Terrain Navigator
CD ROM topographic map coverage for ALL of Alaska

Click for more information

Complete Catalogs

Alaska Hunting Books
Alaska Fishing Books
Alaska Travel Books

Plan Your
Alaska Trip
with The Milepost

Click here for more information or to
order your copy

[ Return to Contents | Post a Reply | Post a new message ]

1.) Alaskan Native corporations aren't sovereign nations so that example doesn't exactly fit the situation up here. A soveriegn nation owns the game within its lands. The example would be similar to shooting an animal in the US and having it drop in Canada with a customs check between you and it. God forbid anyone ever gets tangled up in that kind of mess!!!

2.) That's kind of similar to the Governors Tag auctioned off for sheep hunting. It helps provide much needed revenue for management but essentially equates to the state selling game. That differs from a private (native) corporation selling game for its own profit but I'm sure we could start a whole other thread on that one!

3.) I'm not sure about Alaska but I know that in other states such as NY the landowner must reimburse the state a set fee for each game animal enclosed within the fence. I believe it was something around $500 per deer in NY. (A wealthy landowner in NY encouraged a friend of mine to shoot every deer he and his friends legally could off her land before her fence was enclosed; whe happily obliged.)


4.) The hunter contacted the wrong law enforcement official. The local sheriff isn't in charge of game regulations. He should've contacted a game warden or the appropriate state enforcement officer. Seems to me that the sheriff just wanted to shirk the issue off and took the most expedient means of doing so.

Message Thread:

• Access fee or selling game? GunsmithRob Jan 11 2006
  • Ideas vs people Webmaster Jan 13 2006
    • forgive me, but not entirely a people v idea issue RobR Jan 17 2006
    • Good idea AkHunter45 Jan 13 2006
  • would u prefer they prohibited hunting completely RobR Jan 13 2006
    • not opportunity twodux Jan 13 2006
      • semantics RobR Jan 17 2006
      • Private Land Sheep Hunter Jan 15 2006
    • Right on Rob & mt chignik Jan 13 2006
    • Big assumption B_M Jan 13 2006
      • You said it AkHunter45 Jan 13 2006
        • read the post i was responding to RobR Jan 17 2006
    • Right on RobR martentrapper Jan 13 2006
      • charging twodux Jan 14 2006
      • Afognak timber GunsmithRob Jan 13 2006
      • Native corp AkHunter45 Jan 13 2006
      • prince of wales island muskeg Jan 13 2006
  • So! Why do we have Fedral Fish and wildlife ? Bigmnt Jan 13 2006
    • Constitution PatrickH Jan 13 2006
    • USF&W thenarwhal Jan 13 2006
      • Thanks Thenarwhal Bigmnt Jan 14 2006
      • Dead serious Bigmnt Jan 14 2006
        • feds twodux Jan 14 2006
        • reality muskeg Jan 14 2006
  • Let only the rich hunt! akflyfisher Jan 12 2006
  • The State Does It, Too Mark Jan 11 2006
    • The lower 48 attitudes are creeping up thenarwhal Jan 12 2006
      • scenarios GunsmithRob Jan 12 2006
      • right of retrieval homerdave Jan 12 2006
      • wanton waste? twodux Jan 12 2006
      • Native Land B_M Jan 12 2006
  • attitude homerdave Jan 11 2006
    • game farm attitude Chisana Jan 11 2006
  • Selling Game tccak71 Jan 11 2006
    • Afognak Mr. Pid Jan 11 2006
      • fees for public resources twodux Jan 12 2006
        • trophy fees Mr. Pid Jan 12 2006
          • That's the point B_M Jan 12 2006
            • Fees DPhillips Jan 12 2006
              • Devil's Advocate GunsmithRob Jan 17 2006
              • they do charge twodux Jan 13 2006
                • My Point... DPhillips Jan 13 2006
                  • you DO understand... homerdave Jan 13 2006
                    • ??? DPhillips Jan 13 2006
            • the point Mr. Pid Jan 12 2006
              • what if twodux Jan 14 2006
              • boat launch?? BRWNBR Jan 12 2006
      • Fee's AkHunter45 Jan 11 2006
        • fees Mr. Pid Jan 11 2006
          • Just wrong! Justin Jan 12 2006
          • Land AkHunter45 Jan 11 2006
          • Their LAND - not their game B_M Jan 11 2006
            • agree to disagree Mr. Pid Jan 11 2006
              • the difference twodux Jan 12 2006
            • bitter martentrapper Jan 11 2006
              • Afognak AkHunter45 Jan 11 2006
                • a scam? u got to be kidding RobR Jan 17 2006
                  • yup twodux Jan 17 2006
                    • then about every landowner in the lower 48 ... RobR Jan 18 2006
    • Private Land B_M Jan 11 2006