Board of Gaming the System: Managing Wildlife for the 1%

Before you dismiss this post as the opinion of a Bambi-loving extremest greenie,  just for the record I'm a multiple gun owner who has hunted caribou, moose, deer and various winged critters. I think that if you eat meat or wear any sort of animal product (including leather), it is nothing sort of hypocritical to be opposed to hunting.  Fine if you choose not to do so, but don't expect me to do the same.  I believe in the freedom of and from any sort of religion and that includes most any rigid political or social dogma.

There is a certain tragic beauty in the natural balance of nature. No matter if the predator is human or beast, hunting is essential to that balance.

On the Kenai right now there's an overpopulation of arctic hares and feral bunnies.  Besides making it darn near impossible to take your dog for a walk off-leash, there's plenty of snacks for predators - - especially lynx.  As this year's lynx have a feast, these well-fed cats will lose few of their own kind to starvation. Since more lynx will survive, there will be more offspring.  This trend will continue for a couple of years until enough fluffy bunnies have been consumed that there aren't enough of them to sustain the lynx. Some of these predators will begin to starve and the downward spiral begins again until there aren't enough lynx to keep the little hoppers from breeding, well, like rabbits. And the cycle goes on and on. 

That same pattern is part of the balance of predators and moose. Because moose breed, well, like moose, the cycle of feast and famine takes longer to phase through.

Humans are part of that natural cycle; we have been since we evolved. 

If there is something beyond nourishment, warmth and art that comes from harvesting wild game, it is the challenge of matching ones skills to the terrain, the weather, and the deadly smarts of our wolf and bear competitors.  Some years are lean for all involved. We humans have the luxury of stopping off at a store on the way home, so unsuccessful hunts don't thin our ranks.  If you haven't noticed, there's an overpopulation thing happening on the planet. With more people, there are more hunters and more of a demand for prey.  Not everyone will be successful. Get over it. Those who aren’t successful have a few options. They can keep at it and hone their skills and patience. They can find another hobby and in that way thin the ranks of human predators, or they can get appointed to the Board of Game and game the system, so that their big-game hunting guide cronies can bring in rich outside trophy hunters and guarantee them a kill.

That is the agenda of the Board of Game with their recent decisions to expedite aerial predator control on the Kenai and many other places around the state.

In making their decision about the Kenai, the BoG chose to ignore the 300+ moose killed in traffic collisions here.  Meat harvested from these accidents is eaten by Alaskans.  Although not hunted with a gun or bow, a dead and harvested moose is a dead and harvested moose.  When these moose are added to the numbers that hunters get, the yield for the Kenai is very plentiful.

The Rossi scandal is exposing the depths of how political cronyism coupled with blatant personal unethical practices have made Alaska wildlife management decisions become based on what is best for big game guides of rich outsiders.

Let’s begin with Ted Spraker, a central peninsula resident, former Fish and Game biologist and Safari Club member.  Ted admits that habitat is the most important factor when it comes to moose populations; in the log run, a habitat can only support so many moose.  In area 15A the moose population is slightly lower than the habitat can support, and in Area 15C there are slightly more than average as the habitat is much better there. Both well within what is normal for their different stages of habitat flux.  15A hasn’t had a major wildfire for decades and there just isn’t enough browse to support significantly more moose.

Despite Spraker’s awareness of this, he is looking for a short-term boost to the moose populations.  Why?  Well, the spin is that they want more moose meat on the table of Alaskans.  Ted knows that that the aerial hunting of predators will not significantly increase the success of Alaskan hunters. 

If there was a concern about the number of moose for ordinary Alaskans, how come the Board of Game has never considered reducing the number of rich Outside game and trophy hunters that guides bring in? Professional hunting guides do have skills and their clients are more successful than the average Alaskan.  And make no mistake, non-subsistence urban and Outside hunters take most of the game in any given management area.

There’s certainly a legitimate debate if subsistence users should have priority with hunting rights.  In my mind, they absolutely should.  In bush Alaska, the grocery store is nature.  In Kenai and Anchorage, we have Fred Meyers and Safeway. 

