Administrative error reopens discussion on Nelchina hunt
PREDATORS: But Board of Game’s failure to notify does not affect McGrath
wolf kill.
By DOUG O’HARRA
Anchorage Daily News
The Alaska Board of Game must revisit its decision about Nelchina Basin
wolf control and get more public comment because board staff members
didn’t send official notices to about 1,000 people on its mailing lists.
The state Department of Law ruled that this lack of public notice —
caused by a misunderstanding in an e-mail message — nullifies 25
proposals passed during the board’s Anchorage meeting, said Diana Cote,
executive director of the board support section in the Department of Fish
and Game.
“It was an error on our part,” she said Thursday. “I think everybody who
wanted to know about the meeting knew … but the letter of the law wasn’t
followed.”
Among the actions now on hold are new regulations that would permit
certain private pilots to land and shoot wolves in a 7,800-square-mile
area north of Glennallen as soon as January, in a program aimed at
increasing Nelchina Basin moose and caribou by killing 100 to 130 of their
predators.
That proposal, as well as 24 routine regulatory changes for Region 5 in
Western Alaska, will now go through another round of public scrutiny.
The board must mail and publish new meeting notices as soon as possible,
take written public comment for another 30 days and then vote again at a
teleconference meeting Dec. 15, Cote said.
While no new oral testimony will be taken in December, all previous
comments remain valid and people will be able to listen to the
teleconference meeting at sites in Anchorage, Fairbanks and Juneau.
The process will cost about $5,000, Cote said.
“The first question you ask is, ‘Why?’ ” said Game Board chairman Mike
Fleagle of McGrath. “But once they explain that it’s just an error or an
oversight, you say, ‘OK, let’s pick it up and let’s fix it.’ I certainly
don’t blame anybody.”
In practical terms, the administrative glitch could mean little difference
in the timing or number of wolves that might be killed under a
predator-control program that has reignited one of Alaska’s most divisive
wildlife issues. And the other 24 regulations on the table for Western
Alaska weren’t supposed to take effect until July 1.
Three to five private pilots still will be issued permits to shoot about
40 wolves from aircraft in a 1,700-square-mile area near McGrath later
this month, wildlife officials said. The goal was to reduce the number of
predators eating moose.
While the board discussed the McGrath project at the meeting and voted to
reaffirm its support, the project had been approved under existing
regulations and wasn’t affected by the meeting notices, according to Cote.
“Our understanding is the signal to proceed is still valid,” said Matt
Robus, director of the Division of Wildlife Conservation. “We can issue
permits right now … and that’s what we intend to do in the McGrath
area.”
If the board reapproves Nelchina wolf kill, permits could be issued by
mid- or late-January, said Jeff Hughes, regional supervisor for the
wildlife division. That’s only a few weeks later than if the decision
hadn’t been nullified.
The mistake notice occurred when two staff members overseeing the mailing
lists misunderstood each other, Cote said. Notices were mailed to game
advisory boards but not to the state Law Department, federal agencies and
many individuals.
Cote would not identify the people who goofed or say whether they would be
disciplined.
“Our division has a lot of checks in our system to make sure errors like
this don’t happen,” she said. “We’re working with the Department of Law to
identify more checks that we can put into our system so that it doesn’t
happen ever again.”
Some conservation groups and animal welfare organizations have protested
the board’s decision to conduct a wolf kill, arguing that it’s unnecessary
and ignores Alaska voters’ rejection of land-and-shoot hunting in 1996 and
2000. One group has threatened to launch a national tourism boycott.
But wildlife officials have countered that these projects aren’t hunting
but state-sponsored predator control conducted by a small number of
citizens with permits.
Although the board has unanimously approved the wolf programs once, it
will study any new comments before voting again, Fleagle said.
“Obviously, the board could take new votes based on new testimony,” he
said. “A person really hates to presuppose anything on this, but
conceivably we could maintain the same decision.”
“I think Alaskans ought to take this opportunity to send written comments
into the Board of Game regarding these proposals that violate the wishes
of the Alaska people,” responded Karen Deatherage of Defenders of
Wildlife, a group opposing the wolf program. “And call the governor.”