There is a new rule in the 2006 Alaska Spring Drawing hunt Supplement.It requires that proxy hunts take place only where its any bull or antlerless.The second part requires the destruction of both the hunters moose or caribou antlers and the person they proxy hunr for.I did see some hunters with proxy tags last year and the year before taking more than one moose.They usually got a spike then looked for another bull.This new rule seems like yet another of AK F&G way of getting rid of a hunting right to where no one will do it.They have eaten away at hunters rights more and more every year.The Ak F&G is not for hunters only for themselves.

DGR, I disagree. tier 2 hunts are supposed to be for a reason ie subsistance. Grant it not a good system but so far the only one we got.

My wife last year got proxied a bou tag for caribou. she ended up with a nice bull and some meat in the freezer. the guy didnt want any of it. so we will definitaly take it.

Also new is that to be proxied a hunt you already have to be a tier 2 recipiant. no more proxiing a normal joe.

Fins and feathers, along with the BOG has got to do something. no reason why a guy from town with a 40 ft motorhome and 6 ATV's needs a subsistance tag.

If they do want rich fuggers to shoot a bou along the road system, they make something called a registration hunt.

I dont see nothing wrong with "destroying" the antlers. I mean come on, any decent taxidermist can put the antlers back together if you split the skull plate. Thats one of the ways to destroy the trophy. besides it makes it easier to carry.

there is no such thing as a proxy hunt. its still a tier2 hunt that somebody, for whatever reason, signs there tag over to somebody to hunt. By law the original recipient is supposed to get the meat and antlers unless its signed over to the "proxy" hunter.

Joel:
Let me see if I understand you correctly, If I'm a rich fugger with a 40 foot motor home and 6 ATVs, I can't do a proxy hunt for my poor old Auntie in Aniak who is in a wheel chair, but you, can do the hunt, because you live in Dillingham, and don't have a 40 foot motorhome and 6 ATVs? Is that a correct assumption?
I'm from Hooper Bay and I can't feed my six kids there, so I move to Anchorage, I get a job with an oil company, and can feed them. However, I can't do a proxy hunt for my Auntie in Aniak because I live in Anchorage and have a 40 foot motorhome? Think about it.

No TJ thats not what I'm saying. I dont make the rules. you know as well as I do folks abuse the rules that dont need a subsistance tag.

Theres a diffeence than needing a tag for meat than wanting it for a reason to hunt along the road system. They have a registration hunt along the 40 mile for that.

IMO, though if you can afford a 40 ft'er with 6 atv's, than you shouldnt qualify for a subsistance tag. No need to bring up a persons heritage into it. I could give a rats ass what color your skin is. I dont qualify for tier 2 and I could care less. I only hunt bear so It doesnt really matter to me. I seen nothing but city folks shooting caribou that dont deserve to out of paxson this past year. My wife was lucky enough to have an old guy sign his tag over to her. its a messed up system and needs to be fixed. doesnt help when people start throwing heritages into it. I thought all animals belong to all alaskans.

Of course this is just my opinion

quote:

I thought all animals belong to all alaskans.

Perhaps you meant that all Alaskan animals belong to the state of Alaska? Of course, this is jmo.

Your comments on nondeserving people or those who may be well heeled are way off base, Joel. The issue here is proxy hunts. Again, jmo.

DB

What wrong with giving hunts to the folks that need it? I gues I'm wrong in thinking that a tier2 subsistance hunt is for subsistance. I guess fins and feathers should just make it a registration hunt since that basically what it is anyway.

IMO, which is obviously wrong here folks from sutton to glenallen and up to delta should get the tags. Not some guy who lives in idaho (that proxied the hunt to my wife).

Also last I read when F&G used the term proxy hunters its supposed to be for people who cant hunt for themselves, Like TJ's aunt. she can sign her tag over to somebody who can. No such thing as a proxy hunt, just proxy hunters. Its still a subsistance hunt.

When we were up on the denali, I was talking to a guy that has only lived in the state for 2 years and he had a tier 2 permit???? I guess you can write down what you want on the application. Its messed up, either make it subsistance or a registration hunt.

You are right on the termonalogy for the rights of the animals, but since the critters are the states and alaskans pretty much own the state....

Sorry for the confusion but in this instance I'm talking about the nelchina caribou herd, not subsistance hunting statewide.

I reread my post and didn't see any reference to heritage or skin color.
I guess we have a different definition of subsistance. I don't look at subsistance hunting as another form of relief for the poor folks from the guvment. I can be a millionaire and still feed my family with wild game.

TJ, I'm not saying is relief for poor folks. There is a reason to have a subsistance hunt.

Take your aunt in Aniak for example, she just cant run down to the fred meyers and pick up a lb of burger. Theres a reason for subsistance hunts, I dont see a problem with having to destroy the antlers. subsistance hunts are there to fill the freezer, nothing more.

