Quantcast

FLORIDA RECORD

Friday, May 10, 2024

Settlement talks under way in lawsuit seeking to roll back hunting on Florida refuges

Lawsuits
Fishing pexels pixabay

Pexels.com / Pixabay

A federal lawsuit that seeks to reduce currently allowed hunting and fishing opportunities at national wildlife refuges, including two in Florida, has been put on hold by a Montana district court.

The lawsuit filed by the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) last November argues that a federal rule adopted in 2020 to expand hunting and fishing at refuges such as Everglades and St. Marks in Florida hurts photographers’ ability to capture images of wildlife. In addition, bullets fired by hunters increases the risk that birds will be poisoned, according to the complaint.

“The case is currently stayed so we can engage in settlement discussions,” Camila Cossio, a staff attorney for the CBD, told the Florida Record in an email.

The original complaint challenged the expansion of hunting and fishing on 2.3 million acres that make up 147 wildlife refuges and fish hatcheries. Nationwide, rare animals such as grizzly bears, jaguars, ocelots and whooping cranes could be harmed by the use of lead ammunition and tackle, as well as increased human traffic and noise, according to the lawsuit.

The new rule will allow thousands of more acres to be added for hunting at the St. Marks refuge in Wakulla, Jefferson and Taylor counties. Game hunting there will include animals such as white-tailed deer, turkey, squirrel, rabbit, raccoon and feral hogs, according to the lawsuit.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has not adequately considered the effects of the new rule on fish and animals at St. Marks or the Everglades, the complaint states. 

“The service did not consider that Audubon’s crested caracara could feed on a hunter-killed carcass that has been contaminated with lead or that (the crested caracara and the wood stork) could be exposed to lead from tackle if they feed near the freshwater marshes where fishing occurs,” the lawsuit says.

Hunting groups have expressed support for the new rule in court briefs, arguing that hunters and anglers merit access to the public lands because they support the management of such lands through license fees.

More News