How Florida Amendment 2 May Affect Hunting and Fishing

Florida voters will decide in November whether to include fishing and hunting as a constitutional right.

Amendment 2 supporters, including outside groups, say the proposal will protect Florida’s cultural heritage from “anti-hunting” threats.

Opponents say so may allow “objectionable” hunting practices and lead to unnecessary wildlife deaths. Groups like the Florida Bar’s Animal Law Section and Sierra Club Florida have come out against it.

Here’s what you need to know.

What would the amendment do?

Florida statutes already recognize the right to fish and hunt as a “valued part of Florida’s cultural heritage.”

The amendment would “perpetually preserve fishing and hunting, including the use of traditional methods, as a public right and the preferred means of responsible management and control of fish and wildlife.” It would not limit the authority of Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission.

Lawmakers placed the initiative on the ballot last year. The measure passed unanimously in the Florida House and 38-1 in the Senate. Democratic Sen. Lauren Book cast the lone “no” vote.

What are supporters saying?

Supporters say the amendment, which has gained bipartisan support, is needed to combat future “anti-hunting” challenges.

Martha Guyas, director of Southeast fisheries policy for the American Sport Fishing Association, said fishing and hunting have been challenged in other states. She was referring to a 2022 Oregon animal cruelty initiative that critics said would have criminalized hunting, fishing and certain animal management practices in the state. That initiative did not come to a vote.

“It’s just getting ahead of any of those challenges in Florida,” Guyas said. “There are many times when something seems unpredictable, but five or 10 years later it becomes a problem.”

Rodney Barreto, vice chairman of Yes On 2, the committee supporting the amendment, said he wants to see hunting and fishing protections set “in stone for future generations.”

“It’s a Florida way of life,” Barreto said. “It’s about how we’re raised and the right to have that not be taken away.”

Amendment 2 is supported by the National Rifle Association, the American Sport Fishing Association, the Congressional Sportsmen’s Association and other groups.

Florida has 242,000 hunters and 2.3 million resident anglers, according to the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission.

What do the critics say?

Opponents say the change is unnecessary.

“It’s not like you need the right to play tennis in Florida,” said Chuck O’Neal, chairman of NoTo2.org, the committee opposing the amendment.

Opponents also worry that the amendment would allow practices harmful to Florida’s wildlife. O’Neal said making fishing and hunting the “preferred means” of wildlife management could mean invasive animals are killed rather than relocated. That could have dangerous implications for black bears, he said, because interactions between humans and animals have increased in recent years.

Allowing “traditional methods” of fishing and hunting could justify trophy hunting, steel traps and other “primitive” techniques, he said.

“These are things that are traditional, but in public they are largely objectionable,” he said. “It’s kind of putting a wolf in sheep’s clothing.”

O’Neal is also concerned that hunters could use the amendment to justify hunting on private property.

Advocacy and legal groups like the Florida Bar Animal Law Section have taken an active stance against the change.

“Hunting is not illegal in any state,” wrote Macie JH Codina and Savannah Sherman in an op-ed for the Animal Law Section in May. They said there is little evidence of future threats in Florida.

“What there is evidence of,” Codina and Sherman write, “is the threat Florida’s proposed constitutional amendment would pose to wildlife and the ecosystem as a whole.”

Campaign financing

Yes On 2, the group sponsoring the amendment, has raised more than $450,000, including $100,000 from Florida Agriculture Commissioner Wilton Simpson and $250,000 from T. Roosevelt Action, a pro-hunting political committee. That’s hundreds of thousands more than NoTo2.org, which has raised just over $5,000. Most of these are individual donations ranging from $5 to $1,000.

O’Neal remains optimistic and said NoTo2.org has taken to social media to get the word out. “I have faith in the common sense of the voters,” he said.

The amendment needs the support of at least 60% of voters to pass in November.

Also on the ballot are school board election, marijuana, abortion, inflation and campaign finance amendments.