Tuesday, December 26, 2023

NY becomes tenth state to ban wildlife killing contests


a man holds up a dead coyote as part of a coyote killing contest

New York becomes the 10th state to stop the slaughter of wild animals for cash and prizes

Albany, NY — On Dec. 22, Gov. Kathy Hochul signed critical legislation (A.2917/S.4099) ending wildlife killing contests for coyotes, foxes, bobcats, squirrels, raccoons, crows and other species in New York. This historic new law prohibits competitive events during which contestants compete to kill the most, the heaviest and the smallest animals for cash and prizes. Championed by Assemblymember Deborah Glick, D-Manhattan, and Senator Tim Kennedy DBuffalo, this legislation was approved by bipartisan majorities in both the Assembly and Senate earlier this year. New York is the tenth state to end these gruesome competitions after Oregon took action to do so in September.

The bill was supported by leading animal protection and conservation groups and by thousands of New Yorkers. Hunters, farmers, veterinarians and wildlife rehabilitators also backed the legislation.

The Humane Society of the United States has gone undercover at contests in 10 states, including two in New York. In 2018 and 2020, the HSUS released investigations that exposed wildlife killing contests in Wayne County and Sullivan County. The investigators documented participants hauling in bloody piles of dead foxes and coyotes to be weighed and counted for prizes. Competitors joked about the “thrill” of the kill and threw dead animals into a dumpster. More than 20 killing contests took place across the state in January and February 2023.

“After two decades of work by many people and organizations, New York has finally ended the wanton and senseless killing of various species in contests for prizes. I thank Governor Hochul for signing into law a prohibition on this abhorrent practice,” said Assemblymember Deborah Glick, sponsor of the legislation and chair of the Assembly Environmental Conservation Committee. “Wildlife killing contests may have been viewed as part of a tradition, but with time we understand that the constant stress on the natural world requires us to re-evaluate customs that are undermining healthy ecosystems. At the same time, this measure in no way prevents farmers, ranchers or others from dispatching nuisance animals predating on livestock or companion animals, in accordance with Department of Environmental Conservation regulations. New York becomes the 10th state to eliminate these so-called contests.”

“Gov. Hochul has signed into law a critical, meaningful environmental policy, ending the wasteful use of our shared wildlife resources simply for cash and prizes,” said Brian Shapiro, New York state director for the Humane Society of the United States. “We are grateful for the governor’s action and recognize the bold leadership of Assemblymember Glick and Senator Kennedy for championing this law. These inhumane, wasteful competitions must come to an end across the country once and for all and we hope other states will follow New York.”

“The Adirondack Council thanks and applauds Governor Hochul for signing this legislation that will help rewild our Adirondack Park,” said Kevin Chlad, director of government relations for the Adirondack Council. “We support ethical and science-based hunting practices, as well as efforts to foster the return of keystone predators that will restore balance to our wildlands. The best available science tells us that these contests are not beneficial to Adirondack ecology. Signing this bill into law is a victory for wildlife management in the Park and statewide.”

“Killing contests make a cruel and shameful game of inflicting misery and death on wildlife. Efforts to ban this practice through S.4099 garnered overwhelming support from New Yorkers, including animal advocates, environmental advocates, and even hunters,” says Animal Legal Defense Fund Strategic Legislative Affairs Manager Kathleen Schatzmann. “We are grateful to Governor Hochul for signing the bill into law, and the leadership of bill sponsors Assemblymember Glick and Senator Kennedy for championing this critical animal protection legislation.”

“To maximize their chances of winning cash and prizes, contest participants often use bait and electronic calling devices to attract animals with sounds that mimic prey or distress calls of wounded young, which is unethical,” said Johanna Hamburger, director and senior attorney for the terrestrial wildlife program at the Animal Welfare Institute. “This ban will save the lives of thousands of animals each year in New York who are killed in these cruel and wasteful contests.”

