Buck Hollow Sporting Goods - click or touch to visit their website Midwest Habitat Company

Ban Hunting in Fenced Preserves?

blake

blake

Life Member
North Dakota High Fence Hunting Going to Vote

BISMARCK, N.D. (AP) — North Dakota voters in November will decide whether to ban big-game hunting in fenced preserves.

Secretary of State Al Jaeger on Thursday said supporters of the measure submitted more than the necessary 12,844 petition signatures to qualify the measure for the Nov. 2 ballot. Jaeger said it will be listed on the ballot as Measure No. 2.

The measure seeks to abolish fenced preserves where people pay to shoot big game such as deer and elk. Its supporters say fenced hunting is unethical, while opponents say a ban would violate the property rights of those who run fenced-hunting operations.
 
Wow. I'd like to know what group(s) sponsored this piece of legisaltion. I didn't know there were 12,844 registered voters in North Dakota.

Bad piece of legislation in my opinion. Hope it doesn't pass.
 
I'm not a high fence guy, but this would be one foot in the door for the anti's. While I'd say a vast majority of us on this site are the same way.... I'd rather us have them as an option, than to have them banned by anti's.....

imo
 
Push by Anti's is bad, but with all the fear of disease, keeping deer in close proximity is not a good thing. Some of the disease problems we have now, can be traced back to enclosures.
 
Good points by loneranger and Iowa1. It pretty much draws the parallel lines in the sand. Property rights vs. greater good. So as a compromise these establishments should be regulated (and I believe they have a lot of regulations to follow) to try and mitigate their threat but the property owner still retains their right to pen raise animals.

I still wonder if it was anti hunting groups or health concerns. My money is on antis.

The 'Bonker
 
I was curious about how this started, whether it was a group of anits or what. It just didn’t seem right that North Dakota would have enough anti hunting groups to make a difference. What I found was rather eye opening.

A group called North Dakota Hunters for Fair Chase is using a process called public ballot initiative to get a public vote on shutting down high fenced hunting. This is a process that starts with the Secretary of State not the legislature. All a group has to do is get a petition and have it signed by a percentage of registered voters then the initiative is put on the ballot for residents to vote on. Iowa does not have this process.

The North Dakota State Legislature voted down a similar law in the early 2000’s citing property owner rights. The NDHFC using the public ballot initiative is practicing direct democracy in trying to get this law passed with out the aid or hindrance of the North Dakota Legislature. The question will be on the State Ballot on November 2nd.

A similar law was passed in Montana using the same public ballot initiative.

So when I said this is a bad piece of legislation I was mistaken because it is not coming from the legislature but the voters of North Dakota.. At this point I don’t know what to think of it. Vox populi will rule and can that be bad?

If you want to do some interesting reading search on “North Dakota bans high fence hunting” “public ballot initiative” and “Montana high fence hunting”.

What I’m still trying to figure out is how bond referendums and initiatives like Iowa City’s 21 and over ordinance can get put on a ballot on a local level but we can’t do that on a state referendum. Guess I shouldn’t have slept through my government classes.

I think I have my facts straight on this one. If not please feel free to educate me. I am here to learn as much as anything else.

The ‘Bonker
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom