quote:

Originally posted by Zhurh:

When the bears are taking 85% of moose calf production, something has to be done,

When the bear & wolves clean an area out, then they start eating each other until they go extinct or move on.

The sensible side of me tells me the wolves kill all the moose in winter and bear get most the calves in May & june.

Claims like these are why I responded to these posts. For the third time, I beg for a reply: "Why are there still moose in Denali National Park in moderate numbers?" Wolves and bears have not been "managed" in the park for 80+ years. They kill a lot of moose. But predators have not "cleaned an area out, then started eating each other until they go extinct." If that claim was true, wolves, bears and moose would have all been gone from Alaska long before people came here.

There are facts based on research and there are fairy tales based on who knows what.

Thats like me saying Why do the Swedes take 200,000 moose every season. Well of course, there are only like 50 wolves in Sweden and the locals want those ones gone too. They really control the bear population too. I bought a plott from breeder who has taken dogs to Sweden; more moose than he has ever seen anywheres.

No hunting in Denali, is that what you're getting at? Trouble is that mind set will never catch on, way more hunters & HUMANS that depend on subsistence moose than any other user group.

I want to see honest game management. We live in a different world than say 200 years back. People matter to me more than some fantasy about the perfect balance in nature. I'm glad there are wolves & bear in Alaska; don't want to ever see them gone. I also don't want to see predators taking such a large % of the resource that the moose & caribou are going downhill. Hunters will always take some of th resource, the predators take a much larger share and F&G will tell you that themselves. Just want the problem resolved without our moose going under first.

Locally it is thought by some that there are too many predators. The solution to this alleged problem has been for the local outdoorsmen to take matters into their own hands rather than sit on said hands waiting for the gov. to do something for them. Trapping is popular here and seems to me to be effective. Wolves are a favorite trapping target and in the Nushagak drainage the success rates seem pretty good. Bear hunting is popular also and I'd have to guess that this spring the bear hunters using snow machines or airplanes for transportation will do quite well due to thick ice, deep snow conditions.

We outdoorsmen have the tools at our disposal to assist in game management in our locale's.

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:
Locally it is thought by some that there are too many predators. The solution to this alleged problem has been for the local outdoorsmen to take matters into their own hands rather than sit on said hands waiting for the gov. to do something for them. Trapping is popular here and seems to me to be effective. Wolves are a favorite trapping target and in the Nushagak drainage the success rates seem pretty good. Bear hunting is popular also and I'd have to guess that this spring the bear hunters using snow machines or airplanes for transportation will do quite well due to thick ice, deep snow conditions.

We outdoorsmen have the tools at our disposal to assist in game management in our locale's.

You are absolutely right. When snowmachines became very reliable and saturation snaring became widespread in the early 1980s trappers became very effective. I knew some trappers that took entire large packs (up to 19) from one bait. Where there is access, wolf trappers can be effective in keeping wolf numbers low. Trouble is, it's hard work and not very lucrative compared to marten, lynx and fox.

If trappers, rather than aerial shooters, were doing most of the wolf reduction in places where it's necessary, many of those opposed to the large-scale control programs would back off. I know I would as long as the programs were based on reliable field data and were carefully monitored and properly evaluated. Trapping is sustainable in the long run--aerial shooting is not.

quote:

Originally posted by Zhurh:

I want to see honest game management.

Me too! What we've had since 2002 is not honest management. The AOC and SFW (whose agendas drive predator control at the political level) do not care a bit about conservation--they focus only on "hunter opportunity." All professional wildlife biologists are taught that conservation of the resource comes first. Hunting is second. That is the basis of the North American Model of Wildlife Management that is the most successful ever devised. When political special interest groups focus on single-species management and revert back to 19th century wars on predators, the process jumps the rails.

If you want to learn the basics, Google "Shane Mahoney" and read his articles and talks. He is widely recognized as an international leader on these issues.

quote:

Originally posted by vicvanb:

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:
Locally it is thought by some that there are too many predators. The solution to this alleged problem has been for the local outdoorsmen to take matters into their own hands rather than sit on said hands waiting for the gov. to do something for them. Trapping is popular here and seems to me to be effective. Wolves are a favorite trapping target and in the Nushagak drainage the success rates seem pretty good. Bear hunting is popular also and I'd have to guess that this spring the bear hunters using snow machines or airplanes for transportation will do quite well due to thick ice, deep snow conditions.

