Montana's Senator John Brenden's "Heathen Into Christian" Bison.

Recently,  Sen. John Brenden, on April 11th, 2013, during the SB 143 hearing before the House Agriculture Committee, compared wild bison in Montana, to heathens, and domesticated bison to Christians, "They are maintaining that bison from Yellowstone National Park are wildlife. There's been bills and discussions put in, that once they are in captivity, they become domesticated, or they're livestock. If I knew the exact transition, the moment that you go from being a heathen into a Christian, I don't know that answer. It's a very difficult one."

This statement has larger ramifications than just the speciesism against wild bison in Montana; this is racism, against the Native American tribes, whose culture is intertwined with the bison. Brenden did not make an association of value between wild and domesticated bison, but made a moral association, which does not apply to animals, but to people.

The Native Americans across the U.S., as well as indigenous peoples across the world, have often been subjected to forced conversions to Christianity, or another dominant religion, in the guise of "civilizing" or "domesticating" them. This arrogant perspective that one belief system is superior and needs to be imposed on another is deplorable. The very term "heathen", from Old English hæðen, means "not Christian or Jewish". Perhaps this was a "Freudian Slip", revealing his views of Native Americans being herded onto reservations to be "domesticated" and often converted to Christianity, as being superior to those Native Americans that desire to uphold an older spiritual culture that views bison as kin.

In Lame Deer, Seeker of Visions, by Richard Erdoes and John Fire Lame Deer, Lame Deer states, "It is the same with the buffalo. They have the power and the wisdom. We Sioux have a close relationship with the buffalo. He is our brother. We have many legends of buffalo changing themselves into men. And the Indians are built like the buffalo, too-big shoulders, narrow hips. According to our belief, the Buffalo Woman who brought us the peace pipe, which is at the center of our religion, was a beautiful maiden, and after she taught our tribes how to worship with the pipe, she changed herself into a white buffalo calf. So the buffalo is very sacred to us. You cant understand about nature, about the feelings we have toward it, unless you understand how close we are to the buffalo. That animal was almost like a part of ourselves, part of our souls.

The buffalo gave us everything we needed. Without it we were nothing. Our tipis were made of his skin. His hide was our bed, our blanket, our winter coat. It was our drum, throbbing through the night, alive, holy. Out of his skin we made our water bags. His flesh strengthened us, became flesh of our flesh. Not the smallest part of it was wasted. His stomach, a red-hot stone dropped into it, became our soup kettle. His horns were our spoons, the bones our knives, our women's awls and needles. Out of his sinews we made our bowstrings and thread. His ribs were fashioned into sleds for our children, his hoofs became rattles. His mighty skull, with the pipe leaning against it, was our sacred altar. The name of the greatest of all Sioux was Tatanka Iyotake--Sitting Bull. When you killed off the buffalo you also killed the Indian--the real, natural, 'wild' Indian." 

Now, that is not Christianity. That is what Sen. John Brenden would say was "heathen" - juxtaposed to Christianity. And this interconnectedness is not isolated to just the Lakota nation. While not having researched the other Montanan nations yet, I have heard a number of other Nations speak of the Bison, as related and sacred. An example of this was evident at the Montana Bison Rally, at the Helena Capitol, on March 12th, 2013. This video clip was made by the Buffalo Field Campaign. As soon as I can edit the full version of Sen. Sharon Stewart-Peregoy's speech, I will put it up. She spoke very clearly on the importance of the bison to the Native American nations in Montana.

This comment of Brenden's needs to be challenged and publicly called into question. He needs to be held accountable. Racism and lack of tolerance for other's spiritual practices has no place in a "civilized" society, certainly not in our legislature. 

Kathryn QannaYahu

The Transparency of the Montana 2013 Legislative Bison Crosshairs

For over a month I have closely watched the 2013 Montana Legislative Session. It is difficult to describe the overwhelming attack on Montana's wildlife and the public's access. There is a very concerted effort to erode the public's rights, putting them in the hands of a privileged elite. For example, HB 404, sponsored by Rep. Kelly Flynn (rancher and outfitter in Townsend, MT) - Provide funding for block management program. This bill seeks to fund Montana's Block Management Program, a program where the State leases land from private landowners, so that public hunters can hunt on that land. The catch is, the funding will come out of Habitat Montana, a program where the State purchases land for public access. Habitat Montana benefits the Montana public, while Block Management ultimately benefits the private landowner. While Block Management can be beneficial to the public hunter, it should not be at the cost of the better benefit - that of purchasing land, making it available to all the public of Montana for many purposes.

HB 404 is the epitome of what is taking place in the Montana 2013 Legislative Session - the removal of what is public, for the benefit of a minority (5%) elite agriculture/ranching industry. And no other wildlife is in this legislative crosshairs like the Wild Bison.

There are 10 House and Senate bills (short titles) that target the Bison.

SB 143 - Revise bison management, sponsored by Sen. John Brenden (Republican, owner of Brenden Farms in Scobey). Senate Fish & Game Committee. This bill would allow year round hunting on any bison that stepped out of the YNP, would prohibit the transfer, relocation and transplantation of any wild bison - equates them with diseased vermin.

SB 256 - Making FWP liable for private property damages caused by wild buffalo/bison, sponsored by Sen. Frederick (Eric) Moore (Republican, rancher, co-owner Solaris Feeders Llc. - cattle feed, Miles City). Senate Fish & Game Committee. This bill would make the FWP liable for any private property damages from bison, contrary to the status of all other Montana wildlife, provided by the Montana Supreme Court ruling of C. R. Rathbone.

SB 305 - Generally revise laws governing bison management in Montana, sponsored by Sen. Jim Peterson (Republican, owner Jim Peterson Ranch). Senate Fish & Game. This bill would prevent bison, such as the American Prairie Reserve pure bison, being released with a transplanted wild herd (such as at the CMR) to increase the genetic stock.

SB 341 - Establish criteria for transplantation or augmentation of wildlife, sponsored by Sen. Jennifer Olsen Fielder (Republican,Silverline Projects Inc., "Wildlife Damage Control", husband Paul Fielder Montana Trappers Association).Senate Fish & Game Committee. This bill seriously prohibits any release, transplanting, etc.of bison by means of public rejection, "implemented only after it is determined that transplantation or augmentation of a wildlife species will not jeopardize existing grazing allotments" on public land, is possibly a traffic hazard, require approval of county commissioners, require nearby private landowners permission, ad nauseam.

HB 249 - Revising laws related to presence of bison/buffalo on private property, sponsored by Rep. Alan Doane (Republican, rancher in Bloomfield/Glendive). House Appropriations Committee. This bill gives private property owners the right to kill wild bison as they see fit.

HB 328 - Allowing hunter notification of wild buffalo/bison location, sponsored by Rep. Ted Washburn (Republican, Big Game Hunting). House Fish, Wildlife and Parks Committee. This bill gives the Dept. of Livestock the authority to determine if a wild bison can be killed with a hunt,notification of license recipients as to when and where they may hunt, including the location of the wild bison. (Thats not a hunt when you demand exactly where the bison is.)

HB 396 - Revise laws regarding translocation of wild buffalo/bison, sponsored by Rep. Mike Lang (Republican, owner Northern Ag Service Malta). House Agriculture Committee. This bill grants authority to local County Commissioners to veto the release, relocation and transplantation of any brucellosis free bison.

HB 484 - Generally revise bison laws, sponsored by Rep. Alan Redfield (Republican., rancher - Davis Creek Ranch Livingston). House Agriculture Committee. This bill is very insidious, seeking slaughter of any wild bison exiting the YNP, capturing for experimenting, vaccinating, treating all wild bison as diseased vermin, gives the Dept. of Livestock the primary authority over wild bison, ...

HB 507 - Generally revising management of wild buffalo and wild bison, sponsored by Rep. Bill Harris (Republican, Rancher, Outfitter - Harris Ranch, Fort Musselshell Outfitters). House Agriculture Committee.This bill applies livestock laws to wild bison, restricts release and transplanting, holds the Dept. of Livestock as the authority over wild bison, may not transplant any wild bison outside of nearby area of YNP. Any animal leaving the YNP are the property of the Dept. of Livestock to do as they see fit.

HB 312 - Revise laws relating to brucellosis surveillance, sponsored by Rep. Alan Redfield (Republican, rancher - Davis Creek Ranch Livingston). House Agriculture Committee. This bill is a test and slaughter bill, not only of elk, but also bison, charging FWP for the financial bill.

Each of these bills contains more detrimental language than the very short descriptions I have provided. If you will notice, there is a political party common denominator in all these anti-bison bills - Republican. Why are these republicans so adamantly set on destroying the wild bison and prohibiting them from being released elsewhere in Montana? Well, if you read the language, you see 2 common thoughts expressed - grazing competition and disease (brucellosis). 

Supposed Brucellosis Threat

So lets tackle the brucellosis issue for a moment. There has not been one documented case of a bison transmitting brucellosis to any livestock. And since science has advanced to the point that they can genotype the Brucella abortus found in the recent cattle outbreaks, they have all shown to be from elk, not bison. The Department of Livestock knows this and even posts it to their news release section of their website for the last 5 years. In fact, in the last 5 years there have been 9 cases from about 5 or 6 herds. In 2008, Paradise Valley (1 cow). In 2010,  Gallatin (1 domestic bison cow) county, on Turner's Flying D Ranch (speaking with Eric Liska of MTDOL, he stated that there were other bison, but no specific numbers could be provided, that were not cultured, but simply tested seropositive, meaning they had antibodies, showing they had been exposed but were not cultured to see if they were infective. I asked for a location on their website confirming the data and none could be provided.) In 2011, 2 cattle herds had positives in Park (6 on one ranch - confirmed at the Brucellosis in Yellowstone Bison, Science Review and Workshop, presenter Dr. Marty Zaluski), and Madison (1 bull) counties. According to MTDOL, the genotype indicates the brucellosis came from elk.  MTDOL Livestock News Releases  9 cases of brucellosis to warrant the massive killings of 2009 YNP bison for  these last 5 years.

Not all bison are exposed to brucellosis, first brought to wildlife by the livestock industry. Of those exposed, not all are infectious. Brucella abortus can only be transmitted through contact with an aborted fetus (generally the first calf) and those birthing fluids for a very short period of time (heat and sunlight, as well as animal scavenging seriously diminish the possible exposure time). Bison bulls, calves, yearlings and non-pregnant females do not shed infected materials that can possibly spread brucellosis. Possibly infected females, in their first pregnancy, are the only possible risk. But as stated before, there has not been a documented case of brucellosis transmission from bison to cattle. 

 

Interview with Dr. Marty Zaluski - Montana State Veterinarian, Dept. of Livestock

In a recent interview (Feb. 12th, 2013), I asked Marty a number of specific questions about bison and brucellosis. 

Q: From a health perspective, were you comfortable with the movement of bison from quarantine to Fort Peck? 

A: Yes, he had no reservation about their health status, but believes it would be good to follow up, to make sure they remain free of brucellosis.

Q: Did you approve moving the bison herd from Elk Island Park in Alberta, Canada to the American Prairie Reserve in Montana? Are you comfortable with their health status? Could these bison be used for restoration of a wild bison herd here in Montana? 

A: Yes, Marty approved the health status of the APR bison and was comfortable with their being brucellosis free. And yes, they could be used for restoration. His, "focus is quite narrow for disease issue."  

Q: Could the wild bison on Turner's Green Ranch be used for restoration? 

A: Yes, they are the most tested herd and have been proven to be free of brucellosis. The risk is infinitesimally small.

Q: What's your assessment of disease transmission from bison to cattle - under the current program? 

A: Not zero, its low. You cant prove a negative. The current management is a result of tradition. 

Questions to the radical anti-wildlife ag/livestock industry.

Why, when the Montana State Veterinarian has had no reservations about the health of the transplanted herds, and sees an infinitesimally small risk of transmission of brucellosis from bison to cattle, do so many of the radical ag/livestock industry treat wild bison as diseased vermin and legislativally demand their slaughter? Especially since they know the known cases come from elk? Because this is not about brucellosis, this is about grazing and the nearly free grazing rights on public lands that they want access to and the wild bison not to have access to. 

As to SB 212, the oft quoted anti-bison bill that became law in 2011, that required the FWP management of wild bison that are released or transplanted in Montana, it does not apply to the wild bison that are entering Montana on their own, which is part of the recent spat of legislative bullsh$it erupting right now. 212 makes the state liable for the costs for this bison management, which does not apply to any other wildlife in Montana. This needs to change. Wild Bison are wildlife, not livestock and need to be treated as such. Which brings me to the Bison Brucellosis Workshop.

Bison Brucellosis Workshop Agenda Feb. 26-28, 2013

A Bison Brucellosis Workshop is being held at the Chico Hot Springs Resort in Pray, MT, on February 26-28, 2013. On the first day, from 2:30 - 3:00 Disease Suppression: Immunocontraceptives will be presented. This is the frickin' experimental drug GonaCon. The Department of Agriculture APHIS (Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service) has developed a "vaccine" on captured bison that migrated out of YNP. When the GnRH vaccine is injected into the animal's body, the body's immune response neutralizes the hormone's function, resulting in infertility in both males and females. 

This is our wildlife they want to make infertile. And what about the effect on anyone eating bison meat that has been "innocultated" with this GonaCon"vaccine". We know that livestock treated with growth hormones, antibiotics and such, pass into the meat and milk and affect the humans that eat it. Will this also transfer to those that hunt the bison and eat the meat? Or those that simply eat the bison meat? Will this make humans infertile as well? They have used this on deer as well. This should not even be on the table at this workshop. Our wildlife is wild and should not be treated with infertility drugs.

Just after this debacle of an idea, from 3:00-3:30 is Disease Suppression: Vaccination. This is the plain old garden variety bad idea brucellosis vaccinating our wildlife bullsh$it. What hunter wants to eat vaccinated wildlife? What economic success is there going to be in trying to inoculate a free roaming population of wildlife? In fact, when I spoke with Dr. Marty Zaluski about HB 312 and seroprevalence reduction in wildlife through vaccination, he answered, "Vaccinating elk is not viable, vaccinating bison poses challenges, there is no hope at all in vaccinating elk." 

Dr. Bruce L. Smith stated in his letter to the HB 312 committe, "Tools for reducing prevalence of brucellosis, and for that matter other diseases in free-ranging wildlife, are limited compared to those for remedying the disease among infected herds of cattle: tools such as prophylactic vaccinations, culling, test and slaughter, or whole herd depopulation. My experience in Wyoming shows that available vaccines (S19 and RB51) are so marginally efficacious in protecting elk against field strain brucellosis infection and preventing brucellosis-induced abortions that they are not a viable management tool. Wyoming’s experimental test and slaughter program—implemented to greatly reduce or eliminate brucellosis in feedground elk—was abandoned after 5 years due to its tremendous budgetary costs and failure to achieve the program’s goal. The most cost-effective means of limiting exposure and infection of susceptible cattle herds to brucellosis from potentially infected bison or elk are to calfhood vaccinate cattle herds and proactively implement practices that limit species sympatry and comingling during periods when transmission is most likely to occur." 


We need to get the radical ag/livestock industry out of legislating our wildlife as livestock. Wild bison are wildlife and have a right to be here in Montana as wildlife, just as all the other wildlife populations. The Montana public has a right to that wildlife. 5% of the ag/livestock industry should not hold over 50% of the legislative seats to push their special interest agendas on us.

Please take a few moments and contact these legislators and get these anti bison bills killed. 

http://leg.mt.gov/css/Sessions/63rd/legwebmessage.asp  

Call: 406-444-4800

 Kathryn QannaYahu

...there will be a war!

On January 31, 2013, at the Montana State Capitol, 3:00 PM, lines were being drawn in the sand. A war was brewing, though some would say the war has already been here, it's just gaining momentum.

In an age old military tactic of "divide and conquer", two major anti-wildlife bills had hearings at the same time, though one was not originally scheduled as such. Senate Bill 143, sponsored by Sen. John Brenden (farmer), in Room 303, AN ACT REVISING BISON MANAGEMENT LAWS and House Bill 312, sponsored by Rep. Alan Redfield (rancher) in Room 472. SB 143, AN ACT PROVIDING AUTHORIZATION FOR TESTING AND PREVALENCE REDUCTION OF BRUCELLOSIS IN LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE.

