The anti’s vs. hunters is the theme chronically attached to the SYSTEM of wildlife management in Alaska. It is divisive and like any chronic disease improperly diagnosed improvement is unlikely.
I am fairly certain the majority of Alaska residents are conservationists first. That majority does not yet fully understand the extent to which the commercial hunting and in-river commercial sport fishing industries in Alaska control the public process in order to serve their special interests and how that perpetuates the divide.
Your article Mr. Medred was better than most I have read of not continuing to divide people by miss-diagnosing the systemic issue including the way in which you managed quotes taken from your interviews with two exceptions.
The first being that you failed to mention that Wade Willis was a biologist with the ADF&G for ten years and only a staffer at DOW for 6 months. The other notable exception is that you failed to mention that Aaron Bloomquist makes a substantial part of his living selling public wildlife resources and guns. Not that any of that makes any difference to me but given the circumstances it might have been better not to write only that Wade Willis worked for DOW.
When the conservation majority of Alaskans gets on board with understanding the universal problem affecting our system of wildlife management the common ground that comes with that understanding is going to insist the control the special interests of the in-river commercial sport fishing and commercial hunting industries have over our public process belongs……under the bus.
How quickly that happens now will depend largely on how people like you frame the stories they choose to write about.
And no, I am not suggesting in any way shape or form that the conservation majority of Alaskans would EVER or should consider going so far as to turn over control of the public process to extreme environmentalists.
Extremists on either side of any issue probably should hold no seat on any public board or committee that provides them a venue to control the process.
But, when it comes to the in-river commercial sport fishing industry and to the commercial hunting industry through appointed boards and elected grass roots committees this kind of extremism is widely represented. Understandably, that upsets some environmental activists. And there is where the majority of Alaskans who are also conservationists sit; between the extremist who control the process and the extremest who want to control the process. That is not a place the majority of Alaskans want to be in and who can blame them. I don’t. I sat on the sidelines for 35 years.
So, from my view, what is most publicly being played out at the Anchorage A/C is the conservation majority of Alaskans dealing with the very real and most fundamental issue of who is going to control the public process and represent the public interest.
The 2009 Anchorage A/C is a recent example of what happens when Alaskans; who are mostly conservationist first, sit at a table and feel comfortable with putting on their residents first hat and challenge industry.
So, as much as some Anchorage A/C committee members did not want to find themselves in “the middle” of a war I expect members of the 2010 committee will be comfortable with wearing their “residents first” hat to committee meetings before the year is over and the special interests of these out-side the law industries will go….under the bus as they mostly did in 2009 at this committee.
The Anchorage A/C is a most appropriate venue for this battle at this time in our history of being divided by extremists on both sides who want to change to our fundamental SYSTEM of wildlife management to suit their special interests.
What happens at the Anchorage A/C in 2010 and 2011 is going to impact what happens in the coming years at the BOG and at the Big Game Commercial Services Board; you should not make any mistake about that Mr. Medred.
If the truth was known now…..what happened in 2009 as a result of actions taken by the 2009 Anchorage A/C committee has started the groundswell that will eventually put the conservation majority of Alaskans back in control of our public process that is so integral to our SYSTEM of wildlife management. Things are working just the way they are supposed too. It’s not pretty, it’s not fun but it’s working just the way it is supposed to.
What is playing out at the Anchorage A/C is mostly been driven by certain and specific actions taken up by the DNR which is significant.
DNR took on with no record of any administrative finding or decision; without statute, without regulation, without funding and without any kind of public process decided to develop a project of major public interest now known as the Guide “”"Concessions”"” Program.
The back story on this proposed program is of significant public interest and an opportunity of historic proportion to publicly demonstrate; educate the conservation majority of Alaskans, just how corrupted the system has become by the special interests of the commercial hunting industry.
The story simmered along through the 2009 Anchorage A/C committee and the January election has now perfected the perfect storm.
Fish and Game has it’s own body of law. DNR has it’s own body of law. The commercial hunting industry has manipulated our public process at the administrative level, avoiding the public process and engaged DNR; supported by the Board of Game and the Big Game Commercial Services Board, to develop what is the most special of special interest.
I predict the history will define the story of the proposed DNR GCP and the role of the 2009/2010/2011 Anchorage A/C as the turning point in the wildlife allocation battles this state has faced and will shape policy and procedure in a good way for residents for many many years to come.
With the support of both the BOG and the Big Game Commercial Services (appointed boards) and state administrators; the commercial hunting industry in collaboration with the DNR, is on the brink of hi-jacking the constitution of this state. Changing our SYSTEM of wildlife management to suit only their special interests. Some members of the 2009 A/C committee understood that. I expect the 2010 committee will understand it too before the year is over.
Those running Sportsman for Fish and Wildlife and the Alaska Professional Hunters Association understood the implications of an A/C that is not submissive to their special interests even if their constituents believed the problem to be the age old anti’s vs. hunters syndrome.
It is my hope that they are so far behind the real power curve that the backlash and unintended consequences of their actions ultimately end up in dissolving these organizations. They need to go away or be taken over by Alaskan residents who are able to put residents first. It would not hurt the AOC to have a full turn over of their board and paid staff either.
Resident hunters and fisherman; who are conservationist too, support organizations like Back Country Hunters and Anglers, The Alaska Outdoors Coalition, Sportsman for Fish and Wildlife thinking that as a member of these orgs that their non commercial interests are naturally going to be at the top of the priorities of these orgs when it comes to protecting them from ANY special commercial interests and the special interests of extreme environmentalists.
