Contact and support SB96 reduce archery safety zones in HoCo

[lazarus]

Please contact your reps that you support senate bill 96. Filed by senator Katie Hester. It puts HoCo’s archery safety zones in line with most other Maryland counties, 50yds rather than 150.

Let’s try to convince them to get this across the finish line!

Legislation - SB0096

 

[lazarus]

I heard back on my outreach to the 9a representatives supporting the bill. It is being withdrawn and an identical house bill is being filed instead (it is apparently easier?). It is under discussion

Discussion will continue in a meeting on Friday at 10am and in next week's Howard County Delegation meeting on 1/25 at 8:30am. Both meetings will be livestreamed through the MGA website. You can track the bill here: https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Legislation/Details/sb0096

They highly encourage anyone supportive to contact them, now and Once it is refilled in the house, and later file written testimony in support. It sounds like they’d like to get it passed and positive input would help.

I’ll post a new thread once it is filed in the house with the HB number. Please support this!

 

[lazarus]

I hate to cross post this one with outdoor threads, but this one needs everyone’s support. Please check the other thread for more information and contact info.

Please, even if you don’t hunt in HoCo but just drive through or hunt here, contact all of the HoCo delegation to support a clean SB96 (Howard county delegation bill 15-23).

There is still a good chance of passage, but several proposals to amend away the bill are on the table such as only allowing the reduced safety zone for sharpshooters, or crop damage permits. Also in the table is just tossing it and closing county parks for more days in a failed attempt to expand managed hunting and sharpshooters to try to take the deer population. DNR/county shared only 20 deer were taken in the program versus 432 deer on private property in the county almost all in Western HoCo because of the safety zone requirements.

This is a safe and effective bill please take a minute to send even a brief email in support of the bill, in its clean form without amendment.

The delegation is meeting again next week to consider any amendments and possibly voting on the bill to see if it moves forward.

More info and delegation contacts in the other thread.

Contact your delegates please! HoCo May reduce safety zones for archery SB96

https://www.mdshooters.com/threads/sb96-reduce-archery-safety-zones-in-hoco.272216/ SB96 is currently sponsored by Senator Hester. It puts HoCo safety zones for archery in line for most counties. 100yds from the ground, 50yds from an elevated position. Please show your support, especially if...

www.mdshooters.com

 

[lazarus]

Still time to contact the HoCo delegates and senators. They are meeting again this coming week. Several seem open to the bill (and Hester sponsored it). A couple are openly hostile, but a few have not stated an opinion or asked any questions that seem hostile. DNR is supportive of the bill and made that clear to the delegation that it would be safe and effective. As did the county deer management program director.

But hearing from constituents, HoCo residents, hunters, and even people from the rest of the state who hunt in HoCo or even drive through.

Better deer management will reduce vehicle collisions with deer making EVERYONE safer. If you drive through the county, you have a vested interest in this and you should let them all know that!

Katie Fry Hester
(Katiefry.hester@senate.state.md.us)
Clarence Lam (clarence.lam@senate.state.md.us)
Guy Guzzone (guy.guzzone@senate.state.md.us)

chao.wu@house.state.md.us
natalie.ziegler@house.state.md.us
courtney.watson@house.state.md.us
pam.guzzone@house.state.md.us
terri.hill@house.state.md.us
jessica.feldmark@house.state.md.us
vanessa.atterbeary@house.state.md.us
jen.terrasa@house.state.md.us

 

[Micktaco]

Email sent, I have yet to bowhunt in HoCo, but can't say I won't in seasons to come.

 

[Melnic]

Wow
Hester, she is a dem and I’m in her district.
Boy do I support this one. I’ll have to contact her about this one and let her know it’s great she is doing this!

I lost my setback last year and this will get it back as I can move to the other side of my property.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[lazarus]

Wow
Hester, she is a dem and I’m in her district.
Boy do I support this one. I’ll have to contact her about this one and let her know it’s great she is doing this!

