"...Animal activists are lobbying sharply to alter council's duties and balance of power."
The Star Ledger wasn't fooled by Panter. He tried to convince the Ledger's editorial board that he was amending his bill in cooperation with sportsmen and sportswomen. The Star Ledger did a thorough investigation and found it was not the case.
http://www.nj.com/opinion/ledger/editorials/index.ssf?/base/news- ...
Ant
---------------------------------
Flawed Fish and Game bill
Thursday, November 01, 2007
The New Jersey Fish and Game Council sets hunting and fishing seasons and rules based on a narrow mission statement that reflects its 1940s origins -- to ensure an adequate number of fish, birds and animals for "public recreation and food supply."
Unhappy with that mission, animal activists are lobbying to sharply alter the council's duties and balance of power.
Unfortunately, the legislation proposed to make these changes goes too far. Currently, most council members are re quired to be sportsmen who represent each section of the state. A bill by Assemblyman Michael Panter and Sen. Ellen Karcher, both Monmouth County Democrats, would authorize the governor to name seven people who merely have an interest in conservation of fish and wildlife.
This means a governor could name almost anyone, and that is too much discretion. There is nothing to stop an all-pro-hunting slate, or an all-anti-hunting board, or one made up of representatives only from urban counties or only from rural ones.
The legislation also would drop the goal of managing wildlife and fish for public recreation and food supply, in favor of a call for a "balanced system." But the term isn't defined, which leaves a lot of room for mischief.
Finally, the bill would broaden the council's duties by requiring it to consider nondeadly alternatives for controlling wildlife. This poses practi cal problems. The council, a semi-autonomous body, has no power to order state biologists to study anything and no money or staff to perform its own studies.
Hunters are convinced these changes will start the state on the road to banning all hunting and fishing. That's a bit paranoid. But the opposition is hav ing an impact. Panter now says he is willing to include a re quirement for some sportsman representation, possibly enlarg ing the panel, and to make other changes.
The New Jersey State Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs and Panter say they want to talk about concerns over the bills. Yet each side says it hasn't heard from the other, so no meeting has been held.
This is silly, especially since the federation has been open to expanding the Fish and Game Council, perhaps to include the Audubon Society or other groups with an interest in wildlife. Someone needs to pick up the phone and set a date.
But if the issue is whether hunting or fishing is a valid activity and sport or merely a cruel anachronism from another era, the Fish and Game Council is not the appropriate place for that debate. That is a question for the full Legislature.
In the meantime, so long as hunting and fishing are legal, the state would probably benefit from taking politics out of the equation. Why not leave decisions about season and bag limits to professional biologists at the state Department of Environmental Protection?
