Alaska Wildlife, Guides, Airtaxi's

I am just a fat old Alaskan resident with a cub that likes to take my kids on scenic flights, hunting, fishing and wild life viewing. Alaska is a fantastic place to fly, fish, explore and hunt. A piper cub or husky is king of the bush and gives you access to incredible remote places not accessible any other way.
Having lived full time in Alaska for 30 years (now a snow bird) and being a former air taxi owner, and a retired Alaska big game guide (master guide #110) I have no vested interest for the following comments
It is about the same difficulty to become a pilot and air taxi operator as it is to become an Alaska Registered Big Game Guide/outfitter. In my experience it takes about the same effort. Most successful Alaskan guides/outfitters own a PA-18 with big tires or floats. Most Guides, airtaxi pilots and for that matter private alaska pilots become good cub pilots or they do not survive..
There are too many bad hunting guides in Alaska. Most are not licensed. But there is a small percentage of bad licensed guides that give the rest a bad name. We need to get rid of them but as in any profession or avocation it is hard to weed out the bad ones.
Fish & Game Troopers do an admirable job but with over 44,000 miles of coast line and 375,000,000 acres to patrol they can not catch all the violators.
There is also the same percentage of bad air taxis operators dropping off way to many hunters and destroying our wildlife resource.
Alaska is divided into 26 game management units and each unit is divided into several subunits. Each Alaska Big Game Guides is limited to a total of only 3 subunits that they can take clients into.
Every Air Taxi can drop off as many hunters as they want any where in the state.
The average guide/outfitter takes less than a dozen clients a year a large guide/outfitter may take 30-40 clients a year.
There are lots of air taxis that take over a hundred hunters a year and large ones take over 400 a year. they just move elsewhere after they wipe out the area.
It always looks like a guide has more presence than a air taxi because he or she is required to stay with the clients so a guides plane or planes are in the field. The Air taxi just drops off and returns to the home base in the city or village.
If you add all the bad guides together they do far less damage to the wildlife resource than just one or 2 of the bad airtaxi’s can do in a single season. Guides have a lot of restrictions the Air Taxi’s need similar restrictions placed on them. It is the unregulated airtaxi’s that are destroying our precious wildlife resource more than any thing else
The air taxi has the ability to rape and pillage the wild life resource. Most air taxis do not do this but the few that do do it legally. By the time fish and game can react to the problem the game is gone and the unethical air taxi has already moved some where else and starting to repeat the cycle.


Jerry Jacques

There are too many variables in your question. I know some really good air taxi operations and I know of some really good guides. I know of some really poor air taxis and I know of some really poor guides. Its called buyer beware if you chose any one of them. Me, I own my own Cub and I go wherever I want to go. Solves the problem. I have had people come up to me in Fairbanks and say, "Don. This and that guy are really good with a Cub and they are so much better than you. He has Blah blah blah hours and experience and he has done it all." I just smile and say, "Thats nice." Several of their expert Cub drivers and guides and air taxi brag about buddies are DEAD. I am still flying. So I will just do my ole style safe flying habits and keep enjoying the fishing and hunting. Maybe one of these days I will be a good Cub pilot.

Jerry,
Just a dumb question, but doesn't Alaska F&W have the responsibility to control how many animals are taken by the number and type of hunting tags they issue in each area? Why blame it on the air taxis - or any other form of transportation for that matter?

I have never hunted in Alaska, so I don't know (but my dad was a big time hunter when we lived up there). But at least that's the way it works here on the east coast of the lower-48.

My concern is that if you start limiting where air taxis can go, that's just another opening for the people who want to shut down public access to all public lands. For any reason.

Jerry,

I'll start off by saying that I don't have any connection to an air taxi. I don't own one, I don't fly for one. I fly boxes, so I don't really have a vested interest either. That said, I think that you're barking up the wrong tree. If there is a problem with too many hunters, the problem is the hunters, not the method of transportation. That's what an Air Taxi provides, transportation. Blaming an air taxi for over-hunting is a little like blaming the airlines for crowding at Disney Land, or blaming car manufactureers for drive-by shootings. The air taxi is just providing transportation to resident hunters who have the legal right to hunt there. If an area is being over hunted then regulate the hunters, place more restrictions on the number of hunters allowed to hunt an area via permits, lotteries etc. If for no other reason, it going to be a lot more practical to regulate the hunters. It's one thing to expect a guide to give consideration to the future of the game in an area, he's directly involved in the taking of that game and indeed has a vested interest in preserving that game. An air taxi is a different animal, an air taxi transports people to their requested destination. What those people do at those destinations isn't something the air taxi operator is in the business of dictating. I don't use air taxis, as I'm able to transport myself where I need to go, but if I went to air taxi X and requested to be flown to Lake Y, and the operator told me he wasn't going to do it, because in his opinion there had been too many hunters there already that season, I'd say that it was none of his business, I came to him for transportation, not game management advice.

