New SE Alaska limits on blacktail deer. 1-Buck

[kwackkillncrew]

while doing some research, just 1 village (roughly 200 people) received 119,000 acres from the BLM,. The Locals (of the village) and the FSB is saying there is not enough land for them to hunt on, so they pass regs to allow only qualifed users of the area to hunt the public BLM land as well. It hasent happed in this area yet, but since other corporations have started setting precendent, its bound to happen in the near future. THAT should be more concerning to meat eater and the other people who are worried about federal lands being transfered to the state. And this is just a small case...

 

[Johnboy041586]

Just more government bureaucracy that serves special interests.

Special interests? Special like the residents of the area? What an awful thing to do, preserve the wildlife by limiting the non residents from killing all the deer in a given area....

 

[NevadaMike]

Special interests? Special like the residents of the area? What an awful thing to do, preserve the wildlife by limiting the non residents from killing all the deer in a given area....

Well yes and no. We are talking about federal land that belongs tall of us not Alaska state land. Also, Other Alaska residents are not permitted to hunt their either yet the people of POW can hunt others places in Alaska or the rest of the country. What gets me is subsistence was established to put food on the table for native communities and small communities. Here is the definition when it was established.

"Subsistence hunting was defined as the customary and traditional uses by rural Alaska residents of wild, renewable resources for direct personal or family consumption, including food, shelter, fuel, clothing, and tools. This definition was established under federal law to prioritize subsistence use in Alaska."

Back in the day when it was established the communities were so small they granted subsistence to entire communities without income qualifications. That is no longer the case and they are granting it to large cities like Ketchikan. POW has grown dramatically and while there are certainly families that depend on this source of protein, there are tons of residents that do not. If you are a "subsistence hunter" on POW should you be flying out to Idaho and paying $800 for an elk tag? I don't know the answer but is sure does not feel right.

 

[kwackkillncrew]

according to google there is roughly 200 million acres of federal land in ak. That is larger then every US State (other then AK of course). the federal subsistence board in conjuction with local entities and native corporations are slowly shutting down Lower 48 States worth of federal lands to 99.9% of hunters to benefit .1%. Lands are always best in federal hands.......sure

 

[Banana_Horn]

Special interests? Special like the residents of the area? What an awful thing to do, preserve the wildlife by limiting the non residents from killing all the deer in a given area....

At face value it seems like a good thing, but the federal subsistence board prioritizes management not on biological/population data of the wildlife, but on the socioeconomic whims and complaints of “subsistence” users.

While these subsistence users might seem like a population that deserves special treatment due to their unique circumstances on where they live, it’s not like they’re all highly disadvantaged villagers and such. Some are. Most aren’t. Most were probably shooting plenty of deer anyways would be my guess. They’ll just have to out up with less crowds now. These are not restrictions based on wildlife concerns, but people concerns.

Another example, if you’re a subsistence user from Glenallen, Gakona, Tok, etc, you can hunt sheep IN WRANGELL ST. ELIAS NATIONAL PARK. My guess would be that 99% of anyone doing that is NOT doing it for the food. That in my opinion is a special interest group of users getting extremely preferential treatment. You can bet your ass that there are people out there that maintain a residence in those places just so they can reap the benefit of that rule. While this is a divergence from the deer restriction on POW, it is the same BS mechanism allowing for it.

 

[Johnboy041586]

At face value it seems like a good thing, but the federal subsistence board prioritizes management not on biological/population data of the wildlife, but on the socioeconomic whims and complaints of “subsistence” users.

While these subsistence users might seem like a population that deserves special treatment due to their unique circumstances on where they live, it’s not like they’re all highly disadvantaged villagers and such. Some are. Most aren’t. Most were probably shooting plenty of deer anyways would be my guess. They’ll just have to out up with less crowds now. These are not restrictions based on wildlife concerns, but people concerns.

Another example, if you’re a subsistence user from Glenallen, Gakona, Tok, etc, you can hunt sheep IN WRANGELL ST. ELIAS NATIONAL PARK. My guess would be that 99% of anyone doing that is NOT doing it for the food. That in my opinion is a special interest group of users getting extremely preferential treatment. You can bet your ass that there are people out there that maintain a residence in those places just so they can reap the benefit of that rule. While this is a divergence from the deer restriction on POW, it is the same BS mechanism allowing for it

Your not entirely wrong. My view point as Alaskan resident is slightly different. To me it's irritating to hear a big uproar from people about not being able to come here and shoot more animals. To me it doesn't matter much if subsistence hunting is not based on income. People that live in AK endure long shitty winters, high price commodities, etc. That is the price we pay to have access to these lands and resources.

