S
shedhunter2
Guest
Federal court decision in Arizona seen as threat to South Dakota hunting system By Kevin Woster, Journal Staff Writer
A federal court decision in Arizona recently could strengthen the effort of some West River landowners to force the state Game, Fish & Parks Commission to authorize more big-game licenses for nonresident hunters.
Elm Springs rancher Pat Trask, a landowner-rights advocate who believes that state nonresident hunting license quotas are unconstitutional, said Tuesday that the Arizona case would be valuable if he and other landowners decided to challenge the GF&P regulations in court. Trask said he was laying the legal groundwork for such a challenge.
"We knew our position had solid standing in regard to the Commerce Clause and the Constitution," Trask said. "What this (Arizona) case does is make the solid standing of our case understood by the citizens of South Dakota."
Some sportsmen's advocates argue that the Arizona ruling and its potential to eventually affect license distribution in South Dakota could further diminish hunting opportunities for resident hunters. Black Hills Sportsmen president Jeff Olson of Rapid City said Tuesday that forcing GF&P to open up big-game licenses to more nonresidents would mean fewer residents would be able to hunt.
"I think it's huge," Olson said of the July 13 ruling by U.S. District Judge Robert Broomfield, which declared Arizona's 10 percent cap on certain nonresident hunting licenses unconstitutional. "I think it could destroy hunting in South Dakota as we have known it," Olson said.
The Broomfield decision is forcing the Arizona Game and Fish Commission to develop a different method to distribute permits for elk and deer hunters this fall. If the ruling stands up to appeal, it also could create a precedent beneficial to a challenge to nonresident limits in South Dakota's big-game licensing system.
GF&P Secretary John Cooper said the ruling had the potential to change South Dakota's system on nonresident big-game hunting. But big-game licensing for the hunting seasons this fall will continue as usual, he said.
"This particular decision is in a different judicial circuit than we're in. It doesn't affect South Dakota," Cooper said. "We won't make any recommendations for change in South Dakota unless we receive specific mandates from the Legislature or unless there's some sort of specific ruling in federal court."
Cooper also is watching a federal case in North Dakota that challenged that state's restrictions on nonresident waterfowl hunters.
South Dakota's elk, bighorn sheep and mountain goat seasons are closed entirely to nonresident hunters. Nonresidents may apply for a few available permits in the East River prairie rifle season, but only after two resident-only drawings. In the West River rifle deer season, 8 percent of the licenses are offered to nonresidents in the initial drawing.
Those limitations mean that some nonresident hunters who are willing to pay to hunt trophy deer aren't able to do so because they fail to draw one of the limited licenses. That situation led some landowners to violate the law in order to serve pay hunters from other states. After separate undercover investigations in the 1980s and 1990s, authorities indicted a group of ranchers in the Wall area who were operating a commercial hunting operation.
Trask, who was running a commercial hunting operation himself, was investigated but never charged. Some of his friends and relatives were indicted, however. None of that would have happened if the Arizona ruling had been accepted as law years ago, Trask said.
"Those families would not have been exposed to an avalanche of stress, which has cost them their health, a significant portion of their lives and immense financial pain," said Trask, who contends that GF&P had previously led landowners to believe that certain deer-license transfers were acceptable.
GF&P official John Wrede of Rapid City, who once worked as a conservation officer in Wall and began initial investigation on the commercial operations there, said he and another officer there never led landowners to believe that transferring deer tags was OK. Wrede said it was unfortunate that landowners and their families suffered because of the investigation and charges but that that didn't mean the law or the legal actions were wrong.
"They had to know it wasn't something we were going to be lax in enforcing," Wrede said. "Businesspeople, which these ranch families are, routinely get crossways of regulations. I have trouble distinguishing this unusual hardship on a segment of the ag community that chose willingly to violate the law."
Trask believes that law is on its way out and that the Arizona ruling will help. He will discuss the case and its effects during a meeting of landowners at 7:30 p.m. Thursday, Aug. 5, at New Underwood Community Center.
Contact Kevin Woster at 394-8413 or [email protected]
Back to top Email this story Print this story
This Article was published online on Wednesday, August 04, 2004
Get the whole story every day! ? Home Delivery - Click Here to Subscribe ? Headline E-mailer - Click Here to Subscribe
A federal court decision in Arizona recently could strengthen the effort of some West River landowners to force the state Game, Fish & Parks Commission to authorize more big-game licenses for nonresident hunters.
