Rulings like this will keep Montana from become Texas
Courts continue to dismiss game farm appeals
by JENNY JOHNSON - Ravalli Republic
A federal appeals court Monday dismissed all claims in a suit alleging Montana's initiative outlawing the hunting of captive elk, deer and other animals violated the rights of game farm operators.
The three-member panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with a 2003 Federal District Court ruling that game farmers who sued the state failed to make a case that the law was unconstitutional.
Game farmers Bob Spoklie of Kalispell and Kim Kafka of Havre appealed the district court ruling that also threw out their claims. The pair asserted that the state owed them damages from lost business, lost commerce and that the prohibition of shooting game farm animals for a fee was a "takings," - it took away from their property rights.
The federal lawsuit contended Initiative 143, which voters approved in 2000, violated federal protections and amounted to an illegal "taking" of their property.
The 16-page Court of Appeals opinion written by Judge William A. Fletcher affirmed the dismissal by the lower court. He said that I-143 did not violate the property rights of game farm owners and that Spoklie and Kafka "failed to establish that there has been a taking." Their properties, their animals, the meat and animal by-products can still be sold for whatever purpose.
The case is one of 13 filed over I-143. Last month, a state District Court threw out another case making similar claims.
District Judge Dorothy McCarter of Helena ruled that the government does not have to compensate owners because the 2000 law did not result in an illegal taking of property from owners.
One of the plaintiffs in the case, Len Wallace who used to own a game farm south of Darby but now lives in Idaho, told the Associated Press that he would likely not appeal the decision to the Montana Supreme court because he doesn't believe the result would be different.
Len and Pam Wallace and Bruce and Shirley Buhmann sued the state in June 2002, seeking more than $22 million in damages for lost profits and investments.
McCarter's ruling said that owners "should have anticipated the possibility that future regulations could impede their anticipated business profits."
"The intended effect of I-143 was to reduce the number of game farms and captive game animals in Montana, thereby reducing the potential contact between captive game animals and wild game," she wrote.
"This clearly bears a reasonable relationship to the state's interest in protecting wild game populations from the spread of diseases and from genetic pollution by game farm animals."
Courts continue to dismiss game farm appeals
by JENNY JOHNSON - Ravalli Republic
A federal appeals court Monday dismissed all claims in a suit alleging Montana's initiative outlawing the hunting of captive elk, deer and other animals violated the rights of game farm operators.
The three-member panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with a 2003 Federal District Court ruling that game farmers who sued the state failed to make a case that the law was unconstitutional.
Game farmers Bob Spoklie of Kalispell and Kim Kafka of Havre appealed the district court ruling that also threw out their claims. The pair asserted that the state owed them damages from lost business, lost commerce and that the prohibition of shooting game farm animals for a fee was a "takings," - it took away from their property rights.
The federal lawsuit contended Initiative 143, which voters approved in 2000, violated federal protections and amounted to an illegal "taking" of their property.
The 16-page Court of Appeals opinion written by Judge William A. Fletcher affirmed the dismissal by the lower court. He said that I-143 did not violate the property rights of game farm owners and that Spoklie and Kafka "failed to establish that there has been a taking." Their properties, their animals, the meat and animal by-products can still be sold for whatever purpose.
The case is one of 13 filed over I-143. Last month, a state District Court threw out another case making similar claims.
District Judge Dorothy McCarter of Helena ruled that the government does not have to compensate owners because the 2000 law did not result in an illegal taking of property from owners.
One of the plaintiffs in the case, Len Wallace who used to own a game farm south of Darby but now lives in Idaho, told the Associated Press that he would likely not appeal the decision to the Montana Supreme court because he doesn't believe the result would be different.
Len and Pam Wallace and Bruce and Shirley Buhmann sued the state in June 2002, seeking more than $22 million in damages for lost profits and investments.
McCarter's ruling said that owners "should have anticipated the possibility that future regulations could impede their anticipated business profits."
"The intended effect of I-143 was to reduce the number of game farms and captive game animals in Montana, thereby reducing the potential contact between captive game animals and wild game," she wrote.
"This clearly bears a reasonable relationship to the state's interest in protecting wild game populations from the spread of diseases and from genetic pollution by game farm animals."