I think that it comes down to perspective. I look at an over-hunted area and I see too many hunters than want to hunt there and can afford the charter, you look at that same area and see air taxis creating the problem by bringing too many hunters. In a sense, I can understand that view, as the air taxi is much more visible and identifiable, while the individual hunters are anonymous and numerous. It human nature to associate the problem with the more identifiable entity, but I don't believe that it's accurate.

Consider these 3 scenarios, all regarding the same hunting area:

1) A single 135 operator brings in 50 hunting parties in a season and the hunting is ruined.

2) 25 different 135 operators each bring in 2 hunting parties in a season and the hunting is ruined.

3) 50 hunting parties fly themselves to that area in privately owned airplanes in a single season, and the hunting is ruined.

What is the common denominator? 50 hunting parties, which ruined the hunting. Not one air taxi, not 25 air taxis, not the private planes. It was too many hunters. Regulate them.

One thing to add. I said that it would be more practical to regulate the hunters than the air taxis, but I didn't explain. Here's why:

Game is regulated by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Hunters (and guides) are already under the jurisdiction of ADFG. Air Taxi operators are not. In order to regulate hunting through Air Taxi operators, you would have to bring the air taxi operators under the jurisdiction of ADFG, which might be difficult if not impossible. There is federal preemption to deal with. You might be able to get around that, but the court challenges and lawyer battle might go on for a long time.

It's one thing for the state to require survival gear in airplanes, it would be a whole different ball of wax to for the state to establish an entire new set of regulations dictating to federally regulated carriers who they can carry, when, how often, and for what purpose. From a purely pragmatic standpoint, it would be a quagmire. Regulate the hunters, who are already regulated under AFDG

What we need is...........................................................





What? are you talking about? :-?

Good Grief!!

Christina--the State Troopers have nothing to do with setting seasons and bag limits, although they do sometimes provide input to the Boards.

aalexander--Alaska Department of Fish and Game does NOT set seasons, bag limits or manage game. They provide input to the BOARDS of Game and Fisheries. The Boards are the entities which set seasons, bag limits, etc. And, believe me, the Boards often completely ignore what ADFG and AST recommend to them.

None of this is anywhere as simplistic as posters have made out, by any means.

Kodiak brown bear is an example of a sustainable yield program, with good harvests, guides hunting, residents hunting, very little crowding, etc. That system was a federal system that the State took over (reluctantly) at statehood. The State didn't like it for a long time. At the time (eighties) when everyone finally woke up and realized that brown bears on the Alaska Peninsula were declining, and something needed to be done, the State was still pissed about 17d2 and wouldn't even consider a permit system "like that federal system we got forced to accept on Kodiak". So, they went to an every other year system of hunting there. The bear season is only open every other year on the Peninsula. The Boards' logic was that "opportunity" is more important than the "quality" of the experience.

They said that they'd rather every resident had the opportunity to go hunt bears on the Peninsula, than that a certain number of permit holders would have a better quality experience.

This forces everyone, including the guides to jam as much into one year as they can.

There is what amounts to a "private hunting preserve" on the Koyukuk River, in an area that argueably has the densest population of moose on the planet. But, you can't fly in to hunt there. You have to travel to either Galena or Huslia and hunt by boat. So, every moose that gets killed is within a few hundred yards of the river. ALL the hunting pressure (and there's a lot) is right on the river. There are half a dozen different permits there as well, some where you have to destroy the trophy value of the antlers, some you can keep the anlters, etc.

This all came about because a powerful member of the Board of Game was from there.

Now, if they allowed a little access by air, it would distribute the hunting pressure more, but that would allow "outsiders" to hunt on State and Federal lands. Heaven forbid those "outsiders" from Fairbanks or Anchorage be able to kill a moose there after having flown in.

Oh, yeah--there's the little issue of State land, Federal land, and Native land.

The whole thing is a huge can of worms, and is not nearly as simplistic as portrayed by Jerry's post.

Game and Fish management in Alaska is, and has always been, a VERY politically charged issue, and sometimes it has not had much to do with the best interest of the critters or the citizens who want to hunt them.


MTV

mvivion said:

Good Grief!!

Christina--the State Troopers have nothing to do with setting seasons and bag limits, although they do sometimes provide input to the Boards.

aalexander--Alaska Department of Fish and Game does NOT set seasons, bag limits or manage game. They provide input to the BOARDS of Game and Fisheries. The Boards are the entities which set seasons, bag limits, etc. And, believe me, the Boards often completely ignore what ADFG and AST recommend to them.

None of this is anywhere as simplistic as posters have made out, by any means.

Kodiak brown bear is an example of a sustainable yield program, with good harvests, guides hunting, residents hunting, very little crowding, etc. That system was a federal system that the State took over (reluctantly) at statehood. The State didn't like it for a long time. At the time (eighties) when everyone finally woke up and realized that brown bears on the Alaska Peninsula were declining, and something needed to be done, the State was still pissed about 17d2 and wouldn't even consider a permit system "like that federal system we got forced to accept on Kodiak". So, they went to an every other year system of hunting there. The bear season is only open every other year on the Peninsula. The Boards' logic was that "opportunity" is more important than the "quality" of the experience.

