|
[ Return to Contents
| Post a Reply
| Post a new message
]
We agree
Posted by bushrat on Mar 03 2006
Mike,
First off I want to say that no matter whether or not I agree with what any AC proposes, I really do respect all the people who volunteer their time to become involved in the local Advisory Committee process. I think the fact you are involved is great, and I support your involvement whatever your take on certain things. And I support the ability of the ACs to "do research, get info, work with the state, and come up with proposals that benefit the people they represent." Well put. Just like I support free speech even though sometimes I don't agree with what's being said. Overall, it's good.
I think in the past what's been happening is that your posts, like this one... "I live in a town with 3 dead end roads. Each road is 80 miles long. I can stop just about anywhere on that road and dump off a 4 wheeler and go........well, at least if a river, mountain, heavy brush, ditch, swamp, or some other natural obstacle doesn't stop me. There are no regs currently preventing me, and 3000 or so other people from using off road vehicles here. Nobody even gives a concern about the anadromous fish worry. Despite this access, hunting is pretty good here."
Well, you give an impression that is totally opposite of what your own Northern Norton Sound Advisory Committee often says. Here's one of the proposals you and your AC ran by the Board (Proposal 18, Fall 2005
http://www.boards.adfg.state.ak.us/gameinfo/meetinfo/2005-2006/gprop1105body.pdf):
"ISSUE: Moose harvest allocation in Unit 22C---moose harvest quotas of Unit 22 have been drastically reduced in recent years resulting in the possibility of intensive management practices.
WHAT WILL HAPPEN IF NOTHING IS DONE? Alaskan residents will find it more difficult to harvest moose and subsistence needs will not be met.
WILL THE QUALITY OF THE RESOURCE HARVEST OR PRODUCTS PRODUCED BE IMPROVED? Residents will not have to compete with other hunters for a severely limited resource.
WHO IS LIKELY TO BENEFIT? Resident moose harvest may increase and nonresident hunters will not be led to believe there is a realistic possibility of a 50 inch bull."
And there it is right there, I think. You're telling people on a hunting forum visited by thousands that despite atv access in your area, despite the fact that 3000 other people aren't restricted in using atvs for hunting, that "hunting is pretty good here."
So if hunting is "pretty good" there, just why is the Advisory Committee you are a part of trying to eliminate the non-resident hunt in 22C? I just don't get why you would promote hunting in your own area when you know that it isn't in fact very good. Don't you think some hunter may read your posts, and will think, "Man, sounds pretty good over where Martentrapper lives, they can use four-wheelers to their heart's content, cross anadromous streams, nobody seems to really be too concerned about it...and the hunting is 'pretty good'...gee I think I'll go there."?
I agree, locals should get first shot when populations are low. I totally agree. Locals, residents, non-residents...in that order. That's the system we have set up in Alaska to insure the people who most "need" the resource are able to get it! Yet on this forum you have espoused that everyone should have equal opportunity to hunt, that to claim local preference is somehow a bad thing.
Put me in the category of guys Barron doesn't agree with. Please. (And no disrespect to you, Barron...I hear where you're coming from, respect your opinion, we just disagree) I'm just glad to know, Mike, that you and I are aren't so different as you've made us out to be. We're both just plain selfish...we both want us to have more opportunity than some guy living in Anchorage or Texas when the game densities are low. Why? Because contrary to what you've said all along about no one living a true subsistence lifestyle, including myself, you and your Advisory Committee, and the locals there who give you input, consider people living in Nome to be subsistence users who depend on moose to get through the winter. And thus, they are more dependant on the moose from THAT AREA than are hunters from Anchorage, or hunters from the lower-48. Just like I am more dependant on moose to get my family through the winter. Yeah, we CHOOSE to live here, as you've often told me. But that cuts all ways.
We finally totally agree.
Selah,
Mark
Previous: Example of good work by an ad comm martentrapper Mar 03 2006
Next: Yup, YUp, YUp Barron Mar 03 2006
 Message Thread:
|
