interfere with their federally protected (ANILCA) subsistence lifestyle by keeping bou in unreachable terrain during august and september. However, they shifted this argument in favor of a more effective reason citing the herd has declined to below the critical threshold for management (200,000 caribou). However, the state management agencies (ADFG and BOG) opposed the closure request because management strategies at this population level still provide harvest allocations for everyone, but that a more scientific approach to understanding harvest allocations and impacts REQUIRES natives to report harvests per state law. Many still do not and will not ever report harvests.

THAT is why it would not be justified to close GMU 23 and 26A to motorized access. If that were suggested, then natives would be prevented from their subsistence lifestyle and that would be a blatant breach of federal laws set forth by ANILCA. The FSB closed the public lands for 2 years to limit the 300 non-local hunters who come up to harvest 1 BULL so that natives can shoot up to 15,000 caribou (cows, calves and bulls). However, since it is widely admitted that many thousands more get killed and NEVER reported (violation of state law) each year suggests the non-local take is so insignificant to the 15,000-20,000 which are actually harvested every season. Makes one question what is really backing these closures if not science? It's Native Power and the crooks in charge of the OSM, namely Gene Petola. Get that crook out of office and maybe something would change for non-locals in the future. Until then, I am personally DONE observing the closures on these grounds. I will continue to hunt below mean high water in the closed areas UNTIL the state of Alaska declares a biological justification for limiting my caribou bounty of 1 bull a year.

Hope this adds to your thoughts.
 

cjc5062

FNG
Joined
Nov 30, 2020
Messages
22
Location
Cincinnati, OH
Any updates from hunters who still went up this year to hunt portions of 23 or 26a? Our hunt with GE was postponed for this year, but are hopefully they get things figured out and strategy in place to put us in a good position for 2023. I saw RAM had some luck up there with most of their hunters.
 

AKBC

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Dec 22, 2014
Messages
223
Z987K, Yes as you stated is true but the NWRAC requested the closure initially for COVID-19 fears, but FSB coached them to change their reasonings to give them a better chance of approving a closure. So they tossed up aircraft harassment and herd dynamic reactions to non-locals hunting in august and september, which they believed but have never proved to interfere with their federally protected (ANILCA) subsistence lifestyle by keeping bou in unreachable terrain during august and september. However, they shifted this argument in favor of a more effective reason citing the herd has declined to below the critical threshold for management (200,000 caribou). However, the state management agencies (ADFG and BOG) opposed the closure request because management strategies at this population level still provide harvest allocations for everyone, but that a more scientific approach to understanding harvest allocations and impacts REQUIRES natives to report harvests per state law. Many still do not and will not ever report harvests.

THAT is why it would not be justified to close GMU 23 and 26A to motorized access. If that were suggested, then natives would be prevented from their subsistence lifestyle and that would be a blatant breach of federal laws set forth by ANILCA. The FSB closed the public lands for 2 years to limit the 300 non-local hunters who come up to harvest 1 BULL so that natives can shoot up to 15,000 caribou (cows, calves and bulls). However, since it is widely admitted that many thousands more get killed and NEVER reported (violation of state law) each year suggests the non-local take is so insignificant to the 15,000-20,000 which are actually harvested every season. Makes one question what is really backing these closures if not science? It's Native Power and the crooks in charge of the OSM, namely Gene Petola. Get that crook out of office and maybe something would change for non-locals in the future. Until then, I am personally DONE observing the closures on these grounds. I will continue to hunt below mean high water in the closed areas UNTIL the state of Alaska declares a biological justification for limiting my caribou bounty of 1 bull a year.

Hope this adds to your thoughts.
Gene Peltola; the spouse of our new congresswoman Mary Peltola. Non-Native/urban hunters are in trouble.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 3, 2020
Messages
618
Location
Eagle River, AK
quick google search says hes her husband. looks like he is a big wig for the BIA which isnt good news as you said. Keeping it closed is just going to push people to hunt the rivers which is how a majority of the natives access the caribou until the snow flies. So keeping the uplands shut down is actually going to make the rivers more busy in the future.
 