They said that they'd rather every resident had the opportunity to go hunt bears on the Peninsula, than that a certain number of permit holders would have a better quality experience.

This forces everyone, including the guides to jam as much into one year as they can.

There is what amounts to a "private hunting preserve" on the Koyukuk River, in an area that argueably has the densest population of moose on the planet. But, you can't fly in to hunt there. You have to travel to either Galena or Huslia and hunt by boat. So, every moose that gets killed is within a few hundred yards of the river. ALL the hunting pressure (and there's a lot) is right on the river. There are half a dozen different permits there as well, some where you have to destroy the trophy value of the antlers, some you can keep the anlters, etc.

This all came about because a powerful member of the Board of Game was from there.

Now, if they allowed a little access by air, it would distribute the hunting pressure more, but that would allow "outsiders" to hunt on State and Federal lands. Heaven forbid those "outsiders" from Fairbanks or Anchorage be able to kill a moose there after having flown in.

Oh, yeah--there's the little issue of State land, Federal land, and Native land.

The whole thing is a huge can of worms, and is not nearly as simplistic as portrayed by Jerry's post.

Game and Fish management in Alaska is, and has always been, a VERY politically charged issue, and sometimes it has not had much to do with the best interest of the critters or the citizens who want to hunt them.


MTV

Click to expand...

Isn't that what I said Mike! ????????????????????????????

mvivion said:

Good Grief!!

Christina--the State Troopers have nothing to do with setting seasons and bag limits, although they do sometimes provide input to the Boards.

Click to expand...

I don't believe that I mentioned state troopers anywhere in my post above. I have absolutely no idea where you got that from.

Oh, yeah--there's the little issue of State land, Federal land, and Native land.

The whole thing is a huge can of worms, and is not nearly as simplistic as portrayed by Jerry's post.

Game and Fish management in Alaska is, and has always been, a VERY politically charged issue, and sometimes it has not had much to do with the best interest of the critters or the citizens who want to hunt them.

Click to expand...

I had a conversation with a hunting guide/air taxi operator about my perception that the resource was being hammered (like caribou near Iliamna) by drop off hunters. I said there must be something the Game Board can do.

His response, which supports what Mike V just said, was that this situation isn't something that the Game Board can really deal with. It is something that "fixes itself." His theory is that Alaska is very large, and the game regs would be larger than the New York City phone book to try to address every specific spot and issue. Further, the Game Board likely wouldn't get it right.

My friend says that it fixes itself as follows. For example, the caribou herd growns near Iliamna. The air taxi operators drop off more and more hunters, and quality of the hunting goes down. Hunters wise up and stop coming to hunt. The hunting activity shrinks. The air taxi drop off (or guided hunting) activity shrinks.

After some time, the herd rebounds. Then the whole cycle repeats. He gave me other examples where the same thing happened in other parts of the state.

I have only lived in Alaska for five years, so I don't have enough history to know whether his explanation makes sense?

George

PS: The other thing that he and others have said, is that you need to be able to fly a Cub or Husky on Bushwheels into hairball strips if you want to have a chance at success. If an Otter on floats can get in, so can unlimited hunters. If only a good stick in a two seat plane can get in, and there is a chance of wrecking, it cuts down on the traffic. And if you are willing to hike from there, so much the better. Despite being a helicopter pilot, I am glad that helicopters are forbidden for hunting in Alaska.

Christina Young said:

I don't believe that I mentioned state troopers anywhere in my post above. I have absolutely no idea where you got that from.

Click to expand...

Christina, we both mentioned ADFG, which is a branch of the troopers. As Mike pointed out, they don't determine the game regulations, they enforce them.



Mike, you're right, I don't know what I was thinking, anyway substitute in "Board of Game" wherever I said ADFG, and the principle remains the same. I do realize that the regulatory process is very political, and I wasn't trying to trivialize that. My point was that *if* there is a problem, and *if* the problem is to be addressed by regulation aimed at limiting hunting pressure in an area, the target of that pressure should logically be the hunters themselves, not thier method of transportation.

I don't disagree with you that any attempt would be a can of worms, I'm just saying the can would be a lot smaller if you were trying to regulate the hunters, rather the to extend the regulation to dictate what the air taxis were doing in order to limit the hunters. Maybe I didn't make that point very clearly.

Air taxi's can operate as outfiters with few restrictions

Air Taxi's are operating as outfitters with few restrictions on them is one of the problems.

I admit my first post was over simplified and I also agree with aalexander that it is the amount of hunters that will need to be controlled not the form of transportation. But please do not ever assume that the airtaxi's are providing transportation to resident hunters. if that was all it would not be a problem. Many air taxis advertise outside of AK and are acting as outfitters to non residents. That can bring the number of hunters coming into a area way above what it can support.

Thankfully most of Alaska is not on a permit system. It will be some day but I want to avoid it as long as possible

Fish and game counts game from time to time in each subunit the results of the game counts lets the biologists determine how many animals may be harvested then make recommendations then the game board sets the regulations and controls the number of animals harvested by adjusting the length of the hunting season in that subunit. In remote places it may be many years between game counts.

