Decision to prohibit hunting hits the mark

NORTH ANDOVER - The Conservation Commission temporarily prohibited hunting on Half Mile Hill, Half Mile Summit and Sunny Hill Ridge last night because of neighbors' concerns about public safety.

Resident Susan Walsh was tipped off by a curious hunter scoping out the areas before the opening of bow and arrow hunting season for deer, which begins Oct. 16.

The Conservation Commission adopted rules and regulations last February regarding hunting on town-owned land, but Walsh, a resident in the area for 36 years, did not hear of the rules.

Neither did Sylvia Stephenson, who runs Family Cooperative Preschool next to Half Mile Hill.

The residents met with the Conservation Commission members last week to air their concerns that hunting was allowed in an area that is used year-round for recreation, and is next to the preschool, private homes and Edgewood Retirement Community.

So? Is hunting not partially "recreation"?


"I don't want anyone with bows and arrows around a preschool," said Bill Callahan of Osgood Street. "Public safety is my concern."

We used to USE bow and arrow in gym class. It's called " A - R - C - H - E - R - Y"

Conservation Committee members agreed, including Joseph Lynch who said he normally supports hunting.

But not now? Is this abnormal?



...The Conservation Commission ... will decide then whether to prohibit hunting on Half Mile Hill, Half Mile Summit and Sunny Hill Ridge permanently.

In the meantime, the Conservation Committee will notify police of the decision, but do not plan to post signs in the area.

Oh, so they can "catch" people?


Stephenson said she was satisfied with the decision, although surprised the committee did not take the preschool and cross country runners into account when making their initial decision to allow hunting.

What about taking into account HUNTERS when making their decision to prohibit hunting?



"They realize safety comes before anything," she said. "I'm very pleased they are taking this seriously."

Are they suggesting hunters DON'T take safety seriously?



...Felipe Schwarz of the Community Preservation Committee said he has questions about why the policy regarding hunting is not more well-known, especially on places such as Half Mile Hill that were acquired with money from taxes and donations.

Hunters pay taxes and donate, too.



"Hunting was never envisioned as a use on the properties. It was not promoted," Schwarz said.

Why NOT?


"Our main goal was watershed protection, and after that allowing for passive recreation."

So? Is hunting less passive than mountain biking or heck, even hiking?
 
Where was the hunting community when this was being discussed? Did no one step forward to offer the hunter's point of view? To educate these people on hunter's safety?
 
Where was the hunting community when this was being discussed? Did no one step forward to offer the hunter's point of view? To educate these people on hunter's safety?

What!?! Did you think that they were going to give the hunters a heads-up before deciding to cut them off? Not bloody likely. OTOH, why should I give a damn? I don't hunt much any more. As long as I've got my assault rifles and hand guns, it doesn't really affect me, does it. </sarcasm>

Originally from Felipe the CPC Dork:
"Our main goal was watershed protection, and after that allowing for passive recreation."
Like those passive cross-country runners? Yeah, there are few recreational activities more active than sitting as silently and motionless as possible in a tree stand for several hours; right up there with kick boxing and triathalons. [rolleyes]

Ken
 
Piss them off big time! Hunt the Harold Parker State Forest. it's state owned and there is nothing that the local bordering communities can do about it. My friends took a ten pointer and an eight pointer there a few years ago on opening day of the shotgun season.

TBP
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom