Elliott: Ban hunting in the state forest

Full story: Lowell Sun

City Councilor Rodney Elliott has filed a motion for next Tuesday's meeting that seeks to ban hunting in the Lowell-Dracut-Tyngsboro State Forest.

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 18 of18
Horses in danger

Windham, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Dec 7, 2007
 
Cutter Farm abuts the state forest also, and the trails are used for horses, wouldn't want to see my daughter injured or her horse, thinking her horse was a deer.
Lowell

Chelmsford, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Dec 7, 2007
 
We need more tree huggers in the area! The dog should have been tied up!!
Frank

Waltham, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Dec 7, 2007
 
leash law baby, leash law.
Bob

Verona, WI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Dec 7, 2007
 
Expect a lawsuit Mr. Elliot that will tie this decision up in court for many years to come, are the residents of lowell ready to pay for that?
May

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Dec 7, 2007
 
Go Elliot!! Dracut needs to do the same. Im not against Hunting but Im Pro- recreation use in the forest.
relieved

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Dec 7, 2007
 
The hunters wont like this course of action, but its a tough reality that hunting and other forms of outdoor recreation in this particular location are a bad mix.
Dont blame the so-called tree huggers. It took an unleashed dog(illegal)and a hunter not using proper care when firing his weapon (also illegal) to force this situation.
Instead, we can all thank the tree huggers for the creation and preservation of this open land in the first place, and thier continued efforts to save it for everyone.
Erika

Boston, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Dec 7, 2007
 
It's not about the dog being tied up, this could have been a child. I am also not against hunting and understand the necessity of it, sport and the food however such a highly polulated area. Tough decision all around. But let's stop bashing of Smokey's mom and giving hunters a bad name because of one complete loser with a gun.
Outdoorsman

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Dec 7, 2007
 
All the treehuggers, bikers, hikers and what not have no complaint, nor will any suit be legal. All the fees raised to not only purchase the land, but also to maintain and operate the state forests, come out of the sales of hunting and fishing licenses and the associated land stamp.

Untill a recreational land stamp fee is attached to the sales of mountain bikes, binoculars, hiking boots or there are permits sold to persue such activities with the attached lands stamp none of them have more rights to be in those woods than hunters who have paid the way for all of tehm to have a place to use without hunters present for 9 months out of the year. Use your brain the other 3 months and wear orange and dont let your dog run free in the woods where people are hunting for deer with guns because just like licensed drivers not all of them are smart.
Mike

Sharon, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Dec 7, 2007
 
Hunting is one of the priority uses of the State Forest system just the same for hiking, biking, fishing and horseback riding.

The person who shot this dog is a complete idiot. People like that give hunters a bad name. Most hunters are nothing like the person who shot this dog.

Shotgun deer season is only 12 days long out of the whole year. I don't see why there can't be a balance here. There is no need to just shut the whole place down to hunting because of the reckless act of one idiot.

The person who shot this dog is a complete idiot for certain, but the non hunting public should take some precautions to ensure a safe visit by staying on the trails, leashing their dogs and wearing hunter orange vests during the 12 day shotgun deer season.

I don't deer hunt but am a hunter and would hate to see yet another area close to home shut down to hunting. There are not many places for hunters to enjoy their activity in this area anymore.
Jason M

Lowell, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Dec 7, 2007
 
While I feel for this dogs owner, it was targeted by a cruel person. Hunting in Massachusetts is shotgun only (for deer season.) If this lab was hit with a shotgun, there would be no looking for a projectile,(which passed through the animal as stated in the reports), it would be easily discernable what type of weapon killed the dog. Banning hunting is a severe over-reaction. There has been a motorized vehicle ban in the forrest for years, and that has worked out so well. Walking in the woods you have a better chance of being hit by a recreational vehicle than you do being shot by a hunter. Side note: sportsman care for the enviroment and pay/do more to keep it "green" than any other single party. don't make this type of an overreaction to a situation of a cruel person.
Gregg

Lowell, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Dec 7, 2007
 
Outdoorsman wrote:
All the treehuggers, bikers, hikers and what not have no complaint, nor will any suit be legal. All the fees raised to not only purchase the land, but also to maintain and operate the state forests, come out of the sales of hunting and fishing licenses and the associated land stamp.
Untill a recreational land stamp fee is attached to the sales of mountain bikes, binoculars, hiking boots or there are permits sold to persue such activities with the attached lands stamp none of them have more rights to be in those woods than hunters who have paid the way for all of tehm to have a place to use without hunters present for 9 months out of the year. Use your brain the other 3 months and wear orange and dont let your dog run free in the woods where people are hunting for deer with guns because just like licensed drivers not all of them are smart.
I don't see signs on state forests that say hunters have more rights than the rest of the public. State forests are public property and therefore are kept up through our tax dollars. Why should everybody who uses the Lowell-Dracut State Park have to worry about being shot because they didn't were a vest. I have a better idea why don't the hunters go to a park that is not so crowded with other recreational users.
Outdoorsman

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Dec 7, 2007
 
Gregg,

I dont see a sign on your forhead saying you are an ignorant ass who twists others words either but fact is fact.

