Article Comment 

John Imes: Concerned about stray arrows

 

 

I was walking the Riverwalk recently. Leaving the paved way to walk the path that follows the raised ridge on the side, I was surprised to see a fellow in camouflage walking along with his compound bow. He said he was hunting, and when I said I thought he shouldn''t be hunting so close to the Riverwalk, he said that Corps of Engineers owned the land and that bow hunting is allowed for those who have a certain permit. He knew of only a couple other people who hunted there. He also said that as he knew the difference between a person and a deer, there''s no danger. Still, everyone I''ve mentioned this to has been uncomfortable with this set-up, as am I. 

 

We are very fortunate to have the Riverwalk - where we can move and breathe easy and enjoy nature. I would like to see the land around there preserved for humans and wildlife to roam freely and without fear of stray arrows. 

 

I''ve written the local office of the Corps of Engineers and encourage you to do likewise, if you share my concerns. Their office is at 3606 W. Plymouth Road, Columbus, MS 39701.

 

 

printer friendly version | back to top

 

Reader Comments

Article Comment sutter commented at 12/20/2010 2:44:00 PM:

i would also see the need to contact the mississippi game and fish commission....perhaps the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing! so he does know the difference between a deer and a human! that makes a lot of sense if one were to miss!

 

Article Comment brother r. commented at 12/20/2010 6:05:00 PM:

The Corps of Engineers is a Federally Run Program. So you will have to go through the Federal Government to see any results. You may want to start by writing to our new friend in Congress, Alan Nunnellee, and see what the options are. Such as, is the Riverwalk legally there? or there by permission. The city or the county may have to buy the property from the corp, but getting it deemed a sanctuary as suggested would be the best bet, and will be cheaper in the long run,and take time. There will be a need for a legal rep on behalf of the people seeking this new status. Then the property will be propably be turned over to the U.S. Parks and Recreation Dept., and maintained by the Corp. There may even be a petition required, if going through Congress. US Congressman, Alan Nunnellee, would be a good place to start.

 

Article Comment hope commented at 12/20/2010 8:52:00 PM:

And then there are sound shooters.

 

Article Comment raider commented at 12/21/2010 3:39:00 PM:

If the hunters were there first, why should they have to leave the area because a different group of folks now want to walk on the Riverwalk. Maybe they should put up signs that advises walkers to "use caution, hunters in the area". I don't hunt but it irritates me when one group of folks elbows thier way into an area and then demands that the original group leave. All of a sudden, the new group takes all the rights and the original group is outcast. Just bs if you ask me.

 

Article Comment zenreaper commented at 12/22/2010 8:45:00 PM:

The hunters are there from the end of September into January. Maybe they could SHARE it, like no hikers during hunting season (3 months out fo the year). But the bottom line is that this country is losing 10,000 hunters a year to disinterest in the sport. And while many tree huggers may stand up and cheer about that, they will be the first to complain about deer starving to death, running out on the highway, and generally causing a nuisance to the expanding communities.

See, they don't want bobcats or cougars roaming around, and they don't want hunters roaming around, well who will thin out the deer population?

 

Article Comment bb255 commented at 1/7/2011 2:38:00 PM:

Well, let's get the rest of the story now, the esteemed walker at Riverwalk, was actually off the walkway and in an area that requires a permit. I guess he "conveniently" forgot that part of his tirade against the hunter. Oh yes, he did go off on that bowhunter that was in the area legally and did I mention that he was in a place that he (the walker) did not belong in without the proper permit??? Please people let's not forget that there is always a second side of the story.

 

back to top

 

 

 

 

Follow Us:

Follow Us on Facebook

Follow Us on Twitter

Follow Us via Instagram

Follow Us via Email