Preserving ones way of life is a legitimate consideration however, but ethical decisions must be made. I don’t understand the arrogance of thinking that someone who does not depend on hunting to survive should have as much access to the resource as someone whose life does.  Once subsistence needs are met and then if there is enough game left to satisfy recreational Alaskan hunters, only then you should you allow rich Outside sport and trophy hunters to get their trigger locks off.

Each and every current Board of Game member is tied in some way or another to big game hunting guides.  There is no balance on the board – each and every one was appointed by governors as a favor to the big game guide lobbyists.

The recent Corey Rossi scandal is exposing some of the arrogance that these political appointees practice.  While Rossi is not on the BoG, he was the director of the Alaska Division of Wildlife Conservation and just got busted for violating hunting rules and lying about it. In addition, Rossi and current BoG Chairman Cliff Judkins and then-Game Board member Bob Bell of Anchorage went on a subsistence musk ox hunt. Yeah, that’s right, none of these nimrods depend on musk ox to live, but they had a subsistence permit.  The permit rules state that you must destroy the  horns.  That rule is there to keep those just interested in a trophy from killing the animal under the guise of subsistence.  Well Judkins and crew tried to bully a lowly F&G biologist to make an exception for them. They wanted trophies.  The biologist refused to play along. They tried to use their power to break the rules. 

Rossi and his kind have abused their special perks of obtaining trophy permits by giving them to Outside hunting lobby groups such as the Sarfari Club to auction off for fund raisers for those organization.  More meat for rich outsiders, less for Alaskans. 

The BoG is about special privileges for guides,  the connected and the rich. 

The BoG took public input about introducing aerial predator control on the Kenai and a whopping 92% of the testimony was against the practice.  Yet the Board’s decision to expedite the slaughter  was unanimous. 

The BoG has an agenda that isn’t tied to facts, ethics, public opinion or sound wildlife management practices. Why does that seem acceptable to the Governor? Why is this OK?

Reason 738 why we’re SOL.

The Alaska Dispatch has had an excellent series of reports about these scandals.  I hope you are reading them:

Smart Alaska Game Board decisions drowned out by bad calls

New allegations surface against disgraced former Alaska wildlife chief

Alaska Board of Game shows affection for any predator control program

State is playing an unscientific game

And some related links:

Aerial control

Political science at Alaska Fish and Game

Rossi investigators examine signature of Kenai hunting guide

This is old, but still applies:

End Aerial Wolf Hunting

Read more here: http://www.adn.com/2012/01/19/2273061/rossi-investigators-question-signature.html#storylink=

A Not-So-Modest Proposal: Aerial Hunting of Commercial Fishermen

Overview of Relationships Between Commercial Fishermen, The Sport Fishing Industry, Dip-Netters, Mat-Su Politicians, and Salmon in Cook Inlet, Alaska

Relationships between large predators and their prey in Alaska are complex; it is possible to generalize about some situations, particularly in Cook Inlet. This information on the biology of salmon and the impact of commercial fishermen and the sport fishing industry represents highlights from 25 years of research and management programs. The recent introduction of dip-netters and politicians from the Mat-Su borough now is beginning to play a major role in allocation decisions.

In the coastal fisheries of Canada and Alaska, where commercial fishermen (either set netters or the drift fleet) are major predators of salmon, salmon returns typically remain well below levels that wealthy and influential individuals and wasteful personal use dip-netters would like to see. This occurs primarily because, together, set and drift fishermen, are efficient predators on salmon stocks, and kill many of the returning fish.

Commercial fishermen have been found to be very adaptable and within a few years, they recover from times of low fish returns. Despite relatively heavy regulation and operating costs over the last century in Alaska, commercial fishermen occur in nearly their entire traditional habitat throughout Cook Inlet.

Commercial fishermen are social animals that often live in large family groups. Depending upon the relationship of adult males and females, multiple births of potential commercial fishermen may occur. Most children born into a commercial fishing family themselves become commercial fishermen – especially in areas where salmon returns are abundant.

A solution to this problem can be found in Game Management Unit 20A where wolf control has been shown to be effective at maintaining high numbers of moose and high long-term harvests of moose. In Unit 20A, reduction of wolves by the introduction of aerial hunting has increased moose population density.

