Kissing your spouse in public earned you a few hours in the stockade and a faceful of rotten fruit in Puritan-era Massachusetts. Regulated by a colonial blue law that is no longer enforced, public displays of affection were one of many things banned in the 17th century that are now commonplace, like going to the grocery store on Sunday and putting tomatoes in clam chowder.
Most of Massachusetts' blue laws are relics from a past in which religion shaped many societal laws. During the 20th century, many of those laws were repealed without much fanfare, such as the one prohibiting opening a business on Sunday, and the one from 1675 mandating that Native Americans could not enter Boston without an escort of musketeers.
Other blue laws have ignited heated discussions about whether or not they are still necessary. While most blue laws were ostensibly created to keep colonial morals intact, blurring the line between church and state, in 1961 the Supreme Court ruled that it was permissible for states to uphold a blue law only as long as the purpose of the law is to promote the health, safety and welfare of its citizens and not to endorse religious practices of any faith.
The past few months one of the more controversial remaining blue laws, the ban on Sunday hunting, has created a public dispute as lawmakers deliberate repealing it. While the ban was perhaps put in place to enforce the sanctity of Sunday as a day of rest, many argue that it is needed even more now due to safety concerns and increases in population and outdoor recreation. Other factions claim the law discriminates against hunters.
"As hikers, you're always a little bit edgy during the deer season anyway," said Pioneer Valley Hiking Club president Anne Marie Visconti in a recent interview with the Advocate. "We did feel comfortable on Sundays, knowing that there wasn't going to be any hunting. It would just be nice to have one day where you didn't have to be fearful."
The MSPCA (Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals) echoes Visconti's sentiments, asserting that allowing hunters to roam the woods on Sundays deprives non-hunters of the chance to enjoy the woods without the presence of guns.
"If anything, the need for the prohibition on Sunday hunting is as important as it has ever been," states the MSPCA on its website, www.mspca.org. "According to 2006 preliminary data from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1.7 million Massachusetts residents (34 percent of the population) aged 16 and older take part in bird watching, photography, hiking, and other wildlife activities unrelated to hunting. The same data shows just 1 percent of the population participated in hunting."
The statement on goes on to explain how allowing hunters access to the woods on Sunday would be an act disproportionate to the differential between the large number of nonhunters and the relatively small population that hunts: "With the number of Massachusetts citizens interested in wildlife watching being so prevalent and with so few hunters, it is patently unfair to deny Massachusetts citizens access to areas where they may enjoy wildlife-watching activities one day a week, without being concerned about potential conflicts with hunters."
Other nature enthusiasts, such as Philip Keyes, spokesman for the New England Mountain Bike Association, have expressed concern over safety issues. But they are also hesitant about limiting hunters' access to the woods, stressing that hunters have an equal right to use the woods. "[Hunting on Sunday] would certainly raise a safety concern for anyone using the woods," said Keyes. "But we're hesitant to get down on these folks—they have limited time to hunt as well."
The Massachusetts legislature is facing increased pressure from sportsmen's groups like GOAL (Gun Owners' Action League), the Massachusetts State Firearms Association and the Massachusetts Sportsmen's Council to repeal the ban on Sunday hunting (all are official petitioners of the bill), as well as the NRA (National Rifle Association).
While most groups opposed to lifting the ban cite peacefulness and safety, some opposed to keeping the ban maintain that many of those groups are implementing a manipulative strategy.
"By restricting Sunday hunting, states are not only limiting opportunities for today's hunters, but are making it harder to recruit new hunters to carry on our proud heritage," states the NRA in a policy paper on its website. "Anti-hunting groups understand this; that's why they oppose lifting Sunday hunting bans—they don't want a new generation of hunters to enter the field."
While it's true, according to NRA chief lobbyist Chris Cox, that the number of hunters is dwindling, it's unclear if repealing the Sunday hunting ban would help boost the declining sport.
Jim Wallace, executive director of GOAL, believes repealing the ban is long overdue and keeping it in place is nothing short of discrimination.
"It's wholly unfair for one user group to be denied [use of the woods]," said Wallace in a phone interview with the Advocate. "The bulk of the argument [to keep the ban in place] is based on discrimination. If these people actually feel that they're unsafe in the woods with hunters, then perhaps we need to amend the law to ban every other activity [other than hunting] on Saturday so that we can have the woods to ourselves. They [people who feel unsafe in the woods with hunters] should self-ban themselves."
