Editorial: Legal limits to shining deer make sense

This is a editorial that I stumbled across which just made me a little furious. Apparently there are some areas in the United States that consider “Shining Deer” a legitimate recreational sport and from time to time that activity gets abused.

It is one thing to shine deer and it is another to use it as a way to shoot deer. Just like the third chapter states “And sometimes, one person holds the spotlight while the other aims the rifle. In early February, three teenagers with spotlights were arrested and charged with shooting deer, out of season and after dark, in Dodge County. The deer were left to rot”.

There is a fine line between shining deer and poaching and the general public just does not see that. They see someone shining a light into a field and they remember stories of people shining or jacking as it is also called and they start to get alarmed.

Sen. Minority Leader Dave Senjem, a Republican from Rochester, and Rep. Randy Demmer, a Republican from Hayfield, are the sponsors of a proposal in the Minnesota Legislature that would set new limits on a recreational activity known as “shining deer.”The principle behind this pastime is fairly simple. Deer are largely nocturnal, and they tend to freeze when they’re hit by a bright light — hence the expression “like a deer in the headlights.” So, taking advantage of that instinct, some people’s idea of fun is to drive around at night and use super-bright spotlights to look for deer.

And sometimes, one person holds the spotlight while the other aims the rifle. In early February, three teenagers with spotlights were arrested and charged with shooting deer, out of season and after dark, in Dodge County. The deer were left to rot.

Marty Stubstad, owner of Archery Headquarters in Rochester and a former board member of Bluffland Whitetails Association, says that last year some conservation officers approached the southeastern Minnesota-based organization and suggested that it should spearhead an effort to clamp down on shining and its related ills.

Stubstad said that complaints about recreational shining have become so widespread that poachers are having an easier time.

“If law enforcement is getting 30 calls a night from people who are having lights shined in their windows, the conservation officers don’t have much chance of tracking down the one guy who is using a gun as well as a spotlight,” he said. “If everybody was a strictly recreational shiner, we wouldn’t be proposing a change. But that’s not the case.”

The bill introduced by Senjem and Demmer would limit shining to one hour after sunset. Right now the lights have to go off at 10 p.m. from Sept. 1 through Dec. 31, with no limits during the rest of the year.

The proposed rule change makes sense, and it has been well-received in the Senate, but it appears to have run aground in the House. The Minnesota Deer Hunters Association testified strongly against it during an environmental committee meeting, arguing that shining is a legitimate recreational activity, and that the related poaching problems are limited to southeastern Minnesota.

We find that hard to believe, and contend that MDHA’s argument would carry more weight if the Grand Rapids-based group didn’t have a long track record of opposing almost every idea that originates from its southeastern-Minnesota based counterpart.

We encourage Senjem and Demmer to press the issue, not only to protect the rights of landowners who are tired of having lights shined in their windows, but to safeguard the rights and reputation of law-abiding hunters.

http://www.postbulletin.com