Tony Dean attacks Republican legislator

Tony Dean has a column in the Argus Leader that includes this attack on South Dakota Republican legislator Betty Olson:

Senate Bill 96 currently before the state Senate is legislation deserving of death. This idea, sponsored by a "who's who" of Game, Fish & Parks critics and anti-sportsmen lawmakers, would take South Dakota a giant step toward Texas-style, pay-for-play big game hunting by allowing the issuance of landowner-sponsored big game hunting licenses. But you should realize landowners already receive 50 percent of the licenses available in each county and these would come from deer licenses set aside for South Dakota residents. Sportsmen would lose, while a handful of ranchers would have the state helping them get into commercial big game hunting by assuring them of a customer base.

This horrendous idea is sponsored by senators Jule Bartling, D; Ryan Maher, D; Jim Lintz, R; and representatives Mark T. Devries, R; Thomas Brunner, R; Gordon Howie, R; and Betty Olson, R.

You'll find Olson's name on other absurd proposals, including another attempt to prevent conservation officers from entering private land without landowner permission; and another that would allow a daily bag limit of 25 pheasants on shooting preserves.

Shooting that many pheasants in a single day might satisfy a game hog with a fat wallet, but it wouldn't do much for the image of hunting. Rep.Olson was one of the leaders of the failed West River Lockout, which gives you an idea of where she's coming from. She's also the chief sponsor of legislation that would make mountain lions a varmint once they are seen outside the Black Hills. In another piece of legislation, the Game, Fish & Parks Department would be required to reimburse motorists whose vehicle hit a deer. Nonsense, sheer nonsense.

You can bet participating landowners would market those big game licenses for substantially more than they pay for them because, well, that's the whole idea. Big game licenses should not be sold by individual ranchers, but instead by the department of Game, Fish & Parks. It's a backhanded attempt to claim ownership of wildlife that belongs to all citizens.

Chris Hesla and Dave Nauman, who lobby for the South Dakota Wildlife Federation, told me they expect this bill to come out of the Senate Ag and Natural Resources Committee and likely with a "do pass" recommendation, a slap in the face of South Dakota sportsmen and women.

The legislation that would increase the daily pheasant bag limit to 25 on shooting preserves is SB 167, while Betty Olson is also sponsoring a house version (HB 1177) of the landowner big game transferable license as well as HB 1148, which would prevent Conservation Officers from going on private land without landowner permission.

Here is a comment that was made in response:

I'm not sure if Tony has sunk to an incredible low in his journalistic career or simply lost his mind, but more and more frequently his writing is full of inaccuracies if not outright lies. This story illustrates this point perfectly.
I do not personally agree with everything Betty Olson supports but would never consider attacking her with falsehoods as Tony does in this article.

Check the facts on the bills Mr. Dean references as her creations: HB 1177 landowner big game transferable license and HB 1148 which would prevent Conservation Officers from going on private land.
The reality in 2008 is HB 1148 is "An act to exempt the land application of certain solid waste used for irrigation purposes from requirements related to large-scale solid waste facilities" and House Bill 1177 is "an act to create the beverage container recycling and redemption program".

Rep.Olson is not signed on to either of these bills, but is listed on SB 167 which is referenced in this article as the Senate version of a bill to increase the daily pheasant bag limit to 25 on shooting preserves, but the 2008 bill is actually "An act to revise the penalty for a train blocking a street, road, or highway under certain circumstances."

In the current, 2008, legislative session there is not an open fields bill or a bill to raise limits on shooting preserves. The only bill mentioned in this article that accurately reported is Senate Bill 96 "to provide for the issuance of landowner-sponsored big game hunting licenses."

The bills Tony refers to as HB 1177, HB 1148, SB 167 were presented in the 2007 Legislative Session in the context reported in this article and all died. Is this sloppy journalism at it's best or an absurd personal attack at worst!

Ouch! And SB 96 did past the test in committee on Thursday and will be on the Senate Floor soon. All it does is throw a bone to landowners. It is a far cry from Texas-styled hunting.