The Alaska Department of Fish and Game is again planning to shoot hundreds of bears and wolves, according to a release from Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility. Part of the plan would involve stationing shooters in helicopters to fire on the animals from the air. Other gunners would operate from snowmobiles.
The plan is open for public comments until December 27.
The goal is to thin the population of bears and wolves by as much as 80% within a 20,000-acre area bordering Denali and Lake Clark national parks and preserves. The state would like to see populations of those animals in the area reduced to 35 wolves, 700 black bears, and 375 brown bears.
The proposal put forward by Alaska DFG suggests the state may need to shoot 100 wolves per year to maintain the population goal of 35 animals in the 20,000-acre area under consideration.
According to the release from PEER, the efforts to reduce the population of these predator animals is intended to increase the amount of moose and caribou near Denali and Lake Clark.
Reducing the amount of wolves and bears around the national parks, of course, means fewer of those animals enter the park, and fewer opportunities for visitors to these Alaskan national parks to see those animals. Potentially, that's a huge loss in tourism revenue for the state as wolf viewing is a big draw. According to a statement from PEER in 2019, when the Alaska Department of Fish and Game elected to open wolf hunting in areas bordering Denali in 2010, the success rate of viewing wolves in the national park was 45%. By 2019, the success rate had plummeted to 1%.
“Alaska’s predator control policies are cruel and the epitome of penny wise and pound foolish," said PEER Executive Director Tim Whitehouse in the release. "The amount of tourist dollars from people seeking to view these predators in the wild dwarfs any incremental increase in hunting fee revenue the state hopes to realize.”
You can read the proposals here. And, if you'd like to submit a public comment, follow this link.
Story Categories:
A copy of National Parks Traveler's financial statements may be obtained by sending a stamped, self-addressed envelope to: National Parks Traveler, P.O. Box 980452, Park City, Utah 84098. National Parks Traveler was formed in the state of Utah for the purpose of informing and educating about national parks and protected areas.
Residents of the following states may obtain a copy of our financial and additional information as stated below:
- Florida: A COPY OF THE OFFICIAL REGISTRATION AND FINANCIAL INFORMATION FOR NATIONAL PARKS TRAVELER, (REGISTRATION NO. CH 51659), MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE DIVISION OF CONSUMER SERVICES BY CALLING 800-435-7352 OR VISITING THEIR WEBSITE. REGISTRATION DOES NOT IMPLY ENDORSEMENT, APPROVAL, OR RECOMMENDATION BY THE STATE.
- Georgia: A full and fair description of the programs and financial statement summary of National Parks Traveler is available upon request at the office and phone number indicated above.
- Maryland: Documents and information submitted under the Maryland Solicitations Act are also available, for the cost of postage and copies, from the Secretary of State, State House, Annapolis, MD 21401 (410-974-5534).
- North Carolina: Financial information about this organization and a copy of its license are available from the State Solicitation Licensing Branch at 888-830-4989 or 919-807-2214. The license is not an endorsement by the State.
- Pennsylvania: The official registration and financial information of National Parks Traveler may be obtained from the Pennsylvania Department of State by calling 800-732-0999. Registration does not imply endorsement.
- Virginia: Financial statements are available from the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, 102 Governor Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.
- Washington: National Parks Traveler is registered with Washington State’s Charities Program as required by law and additional information is available by calling 800-332-4483 or visiting www.sos.wa.gov/charities, or on file at Charities Division, Office of the Secretary of State, State of Washington, Olympia, WA 98504.
National parks and their natural resources belong to you. The National Parks Traveler works to ensure you know how these essential places are being cared for.
Sign Up For Our Weekly Newsletter
Unsubscribe at any time.
INN Member
The easiest way to explore RV-friendly National Park campgrounds.
Here’s the definitive guide to National Park System campgrounds where RVers can park their rigs.
Our app is packed with RVing- specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 national parks.
You’ll also find stories about RVing in the parks, tips helpful if you’ve just recently become an RVer, and useful planning suggestions.
Comments
Yeah... this is barbaric and foolish. Increase legal hunting permits if there is an overpopulation. And by legal- I mean on the ground hunting in a traditional manner. No heli or snowmobile shooting
Makes me sick to my stomach. People are incredibly cruel to think this is a good idea. I go to Alaska every summer and spend a lot of money frequenting areas in the hopes of seeing wildlife, bears and wolves top the list. I would hate to have to vacation somewhere else where all wildlife lives matter.
I would defer to the trained experts in AK who are on the ground and are fully aware of the ncecessity of this predator control.
