Skip to main content
Report this ad

Rep. James Murphy attacks hunting community on behalf of anti-hunting groups


Rep. James M. Murphy / The Patriot Ledger

Proving yet again that today’s Robber Barons are without a doubt on Beacon Hill doing the dirty work of special interest groups, Representative James Murphy (D) of the 4th Norfolk District has filed two budget amendments #149 and #152 that propose the following:

  • Establish a “Wildlife Rehabilitation Account” within the Inland Fisheries and Game Fund.
  • Divert all proceeds from the sale of the $5.00 Wildland Conservation Stamps to the new account. (This alone totals approximately 1.5 million dollars a year.)
  • Divert one dollar from the sale of every sporting, fishing, trapping and hunting license and deposit it into the new account..
  • Divert contributions and any grant monies from the federal government or other public and private sources and deposit it into the new account. (It is unclear from the language, but this may include all of the federal Pittman-Robertson approximately $4,000,000 a year. See more information about this funding below.)
  • Mandate that the Director of the Division of Fisheries and Wildlife (DFW) distribute the funds in the wildlife rehabilitation account equally to all nonprofit organizations licensed by the DFW that provides wildlife medical treatment, caring, rehabilitation, and releasing of non-game wildlife and endangered species in the commonwealth. These groups include the HSUS and the MSPCA, two organizations that, unlike the Sportsmen and Women of Massachusetts, have worked to destroy professional wildlife management nationally and locally.
  • Amend the laws regarding the use of the Inland Fisheries and Game Fund to include the medical treatment, caring, rehabilitation, and releasing of non-game wildlife and endangered species.

I wrote about the Sportsmen & Women of Massachusetts awhile back as being Massachusetts FIRST and BEST Conservationist and those words still ring true while others seek to literally steal through the legislative process all of the money set aside for Wildlife Management in this state (behind the scene) through no effort of their own. This is an outrage of the highest order.

Put another way if you and your fellow employees decided to deduct $10.00 per week to contribute to a  local charity and give those funds to that charity at the end of a year you would be applauded. Yet at the 11th hour someone in Human Resources then decides to give the money to another charity more to their liking – how would you react? Exactly.

If these anti-conservation groups, who like HSUS lack no funding what-so-ever, want to establish a “Wildlife Rehabilitation Fund” then let them establish a like tax on goods and services as the Sportsmen & Women have to fund such a noble cause or better yet get together with those who already fund these programs to work together to establish such a fund rather than attempting to – yet again - steal these funds.

Today Representative William M. Straus and Representative George N. Peterson, Jr. have filed amendments #27 (to the Division of Fisheries and Wildlife line # 2310-0200) and #28 (to the Wildland acquisition line 2310-0316) to the House FY2011 Budget (H.4599) regarding The Division of Fisheries and Wildlife Land Stamp funding. These amendments would restore the current funding and prevent the half-million dollar proposed cut.

However you need to do your part by calling the office of your local House Representative and encourage them to stop this attempt of outright theft.

For more info: 

To find your legislators to contact:

House Budget Site:

For a history of DFW and acquisitions in the public interest:

Wildland Acquisition Account law:


  • Thomas 5 years ago

    So, a wildlife rehabilitation fund is "dirty work" and "anti-conservation." Wow, talk about doublespeak. I would think that organizations that do good work in ensuring wildlife can thrive in the Bay state would be a good thing. I didn't know it was an anti-hunting conspiracy.

  • Ron Bokleman 5 years ago


    You miss the point. Theft is theft. Period. Full stop. While the treatment and rehabilitation of animals may well be a worthwhile endeavor, it was clearly not the appropriate use of these funds.

  • George Sommers Boston PETS Birds&Fish Examiner 5 years ago

    First of all, the "special interest groups" are the gun owners. A huge majority of citizens in Massachusetts do not hunt. Leaving aside the question of whether maiming and killing animals with high tech equipment can even be technically characterized as a "sport"; I see nothing that can even remotely be considered anti-hunting in the Representative's proposal. You're setting your own cause back with your paranoid spin- keep up the good work!

  • Ron Bokleman 5 years ago


    Your ignorance of this issue just clearly shines through in your comment. If and when you ever do decide to become educated let me know and then perhaps we could conduct a fact based discussion.

  • buck 5 years ago

    Hey, what do you expect from a state that kept electing Teddy and J. Kerry?

  • JR Bailey Casper Christianity Examiner 5 years ago

    George Sommers,

    Your ignorance concerning hunting sir, abounds!

    You no doubt take the insane and INHUMANE position which does PETA, concerning game animal populations: ban hunting and let the large game animal (deer, elk, moose, antelope, bear, etc) STARVE to death, because starvation is a 'natural process'.

    Allow me to say sir, that so is predation amongst humans: how about we pull all the cops from your neighborhood, work place, and places you frequent, and let you fend for yourself amongst the denizens of the 'concrete jungle'?

    Lastly, allow me to point out that nearly all the mass murder sprees during the last 20 years have occurred in the 'paradise' of anti-gunners like yourself, 'Gun Free Zones'.

    The only one with guns were the murderers/thugs and the cops when the cops finally arrived: AFTER the fact and AFTER innocent people were murdered.

    Just as has recently occurred in Great Britain.

    Get a clue, get informed, and get real.


  • Ed 5 years ago

    Reintroduce wolves and you will not need to worry about large game animals starving to death. The weak and young animals will be predated as the wolf packs grow until an equilibrium is reached. An added benefit is that coyotes, stray dogs and cats may be less of a problem after reintroduction of the wolves.

    Will it be a perfect solution? No. Nothing ever is. We do not live in a zoological park, even though many are of that illusion.

  • Jon Weiss 5 years ago

    I was raised in the Pacific Northwest and in the 1970's there was a case where animal rights activists decided that hunting was inhumane and needed to be stopped, so the state put a short term moratorium on sections of the state to halt hunting. The following year, with no action by man to help or hinder the deer populations, the population of deer exploded, and the environmentalists and animal rights people reared their heads once again. This time the tax payers were told that because of the increases in deer population and the loss of revenues from hunting licenses and tags that taxes would be increased to provide winter feed for the overpopulated deer. The following year the hunting was re-established and the deer population brought under control. It took several years after that for the grass cover that had been overgrazed to recover enough to support even the culled population.

  • larry m. 5 years ago

    ....and yet another nut job, (murphy) kiss ass to special interest,(animal rights, and obama) telling us we cant hunt, but rely on the gov. to feed us and take care of us!!! maybe we could stop serving steak to the white house, also??? yeah, thats goning to happen!!! murphy, why dont you shut your piehole, slime!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Report this ad