DWIGHT GROSZ: THE REAL AGENDA OF MEASURE TWO
What is the real agenda of Measure Two, the captive-hunting initiative on the November ballot? Is it simply about abolishing hunting of farmed elk and deer. One of the big question marks out there amongst the public is, "people own domestic elk and deer?" They were purchased from the federal government or the U.S. Biological Survey back in the 1920s, same time as buffalo. They are several generations removed from the wild. They are private property same as buffalo.
The measure: BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA: SECTION 1. A new section to chapter 36-01 of the North Dakota Century Code is created and enacted as follows: Fee killing of certain captive game animals prohibited – Penalty – Exception. A person is guilty of a class A misdemeanor if the person obtains fees or other remuneration from another person for the killing or attempted killing of privately-owned big game species or exotic mammals confined in or released from any man-made enclosure designed to prevent escape. This section does not apply to the actions of a government employee or agent to control an animal population, to prevent or control diseases, or when government action is otherwise required or authorized by law. SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Act becomes effective on November 1, 2012.
The measure does not say farmed elk, bison or deer. It does not say hunting, owner or on farm slaughter. If it were passed in Nov. it will have to go to court to decipher its code. A judge may throw it out as it means nothing. However, it is written so vaguely, a judge could interpret it broadly. It could have far more ramifications than what the public is being told or what voters would even allow. Language like this would never make it out of a legislative committee. It would be amended to say what it means.
The sponsers of the measure are a coalition of three things.No.1 Elitist fair chasers. If you don't hunt the way they do then just stay home. No.2 Animal Rights Advocates. They like the language of this measure as it would be placed in the livestock section of the NDCC. Think about it, no killing or attempted killing of an animal confined in or released from any man-made enclosure designed to prevent escape. It could be a future virus planted in the livestock section. No.3 Certain current/retired federal government employees from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the United States Geological Survey. There are seven who are/were sponsers of the fair chase initiative in 2007 and now in 2009. They refuse to recognize "farmed elk and deer." Theirs is a militant approach. Nature knows best.
Whether it's high fence hunting, cattle burping and farting methane, navigateable waters, wolves, CRP, spotted owls, wetlands, global warming, lead ammunition and just about every other politcal debate we are having, it increasingly defines the two world views between states rights and federal encroachment.
Those who don't believe governmental control and regulation are the answer to every problem should be in panic mode. We simply do not know how to deal with the situation effectively. We can't identify who is pulling the levers and why.
Propondents of statism-the concentration of economic controls and planning in the hands of a highly centralized government-not only understand this but are actively creating crisis in order to advance their agenda.
Measure two is about the delivery-ethics, disease, it's not fair-coming from the fair chase committee. Create a "crisis discipline." Pound the table with emotion when the facts are not on their side.
Using the fair chase committee as a front and using the press they realize that there is no such thing as bad publicity. Social change is always about pressure. Newsworthy or colorfull demonstrations in the streets are the tested, tried and true method to grow the number of uninterested voters. Trial by media.
The chairman of the fair chase committee, Roger Kaseman moved to North Dakota about six years ago from California. His activities with the Humane Society are well documented. At a public forum in Jamestown ND he said, "We do not recognize property rights." The word "we" is plural. He was speaking for the committee as a whole. The man seated next to him was Lloyd Jones, sponser of the measure, federal employee with the USFWS.
The proponents of the measure do not want the government to take physical possession of the animal because then they would have to compensate the owner.
Property is defined as five things:
No.1 Possession
No.2 Use
No.3 Control
No.4 To the exclusion of others
No.5 Disposition
This isn't about the ethics of hunting in a high fence as much as it is a stripping away of options and economic value on property with no compensation. Take away the option of how these animals are sold and make them worth as much as an unwanted horse. Force every elk and deer grower out of business. That is the real agenda.
Please vote no on Measure Two
DakotaBeacon