Measure 2, the so-called high-fence hunting ban, is not about hunting. Nor is it about property rights. Nor is it an invitation for the anti-hunting crowd to get a foothold in North Dakota. Nor is there evidence it's a threat to traditional hunting in the state.
Measure 2 has the potential to be a legal nightmare. Despite claims the language is iron-clad, the measure is ambiguous enough to have lawyers salivating over the prospect of going to court should the measure pass. That potential should send proponents of the measure back to the drawing board.
High-fence, or canned, "hunting" is not hunting in the tradition North Dakotans cherish. Shooting animals raised on game farms in fenced enclosures - no matter how large the enclosure - is akin to plinking fish in a shallow stock pond. It's an insult to North Dakota's hunting tradition. "Hunters" who brag about a trophy elk or deer bagged inside the fence are worthy of scorn. They are shooters, not hunters.
That being said, Measure 2 is a flawed instrument. If North Dakotans want to control or limit high-fence operations, Measure 2 is not the way to go. Vote "no."
Endorsements represent the views of Forum Communications, the Herald's parent company. This endorsement was written by The Forum of Fargo-Moorhead.
