No non-subsistence Alaskan Caribou or moose this fall in two units

[Panda Bear]

@wllm1313 The federal regs would apply, but are the same more or less. You are right it is comical, as is the double standard. The amount of wasted and rotting meat hanging in villages is sickening, all while the locals fret about wasted meat by the non-locals. The state and feds have no clue how many caribou are actually killed, many are no even reported and there is little to no enforcement.

They are being typical hunters. Always looking out for themselves first and everyone else second. Its no different than residents not wanting NR to have the ability to hunt in their state with the same privileges. This just happens to be resident "locals" against everyone else. The claim that non-locals are having any more impact than "locals" with big snow machines and AR15's gunning them down by the dozens is funny. Most non-subsistence hunting happens 100 miles from the nearest town, while the later is mostly regulated to the rivers and closer to town after freeze up. They claim that those far off hunts earlier in the fall affecting their hunts closer to town. I mean it couldn't be that caribou, the most unpredictable animal on the planet, are just going somewhere else to avoid the local hunters. The local hunters today number about 2x what they did 50 years ago as well. They will claim that oral history says this or that rather than science and actual facts that can be backed up.

Moose are not even native to that part of the state in modern history, so claiming subsistence for them is funny. 100 years ago there was virtually no mose north of the Koyukuk River (south slope of the Brooks). The moose in unit 23 have only really been around for the last 40-50 years.

Some have asked and I am not from the Yukon in Alaska, so I have no say, but the above post as well as several others have made excellent points.

IMHO, they are cutting off their nose to spite their face, and will regret this, if it happens. A lot of revenue that comes to an area and community will be lost.

There is another thread on the forum about this and yes we are allowed to harvest caribou and moose when they are in the water. No we are not allowed to waste any of the animal and dont.

From afar--I believe it is a power grab they will regret. Does anyone know what their real end game is. I can not believe what I am reading is the reason, as Bambistew and others have stated, it makes no sense on several levels.

You mention moose not being around that long, we have the same situation with Elk. when someone say's "our forefathers" in relation to Elk, I always say--oh please, get real.

Best of luck on this fellows

 

[Bambistew]

IMHO, they are cutting off their nose to spite their face, and will regret this, if it happens. A lot of revenue that comes to an area and community will be lost.

You bring up a point. The local communities do not rely on outside money generated from hunting, at least not in any meaningful amount outside Kotzebue. A few transporters live there, a couple guides, but that's about it. Most that don't live in the area, they just move in for a month or two and leave. Hunters spend little to no money in the villages outside a night in a hotel, maybe and a few snacks in Kotz. Most come in and leave the same day.

The subsistence lifestyle is not sustainable on a large scale without money from the feds/state. End of story. They can pretend that they survive off the land, but they don't do any more than live in paid for housing, using paid for utilities, eating food paid for by the government, using health care paid for by the state and feds... all while eating the meat and a few berries they harvest themselves each year. That is the current definition of a subsistence lifestyle for many. The state pays for the schools, infrastructure, airports, etc. The native corps pay a little, and they get a big chunk of money from Red Dog mine via extortion taxes. The regional native corp owns half the mine as well with profits split amongst all native corps. Some of the villages have unemployment in the 60% range or more. There are villages that literally have 3-5 jobs outside the school and post office. Red Dog mine employs by far the majority of people in the region. I'm not sure how long we can continue to support something that is unsustainable. What happens when the mine closes? I understand the reluctance to change, but the reliance on a handout for generation after generation is not good for anyone. Having access to a secure food source is a long ways down the list of fixing the issues with living a subsistence lifestyle.

The reason they are pushing for this is because they can. The locals cite anecdotal evidence as fact, and it has more sway with the appointed board than scientific evidence. The Alaska Department of Fish and Game has come out time and time again against these type of closures because they have no science behind them. The state is against it. They are 100% motivated by want.

These areas were closed in 2016. It would be interesting to see how much the harvest rate increased in that year of closure... oh wait, they don't have accurate information on harvest because many are not reported.

The same groups were behind the push to close caribou to hunting by unguided NR a couple years ago in the central Brooks. Its all a power struggle to see who can control the harvest.