I lost my setback last year and this will get it back as I can move to the other side of my property.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Send emails to ALL delegates and senators in HoCo please (list above). They need to hear from us all! A few won't change their minds, all we need is a plurality and the bill will move forward (and likely get passed by the house and senate then).

 

[sclag22]

I emailed to them all. Got a thank you from Chao.

 

[lazarus]

Sounds like they are kicking the can till at least the next meeting. Some amendments proposed.

Limit the archery safety zone reduction to only HoCo managed hunt program
One to limit it just to county sharpshooters
One to limit it only to crop damage permit holders

It sounds like possibly some or all of those will get adopted. It might just pass clean (or just get defeated).

They were struggling to figure out what the heck the law today means. Some thought you didn't need permission from other people if you have permission of the landowner. Delegate Feldmark of all people pointed out that it is from anyone in that radius who is the owner/occupant of a dwelling. Not just the owner of the land. Delegate Hill put forward that the amendments really seemed to dilute the impact of the bill on actually controlling deer populations.

So I don't know. They are waiting for final language on those amendments and a couple delegates had asked for amendments that combined the managed hunt and sharpshooter program and county managed hunt and crop damage. They are waiting to get that, probably discuss the bill again at their next weekly session.

So no idea where this one is going. Sounds like it'll likely pass in some form. I hope clean, might not be.

They didn't share specific text, but most of the conversation on the amendments was "the closer 50yd" on the amendment. So I don't know if the amendments are only going to target the 50-100yd range being limited to possibly managed hunts, sharpshooters, and crop damage permit holders and that they would allow the 150 to 100yd reduction written in to the bill to stand without dicking with it. That would at least be some win if they do that. But I am hoping it passes clean as written. 50yds is proven safe as has a much larger impact than 100yds. But 100yds is still a lot better than NOTHING.

Doesn't hurt to reach out again and encourage them to pass it clean...

The bill draft deadline is February 9th. So if they don't vote it to move forward by then, it doesn't move this year. Watson did encourage the bill sponsors of these last 4 bills to work with delegates to answer questions ahead of next weeks meeting so they can move on these quickly, rather than spending 20, 30, 40 minutes just answering more questions.

 

[trailman]

Late to the party, I worked on the first bill here in FredCo. Points to make.

Safety, The law has a proven record through the large handful of counties that already have it, NRP records prove that. When we passed it PA had it statewide for a number of years including Urban areas of Philly and Pittsburg.

We used pictures with safety zone radius's to illustrate the concept and the relatively short range of archery. You really have to intend to shoot high and far and that can happen with a 150yd zone. Pointed out that this reduced yardage would allow more culling of deer in developments where they are prolific especially since many of them contain greenspace that would be huntable.

People here tend to forget that legislators are rarely SMEs and need to be educated on your topic of choice.

 

[lazarus]

Late to the party, I worked on the first bill here in FredCo. Points to make.

Safety, The law has a proven record through the large handful of counties that already have it, NRP records prove that. When we passed it PA had it statewide for a number of years including Urban areas of Philly and Pittsburg.

We used pictures with safety zone radius's to illustrate the concept and the relatively short range of archery. You really have to intend to shoot high and far and that can happen with a 150yd zone. Pointed out that this reduced yardage would allow more culling of deer in developments where they are prolific especially since many of them contain greenspace that would be huntable.

People here tend to forget that legislators are rarely SMEs and need to be educated on your topic of choice.

Thanks! Yeah, I didn't become aware until Senator Hester had already introduced it. I've been in touch with the Gentleman who has helped push it by getting signatures and stuff, but we haven't talked at length. I am not sure if this was discussed at the public delegation meeting, I think it was, in November or not. DNR and County deer management officials have come out strongly in support and batted down the crazier things from Terrasa and Feldmark. A couple of others have been a little wishy washy. The DNR director pointed out to Terrasa that 50yds is still a pretty long distance and they are talking about elevated even. Feldmark grabbed some pearls and asked, "but an arrow CAN physically travel more than 150yds, right?"

