NJ Governor Bans Bear Hunt on Public Land

[sweetnectar]

Oh crap. My gut says this kind of thing will keep happening as hunters slip further and further into the minority.

 

[fmnjr]

My hope: That the bears totally over run population estimates due to lack of management and cause a huge public meltdown for the Guv.

 

[HighDesertSage]

How much state land does new jersey have? Will this have a significant effect on population harvest? I know when I lived in PA alot of guys hunted NJ and they had a ton of deer, but I don't remember if you could hunt bears back then or not.

 

[one ate E grain]

40% of NJ bears are killed on state land, a further 45% are taken on private land, the remainder on federal, county and municipal property. The governor didn't have the authority to ban bear hunting on private, but if he can appoint commissioners on the state division of wildlife, or however they have it organised in NJ, he can end bear hunting state wide.

 

[HighDesertSage]

Well that's too bad. As stated above, this will continue to be a trending theme as we become more urbanized.

 

[VikingsGuy]

Don’t be too quick to suggest this is “just NJ”. This is a long term priority for an important wing of the Dem party with many more votes and $ than the anti-state transfer folks. So, the “just vote Dem if you care about public land hunting” approach often promoted here is going to end up closer to this outcome across the board than you think over the next 30 years if we aren't careful.

Public land hunting requires the legal ability to kill large animals and ability to carry a firearm (or a 'scary' bow), as well as the presence of public lands - both parties struggle getting all three right.

 

[BigHornRam]

Don’t be too quick to suggest this is “just NJ”. This is a long term priority for an important wing of the Dem party with many more votes and $ than the anti-state transfer folks. So, the “just vote Dem if you care about public land hunting” approach often promoted here is going to end up closer to this outcome across the board than you think over the next 30 years if we aren't careful.

Public land hunting requires the legal ability to kill large animals and ability to carry a firearm (or a 'scary' bow), as well as the presence of public lands - both parties struggle getting all three right.

Very true. Wonder what ideology the newscientist supports?

https://www.newscientist.com/articl...ear-trophy-hunt-its-immoral-and-unscientific/

 

[Irrelevant]

Don’t be too quick to suggest this is “just NJ”. This is a long term priority for an important wing of the Dem party with many more votes and $ than the anti-state transfer folks. So, the “just vote Dem if you care about public land hunting” approach often promoted here is going to end up closer to this outcome across the board than you think over the next 30 years if we aren't careful.

Public land hunting requires the legal ability to kill large animals and ability to carry a firearm (or a 'scary' bow), as well as the presence of public lands - both parties struggle getting all three right.

This is a little different than the public land issue. The National Republican platform includes the divestiture of our public lands. No where in the Democratic platform does it mention being anti-hunting. Though to be fair they're getting close.

" Democrats support science based management of iconic wildlife in Africa, including stronger regulations banning the importation into the United States of hunting trophies that are not supported by current science-based evidence and are
related to or funded by non-scientific special interests."

https://www.democrats.org/party-platform

 

[VikingsGuy]

This is a little different than the public land issue. The National Republican platform includes the divestiture of our public lands. No where in the Democratic platform does it mention being anti-hunting. Though to be fair they're getting close.

" Democrats support science based management of iconic wildlife in Africa, including stronger regulations banning the importation into the United States of hunting trophies that are not supported by current science-based evidence and are
related to or funded by non-scientific special interests."

https://www.democrats.org/party-platform

Fair enough. I appreciate the additional context. I was generally commenting about the Dem's trend-line more so than current platform, but your comments are helpful. I know a PETA pundit and they (and their allies) are going to push this hard in the coming election cycles. In my opinion, it's just a matter of time that the urban hollywood-struck mainstream Dem voters cause the party to fall in line on this one.

 

[Deleted member 38069]

Whoops