PGI logo cropped.png
Congressional Millionaire’s Club
The Personal Gain Index shines a light on how members of Congress benefit during their tenure.





Montana Commercial Trapping Amendment (2010)

From Ballotpedia
Revision as of 11:07, 20 September 2012 by BaileyL (Talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search
Not on Ballot
Proposed allot measures that were not on a ballot
This measure did not or
will not appear on a ballot
The Montana Commercial Trapping Amendment did not appear as an initiated state statute on the November 2, 2010 statewide ballot in Montana. The measure would have prohibited the trapping of all wild mammals and birds on public lands in the state. The petition drive deadline to submit signatures for ballot consideration was June 18, 2010. The petition drive effort must have collected at least 24,337 signatures since it is a proposed state statute. However, the measure did not collect enough signatures.[1][2]

Text of measure

Ballot language

The ballot language of the measure read:[3]

I-160 prohibits trapping of all wild mammals and birds by any means on public lands in Montana, subject to limited exceptions. It allows trapping for scientific purposes and for breeding of migratory game birds. It also allows trapping by public employees to protect public health and safety. However, it prohibits commercial use of wild mammals and birds trapped on public lands for any of the allowable purposes.

I-160 costs approximately $47,780 of state funds annually, resulting from a loss of trapping license revenue.

[ ] FOR prohibiting trapping of all wild mammals and birds on public lands in Montana, subject to limited exceptions.
[ ] AGAINST prohibiting trapping of all wild mammals and birds on public lands in Montana, subject to limited exceptions.

Support

Supporters

  • A group called Footloose Montana was spearheading the petition drive to collect signatures and place the question on the ballot.

Members of a Florence-based group called Footloose Montana were circulating petitions to ban trapping on public land. The group was formed in 2007 and was in opposition to trapping in public lands, citing a brutality in the method. Montanans For Trap Free Public Lands was promoting the intitiative.[4]

Campaign tactics and strategies

  • Supporters had planned to collect signatures on June 6, 2010 near the Bozeman Brewing Company, and had also planned "to educate, enlighten and entertain to promote trap-free use of state and federal lands" while collecting the signatures.[5]

Opposition

Opponents

The following groups had claimed opposition to the measure:[6]

  • The Montanans for Effective Wildlife Management is main campaign against the measure.
  • Montana Trappers Association
  • U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance of Columbus, Ohio

Campaign finance

Support

The main campaign for the passage of the measure, Montanans for Trap-Free Public Lands, had raised over $20,000 through May 19, and have spent almost $8,400. According to reports, the most money donated was from Footloose Montana for Trap Free Land at $3,000.[6]

Opposition

The main campaign against the measure, Montanans for Effective Wildlife Management, had raised more than $70,000 according to reports, and had spent approximately $59,000 of that money, as of May 19, 2010. The following organizations have donated money to the campaign:[6]

Contributor Amount
Ballot Issues Coalition of Washington, D.C. $12,500
Montana Trappers Association $10,000
U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance of Columbus, Ohio $5,000

Path to the ballot

See also Laws governing the initiative process in Montana

Petition circulators had until the June 18, 2010 petition drive deadline to turn in the required 24,337 signatures, since the proposed measure was a citizen-initiated state statute. Reports out of Montana were saying that the measure's sponsors were uncertain, but hopeful, that they had collected enough signatures to qualify it for the ballot. Counties had until July 16, 2010 to send verified signatures to the Montana Secretary of State's office, where the Secretary of State may or may not qualify for the ballot, pending another review of signatures. The measure did not collect enough signatures for the ballot.[7][2]

See also

External links

Additional reading

References