We outdoorsmen have the tools at our disposal to assist in game management in our locale's.

You are absolutely right. When snowmachines became very reliable and saturation snaring became widespread in the early 1980s trappers became very effective. I knew some trappers that took entire large packs (up to 19) from one bait. Where there is access, wolf trappers can be effective in keeping wolf numbers low. Trouble is, it's hard work and not very lucrative compared to marten, lynx and fox.

If trappers, rather than aerial shooters, were doing most of the wolf reduction in places where it's necessary, many of those opposed to the large-scale control programs would back off. I know I would as long as the programs were based on reliable field data and were carefully monitored and properly evaluated. Trapping is sustainable in the long run--aerial shooting is not.

The citizenry needn't knash their teeth, wring their hands and wait on their benevolent gov. to save them.

Most people that set snares here, check every week or so, some much longer. Reason why so many don't trap anymore is fuel prices so high, distances traveled, ect. Not many trap and make enough money at it to be worth it. A few locals get 50 marten every season, but not much more.

WE shoot a few wolves every fall when caribou move through, but really are spending our time getting the moose & caribou tags filled.

Last couple years, have had bear stand, but only me and another local guy have stands. Nobody wants invest time and money. I tell them they need to help the moose out too and they laugh and talk about F&G people forever trying to write them up. I was checked once in my entire life, never written up for anything. I've been working on a new trail all winter when it gets warm, new place for my stand. Plan to do what I can to lower bear numbers, many of the locals here eat bear meat.

I'm not beggin the govt for nothing, never have. I guarantee ya one thing though, all the Anch, Fairbnks, outside, and non-resident hunters will see many areas closed down to hunting if the moose & caribou numbers continue downward. The locals will get their subsistence tags or will shoot them when they see them, like the Indians.

In our area, I saw more grizz last sept than any other year, maybe just cause they were in the blueberries. We started to notice more wolves maybe 3 years back, see them much more often too.

Zhurh,

Give them bears and wolves hell.

I agree, even though the military took me out of Alaska in 2000 I have been a fairly well read Alaska newsie since then. Everyone in alaska wants to bitch about wolves and bears but not very many people want to hunt them.

Why let the state control the wolf issue. The state wants people to hunt them.

Check out Karl Braendel's Compass column in the February 5 Anchorage Daily News--titled "Predator Control Demeans Us All." Karl is a long-time big game guide who hunts Kodiak Island. When guys like him speak out, you know that the Game Board is way too extreme in their actions. They used to dismiss opponents as "greenies" but Karl and others demonstrate that a lot of us hunters are fed up with how things have gone.

You know, people feel the way they do from what they see around where they call home. Most rural people out this way agree the wolf populations have grown dramatically and there always has been all kinds of bear. F&G seems to concur and sees the correlation between increasing predators & lower moose numbers; why they are working on predator control in the first place. I guess everybody sees it one way or another.

We got a bunch of bear out of our stand last Spring, will do the same this year; actually it's easier for us to just shoot them than deal with bucket snaring if it ever even happens. Many of the locals here eat bear, personally I just want less of them around; might help out the local moose. F&G should require that moose hunters also tag a bear every other year or no moose hunting for them. We are allowed 3 black & 2 grizz every season; myself I'm trying to get more locals to fill their tags.

Out here, we have several families that live up and down the river. Over the years they have tried about everything to make ends meet, you know, illegal guiding, on and on and on. Well, now most of them are doing everything from dogsled tours, camping trips, trapline tours, rural cabins they rent to Euros, ect ect. Thing that strikes me funny is just as soon as these families get to where they can make it in tourism, they all seem to get born again into the enviromental/greenie/wolf luver mindset, ha ha. No joke, I've heard them say they are just tired of all the killin. Of course it's all about their clients feelings and the $$$$.

