Chesterfield ordinance on bow and arrows deferred
Published: November 19, 2009
Updated: November 19, 2009
RICHMOND, Va. -- Chesterfield County supervisors last night unanimously agreed to wait three months before voting on an ordinance prohibiting the use of a bow and arrow within 600 feet of a home.
The issue arose in response to complaints from Salisbury residents in the Midlothian area concerned that bow hunters were hunting too close to homes where children were playing.
Currently, property owners are not allowed to shoot arrows onto other people's property. The use of a firearm is prohibited within 600 feet of a home.
Of the dozens who spoke at last night's Board of Supervisors meeting, most vehemently opposed the change; they said bow hunting is needed to thin the county's growing deer population. Deer have adapted to suburban life, become tame and are living in and near neighborhoods for easy food, they said.
"This ordinance, as it's penned right now, would hamstring the ability for us to control and manage the deer growth in Chesterfield County, and it's already exploding in the Midlothian District," said Kevin Carroll, a Chesterfield resident representing the Virginia Deer Hunters Association.
In fact, at least one Salisbury homeowner hired a bow hunter to kill deer on his property, said Ed Malloy, vice president of the Salisbury Homeowners' Association.
Many speakers said the deer are causing auto accidents. The county has had 1,465 deer-related accidents since 2004, said Carroll, who is also a county police officer.
Jennifer Martin Lemler of Midlothian said she supported the ordinance because of the potential dangers posed by the high-powered weapons.
"Not to be melodramatic, they can bring down a grizzly bear," she said. "They have absolutely no business in the close quarters of a residential neighborhood. In my neighborhood, kids run and play in the yards and the woods that border the yards, as it should be. I don't want to put blaze orange on them in order to go out in the backyard."
The restriction also would apply to shooting arrows near businesses, public buildings and gatherings.
Carroll said the ordinance would not allow Boy Scouts to practice with bows in their backyards.
"And we're not talking about just the people in Salisbury that this would affect," he added. "This is a countywide issue if you make this change."
Supervisor A.S. "Art" Warren said more time to consider the proposal is necessary.
"Given all the information that we've gleaned . . . personally, I'd like the time to adequately digest it before taking any action," he said. "I think there are property rights involved."
Contact Wesley P. Hester at (804) 649-6976 or
.
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
Rockwood Park currently has a well maintained 12 target outdoor archery course. It is open year round dawn to dusk, free of charge. Bring your own equipment. For beginner level archery lessons, call Kristi, park naturalist, at 804-310-7964. Rockwood Park is located at 3401 Courthouse Road, Chesterfield, VA 23236.
Comincents you’ve obviously never shot a bow let alone paid $10 + for an arrow. Sorry but anyone that buys a few wants them back and doesn’t take low percentage shots. I’m on my third deer with the same arrow and I shoot the fastest crossbow in production. It didn’t go anywhere near 100 yards on the last shot and I was on the ground. I’ve shot bows for years, shot tournaments at 3D targets and I hate to tell you they don’t go off into space and go any distance.
They have a archery range in Newport News City Park and they don’t close down the park for a shoot.
I hunt another controlled hunt too. All the hunters have to put in permanent ink their last name and last 4 digits of their SS number on their arrow. No problems on who’s arrow it is. Caught hunting with an arrow with no info and you’re out of the game and fined. Always a way to weed out problem people. Make a permit and get the hunters name and assign them a unique number to go on their arrows. You’ll weed out 99% of the riff raff because idiots don’t want to be identified. You have control and personal info on who’s shooting. The real hunters will police themselves if you allow any kind of program to be put in place.
Will any method or action prevent a problem or accident? No but when the chances are extremely low one plays the odds. We do it driving, flying in a plane and just about anything else that someone can die doing. I can tell you more people will die in swimming pools in Richmond in one summer than are injured in 5 years from bow hunting. So do we close all the pools? No life is a chance and you can’t go around banning everything because something bad might happen.
But I think it’s not really about injuries. It’s about something else and they’re using the danger aspect to accomplish their real agenda.
Posted by Richard Knoggin on November 21, 2009 at 4:59 am
again, cominscents you are confusing your passion with facts.
I would write more but it’s 5am and I am leaving to go hunting
Really? I offer nothing but facts, so I assime your answer is tongue in cheek. The statistics I share are from the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. I beleive there is a good arguement for either side in this, and most other issues. The realities are that someday, someone, will be killed by a bowhunter in a neighborhood. It may not be Salibury and it may not be for twenty years. Or it could be tomorrow. Statistics are much more reliable than hyperbole. The same applies that a bowhunter will save a life someday. I simply suggest that nobody knows the numbers. But statistically, both will happen. Just as it is statistically predicted by safety engineers how many people will die on a major construction project. My point is simple, people can throw all kinds of “info” out there that is, as you call it, simply passion speaking. The facts are there. A bow hunter can’t keep his arrows off adjoing properties. If you dispute this why not suggest a substantial fine for any arrow found off the hunters property? How about an amount equal to the value of a human life (1,000,000?). That way the hunters risk is more equal to the unsuspecting neighbors. Would you support such an amendment. And if not, Why not? Because there is a very real but denied risk that the arrow will occasionaly go where it wasn’t supposed to. It’s called putting your money where your mouth is.
again, cominscents you are confusing your passion with facts.
I would write more but it’s 5am and I am leaving to go hunting.
