Possible Bowhunting Ban

[WRM]

Even in dark blue MN, my buddy just got a tag to bowhunt in a park that's basically downtown st paul.. Crazy to think it'd pass in GA.

I don't disagree it probably won't, this time. But, GA, and a lot of other places are not the same as a few years ago, particularly post covid.

 

[FLATHEAD]

They're trying really hard to turn me in to a criminal.
A man can give up only so much.

 

[WRM]

You probably are a criminal now, but don't know it yet. You for sure will be one before it's all over.

 

[Riley_cody08]

Along way from some of you but if passed by one county look out...

​ Columbus, Muscogee County Latest To Try To Restrict Hunting

​ Ordinance would ban bowhunting on tracts less than 10 acres.

​ ​ The city of Columbus recently discussed implementing a ban on bowhunting for deer in Columbus and Muscogee County on any tract of land that is less than 10 acres. The discussion came up for discussion on Feb. 9, and it's expected to come up for more discussion on Tuesday, Feb. 23 at 5:30 p.m. The city of Columbus and Muscogee County is a unified government. This ordinance, if passed, would cover 217 square miles could adversely impact the property and hunting rights of thousands of people, both urban and rural. Under Georgia state law, local governments have no authority to regulate hunting—only DNR can do that. However, they can attempt to implement weapons-discharge ordinances. Full Story: Comments by Columbus mayor and Anything the government touches

Along way from some of you but if passed by one county look out...

​ Columbus, Muscogee County Latest To Try To Restrict Hunting

​ Ordinance would ban bowhunting on tracts less than 10 acres.

​ ​ The city of Columbus recently discussed implementing a ban on bowhunting for deer in Columbus and Muscogee County on any tract of land that is less than 10 acres. The discussion came up for discussion on Feb. 9, and it's expected to come up for more discussion on Tuesday, Feb. 23 at 5:30 p.m. The city of Columbus and Muscogee County is a unified government. This ordinance, if passed, would cover 217 square miles could adversely impact the property and hunting rights of thousands of people, both urban and rural. Under Georgia state law, local governments have no authority to regulate hunting—only DNR can do that. However, they can attempt to implement weapons-discharge ordinances. Full Story: Comments by Columbus mayor and counci

Everything the government touches seems to turn to s@#t. I wish people would learn to stop voting in these criminals.

 

[jayden_m20]

Some of the rules and regulations that make are so dumb and make no sense.

 

[KHNC]

Well, Georgia supposedly is a BLUE state now. I figured Atlanta would have been the first area to impose restrictions like this. Some monster deer going down in city limits there.

 

[Deadfall]

Eh. We be at war withRussia, China and talliban before long anyway...lol....

 

[DonPablo]

You should get your state reps to add a right to hunt amendment into your state constitution. That would give the lawyers some leverage if anything like this ever passes. A fight like that wouldn't be cheap but it would be worth fighting IMO.

 

[LostArra]

I wonder if this is in response to the youtube dudes who are subdivision hunters in Atlanta. They shoot monster yard deer off tiny suburb lots but don't tell about the ones that end up crossing a major thoroughfare, dying in a parking lot or fall in Karen's swimming pool.

The 10 acre restriction is silly.

 

[HGrodner]

Thanks for posting this. I live in Georgia and will definitely have to keep an eye on this. I have to say, this seems quite odd given the fact that in the metro Atlanta area you can hunt on small tracts and MANY deer are taken in that manner. It’s also strange since state law says you can retrieve game from another’s property without permission as long as you don’t carry a weapon on their property.

Can you find this in writing? I have heard this most of my life, but talking to my game warden buddies they disagree.

 

[Newtosavage]

Bans like these are the result of bowhunters being careless/stupid with where they hunt. Let's just call it what it is.

The midwest embraces bowhunting like no other part of the country. It's a way of life in places like Columbia MO, the St. Louis suburbs and where I used to live in Southern IL. MOST people in those areas are completely aware of and completely fine with bowhunters in and near their towns.

BUT, it's still the responsibility of the hunter to make sure they have enough ground to recover their deer. Otherwise, don't hunt it!

