Posted on 02/21/2002 8:39:41 AM PST by jrob
Group Goes After N.J. Fish and Wildlife Agencies for Expanding Deer Populations to Provide Living Targets for State Hunting Minority For Immediate Release: February 14, 2002 Contact: Matthew Penzer 757-622-7382 When a deer took out the entire front end of the car driven by two PETA anti-hunting campaigners, PETA saw red—and it wasn’t just the blood of the animal they believe was fleeing hunters’ guns. Today, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) faxed to Bob McDowell, director of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection’s Division of Fish and Wildlife, and John Bradway, chairman of the Fish and Game Council, a notice of intent to sue them as a result of the collision late last November. PETA maintains that this accident—as well as thousands more that take place every year— was caused by the state’s mismanagement of the deer population, which includes purposely increasing herd sizes in order to provide more live targets for hunters and so jeopardizes the well-being of people who use the roads. In 1999 alone, there were more than 14,000 deer-vehicle collisions reported in New Jersey. PETA argues that by placing the interests of hunters, who amount to barely more than 1 percent of New Jersey’s population, above the safety of the more than 8 million New Jersey residents and countless out-of-state travelers who use the roads, wildlife agencies are violating the state’s constitutional mandate to provide protection and security to its people. PETA also opposes the fear, the disruption of herd members’ relationships, and the bloodshed suffered by the deer on grounds of cruelty to animals. "Motorists should be warned that New Jersey’s highways aren’t safe, thanks to wildlife management programs that put the amusement of hunters ahead of the safety of drivers," says PETA Legal Counsel Matthew Penzer, who hopes that this suit will encourage others. "New Jersey wildlife managers are creating dangerous conditions for both people and deer."
FRegards,
CD
Or maybe since it's PETA it would be a "pair o'ducks"
Absolutely! The state is clearly negligent because it has not provided condoms for the deer.
If the deer population was zero PETA would be happy, because there would not be any deer for people to abuse.
Meinwhile, I sugest that PETA sue the manufacturer of their automobile and the oil company that sold the the gasoline.
LOL. The environmentalists will love this. Deer management has nothing to do with the environment, and is therefore unlawful.
Sunday, SUNDAY, SUNDAY!!! PeTA vs. ELF, round one!
I'm going to enjoy watching this!
Yes these PETA people need to have more sources of protein in their diet....
This is wrong on so many levels it's hard to know where to begin. How on earth does the state "purposely increse" deer herd sizes for any reason, much less to "provide live targets"? Do they run an insemination service? A deer singles club?
Or do they...uh...restrict hunting? Hmm?
And, in the absence of encouraging hunting, what would PETA recommend in order to keep deer from making little deer? Condom distribution?
A car titled to PETA? Were they driving to a home owned by PETA? And are their other cars owned by PETA? Do they have a swimming pool in the back yard owned by PETA? It sure beats working for a living!!!! fsf
I wonder how they came to that conclusion.
"Shortly before 1 o’clock in the morning on that date, .........., a deer darted out in front of the car and a collision resulted. "
Those hunters were up pretty early that morning? LOL, these morons are too stupid to be allowed on the roads. Their drivers licences should be confiscated for the safty of the public:)
Yeah-But, deer are people, too. So why doesn't PETA sue the deer?
Nope. Ain't even gonna touch that one, too easy.
If my memory serves me right, New Jersey laws don't allow motorists to take their deer...they're actually required to get a permit first.
Also, wasn't PETA the group that forced the state to restrict the length of the hunting season several years ago, because the hunters were presumably taking too many deer? All I remember was the silly "deer contraception" program they proposed as an alternative for herd management. Does anybody else remember this? It was 8-9 years ago.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.