Hear the call of the wild

By Julie Carter

They are here and they are everywhere. The fall months bring out the masses of hunters seeking trophy antelope, deer, and elk.

Wal-Marts across hunting country are full of camo'd men talking on cell phones loading up with ammo, hard candy and beanie weenies.

They drive into town in big, powerful and very expensive vehicles pulling heavily loaded trailers full of all the essentials for a successful hunting camp.

This would include at least 17 gigantic coolers filled with plenty of fine camp cuisine including t-bone steaks and cold beer, a selection of brand new ATV's and camp trailers that completely take the "camp" out of camping.

Recent studies indicate that hunting and other wildlife-associated recreation bring more than $1 billion to New Mexico's economy, including $127 million from outfitting and guiding businesses.

What those numbers boil down to is the majority of that income comes from imported hunters. They come from every corner of the country wearing and owning every thing Cabela's has to offer.

They ride around in a big diesel truck hoping something with horns will jump out in the road before it gets dark.

They will pay $2,500 a gun to hunt in places game is so scare that the landowner does his hunting at the neighbors.

Small towns in the heart of hunting country offer free chili suppers or free breakfast for hunters.

One guy reported it cost him about $200 in gas to go around to all the little towns and eat their food. He isn't a hunter, just an eater.

Signs will be posted "45 miles to the next ammo store" and if doesn't say ammo it says "beer."

While I mock the current state of the sport of hunting, it is not foreign to me and mine. I come from a long line of meat hunters who indeed hunted first for family sustenance and later as a family sport and somewhat a right of passage to manhood for my brothers.

The "locals" just gear up, go kill something, bring it home, skin it out, cut it up and know they have winter meat in the freezer. While they have plenty of fun doing it, it is more a way of life than an epiphany for them.

I have a son who wore his first camouflage as a toddler. He is now 13 years old and the lure of hunting has only matched his growing size. He is a crooked-stick hunter (archery), as well as rifle, and is learning to do a little winter varmint trapping on the side.

The discovery of marketed "scents" to disguise his "people" smell while sitting in an hunting blind was an exciting find for him. Somehow, the idea of wearing elk urine scent on his clothing was completely entertaining to him at an age where he finds that anything gross is hysterically funny.

Like those that have come before him, he lives for the next hunt and the next hunting camp which is apparently as fun as the hunt itself.

"Look Mom, the new Cabela's catalog just came in the mail."

© Julie Carter 2006


Protecting Property Rights in a Landslide

Besides Democrats, and anyone hoping for gridlock in Washington, the big midterm winners were homeowners in the nine states that passed initiatives protecting property rights and reigning in government's power to take homes and businesses. These initiatives were sparked by the Supreme Court's controversial ruling in the Kelo vs. New London decision last summer, which gave the government a green light to use eminent domain to take private property and turn it over to developers for "economic development" purposes. Most Americans were rightfully incensed at the notion that government could arbitrarily evict people from their homes, businesses, and churches simply because it could generate more local tax revenue if these properties were redeveloped as condos, offices, and hotels. Traditionally, eminent domain was only used to acquire private land for clearly defined public uses—such as roads, parks, and public buildings—but Kelo opened the door for government to condemn property for almost anything that it could argue had a public "benefit." The backlash was immediate. In the year since the Kelo ruling, over two dozen states passed legislation to curb eminent domain abuse, and on Tuesday, voters passed a variety of measures intended to do the same thing. An overwhelming majority of voters in Florida, Georgia, Michigan, New Hampshire, and South Carolina approved constitutional amendments that forbid the use of eminent domain to transfer land from one private party to another for economic development purposes, as did Louisiana voters last month. Similar voter-initiated constitutional amendments passed in both North Dakota and Nevada, though Nevadans will need to pass the same amendment in 2008 for it to take effect. Of all states, voters in Oregon have taken one of the strongest stands in recent years to protect their property rights. Measure 39, a statutory initiative that reigns in eminent domain abuse, passed yesterday by more than a two-thirds margin. Moreover, Measure 39 followed on the heels of voters' passage of Measure 37 in 2004, which was designed to protect Oregonians from "regulatory takings," a far more pervasive threat to private property rights than eminent domain abuse....