So many hunters keep talking about arrows not travelling far because, as any bowhunter knows, they never shoot anything over 30 yds. First that is pure_____. Second, does the arrow just drop to the ground next to the deer it missed? The distance to your target does not determine the distance an arrow travels, and you know that. Or do you never miss. Yeah right. The arrow will continue to sail until it hits a solid object, the ground, a tree, a house, a… And please don’t tell me bow hunters only hunt from up in a tree. That is simply not true. The technique is necessary when hunting in deep woods because rural deer are very alert and you simply can’t sneek up close enough to get a shot with a bow. The tame deer in Salisbury simply do not run when they spot an individual. There will certinly be the yahoo sitting on his back porch, drinking a beer, and, “well darned if that deer didn’t just walk right up to me”. Honestly now, tell me it ain’t so. If hunters want the public image to change then support law enforcement efforts to stop the bubba’s out there. THat includes higher licensing fees to pay for them. And much higher penalties for those caught. And turn them in. Almost every hunter out ther knows someone that trespasses while hunting, baits the deer, huntsts after dark, drinks alcohol while hunting, sends their dogs across property without permission to flush deer… If you want your right to hunt to stay on the books you better remind yourselves why it was passed. Because ther is a large anti hunting crowd that is only getting bigger. And self policing is the only way to make a difference. I accept hunting as your right. Don’t change my mind.
Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries estimates million deer in Virginia. Two hundred and fifty thousand are killed by hunters every year. Thirty seven thousand are killed by cars every year. Over 25% killed and this does not effect the population. If you had a problem with deer in New York City then eradicating the deer would help as there are no deer nearby to replace them. Suburbs are between Urb’s and rural areas. Unless you declare war and annihilate everything in sight and then some. Just how many hunters would be necessary?, any impact from bowhunting will be minimal and short lived. Those that point to the low number of bowhunting accidents would have to rethink their arguement if the typical traditionalist bowhunter stopped trying to get away from homes and instead started to seek out hunting oppurtunities in neighborhoods. Of course by then the hapless backyard birdwatcher is dead. It’s a cost benefit and risk analysis that must consider property rights. Will hunting near neighborhoods save more lives from vehicle accidents than hunting accidents cost? Will it reduce the number of injuries from vehicle accidents or increase hunting accidents. There statistically and certainly will be a change in some or all of these numbers. And nobody knows the answer. Nobody. So then we have property rights. Should I be able to hunt on my own subdivision property? That seems fair. Or allow someone to hunt on my own property. That seems fair too. Can I keep my arrows from leaving my property? No. Should my neighbor have to put up with wearing blaze orange? No. Should I have the right to force the risks, no matter how small, on my neighbor? No. Without hard evidence that neighborhood bowhunting will benefit society so much that the property rights of a property owner should be overrode, no bowhunting should be allowed by the John “Doe” hunter. I am frankly amazed that so many hunters, a group (that includes myself) that is strongly behind protecting individual rights, would not see the hypocrisy in promoting something that so clearly ignores the individual rights of those opposed. So there is the answer. Bowhunters should be specially licensed and must have the written permission of all property owners within the 600 ft range. It’s called compromise.
There used to be an archery range at Rockwood Park. Alot of people go here to exercise and have fun. Has anyone been hit with an arrow yet? Well, I haven’t been there in more than 20 years, so I don’t know what kind of people do frequent the place. Would this new law ban bows from all venues???
Thank you Dingo!
I just have to post here- I am sure that the majority of hunters are mature, responsible people but there are enough of the idiotic kind to screw it up for everyone else. So when you look around and spot the idiotic kind, you have to ask yourself- “Would I want this clown hunting with a bow around MY house?“ I think not. I live in a rural are of Henrico on a 3.5 acre lot and I was walking around the other day and low and behold- there was a crossbow bolt embedded into the FRONT OF MY HOUSE!! Where my wife, my four month old son and I live. Four feet away from the window to the room my Mother sleeps in when she stays with us. The police and the game warden both told me that the angle proves without a doubt that it was shot from the road or the 86 year old man’s house across the road. So that tells me that some IDIOT was out spotlighting one night, shot at a deer and missed and drove off. The other neighbor next door walked out one morning and there were two dead deer laying in her front yard, left by IDIOTS. We had one rotting on my property last week and another one this week—IDIOTS. These clowns are not the types of people that should be hunting anywhere, much less in a neighborhood. They clearly have no responsibility, no consideration for other’s lives or property and are lacking in maturity yet the people in power feel obligated to protect their percieved God given right to hunt wherever they choose. It’s almost as though they are scared to death to pass any kind of law that can be looked at as anti-hunting. One solution I offer to this problem is to create a special county permit that is expensive to obtain and only people with these can hunt on land where there are neighborhoods or within a certain distance to a house. With severe fines for not having one. Then, if you have a deer causing property damage you or the neighborhood can still pay someone to come in and thin the deer. County makes money, problem deer can be eliminated in ares where they aren’t wanted by responsible people and the idiots will move on becasue idiots don’t like expensive permits and they really don’t like expensive fines. They’ll probably end up at my house—TAKE COVER HONEY!!!
Rich-
And that is where the ordinance needs to seperate the 2 sports, archery and bowhunting. I would be in favor of no hunting within 150’ of residential dwelling, while allowing archery practice (with fieldtips).
Post a Comment(Requires free registration)
- Please avoid offensive, vulgar, or hateful language.
- Respect others.
- Use the "Flag Comment" link when necessary.
- See the Terms and Conditions for details.


Advertisement