BILL INTRODUCED TO ANSWER THIS QUESTION

Are Bison Wildlife or Livestock?

By Bill Schneider, 1-27-09

	Is this a wild animal? Photo courtesy of the Gallatin Wildlife Association.

If there’s a conservation issue more volatile or confusing than the bison controversy centered in Yellowstone National Park, I’m not sure what it is. And enduring, too, going way back to before brucellosis became big news. Bison migrating out of the park have always been controversial.

Through the decades, lawmakers and agencies have made many attempts to address the problem, but each new law or policy somehow seems do nothing but add a new layer of complication and make the solution even more elusive, if not impenetrable. Now, a long overdue bill in the Montana legislature could start reversing that trend and take a giant step forward in the neverending debate.

One basic problem is definition. The livestock industry considers bison “livestock” and conservationists consider the species “wildlife,” with the livestock definition ruling the day. As a result, the Montana Department of Livestock (DOL) has responsibility for bison management.

That fact is the focus of HB 253, co-sponsored by Mike Phillips (D-Bozeman) and Ted Washburn (R-Bozeman). The sure-to-be-controversial bill is, according to a flier distributed by its primary ball-carrier, the Gallatin Wildlife Association (GWA), “a bi-partisan first step toward returning bison management to wildlife professionals, while respecting and protecting private property rights.”

Keeping in mind the complexity of the bison issue, the proposed legislation:

• Defines bison as “valued, native wildlife.”

• Takes bison management authority away from the DOL and gives it to the Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks (FWP).

• Protects the private property rights.

If this issue interests you, and I hope it does, you have a chance on Thursday, January 29 (3 pm, room 303) to support or oppose this “first step” when the House Fish, Wildlife and Parks Committee hears testimony on HB 253, the Montana Wild Buffalo Recovery and Conservation Act of 2009. 

(P.S. That title illustrates the depth of the disagreement. We can’t even agree on what to call the animal, bison or buffalo, but that’s another story for another time.)

“Bison aren’t livestock,” GWA President Glenn Hockett told NewWest.Net in a phone interview. “They’re wildlife, so they should be managed by FWP.”

The Greater Yellowstone Area is the home of Ameria’s largest wild bison population and the only wild herd in Montana, Hockett explained. Even though HB 253 would cover all of Montana, not only the Yellowstone area, it does not affect ranchers who raise bison commercially. It only applies to wild, free-ranging populations and that, in essence, restricts its impact to the Greater Yellowstone Area.

“While HB 253 would largely transfer management authority for publicly owned wild bison to FWP, the bill maintains a spirit of cooperation between the FWP and the DOL regarding conflicts on private lands,” Hockett added. “Private property rights must be protected and respected, for both those concerned about bison on their property and those that welcome bison onto their lands. The current law allows the DOL to trespass onto private property without permission.”

That seems like innovative strategy to me. The GWA has packaged bison recovery as a property rights bill, and the group has solicited and received much support from ranchers. “This bill will allow private landowners to lead and limit wild bison recovery,” Hockett said.

“We anticipate a large number of diverse supporters to attend the hearing to testify for HB 253,” he speculated, but probably not much support from the livestock industry or government agencies.

The end-game, as explained by Hockett, is the creation of a wild bison hunting district north of Yellowstone Park where the FWP could manage a free-ranging bison population like any other big game animal, including a real, “fair chase” hunting season. “We need to manage bison like elk,” he emphasized.

“There is a lot of habitat that’s conflict free, that doesn’t have cattle,” he noted, referring to several private landowners who actually want bison on their property and to public land (state and federal) currently devoid of cattle.

“Right now, bison can’t even enter public land that doesn’t have cattle on it,” he explained. “The FWP sees this as an enforcement issue. We’d like to see the biologists involved and see how many bison we can harvest on a sustainable basis, no different than mule deer or elk.”

For landowners who don’t want bison on their land, the proposed legislation maintains the status quo, he said. “The bill clearly states that if a landowner doesn’t want bison on his or her ranch, the FWP in cooperation with DOL will remove them and if the agencies don’t get there in time, the landowner can shoot the bison.”

So what’s FWP think about having a little more responsibility? I talked to Chris Smith, chief of staff, about that and he said the governor’s office “has taken the lead” on this bill, so couldn’t really comment on it. He did say, however, that both the FWP and DOL would be making “informational testimony” at the hearing, which means the agencies aren’t supporting or opposing the bill.

From my perspective, we need to start unraveling the mess we’ve gotten ourselves into over bison management. The essence of the bill is simple--bison are wild animals. Doesn’t sound like a revelation to most people, but legally, it isn’t clear, so having our lawmakers clear it up is long overdue.

HB 253 won’t solve the bison problem, but at least it will point us in the right direction. Let’s pass it, and then, build on it.

Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.