|
Bear debate changed public’s view of hunt |
|
|
|
Written by Robert Fisk, Jr.
|
|
Thursday, 29 December 2005 |
Op-Ed Maine Sunday Telegram (11/20/05)
by Robert Fisk, Jr., director of Maine Friends of Animals
Deirdre Fleming’s Outdoor column “Sportsman’s Alliance taps unity“
(Telegram 10/30/05) had a substantive omission and lacked a balanced
perspective. The opening sentence read: “The bear referendum last fall
did wonders to unite the sportsmen’s clubs around the state.”
What Ms. Fleming neglected to consider is how did the bear referendum
affect the proponents of it? The answer is they increased their support
substantially and far more so than any growth within sportsmen’s
clubs.
The general public awareness resulting from the referendum means these
bear “hunting” practices will never be viewed the same, and with it
came a base of support that has built the ranks of animal protection
advocates like never before. Equally important, with it has come
support from many of those who enjoy Maine’s wildlife in a
non-consumptive way that do not consider themselves animal protection
people. It also should be pointed out that the number of hunters in
Maine has declined for 15 years in a row while the number of people
appreciating our wildlife without killing them has grown every year in
that same period.
What grows our ranks even more is the give-no-quarter, fall on your
sword, no compromise attitude by the more radical hunting and trapping
groups that now control Maine’s wildlife management decisions in an
unholy alliance with the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife.
Doggedness and divisive positions are not ultimately in the best
interest of hunters and hunting. Nevertheless, they persist as the
opposition continues to grow.
A perfect example is Maine remains the only state in the country that
still allows the barbaric and needlessly cruel practice of trapping a
bear. SAM and the Department of IF&W response is that is fine, it
shows Maine independence. In my view such intransigence will ultimately
be their undoing. There is still time to find compromise, but there is
no indication that is coming any time soon.
Maine Friends of Animals today has an active nine member board of
directors, fifteen state-wide District Coordinators, our membership has
doubled in the last two years, we have added paid staff, and support
comes from non-animal protection folks, including many hunters. We feel
more beholden to advance these issues than ever before. Increasingly
there is a feeling that this proprietary and inflexible attitude of
certain hunting groups and the Department make them incapable of ending
any hunting practice no matter how cruel, unethical, or unnecessary it
may be.
Whatever you make of the closeness in the vote in the bear referendum
and its ramifications, one unquestionable result is that bear hunting
in this state will never be viewed the same. The public awareness that
came from the referendum changed all that.
A current legislative directive to the Department of IF&W to
seriously review the bear hunting practices in this state is an
opportunity for the Department and sportsmen to be viewed as positive
agents of change. If inflexible hunting groups and the Department
continue to insist on no hunting restriction on any hunting practice,
continue to exclude the non-consumptive users from any meaningful
opportunity to affect change, and continue a rigid ideology that
hardens positions, then I fear we will see a greater division and
escalation of tensions between hunters and non-hunters, growing
criticism of a department that continues to serve a special interest
group and not all its citizens, more contentious legislation, and calls
for future referendums. Sides will be polarized like never before.
And our numbers will continue grow.
|
January 2008