That’s been a popular question in recent weeks after the Ontario County Board of Supervisors, in January, passed a resolution to seek state legislation allowing the use of rifles for big-game hunting in designated hunting areas south of Routes 5 and 20. While the legislation still needs state approval, then a local hearing and a vote by the county board, the issue remains hot. Hunting big game with rifles has been one of the most popular topics at www.canadice.org, the town of Canadice’s online forum. One of the participants in the discussion has been Kris Singer, the town’s supervisor and a gun owner. She was one of six supervisors — with Ralph Angelo, R-Richmond; David Baker, D-City of Canandaigua; Frank Duserick, R-Naples; Mary Green, R-Hopewell; and Don Jensen, R-Seneca — who voted against the resolution two months ago.
“My concern is people not being familiar with that extra distance of being able to use a rifle in that area and making sure they have a clear shot beyond that,” she said. “A rifle bullet can travel much further than a shotgun slug.” Terry Docteur, a hunter from Bristol, has been another major player in the online discussion. He said he’s still undecided on the issue because he understands both sides of it. “If you ask me on different days, you will get a different answer,” he said. “I’m a hunter and I certainly would like to hunt deer with a rifle, but I’m also a homeowner and I have concerns about switching to a long-distance weapon.”
While there is no disputing a rifle bullet can travel farther than a shotgun slug if both are unobstructed, one positive on the rifle front is this: Rifle bullets don’t ricochet off solid surfaces like shotgun slugs do. “They basically disintegrate, whereas a shotgun slug, just because of the nature and the size of the thing, it tends to hold together so you can get involved with ricochets and such,” Docteur said. “There are some that say that in actual hunting conditions inside the woods, a rifle may not go farther than a shotgun.” Wayne Houseman, R-Bristol, is the supervisor who proposed the legislation to the county’s Planning and Research Committee, which then sent the resolution to the entire board.
While Houseman — a hunter — won’t argue that an unobstructed rifle bullet travels farther than a shotgun slug, he doesn’t believe that makes it a greater safety hazard. “I will emphasize that many injuries or fatalities occur because of ricochet. A rifle shell will not ricochet; it literally hits a target and tumbles,” he said. “A shotgun shell will actually ricochet off of trees and rocks. In a sense, more injuries are caused because of ricochet than actually missing the target and having that shell travel for a long ways.” Houseman said he contacted each of the seven rod and gun clubs in the county, and those groups “consented to support such legislation.”
Sponsored Links
Chuck Hillis is a member of the Canandaigua Sportsmen’s Club — one of the seven Houseman spoke with — and said both he and his club support the legislation. “I hunt in the Southern Tier with one now,” Hillis said of a rifle. “They just changed (the legislation) in Steuben County, and they didn’t have a problem with the rifle situation the entire year.” Both Steuben and Yates counties allow big-game hunting with a rifle, and neither has reported a problem with rifle slugs traveling a great distance and hitting homes. According to the United States Census Bureau’s 2007 estimates, almost 104,000 call Ontario County home, just under 97,000 live in Steuben County and approximately 25,000 people live in Yates County.
Ted Fafinski, R-Farmington and chairman of the Board of Supervisors, doesn’t think the population difference should be a factor and compared the southern portion of Ontario County to the rural counties in the Southern Tier. “South of Routes 5 and 20 is less populated than the other parts of the county,” he said. “It’s relatively comparable with the southern counties that adopted this as far as population goes with the areas.” Houseman also argues that a rifle kill is more humane than a shotgun kill. “It is far more accurate, and it is much more humane. So many times with a shotgun one wounds the animal, and what you have to do is trail that wounded animal,” he said. “The rifle is much more humane because if it hits the mark, it usually means that the animal is immediately dropped.” Docteur agrees on the accuracy statement, but considers the term “humane kill” more of an oxymoron.
“It sounds like a bunch of wishful thinking. I don’t think I personally would know the difference if I had been shot with a shotgun or a rifle,” he said. “I think I’d be dead just as quick.” While the issue affects towns south of 5 and 20, supervisors in those towns want supervisors north of the highway to hear their concerns. “I will be making a case where I will look to the supervisors that this does not impact,” said Singer, whose town is south of 5 and 20. Three of the six supervisors who voted against the measure represent towns south of 5 and 20.
When asked if he took into consideration the opinions of those who would be affected by the issue, Fafinski responded “absolutely.” However, he cited the lack of safety problems in the counties that allow rifle hunting as the reason for his “yes” vote.
“There was not any safety concerns in the areas that had instituted this in the past,” he said. As for when the state will send the resolution back to Ontario County, that’s anyone’s guess. “They work at their own pace,” said Mary Green, R-Hopewell, of state lawmakers. “A perfect example of that is the sales tax. We’re still waiting for a reply from the state. I don’t know how long it’s going to take them.” Houseman remained hopeful that a decision will come before the beginning of the 2009 big-game season in November.
Source: MPNnow.com
No Responses to “How safe is rifle hunting?”
Please Wait
Leave a Reply