Taking aim

County commissioners ban bow and arrow use in Sugarloaf community

0

Is a bow and arrow a firearm? Yes, according to the Boulder County Commissioners, but only on Sugarloaf Mountain.

The commissioners voted unanimously on Monday, March 9, to adopt a resolution that will ban the use of bows and arrows in a small community up on Sugarloaf Mountain. The resolution “clarifies” a 1980 resolution that established a firearms discharge district in the area that prohibited the use of firearms in the 4-and-a-halfsquare-mile area of private and public land in the area.

However, it was unclear in 1980 if the county had the ability to enforce firearm restrictions on federal land. In 2011, as chronicled in Boulder Weekly, two Sugarloaf residents convinced the county to start enforcing the firearms ban, but bow hunters were still allowed into the land to hunt.

That’s because there was ambiguity concerning the definition of a firearm. The original statute defines a firearm as “any pistol, revolver, rifle or other weapon of any description from which any shot, projectile or bullet may be discharged.”

Does that mean a bow as a “weapon” and an arrow is a “projectile”? When an arrow is shot from a bow, is it “discharged”? The county commissioners say yes.

In response to concerns from several speakers at the hearing, Commissioner Elise Jones said the ruling will not set a precedent that a bow and arrow is a firearm, adding that it’s a “relatively small issue,” that pertains explicitly to the discharge district on Sugarloaf. Be that as it may, the ruling does have farther-reaching effects, according to testimony from a state wildlife official, residents and hunters.

The first issue is why there was such a fuss to combat bow hunting in the area to begin with. Residents say there were safety and quality of life issues caused directly by bow hunting in the area, including stray arrows coming near homes and wounded animals dying on doorsteps.

“Bow hunters, according to what I’ve researched and what I’ve been told by my friends who are bow hunters, often miss their marks,” said Sugarloaf resident Marcia Barber at the meeting. “We have found many, many arrows around our home and on our private property. They’re like razor blades.”

“The concern is that these are projectiles; these are dangerous,” said Alex Barber, a Sugarloaf resident, at the meeting. “Other people have found arrows. One of the arrows I think was found within 25 yards of a child’s swing in their backyard.”

Susan Marath Horner, an attorney for the residents, said the issue should be seen not as a personal battle between two groups, but a broader issue of “health and safety.”

“If you’re not a hunter and a large, beautiful animal has died on your land, it’s a very upsetting thing,” she said at the meeting. “It’s not about hunters versus non hunters in the broader sense. It really is about a very small area that has unusual problems due to the interspersing of private property and public property. It’s an usual configuration up there.”

It’s unclear, residents say, because not all property owners mark boundaries where public and private land is delineated. But Kristin Cannon, district wildlife manager for Colorado Parks and Wildlife, says those in the Sugarloaf community who brought this issue to the commissioners are not looking at the broader context.

“I feel that the real issue here, especially when it comes to archery hunters, is that some residents do not want to see or be exposed to hunting near where they live,” Cannon said at the meeting. “There is no evidence to suggest that hunting in the area threatens human safety. There are those that dis agree with that conclusion, but I contend that their point of reference is that hunting is inherently dangerous and that is despite national data to the contrary. In fact, statistics suggest hunting is one of the safest outdoor pursuits.”

Harris Glow, a Sugarloaf resident for 40 years and a veteran Sugarloaf firefighter, said deer have actually proven to be more dangerous than hunters in the area.

“I recently retired from the fire department after 30 years of service,” Harris said at the meeting. “I have never responded to an incident involving a bow and arrow, or anybody hurt with an arrow. I have responded to a lot of accidents of people hitting deer, people on bikes hitting deer and getting hurt. I’ve also had deer die in my yard almost every year, but they were hit by cars, not by bow and arrows, so maybe we ought to amend this thing to do away with cars as well.”

Cannon says the majority of the deer population lives at the elevation of the housing divisions on Sugarloaf Mountain. Controlling that population is important to prevent the accidents Harris mentioned, but also to promote the health of the deer herd, she says. Though state officials will still be able to discharge weapons in the area, hunting from citizens has long been a way the state has controlled deer populations. Cannon also said she’s worried the area will be expanded, which will further make it difficult to manage wildlife.

“I would rather see these deer utilized for food than causing car accidents or suffering and ultimately dying of chronic wasting disease, other disease or starvation,” Cannon said. “We can still manage deer without the relatively small area designated by 80-52 [the Sugarloaf region], but the expansion of 80-52 to other areas in Boulder County will be detrimental to our ability to manage wildlife, and that there is every reason to expect that these requests will be coming next.

“By making what seems like a simple clarification, I worry you are setting a precedent that any Boulder County resident with enough time and money may shut down any activity they do not approve of or agree with on public land.”

To that end, Sugarloaf resident Anita Moss said when she initially filed a petition with 87 signatures on it a little over two years ago (and for which the hearing on Monday was the result), the petition asked for the Sugarloaf region to be expanded. Moss added that she still plans on bringing the expansion of the discharge district before the commissioners.

The increased development of Boulder County has made it ever harder to control deer populations, Cannon said, and to hunt on public land, said Tim Brass, a local hunter.

“These big game animals are not pets, they’re wildlife,” Brass said at the meeting. “While I understand these folks’ desire to live near them, as there becomes more and more development in Boulder County and elsewhere, we’re getting pinched with development.”

What’s clear is that it is an immensely personal issue. Many homeowners don’t like the safety risk caused by wayward arrows and animals dying in their yards; hunters and wildlife control staff say their actions are as safe as possible, and they want access to public land. The conflict has caused many a kerfuffle. Every person who has bow hunted in the area who spoke at the meeting spoke of harassment from Sugarloaf residents who didn’t want them accessing the public land to hunt.

“I too have been harassed up there,” said Louisville resident and hunter Mike Etchery at the meeting. “I’ve been up there just walking around, and I’ve been … followed, videoed, photographed, license plate written down, honked at. I think that’s infringing upon my rights.”

The commissioners, before voting to pass the bow ban, admonished those who antagonized hunters, and made it clear they did not want to ban hunting.

“Our intention is not to eliminate hunting in Boulder County,” said Commissioner Deb Gardner. “We’re certainly not in favor of that. We’re not talking about anything in any other area besides 80-52 [Sugarloaf ], where our intention is to minimize the conflict that is happening in that area.”

Commissioner Cindy Domenico “reluctantly” seconded the motion, saying she is a target bow hunter herself, and the resolution is just meant “to clarify what the intent was at the time that [the original] resolution came forward,” in 1980.

Respond: letters@boulderweekly.com