The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-02-23
IS UNFAIR LEGISLATION
John w. Blair Is Opposed to
the New Bounty Bill.
IT FAV0RS ONE SECTION
Counties in the Eastern and Northern
Portion of the State Protect Their
Stock at the Expense of West
ern and Southern Counties.

John w. Blair of Helmville is in the
the board of county appraisers, of which
body he is a member. Mr.. Blair is one
of the best-known residents of the county
and is largely interested in the ranch and
stock industry. Mr.. Blair is taking a
great deal of interest just at present in
the bounty bill which is before the legis-
lature, and which comes up for final ac-
ton in the senate in a few days. The
bounty under the present law is So on
both coyotes and wolves, and the proposed
bill reduces the bounty on coyotes to 81
and increases that on wo.ves to IS.
Mr. Blair is well qualified to speak on
the bounty question, being, as stated
above, the owner of extensive stock inter-
ests. In a conversation yesterday Mr.
Blair said:
Il believe this proposed new bounty bill
to be district legislation of the most vi
cious character. 1t is the protection of one
section at the expense of another. Just
take the figures in the state examiner
office. There we find that in Deer Lodge
Silver Bow, Granite, Jefferson, Ravall
and Madison counties not one wolf was
killed during the past year. In thbee 9TH
er west side counties-Broadwater, Bea-
verhead and Missoula-one wolf was kill
ed in each. Flathead county reported
eight wolves killed. Now, on the other
hand, the east side and northern counties
turned in all the wolf scalps. The num-
Der ranges from 10 in Park county to
2,219 in Custer county.
without going into details as to the
figures the records show that 16 western
and southern counties claimed bounties
on 275 wolves, while eight counties of
the northern and eastern part of the state
returned 1854 wolf scalps of which Custer
county had 2,219 and Choteau 94S. During
last year 10 eastern and northern counties
drew from the bounty fund $75,769, while
IA counties in the western portion Of the
state drew only $13 100. At the ratio of s.
head the bounty in 16 counties would
be only $1375, while in eight other coun-
ties it would be $2S,060.
This is certainly wrong. and no man
should favor legislation that works a
hardship to one section OF the state in or
der to protect the same interests in anoth-
err section. In other words, under the new
law we on the west side will have to pay
for the protection of the stockmen on the
east and north sides, while, on the other
hand. our own professionalism from coy
otes, which are the greatest menace to our
stock-is decreased, the bounty being cut
from 50 to $2
"a certainly think our stock should be
protected from coyotes as well as the
stock of the eastern Montana raiser is
protected from wolves. We do not want
more than a square deal. but the propo-
sition to cut down the bounty on coyotes
from SO to 81 and to raise it on wolves
from So to s. is certainly wrong and ought
NOT TO prevail. While wolves NAV be a
greater menace to stock in Custer and
Choteau and the other counties, our great
est menace is coyotes, and l believe in CIV
ing everybody fair show and in protect
ing the stock interests of western and
southern Montana from coyotes as we'll
as protecting that of eastern and northern
Montana from wolves. There should be
no such vast discrimination between the
two sections as this bill proposes, and I
am strongly opposed to it. and ! believe
every other fair minded man ought to be
opposed to It, too