Hunters, Conservationists and Native Americans filled the rooms, room 472 being so small that the public overflowed into the hallway. But, this particular account is the battle that was waged in room 303 - SB 143. 

On one side sat the 10 member Montana Senate Fish and Game Committee: John Brenden (R), John (R-Chairman), Owner Brenden Farms; Debby Barrett (R), Rancher - Barrett Ranch, Inc.; Tom Facey (D); Jennifer Fielder (R); Brad Hamlett (D), Rancher - Hamlett Ranch Co. Sun River; Larry Jent (D); Jim Peterson (R), Rancher - Jim Petersen Ranch; Rick Ripley (R-Vice Chairman), Farm & Ranch - Wolf Creek; Fred Thomas (R); and Kendall Van Dyk (D). I find it interesting that half of the Fish and Game committee members are farmers and ranchers. And yes, the Chairman of the committee is the same senator that is sponsoring the bill. This leaves the the vice chairman, Rick Ripley, also a republican and also a farm/ranch owner to preside as "Chairman" over this day's battle. 

Brenden opened with a very poor argument for his own bill. The small number of proponents follow, most of which are ranchers/land owners in Gardiner, MT. There is a common thread to their statements, that of property damage, money lost and no compensation. In their eyes the bison are disease laden fiscal liabilities, walking biological warfare agents. As usual, the demonized bison are linked with the wolves, a common pairing at public meetings of either bison or wolves, by their enemies. One of the bill proponents is Bill Hoppe, a resident of Gardiner, whose website lists him as an outfitter. He identified himself as a rancher. In a quote from the New York Times, " He testified before the house committee that metal pens were built at bus stops so children could be safe from bison. 'Buffalo are running free, and we’re corralling our kids in a country where we’re supposed to be free,' Mr. Hoppe testified." The Times journalist Nate Schweber noted, "(The superintendent for Gardiner’s public schools said there were no such pens, however.)" I looked further into the pens. They do exist, they were provided by a non-government organization, due to some of the Gardiner resident concerns, but they have never needed to be used and have been stored with the Forest Service. Hoppe also testified over in room 472, at HB 312, with what sounded like the same speech he read at the SB 143 hearing. 

Then the floor is turned over to the SB 143 opponents. They are clearly in the majority and anxious to have an opportunity to testify. The 22nd person to testify was Patrick Dougherty, representing the Bear Creek Council. He spoke of residents in Gardiner, all of them having bison on their properties, that more damage came from deer and elk, than bison. "The idea that they do tremendous amounts of damage is ridiculous. Elk and deer do far more damage to my property than any bison do. I also want to point out that anyone who testified here from Gardiner, brought up one important point, finances. They all want money. They saw across the river that the Church Universal Triumphant got 3 million dollars for their grazing rights. They are not here because they're against bison. They're here because they want you to pay them to have bison." Grazing rights is a common foundational issue on a number of the anti-wildlife issues. 

Another major front of this battle was being waged by the Native American tribes from the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes, the Nez Perce, the Blackfeet, Fort Peck Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes, the Crow, and a variety of specific tribal agencies like the Intertribal Buffalo Council, Tribal Fish and Game/Wildlife Departments, and the Montana American Indian Caucus. Native American attorney's pointed out the legalities of treaties, constitutions and spiritual/cultural practices. Comparisons were made to treatment of the bison to the Native Americans, that have been rounded up on reservations. One astute Native American (sorry, I cant sit through this video a 3rd time to catch his name) pointed out the artwork in the upper portion of room, depicting the iconic wild bison. Common on the lips of these bison warriors were the statements of existing governmental co-operations, working groups, and the like that would be in jeopardy should this bill be passed, with good reason, as well as the promise, not an empty threat, that this bill becoming law, "ensures endless litigation." I have to admit, this makes me smile. 

Another wildlife warrior, in this particular legislative skirmish, was Glenn Monahan, the 15th opponent to SB 143 and the only person, regardless of time, to be gavelled by Vice Chairman Rick Ripley (R). Glenn Monahan, a Gallatin Wildlife Association member, passionately spoke from a prepared statement, nearly verbatim. 