“On behalf of our 9,200 veterinary professionals nationwide and 500 in New York State, the Humane Society Veterinary Medical Association applauds Governor Hochul for signing Bill A.2917/S.4099 into law,” said Eileen Jefferson, DVM, New York State representative for HSVMA. “After years of effort on the part of animal advocates, scientific professionals, and others statewide, the entertainment and cash-based bloodsports known as wildlife killing contests will finally come to an end. Most rural residents and traditional hunters neither participated in nor supported the cruelty and disrespect for wildlife inherent in these contests.”

“We are thrilled that New York is joining the nine other states that have also banned wildlife killing contests,” said Katie Nolan, general campaigner at In Defense of Animals. “New York’s wild animals like coyotes, crows and foxes will now be given the respect they deserve.”

“We are elated that Governor Kathy Hochul has made S.4099/A.2917, the bill to ban wildlife killing contests, the law of the land!” said Anne Muller, director of The League of Humane Voters®/NY. “Wildlife killing contests are the stuff of nightmares, not only for their brutalized victims, but for those who care about New York’s environment, ecology, and individual wild animals that grace our forests and fields. We are deeply grateful to Assemblymember Deborah Glick, Senator Timothy Kennedy, and Governor Kathy Hochul for bringing this bill to a successful completion, thus allowing us to sleep well knowing that these grotesque contests are in the dustbin of history.”

“Students of Pace University’s Animal Advocacy Clinic commend Governor Hochul’s action to ban wildlife killing contests,” said Michelle Land, Pace professor of environmental law and policy, and the clinic’s chief faculty. “With biodiversity declining at an alarming rate, we are pleased today signals the end to this indiscriminate destruction of wildlife that violates sound ecological principles. The new law will protect New York State’s native wildlife from being exploited for profit and entertainment.”

“Today marks a monumental and long-awaited victory for New York’s wildlife, who have been subjected for far too long to being wastefully killed for cash and other prizes,” said Renee Seacor, carnivore conservation manager at Project Coyote. “We applaud Governor Hochul for signing this critical legislation into law, making New York the tenth state to join the growing list of states rightfully putting an end to these cruel and senseless contests.”

“The SPCA Serving Erie County’s mission is to create a more humane community that nurtures the bonds between animals and people and thanks to Governor Hochel and the choice to eliminate cruel kill contests, New York State can say that we are a more humane community for wildlife,” said Barbara Haney, director of wildlife for SPCA Serving Erie County. “Thank you, Governor Hochel and all of our community that stood up to voice their opposition to these heinous contests. May we continue to grow in kindness and compassion for wildlife and each other.”

“VFAR applauds Governor Hochul for recognizing that wildlife killing contests are an abomination, and for standing with compassionate and decent-minded New Yorkers who agree that our wildlife must be protected against horrific and senseless cruelty,” said Allie Feldman Taylor, president of Voters for Animal Rights.

“Today is a win for every animal that was previously targeted by these cruel contests,” said Regan Downey, director of education at the Wolf Conservation Center. “We applaud Gov. Hochul’s decision to sign A.2917/S.4099 into law. New Yorkers value humane and science-based approaches to wildlife management and we are thankful to finally have a policy that reflects these values in our backyard. Killing contests have no place in the 21st century, nor do they have a place in New York.”


  • Competitors achieve high kill numbers—sometimes hundreds of animals at a single event—by using night vision, thermal imaging and electronic calling devices. These tactics mimic sounds of dependent young or prey in distress to lure animals in for an easy kill. Animals are then shot with high-powered rifles which rip holes in the fur, often rendering the pelts useless for sale. After the killing is over, contestants gather to weigh and count the bodies and take pictures next to the bloody animals. The animals are then typically dumped like trash.
  • The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation has found that indiscriminate killing of coyotes will not reduce their numbers, prevent conflicts with livestock, or boost populations of game species like deer. The best available science shows that random killing can increase coyote populations and increase livestock conflicts.
  • Nine other states have prohibited killing contests including California in 2014, Vermont in 2018, Arizona, Massachusetts and New Mexico in 2019, Colorado and Washington in 2020, Maryland in 2021, and Oregon in September 2023.
  • Hunters and wildlife management professionals across the U.S. have called out killing contests as unethical and warned they are damaging the reputation of hunters and threatening the future of hunting.

