# Hunting restrictions in Clarke County



## sweatequity (Feb 11, 2007)

New Athens-Clarke County Commissioner Doug Lowry this week proposed tighter restrictions on hunting in Clarke County. It's unclear whether it will actually make it to the commission for debate and a vote - that's in the hands of Mayor Heidi Davison.

Lowry's proposal was born out of a dog-shooting - police aren't sure whether it was intentional or accidental - in eastern Clarke County. He says he wants to outlaw or restrict rifle hunting in the county. As of now, hunting can only be done on private property and cannot be done closer than 300 yards of a residence.



I bow hunt already but dont let your voice go unheard if you hunt in Clarke County!


----------



## jbarron (Feb 11, 2007)

sweatequity said:


> ... Lowry's proposal was born out of a dog-shooting - police aren't sure whether it was intentional or accidental...



Well doesn’t that just figure?  There are many posters on this board that like to brag about shooting dogs that interrupt their deer hunt.  Looks like the chickens are coming home to roost.


----------



## BOWHUNTER! (Feb 11, 2007)

Gun hunters will not like this, but if the county goes bow only, they will see a huge increase in the quality of bucks. I know that Clarke Co has got some big bucks already but this will enable the young ones to get older. I don't want to argue the politics, just the deer quality issue.


----------



## Lostoutlaw (Feb 11, 2007)

Didn't see no poll to vote! But just the same I would vote no! We have enough stupid laws being passed and they can't even inforce the ones we have had. Just my vent


----------



## sweatequity (Feb 11, 2007)

*Nothing*

is better than sitting in your stand with your bow and letting a small 6 point walk and it bounds across the creek and gets shot.  Of course I would be better off if it was archery only.  

If they take the guns whats next?  I say we have enough laws on the books and I am against any law that prohibits my use of a firearm.


----------



## fulldraw74 (Feb 11, 2007)

BOWHUNTER! said:


> Gun hunters will not like this, but if the county goes bow only, they will see a huge increase in the quality of bucks. I know that Clarke Co has got some big bucks already but this will enable the young ones to get older. I don't want to argue the politics, just the deer quality issue.



Exactly.....I do quite a bit of hunting in Clarke Co. and would love to see it go "Bow only"......


----------



## Snakeman (Feb 11, 2007)

I'm not exactly anti-government, but this is a typical political response.  Punish everyone for the actions of a few (or even one).  If the person who shot the dog violated an existing law, punish him in accordance with that law.  No need to enact additional laws to do the same thing.  If he didn't violate an existing law, there should be no problem.  If a law needs to be enacted to cover what was done, so be it, but no need to go overboard.

The Snakeman


----------



## W4DSB (Feb 11, 2007)

I'm sure the county does not have the authority to change any hunting rules. Thats the states job


----------



## Chickenjohn42 (Feb 11, 2007)

They get the guns out ,then they can work on weapons period.


----------



## sparkyflint (Feb 12, 2007)

this is just the beginning.  

I've heard that there is a push from the anti's to use this incident to actually make clarke co. a wildlife refuge.  

why is this trash POACHER still being called a "hunter"?


----------



## Daryl Kirby (Feb 12, 2007)

W4DSB said:


> I'm sure the county does not have the authority to change any hunting rules. Thats the states job



You're right, but a county or city has the authority to restrict or ban the discharge of firearms. Can't hunt deer with a rifle if it's illegal to shoot a gun in Clarke County.


----------



## whitworth (Feb 12, 2007)

*Hunting Restrictions*

The more urban a county gets, the more pressure to outlaw rifles and shotguns for hunting.   
I saw one suburban county in PA, where a hunter shot a woman sitting in her car. (out of view of the hunter)
The case went to court, within the last year, and the jury awarded damages to the woman against the owner of the property.  There's some doubt the award will pass muster after a higher court review.  But it will still involve time and money for the lawyers.  And I doubt that property owner will ever allow a firearms hunter on his property again. 