The closure we have seen in unit 13 just north of Anchorage here, has been a total cluster. The premise was for "safety" to eliminate non-subsistence users from a good size swath of area that was popular for hunting. They took all those people and crammed them into an even smaller area, and safety is a very real concern now. Where as previously it was just... anecdotal. I drove through the new congested area last fall in unit 13, and it was scary to see so many people literally on top of each other 100s of yards appart at most, shooting at caribou running in 10 different directions. In a 5 miles stretch I'll bet we saw 120-150 hunters, easily.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

You bring up a point. The local communities do not rely on outside money generated from hunting, at least not in any meaningful amount outside Kotzebue. A few transporters live there, a couple guides, but that's about it. Most that don't live in the area, they just move in for a month or two and leave. Hunters spend little to no money in the villages outside a night in a hotel, maybe and a few snacks in Kotz. Most come in and leave the same day.

The subsistence lifestyle is not sustainable on a large scale without money from the feds/state. End of story. They can pretend that they survive off the land, but they don't do any more than live in paid for housing, using paid for utilities, eating food paid for by the government, using health care paid for by the state and feds... all while eating the meat and a few berries they harvest themselves each year. That is the current definition of a subsistence lifestyle for many. The state pays for the schools, infrastructure, airports, etc. The native corps pay a little, and they get a big chunk of money from Red Dog mine via extortion taxes. The regional native corp owns half the mine as well with profits split amongst all native corps. Some of the villages have unemployment in the 60% range or more. There are villages that literally have 3-5 jobs outside the school and post office. Red Dog mine employs by far the majority of people in the region. I'm not sure how long we can continue to support something that is unsustainable. What happens when the mine closes? I understand the reluctance to change, but the reliance on a handout for generation after generation is not good for anyone. Having access to a secure food source is a long ways down the list of fixing the issues with living a subsistence lifestyle.

The reason they are pushing for this is because they can. The locals cite anecdotal evidence as fact, and it has more sway with the appointed board than scientific evidence. The Alaska Department of Fish and Game has come out time and time again against these type of closures because they have no science behind them. The state is against it. They are 100% motivated by want.

These areas were closed in 2016. It would be interesting to see how much the harvest rate increased in that year of closure... oh wait, they don't have accurate information on harvest because many are not reported.

The same groups were behind the push to close caribou to hunting by unguided NR a couple years ago in the central Brooks. Its all a power struggle to see who can control the harvest.

The closure we have seen in unit 13 just north of Anchorage here, has been a total cluster. The premise was for "safety" to eliminate non-subsistence users from a good size swath of area that was popular for hunting. They took all those people and crammed them into an even smaller area, and safety is a very real concern now. Where as previously it was just... anecdotal. I drove through the new congested area last fall in unit 13, and it was scary to see so many people literally on top of each other 100s of yards appart at most, shooting at caribou running in 10 different directions. In a 5 miles stretch I'll bet we saw 120-150 hunters, easily.

What kind of distance are Subsistence hunters actually going? There are a ton of areas in those units that are well over 100 air miles from a village.

 

[Bambistew]

What kind of distance are Subsistence hunters actually going? There are a ton of areas in those units that are well over 100 air miles from a village.

They can go a long ways in a boat, but most don't get too far up. Some will travel 100 to 150 miles, but most are in the 50 mile range. Once freeze up they will travel a long ways out. This is when the majority of animals are killed, after all most all non-locals are long gone.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

They can go a long ways in a boat, but most don't get too far up. Some will travel 100 to 150 miles, but most are in the 50 mile range. Once freeze up they will travel a long ways out. This is when the majority of animals are killed, after all most all non-locals are long gone.

The numbers are just staggering...

Area = Size of Wyoming
Herd = Size of COs elk herd
Non-qualified hunters = 250 (CO had 312 Bighorn sheep hunters last year)

 

[Glockster]

Looks like public comment is now being accepted.

Public comment opportunity announced for Temporary Wildlife Special Action Request WSA21-01 (Units 23 and 26A caribou and moose)
Due to a high level of public interest in a temporary special action request submitted to the Federal Subsistence Board, there will be an opportunity to submit written comments on this request during a five-day comment period (April 16-20, 2021), in addition to an already-scheduled public hearing.

Public comment opportunity announced for Temporary Wildlife Special Action Request WSA21-01 (Units 23 and 26A caribou and moose) | U.S. Department of the Interior

Due to a high level of public interest in a temporary special action request submitted to the Federal Subsistence Board, there will be an opportunity to submit written comments on this request during a five-day comment period (April 16-20, 2021), in addition to an already-scheduled public hearing.

www.doi.gov

 

[ThunderNocked]

Thats awesome - I know I'm seeing this issue pop up a lot so that is good that they are getting this much of a response to open this!

