Letter to the editor: End Sunday hunting ban | TribLIVE.com
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: End Sunday hunting ban

Pennsylvania Grange president Wayne Campbell’s op-ed “Keep Sunday hunting ban” (Feb. 23, TribLIVE) is missing existing perspective/data. Yes, hunter numbers will likely decline over time. The Pennsylvania Game Commission agrees culture shifts are significantly to blame.

Campbell ignores the fact that hunters cite lack of free time as the overwhelming reason they stop hunting. The commission’s executive director testified in 2016 that “ … the No. 1 reason that people stop hunting is lack of time. The overwhelming majority of hunting takes place on Saturdays. … For a lot of hunters the only option is Saturday.” His full testimony is worth reading.

The commission has already done the “alternatives” research Campbell asks for. Trust the facts.

The Pennsylvania Grange commonly mentions sharing the outdoors, but wants to exclude hunters on Sundays. Curious. Hunters have always shared state game lands, which are funded by hunting license fees.

It’s time to repeal the last blue law; 47 other states have removed bans. Opponents aren’t citing issues in those states. It’s overzealous to tell citizens what to do on private property. They should append their motto to “In essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, in all things charity except Sunday hunting.”

Ron Grzywacz


TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.