I said that noone has more rights to be there than hunters. I did not say that they have less rights to be there. Hunters subsidize these public lands through the land stamp program. Noone else does, this is why it is illegal to ban hunting in state forests.

Why should everyone wear a vest? Cause it is common sense. The orange is not just to ensure rabid hunters wont mistake you for a deer. Its true purpose is so when lineing up a shot or tracking a moving deer and someone is somewhere in the background the orange stands out and allows us to back off the shot so not to risk someone in the background. If you got your head out of your ass and thought about it you would see it.
Ace

Brookline, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Dec 8, 2007
 
Every once in awhile I remind myself why I never voted for this guy. Here's a guy that has now clue what lead to this and the fact this is state land. Although I don't hunt myself I can see hunting being ban. Then an over population of deer and some night while someone is driving the next thing you know you have a deer in your windshield.
PJ Mercier

Lowell, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Dec 8, 2007
 
It seems as though there are many supporters of hunting in the state forest, as well as hunters themselves. If anyone is interested in signing a petition and/or attending a city counsel meeting in support of hunting in the state forest, find my contact below.
PJ Mercier
pj.mercier@comcast.net
outdoorsman

South Hadley, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Dec 8, 2007
 
Gregg, there is a big difference between a state park and a state forest. Nice try on twisting words and purposefull misinformation again.
What next Rodney

Weare, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
Dec 8, 2007
 
Rodney maybe you want to ban cars in Lowell next they kill more peoples than hunters

Since: Sep 07

Lowell

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Dec 10, 2007
 
Jason M wrote:
While I feel for this dogs owner, it was targeted by a cruel person. Hunting in Massachusetts is shotgun only (for deer season.) If this lab was hit with a shotgun, there would be no looking for a projectile,(which passed through the animal as stated in the reports), it would be easily discernable what type of weapon killed the dog. Banning hunting is a severe over-reaction. There has been a motorized vehicle ban in the forrest for years, and that has worked out so well. Walking in the woods you have a better chance of being hit by a recreational vehicle than you do being shot by a hunter. Side note: sportsman care for the enviroment and pay/do more to keep it "green" than any other single party. don't make this type of an overreaction to a situation of a cruel person.
Mike -- you forgot about bow hunting...
Robert Gardner

Lowell, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21
Feb 1, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Gregg wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't see signs on state forests that say hunters have more rights than the rest of the public. State forests are public property and therefore are kept up through our tax dollars. Why should everybody who uses the Lowell-Dracut State Park have to worry about being shot because they didn't were a vest. I have a better idea why don't the hunters go to a park that is not so crowded with other recreational users.
Unfortunatly, the areas for hunters are getting are getting fewer and smaller, I personally hunt the Lowell Dracut State forest every year. I am willing to share the forest, and have often encountered people, pets and what not. While the signs do not give us more rights, they do give us the same rights of use. I pay for my hunting license, my fishing licencse, and my wildlands stamp, I pay addtional (more than an ordinary recreational user) for the privledge of hunting. These monies help pay for the purchase and maintence our recreational lands. How much did you pay for your right to use forest? Nobody is telling you, that you have to wear hunter orange. It's a common sense thing. Be my guest to run aroung with antlers and a brown jacket, I still wont shoot you.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 18 of18
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Other Recent Dracut Discussions

Search the Dracut Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
MA Who do you support for U.S. Senate in Massachus... (Oct '10) 12 hr John 4,692
Jessica Krutuleski (Oct '12) 20 hr Concerned 23
Do you remember???? (Jun '08) Sun Ruth Lowell MA 17,786
toh-doh Italian chocolate Christmas cookies Sun Fred Murray 1
City puts limits on yard sales (May '10) Sun Mujahid 65
Concerns over Patrick plan to shelter illegal-i... Sun LOL 3
lowell crime stories as remebered by residents (Jul '08) Jul 19 lowell 668
•••
•••

Dracut News Video

•••
•••

Dracut Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Dracut People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Dracut News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Dracut
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••