Federal Proposals to CLOSE Alaska's GMU 23 and 26A to caribou and moose hunters

[mcseal2]

I'm also on hold. Lots of great input from everyone, thanks!

 

[mcseal2]

I got to speak after about 1hr on hold. Lots of calls in opposition so far, but quite a few in support too. I hope they decide not to pass this.

 

[Murphy]

Any of the support have anything resembling a valid reason for passing this?

 

[Catag94]

They are currently out of callers but have 30 more minutes.

 

[Sourdough]

Just so as people who are "not" in the know, about some of this thinking. There is a "fair" amount of people in areas that are basically not-subsistence under Federal Requirements, who have had a belly full of being overrun by non-local area hunters and fishermen. Yes........this is different, but it is building. People are getting sick of being overrun by big city Alaskan residents.

I expect you will see some way of taxing "so-called" outsiders who invade areas for fish and game. This is more caustic over fishing then hunting. But it is building. And will continue to build, so expect more anger from many locations in the future.

Much of this could be blamed on the internet, everyone wants the best fishing that weekend, or best hunting for that species that period. But this has been building for decades long before the internet. The resident population has roughly doubled in the last 50 years. It could double again in less then 50 years. There is just a constant progressing build of hunting a fishing pressure, and it is not likely to diminish.

It is not just hunting and fishing.......there have been proposals to start "zoning" Alaska wilderness.........with areas set aside for just photography or just camping, in both proposed zonings (and other proposed zonings) any noise would be a violation.

It does not matter what you agree with, or what you strongly oppose. It is happening, in part because there are so many humans, and humans have time and money for things they did not decades ago.

I don't have any answers........just beware of likely future realities. (actually current realities).

Everyone "Wants" more........but there is only a finite amount of "more" available. Everyone feels rightly or not they have entitlements and rights to Alaska, but there is only some much Alaska to go around.

It will get much worse.

 

[Catag94]

The last caller, in favor, suggested that people could come after the closure. We all know the proposed closure strategically targets the hunting season for non residents. So I ask, what measure can be taken to get the BOG and ADF&G to expand the season for non-residents if this passes?

It would be a real chess move if starting in July, the season for non residents was suddenly open from July 5 to October 25 for these two specific units only.

 

[Sconnie77]

I got to speak after about 1hr on hold. Lots of calls in opposition so far, but quite a few in support too. I hope they decide not to pass this.

Thanks for speaking up!!!

 

[Larry Bartlett]

They can't expand the season for subsistence users because they already take 15,000 caribou each year given the current season, and typical edible timelines prevent smart meat hunters from shooting bulls after september...even if weather was perfect during an attempt (and likely wont be).

 

[AKDoc]

Thank you all for your telephonic testimony in opposition today...I had a very busy and long clinic day with back to back patients, so the best I could do was submit an email in opposition to the proposal, which I shared earlier this week...and I contacted my senators and congressman.

Thanks again fellow hunters...we will see what happens!

 

[Catag94]

They can't expand the season for subsistence users because they already take 15,000 caribou each year given the current season, and typical edible timelines prevent smart meat hunters from shooting bulls after september...even if weather was perfect during an attempt (and likely wont be).

Agreed on the later than September point, but expanding these units to start them in July for Non-Residents only, IF WSA21-01 passes would bring no increased harvest by residents or local subsistence hunters. It would however at least allow lower 48 hunters in for a sometime outside of the closure. I could see the state doing this in an effort to stimulate the economy. I could see the ADF&G supporting this as it would help to fit into their management strategy for the herd and the predators. And, it would alleviate some state land pressure.
Then in 2022, when the RAC proposes a 90 day closure, the discrimination becomes more in focus.

 

[Larry Bartlett]

July is a critical period for any caribou moving south of the Divide as these animals set the stage for trail networks. Ethically if not scientifically, these animals should be allowed a no-hunting period to ensure the consistency and safety of trails set down for the rest of the herd.

Whether or not allowing early migraters the unmolested chance to establish these compass points isn't an exact science, but if non-locals were to start harvesting in the heat of july and then villages suffered a low-numbers year, we would be giving them a real excuse to close our opportunities.

 

[Bigsteak]

Does anyone know when a decision on this is expected? Sorry if i missed it earlier in the thread.

 

[Catag94]

Makes sense. Thanks.

 

[Catag94]

They said something in the beginning about a date (I think today) for lager entities to offer comments. Perhaps ADF&G etc. did someone have better specifics on this? Beyond that, I’ve only heard a decision may be made by mid to late May. But, that’s only hear say.

 

[chucko]

I am a born and bred Alaskan I have hunted in the Arctic for over 25years . I live in Juneau but caribou and moose have been in my diet since I was a baby as my Dad harvested these animals to feed a growing family. Every scrap of of our animals is used . The money I pay to air transporters hotels and resturants helps support their families. The money that out of state people pay for tags and licenses support our state scientific management of game animals and its resources . I as well as most Alaskans fully support subsistence hunting . Harvesting game animals has and will continue to be my primary source of protein . This proposal is a attack on my right to a public resource and is just downright dumb . I will continue to hunt on state land in unit 23 no matter what the decision is and as long as the science supports it .Thinking back probably 80-90% of my game animals have been harvested on state land anyways . I would like to point out that in all my years I have NEVER seen a subsistence hunter while in the field as air transporters go to great lengths to avoid traditional use areas . This proposal is baseless and would do more harm then good and cripple our state wildlife managers . SPEAK UP

 

[Airohunter]

Did anyone sit through Fish and Game's presentation this last Tuesday? Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe it was encompassing unit 23 as well as others. Curious what the takeaways were from the Bio's. Perhaps more in depth what was shared at the Federal meeting?

 

[LongWayAround]

Anyone know how many comments they received on this and the split for/against?

 

[Catag94]

Anyone know how many comments they received on this and the split for/against?

Not sure in terms of the written comments but I did call into, comment, and listen to the entire 4:15 public hearing. I still couldn't give you numbers but would suggest that the percentage of commenters who were opposed was probably 85%. Of those in favor, there was nothing I heard that brought a compelling reason. Also, I heard several of the same voices in favor. I would also suggest that the board would be stepping out in a limb to pass this thing. And, I believe if they do, it will be challenged in court.

 

[LongWayAround]

Not sure in terms of the written comments but I did call into, comment, and listen to the entire 4:15 public hearing. I still couldn't give you numbers but would suggest that the percentage of commenters who were opposed was probably 85%. Of those in favor, there was nothing I heard that brought a compelling reason. Also, I heard several of the same voices in favor. I would also suggest that the board would be stepping out in a limb to pass this thing. And, I believe if they do, it will be challenged in court.

Good to hear.

I wasn't able to call in but sent a few emails and solicited a few more.

 

[Catag94]

Sent an email requesting an update from the OSM today. I received the following reply: