Sunday, January 28, 2007

Some pros & cons of SB 2254

The biggest objection seems to be what they call 'canned hunts' or 'high fence hunting'. When asked, nobody that supports this bill has been to a deer/elk ranch or participated in one of these hunts. Their response is usually, "Meth is against the law and I don't participate in that." Nothing like sending a subliminal message that deer/elk ranchers are involved in meth. Some of the deer/elk ranches have many hundreds of acres of land to have their animals roam on. My question is instead of banning a completely legal activity, why aren't rules established where it can't be called "hunting."

The next objection seems to be there is a disease problem with confined deer/elk and there will be a big problem with the spread of CWD (Chronic Wasting Disease). Well deer/elk ranchers are very concerned with protecting their investment and most states have very strict rules about the health of imported deer/elk. It seems that CWD is the disease of the moment and has not been found to affect humans. In fact the deer/elk ranchers are more concerned with TB and other diseases affecting their herds than with CWD, not that they are haphazard about it. There are always going to be the jerk that isn't as careful as we would like, just like there is the slob hunter that we wish didn't exist.

Another objection is the property rights issue. Deer/elk ranches have been encouraged in North Dakota and our politicians talk about contributions they make to our state's economy. When this is mentioned to the supporters of SB 2254, they call the deer/elk ranchers whores who will do anything for money and it's just too bad if they get closed down. Remember, SB 2254 doesn't ban the deer/elk ranches, it establishes and changes some rules for notification of escaping animals, catching escaping animals and fence heighths.

What SB 2254 does ban, is any shooting of any animals/birds raised on the property of the non-typical livestock or elk licensed property. It does not prevent the licensed property from raising the non-typical livestock or elk and selling it to someone else in North Dakota for shooting. And remember if this passes, there will no longer be any bird preserves left that raise pheasants on the same property they hunt them for money.

Another objection I've heard at least on a local radio-station-rant is the tax dollars that the elk/deer ranches are paid and a lot of people wouldn't like their tax dollars to support these types of activities and all the money it will take to administrate any rules. I guess I can't blame the radio-station-ranter for this one since the supporters of SB2254 claim a bunch of Game & Fish money goes to the ND Board of Animal Health just to administrate the non-typical livestock. The non-typical livestock used to be under the Gamd & Fish Department with allocated money to administer. A few years ago the non-typical livestock were moved to be administered by the ND Board of Animal Health and the allocated money went with the move. As per tax dollars being used to administer the rules for the non-typical livestock radio-statio-rant, take a look at the FCC Budget allocation to administer the rules for radio-station-rants, $304,057,000 (that's 304+ BILLION of yours and mine tax dollars)

Don't take my word for it, check it out:

FCC Budget

North American Deer Farmers Assoc.

Deer & Elk Farmers Discussion Board spend a little time here clicking through some posts and learn a little about some junk science and other things

A ND Legislative Bill Forum

Another forum

Another Legislative Bill Forum

CWD-Info.org

aphis/usda/CWD site

-
-
-

No comments: