Jump to content
Bucksnbows

Bear hunt lawsuit is filed on behalf of NJ sportsmen and women

Recommended Posts

The not so funny thing is nothing on news 12 .I hate new 12


Why would a small left wing crappy station actually report news that doesn’t fall into Their liberal agenda?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm probably gonna crap for this, but I'm not 100% for the bear hunt (mainly for personal reasons with intertwined with my little war with a group of jackasses who've poached and trespassed too many times to count on my land and surrounding private land) However, I'll definitely give praise to the groups who are fighting the good fight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/5/2018 at 3:08 PM, mazzgolf said:

Then he would look REALLY bad and even *I* could successfully sue him - because in his EO closing off public lands to the bear hunt, he literally, actually ADMITS he has no authority to close the season. How can he, in one executive order, claim to not have the authority, and then follow that up with a executive order doing exactly what his earlier EO said he could not legally do? I can't believe he'd be THAT stupid.

The real problem is with the judges.  If a judge was truly impartial and based their opinion on facts not emotion, they would have to rule that there is no evidence of harm by allowing the bear hunts and thus would have to vacate the order.    They would also see right through the attempt to placate a group that he promised he would deliver for politically and again that group cannot prove harm.   If science and facts are what the judge uses to base their decision then they have to vacate the order.   NJ has no impartial judges at the state appellate level or supreme court level and unless one of them has some clarity then the EO will not be vacated.  

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, stratocaster said:

The real problem is with the judges.  If a judge was truly impartial and based their opinion on facts not emotion, they would have to rule that there is no evidence of harm by allowing the bear hunts and thus would have to vacate the order.    They would also see right through the attempt to placate a group that he promised he would deliver for politically and again that group cannot prove harm.   If science and facts are what the judge uses to base their decision then they have to vacate the order.   NJ has no impartial judges at the state appellate level or supreme court level and unless one of them has some clarity then the EO will not be vacated.  

Yet the state supreme court upheld the bear hunt several years back, so that is not entirely true.  They were also the partial architect that allowed the hunt to move forward once again after initial legal challenges by stating item by item what was insufficient about the then 5 Year Comprehensive Black Bear Management Plan.  The Division and Fish & Game Council then focused on those deficiencies and fixed them, and then it went to the supreme court once the hunt was reinstated under Christie and it held up and has ever since.  

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Bucksnbows said:

Yet the state supreme court upheld the bear hunt several years back, so that is not entirely true.  They were also the partial architect that allowed the hunt to move forward once again after initial legal challenges by stating item by item what was insufficient about the then 5 Year Comprehensive Black Bear Management Plan.  The Division and Fish & Game Council then focused on those deficiencies and fixed them, and then it went to the supreme court once the hunt was reinstated under Christie and it held up and has ever since.  

Absolutely.

The Division has been forced to jump through hoops …. twice.

Didn't the Division even go the Environmental Sciences department at East Stroudsburg University to placate the courts? Rutgers Cook College trained biologists weren't enough. (But, for a while, the courts were listening to the phoney-baloney, part time, freshman chemistry lecturer, Edward Tavss [whom I wouldn't be surprised if he is Angi Metler's brother-in-law, or something])

Very sad that our governor continues to pander to these people, and disregard his own biologists.

Vote.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jim_ said:

Absolutely.

The Division has been forced to jump through hoops …. twice.

Didn't the Division even go the Environmental Sciences department at East Stroudsburg University to placate the courts? Rutgers Cook College trained biologists weren't enough. (But, for a while, the courts were listening to the phoney-baloney, part time, freshman chemistry lecturer, Edward Tavss [whom I wouldn't be surprised if he is Angi Metler's brother-in-law, or something])

Very sad that our governor continues to pander to these people, and disregard his own biologists.

Vote.

Yes, to verify population estimates based on DNA if I recall correctly.  It matched our Division biologists' estimates using other techniques.  And that was above and beyond what should have been required.  It's pretty bad when a Governor ignores his own scientists.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Bucksnbows said:

Yet the state supreme court upheld the bear hunt several years back, so that is not entirely true.  They were also the partial architect that allowed the hunt to move forward once again after initial legal challenges by stating item by item what was insufficient about the then 5 Year Comprehensive Black Bear Management Plan.  The Division and Fish & Game Council then focused on those deficiencies and fixed them, and then it went to the supreme court once the hunt was reinstated under Christie and it held up and has ever since.  

But the initial argument in the lawsuit was filed to stop the hunt that was already approved by the DFW, that was a very tall order for the anti's because of the science presented in favor of the hunt and the fact that the supreme court could find no evidence of harm so it is true.   In this case a lawsuit has to be brought to vacate an EO that partially prohibits an activity.   The key here is that the activity is allowed but only on "private lands",   if a judge can see through the veiled attempt at placating a group of partisan people who the governor wanted to reward then the EO will be vacated, if a judge bases the decision on evidence of harm then the EO will stand.  

Share this post


Link to post
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

  • Please Help Support NJ Woods & Water


  • NJ Woods & Water Premium Membership

  • Support NJW&W by Shopping at Amazon!



  • NJ Permit Bow Season Begins on October 27th, 2018

  • NJ Permit Muzzleloader Season Begins on November 26th, 2018

  • 2018-19 New Jersey Hunting and Trapping Digest

  • 2018-2019 Youth Deer Hunting Contest



    Total Prize Values
    Team Contest Donation Percentage
    Donations $430 + prizes

    Current Team Standings
    1st Place Team 5 23 points
    2nd Place Team 1 11 points
    3rd Place Team 3 10 points
    4th Place Team 2 0 points
    4th Place Team 4 0 points
  • 2018-2019 Adult Deer Hunting Contest



    Total Prize Values
    Team Contest Donation Percentage
    Individual Contest $250 + Donation Percentage
    Donations $410

    Current Team Standings
    1st Place Team 1 108 points
    2nd Place Team 2 66 points
    3rd Place Team 4 65 points
    4th Place Team 6 64 points
    5th Place Team 3 48 points
    5th Place Team 5 48 points
    7th Place Team 7 32 points

    Top Individual Scores
    1st Place JHbowhunter 50 points
    2nd Place Buck154 49 points
    3rd Place Nomad 48 points
    4th Place Ms Grit 16 points
    4th Place nb6624 16 points
    4th Place BEAR 16 points
    4th Place KBfishing 16 points
    4th Place Cousin Brown 16 points
    4th Place rgw 16 points
    4th Place A-of-A&N_Hunter 16 points
    4th Place TroutandBucks 16 points
    4th Place LPJR 16 points
    4th Place Tarhunt 16 points
    4th Place resquecfd 16 points
    4th Place Lunatic 16 points