 

[timberman56]

You bring up a point. The local communities do not rely on outside money generated from hunting, at least not in any meaningful amount outside Kotzebue. A few transporters live there, a couple guides, but that's about it. Most that don't live in the area, they just move in for a month or two and leave. Hunters spend little to no money in the villages outside a night in a hotel, maybe and a few snacks in Kotz. Most come in and leave the same day.

The subsistence lifestyle is not sustainable on a large scale without money from the feds/state. End of story. They can pretend that they survive off the land, but they don't do any more than live in paid for housing, using paid for utilities, eating food paid for by the government, using health care paid for by the state and feds... all while eating the meat and a few berries they harvest themselves each year. That is the current definition of a subsistence lifestyle for many. The state pays for the schools, infrastructure, airports, etc. The native corps pay a little, and they get a big chunk of money from Red Dog mine via extortion taxes. The regional native corp owns half the mine as well with profits split amongst all native corps. Some of the villages have unemployment in the 60% range or more. There are villages that literally have 3-5 jobs outside the school and post office. Red Dog mine employs by far the majority of people in the region. I'm not sure how long we can continue to support something that is unsustainable. What happens when the mine closes? I understand the reluctance to change, but the reliance on a handout for generation after generation is not good for anyone. Having access to a secure food source is a long ways down the list of fixing the issues with living a subsistence lifestyle.

The reason they are pushing for this is because they can. The locals cite anecdotal evidence as fact, and it has more sway with the appointed board than scientific evidence. The Alaska Department of Fish and Game has come out time and time again against these type of closures because they have no science behind them. The state is against it. They are 100% motivated by want.

These areas were closed in 2016. It would be interesting to see how much the harvest rate increased in that year of closure... oh wait, they don't have accurate information on harvest because many are not reported.

The same groups were behind the push to close caribou to hunting by unguided NR a couple years ago in the central Brooks. Its all a power struggle to see who can control the harvest.

The closure we have seen in unit 13 just north of Anchorage here, has been a total cluster. The premise was for "safety" to eliminate non-subsistence users from a good size swath of area that was popular for hunting. They took all those people and crammed them into an even smaller area, and safety is a very real concern now. Where as previously it was just... anecdotal. I drove through the new congested area last fall in unit 13, and it was scary to see so many people literally on top of each other 100s of yards appart at most, shooting at caribou running in 10 different directions. In a 5 miles stretch I'll bet we saw 120-150 hunters, easily.

this guy gets it.. 3 friends and I did a fly-in caribou hunt outa Kotz 7-8 yrs ago just before one of the shutdowns. had a great hunt, saw 50-150 bou every day- we were 100+ mi N of Kotz in Arctic circle. Its a power struggle and the "natives" have mega clout, just keep pushing all they can. death by 1,000 cuts. natives sucking on the gov. tit as stated above. city of Kotz was doing a lot of construction when we were there-urban renewal type thing. I talked with couple of contractors by the waterfront one afternoon. they were all from lower 48- said they could not hire anyone local because they had all their bills paid by big gov and too sorry to work. Lots of that going on all over the country now seems like

 

[AlaskaHunter]

Ironically of the 3 caribou herds in 26a, the Teshekpuk herd has by far the highest percentage harvest for subsistence.

The Teshekpuk Lake area is surrounded by state owned land, so if federal lands are closed, with increased harvest and
hunting pressure on these state lands, Utqiagvik, Nuiqsut, Atqasuk villages could be impacted in terms of conflicts.

 

[Randi]

You bring up a point. The local communities do not rely on outside money generated from hunting, at least not in any meaningful amount outside Kotzebue. A few transporters live there, a couple guides, but that's about it. Most that don't live in the area, they just move in for a month or two and leave. Hunters spend little to no money in the villages outside a night in a hotel, maybe and a few snacks in Kotz. Most come in and leave the same day.

The subsistence lifestyle is not sustainable on a large scale without money from the feds/state. End of story. They can pretend that they survive off the land, but they don't do any more than live in paid for housing, using paid for utilities, eating food paid for by the government, using health care paid for by the state and feds... all while eating the meat and a few berries they harvest themselves each year. That is the current definition of a subsistence lifestyle for many. The state pays for the schools, infrastructure, airports, etc. The native corps pay a little, and they get a big chunk of money from Red Dog mine via extortion taxes. The regional native corp owns half the mine as well with profits split amongst all native corps. Some of the villages have unemployment in the 60% range or more. There are villages that literally have 3-5 jobs outside the school and post office. Red Dog mine employs by far the majority of people in the region. I'm not sure how long we can continue to support something that is unsustainable. What happens when the mine closes? I understand the reluctance to change, but the reliance on a handout for generation after generation is not good for anyone. Having access to a secure food source is a long ways down the list of fixing the issues with living a subsistence lifestyle.