This system has worked for a long time in Alaska but now we have many more hunters competing for the limited wildlife resource

The rub with air taxi’s being unregulated as to the amount of hunters they can take they have the ability to devastate a given area and can do it legally. By the time fish and game can react do a game count and make recommendations to shorten or even close the season it is too late the damage has already been done and the air taxi just moves to a new spot..

One air taxi owner that I know is a smart business man he has built up a successful business. He has 2 turbine otters, 2 beavers and 2 supercubs. 70% of his business is flying hunters and fishermen. The moose population has drastically decline close to his home so he just continues to fly father and farther away.
.
Just one instance last year this air taxi flew an otter 400 miles. in 10 days drooped off 26 hunters into a valley 7 miles wide and 15 miles long. These hunters did not ask to go to this valley they asked to go moose hunting and most had no clue to where they were going before the airtaxi took them to the valley. 26 moose hunters in a 100 square miles. It does not take rocket sciences to figure out what happened in this valley in just 10 days. This is just one valley. Many other valleys suffered the same fate by this same air taxi...


My opinion is we should limit air taxis to a max of 3 game management units that they can take hunters into. And if a air taxi is operating as outfitters hold them responsible for what their clients do. This is the same kind of regulation that the guides are under.

I am just a resident with a cub now. I hope not to have deal with a permit system for all Aalaska hunting in the future. As a former guide and air taxi owner I see the biggest threat to our game is the growing number of hunters the second is the lack of regulations on the air taxi's as they have the ability to take unlimited hunters into the field with out regulations.

Re: Air taxi's can operate as outfiters with few restriction

Talkeetnaairtaxi said:

Air Taxi's are operating as outfitters with few restrictions on them is one of the problems.

I admit my first post was over simplified and I also agree with aalexander that it is the amount of hunters that will need to be controlled not the form of transportation. But please do not ever assume that the airtaxi's are providing transportation to resident hunters. if that was all it would not be a problem. Many air taxis advertise outside of AK and are acting as outfitters to non residents. That can bring the number of hunters coming into a area way above what it can support.

Thankfully most of Alaska is not on a permit system. It will be some day but I want to avoid it as long as possible

Fish and game counts game from time to time in each subunit the results of the game counts lets the biologists determine how many animals may be harvested then make recommendations then the game board sets the regulations and controls the number of animals harvested by adjusting the length of the hunting season in that subunit. In remote places it may be many years between game counts.

This system has worked for a long time in Alaska but now we have many more hunters competing for the limited wildlife resource

The rub with air taxi’s being unregulated as to the amount of hunters they can take they have the ability to devastate a given area and can do it legally. By the time fish and game can react do a game count and make recommendations to shorten or even close the season it is too late the damage has already been done and the air taxi just moves to a new spot..

One air taxi owner that I know is a smart business man he has built up a successful business. He has 2 turbine otters, 2 beavers and 2 supercubs. 70% of his business is flying hunters and fishermen. The moose population has drastically decline close to his home so he just continues to fly father and farther away.
.
Just one instance last year this air taxi flew an otter 400 miles. in 10 days drooped off 26 hunters into a valley 7 miles wide and 15 miles long. These hunters did not ask to go to this valley they asked to go moose hunting and most had no clue to where they were going before the airtaxi took them to the valley. 26 moose hunters in a 100 square miles. It does not take rocket sciences to figure out what happened in this valley in just 10 days. This is just one valley. Many other valleys suffered the same fate by this same air taxi...


My opinion is we should limit air taxis to a max of 3 game management units that they can take hunters into. And if a air taxi is operating as outfitters hold them responsible for what their clients do. This is the same kind of regulation that the guides are under.

I am just a resident with a cub now. I hope not to have deal with a permit system for all Aalaska hunting in the future. As a former guide and air taxi owner I see the biggest threat to our game is the growing number of hunters the second is the lack of regulations on the air taxi's as they have the ability to take unlimited hunters into the field with out regulations.

Click to expand...

Last I heard the # of hunters was going DOWN.

Christina,


From your post: "Alaska F&W" The Alaska State Troopers used to have two divisions: a Patrol Division, which is what everyone pictures as the state Troopers. The second division was the Division of Fish & Wildlife Protection, ie: "Alaska F&W". That Division has now, courtesy of the most recent ex governor, been downgraded to a "Bureau" status, whatever that means.

Generally, when Alaskans refer to Alaska F&W, they are referring to the Fish and Wildlife Protection section of the Alaska State Troopers. In any case, the State Troopers have the enforcement responsibility for game regulations.

The Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) are the management and research folks, who conduct surveys, do research, etc. They also make recommendations to the Board of Game for changes in seasons and bag limits.

Jerry--so, you are saying that air taxis should be assigned an area wherein they can drop off hunters? So, who gets what area, and what stops one air taxi from flooding one area, just like you just described?? Would not this approach generate just as many issues?