So, when I read this or that, (especially in the Anch Daily Worker) I temper it with the understanding that usually there are hidden motives behind many comments.

I just want the moose numbers to go back up to where they use to be. Restrict the season for non-subsistence users, kill some predators, just do something before it's too late.

quote:

Thing that strikes me funny is just as soon as these families get to where they can make it in tourism, they all seem to get born again into the enviromental/greenie/wolf luver mindset, ha ha. No joke, I've heard them say they are just tired of all the killin. Of course it's all about their clients feelings and the $$$$

Money is a game changer for sure. Once you start doing something for money then that is what it is all about.

I have seen good freinds who one use to go have a good weekend with hunting and fishing. Get a guide lic then hardly will not talk to you unless willing to pay.

I would love to see a earn a moose program. Where if your not a resident you have to kill a wolf first before you can even hunt moose.

They have earn a buck programs in the midwest and I want to say Manitoba? But not 100% sure on that, the last time I saw it was Babe Winkleman and he was pissed off about it.

But he's kind of retard anyway.

quote:

Originally posted by vicvanb:

quote:

Originally posted by Zhurh:

When the bears are taking 85% of moose calf production, something has to be done,

When the bear & wolves clean an area out, then they start eating each other until they go extinct or move on.

The sensible side of me tells me the wolves kill all the moose in winter and bear get most the calves in May & june.

Claims like these are why I responded to these posts. For the third time, I beg for a reply: "Why are there still moose in Denali National Park in moderate numbers?" Wolves and bears have not been "managed" in the park for 80+ years. They kill a lot of moose. But predators have not "cleaned an area out, then started eating each other until they go extinct." If that claim was true, wolves, bears and moose would have all been gone from Alaska long before people came here.

There are facts based on research and there are fairy tales based on who knows what.

Who says that there are moose anywhere in Alaska at moderate numbers. The predators and prey follow 10-20 year boom bust periods.

It is stupid to allow this to happen when we can control predators and control prey.

When mother nature does it, it's 1000 times more graphic.

MOA, They've talked about what you mentioned (earn a moose) but nothing serious. I figure people would just ignore it anyway, though I think it would be a good idea.

We had a heat wave today, above freezing. I was out behind the place about 4-5 miles working on a new trail with chainsaw. The snow was up to my waist in places in the trees; man was it tough going. Saw lynx tracks everywhere, they move around alot this time of year.

quote:

Originally posted by MOA TACTICAL:
Who says that there are moose anywhere in Alaska at moderate numbers.

Check the facts. Anywhere in Alaska? Moose in Unit 20A (Tanana Flats) are at high density--too high for the habitat and cow hunts are needed to reduce moose numbers. Moose in the lower Kuskokwim are at high density after 5 years of a hunting moritorium. They will propose 2 moose bag limits and cow hunts to reduce moose numbers. Moose in Unit 13A (Nelchina Basin)are at high density and cow hunts will be proposed there soon. In the Matanuska-Susitna Valley moose are at high density and hundreds are being killed by vehicles and trains this winter with hundreds more starving by spring. It's not like some tell it--that moose are scarce everywhere in Alaska--they are scarce in some places and abundant in others.

As I said earlier, in Denali Park last fall I saw 12 60+ inch bulls in one small drainage. Wolves and bears are unhunted there and not "controlled" for the last 80 years. If wolves and bears wipe out moose if not controlled, how come there are still moose in Denali--enough that one small drainage had 12 trophy bulls and a bunch of cows?

quote:

Originally posted by vicvanb:

quote:

Originally posted by MOA TACTICAL:
Who says that there are moose anywhere in Alaska at moderate numbers.

Check the facts. Anywhere in Alaska? Moose in Unit 20A (Tanana Flats) are at high density--too high for the habitat and cow hunts are needed to reduce moose numbers. Moose in the lower Kuskokwim are at high density after 5 years of a hunting moritorium. They will propose 2 moose bag limits and cow hunts to reduce moose numbers. Moose in Unit 13A (Nelchina Basin)are at high density and cow hunts will be proposed there soon. In the Matanuska-Susitna Valley moose are at high density and hundreds are being killed by vehicles and trains this winter with hundreds more starving by spring. It's not like some tell it--that moose are scarce everywhere in Alaska--they are scarce in some places and abundant in others.

