Dana Ferguson

dferguson@argusleader.com

Opponents of a bill that would prohibit transgender students from using the bathroom of their choice are taking aim at South Dakota's $3.8 billion tourism industry.

Would-be travelers on Wednesday threatened to cancel trips to the Rushmore State if Gov. Dennis Daugaard doesn't veto the bill, which would require students to use bathrooms based on their biological sex at birth or else make separate accommodations with the school.

The claims came a day after activists on Twitter took over a hashtag created by the state's tourism department and used it to criticize legislators for advancing legislation they said would lead to bullying and discrimination.

BELOW: SEE A MAP OF HOW LEGISLATORS VOTED

The effort to pressure the governor by highlighting the potential tourism losses mirrors similar efforts in Indiana and Arizona, both of which recently saw substantial backlash from bills that were criticized as discriminatory.

South Dakota travel industry officials are skeptical about the transgender legislation's potential to put a dent in the number of visitors coming to the state -- nearly 13.7 million last year. And one business owner called the boycott threats a "bullying tactic" by transgender supporters.

Advocates of transgender youth offer social media support

Transgender bathroom bill awaits Daugaard's signature

Matthew Barcus, coordinator of sexual and gender diversity at Bloomburg University of Pennsylvania, said although he has family and friends from his alma mater, the University of South Dakota, still living in the state he won't return should the bill become law. Barcus said he voiced his opposition and intent to boycott the state online and called on USD President James Abbott to come out against the bill or lose his donations.

Barcus said he'd considered taking a trip across South Dakota this summer, but has since called his friend to say the possibility of discrimination against transgender students in the state changed his mind.

“I told him that the plan was immediately cancelled,” Barcus said.

Barcus has also advised his family in Iowa not to spend their tax refund dollars on a shopping trip in Sioux Falls. He told them to visit Sioux City or Omaha instead.

Story Continues Below

Dave Woodside, a network engineer from Bear, Del., said his family plans to visit Mount Rushmore and the Badlands in August. He said he'll try to book accommodations outside South Dakota during their stay if Daugaard decides to approve the bill.

"Anything I can do to apply a little bit of pressure on the situation, I will do," Woodside said.

Woodside said he considered cancelling the trip entirely, but the plane tickets weren't refundable.

Former Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer faced public outcry from prospective tourists and businesses when the state considered a right-to-refuse law in 2014. The Republican governor bowed to the pressure and vetoed the measure.

Indiana saw a similar tourism boycott after Republican Gov. Mike Pence signed into law the Indiana Religious Freedom Restoration Act in 2015. Critics said the right-to-refuse service bill would have allowed for discrimination under the guise of religious freedom. And shortly after it went into effect, some governors, companies, advocacy groups and others called for a complete boycott of the state until it let up on the restrictions included in the measure.

That pressure on the Hoosier State's purse was enough to get the Legislature there to amend the law, drawing back some of the potential that critics said could've allowed providers to discriminate. The state lost about $60 million in tourism revenue as a result of the bill.

In South Dakota, Daugaard has five days to approve or veto the measure after it arrives on his desk. If he doesn't act in that time frame the bill will take the effect of law.

STORY CONTINUES BELOW MAP OF HOW LEGISLATORS VOTED.

While the tourism boycott strategy worked in Indiana and Arizona, a national LGBT travel expert said that was largely because tourism and business groups in those states spoke out against the measures.

“There was such an outcry from every section of tourism saying that this is bad business and that they eventually got stepped down," said John Tanzella, president and CEO of the International Gay and Lesbian Travel Association . "I haven't seen that yet in the Dakotas."

A spokeswoman from the South Dakota Department of Tourism didn't respond to multiple voice messages Wednesday requesting comment.

Nicole Ratzlaff, owner of Victorian Bed and Breakfast in Sioux Falls, said she didn't think the threats were well-founded.

“I see that more as a bullying tactic to be quite honest,” Ratzlaff said.

What Daugaard has said about transgender bathroom bill

Rhonda Milstead, owner and manager of Falls Overlook Cafe, said she supported the bill and didn't think the economic toll would meet the hype generated online.

"People get really boisterous on the internet and say all these things, but I don't think it would really affect the state. I don't think it would affect my business," Milstead said.

Teri Schmidt, executive director of the Sioux Falls Convention and Visitors Bureau, said it's too early to tell how the measure could impact the city's tourism.

"We know there are strong feelings on both sides of the issue, but what we don't know is how that will translate," Schmidt said. "Perhaps all the beautiful places to explore in South Dakota will outweigh any negative feelings."

Follow Dana Ferguson on Twitter @bydanaferguson

Bolin: 'We should refute the claim that gender is different from sex'