Sen. John Drummond of Ninety Six had it right when he said that it was time for South Carolina’s legislators “to get out of the rabbit sheriff business.” The problem is, that speech was nearly 30 years ago, and many legislators are still muddling in areas that cry out for good science, not politics.That is not to say that the public should not be considered in natural-resources management decisions. The public should always have a voice, but when political clout wins over sound biology — or even common sense — natural resources usually suffer, and in the long run, the public ends up being the loser.
A case in point — and there were a number that could have been cited from this year’s legislative session — was House Bill 3020, sponsored by Rep. Alan Clemmons of Horry County, which would have required the S.C. Department of Natural Resources to allow hiking and horseback riding on all the lands under its control.
The bill would even have allowed these activities on small Heritage Preserves. Never mind that it would have violated the Heritage Trust Act, which was established to protect rare habitats, animals, plants and cultural sites or that horse traffic could damage or even destroy some of those critical sites.
Never mind also that it would have required the DNR to open all its lands, including wildlife management areas, without regard to potentially serious impacts to the resources that would constitute a “loss of control” and trigger reversions of federal grant dollars that are used to purchase and manage DNR properties. The loss of hundreds of thousands of dollars in federal funding would severely reduce the agency’s ability to manage wildlife and fisheries and provide recreational opportunities for hunters and anglers.
Lobbyist Cary Chamblee of the S.C. Wildlife Federation pointed out other obvious problems in the proposed legislation to the House Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environmental Affairs Committee’s Wildlife Subcommittee.
• Hunters pay $30.50 for the right to hunt on WMA lands. The proposed horseback/hiker fee of $5 per day would be difficult to administer and would not begin to cover the cost of administration.
• Riders already have more than 400 miles of designated horseback trails on DNR lands.
• Horse trails are damaging to the terrain and could severely impact critical habitats.
• If you tried to impose a daily hiking fee, how would you determine if a person was a hiker or just a casual visitor?
• DNR encourages natural resources education on its properties, which are commonly used for field trips by adults and school groups. No fees should be charged for this experience.
A coalition of natural resources organizations and individuals spoke against the bill in front of the full House Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environmental Affairs Committee. Fortunately, the committee carried the bill over to the 2008 session to give DNR time to establish dialog with hikers, horseback riders and committee members.
Hopefully, common sense will prevail next year, and this bill will be allowed to die — or at the very least be modified sensibly.
The time spent on addressing this bill that could have been spent on more critical issues is just one more argument to get politics — and politicians — out of wildlife and fisheries management.
Be the first to comment