STEPS TOWARD RESOLVING A HUMAN-ANIMAL CONFLICT SITUATION
Part 2
Game agencies are bizarrely out of touch with the psyche of the
general public. A NJ resident, who was horrified when she learned that
Canada geese would be hunted in a state park near her home, called the
Department of Environmental Protection to voice her concerns. She
received a lengthy letter in response. The following is an abbreviated
version:
Dear Canada Goose Complainant:
In an attempt to reduce the nuisance resident population of Canada
geese, we are asking that homeowners cooperate with the DEP and allow
“sportsmen & women” onto their property during a 10-day special hunt on
Canada geese from September 6 until September 15th.
Your cooperation would be appreciated.
Hunting, as we saw in the previous issue of the C.A.S.H. magazine, is
in large part responsible for the birds’ being in our parks and on our
lawns to begin with. We saw that state and federal game agencies have
waterfowl management areas which they refer to as “goose production
areas.” They have arrangements with private “cooperators” such as
farmers to leave unharvested corn as goose attractants, so the geese can
serve as targets for hunters’ guns. As you further read, a biologist
with the NYS Department of Natural Resources said it appeared that
“residents” (birds that nest south of the 47th parallel) caused
“migrants” (birds nesting north of the 47th parallel) to “short-stop” by
acting in effect as decoys. You also read that people inadvertently put
out goose salad bars by turning meadows and forests into lawns that
stretch to the water’s edge and keeping them freshly mown.
We read that hunting in the south and the north keeps the birds from
migrating as they seek refuge in safer areas. In fact, the migration
“instinct” is actually selected against because of hunting. So, what are
game managers to do? They have to think of ways to make these suburban
“refugees” huntable. After all, hunters don’t pay their salaries for
nothing. They try to lift local bans on the discharge of weapons by
supporting hunters’ claims that “the Canada goose problem will respond
to long-term management.” Of course, it is hunting that has forced the
geese into suburban areas. Under old conservation law, hunters couldn’t
shoot within 500 feet of a building on unposted property without
permission. That inconvenience to hunters brought about a recent legal
change so that now hunters can shoot waterfowl without regard for any
minimum distance from a dwelling or person if they are shooting them
over a body of water!
If the “conflict” is bad now, just wait! Hunting drove Canada geese
to our lawns for safety and hunting there will drive Canada geese into
our homes. I can imagine what the next letter from the DEP will look
like:
Dear Canada Goose Complainant:
We have received complaints that Canada geese have taken up refuge in
homes, taking over living rooms and forcing families to watch the
programs that they choose (mostly C.A.S.H. anti-hunting videos.) Some
nuisance resident geese are so audacious that they’ve actually demanded
that Entenmanns’s (Entenmann means “duck man” in German) chocolate chip
cookies be scattered all over the floor for them to eat at will, and
they further insist that the bathtub be kept full of cool water. To
alleviate this nuisance situation, we will be sending “sportsmen and
women” to your neighborhood between September 6th and 15th to dispatch
geese. We are encouraging you to welcome these fine upstanding citizens
by permitting them into your home to blast these nervy birds to
smithereens.
We suggest that you keep your children off to the side (if you like
them, of course), at sufficient distance as birdshot sprays. Try to have
all valuables put away. Sportsmen and women don’t like to waste time;
they want to get right down to killing. We must caution you, they don’t
like to clean up after themselves so you may find a few beer cans,
scattered shot and Jolly Rancher candy wrappers around. Of course,
feathers and blood will be everywhere. Don’t worry, though, because
birds have very little blood in their bodies; so it won’t be too messy.
No, our customers do not carry insurance, but we assure you that there
are fewer hunting accidents annually than car accidents, and that
doesn’t stop people from driving, does it? [Game agency logic, not mine]
Most deaths occur because hunters shoot each other or themselves
accidentally. The worst that could happen is that you’ll find one of
them dead when you get back home. Most accidents are because, well, you
know, the big sillies do things like clean out their rifle barrels with
their fingers. Often they trip (it’s all that beer) and fall onto their
rifles, then whoops! Or they mistake each other for turkeys or badgers.
It’s hard to believe, but hunters actually put turkey hen decoys on
their backs to attract the Toms. Of course, the shooter is also at fault
because they’re not allowed to shoot the hens, but you know how excited
they get. We actually have to agree with the shooters sometimes when we
see the photographs of the victims attached to their reports. I
personally have seen photos of the cadavers and I can see how they would
mistake the victims for game. One guy really did look exactly like a
badger.
