This election season, Friends of the Everglades urges you to join us in voting NO on Amendment 2.
Amendment 2, which claims to protect the right to fish and hunt, isn’t necessary. Those rights are already safeguarded under Florida law. If approved, the amendment would prioritize hunting as the “preferred” method of wildlife management in Florida, undermining science-based habitat conservation. The vague language of the amendment also calls for protecting so-called “traditional” means of hunting and fishing, which could open the door to the reintroduction of banned methods such as gill netting or baiting of bears, with such conflicts left to be settled in court.
Also giving us pause: Amendment 2 is not a citizen-led effort. Rather, it was put on the ballot by the Florida Legislature. Blair Wickstrom, senior editor of Florida Sportsman, put that into context in his upcoming column in the magazine:
“The vast majority of our state representatives are complicit in the degradation of our fishery habitat,” wrote Wickstrom. “That degradation is the single largest threat to quality fishing in our state.”
In other words, we shouldn’t take their spoon-fed constitutional revisions. Wickstrom, who is also a board member at Friends of the Everglades, plans to vote NO on Amendment 2.
Not alarmed yet? Then consider who’s financially backing the amendment. Special interest groups, including U.S. Sugar, have donated tens of thousands of dollars to push this amendment forward. These are the same groups responsible for polluting our waterways, and their support of Amendment 2 should give us all pause.
We support the right to fish and hunt — in fact, some of our closest Friends of the Everglades are avid hunters and anglers. But this amendment opens the door to too many risks.
Together, we can ensure that Florida’s wildlife and habitats are preserved responsibly. Please join us in voting NO on Amendment 2 this November.