It's not reasonable to expect people to continue to tolerate hunters having to cross property lines to recover animals. Eventually that is going to get shut down and it's not the landowner's fault. It's the hunter's fault.

I guess it's not cool to take personal responsibility if there's a chance to blame the anti's tho.

 

[Newtosavage]

Can you find this in writing? I have heard this most of my life, but talking to my game warden buddies they disagree.

No state has that law that I'm aware of.

 

[brewster22]

It is never ending.

 

[HaydenLane]

BUT, it's still the responsibility of the hunter to make sure they have enough ground to recover their deer. Otherwise, don't hunt it!

What is enough room, and who decides that? Does it change depending on terrain? Wounded animals can travel pretty far. Are you saying you should only hunt on 11+ acre properties? Or that you can’t hunt within, say, 200 yards of a property line?

Neither of those are realistic or reasonable. Nor is expecting every animal to DRT.

 

[Newtosavage]

What is enough room, and who decides that? Does it change depending on terrain? Wounded animals can travel pretty far. Are you saying you should only hunt on 11+ acre properties? Or that you can’t hunt within, say, 200 yards of a property line?

Neither of those are realistic or reasonable. Nor is expecting every animal to DRT.

That's up to the hunter to figure out. The penalty for getting it wrong can be anything from simple embarrassment to a fine and every instance makes hunters look bad.

 

[timbrhuntr]

That's up to the hunter to figure out. The penalty for getting it wrong can be anything from simple embarrassment to a fine and every instance makes hunters look bad.

Is this really a serious comment answer ? So the solution is no hunting at all ok ! In the area I hunt it is all small parcels and no rifles etc bow only. So the solution is there is not enough land so nobody can or should hunt it ! That should really help the cause drop a bunch of hunters out of the mix just about everywhere in the east . Also I'm not embarrassed at all if an animal makes it across to another property and its a clean kill why would I be and what type of fine would it be curious ?

 

[Newtosavage]

It's a personal decision. I've made it myself many times hunting small tracts in IL near subdivisions.

If you're not embarrassed that an animal you shot crossed onto property you don't have permission to hunt, you should be. It's just a matter of time before you are talking to an LEO about it.

As for the fine, once an animal crosses the property boundary you have permission to hunt on, you are faced with either wanton waste for not retrieving the animal, or trespass if the landowner chooses to pursue the charges. Trespass connected with hunting can, in many states, cost a hunter his/her hunting privileges.

Making a habit of this or being casual about this is a threat to hunting IMO.

 

[HUNT>WRK]

Bump

 

[HaydenLane]

It's a personal decision. I've made it myself many times hunting small tracts in IL near subdivisions.

If you're not embarrassed that an animal you shot crossed onto property you don't have permission to hunt, you should be. It's just a matter of time before you are talking to an LEO about it.

As for the fine, once an animal crosses the property boundary you have permission to hunt on, you are faced with either wanton waste for not retrieving the animal, or trespass if the landowner chooses to pursue the charges. Trespass connected with hunting can, in many states, cost a hunter his/her hunting privileges.

Making a habit of this or being casual about this is a threat to hunting IMO.

Acting like you can control what an animal does once it’s been hit is ridiculous. There is nothing you can do to prevent an animal from crossing an invisible line.

Some states (like mine) allow you to retrieve without permission. You have a right to that animal. In states where that is not allowed, no sane game warden would fine a hunter for not retrieving an animal they would have to break the law to retrieve. It would never hold up if appealed.

Restricting hunting to only those who can access a property of a certain size, and only for the purpose of obtaining meat, are far greater threats to hunting.

 

[Newtosavage]

Acting like you can control what an animal does once it’s been hit is ridiculous. There is nothing you can do to prevent an animal from crossing an invisible line.

Some states (like mine) allow you to retrieve without permission. You have a right to that animal. In states where that is not allowed, no sane game warden would fine a hunter for not retrieving an animal they would have to break the law to retrieve. It would never hold up if appealed.

Restricting hunting to only those who can access a property of a certain size, and only for the purpose of obtaining meat, are far greater threats to hunting.

If your state allows it, good for you. It doesn't surprise me that a state like ND does. Most don't.

There are hunter trespass laws connected with license privileges in many states for a reason.