"I was in attendance last session when Sen. Brenden’s earlier bison bill was heard in this committee. That bill was less extreme than today’s bill, and it did not become law.

Yesterday, I downloaded and reviewed the audio transcript of Sen. Brenden’s testimony to this committee from 2011.

He repeatedly made reference that if we allow wild buffalo in Montana, 'there will be a war'. 

Well he was right, there is a war! It’s a War on Wildlilfe being waged in the legislature at the behest of the radical fringe of the ranching industry.

The radical War on Wildlife is manifesting itself with a bill to ban bighorn sheep transplants, another to create an elk capture, test, and slaughter program when elk are inconveniencing livestock producers, and now we have SB143 – The 'shoot ‘em at the border' bill. The legislative War on Wildlife is real. 

This bill is EXTREME. The mere introduction of this bill is an embarrassment for our state, and if this bill attracts national media attention, it has the potential to do great harm to Montana’s highly lucrative and rapidly growing tourism industry. Economies thrive on diversity, and this unnecessary bill will negatively impact our state’s tourism business, while doing essentially nothing to benefit the livestock industry. We should be nurturing tourism in every way we can. 

In 2010, the Interagency Bison Management Partners authorized the formation of a Bison Citizens Working Group of which I am a member. It was comprised of a cross section of Montanans, including moderate members of the ranching industry, Jim Hagenbarth (Dillon), Lorents Grosfield (Big Timber), and Ariel Overstreet (staffer with Montana Stockgrowers Association). 

We met monthly for 2 years, during which time we did what the legislature does – we discussed and deliberated, AND recognizing that survey’s have show that 68% of Montanans favor wild bison. WE COMPROMISED, and problem solved, with a lot of effort to satisfy all of the diverse interests. 

Recently, the CWG presented its consensus recommendations regarding wild bison - some highlights of which included: 

1. expanded habitat for bison – outside the Park in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem AS A MANAGED SPECIES 
2. respect for private property rights, and 
3. recognizing the concerns of livestock producers 

The extreme position that SB143 represents is a slap in the face to the 40+ citizens who invested much time and energy to come up with equitable solutions. I believe that legislators, as representatives of our entire citizenry, have an obligation to respect the work of the CWG, and SB 143 is emphatically not the way to show that support. In closing I’ll offer one final quote from Senator Brenden’s 2011 committee hearing … he said, 'I’ve been fighting dialogue all my life'. So the approach of SB143 is 'my way or the highway'. No dialogue and no compromise. It’s a bill based on fear, anger, and emotion. I urge (at this point Glenn gets gavelled) the committee to table this bill – you will be saving Montana from the embarrassment of this bill (Ripley gavels again saying, 'That's enough. Next opponent.' You can hear Sen. Brenden say, 'Thank you Mr. Chairman.' Glenn does not get to finish his statement, but you can read it.)– protecting our livestock industry and our tourism industry from the wrath that it will generate. And Senator Brenden, I think that my beloved state of Montana would be best served by you withdrawing this bill." 

The following is a list of the many and varied Opponents who testified (in order), to Senator John Brenden's "ridiculous" SB 143: 

Senator Jonathan Windy Boy; Ruben Mathias, Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes, Tribal Councilman; McCoy Oatman, Nez Perce Tribal Executive Committee; Germaine White, Information and Education Specialist, Natural Resources Department Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes; John Harrison, Attorney Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes; Jim Posewitz, hunting and wildlife author; Mike Clark, Executive Director of the Greater Yellowstone Coalition; Claudia Narcisco, Montana Chapter Sierra Club; Kit Fischer, National Wildlife Federation, Northern Rockies and Prairies Regional Center; Craig Knowles, Bison Quest; Pat Flowers, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Region 3 Supervisor; Ervin Carlson, Intertribal Buffalo Council; Dustin Monroe, Executive Director Western Native Voice; Charles Walking Child; Glenn Monahan; Robert Magnan, Fort Peck Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes, Fish and Game Department; Nick Gevock, Montana Wildlife Federation; Burdette Birdinground, Crow Tribal Member; Ray Yazzie; Wes Heustes; Vito Quatraro, Montana Sportsmen Alliance; Patrick Dougherty, Bear Creek Council; Mike Fox, Fort Belknap Tribal Council; Stephanie Gillin, Tribal Wildlife Biologist; Matt Skoglund, Natural Resource Defense Council; Terry Tanner, Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes; Mark Azure, Director Fish and Wildlife Program, Fort Belknap; David Ditloff; Darrell Geist, Buffalo Field Campaign; Ron Skates, President, Native American Fish and Wildlife Society; Fred Matt, Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes; Christian Mackay, Montana Department of Livestock; Mike Leahy, Rocky Mountain Region Director Defenders of Wildlife; Sharon Stewart-Peregoy, American Indian Caucus. 

