View Single Post
  #17  
Old 03-14-2010, 08:02 PM
FishNHunt FishNHunt is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Maryville,TN
Posts: 221
Default

I have read the artical and still can't figure out exactly all the wording.

I would like to give an example of what can happen if the "voting public" DOES have a say in how recreational hunting is done.

I doubt that not many of you bear hunt and even less lion hunt. I would also guess that many are even repulsed by the very thought of killing such a regal, majestic, beautiful creature. I understand, and will tread lightly with my words.

In Washington state the bear populations is the highest in the lower 48 and Oregon is close behind. In these two states bear hunting is strictly limited to baiting and or stalking. The bear population is not held in check because the "voting public" mostly from the large cities like Seattle and Portland desided that hunting a bear with hounds was "unsportsman like". The states hands are now tied and they must hire payed government hunters to kill off large numbers of bears on lands owned by timber companys because bears like to nibble on the tops of young trees and they destroy many trees marking their territory. The state is loosing much revenue because they will not allow hunters to run their dogs to control this issue. State bioligists have lobbied for years to reinstate hound hunting but, the vote of the public over rides sounds manangement practices in the name of political correctness.

California no longer allows the hunting of mountain lions with hounds and as far as I can find does not allow lion hunting by, the public period. Once a lion creates a problem payed government hunters use the ONLY known practice to hunt them down and destroy them.... hounds. This is again due to the fact that the "Voting" public did not like the thought of houndsmen chasing a mountain lion, treeing it and quickly dispatching it.

New Jersey has a major black bear problem and the state agencies and the public have begged for a season but, one single man... the govenor, vetos the rights to protect the public every time the issue is brought to hand.

I don't believe that the general public should be able to over ride the sound judgement practices of years of biological studies to control populations. This is all done in the name of political correctness.

If the practices that the bioligists and state agencies implement endanger the publics well being or are causing more problems than good then they must be addressed and revised. Let the people who know how to manage the wildlife do their jobs.
Reply With Quote