Editor’s note: This commentary is by Lynda Graham-Barber of Newport Center, who is a children’s book author.
This is an open letter to Vermont Department of Fish and Wildlife Commissioner Louis Porter.
I am writing as a Vermont landowner concerned not only with recent decisions made by the board of Vermont Fish & Wildlife but also with what appears to be an abiding lack of concern for the views expressed by a majority of Vermonters.
As I’m sure you are aware fewer Vermonters are hunting. The numbers speak for themselves: In 1990, some 105,333 licenses were issued in Vermont; that number fell to 62,813 in 2017. As a result of this downturn, Fish & Wildlife is losing funds.
All organizations need funding. With license fees down I understand that you must be proactive in generating interest in hunting and fishing. Nothing wrong with that. However, why shut out wildlife advocates in the process as they represent another potential source of revenue? We own some 160 acres of land and do not engage in hunting but allow hunting on our property and encourage outdoor recreational activities. Our woodland trails are open to hiking, mountain biking, horseback riding and cross-country skiing. During the past decade people engaged in these non-game activities have outnumbered hunters by a wide margin. And those folks generate income for local businesses.
What I object to is the way F&W conducts their business in dealing with the public and their concerns. Bear in mind the majority of Vermonters do not hunt, yet to date no non-hunter had ever held a position on the F&W board. I’m not suggesting appointing animal activists here. Qualified biologists, wildlife rehabilitators, and scientists have applied to be on the board, but they have been consistently passed over in favor of individuals from the hunting/trapping community. This is not fair. It is simply not representative. And it’s not good science. Individuals with science backgrounds might well contribute to the discussion of the long-term effects of an increasing deer population in our Vermont woods and the possible ramifications of extending otter trapping season. With regard to the latter issue, what guarantee do we have that an expanded season would not overlap the period when young otters are nursing and suffer potential starvation when a mother has been trapped?
Whenever I have attended meetings sponsored by F&W their responses to suggestions from the non-hunting public are always the same. For example, they question the need for a law making wanton waste illegal when people will just continue to shoot and then abandon carcasses on the roads, fences or even porches irrespective of any law. Well, following that line of reasoning why do we have laws that make it illegal to drive while intoxicated, for folks will do it anyway. Or, and I’m quoting you here: ” … it’s wrong to view the killing of coyotes as wasteful, even when their pelts aren’t used, because the activity still serves as a way for sportsmen to connect with nature.”
Connect with nature? I’m sure, Commissioner, you might find that statement a bit of a stretch. Since when does eliminating a family of coyote pups, then stringing them up for pubic view, as was recently documented in Bloomfield, constitute a bond with nature? Is this the visual message hunters/trappers want to send to their neighbors? If so, what does it prove?
I do not dispute the notion that hunting does present an opportunity to “bond with nature” and connect people to their food source. I’ve talked with fathers and their youngsters as they set out to go hunting in our woods. I’ve witnessed their excitement at following tracks in freshly fallen snow, of anticipating the sight of a bounding deer. I’ve sensed their eagerness at sharing a day in the woods, at perhaps being surprised at the hoot of an owl or the yip of a coyote echoing off the mountain.
Personally, I find F&W’s positions on far too many issues to be intractable and settled. They invite public comment but continue to stick to the old tried-and-true policies whether they reflect public sentiment or not. This was evidenced recently when F&W denied a petition to enact a regulated coyote hunting season versus the current open season. Wildlife advocates outnumbered hunters that evening and gave compelling testimony, yet F&W went against its own science (your website points up the important ecological niche these animals occupy) and denied the petition. This is not healthy in my opinion, nor does it bode well for the general welfare of Vermont’s wildlife community.