The director tried hard to not roll his eyes and said you have to be shooting it up into the air to do that.

I am very much hoping this passes clean. If it does get amended, my hope is that the amendments are ONLY to the 50-100yds elevated position language and we at least get the safety zone reduced to 100yds for everyone not on a crop damage permit, managed hunt, or sharpshooter (The three proposals). The language they were all using in discussing the amendments (no text was shown at the time) was all related to "the reduced 50yd safety zone from an elevated position). 100 is still "too much" and 50 is proven safe, but 100 is still better than 150.

I've pointed out in emails to the senators and delegates that 50yds is from the hunter, where their arrow travels, and the deer. So unless the deer is directly below you, a typical hunting situation means you have a zone about 2 acres in size with the hunter at the center of it to be legal with a 50yd safety zone. Which means it will not apply to almost all of Eastern Howard county. Where the pearl clutchers represent/live. What it really means is that smaller 3-5 acre properties MIGHT be able to be hunted, depending on set backs and layout of the property. That the 150yd safety zone today would mean a bunch of 6-8 acre properties with the houses in the center, or a 11-15 acre property with 1-3 acre properties surrounding it.

In my own instance, I have about a 10yd arc out from my back porch that is 150yds or more from all of the houses around me because of how my 4.4 acres is setup, with one property 4.2ac next to me, and the rest being 1.5-2 acre properties with a couple of unbuilt 1.3 acre properties flanking a house behind mine. 100yds would open things up a LOT more for me. I still wouldn't be able to hunt where I am. But at least that would give me maybe 30-40yds in an arc from my back porch that I could legally hunt without permission. A bit in both of my side yards too that is probably 20-30yds from my house. 50yds opens up around 3.5 acres of my 4.4 acres I could hunt. I do have permission from all of the neighbors that matter now. But it just takes one neighbor changing their mind, or them moving and an anti moving in. Or just a neighbor that doesn't like me, and I can't hunt most of my property today.

The 100yds would mean if one bad neighbor moves in or one changes their mind, a lot of my property remains open to hunting. It would take 2 or 3 neighbors to shut down most of my property to hunting.

 

[lazarus]

Late to the party, I worked on the first bill here in FredCo. Points to make.

Safety, The law has a proven record through the large handful of counties that already have it, NRP records prove that. When we passed it PA had it statewide for a number of years including Urban areas of Philly and Pittsburg.

We used pictures with safety zone radius's to illustrate the concept and the relatively short range of archery. You really have to intend to shoot high and far and that can happen with a 150yd zone. Pointed out that this reduced yardage would allow more culling of deer in developments where they are prolific especially since many of them contain greenspace that would be huntable.

People here tend to forget that legislators are rarely SMEs and need to be educated on your topic of choice.

Sorry, my other reply was getting long. The DNR director pointed out there have been NO 2 person hunting accidents for archery in Maryland since statistics started being collected in the 1970s. He clarified that means no hunter has ever shot someone with a bow in a hunting situation. All accidents have been single hunter incidents, mostly falls from tree stands, or self inflicted wounds and it is single digits every year, STATE wide.

Terrasa lied and said lots of hunters are killing people's pets and made up a story about a constituent who claims a hunter shot their dog and the person's vet says it happens all the time (slight benefit of the doubt, she might not have made up the story, but just has a constituent who did). The DNR director basically called out her lie that it is NOT happening and he has nearly 30 years in the job and has never heard of such a thing in that entire time. That sometimes there ARE incidents of people shooting an arrow at someone's property or animal, but these are NOT hunting related incidents and are not occurring in the act of hunting. Its a criminal deciding to commit a crime. Same thing with poachers today and the change in law would not impact this.

