Liberals Claim Montana Republicans Are Pushing “Anti-Wildlife Bills”


Despite their only interface with actual wildlife having come from the zoo, Montana’s granola-lefties are incensed as of late over what they call “anti-wildlife bills” going through the state legislature. Funded almost exclusively by out-of-state special interest groups on the west and east coasts, rabid animal rights activists are insisting that Montanans defer to extremist groups on animal control.

Our Green Planet, which is run from New York City by vegans, has highlighted nine bills they claim “will destroy Montana wildlife.” These include a bill to allow Montanans to capture and kill an unlimited amount of wolves, so long as the statewide population stays above 15-mating pairs of wolves (SB314), implement the use of bounties to incentivize wolf killing (SB267), the use of snare to capture wolves (HB224), extending the wolf trapping season (HB225), allow Montanans to kill grizzly bears eating their livestock (SB98), limiting grizzly bear relocation (SB337), using dogs to hunt wolves (HB268), and more.

Montanans largely recognize that these bills protect wildlife from the untenable population of wolves, a nuissance and dangerous animal, which decimate the population of animals that residents hunt, eat, and make a living from in the outdoors tourism industry. Killing wolves typically protects our economy, livestock, and wildlife, like elk and deer.

The Missoula Current, a far-left publication largely known for fake news and leftist commentary, ran a similar article (see below).

That article reveals that “[sixteen] retired employees of Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks and three former FWP commissioners joined other biologists from tribal nations and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in a letter asking the Montana Legislature and Gov. Greg Gianforte to kill seven bill that seek to increase opportunities to [control wildlife populations].”

Attempting to speak for ranchers, the article’s author, Laura Lundquist, cited the above-mentioned letter, “Farmers and ranchers don’t want to get up in the night to find out who is spotlighting and shooting on their property.”

Of course, it’s farmers and ranchers who are asking for the capacity to limit wolf populations for the sake of their livelihood. Landquist, on the other hand, is a Democrat activist who supports abortion rights, and is significantly less interested in saving the lives of actual humans.

Defenders of Wildlife, a Washington D.C.-based organization focused on protecting wolves a long way away from Washington D.C., issued a similar warning (see below).

Meanwhile, Montana’s Republicans are doing their job of protecting the state’s interests, including that of outdoorsmen, ranchers and ag-producers, and property owners who are rightly concerned that predator populations are out of control. Perhaps no better metaphor exists for the difference between Republicans and Democrats.

Republicans are trying to protect the state from predators, and Democrats want to protect the predators. It’s a fitting illustration that voters should remember.


Bringing you conservative news and commentary means it is tough out there on social media. We’re constantly getting kneecapped and constrained by tech companies who find the truth intolerable, resulting in our reach being severely throttled.

For this reason, please consider supporting us directly. If you like what you are reading and desire to to see more, please support our work here.

Stay informed. Subscribe today.
Enter your email address below.

[yikes-mailchimp form="1"]


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here