New Jersey Hunters banner
41 - 60 of 78 Posts
Hey GVS, I have to say, it seems like your glass is "half empty". But having said that, I think you're also missing an important point here. I don't know if you live or just hunt in "rural" Sussex Cty, but for people such as myself who live in suburban developments loaded with deer there is a another perspective. Many deer get killed by cars in these areas and the carcasses lay in the roads, backyards and parks of these semi-developed areas, half eaten by foxes, vultures and other critters and cause a major problem for residents. I can't tell you how many deer I've personally dragged out of neighbor's yards just to help them get rid of the stench. The township won't deal with the dead deer on your property, so it's up to the homeowner to handle. Yes, the possibility exists that a deer could drop in someone's yard, but according to my non-hunting neighbors they would rather have a hunter drag it out after it dies than have it lay there and rot for weeks at a time. Remember, part of the reason this bill is being passed so far is that the townships, and the politicians, get many complaints regarding dead deer on properties. It's not just about our recreational hunting "adventures," it's also about helping with the overpopulation in these areas of our state.
 
Thank you Jack.

Coming from someone who's lead the charge on conservation and bowhunting throughout New Jersey for decades, your words mean a great deal.

I am grateful.
 
The only problem I can forsee is that if the State allows it, and a Township gets TOO many complaints, the Township will just impose a NO HUNTING ordinance. Then NO ONE will hunt ANYWHERE in that township.
Just look at Cherry Hill. Plenty of huntable land there (either 450' or 150' ) and they have a deer PROBLEM. But due to a NO HUNTING ordinance, NOBODY hunts anywhere in Cherry Hill....
 
I do know, having testified in cherry Hill to allow hunting, that their ordinance Prohibited Hunting and F&G would not interceed.
Seems that F&G hunting laws can only superceed Local NO HUNTING Laws on STATE LAND.

Same with a Twp. no discharge ordinance. It cannot be applied to State Land while in the process of hunting.
 
Why would you let the ignorance of others cause you fear and why would you allow it to control you when you are not only providing a public service (deer control) but also putting food on your table? IMO - fear should remain a life saving impulse and not used to control a person from engaging in legal and legitimate activities and basic freedoms.

Fear is what the antis want you to feel. Why give them such power? They are wrong from an environmental health standpoint and a conservation standpoint.

I don't fear the anti's, I fear creating more of them. There's a difference. I agree with the poster that said some towns may get so many complaints that local no discharge laws are passed.

I also agree with the poster who said I don't hunt in urban areas where this bill will open up additional hunting opps. So yes my perspective is different than yours.

Beyond that I just wouldnt get much enjoyment out of hunting 50 yards from a house. Dog's barking, kids yelling, car doors slamming...I hunt to get away from the everyday sounds and aggravation, not to kill the biggest buck or to shoot the most deer.

If I get a deer great, if I don't I still enjoy my hunt. The whole management tool arguement is bogus to me, sure it's an end result but how many people hunt because they are concerned about the deer population? Farmers and???

I do hope I'm wrong and I hope all hunters will be responsible and sensible about where they set up.

I wont change anyones mind and you probably wont change mine, we can agree to disagree,

Good luck, I hope you enjoy sucess with the bill and whatever type of hunting you prefer.

G
 
I want to second Pathman's statements. In addition to hunting in the rural parts of the state, I also hunt in a township as part of a cull program. The residents of the town are literally begging the town's officials to do something about the deer population. A bill like this one gives us the tools to do just that.
 
Discussion starter · #49 ·
I don't fear the anti's, I fear creating more of them.
There's that word "fear" again.

Beyond that I just wouldnt get much enjoyment out of hunting 50 yards from a house. Dog's barking, kids yelling, car doors slamming
Would a deer hunter (or any hunter) hunt in this environment? What deer (or prey) would be found near all this ruckus? So... Hunting in the scenario you mentioned isn't realistic so why concern yourself with something that would never happen?

The whole management tool arguement is bogus to me...
As a hunter you have a duty to fellow hunters and society at large to learn about hunting, the benefits of hunting to the ecology, how states use hunting as a game management tool and the concept of sustainable use (conservation).

An educated hunter helps to educate the public about the workings of conservation and the role of hunting. The idea of an educated public joining the ranks of animal extremists is nothing to fear.

IMO - these scenarios of fear that you imagine are a function of public ignorance. Educate yourself about conservation and value of hunting and then educate the public. Then you've little to fear.[up]

Ant
 
As a hunter you have a duty to fellow hunters and society at large to learn about hunting, the benefits of hunting to the ecology
yeah okay no need to preach, I understand the benefits of hunting to the ecology, probably better than most, but it's a result of our actions, not the reason we begin or continue to hunt. Anyone who says we need the 150 foot sfety zone so that we can manage the deer heard is full of it. We "need" it so we have more places to hunt...and as a result some herds that previously found refuge in these zones will be better managed.
 
