Post by Woody Williams on Jul 28, 2005 17:14:48 GMT -5
www.roanoke.com/printer/printpage.aspx?arcID=26453
The Roanoke Times
Thursday, June 30, 2005
Judge: No right to hunt clay pigeons
By Laurence Hammack
981-3239
A Nelson County judge rules that Constitution doesn't
extend to target shooting.
A Nelson County judge shot down the argument Wednesday that shooting at clay pigeons falls under Virginians' constitutional right to hunt.
In what is believed to be the nation's first ruling in a right-to-hunt case, Circuit Judge Michael Gamble upheld the county board of supervisors' denial of a conditional use permit for a shotgun sports center at Orion Estate, an exclusive hunting preserve.
Orion had claimed the county violated a constitutional
amendment, approved five years ago by voters in a statewide referendum, that protects the rights of Virginians to "hunt, fish and harvest game."
But in an eight-page decision issued Wednesday, Gamble rejected the preserve's argument that shooting at airborne clay and plastic targets at its shotgun sports center is an integral part of hunting.
"The real issue in this case involves the definition of
the word hunt," Gamble wrote.
Applying the "plain, obvious, and common sense" meaning of the word, as set out in legal cases and described in dictionaries, Gamble sided with the county in defining hunting as the pursuit of live game.
"Shooting sporting clays is not the pursuit of game,"
Gamble wrote. "It is essentially shooting at an inanimate object."
Although Orion has said the case could have a major effect on hunters in Virginia and across the country, Gamble made it clear in his decision that the right to hunt remains fundamental.
But that right is not all-encompassing, he added. "Even
our greatest federal constitutional rights such as freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of assembly have limitations," he wrote.
The case has been watched closely by hunting advocates, the National Rifle Association, and nearby residents opposed to the center. Gamble's ruling could provide legal guidance elsewhere as other states join Virginia in offering constitutional protection to their hunters and fishers.
Virginia is one of at least a dozen states to make hunting and fishing a constitutional right, and others are
considering such measures, according to the National
Conference of State Legislatures.
An appeal to the Virginia Supreme Court is possible. An
attorney for Orion said the estate plans to weigh all
its options over the next several days before deciding
what to do next.
"We believe our case has merit," said Alan Nunley, the
estate's corporate counsel. "And while we respect Judge
Gamble's decision, we are disappointed in the outcome of this trial."
Nelson County attorneys could not be reached for comment on the decision, which came a day earlier than when Gamble had promised a ruling. The judge heard final arguments last week after a three-day trial in April.
The county has said all along that while it never intended to restrict the right to hunt at Orion, the shotgun sports center amounted to a commercial operation unsuited for a rural area along the banks of the James River.
While granting zoning for a corporate training facility
on the 450-acre preserve last year, the board of supervisors denied a conditional use permit for the center after hearing concerns from neighboring residents worried about noise and safety.
John Zunka, a Charlottesville attorney who represented
the county, said in final arguments last week that the
center could accommodate as many as 81,000 shooters a year, who would take as many as 4 million shots at clay and plastic targets thrown through the air by machines.
Orion countered that those numbers were far too high.
But it argued the operation was vital to the future of
a hunting preserve that hopes to bring in corporate
clients at a rate of $30,000 a year to shoot at both live
and fake targets.
Shooting at moving targets is a necessary warm-up to
hunting, and it promotes both safety and the humane
killing of live game, expert witnesses for Orion testified
in April.
Gamble was not convinced. "This argument fails because
the commonly understood definition of the word 'hunt'
does not include proficiency, safety, or the humane
hunting of game," wrote the judge, who during the trial
took the unusual step of visiting the preserve to watch
shooting demonstrations.
Orion had also argued that shooting at clay targets is
not just a preparation for hunting, but a form of the
sport in and of itself.
As growing urbanization has led to the loss of wildlife
habitat, and as people have to travel farther to find
suitable places to hunt, more sportsmen have become
content to engage in the kind of simulated hunting that
Orion provides, witnesses testified.
Gamble did allow hunters at the preserve to continue to
shoot at clay pigeons and other artificial targets on a
limited basis, as long as it is done only as a warm-up
to hunting live targets.
The Roanoke Times
Thursday, June 30, 2005
Judge: No right to hunt clay pigeons
By Laurence Hammack
981-3239
A Nelson County judge rules that Constitution doesn't
extend to target shooting.
A Nelson County judge shot down the argument Wednesday that shooting at clay pigeons falls under Virginians' constitutional right to hunt.
In what is believed to be the nation's first ruling in a right-to-hunt case, Circuit Judge Michael Gamble upheld the county board of supervisors' denial of a conditional use permit for a shotgun sports center at Orion Estate, an exclusive hunting preserve.
Orion had claimed the county violated a constitutional
amendment, approved five years ago by voters in a statewide referendum, that protects the rights of Virginians to "hunt, fish and harvest game."
But in an eight-page decision issued Wednesday, Gamble rejected the preserve's argument that shooting at airborne clay and plastic targets at its shotgun sports center is an integral part of hunting.
"The real issue in this case involves the definition of
the word hunt," Gamble wrote.
Applying the "plain, obvious, and common sense" meaning of the word, as set out in legal cases and described in dictionaries, Gamble sided with the county in defining hunting as the pursuit of live game.
"Shooting sporting clays is not the pursuit of game,"
Gamble wrote. "It is essentially shooting at an inanimate object."
Although Orion has said the case could have a major effect on hunters in Virginia and across the country, Gamble made it clear in his decision that the right to hunt remains fundamental.
But that right is not all-encompassing, he added. "Even
our greatest federal constitutional rights such as freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of assembly have limitations," he wrote.
The case has been watched closely by hunting advocates, the National Rifle Association, and nearby residents opposed to the center. Gamble's ruling could provide legal guidance elsewhere as other states join Virginia in offering constitutional protection to their hunters and fishers.
Virginia is one of at least a dozen states to make hunting and fishing a constitutional right, and others are
considering such measures, according to the National
Conference of State Legislatures.
An appeal to the Virginia Supreme Court is possible. An
attorney for Orion said the estate plans to weigh all
its options over the next several days before deciding
what to do next.
"We believe our case has merit," said Alan Nunley, the
estate's corporate counsel. "And while we respect Judge
Gamble's decision, we are disappointed in the outcome of this trial."
Nelson County attorneys could not be reached for comment on the decision, which came a day earlier than when Gamble had promised a ruling. The judge heard final arguments last week after a three-day trial in April.
The county has said all along that while it never intended to restrict the right to hunt at Orion, the shotgun sports center amounted to a commercial operation unsuited for a rural area along the banks of the James River.
While granting zoning for a corporate training facility
on the 450-acre preserve last year, the board of supervisors denied a conditional use permit for the center after hearing concerns from neighboring residents worried about noise and safety.
John Zunka, a Charlottesville attorney who represented
the county, said in final arguments last week that the
center could accommodate as many as 81,000 shooters a year, who would take as many as 4 million shots at clay and plastic targets thrown through the air by machines.
Orion countered that those numbers were far too high.
But it argued the operation was vital to the future of
a hunting preserve that hopes to bring in corporate
clients at a rate of $30,000 a year to shoot at both live
and fake targets.
Shooting at moving targets is a necessary warm-up to
hunting, and it promotes both safety and the humane
killing of live game, expert witnesses for Orion testified
in April.
Gamble was not convinced. "This argument fails because
the commonly understood definition of the word 'hunt'
does not include proficiency, safety, or the humane
hunting of game," wrote the judge, who during the trial
took the unusual step of visiting the preserve to watch
shooting demonstrations.
Orion had also argued that shooting at clay targets is
not just a preparation for hunting, but a form of the
sport in and of itself.
As growing urbanization has led to the loss of wildlife
habitat, and as people have to travel farther to find
suitable places to hunt, more sportsmen have become
content to engage in the kind of simulated hunting that
Orion provides, witnesses testified.
Gamble did allow hunters at the preserve to continue to
shoot at clay pigeons and other artificial targets on a
limited basis, as long as it is done only as a warm-up
to hunting live targets.