ALASKA :
The management of millions of acres of public land was at stake due to the 2015 rule changes . A very broad definitiion of " predator reduction " left the door open to end all types of hunting .
The architects of the 2015 NPS rule change were both clever and strategic in how they manipulated public opinion to disguise the NPS power grab by portraying the 2015 rule change as a federal ban of unpopular hunting practices . They tapped into the general public ’ s apprehension about hunting practices like hunting denning bears , swimming caribou or hunting wolves in late spring , which are traditional methods in Alaska , especially for native populations . They fully understood that the headlines would shape the discourse among a national public unfamiliar with the need to hunt for food to survive in rural Alaska .
Many of the hunting practices the rule changes banned were already prohibited by the state . However , the architects of the rule did not publicize that fact , creating the impression that repealing the rules would legalize practices like poisoning animals . The rule changes targeted other traditional hunting practices , especially denning of bears , which are traditional and cultural hunting practices used by remote native communities to gather food in the winter . They knew that the media and general public would not take the time to map the areas and understand that the state only allowed these hunting practices in remote areas to accommodate culturally and locally appropriate needs and practices .
Trying to pit hunter against hunter , the architects also purported to exempt “ subsistence ” hunting . This was a false narrative , because much of the ordinary non-subsistence hunting in Alaska is hunting for food , and Alaskan native communities are only eligible to hunt as subsistence hunters during very specific times .
APHA President Sam Rohrer looks back to 2015 when the NPS passed the now-repealed regulations . “ I sat on Kodiak ’ s local federal subsistence Rural Advisor Committee when the 2015 rule was put out for public comment . As a group of rural Alaskans tasked with providing input to the federal land managers , we were taken aback and by the misleading title ’ non-subsistence hunting in Alaska .’ In fact , the rural hunting community across the state was put on their heels by the Park Service proposal and , frankly , offended by the Park Service ’ s overt efforts to conquer hunters by dividing us .”
Trying to play into perceived public opposition to predator control , the
Adobe Stock
14 SPORTSMEN ’ S MONTHLY