|
Initiative to ban game farm industry generates controversy By ERIN P. BILLINGS Gazette State Bureau HELENA – Game farming may be a small industry in Montana, but it’s mired in controversy, and a group of vocal sportsmen would like November voters to agree to do away with it altogether.
The future of the industry is in the hands of those voting on I-143, which if approved Nov. 7 would prohibit new game farm licensing, expansions or license transfers and ban captive shooting of game farm animals. Backers of the initiative say it’s time to phase out the operations to protect wildlife from the threats associated with raising game farm animals, including disease and genetic pollution. They also say game farms, which allow trophy hunting, fly in the face of the principal of a fair chase. Opponents, however, said I-143 seeks to hurt family farmers and ranchers by prohibiting them from diversifying their businesses, attacks private property rights and could damage the local economies that benefit from the operations. They also say game farms pose no greater a disease threat than do animals in the wild. Stan Frasier, secretary/treasurer of Sportsmen for I-143, said sportsmen have long been worried about game farms, the threat of disease they pose and costs associated with a possible outbreak of disease. He said they decided to devise the initiative because lawmakers wouldn’t listen to their concerns about game farms. “These are the same issues that we’ve been attempting to have the Legislature deal with for the last three sessions and they have refused to deal with it,” said Frasier, who helped author I-143. “It was because of that sense of frustration with the Legislature that we decided to put it right before voters in this state.” But Mark Taylor, a Helena attorney representing the Montana Alternative Livestock Producers, the primary opponent to I-143, said the backers are misguided. He said alternative livestock producers are simply farmers and ranchers trying to keep afloat by varying their traditional agricultural base. “Our hope is that Montana voters will see this for what it is – which is effectively putting 100 family farmers and ranchers out of business,” Taylor said. Taylor estimated that it would cost about $50 million to compensate the game farming industry for the economic losses they would sustain if I-143 is approved. Not only would the initiative prevent any new operations, it would cut down significantly the business that those licensed today can do, he said. “The bottom line is I-143 is bad for the state, it’s businesses, it’s farmers and ranchers and of course the elk producers,” Taylor said. Not so, say backers of I-143. They argue that it would be better for Montana in the long-run if game farms are phased out and Montana’s wildlife remains protected. Plus, they argue, game farm producers can continue to operate as they are, they just can’t transfer their licenses or allow hunting. “All existing game farms will be able to stay in business with the original owner,” Frasier said. The politics of game farm operations jumped to the fore last fall when chronic wasting disease was found for the first time in Montana in a dead elk at a game farm near Philipsburg. Chronic wasting disease is a deadly neurological disease found in deer and elk for which there is no test in live animals. Opponents to I-143 say said the industry has “gone the extra mile” to protect Montana’s herds, both domestic and wild, from disease. In fact, he said, Montana has the most stringent game farm regulations in the country. But I-143 backers say game farms serve as breeding grounds for the wasting disease and other afflictions such as tuberculosis. If chronic wasting disease were transmitted into the wild, huge populations could be infected and wiped out. If approved, Montana would be the first state to adopt by initiative a phase-out of game farms. The only other state that has prohibited the operations is Wyoming, where the state Legislature decided to disallow them.
|