Jump to content
IGNORED

NJ bear hunt is back on!


nmc02

Recommended Posts

Here's the judge's ruling in case you want to read it:

https://dep.nj.gov/wp-content/uploads/njfw/2022-12-06-court-order-black-bear-hunt.pdf

And hey! Let's be safe out there! Part of the lawsuit was the antis' contention that hunting accidents will occur making them unsafe.

"Metler will "fear for her safety caused by hunting accidents. ... appellants contend the black bear population will be diminished and hunting accidents could occur. On balance, however, the public interest advanced by respondents is grounded in the protection of the public from the growing bear population and commensurate damage and nuisance incidents. In our view, the balance of hardships tips in respondents' favor. We therefore conclude appellants have failed to meet their considerable burden of demonstrating entitlement of a stay pending appeal. The temporary stay issued pursuant to Rule 2:9-8 is dissolved. Appellants' appeal may proceed in due course."

Oh, I love this part, too:

"their interest in individual bears will be harmed if those bears are killed ... Metler's use and enjoyment of her property will be diminished"

These people are crazy and actually think individual wild bears are their pets.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mazzgolf said:

Here's the judge's ruling in case you want to read it:

https://dep.nj.gov/wp-content/uploads/njfw/2022-12-06-court-order-black-bear-hunt.pdf

And hey! Let's be safe out there! Part of the lawsuit was the antis' contention that hunting accidents will occur making them unsafe.

"Metler will "fear for her safety caused by hunting accidents. ... appellants contend the black bear population will be diminished and hunting accidents could occur. On balance, however, the public interest advanced by respondents is grounded in the protection of the public from the growing bear population and commensurate damage and nuisance incidents. In our view, the balance of hardships tips in respondents' favor. We therefore conclude appellants have failed to meet their considerable burden of demonstrating entitlement of a stay pending appeal. The temporary stay issued pursuant to Rule 2:9-8 is dissolved. Appellants' appeal may proceed in due course."

Oh, I love this part, too:

"their interest in individual bears will be harmed if those bears are killed ... Metler's use and enjoyment of her property will be diminished"

These people are crazy and actually think individual wild bears are their pets.

Is Metler a medieval king or queen?  They own the wildlife?  What a time to be alive...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...