Alaska Sheep Harvest 2023

[Confluentus]

De minimis in the Wrangells. Not sure elsewhere. Ironically, success rates are about on point with most of the State areas.

**I found the 2022 harvest data as well, 2 rams were killed in Unit 11 and 0 rams were killed in Unit 12.**

So my impression was that most rams taken under subsistence harvest in the national parks are still sealed and measured by ADFG, and that a harvest ticket is punched. They then show up in the ADFG database like such:

So in these harvest stats from 2021 for unit 11, all of those 3-5yo rams with 14”-25” horns are harvested under “any ram” subsistence regs. Of course some subsistence guys also kill big rams and those numbers are in this table somewhere too, but otherwise unidentifiable as subsistence harvest (except for the rams harvested in MtnHerd D, referring to Chugach, and 100% of the Chugach in unit 11 is Hard Park). Anyway I figure that at least a dozen or so of the rams in the unit 11 stats shown here are subsistence harvest.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SLDMTN]

So my impression was that most rams taken under subsistence harvest in the national parks are still sealed and measured by ADFG, and that a harvest ticket is punched. They then show up in the ADFG database like such:

So in these harvest stats from 2021 for unit 11, all of those 3-5yo rams with 14”-25” horns are harvested under “any ram” subsistence regs. Of course some subsistence guys also kill big rams and those numbers are in this table somewhere too, but otherwise unidentifiable as subsistence harvest (except for the rams harvested in MtnHerd D, referring to Chugach, and 100% of the Chugach in unit 11 is Hard Park). Anyway I figure that at least a dozen or so of the rams in the unit 11 stats shown here are subsistence harvest.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Interesting, especially on the Unit 11 Chugach harvest. When I was younger hunting under a subsistence tag, we never reported to the State. Not sure if they require it now? Seems odd that those same numbers wouldn't correlate to what the Feds are reporting. Would love to have a State bio shed some light on the numbers, especially those 2-4 year olds.

 

[Choogiak]

Maybe I misunderstood, but the area biologist at the meeting in Fairbanks seemed to indicate it was hard to get subsistence harvest numbers, I think he was referencing the eastern brooks at the time. Does anyone know if subsistence hunters are required to seal/report their ram or harvest? And what/who sets the regulations, or are there any regulations? I was reading on the national park website that because of recent declines they are asking subs hunters to limit ewe harvest?!?

 

[SLDMTN]

From my understanding (please correct me if I’m wrong), subsistence harvest does not have to be reported to the state. Hunters are supposed to report harvest to the Feds though. The regs are set by the Federal Subsistence Board.

https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/wildlife-reg-book-2022-2024-units-1-11.pdf

https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/wildlife-reg-book-2022-2024-reduced-file-size.pdf

Disclaimer, this is not my stance, just my opinion of the situation…Trying to retain hunting rights by limiting subsistence harvest is not going to work, you need only look at the caribou hunt up north. Subsistence users will 1000% be the last people to lose ground. We are the non residents in that argument and we’ll lose every time.

 

[adventure907]

Subsistence rams are required to be sealed.

 

[WalterH]

So my impression was that most rams taken under subsistence harvest in the national parks are still sealed and measured by ADFG, and that a harvest ticket is punched. They then show up in the ADFG database like such:

So in these harvest stats from 2021 for unit 11, all of those 3-5yo rams with 14”-25” horns are harvested under “any ram” subsistence regs. Of course some subsistence guys also kill big rams and those numbers are in this table somewhere too, but otherwise unidentifiable as subsistence harvest (except for the rams harvested in MtnHerd D, referring to Chugach, and 100% of the Chugach in unit 11 is Hard Park). Anyway I figure that at least a dozen or so of the rams in the unit 11 stats shown here are subsistence harvest.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is pretty much spot on from what I understand.

Looking at the subsistence regs, when the regs spell out a specific permit number (FSXXXX), animals taken under those permits are reported to the feds and adfg for sealing. The elder hunts in Units 11 and 12 for example. These harvests show up in the federal subsistence harvest data.

Animals taken under fed subsistence "general hunt" regs don't require a fed permits, just state harvest ticket, and are only reported to adfg. They don't show up in the fed subsistence harvest info. Both show up in the adfg harvest data.

I think 1) it is crazy that sheep are classified as a subsistence animal, and that 2) ewes and sub-legals can be killed for subsistence.

To me subsistence hunting should be limited to the biggest return on investment if "subsisting" and survival are the priorities. Hard to compare the yield on a sheep to a moose or caribou. It seems like a significant number of "subsistence" hunters are after trophy class animals more often than not.

 

[mtwarden]

We won't know participation totals until all residents turn in their HT. Based on the last 2 years of prelim stats... Total participation this year is around 220nr and 1450 res, but we won't know for a while. Both are down a bit but not a lot.

Are those participation numbers pretty close for years past?

I'm wondering if roughly a 50% (114/220) harvest for nonresidents might slow participation some for them????

Is there any caps for nonresident participation? Is there any caps on how many licenses an outfitter can have?

The outfitter I hunted with (Brooks) had less sheep hunters than in the past, but it sounded like a decision he made based on what he was seeing, not anything the G&F dictated. If true, an outfitter looking to maximizing profit and not giving a tinker's dam about the population could really reek some havoc on a population.

It would seem prudent to have some realistic caps, based on population estimates, for outfitters- not an unlimited number of licenses. Maybe that is the way it is, but didn't sound that way from visiting with the outfitter I used.

 

[WalterH]

Are those participation numbers pretty close for years past?

