(4-17-2006) Last month we wrote that the Maryland Sportsmen’s Foundation appeared to have been taken over by the Humane Society (normally a political opponent.) Our concern, of course, is that any group so easily turned into a puppet for the HSUS today could become a puppet for Sarah Brady tomorrow, and that would hit our issue squarely.
We won’t belabor the point, but having raised the matter it is fair for us to report their win/loss for the session. The Sportsmen’s Foundation pays tens of thousands of dollars annually for the services of lobbyist Bill Miles. What did the many Foundation’s donors get for their money this year?
“Maryland Sportsmen’s Caucus Posts Another Stellar Session For Sportsmen” That was the banner headline on their web site. Within a day of their “sportsman of the year” killing the range protection bill, they declared victory. Their celebratory press release omitted a few details, however. An effort to impose a minimum hunting age never got off the ground (as they mention) but in truth this was quietly dealt with by the NRA last December, well before Bill Miles noticed it was coming up. His sole role seems to be taking credit for it. Not mentioned at all was HB 465, which passed largely unopposed and bans certain forms of trapping in Howard County. (Guess it can’t count against Miles’ win-loss record if he never got in the game. Or maybe they don’t think trappers are “sportsmen.”)
HB 11 proposed to expand animal cruelty laws’ scope to say “a person may not inflict unnecessary suffering or pain on an animal.” It sailed through the House, because informed sportsmen knew the law already gave clear exceptions for hunting, trapping and agricultural activities. Then Miles and the Humane Society lobbyist got involved. Even though hunting was already protected, they got distracted senators to demand an amendment to redundantly assert hunting protections; that in turn served as the vehicle for a further amendment which HSUS couldn’t have won alone, clarifying that only “lawful” hunting and trapping is exempted. This form of the bill passed with only minutes left in session. What did the Miles/HSUS tag-team win? A legitimate hunter or trapper who commits some technical infraction may now be charged with animal cruelty too – a Humane Society goal. Miles sprung this at the end before NRA could get word of the problems out to enough sportsmen to stop the monkeybusiness.
A ban on so-called “internet hunting” seems to be Miles’ big victory. It passed and became law. Entertainingly the law Miles ultimately helped pass does not outlaw the one banner activity which generated all the excitement in the first place – namely, using a computer in Maryland to shoot game in Texas. In other words, it solves no problem.
So what’s the big deal? This. Along the way to solving no problem, the Sportsmen’s Foundation (through Miles), the Maryland Sportsmen’s Association (represented by Wendy Donahoo) and the Humane Society (represented by Julie Janowski) worked shoulder to shoulder to validate positions that will haunt hunters and trappers. We learned in testimony that “You shouldn’t be able to pay a fee and get a guaranteed shot at an animal.” When HSUS comes back next year to ban preserve hunts, sportsmen groups are stuck: they can either flip positions (but lose credibility entirely) or endorse the bill, waving goodbye to a big chunk of the state’s hunting economy. Think it can’t happen? It just did in Alabama, where an ‘internet hunting’ bill was maneuvered into a HSUS victory over managed hunts. (We also learned through their testimony that hunting activities without “danger and discomfort” are not legitimate, and so should be banned. We learned “no true sportsman” hunts in the comfort of his back yard, you must instead “get out in the field where the wild animals live.” These groups mean to stamp out hunting which “lacks honor.”)
Bottom line: Legitimate sportsmen should be surprised to discover that lobbyists purporting to represent their interests earn big money to enact new restrictions on hunting activities in their name. Furthermore, because of the rising danger their out-of-control groups present to those of us concerned with liberty issues, a large number of legislators who trusted Miles’ advice on internet hunting needlessly earn a red mark in ratings going into elections.