Photo at top: Coyote Contest Kill – Sullivan County, NY. Photo Credit: The Humane Society of the United Sates. (The HSUS.)


Related Stories

Community news stories come from press releases and other notices from organizations, businesses, state agencies and other groups. Submit your contributions to Almanack Editor Melissa Hart at editor@adirondackalmanack.com.

48 Responses

  1. jane says:

    Finally. NYS should have been one of the leaders in this long-awaited signing. I guess we can fall back on better late than never.

  2. Rob says:

    Wonder how many of these organizations support democrats?? Let’s save the animals and trees but allow abortion. Doesn’t make sense

    • Bill Keller says:

      The state doesn’t have any business deciding medical care for a woman, neither do you. Typical Republican, ant-abortion but against aid to children in need.

      • Rob says:

        Yup I will not vote Democrat Actually abortion does fall to the state level now that Roe is canceled. They can either allow it or make it illegal like some states have. How am I against aid to children??

        • Bill Keller says:

          Republicans historically are against any public aid. If you vote Republican that’s what you vote for. Current examples are the Tennessee Governor and the Oklahoma Governor turning down federal aid to feed kids. By “the state” I mean any government should not interfere with a woman’s reproductive rights. My opinion and the opinion of the majority of Americans ( a 61% majority of U.S. adults say abortion should be legal in all or most cases) is that abortion is the woman’s decision, no one else. I hope that answers your question.

      • Rob says:

        But you didn’t answer my question. How can people who are so active in saving trees being cut for trails etc vote democrat if they support abortion? Kind of goes against one another doesn’t it. Save the trees but not a kid. Kind of messed up

      • Zach says:

        How do you classify it medical care for a women when you kill a baby? Did you ever consider the babies rights? There are actions and consequences. Not like yiu just wake up one day pregnant. Call it like it is. Otherwise you’re misled, and caught in the dogma of the day, just another sheep.

      • ADKresident says:

        Nope, Bill. Your reply is typical.

        One can actually support both the saving / protection of wildlife as well as human life. It’s not a Dem or Rep issues, let alone an either/or issue, when one takes off their partisan lens. And to add that if you are pro life that you are against aiding children in need is either said out of pure ignorance or simply a downright asinine statement. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and choose to believe the former.

        • AG says:

          I totally agree

        • Bill Keller says:

          Nope, ADK, your reply is typical to someone who disagrees with you. The majority of Americans favor legal abortion, that’s a fact. I agree that abortion is not a partisan issue, it’s a deeply personal issue for the woman. My comment did not state, “And to add that if you are pro life that you are against aiding children in need” that’s you adding in your two cents. My actual comment was “Typical Republican, ant-abortion but against aid to children in need”. Just another fact that you can see actual examples of if you follow politicians votes and any news outlet other than Fox. Current examples are the Tennessee Governor and the Oklahoma Governor turning down federal aid to feed kids. Your name calling, ignorant and stupid, tells a lot about you.

          • ADKresident says:

            Nice spin, Bill.

            You say that you agree that it’s not a partisan issue and then state your entire argument on political partisanship, even pointing to Fox (as if I listen to Fox news). That invalidates your statement.

            You also say I misquoted you, which I did not: anti-abortion = pro-life. Period. Anyone who read my comment and was not clouded by becoming offended knows that I did not call you any names, but referred to your statements as being either ignorant or asinine. Believe it or not, I can actually separate you as a human being from your statements. I do NOT think you are stupid.

