Lawmakers considering open season like Georgia'sThe Post and Courier
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Bagging an alligator won't be for the meek. In Georgia, hunters go out in the dark after the biggest gators — using snares, snag hooks, harpoons or tethered arrows. In effect, they remove the most menacing animals, wildlife officials say. In South Carolina that isn't happening. A proposed law to open the threatened species to limited hunting — based on the Georgia law — now sits in a S.C. House committee, apparently a victim of legislative wrangling over the proposed Interstate 73. Ron Russell, of Gator Getter Consultants, the contractor who captured and killed the 11-foot, 10-inch, 550-pound alligator that tore off a snorkeler's arm in Lake Moultrie earlier this month, says if South Carolina had passed that law, the alligator likely would have been among the first taken —it was just too big and too widely known. 'When politicians will stop being biologists, (S.C. Natural Resources) can do the job they're supposed to,' Russell said. Senate President Pro Tem Glenn McConnell, R-Charleston, said there is no excuse that the bill did not get acted on in the House. McConnell, one of its four sponsors, said the bill left the Senate with no opposition and with two months left before summer adjournment. “The rumor around the Statehouse is there was a political dispute over the route of a road.” McConnell said. As he recalls, the problem stalling the bill in the House had nothing to do with the merits of the bill. “I have been very blunt with the House in telling them they will see that alligator bill again and again until we get it passed because the public safety is at risk,” he said. “I have been going to Lake Moultrie for over 50 years. Not until the last several years have I started seeing gators in areas they had never been before. They are getting as bold as wharf rats coming out of the swamps.” Rep. Mike Pitts, R-Laurens, is chairman of the wildlife subcommittee where the gator bill would have been referred for action. However, Pitts said he never saw the bill. “I am not sure why. Chairman Witherspoon is the one who makes the assignment.” Rep. William Witherspoon, R-Horry, represents the area where the proposed interstate is expected to be a boon. S.C. Natural Resources last year objected to a route through wetlands in the Little Pee Dee River Heritage Preserve. Witherspoon did not immediately return phone calls asking for comment. “I know some bills that had problems because of I-73,” Pitts said. “Could I-73 have played a part? Yes it could have.” But he said the reason the bill didn’t see action in the House can be attributed to a number of factors. House Speaker Bobby Harrell, R-Charleston, said the legislation will likely pass when lawmakers return. The 2003 Georgia law has been enough of a success that Florida, Alabama, Louisiana and Texas have passed hunting laws since then. Georgia estimates its alligator population at 200,000; S.C. Natural Resources estimates there are more than 100,000 here. In Georgia, permits are issued for specific areas targeted by Georgia Natural Resources as having the most alligators. The number of permits issued is based on surveys of the number of alligators. The permits are issued by random computer drawing because of the demand. In the five years the state has allowed hunting, the number of people asking for permits has doubled to 4,391 and the number of permits issued has tripled to 553. Far more permits are issued than alligators killed; last year 175 alligators were taken. The law requires hunters to use hand-held ropes or snares, snatch hooks, harpoons, gigs or arrows with a restraining line attached. Legal gators must be killed upon capture by using a handgun, bangstick or by severing the spinal cord with a sharp implement. Alligators must be carried away by the hunter, who is allowed to sell the hide. Targeting the permit areas and the hunters’ desire to bring back the big one seem to be working to remove the animals that pose the greatest threat, said Greg Waters, Georgia Natural Resources wildlife biologist. “Most people out there are going for the larger alligators.” S.C. Sen. Larry Grooms, R-Bonneau, who proposed the hunting bill last year for the second time, said he expects the same thing to happen in this state. “I believe in hunting season you will see people coming into problem areas like northern Lake Moultrie because that’s where they know the gators are.” Reach Bo Petersen at 745-5852 or bpetersen@postandcourier.com. |
Article tools
Sponsored Links |
|||
|
Notice about comments: Charleston.net is pleased to offer readers the ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Charleston.net does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not charleston.net. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "suggest removal" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website. Full terms and conditions can be read here. |
Comments
This article has 25 comment(s)
Posted by Early on September 27, 2007 at 8:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
This is absolutely necessary for public safety in our state. Don't want to hear the crap it's their area and we invaded it and poor little cute creatures. They have no natural enemies anymore, the flourish in our area and we humans do not keep them in check. Example, could you imagine the deer population in this area if they did not have a long hunting season. SC has the one of the most liberal hunting season and rules in the country. if we did not have these rules there would be major crop damage, vehicle damage and property damage. The same goes with the gators except you lose a arm or a life. Look at Fl and how many children and pets have been killed. Last night on my dock, there was a huge gator swimming against the tide, big enough to cause concern, never any back there before.
Take-em-out
Posted by bhippey on September 27, 2007 at 8:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Yep. This is really necessary. Let's kill things because they might kill or have killed in the past. Let's have open season on humans then. Some of them kill, and all have the resources available to kill. Why is killing animals ok but not humans. We can just use the human skin to make items like belts and purses, and eat the meat.
Posted by Early on September 27, 2007 at 8:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)
bhippey, thats questions you need to ask God. Why did he put humans on top of the food chain???
Posted by bhippey on September 27, 2007 at 8:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)
If humans were on the top of the food chain, why are they being eaten by alligators? And I don't believe in God, so that's a no go for me.
Posted by iopturbo on September 27, 2007 at 8:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)
hippey, humans don't taste good. too much fat in the meat. seriously.
Posted by WalkMan on September 27, 2007 at 8:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)
We do have legislation in place to help remove the biggest most "menacing" and dangerous human beings. It's called the Death Penalty.
