Hunting and fishing amendment passes

Tuesday, November 2, 2010 at 11:04pm

Tennesseans have voted to amend the state constitution to add a provision citing a right to hunt and fish.

It passed by roughly four-to-one. 

Despite a licensing system in place to permit hunting and fishing, supporters said the amendment was needed to protect that right from being outlawed. The permitting process will remain in effect.

Tracy Reiman, executive vice president of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, sent a letter to the chancellor of the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga calling fishing “blood sport that causes immense physical and psychological suffering … .”

The push for the amendment included endorsements from fishing heavyweight Bill Dance and former University of Tennessee football coach Phillip Fulmer.

Filed under: City News

10 Comments on this post:

By: HighlyAnnoyed on 11/3/10 at 7:27

How retarded.

By: larro12 on 11/3/10 at 7:41

u know we needed this for our rights because we have lost alot of things to the socalled socilist systum that we have now thay say we dont but take a close look at all the things that have been done and u will see it there in front of ur face

By: localboy on 11/3/10 at 8:13


By: EquinsuOcha on 11/3/10 at 8:15

Retarded is PETA calling fishing a blood sport.......Retarded is this not passing unanimously.....

By: RTungsten on 11/3/10 at 8:15

larro12: I stopped counting at 6 grammatical errors.

Now, when can I start fishing without a permit?

By: tjos1 on 11/3/10 at 8:42


By: Cookie47 on 11/3/10 at 9:11


I assume you're being sarcastic but surely you don't think the state is going to stop taxing us by way of a license fee simply because hunting and fishing is now a constitutional right in Tennessee. Do you? (The question is rhetorical.}

Do these idiots from PETA simply have no lives? Please tell them to do something for all us meat eaters like, oh, lets say, take a long walk off a short pier.


By: PromosFriend on 11/3/10 at 9:51

Dear editor:

Please send Mr. Nix back to school for remedial math (smile). If voters voted for a measure at at "four to one" ratio as Mr. Nix wrote, then the hunting/fishing amendment would have only had 80% of the vote. At a score of 1,287,418 for and only 147,332 against passage, it was closer to a 9 to 1 split in favor. So instead of as many as 20% of those voting against passage, it was really only a measley 11% (rounded). While the diffence may be small by City Paper standards, as a meat eater and supporter of hunting rights I do not want to give the PETA nut cases any more credibility than they deserve.


By: govskeptic on 11/4/10 at 5:03

Great, now let's ask this great body to put a real Constitutional
issue on the ballot. The popular election of the State's Attorney
General! That's a real issue that could and should improve the
lives of all our citizens and is 50 years over due. The way we
select and elect Judges in this state could also be improved!

By: cval on 11/4/10 at 9:04

larro12- Has the "socalled socilist systum" (as you say), prevented you from getting an education?