BACKGROUND From About.com Animal Rights
A dangerous bill designed to expand hunting is pending in the Wisconsin legislature right now, and has already passed the state assembly. According to the Bear Interest Group of Wisconsin, SB226/AB311 "will in effect turn the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources into a recruitment and training organization for the hunters and trappers." State wildlife management agencies already tend to be run by hunters, for hunters, but this bill would give Wisconsin's Department of Natural Resources more power to expand hunting in several ways:
- Establish a "sporting recruitment and retention council" to figure out ways to increase the number of hunters and trappers in the state
- Establish an incentive program for hunters to recruit new hunters, including credits towards license fees and a prize drawing
- Require school boards to give high school credit to students who complete the hunter education, bow hunter education or trapper education programs
- Offer their trapper education program online
- Reduce fees for new hunters or anyone who hasn't hunted in the state within the past ten years; and
- Prohibit the acquisition of new lands under the state's stewardship program unless hunting, fishing, trapping, hiking, and cross-country skiing will be allowed on that land, or unless the acquisition is unanimously approved by the natural resources board.
What you can do: According to BIG Wisconsin, "This bill passed the Wisconsin Assembly as AB311 on Nov. 1, 2011. 84 representatives voted yes...12 voted no and 12 abstentions. The bill is now being introduced into the Wisconsin Senate as SB226." Contact your own state senator and members of the Senate Natural Resources Committee and politely ask them to oppose SB226/AB311:
Senator Kedzie (Chair)
Senator Moulton (Vice-Chair)
Senator Moulton (Vice-Chair)
WHOM TO CONTACT
It has come to my attention that SB226/AB311 is being hastened through congress with no public input and I am writing to establish my protest. This statute "would allow hunters and trappers in and opens every state and county park and all publicly funded Stewardship lands to all forms of hunting, fishing, and trapping." (Read more: http://host.madison.com/news/
opinion/column/patricia- randolph-s-madravenspeak-the- end-of-safe-state-parks/ article_420b6707-7f53-5114- a8b9-55b69986dad1.html# ixzz1dvXx8VCb )
I suspect that to establish endorsement, pro-killing enthusiasts and supporters exaggerate potentially dangerous situations and exploit community fear, dispelling any measures to protect wildlife. Indeed, the human animal is deceptively clever and duplicitous in gaining support for the vicious killing of a non-human animal who is worth more dead than alive to calculating hunters.
First, this type of mass killing is unethical, the sentient life of these animals taking precedent over the whims and desires of thrill-seeking hunters and trappers. The traps themselves pose remarkable pain, fear, and slow deaths, and can make victims non-target animals, such as dogs who wander off trails.
Second, refusing no public input demands reconciliation. In what capacity gives you right to make deliberate and dangerous decisions banning input from those very people who gave you capacity with assumed consultation?
Third, of utmost concern is the unethical agenda of this decision, and the goal of death by these hunters. Hunting is inherently cruel, these hunts are particularly savage, fundamentally cruel, and based on inequity and accommodating promoters, employing cheap baiting tactics to attract animals, a decidedly unmerited and cruel strategy to lure creatures to their deaths. The trapping causes great pause as at least one non-target animal has been victim yet ignored by you. Do you sleep well knowing you chose to ignore an unethical and brutal death that could have been prevented? The targeted animals themselves endure horrific trauma and slow death, at times chewing their own limbs off in attempts to escape. Is it easy to pass judgement on innocent animals, sentencing them to excruciating pain and position in which they would feel the need to escape via chewing off their limbs and subjecting them to death?
Fourth, there is an inversely proportionate number of hunters who control the legislative budget; while hunting continues to lose popularity, more dollars are allocated by a ridiculously low percentage of supporters as compared to high numbers of those who disapprove.
Therefore, I respectfully request that, based on the established brutality involved as well as cheap political tactics ignoring public input and inversely proportionate support, you please vacate any decision supporting the brutal hunting proposition, SB226/AB311, in the above listed areas, county parks, and as well as Stewardship land. Please leave your reputation free of such brutal, inequitable hunting enterprises, and do not allow economical benefits, hunting sympathizers, and distorted accusations to dominate over ethics and judicious resolutions.
I know your time is limited, and I thank you very much for your attention to this urgent concern.