Wildlife Protection Act is Warranted

Hunters and trappers are trying to associate the animal rights group PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) with the Question 1 campaign in Massachusetts, but the fact is that PETA has nothing to do with his campaign.

Question 1, "The Massachusetts Wildlife Protection Act," is supported by the Commonwealth's two oldest and largest animal protection groups--the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and the Massachusetts Audubon Society--not PETA.

It is obvious that the campaign to defeat Question 1 will be based on scare tactics and outrageous statements. I, for one, have read the proposed law and support it. It will prohibit in most instances the use of certain cruel traps, but it does not ban trapping.

Humane traps will be the preferred method of catching wildlife when necessary. It will ban the hunting of bears and bobcats with packs of dogs. Hounding is downright cruel and unnecessary. Hounding will end, but bear and bobcat hunting will continue.

Finally, Question 1 will eliminate the majority quota of hunters on the Fisheries and Wildlife Board which is supposed to manage wildlife for all of us. How does purchasing a hunting license make one qualified to set wildlife policy? I would rather have professional biologists and environmental scientists on this board so that the decisions are based on sound science, not the desire to satisfy trappers and hunters.

I say Yes to question 1, and urge my friends, neighbors and everyone else to vote likewise. --Mary Kelly, New Ashford