Appeals court deals blow to bear hunt
27/09/07 07:15 Filed in: NJ Bear
Issue
By RICHARD COWEN
STAFF WRITER,The Record
www.northjersey.com
No bear management policy, no bear hunt.
That’s been the rule in New Jersey ever since 2004, when the state Supreme Court cancelled a proposed hunt because the state didn’t have a valid black bear management plan on the books.
That decision was brought to bear on Thursday, when an appeals court upheld Environmental Commissioner Lisa P. Jackson’s 2006 decision to withdraw approval of the Comprehensive Black Bear Management Policy.
Jackson had done so to block a hunt proposed by the state Fish and Game Council.
STAFF WRITER,The Record
www.northjersey.com
No bear management policy, no bear hunt.
That’s been the rule in New Jersey ever since 2004, when the state Supreme Court cancelled a proposed hunt because the state didn’t have a valid black bear management plan on the books.
That decision was brought to bear on Thursday, when an appeals court upheld Environmental Commissioner Lisa P. Jackson’s 2006 decision to withdraw approval of the Comprehensive Black Bear Management Policy.
Jackson had done so to block a hunt proposed by the state Fish and Game Council.
Hunters had sought to re-instate the policy in time
to authorize another hunt in December. Represented in
a lawsuit by the N.J. State Federation of
Sportsmen’s Clubs, the Safari Club
International and the U.S. Sportsmen’s
Alliance, they must now decide whether to appeal the
latest court verdict to the state Supreme Court,
which wasn’t too amenable to their arguments in
2004.
Ed Markowski, president of the N.J. state Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs, noted “the court has upheld the commissioner’s authority to revoke the black bear policy. That obviously broadens her powers. And the last time we went before the Supreme Court, we lost 5 to 0.”
New Jersey last held a bear hunt in 2005, with 298 bruins killed. The current population is estimated at 3,000 to 4,000.
Thursday’s decision is expected to do little to end the power struggle between Jackson, commissioner of the Department of Environmental Protection and the Fish and Game Council, the 11-member appointed body that sets the game code. The Council, dominated by hunters, argues that hunting is necessary to control the bear population; Jackson favors non-lethal methods like tougher enforcement of trash laws, and more public education on living safely among bears.
The Superior Court, Appellate Division decision is largely silent on how the two sides should resolve differences. Instead, it decided the case on narrow technical grounds, saying the Comprehensive Black Bear Management Policy was akin to a DEP rule — and thus should have been published in the New Jersey Registry and put to public comment before its adoption in 2005. It was not.
Thus, the court found, Jackson could not have overstepped her authority when she withdrew the policy because the policy was never legally adopted in the first place.
“So it’s back to the drawing board,” said Doug Burdin, attorney for Safari Club International.
But Jackson and the Council are far apart.
In August, Jackson submitted a draft of a new policy favoring non-lethal methods.
The Council responded with a draft calling for a hunt in 2008 if the state had not reduced so-called Category 1 incidents — in which a bear is deemed a threat to human life or property — by 30 percent by September 2008.
Jackson on Thursday stood fast in opposing use of statistical assessments to trigger a hunt.
“I don’t think it’s all about a certain number,” she said. “Let’s look at other things. Are we educating? Are we doing enough enforcement of trash laws?”
She added that she would reach out to the Council to get a management policy in place. But she wants that policy to lean toward non-lethal strategies because she believes that what most people in the state want.
“There’s clearly a philosophical difference,” she said. “There’s a movement going on, and we don’t like the idea of a hunt as the first way of managing the bear population.”
Jeanette Vreeland, the Council’s chairwoman, said her panel welcomes further discussion, but isn’t about to drop hunting.
“Go with any scientific method of wildlife management, and it will include hunting,” she said.
Ed Markowski, president of the N.J. state Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs, noted “the court has upheld the commissioner’s authority to revoke the black bear policy. That obviously broadens her powers. And the last time we went before the Supreme Court, we lost 5 to 0.”
New Jersey last held a bear hunt in 2005, with 298 bruins killed. The current population is estimated at 3,000 to 4,000.
Thursday’s decision is expected to do little to end the power struggle between Jackson, commissioner of the Department of Environmental Protection and the Fish and Game Council, the 11-member appointed body that sets the game code. The Council, dominated by hunters, argues that hunting is necessary to control the bear population; Jackson favors non-lethal methods like tougher enforcement of trash laws, and more public education on living safely among bears.
The Superior Court, Appellate Division decision is largely silent on how the two sides should resolve differences. Instead, it decided the case on narrow technical grounds, saying the Comprehensive Black Bear Management Policy was akin to a DEP rule — and thus should have been published in the New Jersey Registry and put to public comment before its adoption in 2005. It was not.
Thus, the court found, Jackson could not have overstepped her authority when she withdrew the policy because the policy was never legally adopted in the first place.
“So it’s back to the drawing board,” said Doug Burdin, attorney for Safari Club International.
But Jackson and the Council are far apart.
In August, Jackson submitted a draft of a new policy favoring non-lethal methods.
The Council responded with a draft calling for a hunt in 2008 if the state had not reduced so-called Category 1 incidents — in which a bear is deemed a threat to human life or property — by 30 percent by September 2008.
Jackson on Thursday stood fast in opposing use of statistical assessments to trigger a hunt.
“I don’t think it’s all about a certain number,” she said. “Let’s look at other things. Are we educating? Are we doing enough enforcement of trash laws?”
She added that she would reach out to the Council to get a management policy in place. But she wants that policy to lean toward non-lethal strategies because she believes that what most people in the state want.
“There’s clearly a philosophical difference,” she said. “There’s a movement going on, and we don’t like the idea of a hunt as the first way of managing the bear population.”
Jeanette Vreeland, the Council’s chairwoman, said her panel welcomes further discussion, but isn’t about to drop hunting.
“Go with any scientific method of wildlife management, and it will include hunting,” she said.
