Several weeks ago, the grumbling started, and I braced myself for the impending battle. “Did you hear what they’re gonna do in Brewer?” a hunter asked. “They’re looking at expanding the restricted zone for firearms discharge,” another said.

Hunters, I figured, wouldn’t react well to the notion that yet another parcel of land was in danger of being deemed off-limits.

On Tuesday, after weeks of work by an ad hoc committee and after three open meetings at which citizens had their chance to voice opinions, the Brewer City Council revisited the issue and discussed the committee’s report at its regular meeting.

And that sound you hear … more accurately, that silence you don’t hear? It’s the sound of an impending battle that never materialized.

Tim Brochu, secretary of the ad hoc committee, seemed to think there’d be a battle, too.

“There wasn’t much of an attendance by the general public, even though it was in the paper and everything,” Brochu told the councilors.

“I was hoping that a lot of people would come and voice their opinions,” he said.

It didn’t happen.

At the first meeting, one citizen showed up. At the second, two. And at the third, six or so decided to come and speak, Brochu said.

David McDonald of Brewer attended one committee meeting, and was in the City Council chambers Tuesday.

“I guess it’s fair to say I’m not too happy with the proposal,” he said.

That proposal, according to Brochu, essentially would limit firearms discharge in an area outlined by Wilson Street, the Holden town line and the Eddington town line. Shotguns, black powder rifles and handguns would be permitted. Rifles wouldn’t … unless, according to the proposed ordinance, you live on the land in question or are an immediate family member of the owner.

That final clause didn’t satisfy McDonald, who said he’d been hunting in the area in question for 45 years.

“It seems to me like [changing the existing law] is a safety issue,” McDonald said. “What makes a landowner any safer to hunt with a rifle than me?”

Good question.

The answer, it would seem, is that when Brewer enacts the ordinance in a few weeks, as it seems poised to do, it won’t really be addressing safety at all.

It will be addressing perceived safety, as many other towns have in the past.

A garden-variety bonehead can prove infinitely more dangerous with a black powder rifle in his hands than a conscientious hunter with a .30-06 would, you see.

And the fact that a hunter owns property doesn’t make him more careful or conscientious (nor harmless, might we mention) than a non-landowner.

It’s all about perception.

Some landowners in the affected area have complained, committee members said. Hunters have been on their land. Shots have been heard.

And when you’ve just plunked down $200,000 or $300,000 for a beautiful home in one of the city’s nicer neighborhoods, that can come as a bit of a surprise.

“There had been no change in the [firearms] ordinance for about 17 years,” said Brewer mayor Joe Ferris, who played a key role in the re-examination of the existing law and possible changes. “Clearly, in that area of Brewer there have been changes.”

There have.

And honestly, I have no problem with Brewer’s new proposal. As an outdoor columnist, I’m sure I’ll hear from plenty of people who say I should be angry. That I should throw a fit. That I should fight City Hall.

My answer: The hunters of Brewer, with very few exceptions, didn’t even get riled up enough to drive across town and attend a meeting to discuss the matter.

Committee members debated. They compromised. They did what they could to continue to allow hunting, while listening to the concerns of those who felt uneasy.

And if that’s OK with the hunters of Brewer, it’s OK with me.

But after this ordinance is passed, let’s make sure we don’t applaud it as a measure to ensure the safety of the townsfolk.

The townsfolk were pretty safe before, even with an ordinance that hadn’t been tinkered with for 17 years.

But the perception of safety? It’s easy to see the perception had begun to fray a bit as new residents in formerly rural neighborhoods began to deal with the realities of urban sprawl.

Sometimes, I figure, the line between perception and reality proves razor thin. And other times, it’s simply immaterial.

John Holyoke can be reached at jholyoke@bangordailynews.net or by calling 990-8214 or 1-800-310-8600.