- The national animal rights group PETA says the NRA’s proposal to amend to constitution to protect the right to hunt, fish and harvest wildlife is frivolous and bizarre.
Come November, Lone Star State voters will decide whether to amend Texas’ constitution to protect the right to hunt, fish and harvest wildlife despite the fact that residents have the right to hunt, fish and harvest wildlife.
“Adoption of the Right to Hunt and Fish amendment will safeguard the hunters and anglers of Texas from extreme animal rights groups dedicated to abolishing America’s outdoor tradition,” Chris W. Cox, executive director of the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action, said in a press release. “This important constitutional safeguard will protect wildlife and promote conservation.”
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals Senior Vice President Lisa Lange told the San Antonio Current that the November ballot item is a Hail Mary that’s not going to stop people from shunning a “bloody pastime” and choosing to watch wildlife rather than hunt.
“An amendment to ‘protect’ the right to hunt and fish is bizarre and frivolous — it would clutter up the most important charter of government and open the door to a flood of other amendments whose sole purpose is to make political statements for special-interest groups,” Lange says.
Legislative documents provide more insight into the NRA’s fear.
“Hunting and fishing are activities that have been inherently passed down from generation to generation and engrained in our state’s heritage. But, in this day and age, with recent lawsuits and certain efforts with the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act, our heritage is threatened and needs protection,” A Senate Research Center analysis states.
The analysis doesn’t specify what lawsuits threaten hunting in Texas.
The House Culture, Recreation & Tourism committee analysis is equally vague and meaningless.
“According to some sources, various groups around the country have worked to limit or eliminate hunting in some states, and in response a number of states have adopted some form of constitutional protection for hunting and fishing,” the hard-hitting research states.