Oh and Hooperbay is a nice little community. I spent a couple of weeks there about 8 years ago. Nice folks.

I would agree that destroying the antlers is ok. If you are shooting an animal under a proxy hunt for another Alaskan who needs/wants the meat then the antlers have no bearing on this issue at all.
If the antlers are important then I would question the right of it being a true proxy hunt.
Proxy hunts are for meat, period.

Its the antlers of both the proxy person and the hunters antlers of the hunters animals that will be distroyed.I think anchorage people should not be allowed to hunt tier 2 permits period.I have seen more of them let caribou rot and shoot the denali herd just for the antlers than any one.The new rule about antler distruction willk only hurt then ones that really need someone to hunt for them.How many hunters are willing to have their moose or caribou antlker be distroyed for someone else.I have also seen too many of the 40 ft 6 4wheeler hunters from Anchorage who get subsistance tags instead of people who could really use the meat.Its mostly based on how long you have been in Alaska and the cost of gas and food where you live.It should be based more on where you live away from major retail chains not how long you have lived in Anchorage.I have posted about this before but I always get slamed about saying anything about it.I think F&G want to end proxy hunting so they dont have to fool with it.Most people I knew who proxy hunted usually shot a spike or fork for the other person and shot a bigger moose for themselves.The other rule that has changed I forgot to put on here is that the proxy hunts can only take place where its any bull or cow hunts.Those places are getting more limited to ones on the road system and the whole state.Its only the ones who cant hunt for themselves that will hurt from these new rules.

dgr416,
If Anchorage people should not be permitted to subsistence hunt then please tell me who should be able to? What guidelines would you put in place to award permits?
If a family moves to the bush and has a combined income of 150k would they still get a permit?
How about a family of 4 living in Anchorage with a income of 40k?

The families in Anchorage have plenty of stores and can get food stamps if they need them.The rual and bush towns and places dont have the stores that Anchorage has.The Federal Subsistance guide lines make more better choice for the tier 2 permits than the state regs.If there are 6,000 tier 2 permits for the Denali hwy caribou they should go to rural communities not the people in Anchorage who only get them because they have been in Ak for 40 years.Its not the meat they are after its the antlers to hang on their wall.If they have a new 40 ft rv and 6 4 wheelers they have plenty of money for meat.As for the antler restrictions for the proxy hunts I wonder howq many hunters will distroy their own moose and caribou antlers so that they can kill someones elses moose or caribou.I dot think many will do it with that reg in place.

Are there any subsistance hunters left in the state? It's a serious question, and it becomes a political, racial, economic pissing match with no chance of a good resolution.

Does someone living a subsistance abuse lifestyle because they are too lazy to get a job get dibs on hunting? If you infer any racial or urban/rural bias in that question it is not intended.

If someone is willing to go to where they can get a job, does that mean they should loose their chance to hunt and put game meat on the table?

I think proxy hunting and fishing should be maintained, as it is customary for hunters to provide food for the elders. I can tell you few things have given me more satisfaction than giving salmon to little old ladies, that don't have sons providing them with fish. Even if I didn't use a proxy tag to provide that fish.

Sad part of it is some folks look at rules as opportunities to abuse. Proxy hunting isn't about getting the opportunity to kill a truck full of critters, it's about putting meat in the freezers of the elderly and infirm. The problme is you can't come up with a system that will differentiate between those who proxy hunt.

I'm with Paul on this one.
Don't confuse proxy hunting with Tier II or Subsistance hunting. All totally different, and I don't think we want to get into that discussion.
Proxy hunting is not based on where you live, buy your gas/groceries, how long you've eat game from this area etc.
I think it was instituted to provide the old folks with the ability to continue to eat meat from animals they enjoy eating.
I've hauled 22 Caribou home from Iliamna from the spring hunt one year. Most were dry cows. I brought all the antlers home. I like antlers. Did I shoot these cows for their antlers? Nope.

20 of those caribou went to the old folks around here. All were proxy hunts.
I personally think it's a joke to require the antlers to be sawed so they can't be used for a trophy. Who cares? The animal is dead either way.
If it was shot under legal conditions, be they Proxy, Tier II or Subsistance, the antlers are a by product.

Good points. The antlers from a proxy hunt are simply a by product. I wouldnt care if F&G wanted them turned in, cut in little pieces or burnt. An elders smile would make all the work worthwhile.

I'm afraid that the proxie hunt *has* become a trophy hunt for many people that are not choosen for the tier II permit. It is a correct step in the right direction that the DF&G has taken. All too many people drum up the elderly to fill out their permits so they can get the proxie.

I'm in complete favor for the new regulations. I have lived in Alaska for over 33 years and last year was the first tier II permit I received. Just think....I even owned property in that hunt area for years.