For those that would like to view the Montana SB 143 hearing, click on the SB 143 link below the video screen and save yourself 16 minutes of the Roll Call.

Send a message to the Montana Senate Committee of Fish and Game and tell them to kill SB 143 and stop the war on Bison. 

Choose Committee 
Use the drop down menu and choose Senate Fish and Game 
Type in SB 143 in the Bill box 
Select Against 
Type out a specific message if you wish, then hit the Send button. 

Kathryn QannaYahu 

Anti-Montana Bison Bill - SB 143

The War on Wildlife in the Montana Legislature continues. Senator John Brenden (R) Scobey has introduced an Anti-Montana Bison Bill - SB 143. This bill would require the immediate slaughter, removal and/or sale of all native bison that enter the state of Montana from Yellowstone National Park whether they are on public or private land.

SB 143 Will Create a Zero Tolerance Policy for Native Bison in Southwest Montana: Senator Brendan, an aggressive enemy of wild bison, fails to recognize bison as valued native public wildlife in Montana. He needs to hear from you.

SB 143 Violates the Public Trust as well as Private Property Rights: SB 143 gives anti-bison landowners carte blanche to kill any native public bison that happens to wander across their property. It would force the Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks department to act as an accomplice to this act. While many private landowners in the Greater Yellowstone Area enjoy native bison, SB 143 would require the Department of Livestock to enter private property without permission to slaughter and/or remove these native bison - so much for respecting private property rights.

SB 143 is also likely Unconstitutional. The Montana Supreme Court (Sacksmen and Rathbone cases) and a very recent court decision in Park County just north of Yellowstone National Park clarify that wildlife are part of the landscape. Most Montana landowners recognize this and understand that some native wildlife use of their property is a responsibility of landownership. In both Sacksmen and Rathbone the court stated, "Wild game existed here long before the coming of man. One who acquires property in Montana does so with the notice and knowledge of the presence of wild game. Accordingly, a property owner in this state must recognize there may be some injury to property from wild game for which there is no recourse."

SB 143 would unreasonably limit Native Bison Translocation in Montana only to the high-fenced National Bison Range at Moiese, which cannot handle any more bison. Thus, SB 143 would prevent any native bison restoration efforts elsewhere in Montana such as the landscape in and around the Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge in north central Montana.

SB 143 Treats Native Bison as Vermin: Finally, SB 143 would eliminate the current regulated bison hunting license and replace it with a shoot on sight license. No rules, no regulations, no management, no respect – bison could be shot on sight year round.

Comment to the Senate Fish & Game Committee: SB 143 has not been slated for a hearing yet, but it will be heard in the Montana Senate Fish & Game Committee soon. Please send your comments to the Senate Fish & Game Committee here:



On the form below, select "Committee" Scroll down the drop down menu to "Senate Fish and Game" and on the bill line, type "SB 143".

http://leg.mt.gov/css/Sessions/63rd/legwebmessage.asp

You can also email Senator Brenden directly: senatorbrenden@gmail.com

Here is a link to the language of SB 143:

http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2013/billpdf/SB0143.pdf

Please spread the word about this anti-Montana bison bill and encourage others to comment.

Thanks

Glenn Hockett
Volunteer President, Gallatin Wildlife Association 


Note added by Wildlife Advocacy: Senator Brenden is the owner of Brenden Farms in Scobey and also a recipient of $15,478 in subsidies from 2001 to present.http://farm.ewg.org/persondetail.php?custnumber=A11630091