Remember it takes only one incident for non-gun owners to get "traumatized" by guns.   And it's getting rather difficult to reduce all gun incidents to zero, in an urban county. Remember, deer hunters still fall out of their treestands. 

If the Atlanta metro keeps growing, a hunter may have to travel a hundred miles or more, to use a firearm.

Years ago a neighbor, a non-hunter, who kept a revolver in his house for protection, came to watch me shoot my compound bow at a practice session.  

After the first shot he said, "Those things can kill people."  He was actually shocked by the velocity.  Those are the kind of non-hunters that live in urban areas.


----------



## Chickenjohn42 (Feb 12, 2007)

You should have told him "DUH" bows have been killing people for hundreds of years lol .Those folks vote lol


----------



## wack em (Feb 13, 2007)

First of all why do they automatically point the finger at the deer hunter? I have known several people to shoot dogs that weren't even hunters. Secound of all at 45 yards i can kill a dog just as dead with my Hoyt as someone can with a firearm. Is the banning of firearms an act to protect all of the dogs in Clarke county?


----------



## jason8047 (Feb 13, 2007)

Maybe we need a law requiring dog owners to have their property fenced in to keep their dog at home instead of bashing all hunters because someone shot a dog....people are always going to complain about something no matter what.  Somebody always wants to tell somebody else what they can and cant do.  Everyone has their own opinion on every issue and thats OK but we have entirely too many laws as it is.  Just my opinion...I like to hunt.  If you dont agree with hunting then dont hunt.  I wont have a problem if you dont hunt.  Try to tell me I cant hunt anymore and youll just have to arrest me and call me a poacher because I wont stop


----------



## wtailchaser (Feb 13, 2007)

it's been said a thousand times, but some folks are not getting it... our individual actions reflect the whole community!  please let this incident be a powerful reminder that our privileges and our rights are not permanent.  i live and hunt in clarke county and feel the repercussions from this may be more severe than tighter restictions in the future.  sure there are some advantages to bow only, but will the restrictions stop there?  one errant arrow and that will change too.  we must remain as responsible with any weapon we carry and make descisions accordingly.  development has made the previous season the last one that i could gun hunt in clarke county, but that does not mean i'll stop supporting others in the county who can.  this affects everyone.  we must police our own ranks or it will be done for us by others who do not understand our passion for the sport and the important role we play in wildlife conservation.


----------



## jason8047 (Feb 13, 2007)

I do agree with you wtailchaser but it does make me mad that hunters are treated the way that we are.  The actions of one does impact others because we are looked down on by so many people it is pathetic.  I thought of this after I had posted last night and it gives an example of how different it is for hunters.  This one dog shooting incident could have firearms hunting banned in this county.  How many DUI, DWI have been charged in this county?  Ban driving??  I dont think so.  I just get very upset when stuff like this goes on because I know that there are so many out there who would like nothing better than to take away from us what we all love because they think its just so horrible.  Then again these same animal rights people and PETA have no problem with abortion.  Go figure!


----------



## Rebel 3 (Feb 14, 2007)

Everyone should hope that Clarke County does not go bow only.  As mentioned earlier it is only a method for anti hunters to get one step closer to no hunting in Clarke County.  By going bow only it is one step closer for the anti's and a victory  for the anti's.  They will have just a little more power than they have now.  Then it will be another county and another, so on.  Some of these counties may next turn to no hunting.  If Clarke went bow only counties like Gwinnett and Rockdale would be even more likely to go bow only in the future.  Everyone should hope this does not happen.  No matter where you hunt, as a hunter this would be negative to you whether you realize it or not.


----------



## fulldraw74 (Feb 14, 2007)

> Maybe we need a law requiring dog owners to have their property fenced in to keep their dog at home instead of bashing all hunters because someone shot a dog




That was part of the controversy here in Clarke County. There is a leash law in effect and the dog was not on a leash. Not to mention the dog owner was also trespassing along with the shooter of the dog....


