Post by Woody Williams on Aug 30, 2005 10:17:43 GMT -5
Where do we draw the line?
By BRUCE BISCHOFF
Record-Eagle outdoor columnist
Late last month the Michigan House and Senate approved HB 4465, a bill to ban Internet hunting.
This remarkable act of political courage was spurred by reports that an entrepreneur in Texas (now why doesn't that surprise me?) was offering "hunts" in which a "sportsman" anywhere in the world could go online to view a set-up shooting enclosure in real time and, should an animal appear, remotely aim and discharge a pre-set weapon over the Internet.
OK, it's pretty sordid - but did we really need a law?
I've always been of the mind that any time a new law is enacted, an old one should be taken off the books. State legislators sometimes remind me of a bunch of elementary kids who've formed a club and immediately start making up rules. (Although I suppose nowadays clubs are outlawed in elementary schools - gangs, you know.)
Back to HB 4465. In the first place, is there any evidence that this is really a problem? Are lots of people in Michigan doing this? Or is it like razor blades in Halloween candy, or the mass hysteria a few years back over the rumor that drug dealers, forsaking the profit motive, were scattering temporary tattoos laced with blotter acid across the playgrounds of America?
What about enforcement? Will the Internet crimes unit of the Michigan State Police divert some of its resources to tracking down online hunters? I suspect they have plenty to do already. Is HB 4465 even constitutional, or does it violate the Commerce Clause? Not that anyone's going to spend time or energy to challenge it.
But hey, it's a feel-good bill with no political risk, as irresistible to legislators as a salt lick is to deer. It will be interesting to see if lawmakers show as much courage in the upcoming battles over captive cervids, when the 800-pound gorilla of the Michigan ag lobby will be involved.
Internet hunting may be an extreme, but it points out the kind of ethical dialogue that will become increasingly important in the outdoor community over the coming years as "wild" hunting opportunities decrease and private enterprise moves in to fill the gap. As more farmland is gobbled up for development and more of the northern forest is allowed to mature past prime habitat stage, hunting wild animals on wild lands will become increasingly rare.
The question is, where do we draw the line? No serious hunter is going to defend Internet hunting.
But what about game farms? None of my hunting friends would shoot an animal in a small enclosure. But I know people who see no problem with putting a 10-foot fence around a 40- or 80-acre parcel and stocking it with deer with the genetics to produce trophy racks. Personally, I don't see the point. A 20-inch rainbow is a nice fish, for example, but if you catch it from a stocked pond it's kind of meaningless.
And what about gamebirds? With upland gamebirds in Michigan as scarce these days as patrons at a right-wing film festival, put-and-take bird hunting may be the only game in town for many hunters. I know a certain English setter who would vote in favor of gamebird preserves, paws down. Again, where do we draw the line?
Of course all this plays into the hands of the anti-hunting groups, who seize on aberrations like Internet hunting to blacken the reputation of an entire sport, despite the fact that most hunters find the idea equally odious.
Unfortunately, there will always be people who find that opening their checkbook is the easiest way to get what they want, be it a trophy whitetail rack or the company of a beautiful woman. That's not likely to change. But we in the hunting community can come to some consensus on where to draw the line between legitimate hunting and simply shooting domestic animals.
It may not be easy, but we need to do it. Otherwise, our legislators may try to do it for us.
Record-Eagle staffer Bruce Bischoff is a contributing writer to the outdoors page. To read his recent columns, visit our Sports page. Bischoff can be contacted at bbischoff@record-eagle.com
www.record-eagle.com/2005/aug/28bruce.htm
By BRUCE BISCHOFF
Record-Eagle outdoor columnist
Late last month the Michigan House and Senate approved HB 4465, a bill to ban Internet hunting.
This remarkable act of political courage was spurred by reports that an entrepreneur in Texas (now why doesn't that surprise me?) was offering "hunts" in which a "sportsman" anywhere in the world could go online to view a set-up shooting enclosure in real time and, should an animal appear, remotely aim and discharge a pre-set weapon over the Internet.
OK, it's pretty sordid - but did we really need a law?
I've always been of the mind that any time a new law is enacted, an old one should be taken off the books. State legislators sometimes remind me of a bunch of elementary kids who've formed a club and immediately start making up rules. (Although I suppose nowadays clubs are outlawed in elementary schools - gangs, you know.)
Back to HB 4465. In the first place, is there any evidence that this is really a problem? Are lots of people in Michigan doing this? Or is it like razor blades in Halloween candy, or the mass hysteria a few years back over the rumor that drug dealers, forsaking the profit motive, were scattering temporary tattoos laced with blotter acid across the playgrounds of America?
What about enforcement? Will the Internet crimes unit of the Michigan State Police divert some of its resources to tracking down online hunters? I suspect they have plenty to do already. Is HB 4465 even constitutional, or does it violate the Commerce Clause? Not that anyone's going to spend time or energy to challenge it.
But hey, it's a feel-good bill with no political risk, as irresistible to legislators as a salt lick is to deer. It will be interesting to see if lawmakers show as much courage in the upcoming battles over captive cervids, when the 800-pound gorilla of the Michigan ag lobby will be involved.
Internet hunting may be an extreme, but it points out the kind of ethical dialogue that will become increasingly important in the outdoor community over the coming years as "wild" hunting opportunities decrease and private enterprise moves in to fill the gap. As more farmland is gobbled up for development and more of the northern forest is allowed to mature past prime habitat stage, hunting wild animals on wild lands will become increasingly rare.
The question is, where do we draw the line? No serious hunter is going to defend Internet hunting.
But what about game farms? None of my hunting friends would shoot an animal in a small enclosure. But I know people who see no problem with putting a 10-foot fence around a 40- or 80-acre parcel and stocking it with deer with the genetics to produce trophy racks. Personally, I don't see the point. A 20-inch rainbow is a nice fish, for example, but if you catch it from a stocked pond it's kind of meaningless.
And what about gamebirds? With upland gamebirds in Michigan as scarce these days as patrons at a right-wing film festival, put-and-take bird hunting may be the only game in town for many hunters. I know a certain English setter who would vote in favor of gamebird preserves, paws down. Again, where do we draw the line?
Of course all this plays into the hands of the anti-hunting groups, who seize on aberrations like Internet hunting to blacken the reputation of an entire sport, despite the fact that most hunters find the idea equally odious.
Unfortunately, there will always be people who find that opening their checkbook is the easiest way to get what they want, be it a trophy whitetail rack or the company of a beautiful woman. That's not likely to change. But we in the hunting community can come to some consensus on where to draw the line between legitimate hunting and simply shooting domestic animals.
It may not be easy, but we need to do it. Otherwise, our legislators may try to do it for us.
Record-Eagle staffer Bruce Bischoff is a contributing writer to the outdoors page. To read his recent columns, visit our Sports page. Bischoff can be contacted at bbischoff@record-eagle.com
www.record-eagle.com/2005/aug/28bruce.htm