PEER has no professional basis for questioning this proposal. As noted in the proposal, enlisting hunters using "traditional" hunting practices has been ineffective.
Why must humans always think we know best? Honestly, havent we learned by now that mother nature was put together perfectly from the beginning. All things working together perfectly. Remember when the US government eradicated wolves from Yellowstone in the 1920's? For the exact same reason? The adverse effects were profound and devastating! It took years to understand the impact not only wildlife but the entire eco system. Shooting them from the air? Really? Nature has survived millions of years and always maintained balance, Obviously, mother nature knew how to maintain the balance well enough all these years ! I agree, if human interference is absolutely inevitable, a traditional ground hunting in which the animal can then used for food, clothing etc., and benefits the local peoples. This is the better, sensible option. Native Americans could educate you, they understand Nature best, and the circle of life, how it is meant to be. A flyover brutal kill is "easy" however it is unnecessary. There are other options as noted that will also be beneficial to the Native communities in the area.
The interior of Alaska has historically had a very low population of people due to the lack of ungulates (moose, caribou and sheep) caused primarily by wolf and bear predation. Families were very large, with 12 to 15 children as only a handful survived childhood.
The fake narrative of a "natural balance" is a fairy tale for ignorant, urban people. What occurs in Alaska's interior are predator pit conditions, wherein even the predators become scarce after killing off the ungulate populations. These are century long conditions.
Alaska Natives (we are not "indigineous" like animals and plants, we are human beings), primarily snared moose, caribou, along with hares and birds. It is the most effective method to aquire food with the least effort, when failure results in losing your children and elders.
Our elders denned wolf pups, killing them in their dens in May during the pup season. Every effort to kill bears and wolves was used to reduce the deaths among families.
The logic of aerial killing wolves and bears creates optimal opportunity for moose and caribou calves to survive increasing the entire biomass. This enhances the populations of all animals to meet nutritional needs of humans and allow for the decadent pleasure of ignorant, rich outside people to view animals and create nonsensical myths from reality, without destroying our cultures.
The national parks have destroyed wildlife and encroached on our lands, with totalitarian administrators dictating ecobabble regulations destroying large regions in Alaska.
Predator control is one of the few functions the State of Alaska conducts that is meaningful to wildlife and subsistence.
This is barbaric and should not be an option
I think those who are most in favor are those that find pleasure in killing these beautiful animals just for the thrill of killing them. Pathologic. Animals taken for food or clothing is an act where we give thanks yo our Creator for these provisions. Sure, if there is a rogue predator seeking out humans to attack/ kill them, then its it is necessary to hunt and kill it. It is barbaric, shameful, and cowardly, and lazy to use helicopter and snow mobiles to kill just for sport.
Apart from animal welfare concerns, there is ample evidence, including studies published by former ADFG biologists, that the State’s aerial shooting of bears and wolves is generally NOT effective at increasing the numbers of caribou and moose for harvest. It is noteworthy that the Board of Game does not include any scientists among its board members. It is well documented that the AK predator control program does not follow National Research Council recommendations for monitoring and evaluating the effects and effectiveness of the State’s predator control program.
Here are a variety of information sources supporting the above. Too much information, I know! Just saying there is considerable scientific evidence suggesting legitimate concerns that the program does not accomplish what ADFG says it will.
https://alcesjournal.org/index.php/alces/article/view/371/455#:~:text=In...)%20and%20addressed%20biological%20and%20socioeconomic%20issues.
https://www.mdpi.com/1424-2818/14/11/939
https://alaskapublic.org/2023/07/20/alaska-predator-control-doesnt-resul...
https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.30...
https://www.investigatewest.org/news/in-an-era-of-climate-change-alaskas...
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UcUSRqyMkYJKyA50iMz2ymyHoTNPW3C-/view?u...
Mike Murray
Wow your going to allow people to kill animals in the name of the all mighty dollar. Alaska you truly amaze me . These bears and wolves have more of a right to be here then so called humans ,if it was for food it might be different but certainly not to kill from helicopters or snow machines . BTW Who is actually the human in this case
Kill the wildlife, and you kill humanity. There is a balance to the ecosystem. We're already imbalanced. Don't perpetuate the issue further with this illogically-minded approach.
As a life long Native Alaskan, it would be wise to open the area up for trapping & hunting. People are busy, making a living & caring for their families in the cities, so it's unlikeky to draw many folks to go trapping for 2 weeks to 3 months, unless you want to lose your day job. Remote cabins are needed to be built by trappers...