            Lastly, you have to be more specific if you want to throw around stats like you did a few comments up. While you are correct, there is a little more than half (6 out of 10) that are pro-choice in the 1st trimester of pregnancy, however, MOST Americans do NOT support abortions past 20 weeks (less than 3 out of 10) without any regulations or protections for the baby (life) and it drops even more for last trimester Now that is an EXTREME position no matter what your political affiliation. However, if that is the hill people want to die on, have had it and let the peoples decide individually per state. I believe most people, if they really knew the facts, would not agree with how extreme the Dem platform has now become which is: Abortion for ANY reason with zero protections for the unborn baby up to birth, even if the baby is born alive, care is not required by law (yes, they voted 100% against the Born Alive Act). And before you come back and say that late term abortions are ‘rare’, here is an actual inconvenient fact: There are appox. 900,000 abortions per year (avg) with appox 1.2% after 21 weeks making that 10,800 babies whose life was discarded by abortion. Even if that were cut in half and labeled as ‘medical emergencies” that would mean approx. 5,000 perfectly healthy babies were medically taken without any valid reason. As a woman who is 100% pro-woman, I find that to be a barbaric, an anti-human act and is actually regression for women, not progression.

            Also, I don’t know the bills not passed that you are referring to, however I DO KNOW that Congress always combines multiple issues into one bulk bill and the media LOVES to exploit the one thing like ‘feeding kids’ as a talking point which is not the actual reason why it was not voted for but because of the 99 other things that were in the bill. Both our political system and the media are very deceptive and manipulative. It’s too bad people fall for their words so easily.

          • JohnL says:

            Hi Bill. You said the following:
            “My comment did NOT (my emphasis) state, “And to add that if you are pro life that you are against aiding children in need” that’s you adding in your two cents. My actual comment was “Typical Republican, ant-abortion but against aid to children in need”.
            Help me out her BK, but when you say ‘Typical Republican, anti-abortion (aka pro-life) but against aid to children in need, that’s exactly what you’re saying.
            Now to the bigger issue. Just because a ‘majority of Americans’ believes in abortion, doesn’t make it right. 2 things: A. At one point in our history, a majority of Americans believed that slavery was OK. Did that make it right? Of course not. The Founders called this the ‘tyranny of the majority’. and 2. The majority of Americans DO NOT agree that abortion should be legal until the moment of birth, which is what many on your side are striving for, and what should not be allowed. That’s it. Have a great day.

      • Mike says:

        You probably didnt have any problem with forcing woman to take a covid vaccine.

        • Rob says:

          No one should have ever been forced to take a Covid vaccine. That is the biggest farce ever. “ you can eat in a restaurant but you need to keep a mask on unless you’re drinking or eating”. Yeah that is going to solve anything.

    • WTA says:

      I know you are against saving the trees, the environment, the animals. If we did things your way, the air would be poisonous and there would be even more plastic in the ocean than there already is. As far as abortion, unless you are paying for the care of the future child, you don’t have the right to demand others be made to have children. A sperm cell or a fetus is not a child or a person. It all makes perfect sense if you understand the idea of preservation and not destruction. I’m against animal abuse, and it is just that simple. If you don’t like abortions, don’t have one–that is freedom. Find something to do with your time that doesn’t cause suffering, animal abuse, baby animals being orphaned and dying of starvation. I’d be embarrassed to advocate for animal abuse.

      • AG says:

        While I agree with your overall sentiment. Most would be against cutting out a fetus of a deer or a bobcat… But think it’s ok for humans… That’s where the dissonance exists

        • WTA says:

