As Florida heads into the next election cycle, a new amendment, Amendment 2, is generating a lively debate across the state. This proposal aims to enshrine the right to fish and hunt in the Florida State Constitution. Supporters say it’s essential for preserving outdoor traditions and conservation efforts, while opponents worry it may weaken wildlife protections. Here’s a closer look at what Amendment 2 entails and the arguments for and against it.
What Amendment 2 Proposes

Amendment 2, titled “Right to Fish and Hunt,” proposes adding a new section to the Florida State Constitution to protect hunting and fishing as “a public right and preferred means of responsibly managing and controlling fish and wildlife.” According to the proposed text available on the Florida Division of Elections website, the amendment would allow fishing and hunting to be “preserved forever” as a key tool in wildlife management. It also specifies that the amendment wouldn’t limit the authority of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) to regulate these activities under Article IV of the State Constitution.
A Proactive Measure or an Unnecessary Amendment?

Supporters, like Travis Thompson, a guest on the Salt Strong Podcast, argue that this amendment is a proactive approach to conservation. Thompson emphasizes that this amendment will prevent future legal challenges to hunting and fishing rights. In his view, it’s essential to guard against what he calls “ballot box biology,” where non-experts make decisions on wildlife management. He calls Amendment 2 “a guard-the-gate issue,” believing it will lock in protections for hunting and fishing, which he considers crucial conservation tools.
Broad Support from Conservation Groups and Legislators

Amendment 2 enjoys bipartisan support in the Florida Legislature, with only one opposing vote. Various conservation groups, like the Fish and Wildlife Foundation of Florida, are also backing the measure. They’ve invested substantial funds into campaigning for the amendment’s passage. The Colemans, a family featured in a WESH 2 News segment, echoed this sentiment, with Larry Coleman saying, “It’s very important that we have the right to hunt and fish.” The family sees the amendment as a way to secure outdoor traditions for future generations.
The Opposition’s Concerns: Vague Language and Unintended Consequences

However, some organizations, like the Florida Wildlife Federation, argue that Amendment 2’s language is too vague and could lead to unintended legal consequences. In a statement, Federation CEO Sarah Gledhill warned that “the amendment could potentially complicate the very protections it seeks to uphold.” Critics argue that the amendment’s language could unintentionally open the door for practices like gillnetting, which is currently banned due to its indiscriminate impact on marine life. Reddit user u/nn123654 noted that it could “make it easier for commercial fishermen to file lawsuits challenging state fishing restrictions, leading to more overfishing.”
Confusion and Misunderstanding Around Regulatory Authority

One common concern is that Amendment 2 may alter the FWC’s authority to regulate fishing and hunting. Some voters mistakenly believe that the amendment would allow unrestricted hunting and fishing or even eliminate licensing requirements. Thompson clarifies that the amendment does not change existing laws on permits or wildlife limits, nor does it undo the current ban on gillnets. He says, “This amendment locks the door to protect something we care about without changing the regulatory powers of the FWC.”
Private Property Concerns

Another point of contention is how the amendment affects private property rights. In a Reddit discussion, user u/self-defenestrator raised concerns about whether the amendment would permit public access to private land for hunting. Opposing user u/nn123654 responded by clarifying that the amendment “does not give anyone the right to hunt on private property without permission.” Private property rights in Florida are protected by a separate section of the state constitution, making this unlikely to change under Amendment 2.
The Issue of Conservation vs. Recreation

A primary worry among environmentalists is that Amendment 2 may prioritize recreational hunting and fishing over broader conservation efforts. In her statement, Gledhill argues that hunting and fishing should be balanced with conservation goals, not seen as the state’s only wildlife management tools. However, Thompson argues on the podcast that hunting and fishing contribute significantly to conservation funding through license fees and federal excise taxes on equipment, which are reinvested in environmental projects across Florida.
Backlash Over Potential Impact on State Parks

Some Floridians worry that Amendment 2 could lead to expanded hunting in state parks, though this scenario is unlikely given FWC regulations. Reddit user u/BEARSHARKTOPUS167 humorously voiced this concern, saying, “So would this make it easier for idiots to turn our beautiful and natural state parks into golf courses?” In response, proponents like Thompson argue that FWC regulations would still apply to state parks, ensuring that only areas designated for hunting would remain accessible to hunters.
Could This Open Doors for “Traditional” But Outdated Methods?

The term “traditional methods” in Amendment 2’s language has raised eyebrows, with opponents suggesting it could justify previously banned hunting and fishing methods. On Reddit, u/RickTracee expressed skepticism, suggesting that “traditional” might encompass “regressive, outlawed methods, such as gill nets, spears, poisons, and clubs.” However, Thompson reassures that these interpretations are unlikely to gain legal traction, as the FWC retains authority to enforce humane hunting practices.
Proponents’ Reassurances on Environmental Protection

Supporters argue that conservation remains a priority, with Thompson underscoring that science-based management will continue to guide FWC decisions. He says that Amendment 2 is aimed at safeguarding the rights to hunt and fish in general, not eliminating other environmental protections. To those concerned that the amendment prioritizes hunting over ecosystem health, Thompson assures that it’s simply about securing a tradition that, in his view, coexists with effective conservation.
Should Hunting and Fishing Be Elevated to Constitutional Rights?

One of the core debates is whether hunting and fishing deserve constitutional status. Critics argue that these activities are already protected by state law and don’t need elevation to a constitutional level. User u/cologetmomo voiced this perspective, stating, “We don’t need a constitutional right to fish and hunt. We need careful management and permitting that preserves what’s left of our natural environment.” This sentiment reflects a growing perspective that legislative protections are sufficient for wildlife management.
Voting on Amendment 2: Is It Worth the Risk?

As Florida voters consider Amendment 2, they must weigh the potential benefits of securing hunting and fishing rights with the risks of unintended consequences. Advocates view it as a critical conservation measure that keeps future anti-hunting movements at bay, while critics warn it could lead to legal challenges that disrupt current environmental regulations. As noted on the Salt Strong Podcast, the outcome may set an important precedent for similar amendments in other states.
Defining the Relationship with Nature and Conservation

Ultimately, Amendment 2 represents more than a simple “yes” or “no” on hunting and fishing rights. It asks Floridians to define their relationship with nature and conservation in a changing world. Whether one believes it to be a safeguard for outdoor traditions or a potential threat to wildlife protections, the amendment has ignited a vital conversation on Florida’s natural resources.

Growing up in the Pacific Northwest, John developed a love for the great outdoors early on. With years of experience as a wilderness guide, he’s navigated rugged terrains and unpredictable weather patterns. John is also an avid hunter and fisherman who believes in sustainable living. His focus on practical survival skills, from building shelters to purifying water, reflects his passion for preparedness. When he’s not out in the wild, you can find him sharing his knowledge through writing, hoping to inspire others to embrace self-reliance.