Letters To The Editor – July 2018
Di-Lane Aerial Assault & Hog Hunting Are Two Separate Issues
I read Mr. Evans’ response of the hog control efforts employed at Di-Lane WMA with interest and some concern. Although I appreciate Mr. Evans’ desire to expand recreational hunting, and I personally do enjoy it, sport hunting of hogs has proven ineffective for controlling them, period. Hunting wild hogs makes us feel like we are contributing to the control effort, but if it had any measurable effect, we would not be in the situation we are in today with invasive species.
The congressional funding for the program under criticism was designed to help eliminate wild hog infestations in certain areas. Di-Lane WMA met the requirements for inclusion in that effort, as did the thousands of acres of agricultural land surrounding Di-Lane. The funding wasn’t provided to enhance our recreational hunting of hogs.
The crux of the matter is this: The aerial control effort which included Di-Lane WMA and the state providing additional recreational hunting opportunities for hunters are two separate issues. The federally funded effort to contain or eliminate wild swine and the damage they cause was determined to be a national matter of public necessity, or Congress would not have funded it; it is something we must do to protect our food chain. Conversely, providing additional sport hunting efforts for hogs on Di-Lane or any other WMA, while fun, is not a necessity. It can’t take priority over more crucial public issues, and it certainly has not measurably contained the spread of wild hogs.
John Clower, Monroe
Concerned Daddy Worried About Daughters’ Gun Rights
I’m very concerned those involved in shooting sports are not aware of how close they are to losing not only their second amendment right but also their firearms.
There is a well-organized, well-funded movement within this country chipping away at the right to own firearms. The anti-gunners are banding together, growing and has the media on their side.
Many national companies, including some in Georgia, believe that creating more laws will deter gun violence. If more laws reduced gun violence, Chicago would be the safest city in the world.
While I am a fiscal and social conservative, I never considered myself a single issue voter until 2018. I’ve decided that I will vote with the second amendment as my primary cause for the foreseeable future. This includes the ballot box and my wallet. I will not do business with companies that pander to the anti-gun establishment. I will pay a few cents more for ammo supporting my local gun stores rather than patronize Dick’s for any reason. I chose some time back to fly an alternate airline when I can. I won’t use either one of the national insurance carriers that support animal rights more than gun rights. Going forward, I refuse to support companies, organizations and politicians who take my hard-earned money and then use it to take away my rights.
I’ve lived out of the country. I know what freedom means. As Americans, we have guaranteed rights that no one in the world has, but now the first and second amendments are under attack. There are frequent news stories about social media sites removing content and talk of repealing the second amendment. Once one right is repealed, the rest will soon fall.
There are many countries around the world where you cannot own a firearm. In countries where ownership is allowed, ownership is limited by type, quantity and/or need. Just a few decades ago, English and Australian gun owners thought their guns were safe. America is fast approaching a similar situation.
I’m not a right-wing prepper. I’m just a father concerned the hunting rifle and pistol bought for each of his daughters will end up in the scrap-metal pile in my lifetime.
Lynne Sander, Roswell
Other Articles You Might Enjoy