I like this legislative proposal. It doesn't allow for the destruction of smaller more wary animals. It really seems to focus on the largest of the predators and hence, the one's that generally propose the greatest threat.
Posted by eyfigueroa on September 27, 2007 at 8:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)
iopturbo: i'm afraid to ask how you knew that...
Posted by Early on September 27, 2007 at 9:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)
He and Jeffery Dalmer were close,,,lol
Posted by bhippey on September 27, 2007 at 9:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)
YIKES
Posted by realman on September 27, 2007 at 9:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)
human lives are far more important than the lives of animals. i don't believe we should kill indiscriminately, but if there are too many gators, or any species that is a danger to the public, their numbers should be reduced to acceptable levels. if that means killing a bunch of gators, oh well.
Posted by RTC on September 27, 2007 at noon (Suggest removal)
It's okay to hunt other wildlife, so why not alligators?
The hunting laws are pretty strict, so it would definitely be heavily controlled. Gators are already being killed illegally, so wouldn't it be best to have a legal season where regulations would be implemented?
Posted by mggoose2000 on September 27, 2007 at 12:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I'll pray for you, bhippey.
As for killing the gators; if you think they're cute; people, remember, they are prehistoric animals, having survived on this planet for millions of years. They are eating machines. A gator the size of the one that tore the man's arm off was very old and eating was his life's work. I don't care if you believe in God, but you better believe that this creature will attack and eat humans and they don't need invitations to do so. They've lost their natural fear of man and people that use our waterways would be better served if they didn't have to worry about being attacked.
Posted by justathought on September 27, 2007 at 2:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Bhippey obviously needs prayer, but atleast now we know her problem it isnt just big hips!
Posted by justathought on September 27, 2007 at 2:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I think this is a great idea and it is long overdue for South Carolina. It is wrong that they shot it and left it for dead. If your gonna do something do it right people.
Posted by MHA on September 27, 2007 at 3:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Off topic, but why would you pray for someone that doesn't believe in your god? Please believe me when I say I don't want to go to your heaven. I in no way what so ever want to spend eternity with religious hypocrites, and at the age of 44, I've yet to meet a religious person that isn't a hypocrite. You can argue this if you wish, but the post above proves my point. You say that I'm not supposed to judge people, judgment should be left to your god, but you pass judgment on me for not believing in your god. Get over yourselves. Not everyone is so weak a person as to need religion as a crutch in their lives. If you're going to pray for me, pray that beer and gas prices come down.
Posted by justathought on September 27, 2007 at 3:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)
There is no use arguing with you. One day hopefully later than sooner, you will wish you had believed in My God and wish were in My Heaven. I dont claim to be perfect I try to do what is right.
Posted by justathought on September 27, 2007 at 3:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Put it this way MHA
I would rather believe what I believe and be right than believe what you believe and be wrong. That is assuming you are one of those that believe there is no Heaven or Hell.
Posted by MHA on September 27, 2007 at 4:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
There may very well be a heaven and a hell. I don't know and I really don't care. I'd rather live my life for this life, not the chance of an afterlife. If you ARE right about your heaven, than you can spend eternity with the murderers and rapists that all found god and became saved before they died. Me, I'd rather not be there. I'd rather be with the people that lived honest, hard working lives with great morals and values but didn't believe in religion. You see, we won't be allowed in your heaven with the murders and rapists even though we are great people because your god doesn't allow good people in to his heaven unless they are saved or born again or whatever the current "in-term" is.
Don't get me wrong, I hope your religion makes you VERY happy and fullfilled. I just don't understand, as I stated my first post, why you insist on forcing that religion on others.
Posted by justathought on September 27, 2007 at 4:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I am sorry, I dont remember forcing my religion on anyone. Don't get me wrong, I hope you enjoy this life. YOu might as well.
Posted by MHA on September 27, 2007 at 4:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Posted by justathought on September 27, 2007 at 2:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Bhippey obviously needs prayer,
Sounds like forcing your religion on others to me....
Posted by justathought on September 27, 2007 at 4:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
No I don't think so. But I will say you need prayer, and will do so!!! Now is that forcing religion on you.
You are obviously a very unhappy person, don't worry I will pray for you:)
Oops, there I go forcing that religion again.
Smile Jesus Loves You!!!!
Posted by MHA on September 27, 2007 at 4:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Actually I'm very happy, I just wish beer and gas were cheaper :)
Posted by mac0cm4 on September 27, 2007 at 5:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Leave religion out of this. Why must it be injected into everything. Take your God and keep it to yourself. That is the problem with religion - it's a cult - and everyone wants everyone else to know who they believe in and then tell others because they believe in something else they're wrong. Such crap.
Posted by zoolander on September 27, 2007 at 9 p.m. (Suggest removal)
We have the death penalty for humans but we spend more time and money trying to rehabilitate them. Should we focus more on rehabilitating the alligators so they can fit in society.
Posted by moephishwater on September 28, 2007 at 12:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I agree that people would be devestated if we decided that their family/friends/loved ones were a "menace" to society and that we could have open season on them, too. I can almost assure you that if someone took a gun to your son because he was writing fraudulant checks, or took a gun to your granny because she was driving too fast for conditions (or anything else that could potentially cause a threat to society) that you probably would not be the first to stand up clap your hands and mount their heads on your wall at home. I respect animals because I share the the earth with them. We don't own everything. Just because our cars and our property could be damaged due to us demanding our own space and declaring it "OURS" (which really would have little meaning if we all just at around to think about it), does not mean that animals do not have their own rights to invade spaces that are just as much theirs as ours. Just because our human society thrives and gains off of money and feels that we earn every single thing we have, does not mean that animals do not deserve simple respect for not having opposable thumbs and more brain capability.