Comments on: Former Director Opposes F&G Ballot Amendment

By: EDITOR IN CHIEF

EDITOR IN CHIEF — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 13:01:35 +0000

Editor,

I wonder why you even offer people the ability to add comments if you are simply going to put your spin on every one. Your comments regarding water and water rights are false, but you continue to use them as a backboard to oppose a measure that solidifies rights of Idahoans. You would probably earn a lot more respect (and less skepticism) by letting comments inform, educate or humor your readers rather than you trying to force feed your agenda with editor comments on any positive comments.

By: Jared Boley

Jared Boley — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 02:40:38 +0000

Editor: I suggest you talk with the Idaho Department of Water Resources and the Bureau of Reclamation about such concerns. You also asked for an opinion which you paid no attention. The Idaho Department of water resources wanted that wording included so someone with a private fishing pond couldn’t demand a canal system or other means of water diversion continue to supply water to their pond to sustain their right to fish.

EDITOR NOTE–We don’t question the motive of the amendment, only the wording. It says…” SHALL NOT AFFECT RIGHTS TO DIVERT, APPROPRIATE AND USE WATER, OR ESTABLISH ANY MINIMUM AMOUNT OF WATER IN ANY WATER BODY…” which flies in the face of your comment.

By: Andy

Andy — Sun, 04 Nov 2012 10:25:39 +0000

Our Founding Fathers wrote the US Constitution to protect rights they believed Americans already had. They felt that was necessary because they anticipated threats to those rights in the future.

The rights to fish, trap and hunt come under fire every day in this country. That’s due to some religious zealots pushing their dogma on everyone else.

California and Florida just severely limited certain sport-fisheries. CA just banned a hunting pursuit. Other states have trapping bans. Backcountry travel gets more restrictive every day… the list is endless.

It IS time to protect the rights to hunt, trap and fish under the Idaho Constitution. And that’s what HJR2 is all about.

EDITOR NOTE–It also allows water users to drain reservoirs and streams and prevent minimum stream flows to protect fish. We DO NOT need an amendment to hunt, fish and trap. Why did you folks push an amendment to take water from FISH of all things?

By: Sisyphus

Sisyphus — Tue, 30 Oct 2012 20:45:15 +0000

Heh, agreed Bond.

Fraz, thanks for publishing this. Might I have permission to republish with a attributive link redirecting people here?

EDITOR NOTE–
Permission granted!

By: JamesBond

JamesBond — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 15:18:14 +0000

I think we should have a constitutional right to hunt….for grizzly bears, using a knife and face paint.

By: Dirk Pitt

Dirk Pitt — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 11:41:26 +0000

Who is behind this change?

By: tom

tom — Sat, 27 Oct 2012 22:18:36 +0000

trapping is horrifaclly inhumane.. not as inhumane as what happens to alot of people… people need to start caring about others in their own species.. just sayin…..

By: Grumpy ole guy

Grumpy ole guy — Sat, 27 Oct 2012 20:57:05 +0000

Flyhead hits the nail squarely on the head, it is just plain silly to add to the Constitution, with all possible unintended ramifications and potential conflicting language, when laws and regulations govern such activities already.

This is unnecessary, a special interest grab-bag. Vote early and often, as the late Mayor Daily of Chicago used to say.

By: Flyhead

Flyhead — Sat, 27 Oct 2012 17:04:21 +0000

All this nonsense had to be a special interest grab of some kind and now we know… it is smoke and mirrors and deals with a water issue.

We don’t need to change the Idaho Constitution to keep on doing what we do anyway with respect to hunting and fishing.

I voted early and voted NO on all the constitution changes.

By: Zippo

Zippo — Sat, 27 Oct 2012 12:56:25 +0000

Yep, but if you start to pinch the fish the feds turn up.