As I said earlier, in Denali Park last fall I saw 12 60+ inch bulls in one small drainage. Wolves and bears are unhunted there and not "controlled" for the last 80 years. If wolves and bears wipe out moose if not controlled, how come there are still moose in Denali--enough that one small drainage had 12 trophy bulls and a bunch of cows?

My recollection is certaily dated and probably inaccurate but I think at one time moose numbers in the Yukon river delta were going way up.

Due to our salmon numbers the Dillingham area has lots of bears, but we also have lots of wolves and moose too! Unit 17 hosts a total of three moose hunts annually and has recently opened up excluded areas to winter hunts in order to decrease moose numbers.

Our moose numbers aren't moderate.

As I mentioned before, the Dillingham area is interested in predator control but the locals are taking upon themselves to manage it. Trap lines are effective as well as using hot rod snowmachines and super cubs. Gas prices out here are appalling but the advances made in motor vehicle performace has give the modern outdoorsman access to areas ot traditionally utilized.

Who cares about Denali. Those 12 60in bulls do us no good! What about unit 16B. What you also failed to mention about unit 13 was the aggressive predator control that is still ongoing.

Predator control is good, but needs to be done correctly and needs to have the data there to drive it. There are many places in Alaska that bears kill up to 80-90% of the new born calves and they have found that this is far more detrimental to the moose numbers than what wolves do. I am not saying go crazy right now, but I do not have any issues of baiting for grizz in certain units or areas. Trapping of wolves will always be hard to even control the numbers due to the large areas they inhabit. I do my best to catch as many as possible, but in the end, a pair of wolves will replenish any that were taken and the only real means of wolf control is by the aerial guys. Again, I am not advocating an elimination of predators, but precise and controlled predator control does the ungulate populations a world of good and sometimes that is all they need to give them the break needed to start re populating areas that have been decimated by predators.

Let's leave Denali park out of this. That is like comparing wolves and Isle Royale. IT is not the same. Denali is a big zoo. And wolf control happens there as the trappers do get a large amount of the wolves from the park. You must of heard about Gordon Haber and all the wolf lovers attempts to create huge buffers around Denali to stop the trappers from catching those wolves?

The problem with a board like this is that we all have a chance to state our opinions and then move on. Of course that is a good thing also but what I'm seeing here is a lack of discussion and mearly a lot of pontificating.

Wildlife management is'nt something that you just do or don't do. You have to first decide what you want the outcome to be and then develope a management plan that addresses the needs of the resource.

Many areas in Alaska manage the land for a maximum population of preditors primarily bears (Kodiak, AK Penn, S.E. AK, National parks and a few others)
I kind of scratched my head after reading the article vicvanb directed us too writen by Karl Braendel. Karl is a very respected guide who hunts Kodiak island. how long has it been since anyone did prediter control in GMU 8.
I have to assume that his opinions were of preditor control in other areas of the state.

For areas of the state that have a population of residents dependent on moose the management plan for the reagen should include preditor management. Nobody here wants to see any preditor completly elimenated from an area.

I would make the argument that since we have these areas already wich give a good amount of protection to bears we can go ahead and proceed with preditor reduction in the areas where the ungulates just need a breather to reestablish the herd.

Scott -I'm glad that you have a healthy herd of moose over there on the west side of GMU 17. I might add though that on the east side of the unit thats not the story. One of the hunting tips I've learned in the last 15 or so years has been to watch when a cow caribou with a newborn calf moves through the area I'm hunting in the spring. Quite often there will be a bear hot on the trail. They can be as much as a couple hours behind but they will out last the calf. You can often judge whats going on by the way the cow looks as she go'es by (nervous looking over her shoulder a lot)

One time I watched a boar walk through the middle of a herd of cow caribou that had layed down and dropped their calves on the side of a hill above the Koktuli river. He killed several calves. He then walked down by the river and killed a moose calf. That moose calf held him the rest of the night before he got up and moved on about 5:00 am. He only made it a quarter mile or so before we got him. Here he is.




