Friday, December 28, 2007

Opposition Mounts to Deer Hunting

I recently received an email from a friend who received an email from a concerned mother, Kathy Surrett. In this email, which she sent to many local news media outlets, she outlined some of her primary safety concerns:

1. There will be no minimum requirement on how large of a tract of land the owner must possess to allow hunting on their property. The restrictions placed in the ordinance are unacceptable and inadequate, based on typical lots sizes in our city (see #2-#3 of city ordinance 0-35-2007 section 95.05). With these minimal restrictions, there will be many lots in Fort Thomas that are eligible to be hunted on.
2. There is no restrictions to the number of hunters that are allowed on each property at one time.
3. No background checks will be performed on the hunters coming into our city. This means we could have criminals of all kinds in our city.
4. No proficiency tests will be required for the hunters.
5. There is no mention of who will be liable for any damages to property, people, or pets resulting from hunting.
6. Hunters do not have to check in or out with the city.
7. It is not mentioned that the hunters should retrieve arrows from missed or stray shots.
8. Property owners do not have to notify neighbors that hunting will be taking place on their land.
She continues by saying "I will include links to a few successful programs that have very strict hunting rules and regulations below. You will see, most require at least a 4-5 acre tract of land with no other residences in close proximity. They do background checks on the hunters, limit the number of hunters on a property at a time, make sure the hunters are aware of the property lines, hunters must attend a safety education course, carcasses must be covered as being transported, hunters must check in and out with the city, and the cities have an appointed official in charge of the entire operation to ensure safety and measure success of the program."

Kathy provides the following links to other cities that she references:

City of Indian Hill deer management program:
City of New Albany, OH:
City of Granville, OH:
Virginia Dept. of Game and Inland Fisheries:

3 comments:

  1. "3. No background checks will be performed on the hunters coming into our city. This means we could have criminals of all kinds in our city."

    As far as I know, we don't do backround check on those "coming into our town" to go to Warners, buy a cup of coffee at Starbucks, watch a high school sporting event, attend a funeral or take in one of the many church services each week. Why are hunters different?

    I specifically picked out #3, but in general it applies to all of the concerns.

    I have not hunted a minute in my life, but I know many people that do hunt. Not one is a blithering idiot with no concern for the property or life of others.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Blau, great point. Those were Kathy's concerns. While I do not agree with all her points I do believe hunting in such a densely populated community is a very bad idea. I will be posting a follow-up to this story today or tomorrow.

    ReplyDelete
  3. blau..."What makes hunters different" is that we're inviting them on private property that is adjacent to our yards where our children play, take shortcuts home from school...etc. No hunting will be allowed at Warner's or Starbuck's to my knowledge. And how do we know these hunters haven't been charged with any gaming/hunting violations??
    Indian Hill, Granville, New Albany, and many other successful Urban Deer mgmt programs require not only a clear background check, but also require a criminal history background check before being permitted to hunt in their cities.
    I'm glad the many hunters you know are respectful ones...I just want to ensure those are the ones we allow in our city.
    Kathy

    ReplyDelete