          This is starting to go really off topic, but I can help in this one. For one thing, no one said it is OK for humans if it is done against the will of the female, but in the case of the animals you mentioned, it would absolutely be done without their will. There is something that people don’t want to admit or look at: people are alive or dead based on brain activity. If a person is considered dead when they are brain-dead (aka a vegetable) then they should be considered not alive if their brain isn’t alive yet or developed. This is the idea of sentient life vs non sentient life. The Catholic Church wants to draw the line at conception because they want a “be fruitful and multiply” policy, which they even admit to. They are pro-overpopulation so they spread propaganda to push their policy. People who can’t think critically follow along and don’t know they have been propagandized. Organized religions–just like cults–want to increase their base to be as big as possible in any way possible, which will get them more money and power. So that is the main source of the propaganda and against women’s rights. If a woman wants to terminate something that is basically an overgrown sperm cell that is in her body, that is her choice, and everything else is propaganda for ulterior motives, and sometimes people do the bidding for a cause they never even knew existed, and are used as pawns. Comparing live animals that may also have young depending on them to overgrown human sperm cells that don’t have a developed brain is a non-sense argument.

          • JohnL says:

            You know WTA, I was diagnosed early in life as being a person who ‘can’t critically think’. I’ve always been sort of, what did they call me in the old days…oh yeah…..stupid. That’s it, stupid! That’s why I’ve always relied on people like you, people who ‘can help me on this one’ no matter what the subject. So, WTF, I thank you for setting me straight on the subjects of religion and abortion, even abortion AFTER the ‘fetus’ (wouldn’t want to call that 8 1/2 month old ‘overgrown human sperm cell’ a person), is old enough to survive ‘outside’ the mother. Thanks for ‘helping on this one’. And BTW, Happy New Year.

            • ADKresident says:

              Now that was a good chuckle, JohnL, to start off my New Year’s reading!

              I’d have to classify that previous comment as an example of what could be categorized as a new and/or additional definition to “political science”. Total absurdity. Can you imagine telling a prenatal/in-uterol surgeon, “Hold off on that anesthesia, Doc, because it’s just an overgrown sperm cell!”?

              Anyhow, a Happy New Year and Blessed 2024 to everyone in keeping with the situation! 🎉

            • Tony Mawad says:

              You say you were diagnosed in life as someone that “can’t critically think.” Is that why, of all the things to do in life, you chose to run around killing animals? You never found anything else better to do with your time? The 8 1/2 month old that gets aborted that you refer to, how often does that happen?-extremely rare, but according to your hate radio that you cling to, it isn’t presented that way. This whole entire whataboutism didn’t go well. I tried to educate you and help you understand the way that people in the medical field would think, but you weren’t receptive. I would imagine that the people in the medical field and the folks that rehab animals–that you orphan and cripple–they would be a lot more moral so I don’t need your whataboutisms to get me to change my mind about anything. Find something to do with your time other than to be an animal abuser. And give up the idea that you are morally superior because of the way you twist something else around. Then comes the idea of, they did this so I can do that crime argument. The “I can loot a house for this much if someone else looted it for more,” mentality. That isn’t a decent way of thinking. You never came here for anything other than to push invalid arguments and to make snarky comments, and I should have known better. This law was made because society moved on and had the morals to stand up against animal abuse–get over it.

          • AG says:

            a criminal who kills a pregnant woman gets charged with 2 murders. the woman and the fetus. that is hypocrisy then if a woman can kill a fetus legally….

  3. Tony Goodwin says:

    Can we please get back to the bill that was actually passed? My question is whether the traditional “big buck” contests will still be allowed? Any buck entered must be legally tagged as that hunter’s one deer for the season.

    It doesn’t seem that a contest that is limited to just one animal per person encourages random, mass killing. Seems to me that it is a way to give a bit of recognition (and maybe a bit of prize money) to a hunter who is lucky enough to shoot a particularly big buck.

    And FWIW, I am not a hunter, but I recognize that controlled, sport hunting of deer is an important tool for game managers to control the population to a size that can be supported by the available habitat.

    • Boreas says:


      I personally don’t see an issue with Big Buck contests, and I don’t see it mentioned above. The licensee is basically harvesting a legal animal according to big game regulations. The prize often favors the hunter who does the most pre-season scouting. But I honestly don’t know if Big Buck contests are being considered for regulatory measures. Good question.