Based on this data, biologists expect that significant reductions in commercial fishermen (either drift or set net or both) will also lead to higher numbers of salmon for harvest.

The Alaska Department of Fish and Game, with the full support of Governor Sarah Palin has announced the introduction of aerial hunting of Cook Inlet commercial fisherman.

State officials stand by their scientific findings on predator control. "Several times over the past several years, our science has been challenged in court," says Bruce Bartley, a spokesman for the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. "In every instance it has prevailed. If shooting wolves from airplanes works, we expect similar results with shooting commercial fishermen.”

In 2007, Palin approved $400,000 to educate the public about the ecological success of shooting wolves and bears from the air. Some of the money went to create a pamphlet distributed in local newspapers, three weeks before the public was to vote on an initiative that would have curtailed aerial killing of wolves by private citizens. In her current fiscal-year budget, Palin included another $400,000 for a similar pamphlet defending the culling of commercial fishermen. Last year she introduced state legislation that would transfer authority over the program from the state Department of Fish and Game to Alaska's Board of Game, whose members are appointed by Palin.

Palin defended her actions: "Well, let's see. There's ― of course in the great history of Alaska there have been rulings that there's never going to be absolute consensus by every Alaskan, and there are those issues, again, the aerial hunting of commercial fishermen, where I believe are best held on a state level and addressed there. So, you know, going through the history of Alaska, there would be others. But our next-door neighbor is Cook Inlet. As commercial fishermen rear their nets into the water space of the United States of America, where-- where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just right there. It is-- from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on these very powerful predators. I'm like, OK, God, if there is an open airplane window for me somewhere, this is what I always pray, I'm like, don't let me miss the shot. Show me where the open shot is. Even if it's just cracked open a little bit, maybe I'll shoot through that and maybe prematurely pull the trigger through it, but don't let me miss a shot."

Bob Penney, co-founder and a current board member of the nonprofit Kenai River Sport Fishing Association has pledged part of the $4.7 million Congressional earmark his organization received from the Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund (Thanks Uncle Ted!) to promote aerial commercial fishermen hunting. He has proposed expanding the annual Kenai River Classic, a yearly sport fishing event comprising of some the most influential politicians, lobbyists and policy-makers to include a chance to participate in the aerial hunting.

Penny explained his position: “We tried to get the state to buy back commercial fishing permits, but the program would have been expensive and there was no guarantee that commercial fishermen would go along with it. Aerial hunting of commercial fishermen wouldn’t cost the state much money. Plenty of my rich friends would gladly pay for the opportunity to gun down these fish-killing predators. In fact, I’d be happy to offer a bounty for each commercial fisherman shot.

Mat-Su Assembly member Tom Kluberton chairs the Mat-Su Mayor's Blue Ribbon Sportsmen's Committee. "If this is not addressed before fishing season, the commercial fleet may reduce the number of fish escaping into the Susitna drainage to a level that will be devastating to Mat-Su families who rely on salmon for their table and to the guiding and fishing-related tourism industries in the area as well," Kluberton said.

Mat-Su Borough Manager John Duffy is making a plea for relief to state officials.

"We believe that any time the drift fleet is allowed to fish south of the Blanchard Line, the fish bound for the northern district get intercepted," Duffy said. "It would be more prudent to first allow the northern district residents to reach its escapement goals by shooting commercial fishermen."

Ricky Gease, executive director of KRSA, in an e-mail to the fish board claimed that security was an issue and that the board should consider meeting in Anchorage instead of Soldotna when they consider approving aerial hunting of commercial fishermen.

Mr. Gease stated, "At the 2000 meeting in Soldotna, members of the BOF, employees of ADF&G, and numerous members of the general public were threatened with acts of violence, some stretching to death threats ... the fact that the physical security of the public became an issue at this meeting shows that security was not adequately factored into the decision making process prior to the meeting ... Several members of our organization who live outside Soldotna question whether or not their physical security can be guaranteed if the meeting once again happens in Soldotna. We’d better pass this policy and get them before they get us."