There are too many wolves in general everywhere and we need to seriously trap these animals because they do largely deplete the moose calves, and caribou, especially, the grizzly (brown) bears. In the last couple years, in some villages like Ruby, wolves have come in and have eaten folks' sled dogs. It can be dangerous to walk around actually, and so folks drive or use the snow machinne everywhere they go. Last winter, a dog musher & his dogs were chased for several miles, and almost killed by a pack of wolves in Minto. There's got to be a better market for the furs. I know I appreciate fur clothing because if your not dressed warm outside at -40 in one of our 7 months of Winter, you will die. Ask villagers. They are aware of fewer moose because of the wolves, and grizzly bears. Btw, grizzlies eat black bears.
As an Alaska resident, I am in full support of this. Forgive me for putting the needs of Alaskan families to feed their children ahead of people from the lower 48 wanting to take a photo and check one more thing off the vacation bucket list. This has nothing to do with money or hunting for trophies. Alaska is simply trying to rebuild a caribou herd that has been decimated by predators. Funny how we never hear Alaskans telling the lower 48 what they can or can't do regarding feeding themselves. Put simply, no Alaskan residency. No opinion on this matter. In a place where even half decent quality meat at the store is $10-$20 a pound (much more in remote native alaskan villages), many people would not be able to continue to live here without the ability to harvest some of the bounty of wildlife this special place has to offer. This state is more that just a playground for lower 48 to come and take photos for 1-2 weeks out of the year. It is the home of 730000 people year round.
Grown men are discharging firearms from airborne vehicles.
In the lower 48 you work for your food- you dont just get to go hunt it. If the area is not habitable for the people there than the effort should be made to move to where you can live.
The govt is not in the business of making the outdoors an ideal place for you to harvest food to make your life easier. In fact the govt could care less. It why we have so many homeless.
The subsistence lifestyle of many alaskans has become dependent upon the govt for pretty much there entire existence. Where else in the United States are people given money and food to live because the are is not suitable for habitation? Where else does the govt manage herds for subsitance hunting?
No where.
Occasional sport hunting by citizens has nothing to do with the wholesale slaughter of big game by corrupt cops and professional hunters. And no we are not as poor as you assume.
Please note that the planned killings referenced in this article are dwarfed by The coordinated slaughter of other wildlife you and I pay our federal government to commit on our behalf so we can have cheap subsidized meat. Just last year our government's "Wildlife Services" department used firearms, poisoned bait, cyanide bombs and other lethal devices to kill 305 wolves, 6 grizzly bears, 437 Black Bears and 237 mountain lions. In addition to providing public comment when given the opportunity, we should also remain cognizant of the fact that we vote with every dollar we spend and every bite of food that we consume. Purchasing meat from a grocery store is a vote for this continued slaughter. Something to think about when we choose to let other people provide us with food.
https://www.doi.gov/subsistence
to clarify this is what I was referecing- "subsistance" hunting.
To my knowledge no other are of the United States allows such a bending of the rules. If a "rural" community can not sustain and feed itself than it should cease to exist like every other community that went defunct in the lower 48. And I can think of a lot of them inlcluding the salton sea area of CA. Imagine if we allowed people that lived there to hunt year round. Just because.
I am sure the homeless in the US would like to catch and kill widlife for their enjoyment too. But they cant... And no one subsidized there food
If the predator population is not called to a reasonable amount for the area, these animals will die of starvation, which is a much more cruel way of dying for them. I support the game management operations to bring the population of predators back to a normal doable amount, even if it does Cut down on the sightseeing tours of tourism.
Human brutalitality know no limits. These managers want to play god. Where is their scientific, let alone anecdotal proof this works. Why do I nice t animal need to always die instead of other methods to be utilized to either raise prey POPULATIONS (better) or perhaps relocate to predators. You kill off members of social organizations. Nature takes out the weak. Man hunts for the trophies. That is why things like Lyme's disease, chronic wasting disease etc. is allowed to proliferate. Nature's balance was created and fine tuned over millions of years. Man's capacity to mass kill for the sake of killing has evolved in less than the last 200 years, wiping out whole species in his arrogance negatively effecting all humans touch.
Aerial shooting is execution and a cull; it's not our human place to intervene and play God in the determination of what animals need population control. Fod and Mother Nature and science will regulate the popuaions in a natural way without out barbaric and inhumane interference. Reducing the wolves to a poppilation of 35 in the middle of winter will decimate the wolf population. Tourists will boycott coming to Alaska as you are killing the wildlife they are coming to see.