      • Tony Goodwin says:

        Boreas; Thanks for your response and agreement with my questions. If no answer is forthcoming soon, I wonder how we can get one?

        • Rob says:

          From what I have read on this big buck contests and fishing derbies or contests will still be allowed

        • ADKresident2 says:

          I think the answer is that “big buck” “contests” are not a contest within the meaning of the law. In that case, the hunter does no more than what he or she has always lawfully done and there is no competitive incentive, other than the hunter’s own incentive to bag the biggest buck possible.

    • Buck says:

      The law specifically says that contests for deer, bear and turkeys are not included and can remain. That said, this law will not “protect” or “save” the lives of coyotes as our governor implies. They’re hunted anyway, the contests just bring the hunters together and raise thousands of dollars for youth outdoor programs, fire departments and more. The hunters are still going to hunt coyotes, just like anglers go fishing regardless of if there’s a contest or not.

      • Ethan says:

        Correct. Species that are “protected” by the DEC inasmuch as there are bag limits are excluded from this bill.
        There is much to say re “They’re hunted anyway…”. While this is true, it’s a fact that “contests” which award prizes for essentially killing the most animals will likely see participant numbers decline. The incentive simply won’t be there.
        Using state resources for fundraisers is simply unethical no matter which organization it’s for. Maybe time to get back to good old-time elbow grease fundraisers that *everyone* can participate in that don’t require piles of wasted dead wildlife to accomplish that goal.

        • Buck says:

          Of course the participation will decline because the contests – in current form – won’t happen (but organizers will likely get creative). My point is that those who pursue coyotes will continue to do so throughout the season. And they’re pretty upset about this, so read into that what you may. In some cases they saved their bigger carcasses for the contests, which were more about the dinners and the fundraising. As a hunter myself (mostly deer), believe me when I say coyote hunting will continue, perhaps with a greater passion. It’s becoming more and more popular in the farm country nationwide and this year Adirondack hunters reported seeing a good number of coyotes. Off-season hunting up here is already happening.

          One more point on this. Some media outlets reported that the animals were wasted and tossed in dumpsters. Did they ever reach out to the organizers for confirmation? You know, old-school journalism? Those that did got confirmation that only animals with mange, which will eventually kill them, were discarded. The others went to the fur market. As a member of the hunting community I can assure you there’s a lot of mis-information here as this element was certainly exploited.

    • AG says:

      The irony of killing a big buck is that actually weakens the ungulate herds. In nature with hunters who don’t have weapons and traps – they prefer to kill the weaker parts of the herd since it is an easier meal. The stronger genes get passed on. Humans with guns and traps attempting to kill the biggest and strongest has the opposite effect.

  4. wash wild says:

    The article concerns legislation regulating our interaction with wildlife. If Rob and others want to make a reasoned defense of killing contests that would be appropriate. Otherwise some editorial discretion is needed to spare us the embarrassing, off-topic blabber.

  5. Joe Kozlina says:

    I dont see where compitition comes into play with the killing of our wildlife of any kind. Respecting, which all hunters claim, is what is the focus here. Agian Killing to feed your family is what the circle of life is about. It is what hunting is about. I dont see what killing for sport, competition, glory or bragging rights has to do with respect for a living creatrue. We all have heard stories of disrespect for wildlife and predators. Mainly from persons seeking attention , recognition or approval for bagging the biggist, most rare, or just the most, of some living creature. Only then thier standing in the animal killing world are they complete. No amimal should be hunted for Sport. DEFINITION: SPORT…..an activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others for entertainment:….By definition killing for entertainment!…. Nothing much to do with the circle of life.