I'm wondering if roughly a 50% (114/220) harvest for nonresidents might slow participation some for them????

Is there any caps for nonresident participation? Is there any caps on how many licenses an outfitter can have?

The outfitter I hunted with (Brooks) had less sheep hunters than in the past, but it sounded like a decision he made based on what he was seeing, not anything the G&F dictated. If true, an outfitter looking to maximizing profit and not giving a tinker's dam about the population could really reek some havoc on a population.

It would seem prudent to have some realistic caps, based on population estimates, for outfitters- not an unlimited number of licenses. Maybe that is the way it is, but didn't sound that way from visiting with the outfitter I used.

Limits on animals that guides can take, and number of guides in an area varies from place to place.

On state land, generally speaking, there are no limits on the # of guides in an area and the number of clients a guide or transporter can run.

On fed land, some fed land managers limit # of guides and trips guides can run, others do not. All depends on the area.

Some guides self-limit harvest based on concern for their impact on the resource. Others limit their trips because they can only fill so many tags based on current #s of sheep and don't want unhappy customers. Other don't care about other and take all of the business they can get.

Some limits on total # of guides, guides in given areas, and harvest limits on commercial operators is long overdue across the board up here.

I think res and non-res participation have dropped off at about the same rates as of late. Res success has always seemed to hover around 20% regardless of participation. Non-res success used to be reliably around 70-80%, so 50% would be a definite decline. The 114/220 is a breakdown of how many sheep nr vs. rs killed, not overall participation and success rate.

 

[mtwarden]

The 114/220 is a breakdown of how many sheep nr vs. rs killed, not overall participation and success rate.

he posted nr harvest at 114 and then later provided data that nr participation was 220; resident harvest thus far 202, participation ~ 1450

it's two different posts and the data is preliminary, but probably pretty close

 

[Yellowknife]

Are those participation numbers pretty close for years past?

I'm wondering if roughly a 50% (114/220) harvest for nonresidents might slow participation some for them????

Non-Resident hunter numbers haven't been below 400 in the modern era and it was consistently 500+ in the 90's and early 2000's. The drop off over the last few years is substantial. I suspect participation will continue to slow, as there is often a two year lag between bookings and hunts in the sheep business and people are just now starting to pick up on what kind of trouble the state is in.

 

[WalterH]

he posted nr harvest at 114 and then later provided data that nr participation was 220; resident harvest thus far 202, participation ~ 1450

it's two different posts and the data is preliminary, but probably pretty close

Gotcha. Missed that first time around. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[WalterH]

A friend who hunted sheep in Canada this year said that things are going the same way down there, but the guides are trying really, really hard to keep that quiet, as much of the business that had been going to Alaska is headed their way as the current perception is that they are still doing well down in the Yukon and NWT.

I think populations have dropped significantly as well down there, but they started from a higher point and will have less competition for better numbers and age class of rams as compared to AK, at least for the foreseeable future.

 

[Nick Muche]

I’ve heard the same…

 

[carsonkeys]

A friend who hunted sheep in Canada this year said that things are going the same way down there, but the guides are trying really, really hard to keep that quiet, as much of the business that had been going to Alaska is headed their way as the current perception is that they are still doing well down in the Yukon and NWT.

I think populations have dropped significantly as well down there, but they started from a higher point and will have less competition for better numbers and age class of rams as compared to AK, at least for the foreseeable future.

I’ve heard the same…

Unfortunately, it sounds like you’re right. At the recent meeting in Fairbanks, Brad Wendling said the declines we’re seeing in AK are also being seen throughout the entire thinhorn range save for one place in the NWT (IIRC).

 

[mtwarden]

A friend who hunted sheep in Canada this year said that things are going the same way down there, but the guides are trying really, really hard to keep that quiet, as much of the business that had been going to Alaska is headed their way as the current perception is that they are still doing well down in the Yukon and NWT.

I think populations have dropped significantly as well down there, but they started from a higher point and will have less competition for better numbers and age class of rams as compared to AK, at least for the foreseeable future.

My buddy won a Yukon hunt (lucky bastard)- he said they had to hunt really hard to find rams. He ended up finding one near the end of a ten day hunt.

 

[B_Reynolds_AK]

In line with this thread, here is a great podcast with Wayne Heimer, a long time bio and sheep hunter in Fairbanks.

Episode 159: Sheep Management History, with Wayne Heimer

Podcast Episode · Tundra Talk Podcast · 10/30/2023 · 2h 4m

podcasts.apple.com

 

[SLDMTN]

In line with this thread, here is a great podcast with Wayne Heimer, a long time bio and sheep hunter in Fairbanks.

Episode 159: Sheep Management History, with Wayne Heimer

Podcast Episode · Tundra Talk Podcast · 10/30/2023 · 2h 4m

podcasts.apple.com

Everyone with an opinion on sheep management in Alaska needs to listen to this podcast, whether you agree or not with the opinions stated on there. I’ll be getting my paws on Wayne’s book as well for sure. I have a lot left to learn…

 

[rlm]

Certainly the populations are low - but we have seen some very dramatic swings in the past - such as McKinley Park in the forties and the HulaHula. In the early 50s on the HulaHulla survey they observed 75 sheep and estimated 150 - in the 70s or early 80s the survey counted over 3000.

Are there any documented counts on thew Hula Hula prior to the 50's?

 

[wantj43]

Are there any documented counts on thew Hula Hula prior to the 50's?

 

[wantj43]

This is the earliest survey I am aware of for the HulaHula. However, there is information that provides an indication of sheep population levels available for local use from early in the last century.