Federal land and State animals

[Rich M]

Yes if the United States government continues to have it their way in Alaska. Unless a future American president appoints a cabinet member who's friendly to conservation management and, that president is also conservation minded, the Dept of Interior is bent on eliminating or at best, severely restricting recreational hunting.

Thanks. Amazing how this stuff is trending - AK of all places...

 

[Mykolaivka887]

Thanks. Amazing how this stuff is trending - AK of all places...

Yes, was a time when 90% of Alaska's residents didn't care about the effects nonresidents were placing on wildlife species in the state, to the situation now where 90% of residents would rather that nonresidents be severely limited or critically handicapped, or entirely eliminated altogether.

 

[Rich M]

Yes, was a time when 90% of Alaska's residents didn't care about the effects nonresidents were placing on wildlife species in the state, to the situation now where 90% of residents would rather that nonresidents be severely limited or critically handicapped, or entirely eliminated altogether.

Times are changing.

They shut the Quebec caribou hunting down to NR a long time ago. Were 1.4 million critters and now there are only 150,000 (just quick googled it). No-one can hunt them now. It wasn't the NR shooting the bulls, it had to do with habitat or disease or something else.

Anyway - this is exactly what folks want to do in AK. Might make a good case study. Maybe they can learn why the Quebec herd basically died and save the AK herds.

Then the fish numbers - halibut, kings, them funky brown and orange sea bass things. All fished out, surely by the NR. Should close all of it for 3-5 yrs and see if the salmon come back. The other fish grow pretty slow but should be increased anyway.

We have fish issues down here - in my area and north we need to run 40 miles to get on good fish, east & west coasts. Red tide fish kills, algae bloom fish kills on opposing coasts - inshore fish. Numbers and limits are down, still have all kinds of guys heading out to catch as many as possible. Even the migratory fish numbers are down - those gotta be someone else's fault...

It's interesting that all this comes down basically at a similar time-frame. Is it really just the human factor or is it habitat or is it a combination? the commercialization of things makes it even worse for whatever it is - no-one ever hunted a species into obscurity over food for their family, but folks sure will kill every last one for $$.

Wish there was an easy answer. I never wanted to hunt AK nor do i worry about elk hunting but I do feel that we're all on this rock together and should have an opportunity to do something once, maybe twice. Hunting and fishing kills stuff. so we gotta manage how much gets killed so it can replenish itself - not like buying more chicken eggs to stock a pen for growth and harvest.

 

[WalterH]

Yes if the United States government continues to have it their way in Alaska. Unless a future American president appoints a cabinet member who's friendly to conservation management and, that president is also conservation minded, the Dept of Interior is bent on eliminating or at best, severely restricting recreational hunting.

What would you cite as examples of the govt trying to eliminate and/or severely restrict hunting in Alaska?

From what I have been trying to track, I see some very specific actions and orders in a few very specific places.

You make it sound like there is a massive overarching push by the govt to lock us "sport" hunters out of federal public lands, but I just don't see that on the scale you describe.

Here is the list of recent federal wildlife management decisions that affect hunting on fed public lands in AK that I am aware of. I am sure it is an incomplete list.

1. Unit 13 fed lands covid closure, sport hunters, no longer applicable.
2. Units 24A-26B fed lands W of Sag sheep closure, all hunters, expires 2024
3. Units 23 and 26A fed lands moose and caribou closure, sport hunters, expires 2024
4. Mulchatna closure, joint decision supported by the state, all hunters, no expiration
5. NPS proposed restriction on certain types of predator harvest in Preserves, sport hunters

Three of these things are temporary "emergency" actions that have an expiration date. The Mulchatna closure is supported by the state and is based on population concerns. The NPS deal is just a proposal last I looked into it.

My biggest gripe with the feds isn't necessarily what decisions get made, but why and how they get made. Science and conservation don't seem to be the driving forces...

As for ADFG "capitulating" to the feds on fish and wildlife management decisions, quite the opposite. They have pushed back hard in the form of lawsuits on every decision they didn't agree with. Right?

I think it is also noteworthy that most of these management decisions on fed public lands are made by the Federal Subsistence Board, which is not just DOI.