I've seen A-hole guides peeing on each other's hip boots in this kind of stuff, and a guide running down a beach, screaming at me to get the h*** out of "his" territory. Right up till I showed him a badge. Then he was my best friend. Till he got the ticket.

Bottom line is, Alaskans want the freedom to hunt and fish where they want to hunt and fish. So be it. If some areas get hammered, the hunters will stop coming. If hunters run into other hunters every way they turn, they'll use a different air taxi next year.

On the other hand, if its a once in a lifetime hunt, and many are, that guy's screwed.

Welcome to Alaska hunting.

MTV

Mike I have seen my share of guides that need more than a ticket as I am sure you have. It must have been satisfying to help put out of business a few of the bad guides. I agree to many guides think they own the area they are operating. This attitude by some guides is wrong and hurts the guiding industry. The same is true of the air taxis that operate like a vacuum on the wildlife the difference is there is no law against it.

I am not a fan of government making lot of rules and regs and do not like being told what to do. But I have to agree that it is some times necessary to have rules for the good of all.

Guides are now limited to 3 areas that are only part of a subunit inside of a GMU.

I suggest Air Taxi's that fly hunters must have a transporter licence. If we made the transporter licence good in only 3 GMU's and let the air taxi choose the 3 they wanted and not let them change what they have chosen. This would give air taxi's incentive not to over harvest.

Cliff Hudson in Talkeetna was the kind of airtaxi operator that I admire and respect. He limited the number of hunters he would take.
Before I was a pilot I once asked him to take me and my client into a strip for sheep. He would not take me. Cliff said that enough sheep had been harvested from the area this season and he refused to fly any more sheep hunters that year.


Jerry

It may be just a short step from limiting the game units that an air taxi can fly into to limiting the game units that a private pilot can fly into.

Maybe lmit the number of non-resident licences sold for a subunit/unit, or would that reduce tourism dollars....?

I'm not an advocate of restricting hunting opportunity, AS LONG AS the wildlife populations can sustain the harvest levels. There are places in Alaska where this is certainly true.

Using a caribou example is probably the worst example you can use, simply because caribou populations, by their very nature, cycle significantly.

I am not a fan of restricting air taxi operators as to transporting hunters or fishermen. Those folks go through enough government BS just to get a 135 certificate. By the way, the federal government DOES require use permits for air taxi operators on federal lands in Alaska. I didn't agree with that fiat when it came down, and it hasn't done much to change anything except make more paperwork.

Again, if there is a WILDLIFE POPULATION issue, simply the best and most user friendly way to deal with that situation is to issue permits. I again offer the Kodiak bear hunting permit system as an example of this. That system works well. You apply for a permit well in advance of the hunt, you either get a permit, in which case you plan your hunt, or you don't get a permit, in which case you plan something else. If you do get a permit, you have a ten day window of your choice to hunt, and your permit will be for a certain geographic area. It is virtually guaranteed that you will NOT be overrun by other hunters in the area, and that there will be a healthy bear population in the area, so you won't have wasted a bunch of money and time getting somewhere to find a really bad hunting situation.

If you aren't chosen for a permit, you still have plenty of time to plan a different hunt, in a different area.

That model will NOT fit every situation, or every species, though, but there are places that could use such a system.

One of the big problems in Alaska I see are these rather huge and fairly common "private hunting preserves", like Three Day Slough on the Koyukuk that I mentioned earlier. More moose than you can believe, yet you can't fly in and hunt that area. All hunting must be on the rivers.

By excluding a lot of folks from those areas, it forces them into other areas and creates potential conflicts with other users.

Contrary to popular belief, Alaska is NOT a very game-rich state. In fact, big game animals are pretty sparsely distributed, if you consider the size of the state. In addition, much of the game is centralized around the best habitats.

There are bound to be some conflicts amongst users, but I'll continue to suggest that regulating the air taxi outfits is the wrong approach to game management.

MTV

ADF&g is Alaska Department of Fish and Game, biological branch, some carry Trooper Badges, (Alaska Department of Fish and Wildlife Protection), now as MTV says, degraded to somthing akin to second class citizens, (best not go there).

I am a former pilot for guides, assistant guide, and air taxi pilot and owner. I hunted Illiamna in the big years, I hunted moose in the Holitna before the bone on laws, and have hunted the Koyukuk. I worked in many of these areas also, so saw first hand some of the activities that are legal, and some that are not.

In Alaska, opportunity is king. Just look at this site anytime someone speaks of closing a strip ; Alaska regulators seek opportunity.

When do critter populations require something be done?

Quite the question. A couple of govs ago we had an idiot cancle the wolf control due to what I guess is his desire to some day move to the whitehouse, and wanted the political support. Moose continued to decline.

At some point, wildlife management should be proactive. limit BEFORE they are in danger. Sorry aalexander, air taxi's are not taking residents. Yes some, but not most.

To support that count the number of Alaskans, 600,000. figure one fourth hunt moose, that would be 150,000. Of these, my bet is that over half are road hunters, then take thoes with boat camps, atv's and thoes that actually have planes. That does not leave much for the air taxi's to fly.

