Change in Hunting Laws

The laws and politics surrounding the "sport" of hunting in the state of North Carolina are "outdated". Many people believe that the state of North Carolina regulates hunting for the safety and well being of all its citizens. It does not do this. If this is done by anyone, it is done by your local elected state representative and any legislation enacted would only apply on a local county level. Too often the activities that need to be restricted or stopped have been overlooked, protected, and called "tradition". There was once a time when, like most other states, NC had vast expanses of open land where hunting never inconvenienced anyone. This is no more. Using the term "tradition" to describe a manner of hunting is an excuse to continue the practice and will only prolong the intrusion of hunting into the lives of citizens that do not want to be subjected to this intrusion, and whose quality of life is directly affected by this intrusion.

Some examples:

Hunting (General)=> Trespassing and Substance Impairment. There is no statewide law in NC that prohibits a hunter from carrying a weapon onto the property of another. Substance Impairment, it is legal to hunt in NC while being so chemically impaired that you can not stand up. The only exception is hunting on North Carolina Public Game Lands. Why is there not a statewide law addressing these? The concerns of trespassing and substance impairment are the same throughout the state. Why is it not addressed on a statewide basis?

Deer (Dog) Hunting=> Some use of dogs do not inconvenience others very much, if at all; duck, quail, raccoon, and rabbit hunting immediately come to mind. However, there are instances where deer hunting with dogs is prohibiting kids from playing in and around their own backyards. One look at the manner of taking in this type of hunting is very disgusting, even to another hunter. It unnecessarily endangers anyone who indiscriminately comes in contact with the activity; people traveling down the roadways, people still-hunting on an adjacent tract of land, and people who just happen to live near a deer. These are just a few examples. There are many others. Add fox and bear hunting to this as well. The difference in the level of interference and concern that the use of dogs in hunting has on non-hunters is the amount of land that the animal can cover and the type of weapons used in the hunt. Deer and fox dogs cover a lot of territory. In addition, deer hunters commonly use an ammunition that is already outlawed on all federal hunting lands - buckshot! Why? It is absolutely impossible to control 12 or 18 buckshot pellets , whereas one single projectile can be controlled, quite easily. It is almost impossible for anyone to deer hunt with dogs without the hunter, their dog, or both going onto property that they are not entitiled to be on.

Deer (Road) Hunting=> For both dog and still hunters, this applies. A road is a road throughout the state. One law would suffice instead of numerous different counties passing numerous different variations of a similiar road hunting law. According to a knowledgable source of ours, if a road hunting law even mentions the use of a firearm then it isn't worth making because it can not be enforced.

Deer (Still) Hunting=> Trespassing and High Powered Weapons. A typical deer hunting weapon can fire a projectile a distance of over three and possibly out to four miles. Yet, only a handful of counties have a county wide law restricting the possession and use of a high powered weapon unless you are in an elevated position. Why is there not a single statewide law addressing this? Ok, so maybe the mountain area of NC may not need this, but the other two thirds of the state does.

Current Penalties=> Legitimate hunters are paying hundreds of dollars per year to hunt, legally. To have an illegal hunter pay a waiverable offense to the tune of $125 for these violations and fines is ridiculous. To a lot of people, I hesitate from calling them hunters, for they certainly are not Responsible Hunters this is merely the cost of hunting. Where is the deterrent? If what illegal hunters (poachers) are doing are of no more importance than this then we need to re-evaluate the very need for a State Wildlife Agency Enforcement Division. Oh, one more thing about fines and penalties. The fine for night hunting deer is only $250. Nothing disrupts the legitimate "sport" of hunting more than or faster than shooting deer at night. There certainly is no deterrent found in the fines set aside for illegal hunting, absolutely none.

This is an interesting proposition: currently the laws regarding the taking of game animals in NC are open and non-restrictive, yet counties (through the legislative process) can make the laws more restrictive. (Examples are road hunting, treestand hunting with high powered rifles, etc.) This puts the burden of protection on the shoulders of non-hunters. Why not flip this scenario over, make safety laws the same statewide as a firm foundation for the harvesting of wildlife and then allow the individual counties to moderate the laws? In other words the "safety" aspect of hunting would take a higher priority than "manner" aspect of hunting. People that do not hunt would be much more protected by the laws and then the hunters will have the duty to show their responsibility and accountability in order to get the laws moderated? This is a much more progressive approach to ensure the existence of hunting for the next generation(s). This makes for sound reasoning since only a very minute percentage of people hunt and the laws should protect everyone by focusing on safety first. In summary, the protection of both hunters and non-hunters on a state level is more important and should take a higher priority in our legislative process than to spend the time, effort, and tax money in the state legislature passing these same or similiar laws that apply to individual counties only. This is our opinion and is open to discussion. Post a thread or a reply in the Forum section.

Home, Raves and Opinions