----------



## wack em (Feb 14, 2007)

A dog is just a dog, you can go to the pound and get another one. So what is the big deal? I have shot plenty of wild dogs.


----------



## DYI hunting (Feb 14, 2007)

Clarke County Commissioners uphold the beliefs of their constituents.  Many of which are gun-fearing, anti-hunting, tree-hugging types.

I guess it is the college town mentality.


----------



## wtailchaser (Feb 14, 2007)

wack em, that is part of the problem... look at the whole picture.  this dog was not a wild dog, it was someone's pet.  and are you sure that all those wild dogs you claim to have shot were really "wild".  it is a big deal.  you see, many people love their pets as if it were a member of the family and you can not just go to the pound and get a new family member.  i am not defending the dog owner or the shooter, i am asking for responsibility for our actions as to not jepardize the future of our sport, lifestyle, and our passion.  please try to see the other side of the coin too.  that is what we are asking of the anti and non hunters.  don't back down, but repectfully stand your ground.


----------



## jbarron (Feb 14, 2007)

wack em said:


> A dog is just a dog, you can go to the pound and get another one. So what is the big deal? ....


----------



## walters (Feb 14, 2007)

fulldraw74 said:


> Exactly.....I do quite a bit of hunting in Clarke Co. and would love to see it go "Bow only"......



this kind of action knocks the younger generation out of hunting all together, a 9 year old cannot pull a bow back,
some people dont care about the future hunters no way!!
but they still call thereselves sportsman


----------



## wack em (Feb 14, 2007)

Yes! I'm sure they weren't pets. They were all mutts that weren't wearing collars and were screwing up my hunt. I wouldn't shoot a pet, unless of course the pet were trying to take down a farmers cattle or something. The GW once told me that if the dog doesn't have a collar and it interferes with my hunt then it is legal to shoot it.


----------



## sparkyflint (Feb 14, 2007)

that sort of mentality is what causes groups of people to get together and make certain behaviors illegal. 

in the big picture, this is how we lose our freedoms, because with freedom comes responsibility. 

just because you "can" do something doesn't mean that you should.  you can eat cake for every meal, but you'll be a toothless, constipated, diabetic for doing so.


not to mention-I don't buy the argument about "the dog was screwing up my hunt so I shot it."  Guess what?   YOU just screwed up your hunt.  Think the smell of blood and burnt fur is just going to go away?  What about the fecal matter, and urine that the downed kanine excretes on death?   The noise from the discharge, and most of all your "happy dance" walking over to your quary?  

What I think it really comes down to is that folks aren't seeing anything on a hunt (and it can't be their fault), and a dog comes walking through your area and you take out your frustration on the animal.  

This particular situation was not about shooting dogs, this was about the further encroachment of the imperial socialist govt of Clarke Co.  and it was facilitated by people, that were ALL breaking the law at the time because none of them took responsibility for their actions and now we are all going to have to pay. 

my 2 cents for the psa.


----------



## sparkyflint (Feb 14, 2007)

only if they're messin' w/ your hunt


----------



## sweatequity (Apr 16, 2007)

*any new info?*

???


----------



## bayoudawg (Apr 20, 2007)

I'm a clarke county resident. Clarke is the smallest county in the state and has a unified city/county government which makes these kind of issues problematic with regard to defining the line between rural and urban. It is also raidly building out (check out a ariel image). There is not a whole lot of land left in Clarke where you can hunt safely hunt with rifle. From a safety perspective I don't know if allowing the discharge of centerfire rifles is a good idea. The pitty here is that some numbnut *** poacher has made what should be a safety issue into an anti-hunting issue by shooting someone's pet dog on a public walking trail right in front of them. This isue was going to come up anyway sooner or later, but this is an unfortuante way for it to happen.

bd


----------



## champ (Apr 26, 2007)

It'd be tough to hang on to the business end of a full grown running walker on a leash. I don't know about the next fella, but one of my dogs is worth at least two or three cows. If the man killed the dog in an illegal manner, so be it. punish him, not us.


----------

