NSSF: Aiming for Accuracy

At Burlington Free Press, an Apology and an Op-ed

The Burlington Free Press today ran a letter of apology in its print edition after publishing a reader's letter yesterday that said, "I suggest that before the next annual [moose] killing season, other residents be awarded legal permits to kill hunters . . . ." 

The wording of the print edition apology was similar to that which appeared yesterday online. Here's the print version:

Moose-hunting letter inappropriate

Editor's note: The letters to the editor in Wednesday's editions and on the Free Press Web site included a letter about the annual moose hunt. The letter clearly violates the standards of the Free Press for submissions to the Opinion page by advocating for violence against hunters. The letter in no way reflects the views of this paper. We apologize for publishing the letter.

We were pleased to see that Wayne LaRoche, commissioner of the Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department, provided an op-ed column explaining the value and culture of hunting, as we urged yesterday. Here is what Mr. LaRoche had to say about hunting and the state's moose population:

"Vermont has an abundant moose population. In fact, the moose population in the northeastern part of the state has increased to a level that has damaged their forest habitat and caused losses to forest landowners. The Department of Fish and Wildlife and its biologists carefully manage the moose and other wildlife populations using highly regulated hunting to sustain the healthy and abundant populations so that they do not destroy their own habitat or cause serious losses to landowners. Through time, hunting benefits the moose, the forest landowners, hunters and those of us who enjoy viewing moose."

The mistake of printing the letter having been made, we appreciate the quick response from the newspaper to correct it and applaud Mr. LaRoche for taking advantage of the opportunity to help educate readers about the role hunting plays in wildlife conservation.

Newspaper Prints Letter Advocating Killing Hunters

Shameful is the word that comes to mind for the Burlington Free Press and its decision to print a reader's anti-hunting letter, "Take a few hunters along with the moose," that was written in response to the Vermont paper's story about the opening of moose hunting season.

The letter was placed in the newspaper's online letters section as well and has now been taken down after responses from outraged readers. Hunters and non-hunters alike should chastise the paper for its decision to run the letter, and take the opportunity to educate readers about the role hunting plays in wildlife management. It would be nice to see Vermont's fish and wildlife department weigh in, explaining that trained wildlife biologists determine how to best maintain the state's moose population.

Here's the letter:

Take a Few Hunters Along with the Moose

On this beautiful day we learn that about 1,251 hunters are taking to the woods with legal permits to "pursue prized quarry." Certainly the members of various humane organizations do not approve. I suggest that before the next annual killing season, other residents be awarded legal permits to kill hunters who will be out to kill these beautiful, non-destructive animals. Or the government could just rule out all this primitive killing.

ETHAN A.H. SIMS
Shelburne

Here's the apology from the newspaper's editorial page director that appears online and which had better be in the letters section of tomorrow's print edition:

Today's letters to the editor included a letter about the annual moose hunt ("Take a few hunters along with the moose") that violates the statdards [sic] of the Free Press by advocating for violence against hunters. The letter has been taken down. We apologize for our error in judgement.

Aki Soga
Editorial page editor
The Burlington Free Press

While local readers' complaints have forced an apology, you may want to weigh in with your own letter to the editor. Send to letters@bfp.burlingtonfreepress.com

A New Magazine for AR Enthusiasts

A new digital magazine, "AR Guns and Hunting," has launched. Content includes tips, history and discussions about equipment related AR rifles. The magazine, published by Grand View Media Group, is an indicator of the increasing popularity among hunters for AR-platform rifles. The launch coincides with NSSF's national campaign to educate sportsmen about the "modern sporting rifle."

Read Ralph M. Lermayer's editor's letter: http://www.arshunt.com/arshunt/200910#pg5

Read the magazine: http://www.arshunt.com/arshunt/200910

Firearms Accidents Not a Major Factor in Health Care Costs

With some media stories about health care making reference to guns as a reason for rising costs, the National Shooting Sports Foundation reminds reporters and editors that fatal firearms accidents are at all-time lows and now represent less than 1 percent (actually 0.7 percent) of all accidental fatalities in the country.

Declines in accidents involving children have been steep. Between 1996 and 2006, accidental fatalities for children 14 years of age and under decreased by 61 percent, and by 77 percent going back to 1986, according to the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control.