Wallace also stated that he believes safety to be a non-issue. He said that he and his group have not been able to find a single incident where a non-hunter has been harmed by a hunter in Massachusetts.
While the Advocate also could not find evidence of a hunter injuring a non-hunter in Massachusetts, there are reports over the last few years from Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine of hunters injuring other hunters and themselves, including the Sept. 2007 incident in Williamstown, in which hunter Raymond Beaudreau was shot in the face and head, and the Dec. 2007 incident in Burlington, Vt. in which hunter Timothy Madden fatally shot his friend and fellow hunter David Jenkins.
And although there are no recorded instances of a hunter injuring a non-hunter in Mass., there are in bordering states.
"A Massachusetts hunter killed a berry picker right over the border in Vermont," said Linda Huebner, deputy director of advocacy of the MSPCA in a recent interview with the Advocate. "That happened very, very near to my home (in Mass.)… Regardless of what the statistics say, the threat is there… It's also an issue of how comfortable people are going out into the woods knowing that hunting is happening. A lot of people just avoid doing outdoor activities [during hunting season]."
Huebner also cites the August 2007 poll sponsored by the MSPCA and facilitated by Pacific Market Research that found 86 percent of 1,000 adult Massachusetts residents were in favor of keeping the ban in place, and reiterates that the percentage of the population that hunts in Massachusetts is small. "It doesn't seem like that much to ask to have one day for so many people to enjoy the outdoors," said Huebner.
The bill to remove the Sunday ban, No. 2315, was presented by state representative Anne M. Gobi (D-Spencer) and is also sponsored by Rep. John W. Scibak (D-South Hadley), Rep. Christine E. Canavan (D-Brockton) and Templeton hunter Daniel Simkewicz.
Gobi says she filed the bill on behalf of Simkewicz, who works Monday through Saturday, leaving him with only Sunday to hunt. "I had a request by a constituent and, after hearing his reasons, I did agree with him," Gobi said in a recent interview with the Advocate. However, after shopping around the idea of sponsoring a bill to repeal, Gobi found another reason to move forward.
"The amount of people buying hunting and fishing licenses was way down," said Gobi." There's a steady decline in people taking part [in hunting]. One reason is that there's no hunting on Sunday."
The bill calls for Section 57 of Chapter 131 of the General Laws to be repealed, allowing Sunday hunting. While the wording of the bill is straightforward and there is no mention of compromise in its wording, Gobi told the Advocate the bill was worded that way because she thought it should be up to the Department of Fisheries and Wildlife to impose hunting restrictions such as where and what Sundays hunting is allowed, and not because she wants it to pass in its entirety.
"During the public hearing held this past fall, we did make it clear that we [wanted to] allow the Fisheries and Wildlife to designate the days [hunting] would be allowed," said Gobi.
Representative Scibak agrees with Gobi about the need for compromise and doesn't believe the bill will pass as it is currently worded. "I really have a hard time seeing that it would pass as is, opening every Sunday in hunting season," said Scibak in a recent interview with the Advocate.
Scibak decided to sponsor the bill after being approached by a number of his constituents who pointed out that the basis for the ban was an outdated blue law.
"All the other blue laws have been repealed," said Scibak. "Many of [my constituents] say that they work five or six days a week and Sunday is the only day they can hunt."
Scibak points out that many of the fees hunters pay fund the maintenance of public land that hikers also use without paying a fee.
Scibak also says that he has floated the idea of allowing hunters the right to hunt on Sundays during deer season and then shortening the season by a week. "The hunters that I've spoken to were receptive of that, and I think that it's a reasonable compromise," said Scibak.
The Patrick administration, according to Division of Fisheries and Wildlife spokeswoman Lisa Capone, has not, at press time, taken a position on the bill. It's slated to go before the Joint Committee on Public Safety and Homeland Security sometime in January, according to Adam Martignetti, chief of staff for Rep. Mike Costello (D-Newburyport), chair of the committee.
Gobi feels as if the bill she has sponsored is being sent before the wrong committee, because as of Jan. 2007, all new hunters in Massachusetts have had to take a hunter's safety course, which, according to Gobi, increases the safety of the sport.
"I personally think [the Public Safety and Homeland Security Committee] is the wrong place for [the bill]," said Gobi. "I don't see hunting as a public safety concern."
