Reprinted from my Future of Hunting March 2009 column on Bowhunting.net
As always, relative to your (and your kids) hunting future, there is good news and bad news. On the "good news" side, as I write this, the governor of New Jersey has a bill sitting on his desk that will allow bowhunters in New Jersey to hunt on private property and state wildlife management areas on Sunday.
It appears that the Governor will sign this bill, and if so, it’s an extraordinary plus for bowhunters there. Governor Corzine has not been a friend of hunting and played a major role in preventing bear hunting in New Jersey, even though most experts saw no legitimate alternatives and saw the need to lower bear numbers. However, legislators supported this bill to the tune of 69 in favor, 9 opposed. To veto this legislation means you have to explain why to both Democrats and Republicans.
Clearly there are too many deer in many parts of New Jersey and damage to shrubs, cars, and humans via auto collisions and disease is quite evident. And this bill only opens up private property and wildlife management areas (bought and paid for, for the most part, by sportsmen and women in New Jersey).
As you would expect, the Humane Society of the United States, and other anti groups, are flooding the Governor with negative comments on the bill. For example, HSUS is posting several comments for their believers to send to Corzine. Most are erroneous, and some are flat-out lies. Why am I not surprised. For example, one of their statements is as follows. "Arrows know no boundaries and pose public safety hazards to anyone who is within a large radius of the hunter. Domestic animals, such as horses, are sometimes mistaken for game animals. Increasing recreational opportunities for bow hunters diminishes opportunities for hikers, horseback riders, bird watchers, and others."
I have no problem with people being against bowhunting on Sunday. But I have a major problem with the use of lies to convince the unknowing to be against Sunday hunting. The safety issue is always raised by HSUS whenever there is a need for bowhunting in suburban areas (and there are lots of such areas in New Jersey). They do so even though they know that there has never been a mortality of a non bowhunter in a deer bow hunt. In fact, I do not think there has been an accident of any kind involving non hunters during an urban bowhunt. During bowhunts, on any day of the week, safety for non hunters is not an issue. Safety for non hunters is not an issue. Safety for non hunters is not an issue. What is it that HSUS does not understand about the real data on safety and bowhunting and non hunters?
And, no, domestic animals are not mistaken for deer. Yes, there have been a few such bow shootings around the country. There was one in my area several years ago, where a llama was shot by an arrow. But, such shootings are not misidentifications. They are just young, dumb kids who just need to grow up.
There is a second bill on the Governors desk, one that would change the safety zone around buildings from 450 feet to 150 feet. That may not sound like a big deal, but go to a state such as New Jersey where there are tons of out buildings scattered all over the landscape. And remember, that 450 feet (150 yards) is a radius that surrounds ever building. That amounts to about 7 acres for every building. Thus, there are thousands of acres where deer are not managed. By the way, the state legislators understand that there is not a safety issue here either, relative to bowhunting. They voted 66 to 11 in favor of this bill.
So now we await Governor Corzines decision on these very important matters. I’ll let you know.
On another interesting issue, the National Park Service recently came out with a statement saying they would eliminate lead used by hunters and fishers by the end of 2010 on all national parks. We fish in many of these parks, and we hunt in over 60 of these parks. Let’s take hunting for example. There is a major furor of lead bullets going on right now. States such as Minnesota are concerned about venison donated to feed the hungry. They feel that there is a health safety issue there, even though a North Dakota study showed that folks who ate venison in North Dakota had blood lead levels lower than the average US citizen. Hmmm.
The other more real concern is that animal gut piles, and dead animals shot with lead bullets have lead fragments that kill birds of prey that consume such meat. In fact, there is data showing that California Condors are so affected. But the NRA felt that the ruling by the Park Service was just too broad. They released a firestorm of protests, so much so, that two-three weeks after their initial decree, the National Park Service came out and said, something to the effect that, "we didn’t really mean it. What we really meant was that only our employees could not fish or hunt with lead. Everyone else can use it." Yea right. It’s called back pedaling.
Even so, this is a first step to something that is occurring that is just another chink in the decline of hunting and fishing. Removing lead from hunting and fishing products is happening and it will increase over the next ten years. Will the antis support such measures? Of course. They will say, we really support hunting and fishing, we just are against the use of lead. I remember years ago the HSUS saying they really supported hunting, but they just opposed the use of bait for hunting bears in Colorado. Yea right.
@
@