Now look at the number of flights that are added to the schedule in hunting season, or just go to the airport and count the camo guys. These flights come direct from Detroit, Miniapolis, Seattle and a couple of others. Some are getting guided, but many are not.

So Jim Beam comes up after setting up a trip with Bloodmoney air, a FEDERALY CERTIFIED AIR TAXI, that gets a STATE TRANSPORTERS LISCENCE. Bloodmoney air charges "Only $4500 for a moose trip, everything but my personal gear and food included. Never been moose hunting before, but hunted Elk."

Jimmy gets flown out to a two mile long lake with camps on both ends, one is a guide camp established for years, on pattented ground, the other is some poor hunter that was dropped off earlier in the week by Bm air; Jimmy is pointed across the valley to where a couple of "trophy bulls" are.

So Jim works his way down a couple of hundred feet, a mile across the tundra and shoots a bull. His first comment upon walking up to it is "GOOOOOOLY, THIS IS ONE BIG ANIMAL!" After three failed attemps to getting it rolled over out of the eight inches of water it is in, Jim realizes he needs help, upon arriving back at camp he finds his partner, (who also paid $4,500) back from killing his own moose and needing help.

By the time either animal is back at camp the meat is spoiled, or getting that way, dirty and basicly not taken care of.

This is a compolations of many of the people I have watched, flown and talked to. It is not pretty, and sorry, guides have their rotten apples also.

Solution: it is hard to make regulations work. Unfortunatly limited guides were unconstitutional. But some simple but significant changes would help:

Allow a guide the 3 areas, but require him to change areas once every five years.

Restrict Moose Hunting for non-residents to guide only unless the hunter has "shown experience through a successful Alaska moose hunt in the past, has no game violation convictions on record, and has a current Hunters safety/Bow hunter safety card"

Harsh, yes. But it would allow some business for the Air Taxi operators, yet limit the damage that they can cause with new hunters.

Incidently, the meat on the bone regs come from drop off hunts not being monitored and the waste created by thoes hunts.

Residents have their troubles also, I admit. But current status is encourages some air taxi operators to take out unprepared hunters in dense numbers.

Air Taxis selling hunts are required to have a transporters license . This means documentation and reporting of hunters flown, animals taken and areas hunted.

AKTANGO58

You hit the mark, I agree with you.

Bearsnack,

Yes, but no. It requires reporting what they know. Prove I only shot one caribou. You only know if I have one set of antlers....

Who knows if I left a few sets to rot due to their small size...

Regulating the Air Taxi's would be a bummer because Part 135, 91, and 61 (and all their subparts) PLUS the Transporter Regs are alot of Regs already to keep up with; but if the number of hunters in an given area were regulated wouldn't that directly affect the number of hunters being flown in by an Air Taxi into any given area?
How about making it a drawing with Alaska resident's getting a larger percentage of the hunts and the "revenue" hunts going to the overflow permits left over?
For an area that has been/IS being or is beginning to get Hammered by predation (wolves, bears and people) just look at the up-to-date game surveys, take the proper percentage that would be healthy to harvest in that area and give THAT many permits out. First dibs goes to Alaska Residents the rest go to revenue hunts. And for an area that is doing well leave it open and watch it closely.

MTV,
Why isn't this happening? I know it's a can of worms and it's never simple but...why does it seem that the "Board" or whatever waits until an area is shot then the only recourse seems to be shorten or close the season??? Why can't it be more proactive if there are game surveys going on and hunters/transporters reporting (sort of)? Mike does a drawing system or just regulating the number of hunts in any given area make any sense or am I way off? I am a Asst. Guide/Pilot and that's an idea that I came up with all by myself after watching areas get skimpy on moose or caribou. But then there is an area in Copper Valley where I grew up that is restricted access only (walk in only 8 miles from highway) that there used to be moose everywhere up there. Very little if ANY hunting, no one (except us kids) wanted to pack moose 8 miles so the numbers of moose were good. NOW however I've flown over that valley and looked and there's hardly ANY moose left there! It wasn't hunting so...obviously regulating the hunters in THAT particular valley didn't do any good.

RB

Several of you have jumped on my comment about resident hunters, which is interesting, but not surprising.

Let me clarify what I meant, because I stated that badly. What I was referring to, was whether the hunters in question could legally hunt without a guide, rather then where they lived. Yeah, I know, a very poor chioce of words. I was being lazy. I realize that Non-residents don't need a guide if they're hunting moose or caribou, or really anything other than brown bear, sheep or goats. My point was, not that Air Taxis are carrying people who live in or out of Alaska, but rather that they are carrying hunters who may legally hunt without a guide. Resident, or non resident, it's those legal hunters who need to be limited, if in fact there are too many hunting in an area, not thier means of transportation.