In a side-by-side comparison with other forms of unintentional fatalities, firearms rank far down on the list, well below motor vehicles, poisoning, falls, choking, drowning and fires.

These successes have come about through the promotion of the safe use and storage of firearms through voluntary measures, including programs such as Project ChildSafe and the practice of including appropriate gun-locking devices and safety literature with new firearms. These voluntary, firearms industry programs, along with ongoing firearms and hunter safety education efforts, are helping to continue the trend toward increased firearms safety and decreased firearms accidents.

Hunting with ARs--The New Paradigm

Ed Rasimus on his Thunder Tales blog draws attention to the rising popularly of hunting with AR-15-platform rifles. He calls it "The New Paradigm."

We agree. See NSSF's recently launched educational campaign on Modern Sporting Rifles, and pass on the fact card and the video on the campaign's Web site. A four-page insert runs in major sporting magazines such as Field and Stream, Outdoor Life and Petersen's Hunting this month and next.

Thanks to Say Uncle for the reference to Ed's blog post.

What Happened Yesterday in U.S. v. Stevens

For a good overview of the U.S. Supreme Court justices' comments yesterday in the United States v. Stevens case, read Jim Shepherd's account in today's Outdoor Wire. Justice Scalia made a number of informed references to hunting. Also, see the SCOTUS blog. For background, read NSSF's news release and the amicus brief that NSSF submitted to the court.

 

 

New NSSF Long-form AR-15 Educational Video

The National Shooting Sports Foundation's educational campaign on modern sporting rifles has added a new long-form video (long for the Web anyway, five minutes) to accompany its 30- and 60-second messages. The campaign is designed to reach a wide audience in the hunting and target shooting community, with emphasis placed on educating sportsmen whose preference for traditional-looking firearms can lead them to misunderstand AR-15-platform rifles and to even describe them as "assault weapons," which inadvertently lends support to elected officials and organizations who want to ban these rifles.

Some hunters or target shooters may not care to use AR-15-platform rifles. That's OK; we all have our preferences for certain firearms and the right to own the guns we choose. What's damaging to all gun owners, however, is when sportsmen label ARs as "evil" or "bad" guns because they look different from traditional rifles. In doing so they assist gun-ban initiatives that could affect the rights of others to own the type of firearm they prefer--AR-platform rifles--which are favored by younger hunters and shooters, precisely the group on which the future of those activities rests. Traditionalists should be aware that legislation that could ban AR-15-type rifles could sweep up traditional-looking semi-automatic rifles and shotguns (and even handguns) in its net.  

The campaign's four-page educational insert on the modern sporting rifle, which tracks how military rifles of a certain era became popular civilian sporting rifles, will hit in sporting magazines ranging from Field & Stream and Outdoor Life to Petersen's Hunting and Gun Dog, among others. The point is that today's modern sporting rifle is just another step in the long history of the military-to-civilian sporting rifle evolution.

For this campaign to have a widespread effect on changing attitudes toward AR-15-platform rifles and to clear up misunderstanding about them (for example, their operation is semi-automatic, not full automatic, with only one round fired with each pull of the trigger), the campaign needs advocates who are willing to correct individuals—your friends, reporters, elected officials—who are misinformed about these rifles. A helpful pocket fact card available at www.nssf.org/msr can assist that effort. Consider sending the fact card to your local, state and Congressional representatives. 

As NSSF President Steve Sanetti has said, "We ask everyone who values their gun ownership rights to correct misunderstandings about the use and operation of these modern sporting rifles. If we let misinformation go unchecked, we only assist those who would ban ownership of these and other types of semi-automatic firearms, like your duck-hunting shotgun. We can't let that happen."

Obama Hates Bambi . . .

That's the conclusion—we believe tongue in cheek—of Newsweek's Steve Tuttle when he misconnects the recent surge in firearms and ammunition sales—due to fears that the Administration will push for new restrictions on gun ownership—to somehow aiding deer hunters in their pursuit of game. "The deer don't stand a chance," says Tuttle, in his article.