 

[Mykolaivka887]

What would you cite as examples of the govt trying to eliminate and/or severely restrict hunting in Alaska?

Walter:

I realize that you're a proponent of the federal government and a strong advocate for it, My question is; have you been to Washington, DC and Arlington, VA lately?

And on another note, the Alaska Dept of Fish & Game and especially the Division of Wildlife Conservation doesn't sue anyone, because they don't have the authority and it's not in their preview.

 

[william schmaltz]

I think it is also noteworthy that most of these management decisions on fed public lands are made by the Federal Subsistence Board, which is not just DOI.

It's literally nearly all DOI.

The board is 3 public members that are appointed by the Secretary of the Interior (almost always vote to restrict).
Bureau of Indian Affairs (DOI) - almost always votes to restrict.
Bureau of Land Management (DOI)
National Park Service (DOI)
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (DOI)
U.S. Forest Service (USDA)

BLM, NPS, and USFWS vote at the discretion of whoever the Secretary of the Interior is at the time. And you're correct, science and conservation are never the driving force of those decisions. One of the main reasons I have such a gripe with the likes of BHA drooling our over current Secretary of the Interior while her departments simultaneously spit in the face of recommendations from wildlife biologists.

 

[Mykolaivka887]

It's literally nearly all DOI.

The board is 3 public members that are appointed by the Secretary of the Interior (almost always vote to restrict).
Bureau of Indian Affairs (DOI) - almost always votes to restrict.
Bureau of Land Management (DOI)
National Park Service (DOI)
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (DOI)
U.S. Forest Service (USDA)

BLM, NPS, and USFWS vote at the discretion of whoever the Secretary of the Interior is at the time. And you're correct, science and conservation are never the driving force of those decisions. One of the main reasons I have such a gripe with the likes of BHA drooling our over current Secretary of the Interior while her departments simultaneously spit in the face of recommendations from wildlife biologists.

Exactly. Been my point all along. The Dostrict of Columbia is hell bent on eliminating recreational hunting on all federal public lands. It's a driving force, funded by enormous coffers, and strongly supported by the majority.

 

[WalterH]

Walter:

I realize that you're a proponent of the federal government and a strong advocate for it, My question is; have you been to Washington, DC and Arlington, VA lately?

And on another note, the Alaska Dept of Fish & Game and especially the Division of Wildlife Conservation doesn't sue anyone, because they don't have the authority and it's not in their preview.

Ha!

You clearly don't know much about me. I am not pro fed by any means, I am anti-misinformation and pro fact and reality though.

Not trying to pick a fight or defend the indefensible, I just don't think that extrapolating a handful of mostly temporary management decisions that affect a small number of places and people "into the feds are going to shut down all hunting nationwide" is representative of reality. Seems like needless fearmongering, which I am not a big fan of in any context.

And to answer your question about travel, no I've never been to either place, nor do I intend to. Not really my type of zone or people. Maybe if some Dall sheep show up down there and fare better than their Alaskan counterparts...

Apologies and you are partially correct. I should have said the State sued, not ADFG specifically, in the examples mentioned above. Thanks for correcting that technical error.

Regarding ADFG and their purview, reference:

Case No. 3:20-cv-00195-SLG

2021-12-03

State of Alaska, DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME, Plaintiff, v. FEDERAL SUBSISTENCE BOARD, et al., Defendants, and Organized Village of Kake, Intervenor-Defendant.

as one example.

 

[Mykolaivka887]

And to answer your question about travel, no I've never been to either place, nor do I intend to.

You should fly down there and hangout a month or so, and see firsthand what's happening now, based on what's been done on the national level since Nixon signed ANCSA.

 

[WalterH]

You should fly down there and hangout a month or so, and see firsthand what's happening now, based on what's been done on the national level since Nixon signed ANCSA.

That would probably be a terrifying experience. I'll stick to trying to pay attention to what's going on in the back yard and keep my world small.

 

[Mykolaivka887]

That would probably be a terrifying experience. I'll stick to trying to pay attention to what's going on in the back yard and keep my world small.

Nothing wrong with being terrified and keeping your world small. That's kind of an American thing, anyway.