I don't buy the concept that a Non-resident hunter is any more likely to screw up the harvest of a big game animal than a resident. Most of the wanton waste instances I know of involved Alaska residents, many of the more disgusting ones involved rural Natives. If being an ALaskan makes you a clean ethical hunter, then being a Alaska Native snould make you a saint of a hunter, right? No, Bullshit! It's a myth that a person living in say, Fairbanks, with a limited outdoor involvement and no previous hunting experience, would be more likely to take better care of an animal than someone from say Minneapolis. For that matter, I'd be willing to bet that my Dad, who now lives in Maine, so is no longer an Alaska Resident (but has taken moose in Alaska when he lived here, starting back before most of us were born, and has taken them in Maine also) would be much more likely to do a clean, legal, ethical harvest of a moose, compared to some 20-something convenience store clerk who was born and raised in Spenard, but has never been off a paved road before. Residence in Alaska doesn't magically confer woodsmanship, ethics, hunting knowledge, or respect for game.


As to the suggestions that an air-taxi be limited to certain game units, I would repeat that this will put the state in the position of dictating where a commercial operator may conduct air commerce. I could be wrong, but I think the the State just flat does not have the jurisdiction to do this, any more than a city has the authority to require airplanes to fly no lower than 5000' AGL over the city. (several cities have attempted to do this and it has been struck down in the courts) Even if they could pull it off, constitutionally, I don't think we, as pilots, want to get states involved in regulating aviation.

Now, If air taxi operators are providing services *other* than transportation, I don't have a problem regulating those other services. AKtango decribes an operator providing services and equipment beyond mere transpostation. I'd agree that an operator like that is starting to encroach on the legitimate business of a guide-outfitter. I don't doubt that this happens, and if it is, enforce the existing regulations on what a transporter may provide. I'm a little unclear on the finer points of the regulations, but if you're advertising and selling equipped big game hunts, you're going beyond what a transporter can legally do, right?

aktango58 said:

Prove I only shot one caribou. You only know if I have one set of antlers....

Who knows if I left a few sets to rot due to their small size...

Click to expand...

THis is true, but it is true whether the hunter flew in on an Air Taxi, flew himself in in his own airplane, took a jet boat, lived in Alaska all his life or just arrived from Denver. Once again the common denominator is the hunter, not the method of transportation (or where his house was built).

RB,

Simple answer is that the Board is a purely political entity, and more often than not has interests in mind other than those of the resource.

Some, if not most of the restricted access areas in Alaska these days are a result of political pressure (ie: who's on the board, and who they want to please), rather than being put in place to preserve game populations.

I remember when ADFG used to get on the radio stations and tell people what mile of the highway the caribou were crossing, fer cryin out loud. Now, you want to talk about some slaughters.

Pick up a book called "Ordinary Wolves" by Seth Kantner. Offers a pretty perceptive insight into rural Alaska these days.

As to blaming thin game populations on wolves--why aren't the trappers out there trapping the hell out of wolves, if they are so overpopulated?

Lessee--1) they are hard to trap (they are some smarter than muskrats) 2) the hides aren't worth what they used to be.

So, let's use airplanes to hunt them.

Ya know, I've hunted coyotes from the air, and I have no problem hunting wolves from the air, my own self.

However, that is a remarkably effective way to get everybody in the free world's panties in a knot. Now, realize that the State has actually done this, and the world hasn't ended. Just fairly crappy conditions to aerial hunt in lately. But that's global warming, and deserves a thread unto its own........ :lol:

But, in any case, you can't blame game population numbers on wolves. Why not? Here's a question for ya: What the hell did wildlife do in Alaska before white men showed up with their airplanes to save them from the wolves? I guarantee you those Native Americans didn't damage the wolf populations a lot by aerial hunting.

If you have a big thing with wolves, I'd strongly encourage you to get out there and trap the heck outta those rascals, and consider your efforts for the good of all wildlife. Why must government be the one to carry that load? :lol:

In my former life, I frequently got hit up by folks in the Upper Yukon Valley about the beavers damming up all the streams and preventing the whitefish from going upstream to spawn.

Now, this begs the question: What the hell did the whitefish do before the Hudson's Bay Company built Fort Yukon??

And, why aren't the locals out there trapping the hey outta beavers?

Easy answer: Everybody wants an easy fix, and they don't want to have to carry any of the load on their own backs. Oh, yeah, and beaver pelts aren't worth squat, and they're a lotta work to skin.

Same thing applies to the Board process. Most folks go to the Board of Game because they have an Ox that's getting gored. That's not necessarily the best way to manage resources, but that's what's happening.