    • William says:

      Joe, hunting is not about the circle of life and feeding a family. I would call any meat or fur coming from a successful hunt just an additional benefit. Being in the great outdoors, seeing sights that most people will never, the excitement of the hunt, the camaraderie with friends and family…..it’s a blast and refreshens the soul…..of some people, not all. Some people get the same thrill from snowshoeing or cross country skiing, others snowmobiling some trapping…whatever makes them happy I say. There is a fair amount of physical exertion involved as well. Doubt me? Make it to the notch between Little Blue and Azure with a foot of snow while carrying a rifle and tell me if you broke a sweat. I get it though, hunting is not your thing. Speaking about how hunters should act and feel online while trying to equate it to an organized sport really is not your thing either.

      • JohnL says:

        Well said William. For those who don’t hunt, it’s very hard to explain. It should be easier to explain to active, outdoor types who enjoy the outdoors, but that’s not always the case.

        • Joe Kozlina says:

          Hunting involves the same energy as hiking, working, or other forms of outdoor activities. Many people enjoy these activities. No different except for the killing of animals. I have hunters on my property, they share meat with me, they respect my farm and forests and the life of the animal they kill. They understand the circle of life when it comes to hunting wildlife. We converse often and we have camaraderie as most outdoor persons do. Collecting meat and fir from any animal is what hunting is. Use the whole animal and do it with respect. The only difference i see between me and some one that hunts is I dont pull the trigger. I have looked thru a scope at a deer and have enjoyed the excitement of seeing it and watching it. I just didnt pull the trigger. So I am not sure of the point. Where the difference is is I dont recieve enjoyment from the kill or the organized sport. Again as I have posted long ago ” no animal should be hunted for entertainment.” And for some odd reason, some hunters think they are the only ones outdoors and doing good for the wildlife.

          • Jane says:

            Except for the killing of animals….Hey, give ’em a gun so it’s a fair fight, or better yet, lose your gun, and wrassle ’em with your bare hands and teeth. Now that’s sport!

  6. Jane says:

    Killing small animals is so exciting. No camaraderie without bloodshed, right? But of course, it’s not a fair fight, is it. That’s probably what makes it fun for you.

    • William says:

      Lol, you got me.

      Everyone is different with different tastes, can’t we just accept or maybe even celebrate our diversity? I am totally cool with you sitting home knitting mittens even though that is not my thing.

      • Jane says:

        LOL you got me, yessah, I be knitting away…taint mittens though.

      • Dan Vitale says:

        I’m thinking that slaughtering animals just for fun ain’t diversity, it’s pretty nasty business. And I’m pretty sure it can be considered an absolute wrong doing, even among hunters.

  7. Dan says:

    The bottom line is the wedge that is continuing to be driven between hunters and non-hunters, and this bill is a big one. At a time when DEC is asking hunters to cooperate by reporting (and not shooting) big canines after the 2021 wolf discovery, this bill just ticks them off and discourages that cooperation.

  8. Joe Kozlina says:

    I am quoting a previous person here…..”Joe, hunting is not about the circle of life and feeding a family”……Allow me to shed some light on this statement. This video is for hunters and non hunters to view and think about. I realize not all will get it and some may dissagree. Allow youself to hear it and think about it before you put pen to paper. This video is from The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, produced by hunters. I am not a hunter!…..WARNING……it shows the second and arrow hits an elk, that is all, nothing else, no blood. The message is what is important. Sometimes with age we can understand the circle of life. Again, my message is no animal shoud be killed for entertainment………… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwWnCyf6hcY&t=1s

  9. Dan Vitale says:

    I never knew these types of contests existed, even back when I was hunting I wasn’t aware of anything like this. Good idea to ban this senseless slaughter. I’d like to see bow hunting banned also, it is a torturous slow death.

  10. JohnL says:

    I’m proud of your readers. I expected this conversation about hunting contests to devolve into a discussion on banning hunting all together. With only a few exceptions, they’ve kept their comments to hunting contests. I’m sure no-one cares, but, by golly, I’m proud of you, one and all. Happy New Year to all you AA readers (and families). May 2024 be better than 2023 for everyone.

Leave a Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Wait! Before you go:

Catch up on all your Adirondack
news, delivered weekly to your inbox