There is still a problem when this much time and resources had to be wasted on seriously considering a blanket ban because of a single matter between specific residents, which would've been best resolved within the community.
This should never have even gotten to the point of the municipality having to meet on it.
Be aware that we tried for two years to resolve this in our small area. No one wanted to involve the municipality, but unfortunately the MNR, Parks Canada, OPG, Peterborough Utilities, OFAH, and 15 other associations refused and we were told that only the municipality can regulate discharge distances from houses. Also one of our first contacts was OFAH who completely dismissed our request for their help. Shooting in a settlement area where houses are 20 feet apart is not reasonable and I have had hunter friends visit here who are shocked when they see where this person is shooting. I’ve invited Delta Waterfowl to come take a look and so far nothing. Quite disappointing.
Right, so going back to my point about a community solution being optimal.
"tried for two years"
Then it's not really that much of a safety issue, but just a noise disturbance. Any actually unsafe discharge would be handled by the police. Maybe the "can't shoot in the direction of a road" rule might apply, but if it's over water then probably not. It's just a reality that some folks hunt. It's part of our heritage. As long as they do it responsibly. You are actually a perfect candidate for the campaign to allow licensed suppressors in Canada, to help with hearing safety and noise disturbances.
Much simpler than trying to buy up all the land you can in order to have nice a quiet place for yourself.
This is not a noise issue. Would you feel comfortable sitting outside with your kids if you had someone shooting 20 feet from your house. How about on both sides of your house? We are basically in a subdivision when houses are this close together. I know a lot of hunters and they all believe that you have to be at least 100 metres from a dwelling. This has never been a hunting zone so it’s not suppressing anyone. I sold a canoe to a hunter from Bradford yesterday and when he saw where we live, he said this person shooting is what gives responsible hunters a bad name. We can agree to disagree on what is considered a responsible discharge distance.
"This is not a noise issue. Would you feel comfortable"
So it's a comfort issue? I still don't see the valid safety concern. I'm a hunter and live close to hunters who shoot regularly and I trust them because we're good neighbours to each other. Again, going back to the point about the community-based solution...
"they all believe that you have to be at least 100 metres"
So if that's the case then whichever authority defines that limit can be contacted to report the violation.
"This has never been a hunting zone"
Is hunting prohibited where you live? What's the point of this comment?
they all believe that you have to be at least 100 metres"
So if that's the case then whichever authority defines that limit can be contacted to report the violation.
The municipality is the only one that can put in regulations for discharge beside dwellings. We have seven municipalities in Northumberland and five of them have limits either no discharge zones in settlement areas or bylaws. If there’s no bylaw or NDZ then there’s no violation unless the person points the gun at you.
This has never been a hunting zone"
Is hunting prohibited where you live? What's the point of this comment?
You can hunt all around us, but no one hunts here because it’s all rock plus the houses are too close together. From speaking to local hunters born here none of them have ever heard of anyone shooting between lock 13 and 14. My hunting neighbour on the other side of the road for the last 40 years told me it’s a “sanctuary” and has never seen anyone shoot here. Responsible hunters avoid shooting close to houses. We have lots of hunting on the other side of the bridge and all around us because responsible hunters want to stay far from houses.
I don’t know what you mean by a community-based solution. For me that would be going to talk to this person, but the people that promised to do that have not done it or expressed any interest in doing so. He also knows that my neighbours and I do not want shooting close to our houses.
Anyway, it’s OK to disagree. Since I am corresponding with you it would be nice to know your name and not just woodlands65. It’s easy for people to argue when they are anonymous.
"The municipality is the only one that can put in regulations for discharge beside dwellings."
I was talking about the anecdotal reports of the limit being 100m. If that's true, then you might have a case. Otherwise, if there's no clear safety risk, I don't see the issue as being anything other than comfort.
"but no one hunts here because it’s all rock plus the houses are too close together"
Seems like some folks do indeed hunt there, and have been doing it for at least 2 years, per your own report. So again, I fail to see the safety concern.
"For me that would be going to talk to this person, but the people that promised to do that"
There's your issue. What "people"? This is your community. Did you speak to "this person"?
Good decision on the firearms.
And I think they are headed in the right direction on short-term rentals too, but it will take time to get there
Welcome to communist Canada. Where you "own" property but you're fucked if you think you can do what you want with it.