Elm Springs rancher Pat Trask, a landowner-rights advocate who believes that state nonresident hunting license quotas are unconstitutional, said Tuesday that the Arizona case would be valuable if he and other landowners decided to challenge the GF&P regulations in court. Trask said he was laying the legal groundwork for such a challenge.
"We knew our position had solid standing in regard to the Commerce Clause and the Constitution," Trask said. "What this (Arizona) case does is make the solid standing of our case understood by the citizens of South Dakota."
Some sportsmen's advocates argue that the Arizona ruling and its potential to eventually affect license distribution in South Dakota could further diminish hunting opportunities for resident hunters. Black Hills Sportsmen president Jeff Olson of Rapid City said Tuesday that forcing GF&P to open up big-game licenses to more nonresidents would mean fewer residents would be able to hunt.
"I think it's huge," Olson said of the July 13 ruling by U.S. District Judge Robert Broomfield, which declared Arizona's 10 percent cap on certain nonresident hunting licenses unconstitutional. "I think it could destroy hunting in South Dakota as we have known it," Olson said.
The Broomfield decision is forcing the Arizona Game and Fish Commission to develop a different method to distribute permits for elk and deer hunters this fall. If the ruling stands up to appeal, it also could create a precedent beneficial to a challenge to nonresident limits in South Dakota's big-game licensing system.
GF&P Secretary John Cooper said the ruling had the potential to change South Dakota's system on nonresident big-game hunting. But big-game licensing for the hunting seasons this fall will continue as usual, he said.
"This particular decision is in a different judicial circuit than we're in. It doesn't affect South Dakota," Cooper said. "We won't make any recommendations for change in South Dakota unless we receive specific mandates from the Legislature or unless there's some sort of specific ruling in federal court."
Cooper also is watching a federal case in North Dakota that challenged that state's restrictions on nonresident waterfowl hunters.
South Dakota's elk, bighorn sheep and mountain goat seasons are closed entirely to nonresident hunters. Nonresidents may apply for a few available permits in the East River prairie rifle season, but only after two resident-only drawings. In the West River rifle deer season, 8 percent of the licenses are offered to nonresidents in the initial drawing.
Those limitations mean that some nonresident hunters who are willing to pay to hunt trophy deer aren't able to do so because they fail to draw one of the limited licenses. That situation led some landowners to violate the law in order to serve pay hunters from other states. After separate undercover investigations in the 1980s and 1990s, authorities indicted a group of ranchers in the Wall area who were operating a commercial hunting operation.
Trask, who was running a commercial hunting operation himself, was investigated but never charged. Some of his friends and relatives were indicted, however. None of that would have happened if the Arizona ruling had been accepted as law years ago, Trask said.
"Those families would not have been exposed to an avalanche of stress, which has cost them their health, a significant portion of their lives and immense financial pain," said Trask, who contends that GF&P had previously led landowners to believe that certain deer-license transfers were acceptable.
GF&P official John Wrede of Rapid City, who once worked as a conservation officer in Wall and began initial investigation on the commercial operations there, said he and another officer there never led landowners to believe that transferring deer tags was OK. Wrede said it was unfortunate that landowners and their families suffered because of the investigation and charges but that that didn't mean the law or the legal actions were wrong.
"They had to know it wasn't something we were going to be lax in enforcing," Wrede said. "Businesspeople, which these ranch families are, routinely get crossways of regulations. I have trouble distinguishing this unusual hardship on a segment of the ag community that chose willingly to violate the law."
Trask believes that law is on its way out and that the Arizona ruling will help. He will discuss the case and its effects during a meeting of landowners at 7:30 p.m. Thursday, Aug. 5, at New Underwood Community Center.
Contact Kevin Woster at 394-8413 or [email protected]
Back to top Email this story Print this story
This Article was published online on Wednesday, August 04, 2004
Get the whole story every day! ? Home Delivery - Click Here to Subscribe ? Headline E-mailer - Click Here to Subscribe
![20211028_171704[1].jpg](/xf/data/xfmg/thumbnail/18/18790-8f81b0f3fadefca509e48d4a0c18d3f6.jpg?1636036606)