When it was just an honest mistake like that, we usually only revoke
their hunting license for a year. But we get really tough on them when
we don’t feel the victim looked sufficiently like game; then we’ll
revoke their license for 2 years – now that’s real punishment for a
serious hunter. We usually condemn them to fishing during that period of
time and hope they won’t get too hooked (forgive the bad pun) and not
return to hunting after they’ve done time. Look, the excise tax on
fishing gear goes to the Feds, so we’re still getting something out of
this.
I probably shouldn’t be so candid, and I certainly don’t want to
dissuade you from offering your hospitality to our customers. As I said,
they mostly only kill each other. Oh, all right. Once in a while,
they’ll kill someone who’s foolish enough to wear something white during
deer hunting season, but those people should really know better. And if
they don’t, then they deserve what they get. We can’t say that publicly,
of course, so we simply get the guy from the local gun shop to say it.
We bill him as a “local businessman.” He’s got nothing to lose, and
he’ll score some points with his hunting buddies.
Yes, it’s true that hunters are getting lazier and want “hunting
opportunity” closer to home. What better way of offering it than by
asking neighbors to open their hearts and doors to fellow citizens and
by so doing alleviate a problem for themselves?
So be humane, which, according to our definition, means “to show
compassion for other people.” [Pg 84, Northeast Regional Hunter
Education Manual]. Let a hunter into your home today!
If you have any further questions, don’t hesitate to call. Of course,
if your call is anything less than friendly and naïve, we don’t feel we
have to answer you, so there.
You may think I’m making this up because I’ve given it a somewhat
humorous twist; but I’ve gone through hundreds of accident reports
through Freedom of Information Law requests for two years running and
the descriptions of accident causes are entirely accurate. Here’s a
sampling of a report below. Shooters’ and victims’ names have been
deleted to avoid potential lawsuits.
I am 40 years old, reside by myself, and am currently unemployed.
Today I went into the woods before daylight for turkey hunting. I
went into the woods from Kamery Road and sat on the side of the hill
facing the Two Mile Road. At about 8:30 am, I started walking back up
the hill and onto a logging road. I was on top of the hill and heading
back toward Schlosser’s Hill. I heard what I thought was a turkey
making a clucking and a purr on a stump. I raised my 12 ga. Remington
Express, kicked the safe off, and discharged one round of 4 by 6
Duplex shot. I immediately heard someone yelling that he had been hit.
I knew exactly right then what I had done, I ejected the shell, put
the safe back on, and ran over to where I had shot. I found who I now
know to be Don _________. After we introduced ourselves to each other,
we both ejected all the rounds from both guns. Don had been sitting
with his back to the stump. What I thought to be the turkey was
actually a decoy and was on his back. Don was sitting with his right
side toward me and the decoy was facing me. When I discharged the
round some of the shot struck Don on the right side. Don was unable to
walk, so I assisted him and we both walked out of the woods to the
Dempsy Club. There were some troopers there and they called for the
ambulance.
Signed,
John J. ________
CONCLUSION OF HEARING OFICER:
The evidence admitted clearly shows that the responded acted
carelessly and negligently in discharging his shotgun resulting in the
injury of Mr. ________. In his statement, to NYSP Inv. Ensell, Mr.
_______ said that the Respondent stated after the shooting that he
“was wrong for taking the shot…he knew it wasn’t a gobbler and that he
should have looked for a beard” and “that he should have been more
cautious.” At the hearing the Respondent offered no testimony or
evidence to contradict this statement, and in fact stated that
documents read into the record were accurate.
Depositions in evidence show that the decoy was a hen turkey in a
backpack on the victim’s back, and the victim was sitting on or behind
a stump with the decoy visible. The victim’s statement indicated that
he was prepared to leave the hunting area. While the victim certainly
exercised poor judgment in carrying the decoy in plain view on his
back, he was not in violation of any section of the ECL, and was
responsible for the actions of ther espondent. The Respondent was
negligent in that he failed to properly identify his target before
shooting; even while he may have believed that the decoy was a real
turkey, he failed to make the determination that the turkey could be
legally shot.
Submitted,
Signed,
Lt. Dale Balmer
Hearing Officer
From NYSDEP 1993 accident records, obtained through FOIL from Dept.
of Law Enforcement.