Infringement on property ownership and yours rights todo what you please with it.
There is still a problem when this much time and resources had to be wasted on seriously considering a blanket ban because of a single matter between specific residents, which would've been best resolved within the community.
This should never have even gotten to the point of the municipality having to meet on it.
Be aware that we tried for two years to resolve this in our small area. No one wanted to involve the municipality, but unfortunately the MNR, Parks Canada, OPG, Peterborough Utilities, OFAH, and 15 other associations refused and we were told that only the municipality can regulate discharge distances from houses. Also one of our first contacts was OFAH who completely dismissed our request for their help. Shooting in a settlement area where houses are 20 feet apart is not reasonable and I have had hunter friends visit here who are shocked when they see where this person is shooting. I’ve invited Delta Waterfowl to come take a look and so far nothing. Quite disappointing.
"15 other associations"
Right, so going back to my point about a community solution being optimal.
"tried for two years"
Then it's not really that much of a safety issue, but just a noise disturbance. Any actually unsafe discharge would be handled by the police. Maybe the "can't shoot in the direction of a road" rule might apply, but if it's over water then probably not. It's just a reality that some folks hunt. It's part of our heritage. As long as they do it responsibly. You are actually a perfect candidate for the campaign to allow licensed suppressors in Canada, to help with hearing safety and noise disturbances.
Much simpler than trying to buy up all the land you can in order to have nice a quiet place for yourself.
This is not a noise issue. Would you feel comfortable sitting outside with your kids if you had someone shooting 20 feet from your house. How about on both sides of your house? We are basically in a subdivision when houses are this close together. I know a lot of hunters and they all believe that you have to be at least 100 metres from a dwelling. This has never been a hunting zone so it’s not suppressing anyone. I sold a canoe to a hunter from Bradford yesterday and when he saw where we live, he said this person shooting is what gives responsible hunters a bad name. We can agree to disagree on what is considered a responsible discharge distance.
"This is not a noise issue. Would you feel comfortable"
So it's a comfort issue? I still don't see the valid safety concern. I'm a hunter and live close to hunters who shoot regularly and I trust them because we're good neighbours to each other. Again, going back to the point about the community-based solution...
"they all believe that you have to be at least 100 metres"
So if that's the case then whichever authority defines that limit can be contacted to report the violation.
"This has never been a hunting zone"
Is hunting prohibited where you live? What's the point of this comment?
OK, I’ll try and explain.
they all believe that you have to be at least 100 metres"
So if that's the case then whichever authority defines that limit can be contacted to report the violation.
The municipality is the only one that can put in regulations for discharge beside dwellings. We have seven municipalities in Northumberland and five of them have limits either no discharge zones in settlement areas or bylaws. If there’s no bylaw or NDZ then there’s no violation unless the person points the gun at you.
This has never been a hunting zone"
Is hunting prohibited where you live? What's the point of this comment?
You can hunt all around us, but no one hunts here because it’s all rock plus the houses are too close together. From speaking to local hunters born here none of them have ever heard of anyone shooting between lock 13 and 14. My hunting neighbour on the other side of the road for the last 40 years told me it’s a “sanctuary” and has never seen anyone shoot here. Responsible hunters avoid shooting close to houses. We have lots of hunting on the other side of the bridge and all around us because responsible hunters want to stay far from houses.
I don’t know what you mean by a community-based solution. For me that would be going to talk to this person, but the people that promised to do that have not done it or expressed any interest in doing so. He also knows that my neighbours and I do not want shooting close to our houses.
Anyway, it’s OK to disagree. Since I am corresponding with you it would be nice to know your name and not just woodlands65. It’s easy for people to argue when they are anonymous.
"The municipality is the only one that can put in regulations for discharge beside dwellings."
I was talking about the anecdotal reports of the limit being 100m. If that's true, then you might have a case. Otherwise, if there's no clear safety risk, I don't see the issue as being anything other than comfort.
"but no one hunts here because it’s all rock plus the houses are too close together"
Seems like some folks do indeed hunt there, and have been doing it for at least 2 years, per your own report. So again, I fail to see the safety concern.
"For me that would be going to talk to this person, but the people that promised to do that"
There's your issue. What "people"? This is your community. Did you speak to "this person"?