Massachusetts is considering longer deer hunting seasons, including Sunday hunting, reduced setback requirements, and relaxed crossbow rules, to address rising deer densities and related ecological and health risks (Martha’s Vineyard Gazette, Jan. 22, 2026).
That's a win in and of itself for hunting and hunters - all of us.
Expanding hunting seasons on Martha’s Vineyard and Nantucket challenges us to realign wildlife policy with scientific reality and societal needs. This issue demands a deeper understanding, not just a regulatory fix.
Hunter participation is limited by access: work, cost, and time, right where sound deer management is most needed. Addressing these bottlenecks is critical to achieving effective conservation goals.
As a guest on The Outdoor Podcast episode “The Crossbow Wars,” I discussed crossbow ethics, access, and how these changes could impact hunting participation and conservation.
We focused on ethics and wildlife management. Crossbows, often misunderstood, can actually help attract and retain hunters for effective deer management.
Similar to reconsidering crossbow access, re-evaluating Massachusetts’ archery setback distances could mean the difference between legal harvest and artificial refuge for deer in suburban and island settings. When regulations limit where hunters can go, deer become unreachable even as densities climb. That’s not a fair chase. It’s a misapplied policy.
This is not about increasing hunting for its own sake, nor about dismissing non-hunters. It is about policy that uses science and participation to balance conservation with our modern use of public spaces.
Just as important, our public image as hunters, and especially how we treat and regard each other, plays a pivotal role in shaping public policy outcomes.
When we present ourselves as ethical, respectful, and united, we build trust with non-hunters and policymakers alike. Divisiveness or negative stereotypes, on the other hand, can undermine our credibility and weaken our influence in debates like this.
Ultimately, our ability to win support for sound wildlife management depends not only on the facts we share, but on the example we set within our own community and to the public. In other words, stop the hunter-on-hunter bashing because it's not just about good manners - eliminating it can help expand the movement for good, science-based wildlife management.
Massachusetts’ listening sessions and comment periods are an invitation to participate before policy solidifies. Voice your views and concerns during these forums to ensure access aligns with responsibility, supporting forests that regenerate, safer roads, and reduced tick-borne disease.
Hunters aren’t seeking special favors. We seek the ability to do the work necessary to support healthy wildlife populations and shared landscapes.
Not acting is itself a choice. Massachusetts must decide: let outdated tradition shape deer policy, or adopt science-based changes to protect the environment and public health.
Jay Pinsky, Editor, The Hunting Wire & Archery Wire
jay@theoutdoorwire.com