You voted:

(3) comments


Hunting, trapping and fishing are completely interconnected. Hunting pursues prey-species, fish - as they relate to mammalian predators - are also a prey-species; man has to be counted as a predator, and a trapper simply pursues predators. One could remove the human predator from the equation and the balance of prey-species to predators would eventually balance out, but not in our lifetime. We would be relegated to watching wildlife instead of hunting or fishing for it, and on a good day we might be lucky to see one elk on a ridge, rather than the herds of elk and deer, and the flocks of ducks, pheasants, doves, Huns, and quail we see today. HJR2 must pass in November to protect the rights to hunt, trap and fish in Idaho.


One of the best reasons for passing HJR2 in November is that it goes a long ways to disarming the ‘anti-groups’, the groups that want to see hunting, fishing and trapping banned so that we can all eat genetically modified vegetables while petting our kitties. How important is it that you are able to hunt, trap or fish with your children’s children? If that is important than HJR2 must be passed this November. Regardless of whether you hunt, fish, trap, or do all three like I do, you must vote to pass HJR2 in November because anti- hunting/trapping/fishing groups will not stop once they take away your ability to enjoy either of those pursuits. If they accomplish that they are well on their way to saying who can own pets, and then it’s on to what you can and cannot eat… where does it end? Disarm the ‘anti-groups’ this November by passing HJR2.


Although trapping, per se, is not a guaranteed right under the U.S. Constitution, it is an activity, the control and management of which is reserved to the individual states. As such, I strongly feel that it should be a protected wildlife management tool under the Idaho State Constitution. I have trapped since 1951, for profit, for management purposes (mostly nuisance animals) and as a recreational pasttimes, and I have lived in states where there was little or no trapping allowed in certain jurisdictions. As a result of this restriction, I have also witness a burgeoning furbearer population that has affected rural livelihoods by the destruction of irrigation dams and ditches, stockponds, riparian habitat, and the creation of damaging ponds (by beavers), that have reduced the size of productive croplands. This, in addition to the introduction of, and a "reservoir" of diseases such as rabies, sylvanic plague, and other zoonotic illnesses carried by the infected furbearers has never been beneficial to the resident populations of wildlife, livestock and humans. I am a retired law enforcement agent and wildlife biologist of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and have seen the problems of the use of improper management of the furbearers, whether canids and other carnivores, and of rodents. Thank you for this opportunity to comment on this issue.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.