Manage for the needs of the Area. The needs of the people the moose and the preditors themselves. Keep in mind that when the preditors eat us out of our ungulate resources they eat themselves out as well. Maybe we should consider it saving them from themselves and rename preditor controll and call it bear dencity enhancement.

No doubt preditors must be controlled.
I just hate to see bears shot from the air, and not hunted.
OK I like to hunt bears. Maybe the state needs to have a larger limit on bears taken with one bear tag bought. Outfitters in heavy bear population areas could make the money on the hunts, good for the local economy, and bear numbers would be reduced in the areas needed.

And like Phil, I have eaten a lot of black bear meat and it is very good.
I ate the black bears I shot in Montana, Idaho, and the one I shot in Canada.

Mr T.
That is exactly what is happening. Almost 38 years ago when I first came here the statewide limit on Brown/ Grizzly bears was one every four years. Now many areas are the same 1 every 4 years but the targeted areas have now a bear a year and in some cases two bears a year but you must by two tags. I like your Idea about making the second one free.

Rest assured nobody is aireal hunting bears (only some wolves in some areas by special permit)

Akshooter

I would like to do my share to reduce the bear population in Alaska.

Lets work out a plan for next year where I come up and shoot a "brown one" and several "black ones", some wolves, all legal of course, eat some big crabs, drink some Whisky and have a general good time.

Just remember I am retired and have a lot of time, and little money.

Sounds like a plan.

Akshooter

Just tell me how many banks I need to "rob"..

I do have "Special Training" in that area...

quote:

Rest assured nobody is aireal hunting bears (only some wolves in some areas by special permit)

There is a proposal to aerial shoot bears in Unit 19 that the Game Board will consider next month.

Years ago, this proposal would not have had a chance. The Board handicappers give the proposal about a 70% chance of passing. When snaring, shooting cubs, using helicopters and baiting in midsummer are all legal, why not go to aerial shooting?

Stay tuned.

quote:

Originally posted by Northway:
Let's leave Denali park out of this. That is like comparing wolves and Isle Royale. IT is not the same. Denali is a big zoo. And wolf control happens there as the trappers do get a large amount of the wolves from the park. You must of heard about Gordon Haber and all the wolf lovers attempts to create huge buffers around Denali to stop the trappers from catching those wolves?

I understand that you want to ignore Denali--it doesn't confirm your beliefs.

Check the facts--the buffer at Denali was to protect 2 packs from trapping, the 2 that were most often seen by visitors. The buffer was never because trappers were affecting the size of the wolf population in the park. Wolves and bears have not been "controlled" in Denali in 80 years, yet moose are still there in moderate numbers. Those who claim predators will wipe out moose if not controlled are wrong.

Gad I'd hate to think I'm pontificating. Not saying I haven't or didn't but it'd be a mistake. I'm certainly no authority.

I object to the "Gov. gotta do something!" routine because we know they won't. The feds and state let the levies rot in Louisiana and they certainly show less interest in our problems here. If the public or Alaskan outdoorsmen want to see a reduction in predator numbers in a given area or state wide, my only point is there is a realistic plan, do it yourself.

You are familiar with Koliganek so you know "Skin", (last name withheld,)? The man has been a wolf Terminator over the last couple of winters hunting them himself and guiding client hunters via snow-go. Skin is making a difference in Mulchatna moose numbers. I know the residents of Manokotak, Togiak and Ekwok are doing the same. This is a great snow year for pursuing predators via snow-go or plane on skis.

Someone said something to me along the lines of gov. being "Reactive," instead of "Proactive,". In other words, usually if the fish and game is going to get involved it'll be after the last moose calf is consumed and now the poor wolves are starting to starve.

Hopefully I haven't come across as having taken a stand on one side or another of predator control because I'm not familiar with the entire state and certainly couldn't speak to it. My only point was that we hunters have access to rifles and snares and planes and snowmachines so,..........