The reason they are pushing for this is because they can. The locals cite anecdotal evidence as fact, and it has more sway with the appointed board than scientific evidence. The Alaska Department of Fish and Game has come out time and time again against these type of closures because they have no science behind them. The state is against it. They are 100% motivated by want.

These areas were closed in 2016. It would be interesting to see how much the harvest rate increased in that year of closure... oh wait, they don't have accurate information on harvest because many are not reported.

The same groups were behind the push to close caribou to hunting by unguided NR a couple years ago in the central Brooks. Its all a power struggle to see who can control the harvest.

The closure we have seen in unit 13 just north of Anchorage here, has been a total cluster. The premise was for "safety" to eliminate non-subsistence users from a good size swath of area that was popular for hunting. They took all those people and crammed them into an even smaller area, and safety is a very real concern now. Where as previously it was just... anecdotal. I drove through the new congested area last fall in unit 13, and it was scary to see so many people literally on top of each other 100s of yards appart at most, shooting at caribou running in 10 different directions. In a 5 miles stretch I'll bet we saw 120-150 hunters, easily.

Excellent points. This is without a doubt a selfish power grab that makes no sense whatsoever. Excellent points in both your posts. Caribou move, these people live 90% off of us--( government, which we fund ), " They are 100% motivated by want"--you are 100% correct !

 

[mdhunter61]

Looks like public comment is now being accepted.

Public comment opportunity announced for Temporary Wildlife Special Action Request WSA21-01 (Units 23 and 26A caribou and moose)
Due to a high level of public interest in a temporary special action request submitted to the Federal Subsistence Board, there will be an opportunity to submit written comments on this request during a five-day comment period (April 16-20, 2021), in addition to an already-scheduled public hearing.

Public comment opportunity announced for Temporary Wildlife Special Action Request WSA21-01 (Units 23 and 26A caribou and moose) | U.S. Department of the Interior

Due to a high level of public interest in a temporary special action request submitted to the Federal Subsistence Board, there will be an opportunity to submit written comments on this request during a five-day comment period (April 16-20, 2021), in addition to an already-scheduled public hearing.

www.doi.gov

Thanks for posting this. Sent my email in this morning. For those who are limited on time or shy with the pen, here is a rough template that could be copy/pasted and sent from your email address. Please be sure to include your full name and home address on the end of the email...


I strongly oppose the Advisory Council's proposal to close Units 23 & 26A from August 1 thru September 30 to those who are not federally qualified subsistence hunters. Even the Alaska Department of Fish and Game does not support this proposal.

The proposal has neither scientific merit nor field observational support. The Western Arctic Herd is above management objectives, and the harvest of animals by nonlocal residents/nonresidents represents an extremely small fraction of the total harvest each year from those Game Management Units.

80% of the lands in Unit 23 and 26A are federal lands. This proposal is a selfish insult to those of us who pay our federal taxes every year. To limit and restrict the American citizens who can enjoy this resource in the manner currently proposed is both arbitrary and capricious.



Sincerely,

 

[AlaskaHunter]

I assume after the Sturgeon vs Frost Supreme Court ruling, planes could drop hunters off on navigable waters and the feds do not have control of these waters?

If the proposal was implemented, would this likely increase conflict between boat-based subsistence hunters and non-subsistence hunters on navigable waterways within federal lands?

 

[idahohuntr]

The recommendation in the analysis is to only close moose hunting in GMU 23 to non-subsistence hunters (for conservation reasons). This would leave Carbiou hunting as is in both 23 and 26...and also no change to moose hunting in 26. Hopefully this recommendation holds...the analysis seems solid.

https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/wsa21-01-fsb_0.pdf

 

[lynlan1819]

The little bit of talk that I've read is hearsay so take a HUGE grain of salt but it sounds like the tribes are using their subsistence claims to control/prevent non-resident hunters which seems weird if these communities rely on outside $ to boost the economy. I started skimming the records for more information and see there are claims of meat wasted that is being blamed on non-resident hunters. That's enough to piss a guy off but nobody could substantiate the claims in previous attempts to limit hunting. There were also claims of COVID stuff. I need to hear more on what's going on.

https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/region-8-3-nov-2020.pdf

Tribes get first pick,as it should be since they are native and live there.