MTV

MTV
I do not blame everything on the wolves, but rather "Predation"; if you go back you'll note that I listed three of the main predators with wolves being only one of the three. And I do think that people have been more detrimental to caribou in some places than wolves and probably bears combined. I believe wolves play a part but are not completely at fault, hence the question regarding management.
And what about my question? Do you think limited drawing permits in certain areas would work? (disregarding of course for conjecture all the political BS that you alluded to).
Thanks,

RB

OK!!! It's time for me to weigh in!!!
I've lived in WA state all my life. I'm not an Ak resident. I fly a 185 and a PA12, both of which have been to AK many times. In '91, I flew to AK 5 times seeking employment in the timber industry. I worked in SE in '91 and at Icy Bay in '92. Wonderful experiences both times. In '96 I got the opportunity to buy in to a "gold claim" on the Talkeetna river which I did. Jerry, RB, and most of you from the Talkeetna area know it as "Bucks". 'Nuff said, you all know the place.
My dad took me elk hunting in 1962 and opening morning I took a nice bull. I've hunted elk every year since. and in 44 years have taken 35 bulls. I'm a pretty serious elk hunter. I've never hunted elk anywhere but the local area here in SW WA. Bottom line. I know how to take care of meat in the field.
When we bought out Buck in '96, my partners. 3 AK residents and 2 WA residents, took 1 really nice bull moose and had to pack it 2.5 miles into camp. 650 lbs. including the rack came to camp. On our backs!! Every ounce of edible meat came to camp. Yup, there was some bloodshot meat that we didn't pack. In the ensuing years we took 1 or 2 moose out each year. I haven't hunted there since '99 due to the Knowls administration ban on predator control. The wolves were winning the war. The moose population evaporated!! As you locals know, we are located on the boundary of units 13 and 14. About 4 yrs. ago they banned non-resident moose hunting in 13 and made it a 4 brow tine unit. That virtually shut down moose hunting in 13 in our area.
I'm a woodsman! Born, raised, worked and lived my entire life in the woods. I can build a fire where there ain't nothin' to burn. Boy that sounds like bullshit, eh!! Yup, I've spent time in Canada too!!
The requirement for guided bear hunting in our area doesn't make sense to me. The bear population in 13 is out of control. If memory serves me right, the ADF&G census count show 2300 grizzlies in 13 when they say the area can support 900+or -. How much more dangerous is it to kill a gris than to be butchering out a moose in their habitat?? In our camp we've been accosted by bears more than once while procuring a moose to pack. Id love to take one of the "Silvertip" bears in our area and would be glad to buy the out of state tag to do it. The "guided hunt" requirement has been a detriment to my taking one.
In '98 we had one of the local operators bring in a drop camp to our gravel bar strip. 2 guys from back east. When they found out that we had an established camp there and were actively hunting the area, they asked to be taken back to town. I don't think they were very happy with the operator.
I'm going to hunt moose in 14 this year as it seems that Murkowski's wolf hunting program has worked to some degree!! $485 for the moose tag & license and $985 if I could take a bear! Probably buy 100 gallons of gas for the game cops cubs!!
Mike

Maybe we can reintroduce a few thousand of them Alaskan wolves to Darien, Connecticut the home of Freinds of Animals. Just like they did to central Idaho and Yellowstone National Park. It would help them thin out all of their deer. Then we wouldn't have to shoot them from planes. You know how they all complain about that. Everyone has an opinion about aireal wolf hunting but don't have the slightest clue about it. I'll tell you one thing, there were a lot more moose twenty years ago (when there was aireal hunting) than there are today. MTV:, the natives were pretty hungry a hundred years ago. There wasn't that much game. When they came across moose tracks in the winter they followed them for a week just to kill it. Go to the following and read some of their stories>http://www.yksd.com/biographies/elders.html (these are only excerpts from their books) if you could read the whole books you'd know what i'm talking about. There are so many wolves here now, they eat dogs on chains. A few wolves were killed around here, they had tin cans in their stomachs. They are eating trash. The numbers got out of hand during the knowles administration, and everyone is paying the price now.

RB,

I wasnt' referring to your comments with my wolf comment. You are absolutely correct in your assertion that hoofed critters face a LOT of different predators in Alaska. As 85Mike points out, brown bear populations are high in many parts of Alaska, as are black bear populations. Numerous studies have shown bears to be one of the very significant predators on moose populations.

As to your question whether a permit hunt would work, again I'd point to the Kodiak brown bear hunting situation. That's a permit system that's been in place for MANY years. Population is stable, hunting pressure is consistent and harvest is predictable. The permit system works there, no doubt. Would it work equally well in other places? I think so, but there are a lot of variables.

Note that in 20A, they're issuing cow and calf permits to thin out the moose population a bit. That area is close to Fairbanks. A lot of pressure on wolves, and a good bit of pressure on bears out there. There are a lot of folks from FAI who bait black bears. A while back I looked at the black bear sealing records, and a huge percentage of the black bears taken in the state were taken in Unit 20A.

I would wholeheartedly agree with 85Mike's comments regarding the restriction on non residents hunting brown bears only with a guide. That was driven through the Board primarily by the guiding industry, using the logic that they're dangerous game. I too have seen some BIG messes that resident "hunters" created, including one really nice bear on Kodiak that I skinned for the guys because they broke the only knife they had brought with them, and they had no clue how to skin a bear. There are clueless folks all over, the Lower 48 has no exclusive on that trait.

MTV

85Mike said:

I fly a 185 and a PA12, both of which have been to AK many times. I worked in SE in '91 and at Icy Bay in '92.

Click to expand...

Does your 185 have a stretcher door? If it does, I think we've met.