Tuttle gets the background right when he says that the surge in firearms and ammunition sales over the past year has been a windfall for wildlife conservation. The 1937 Pittman-Robertson Federal Aid In Wildlife Restoration Act imposed an excise tax on the sale of firearms and ammunition, with the funds generated being routed back to the states to underwrite wildlife conservation and habitat preservation projects. Firearms and ammunition manufacturers paid about $110 million in the first quarter of 2009, a 43 percent increase from the same period a year ago due to the surge in sales. That’s more money for conservation. More than $5 billion has been raised for conservation since Pittman-Robertson legislation went into effect 72 years ago. Thankfully, these funds "can't be diverted to other uses," otherwise federal legislators and bureaucrats almost certainly would have diverted them, as some states have tried to, with the result that wildlife populations in America today would not be as healthy or widespread as they are.

Despite the writer's quip that “the deer don’t stand a chance,” deer and other game species are doing quite well under America's hugely successful system of wildlife management, a model emulated around the world. This system is responsible for increasing white-tailed deer populations in America from about 500,000 around the turn of the last century to over 26 million today. No one is unhappy with that except perhaps the victims of car vs. deer accidents or the owners of munched on shrubs in their suburban yards. Similar conservation successes are connected with the wild turkey, Rocky Mountain Elk, wood duck and other game species, benefiting nature watchers and hunters alike. Are there more opportunities for hunters to take deer and to put healthful food on their tables and on the tables of those less fortunate through programs like Hunters for the Hungry? Yes, there are, and there's nothing wrong with that.

 

Educating Reporters Two at a Time about AR-15 Rifles

Dear Amanda Lee Myers and Terry Tang,

As Associated Press reporters, I know you want to "get it right."

However, it's utterly incorrect to say an AR-15 rifle is an "assault weapon," as is done several times in your story yesterday headlined, "Man carrying assault weapon attends Obama protest."

An AR-15-style rifle is not an assault weapon.

An assault weapon is a fully automatic firearm--a machine gun that, as long as the trigger is depressed, will continuously fire until the magazine is empty. Fully automatic firearms have been severely limited from civilian ownership since 1934.

An AR-15-style rifle, on the other hand, functions as a semi-automatic. It fires only one round with each pull of the trigger--just like countless other semi-automatic firearms that millions of Americans own legally for hunting, target shooting and self-defense. AR-15s are among the most popular firearms selling today and can rightfully be called today's modern sporting rifle.

Granted, AR-15-style rifles look like military rifles, such as the M-16, but as good reporters it's important that you not confuse the way AR-15s and military weapons function. Unless you deliberately want your readers to be confused about this issue, which is exactly what groups wanting to ban these types of firearms are after--confusion--you should not promote misinformation by using in accurate terms.

Versions of modern sporting rifles are legal to own in all 50 states, provided the purchaser passes the mandatory FBI background check required for all retail firearm purchasers.

If you would like an introduction to learning more about AR-15-style rifles at a target shooting range with a certified instructor, the National Shooting Sports Foundation would be pleased to arrange such a seminar, as we've done for hundreds of other journalists who now understand that AR-15s are not assault weapons.

Thanks for listening.

Young Hunters: Safe and Supervised

The following comment from NSSF has been posted to an MSNBC.com story about a youth hunting accident whose content misleads readers about Families Afield, an initiative supported jointly by NSSF, the U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance and the National Wild Turkey Federation. The comment was posted by NSSF senior vice president Chris Dolnack.

To the Editor:

There is nothing wrong with a family member taking a youngster hunting under supervised conditions in order to pass along the many wholesome traditions that responsible hunting teaches.

By sensationalizing a youth hunting accident, however, your story paints an inaccurate image of young hunters as being unsafe and undermines the successful work of Families Afield, an initiative that seeks to remove restrictive age barriers so that youth can experience hunting with an adult mentor.

Research shows that supervised youth hunting is a safe activity. That's one reason why over the last five years 28 states have changed their hunting laws and regulations to create opportunities for youth to hunt under the supervision of an adult, resulting in 283,000 new and safe hunters. This is good news for hunting, a tradition that faces considerable challenges from urbanization, access and a changing culture.

An introduction to hunting at a young age goes hand in hand with nationwide movement to encourage children to spend more time outdoors being active, enjoying nature and gaining an appreciation for wildlife and habitat. Having tried hunting with a parent or guardian, a child can move on to take a hunter education course, which is required in all 50 states in order to purchase an adult hunting license.