He pointed out there are hundreds of dogs hit by cars in Howard county every year. And no domestic animals shot by hunters that he has ever heard reported in the state.

He pointed out much of the state has had the reduced 50yd archery zones for years now with zero incidents. But those Columbia and Ellicott City delegates don't like them hunters and imagine people hunting off their townhouse deck I think.

Anyway, we will see. I think it is out of "our" hands. I mean, I highly encourage people to continue reaching out to the Howard county delegation in support, even if you just drive through the county. Reduced deer means fewer dangerous and damaging vehicle collisions with deer and less lime disease. But they aren't hearing testimony on bills from the public anymore for "local" bills.

 

[lazarus]

Yup, amendment to gut the change passed.

Passed with just Senator Lam voting against it even as amended. He heard a lot of constituents with concerns against the bill.

I guess waiting to see the language as amended (I am guessing will be filed today or tomorrow on the website), but pretty sure there is NO reduction of the zone from 150 to 100yds for everyone else.

I'd say let's push next year, but I don't think the county delegation as currently composed will ever do anything more. Especially not after the feel good of doing something, that doesn't really do much of anything. But maybe next year we can try to push moving it to 100yds for everyone else next year if that wasn't changed.

The reduced archery safety zones will only apply to crop damage permit holders and those in the county managed hunt program. I just sent this off to them. I am sure no good this year since they already voted the gutted bill forward. I doubt it'll do any good next year either, but I can hope we can try against and get them to do SOMETHING.

Dear Senators and Delegates,

I am disappointed that proposed bill 15-23 did not pass as originally written. Many counties in Maryland, including Montgomery county, have proven that 50yd archery hunting safety zones are safe and effective for deer management. The bill as amended to only allow those hunting in the county managed hunt program and crop damage permit holders a reduced safety zone does nothing to actually improve safety, as a 50yd safety zone is already proved to be 100% effective at keeping others safe. The Department of Natural Resources director shared unequivocal evidence with the Howard County delegation that there is never, not once, in Maryland since statistics have started being collected in the 1970s of a single incident where another person was injured or killed by an archery hunter in the state of Maryland. This includes counties much more densely populated than Howard county that have 50 yard safety zones. Not once in hundreds of thousands of hunts over 50+ years.

The bill as amended will do little to reduce the deer herd in Howard county, and thus have little impact on the safety of residents from increasing Lyme disease and traffic accidents from collisions with deer. Deer don’t stay put, and just because a farmer or their agent has some more breathing room to hunt with a bow, doesn’t mean their neighbor where the deer are spending their day and then coming out at night to eat the farmer’s crops can now hunt their 5 acre property, because their next door neighbor 140yds away on their own 5 acres, doesn’t want them hunting. The county managed hunt program has little impact on deer numbers, because it can only be run on county property. Not on private property near any of the parks, where most of the deer are located. Nor does it reduce safety zones for state controlled land, such as Hugg Thomas WMA, Patuxent or Potapsco parks. Keeping the areas where deer can be hunted limited.

I urge you in the next session, to please refile and take up 15-23 as it was originally written for consideration. People’s concerns that the bill would be unsafe are not grounded in the actual 50 years of data proving the bill would be safe. If those concerns cannot be overcome, then I would at least urge the delegation to consider a bill reducing the safety zone to 75 or 100yds for those not holding a crop damage permit or participating in the county managed hunt program. That would make a much greater impact than 15-23 as amended today will make and not reduce safety any, as even 50yds has proven safe.

 

[Melnic]

FYI, looks like it was withdrawn by Sponsor

 

[lazarus]

FYI, looks like it was withdrawn by Sponsor

Did you check the house bill? They did withdraw the senate bill and then were advancing a neutered house bill. It reduced safety zones only for those with agricultural damage permits and the county managed hunt program. I haven’t checked in the status of the house bill.

Honestly in some ways if it didn’t advance maybe they could take an effective crack at real change next year.