 

[Banana_Horn]

Your not entirely wrong. My view point as Alaskan resident is slightly different. To me it's irritating to hear a big uproar from people about not being able to come here and shoot more animals. To me it doesn't matter much if subsistence hunting is not based on income. People that live in AK endure long shitty winters, high price commodities, etc. That is the price we pay to have access to these lands and resources.

I agree with you, I’m an Alaskan resident too, but this federal subsistence board decision strips my ability to go shoot my state allotted amount of blacktails on federal land… I say the same thing as you, I suffer those long winters and pay extra for everything to live here, and this decision takes some of my benefit away. It’s not just here but anywhere the fed sub board can justify it.

If you don’t live in the POW/ketchikan area, your hunting opportunities have been restricted just like mine.

ETA: maybe that last sentence should be your *harvest opportunities have been restricted just like mine.

As an AK resident, I’m not flying to Ketchikan, hopping on a float plane or ferry, to go shoot one blacktail for 40lbs of meat. I would do it for the chance at multiple, that would be a legit chance to fill the freezer. This restriction takes away my ability to do this hunt as a meat hunt… and I don’t really want another set of antlers in my garage.

 

[Hnthrdr]

Huh it’s almost like hardly anyone knew about blacktail hunting on PoW outside of AK and Wa state… until those glorious influencers showed everyone how awesome it was and how you could kill a few bucks a trip and…. WHAM! 1 deer limit… thanks Stevie Rinella!

 

[Marbles]

POW residents have long complained about people from Ketchikan coming over to hunt. Guess they finally managed to do something about it.

I think it should be managed more like the Nelchina caribou heard (before it collapsed). If you hunt the subsistence in GMU 2, you cannot hunt caribou or moose anywhere else in the state.

 

[NevadaMike]

POW residents have long complained about people from Ketchikan coming over to hunt. Guess they finally managed to do something about it.

I think it should be managed more like the Nelchina caribou heard (before it collapsed). If you hunt the subsistence in GMU 2, you cannot hunt caribou or moose anywhere else in the state.

I like that idea. As I said earlier in the thread they did it to themselves. I ride the ferry back to KTN every fall and there is always at least one truck with a dozen deer with legs hanging out everywhere. I have always felt it was a very bad optic. The ferry employees get to see it every day and they live on POW.

 

[z987k]

POW residents have long complained about people from Ketchikan coming over to hunt. Guess they finally managed to do something about it.

I think it should be managed more like the Nelchina caribou heard (before it collapsed). If you hunt the subsistence in GMU 2, you cannot hunt caribou or moose anywhere else in the state.

That should be the case of all subsistence permits.

 

[wildwilderness]

Special interests? Special like the residents of the area? What an awful thing to do, preserve the wildlife by limiting the non residents from killing all the deer in a given area....

Yeah, I am an Alaskan resident and it affects me too. And my unscientific biased opinion is that lots of "subsistence" want it for an easy hunt- as in; if I can't drive out on the road any given day and kill as many deer (or caribou or whatever) without have to "work" or actually "hunt" for the game then we better ban everyone else from coming here so its easier for me- attitude.

I'm for state control of the hunting, not the federal gov. and Subsistence Boards who don't answer to other Alaskan residents.

 

[kwackkillncrew]

POW residents have long complained about people from Ketchikan coming over to hunt. Guess they finally managed to do something about it.

I think it should be managed more like the Nelchina caribou heard (before it collapsed). If you hunt the subsistence in GMU 2, you cannot hunt caribou or moose anywhere else in the state.

seems like a good idea. if you are in such a hardship that you feel you (and your local friends) should be the only people that can hunt on public land in a certain area, then you should be restricted to that area. You are forcing other people to go else where for meat, why should you also be able to go else where and continue to compete with the same people you got booted from the public land you live by. next thing you know, they will try to get other big game species hunting shut down to non locals on the federal land down there.

 

[gbflyer]

Oh heck no you can be gone 6 months and still qualify for the perm fund. You can be gone longer and maintain residency as long as you “intend to return.”

I guess. I've never left for more than a couple weeks in 30 plus years. Really don't like it anywhere else.

 

[kwackkillncrew]

Oh heck no you can be gone 6 months and still qualify for the perm fund. You can be gone longer and maintain residency as long as you “intend to return.”

there is a proposal going through the state house which will align residency requirements with the PFD. So if it passes, which i hope it does, only way to get the benefit of resident hunting/fishing licenses is if you qualify for the PFD.