The facts of the matter are that these orgs either a) directly support the special interest of the commercial hunting industry or b) do not oppose; stay silent, on matters that advance the special interests of the commercial hunting industry over all other interests or c) incite their members to believe the issue (what ever it is) the orgs want support for manifests as the anti’s vs. hunters syndrome.
The majority of the environmental/conservation orgs Alaska residents support are no better at representing the majority of their constituents when it comes to standing against the special interests of the commercial industries that take our in-river fish and our game on public lands for profits. They are completely silent, probably in part because of their alliances with the in-river commercial sport fishing industry and/or the commercial hunting industry.
Constituents of so called “conservation” ogs believe that the ogs they support are involved in the public process that deals with our SYSTEM of wildlife management but the truth is they are not. And few of their constituents realize the alliance their conservation orgs have with pro in-river commercial sport fish industry and pro commercial hunting orgs
Conservation orgs in Alaska view anti’s vs. hunter issues that manifest publicly as either a) the issue is not a habitat issues or b) the issue is an allocation issue and “conservation” orgs don’t get into “allocation” issues…..so they would like the conservation majority of Alaskans and their supporters to believe anyway. But Pebble is all about allocation. Most Alaska conservation orgs ignore the public process of our wildlife management system in Alaska but every one of them is right at the forefront of one of the largest allocation battle’s ever.
The commercial hunting industry, the commercial in-river sport fishing industry and the limited entry commercial fishing industry and the conservation orgs in Alaska are all cozzied up and one big happy family over Pebble. Rest assured, conservation orgs in Alaska are all about the allocation of Alaska resources….just not wildlife.
Consequently none of these orgs do anything significant to stand against the special interests of the commercial industries in Alaska that exploits and commercializes resources (in-river fish and game on public lands) reserved for the common use of the people. That’s where the A/C’s come in, where they are supposed to come in but as we all know that process is corrupted too by the special interests of the commercial hunting and the in-river commercial sport fishing industry.
When the constituency of these orgs on either side of the middle have had enough of the special interests of industries that commercialize and exploit our public resources reserved for the common use these orgs; their boards and their paid staff are going to be held accountable for the value of the contributions their members make. When that happens who controls the public process when it comes to dealing with issues related to the system of management of our in-river fish and game on public lands is going to be snatched away from these industries that exploit our resources. There is no doubt of that in my mind.
The conservation majority of Alaskans; those of us who do understand what “reserved for the common use” of the people means will demonstrate that we actually own the process; not the special interests of the in-river commercial sport fishing industry and not the special interests of the commercial hunting industry and not the special interest of the most vocal anti predator control crowd. That is my hope.
I believe that day is coming and the likes of orgs in Alaska like Defenders of Wildlife and Sportsman for Fish and Wildlife…extremist outside organizations…may as well pack up and go back home when that happens. The long history of pimping Alaska by these organizations and others is going to be practically speaking; outlawed, by the conservation majority of Alaskans.
Home grown orgs like the Alaska Wildlife Alliance may as well close there doors too and the sooner the better unless they start paying attention to the conservation majority instead of extremists because as it is now that orgs is completely ineffective.
What has happened between January 2009 and January 2010 at the Anchorage A/C demonstrates Alaskans, given the venue and the opportunity can identify common ground and stand against the special interests of these out law (in-river commercial sport fishing and commercial hunting) industries despite the intervention of outfits like SFW, APHA, DOW and ACA.
The Anchorage A/C was very effective at representing diversification in 2009. Letters were sent to the BOG (feb 2009) and the Big Game Commercial Services Board (march 2009) advising those boards of issues specific to implemented industry practices that were interfering with rational wildlife management and what steps those Boards should take to neutralize the effect industry is having on the non commercial interests of Alaskan residents.
The commercial hunting industry did not like what they saw coming out of the 2009 Anchorage A/C and rallied their constituents through Sportsman For Fish and Wildlife primarily and played the time proven effective anti’s vs. hunters to take back control of the process at that level. And of course they are going to win that every time. This is Alaska and when push comes to shove we Alaskans are not going to stand on the side of extreme environmentalism. Alaska is not California. Alaskan is not Utah.
Time will tell whether this new Anchorage A/C committee is owned by the commercial hunting industry and the in-river commercial sport fishing industries in Alaska or can fairly recognize and represent that the law says residents first. That fish in the river and game on public lands may not be exploited or commercialized. That these resources are reserved for the common use of the people and that does call for reason to consider the diversity of uses that exist throughout Alaska.
My guess is this committee will demonstrate recognition of the diverse uses we hold in common and reason out the issues according to the preferences defined by the common use doctrine and make our recommendations and actions accordingly.
The opportunity created on Jan 5th was that some new minds are going to get exposed to how a few Alaskans (left overs from the 09 committee) view our rights and our perspectives and our obligations to stand against these special interest industries that control the public process and give the proper deference to other interests and the common use doctrine.
If we Alaskans want to break it all down to an us vs them mentality then report what is happening at the Anchorage A/C for what it really is….the conservation majority of Alaskans vs. the special interests of the in-river commercial sport fishing industry and the commercial hunting industry attempting to bring through the deliberative process other user interests of resources held in trust for the common use of all Alaskans.