Recently Mark Richards, the executive director of Resident Hunters of Alaska penned a strongly worded commentary piece criticizing Nate Turner, a well-respected member of the Alaska Board of Game and its current vice-chair, who is up for reappointment this year. The piece amounts to little more than a personal attack meant to tarnish Mr. Turner's good reputation.
What do we know about RHAK? RHAK is a group of less than 50 individuals formed primarily because they believe non-residents are taking too many sheep. RHAK's solution is to eliminate 75 percent of all non-resident sheep hunters. They seem to have ambitious goals, including:
RHAK's other motivation appears to be repealing the regulation which eliminates the practice of aggressively spotting Dall sheep with an aircraft during the hunting season, also known as Proposal 207. The Board of Game originally passed Proposal 207, by a vote of 5 to 2 on the basis of ethics, fair chase and the benefits to the Alaska resident sheep hunter. What is perplexing is that RHAK adamantly opposes this restriction, a regulation that greatly benefits resident sheep hunters. RHAK primarily consists of airplane pilots who have fought aggressively to repeal proposal 207. In testimony given to the sheep working group, one of the RHAK board members stated it was appropriate to buzz sheep with his airplane and disrupt other sheep hunter's stalks. Clearly RHAK does not believe aggressively spotting sheep with an airplane is unethical and does not violate fair chase principles.
RHAK further mischaracterizes its own advocacy and the issues of "non-resident second-degree of kindred hunting with their relative family." First, RHAK did not oppose or suggest changes to the proposal (51) as written by the Alaska Professional Hunters Association, instead choosing to focus on repealing the ban on spotting sheep from the air during the hunting season. Second, RHAK itself proposed the most draconian restrictions on non-resident, second-degree of kindred relatives by supporting a blanket "10 percent allocation" to all non-residents in a drawing hunt scenario. Proposal 51 passed 6-1 on its merits while RHAK's proposals failed unanimously.
What is most disturbing about RHAK, is their scorched earth politics. In their first newsletter they dedicate a great deal of space to oppose the reappointment of Mr. Turner. RHAK believes that because Mr. Turner is a registered guide he should not serve on the Board of Game. That is simply ridiculous. If we follow this line of reasoning, we should then remove all commercial and sport guiding fisherman from the Board of Fish and trappers from the Board of Game. RHAK claims that Mr. Turner has a conflict of interest and has contributed to several recent "anti-resident" proposals. The problem with RHAK's claim is Mr. Turner's voting record reflects the opposite. Mr. Turner is an effective board member, who is fair to all user groups. The record also reflects that, more often than not, he votes against his own guiding industry. RHAK's solution is to replace Mr. Turner with their own pick. This "wisdom" should give us pause; one only needs look at the current membership of RHAK to see the kind of board member they would support. Following is an excerpt from a commentary published by Alaska Dispatch News, April 30, 2013, by RHAK Executive Director Mark Richards when referring to the Board of Fish process.
"But what all of us should not respect, nor condone, no matter our position or viewpoint, is any organization running a smear campaign against a BOA' member as a political tactic to get him ousted from the board The very sad fact is that so many legislators seemed to have bought into it. Not to mention how this kind of dirty-politics-at-its-worst will only prevent good people from wanting to serve on our fish and game boards."
One can only assume that Mr. Richards' philosophy does not apply when it comes to the Board of Game.
RHAK would probably like hunters to believe they are protecting the Alaskan hunter. However, the facts prove contrary to their assertions. Richards is the former Alaska Chapter Chairman of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers (BHA), an organization that is one of the latest fronts in Big Green's spider web. Environmentalist activism is the name of the game at BHA, and hunters and anglers are just the camouflage. BHA has received hundreds of thousands of dollars from environmental groups, and BHA executive director Land Tawney has a history of liberal election activism. BHA represents itself as good-ole-boy outdoorsmen who simply want to hunt and fish and be left alone. But don't be fooled. As evidenced by both its sources of funding and current leadership, BHA is nothing more than a big green activist organization pushing a radical environmentalist agenda.
RHAK claims to be the voice of the resident hunter the values of rural Alaska and Alaska Natives.
RHAK states in its first newsletter, FeedbAK, its believe that it will grow to be "the largest force in the largest hunting state in the free world. That is not an understatement. The resident hunters in this amazing state, if organized and involved through RHAK, will drive the hunting and conservation policies." This statement begs the question: Is this more about protecting Alaska residents or power? This statement indicates illusions of self-importance and grandeur. Apparently, this is what a $1,000 membership to RHAK buys you.
Steve Perrins is owner/operator of Rainy Pass Lodge, Alaska's oldest hunting and fishing lodge. Ken Johns of Tazlina served on the Alaska Board of Game from 1992-95 and is a former president of Ahtna Inc. Greg Roczicka of Bethel served on the Alaska Board of Game from 1996-2002 and is a former board chairman.
The views expressed here are the writer's own and are not necessarily endorsed by Alaska Dispatch News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, email commentary@alaskadispatch.com. Send submissions shorter than 200 words to letters@alaskadispatch.com or click here to submit via any web browser.