In an incongruous twist, a proposal to conduct a cow moose hunt in Kincaid Park won the support of the Anchorage Fish and Game Advisory Committee in the same meeting where members demonstrated their reluctance to support any existing antlerless moose hunts in the Anchorage area.
The Anchorage advisory committee decided Tuesday to support the proposed hunt in Kincaid Park, but voted to not reauthorize a popular antlerless hunt at the head of Turnagain Arm. Members once again postponed a decision on whether to reauthorize all other antlerless moose hunts in Unit 14C, a management area stretching from the Knik River to the Portage River.
The advisory committee typically opposes cow hunts because it wants more moose in the Anchorage area for hunting. Some members also want Anchorage to provide breeding stock to rural areas. But several members voiced their support of a cow hunt in Kincaid Park with the expressed hope that the Alaska Board of Game would also allow bulls to be hunted there one day.
As with any wildlife-related issue in Alaska, many conflicting points of view were expressed during the marathon six-hour meeting.
Move it or lose it
The Anchorage committee is one of 84 advisory committees throughout Alaska that assist the Alaska Board of Game in establishing and revising fishing and hunting regulations. Their role is advisory with one major exception.
The Alaska Legislature has given the committees sole authority to reauthorize any antlerless moose hunts in their areas. Wildlife managers use antlerless hunts to reduce a growing moose population and maintain it at what state biologists consider an optimum level by targeting cows. If most advisory committees in a management area fail to reauthorize an antlerless moose hunt, the hunt falls off the books until it can be considered at a subsequent board meeting, typically two years later.
At its November meeting, the Anchorage advisory committee voted to not reauthorize most of the current antlerless hunts in the Anchorage area. The committee had not publicized its plan to vote on antlerless proposals at that meeting; the chair even told the area Fish and Game management biologist it wasn't necessary for him to attend.
A subsequent meeting in December was well attended by members of the public who asked the committee to consider reauthorizing antlerless hunts. The committee voted to reconsider its previous decision, then tabled the vote until its January meeting.
More than 40 people crowded into a small room Tuesday to watch or testify on the issue. Once again, public testimony favored reauthorizing the hunts. Eight people supported antlerless hunts. The five people who spoke against antlerless hunts were board or staff members of the Alaska Moose Federation or its offshoots, the Alaska Moose Conservation Fund (AMCF) and Moose Mamas.
They opposed antlerless moose hunts in the Anchorage area, including one at the head of Turnagain Arm, because they want to capture the moose and move them to the Kenai Peninsula, Point MacKenzie or other parts of the state where moose populations are "depleted," according to AMCF Executive Director Gary Olson. Terrence Shanigan, a former member of the Upper Susitna Fish and Game Advisory Committee, suggested moving 300 moose out of Anchorage "instead of killing them." Craig Gales, an Alaska Moose Federation board member, also opposed "growing moose" in Anchorage and asked "why not leave 600 moose" in Unit 14C and move the remainder — Fish and Game's population estimate is 1,550 animals — elsewhere in the state.
Several hunters testifying in favor of reauthorizing antlerless hunts took exception to the idea of moving hundreds of moose out of Unit 14C. Why not, they asked, let Anchorage residents hunt them? Why should Anchorage be used to stock moose in other parts of the state when many Anchorage residents can't afford to fly to remote areas to hunt moose?
Misunderstandings and bad assumptions
Two members of the advisory committee, Steve Flory and Robert Caywood, are members of the Alaska Moose Federation. They praised board members who testified and kept circling back to the idea of relocating moose, although their primary objective seemed to be to increase the moose population in the Anchorage area to allow more hunting opportunities.
Flory, an alternate member, made motions, questioned those who testified and was such a domineering presence that one member, Gary Brell, objected, calling Flory "disruptive." Another member suggested that Flory "stand down" and perhaps step out of the room to cool off. When he didn't, Brell resigned. Because Brell was the secretary, debate on the pending question was put on hold long enough to elect another secretary to continue the minutes.
The issue that triggered Brell's resignation was Flory's attempt to twist Fish and Game's annual proposal to reauthorize antlerless hunts into a vehicle for increasing the number of bull permits by eliminating all existing cow permits. Flory had just handed a detailed list with the numbers on it to Jessy Coltrane, the Anchorage area biologist. Coltrane looked at the list and was attempting to articulate why it would be difficult for her to delve into such detail having just seen the numbers. At least two committee members then admitted that they hadn't seen Flory's list either.
After Brell walked out, the committee decided to let Coltrane have a week to digest the numbers, and scheduled a subcommittee meeting in which to negotiate a deal. But what the committee wants — more bull permits in exchange for all existing cow permits — doesn't match what Coltrane is asking for: the authority to use antlerless permits as a management tool to keep the moose population between 1,500 and 1,800 animals, the objective established by the Alaska Board of Game.
Issuing antlerless permits is an often-used way to meet that objective. If all cows are protected and more bulls are shot, there will eventually be too few bulls to breed all the cows.
Several committee members —– including Flory, Caywood and Robert Peck — said they don't trust the department's population estimate for moose in Unit 14C.
"Do you think we should allow the same situation with moose in Anchorage as with king salmon in the Kenai River?" Peck said. "It's the same department."
Fish and Game biologists have almost no voice in the committee's deliberations other than to offer advice.
Kincaid moose hunt
The Anchorage committee's opposition to antlerless hunts melted away when a motion to support an antlerless hunt in Kincaid Park was made. Debating the issue, several members asked the proposal's sponsor, Ira Edwards, and Coltrane whether the municipality and the public would accept the hunt if bulls could also be shot. Both Edwards and Coltrane advised the committee not to go there because bulls are more valued by photographers and most moose viewers, and cows with calves are more dangerous than bulls in an urban environment.
The Kincaid hunt now must be approved by the Board of Game.
A remaining hurdle is a possible backlash from Anchorage residents opposed to the hunt. The Board of Game has ignored overwhelming public opinion on similar issues in the past, such as wolverine trapping in Chugach State Park.
The final hurdle is likely to be the municipality of Anchorage. Supervisors of the parks and recreation department aren't particularly fond of hunting in municipal parks; however, they've allowed some strictly regulated moose hunting in Chugiak parks.
Still waiting
Moose hunters who've applied for an antlerless permit in Unit 14C — which includes the Twentymile, Portage and Placer river drainages at the head of Turnagain Arm — are still waiting for the advisory committee to reauthorize the hunts for next fall and winter. Fish and Game will not return application fees if a hunt is canceled by advisory committee action.
According to Fish and Game, one of the three advisory committees in Unit 14, the Susitna Valley Fish and Game Advisory Committee, voted unanimously to reauthorize Anchorage's antlerless hunts. If the Mat-Su advisory committee also votes to reauthorize Anchorage's antlerless hunts, whatever the Anchorage advisory committee does will be moot.
Rick Sinnott is a former Alaska Department of Fish and Game wildlife biologist. The views expressed here are the writer's own and are not necessarily endorsed by Alaska Dispatch News. Contact him at rickjsinnott@gmail.com