Boston
Doctor Owl
please vote YES on #1 -- ban cruel traps!
thanks!
The Old Bear
LeS...@world.std.com (Doctor Owl) writes:
>Newsgroups: alt.animals.bears
>From: LeS...@world.std.com (Doctor Owl)
>Subject: Boston
>Message-ID: <Dzo48...@world.std.com>
>Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 08:14:46 GMT
>Lines: 3
>
>please vote YES on #1 -- ban cruel traps!
>
> thanks!
>
For readers of alt.animals.bears (which is propagated internationally),
this message refers to a ballot referendum in the November 5 state
election in Massachusetts. This year, it is the *ONLY* referendum on
the Massachusetts state ballot. Its purpose is to ban the use of
inhumane hunting traps and baiting in Massachusetts.
Bear aficionados in Massachusetts should give their support to this
referendum, although I point out to other readers that Massachusetts
is a fairly urbanized state in the northeast of the U.S. and certainly
not one known for bear hunting and trapping.
Nonetheless, Massachusetts does have a bear population and this
ballot measure is aimed as much at animal control activities as it
is at sport hunting.
The referendum is intended to benefits all animals -- and household
pets -- which are potential victims of indiscriminate traps which are
"designed to grip an animal's body or body parts, such as steel jaw
leghold traps, padded leghold traps, and snares." It would also
prohibit the pursuit or hunting of bear of bobcat with the aid of
dogs or the use of bait.
Below is the official ballot summary for this referendum as provided
by the Massachusetts Attorney General.
Cheers,
The Old Bear
----------begin included text----------
QUESTION 1: LAW PROPOSED BY INITIATIVE PETITION
Changing the Trapping and Hunting Laws
Do you approve of a law summarized below, on which no vote was
taken by the Senate or the House of Representatives before
May 1, 1996?
SUMMARY
[As required by law, summaries are written by the state
Attorney General.]
This proposed law would prohibit the use of certain traps for
fur-bearing mammals, prohibit certain methods of hunting bear or
bobcat, and eliminates some restrictions on who may serve on the
state Fisheries and Wildlife Board.
The proposed law would prohibit the use, setting, manufacture,
or possession of any trap to capture fur-bearing mammals, except
common mouse and rat traps, nets, and box or cage traps that
confine a whole animal without grasping any part of it. Traps
designed to grip an animal's body or body part, such as steel jaw
leghold traps, padded leghold traps, and snares, would be
prohibited. Federal and state health officials could use such
traps in case of a threat to human health or safety. Where a
property owner had reasonably tried but failed to correct an
animal problem on the property using a legal trap, the owner could
apply for and the state Director of Fisheries and Wildlife could
issue a permit to use a prohibited type of trap, except a leghold
trap, for up to 30 days to correct the problem.
A person violating any of these requirements could be punished
by a fine of between $300 and $1000, or imprisonment for up to 6
months, or both, for each prohibited trap and each day of
violation. A person convicted for a second violation would be
required to surrender, and could never again obtain, any trapping
license or problem animal control permit.
The proposed law would also prohibit the pursuit or hunting of
bear or bobcat with the aid of a dog or dogs. Hunting bear using
any type of bait, lure, or attraction, or knowingly hunting bear
in a baited area, would also be prohibited. The Director could
allow the use of dogs or bait in legitimate scientific research
projects and in order to control particular animals that posed a
threat to human safety or that destroyed livestock, property, or
crops.
Violators could be punished by a fine of between $300 and
$1000, or imprisonment for up to 6 months, or both, for each
violation. A person convicted for a second violation would be
required to surrender, and could never again obtain, any hunting
and dog training licenses and permits.
The proposed law would eliminate the requirement that five
members of the state Fisheries and Wildlife Board have held
sporting licenses in the state for five consecutive years and that
four members represent fishing, hunting, and trapping interests.
The proposed law states that if any of its provisions were
declared invalid, the other provisions would remain in effect.
Heather Baker
Hooray for banning traps.
In the state of Washington it is initiative measure 655. Let's vote
Save the bears,
Silverback
Al Trainer
wilderness.
I say ban the toyota, or nissan, because I don't drive one and they
pollute the air. Besides they are made in Japan.
AL