Bill would restrict relocation of Yellowstone bison

Bison hunker down in a spring snowstorm in Yellowstone National Park's Lamar Valley. Plans to relocate some of park's bison have proved controversial this session. (By Stefanie Kilts, Copyright 2008)

By LAUREN RUSSELL
Community News Service
UM School of Journalism

HELENA – An eastern Montana senator is trying to prevent the Fort Peck Reservation – and anywhere in the state besides the National Bison Range – from getting bison from Yellowstone National Park, even if they’re certified brucellosis free.

Senate Bill 337, sponsored by Sen. John Brenden, R-Scobey, would prevent state wildlife officials from moving quarantined Yellowstone bison to other parts of the state, including the Fort Peck and Fort Belknap reservations, which have applied to receive them.

Brenden said the bill, which passed the Senate 31-19, is intended to protect ranchers and landowners who worry the animals may still carry the disease, which can cause cattle to abort their calves.

“In my neck of the woods, in northeastern Montana and other areas, I’ve heard from property owners, ranchers, farmers and what have you who are very much against it,” Brenden told the House Fish, Wildlife and Parks Committee Thursday. “It’s costing our ranchers and farmers a lot of money to not be brucellosis-free, and I don’t know why we would want to be experimented on. There’s still a lot we don’t know about brucellosis.”

The bison at issue are part of a study started by state and federal wildlife agencies in 2005 to decide if, after years of quarantine and monitoring, some Yellowstone bison can be reintroduced to the range. Chris Smith, deputy director of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, said that a group of 41 bison has already been approved for relocation to the Wind River Indian Reservation in central Wyoming.

Supporters of the bill included representatives from the Montana Stockgrowers Association, the Montana Cattlewomen’s Association, the Montana Farm Bureau Association and county commissioners from Valley and Phillips counties.

They questioned the validity of claims that the bison would be brucellosis free, and they fear the bison could escape to mingle with cattle, exposing them to the disease that has cost the beef industry millions in recent years.

“We spent $33 million to gain (class free status) in 1985, so the livestock industry’s pretty sensitive to this issue right now, and the possibility of these animals getting shipped around to different parts of the state – and how other states will view this – is a huge concern to us,” said Jay Bodner of the Stockgrowers Association.

When Montana lost its brucellosis-free status after two separate cases of brucellosis were discovered in the Paradise Valley in 2007 and 2008, the state was downgraded to Class A status, meaning livestock producers have to test all sexually intact cattle over 18 months of age within 30 days of export. The testing is costly.

“Our members are on high alert when it comes to brucellosis,” said Ariel Overstreet of the Montana Cattlewomen’s Association. “That has been a multi-million dollar hit to our industry.”

But officials from FWP and the Department of Livestock testified that the feds have given the relocation of the animals a green light, based on the same rigorous brucellosis testing standards that the cattle industry uses for its beef.

“The bison quarantine feasibility study uses sound science – science based on the code of federal regulations and state law, and the protocols that are being used far exceed those accepted for livestock or movement of bovines around the nation,” said Marty Zaluski, a veterinarian for Livestock Department. “And it’s the same science that in fact cattle producers in Montana use to argue that our cattle are safe.”

Smith said the bison would only be moved to areas that demonstrate the ability to meet strict management standards.

“It’s very well thought out, very carefully conducted, and it would only be implemented in whatever areas we chose to bring the bison,” Smith said. “You can bet that wherever we translocation these animals, we are going to make sure the facility is secure.”

Representatives from the Fort Peck and Fort Belknap reservations said they had doubts about the true intentions of the bill, saying opposition to the tribe’s management of the bison – not the threat of disease – is the real reason for the ranchers’ fears.

“They’re using the threat of disease as an excuse,” said Robert Magnun, director of the Fort Peck Tribes Fish and Game Department. “If I thought the bison had the brucellosis, I wouldn’t bring them here.”

Tracy King, a councilman and former tribal president of Fort Belknap, said that the tribe has successfully managed a small herd of bison for 40 years, and brucellosis isn’t a problem. The tribe would use the Yellowstone bison in ritual practices and as a healthy food source in their attempt to combat diabetes.

“Our record is far better than that of Yellowstone National Park,” he said.

Jonathon Proctor, representing Defenders of Wildlife, agreed. “This bill is really about tribal wildlife agencies and a lack of trust in their ability to manage the bison,” he said. “Let’s work with them to help them manage them.”

Brenden said his bill wasn’t intended to discriminate against the tribes but to prevent situations in which poor management could lead to bison getting out onto private land.

“There isn’t anybody that could guarantee that buffalo, any livestock of any kind, will never get out of a fence or enclosure,” Brenden said. “People think this is a bill that’s anti-tribe. I’m no anti-Indian or anti-tribal person … it comes from a management situation, and it’s not just the tribes I’m picking on. Anybody could have gotten these bison. It’s just that we’ve had so much trouble with the tribe at Fort Peck with their buffalo getting out … I don’t call that responsibility.”

The Fort Peck tribe’s Magnun said later that though some people have spoken out about not wanting the reservation to acquire the bison, most who have participated in local public meetings have been supportive, not “overwhelmingly against it,” as Brenden said last week’s hearing.

Magnun also said that though the bison occasionally escape their enclosure, fish and game officials are quickly on hand to round them up.

“Sometimes those bulls do get out, they push right through the fence. But when they get out, we push them right back in,” Magnun said.

Other opponents of the bill included the Confederated Salish and Kootenai tribes, the governor’s office, the Greater Yellowstone Coalition, the Yellowstone Buffalo Foundation and the National Parks Conservation Association.