My understanding is that a township cannot impose a no hunting ordinance. The state has authority over hunting. Townships can impose a no discharge ordinance.
Ant, it was several years ago when Springdale Farms wanted to allow Hunting on it's Farm property. They were stopped dead in their tracks by the TWP.. Maybe it was the no discharge law (Cherry Hill has that in effect) that was enforceable on Private Property and not a "no hunting" ban.
A "no discharge law" will stop hunting on Private property just as quick.
And I know from fighting a no discharge law in Tabernacle, that the No discharge law IS superceeded by NJ F&G Laws but ONLY on State Property. I was there when the F&G Reps. testified to that effect.
So NO DISCHARGE = NO HUNTING on PRIVATE PROPERTY, no matter what the distance from a Home..
 
The only problem I can forsee is that if the State allows it, and a Township gets TOO many complaints, the Township will just impose a NO HUNTING ordinance. Then NO ONE will hunt ANYWHERE in that township.
Just look at Cherry Hill. Plenty of huntable land there (either 450' or 150' ) and they have a deer PROBLEM. But due to a NO HUNTING ordinance, NOBODY hunts anywhere in Cherry Hill
I can say this much as I dont want to let to much info slip thru to the wrong hands, BUT many towns like this and there over stepping and basically illegal ordinances about hunting and discharging of weapons are presently being looked at closely and will be dealt with accordingly and legally at the legislative levels ;)

It always easier to sit back and cry about things, but some in the state have had enough and are standing and up pulling together to make a difference for ALL OF US, and I THANK THEM Because they know who they are [kiss]
 
As per a deer management meeting with a Senator and his committee. Ant ordinaces that try to stop hunting on lands other than those owned by the twp are illegal. He was directing his aide to research the towns and draft a letter advising them accordingly. The reason they get away with it is no one has ever legally challenged them.
Also yesterday showed how things get done when we all work together. Thanks to Ton Connors, Ed Markowski, the Audobon Society and the NJ Conservation for testifing on behalf of the bill.
 
I find it disgusting using children for your own political agenda
[rofl][rofl][rofl][rofl]chuckhunter come on you people use it all time about a bear hunt someones kid is going to get kiled by a bear we need a hunt
 
seedog, while I do believe in freedom of speech, I swear if someone didn't know you actually hunt they would think you are only here as a troll to work for the anies [confusedagain] all you seem to bring in you opinions is negativity against your fellow hunters [wallmad]
Your comments seem to always be intended in away to undermine and belittle hunters [spy]
In MY own personal opinion "You're" exactly the kind of hunter that is a real disgrace to us all [down]
 
Thanks to all that called, emailed and especially those that presented at the meeting. To listen to the anti's lies and hysterics was eye opening! So many lies and irrelevant stories. I really liked the lies about hunters using high powered rifles with night vision goggles and lasers. Where to I get one of those? Time to thank those assemblymen and women and write/call your representatives.
here is a link to find the names and contact info for your district.
http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/districts/municipalities.asp
 
Quote:
I find it disgusting using children for your own political agenda
chuckhunter come on you people use it all time about a bear hunt someones kid is going to get kiled by a bear we need a hunt
uuhhmm, nope, actually, I never used that argument in the discussion about a bear hunt.
And I would never schlepp my children to a committee hearing and shove them under everybody's nose as a weapon in this 'fight'.
However, there is a huge difference between discussing dangers to children on a general level and dragging your bored, unhappy, crying small children to meetings and pretending it's a personal danger to *this* cute baby you are parading around.
That's disgusting.
 
Well, GVS, it may not be the reason we begin our hunting pursuits, but for some it is absolutely why they continue. It seems you have little to no experience with suburban deer management, although you claim you understand better than most, if you would have witnessed firsthand the evolution of deer behavior as it relates to suburban areas and the protection it provides, you would realize that a direct approach is required to alleviate this issue and not just an offshoot of a recreational hunt. Yes, as a result, hunters managing deer in these areas may be given the opportunity to hunt other less confined areas of a township as a "reward"(or recreational opportunity) for helping the township, and homeowners, get a handle on the deer situation. And yes, there are hunters who do this type of hunting as their main objective. So, in turn they garner recreation from managing the deer herd, they don't manage the deer herd as an offshoot of a recreational hunt, which really doesn't provide the needed amount of management necessary to control a suburban deer population. The frustration of sitting 450'away from deer moving about within the current over-sized "buffer" zone, is a major detriment to getting thee deer under control. So please don't say it's not necessary to decrease the size of these protected areas if you really don't understand the dynamics of the situation.
 
41 - 60 of 78 Posts