Letters to the editor May 8

Issues on our minds

A recent article says “we should arm ourselves with knowledge and leave religion out of it as dictated by our Constitution.” The much-maligned issues of separation of church and state, national christian heritage, and climate change are continually on our minds.

In summarizing the 1892 Supreme Court decision of Rector, Etc., of Holy Trinity Church v. United States the court looked at our laws, businesses, life and customs and stated “These, and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass of organic utterances that this is a Christian nation.” In 1892 this was a Christian nation.

The Supreme Court case of Everson v. Board of Education (1947) is the origin of the separation of church and state statement. It was based on a letter from Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists, some 10 years after the Constitution and 1st Amendment were enacted. It is not in either. Joseph Story, U.S. Supreme Court Justice in 1833, reveals the intent of the 1st Amendment (page 380 Comment 991) in his “Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States. David Barton also discusses this in his book “The Myth of Separation. Both books are available through the internet.

In his book “1421 The Year China Discovered America” Mr. Menzies mentions the mapping of the north coast of Greenland (by ship) and refers to the official records of Sigrid Bjornsdottir’s wedding in 1408 (pp349), recorded in the state archives in Oslo Norway. Greenland was warm and green in the 1420s, until the mini ice age of the 1430s. Somebody must have bought a lot of carbon credits back in those days to reverse that trend.

—Warren Williamson, Kalispell

Trapping inhumane

If you’ve been wondering why our state is extending the season in which wolves can be legally trapped, I encourage you to visit the website trapfreemt.org to learn the dismaying facts about this outdated mode of wildlife control.

After Governor Gianforte was fined for violating a legal requirement for trapping, I learned from a radio report that the traps are allowed to remain unchecked for 48 hours. 48 hours to allow an animal to suffer is unconscionable. Maybe you’ve had a domestic pet accidentally caught in a wildlife trap, as I have. The trauma and pain to the trapped animal is something that no wildlife should have to endure for 10 minutes, as my pet did, much less for 48 hours.

There are more compassionate and ethical ways to remove these “nuisance” animals from the landscape that is their home. Traps indiscriminately kill nontargeted species or sometimes maim them. The facts indicate a staggering loss of wildlife through trapping. Montana should move forward to tighten regulations on trapping, not backward toward loosening them.

Wildlife create the conditions that keep ecosystems healthy. They are interdependent species and the land depends on them for rejuvenation. We humans can do a better job of stewarding the land by stewarding its creatures in ethical and compassionate ways.

—Debbie Mueller, Butte

Missed opportunity

During the past three decades, nonprofit organizations (501c(3) have been carving up agricultural and forest lands in Montana like the Christmas goose using tax free dollars to buy land and transfer it to federal ownership or encumber it with restrictive easements or covenants.

Hundreds of thousands of acres have been taken out of production over the years by nonprofit organizations and that trend continues at an alarming rate. There are far too many nonprofit groups that operate with impunity in Montana because there are few established parameters that regulate nonprofit activity.

At least seven Western states have laws on the books that regulate land purchases by nonprofit organizations but Montana continues to have nothing.

HB 677 represented an important first step in developing some sideboards within which certain nonprofit organizations must operate but the bill was unfortunately tanked by the agriculture committee.

We must remember that virtually all legislative bills have both proponents and opponents; bills are never perfect but if a greater good is served for the majority of people, those bills should go forward. In the case of HB 677, the overall benefits would have dramatically outweighed any downsides.

The American Prairie Reserve’s (APR) stated goal for Montana underscores the need for HB 677. APR plans to purchase 500,000 acres of agricultural land to leverage use of three million acres of public land for the creation of a wildlife preserve the size of Connecticut. We must ask ourselves what charitable cause does APR serve by taking thousands of acres of farm and ranch land out of production that in turns adversely impacts the local economy and gives wealthy donors a major tax write-off?

Even Montana FWP engages in mega easement deals with landowners and nonprofit organizations.

Representative Dan Bartel’s effort to protect our agricultural economy through sponsorship of HB 677 is greatly appreciated despite a lack of support from faint-hearted Republican legislators who need a trip to the woodshed.

—Ron Poertner, Winifred