The District of Houston is to get its first look next month at the wording of a bylaw amendment which would prohibit hunting within the District of Houston’s boundaries.
The authorization came at the March 3 council meeting, continuing consideration of the ban which emerged last fall following complaints from citizens about weapons discharges on private property, trespassing by hunters and concerns for public safety.
A 2014 bylaw, the one subject to amendment, allows hunting on properties larger than two hectares or five acres.
A first attempt at an amendment to remove that provision from the 2014 bylaw was defeated last December with council then asking staffers to review bylaws in effect in other jurisdictions.
Staffers also conducted a public consultation campaign consisting of a public meeting Feb. 25, an online survey and social media opinion gathering.
Just over 41 per cent of those responding to the District’s online survey agreed that discharging weapons for the purpose of hunting should not be allowed within municipal boundaries.
Nearly 20 per cent felt that hunting should be allowed on parcels of more than two hectares or five acres, consistent with the current bylaw provision.
And just over 23 per cent wanted the bylaw updated to allow hunting on parcels larger than 10 acres.
One hunter and trapper in commenting through the survey backed a hunting ban, saying “shooting hunting rifles in town limits is dangerous, no question. If it is allowed someone within the Houston District must be held accountable if a person, pet or dwelling is hit with a bullet.”
A farmer cited people roaming around their property each fall.
“We have small children on our place, and they love to roam and explore as kids do. Imagine some hunter thinking it’s an animal and shooting in that direction. The results would be devestating,” that person said.
A bow hunter felt that sport should be allowed on private property and also advocated for an area for the sport to be established within municipal boundaries.
That was in reference to the current bylaw’s wording which states “no person shall discharge a firearm, longbow, crossbow or weapon within the boundaries of the District of Houston.”
Another person thought hunting should be allowed on properties larger than 10 acres.
“We have too many deer and way too many bears. You just have to be responsible about the use of your firearm,” that person continued.
A summary of comments from the Feb. 25 public meeting presented to council last week indicated two themes – those who supported an outright ban on hunting and those who supported personal freedoms on private property.
“Conversation around conservation methods, the numbers of wildlife within town limits, and human-wildlife interactions also became a topic for debate, which may suggest that the public is interested in more regulation regarding conservation and wildlife management efforts,” the summary added.
Some people at the meeting indicated they relied on hunters to control the deer population.
Others pointed out that the current 2014 bylaw prohibits slingshots and air soft guns but does allow hunting on parcels of more than five acres.
Conservation Officer Flint Knibbs, from Smithers, was also at the March 3 meeting to answer any questions from council members.
He pointed out that the Wildlife Act prohibits the discharge of a firearm within 100 metres of a building that is occupied by humans or wildlife, regardless of whether the building is within a local government boundary or not.
The prohibition is even wider on a provincial highway such as Hwy16, 400 metres on each side or 800 metres in all, he said.
“That’s for safety considering the distance a single rifle projectile can travel,” Knibbs said in a subsequent interview.
Knibbs was also asked at the meeting about the idea of allowing hunting on larger parcels only as is the case now.
“My response was that for enforcement, it’s better to have a complete prohibition,” he said.
District of Houston chief administrative officer Gerald Pinchbeck said that staffers are now working on wording of the proposed amendment and anticipates it will be ready for council consideration at its April 21 regular council meeting.