OP
L

Larry Bartlett

WKR
Rokslide Sponsor
Joined
Feb 13, 2013
Messages
1,511
It was shared somewhere recently if not here that Gene Petola stepped down from both the OSM and BIA. While that is great news, don't think his replacement wasn't specifically vetted to uphold the status quo of the Native "100-year Plan" to reclaim what was taken from them by non-local interests (statehood and federal land custodian BLM). It's being quietly appropriated on two major fronts:

1) Land Transfer Acceleration Act of 2004 (initiated by Murkowski 25 years post ANILCA) because she needed Native support and wanted to push BLM to hurry up with important land transfers that would spur economic growth and development of federal public lands by returning BLM lands to Native groups and privatizing them to mining companies. BLM currently manages 42-46% of the entire landscape in Alaska, and public land owners are losing millions of acres annually being returned to Native corps and individuals at an alarming rate since 2004. Once BLM has completed their mandated task of land transfer acceleration, how much of the 46% will be available to non-local public land owners is anyone's guess. If the 100-year Plan is a true movement (42 years and counting), they'll have not only succeeded but used our federal systems to accomplish it.

2) Native communities via RACs are assuming control of local state resources using the OSM as an educator, facilitator and judge to close federal public lands WITHOUT scientific justification, evidence supporting claims, nor the state of Alaska's agreement on wildlife crisis levels and general harvest allocations.

With these two doors swinging shut on non-local tax payers, consider adding what state and federal moneys are being spent on these communities after major storms and sea level erosion continue predictably destroying villages. Those communities expect state and federal support when they need it and are lost on the fact that these helping hands also deserve an opportunity to hunt on public lands after we've paid the coffer with our taxes.

If you think that these two major flanks are disconnected, they are not. Currently BLM is trying to shed 15-million acres of public lands in central and northwestern Brooks Range (west of the Haul Rd) to establish pit-mining and two road proposals splitting across the Range (north and south of the Divide). Dovetails too nicely with all these OSM closures in the same region (GMU 23 and 26A/B).
 

oenanthe

WKR
Joined
Aug 21, 2014
Messages
415
Location
Fbks, AK
Larry, as regards #1, what is your source that we're losing "millions of acres annually"?

You may want to read up on the status of ANCSA land transfers. The vast majority of those transfers have already happened. Over 44 million acres have already been conveyed to Alaska Native Corporations. There are 870,000 acres remaining to be transferred, that's a firm upper limit. See https://www.blm.gov/programs/lands-and-realty/regional-information/alaska/land_transfer/ancsa

I'm a firm believer in protecting our public lands, but the ANCSA conveyances are part of a deal made in 1971 to settle all native land claims in Alaska and the feds need to honor that.
 
OP
L

Larry Bartlett

WKR
Rokslide Sponsor
Joined
Feb 13, 2013
Messages
1,511
Ah you're from Fairbanks, O. Cheers!



Agreed on the ANCSA transfers, that's easy to comprehend. We have to consider "state selected" transfers as a partnership with neighboring Native Land owners. For example, Doyon leases nearly 100 oil drill rigs to the contractors striking test sites all over NPRA and what's left of public lands along the Colville River down to Nuigsut and so on. All decisions of land use and access will be open for highest bid once out of federal trust. Who gets most of the big money contracts on industries surrounding and potentially impacting native land? It's a win win for Native orgs once the federal gvt transfers the deed. They might as well own it because we ain't invited to trespass especially not for hunting.

I remember years when the Killik River was public land, the Karupa River was public land...hell that's just a small dot in the brooks range....Land dots on a map are slowly connecting to form what Alaska will be by 2059. Let's assume BLM will have completed their mission to transfer lands because it's mandated by federal law. How much of that land (45% of Alaska's land mass) will you or I still have access to hunt?
 
Top