Post by Woody Williams on Aug 26, 2005 7:05:04 GMT -5
Preserve owner suing over ban
Says DNR can’t regulate deer farms
By Rebecca S. Green
The Journal Gazette
The owners of an Indiana deer hunting preserve sued the Indiana Department of Natural Resources on Wednesday after the state agency moved to ban such preserves in the future.
According to the lawsuit filed in Harrison Circuit Court, Rodney Bruce of Corydon, has a game breeders’ license and operates Whitetail Bluff 2003.
For the 2005 hunting season, Bruce has booked more than 40 customers with revenues expected to be between $150,000 and $200,000, the lawsuit said. He has also taken verbal commitments for 20 to 30 hunts during 2006.
But this month, DNR director Kyle Hupfer announced that hunting white-tailed deer and other animals behind a fence is illegal, and enforcement would begin in 2006. Hupfer also signed an emergency rule into law making it illegal to hunt exotic mammals, such as elk and zebra, inside fenced enclosures.
In the lawsuit, Bruce argues that the emergency rule should be declared null and void because the DNR lacks the authority and the power to adopt it.
Bruce also argues the rule contradicts Indiana law, and defines white-tailed deer as exotic, making it illegal to hunt them in Indiana, according to the documents.
Donald Blinzinger, who represents the Indiana Deer and Elk Farmers’ Association, issued a statement Thursday announcing the lawsuit.
Blinzinger said there are currently about 10 to 12 hunting preserves in the state, and the businesses have existed for much of the last decade.
Correspondence dating back to 1999 indicates that the DNR had approved of the hunting preserves, he said.
“There is nothing, absolutely nothing that has changed in state law since those pieces of correspondence were created,” Blinzinger said. “It is surprising and incomprehensible that the new director of DNR has out of the clear blue sky ” issued a pronouncement that they are ‘illegal.’
Blinzinger, former chief of staff for the Indiana House Republicans, said the deer kept on the preserves do not constitute wildlife, but are private property.
DNR officials declined to comment Thursday either on the lawsuit or Blinzinger’s statement, saying they had not yet had a chance to review the documents.
Whether the deer on high-fenced hunting operations are wildlife, private property or domestic animals has been a matter for debate throughout discussions surrounding the hunting facilities.
In January, the federal government successfully prosecuted a Miami County deer farmer for illegal hunting activities on his hunting preserve. During the trial, attorneys for the deer farmer argued the deer were not wildlife under Indiana statute, and therefore not subject to regulation by the state’s Department of Natural Resources.
Blinzinger said the emergency rule effectively bans the hunting of white-tailed deer by specifying cervidae – the species group that includes deer, elk and moose.
“With the inclusion of deer in this rule, with no distinction as to wild or otherwise, the director has, in effect, barred the hunting of any deer, the taking of any deer in the state,” he said.
The emergency rule bans the hunting of any exotic mammal belonging to the cervid species, as well as 31 other species, according to documents.
In his statement, Blinzinger cited several organizations with memberships that he said either “back” or “support” the lawsuit, including the Indiana Deer Hunters Association, the Indiana Bowhunters Association, the Indiana Sportsmen’s Roundtable and the American Kennel Club.
A spokesman for the Bowhunters Association hotly denied that his membership supports deer farm hunting.
“It goes beyond despicable,” said Gene Hopkins, legislative director of the Indiana Bowhunters Association. “They try everything they can do to create a line or make an association that is untrue. All these groups … have disassociated themselves from this and will continue to disassociate themselves. We do that with knowledge from surveying our members. The last time we asked this question of our members, one was for it. He happened to be a deer farmer who recently joined, I guess, so he could vote in our surveys.
“When we say the IBA supports the ban on canned hunting, it’s not just us as officers, but with our membership’s full support. To try to put our name in here is obviously trying to associate our group with this lawsuit. We will not be associated with the lawsuit. I want our name taken off anything that is associated with this.”
Officials with the American Kennel Club, headquartered in New York, said they knew nothing about the lawsuit.
Says DNR can’t regulate deer farms
By Rebecca S. Green
The Journal Gazette
The owners of an Indiana deer hunting preserve sued the Indiana Department of Natural Resources on Wednesday after the state agency moved to ban such preserves in the future.
According to the lawsuit filed in Harrison Circuit Court, Rodney Bruce of Corydon, has a game breeders’ license and operates Whitetail Bluff 2003.
For the 2005 hunting season, Bruce has booked more than 40 customers with revenues expected to be between $150,000 and $200,000, the lawsuit said. He has also taken verbal commitments for 20 to 30 hunts during 2006.
But this month, DNR director Kyle Hupfer announced that hunting white-tailed deer and other animals behind a fence is illegal, and enforcement would begin in 2006. Hupfer also signed an emergency rule into law making it illegal to hunt exotic mammals, such as elk and zebra, inside fenced enclosures.
In the lawsuit, Bruce argues that the emergency rule should be declared null and void because the DNR lacks the authority and the power to adopt it.
Bruce also argues the rule contradicts Indiana law, and defines white-tailed deer as exotic, making it illegal to hunt them in Indiana, according to the documents.
Donald Blinzinger, who represents the Indiana Deer and Elk Farmers’ Association, issued a statement Thursday announcing the lawsuit.
Blinzinger said there are currently about 10 to 12 hunting preserves in the state, and the businesses have existed for much of the last decade.
Correspondence dating back to 1999 indicates that the DNR had approved of the hunting preserves, he said.
“There is nothing, absolutely nothing that has changed in state law since those pieces of correspondence were created,” Blinzinger said. “It is surprising and incomprehensible that the new director of DNR has out of the clear blue sky ” issued a pronouncement that they are ‘illegal.’
Blinzinger, former chief of staff for the Indiana House Republicans, said the deer kept on the preserves do not constitute wildlife, but are private property.
DNR officials declined to comment Thursday either on the lawsuit or Blinzinger’s statement, saying they had not yet had a chance to review the documents.
Whether the deer on high-fenced hunting operations are wildlife, private property or domestic animals has been a matter for debate throughout discussions surrounding the hunting facilities.
In January, the federal government successfully prosecuted a Miami County deer farmer for illegal hunting activities on his hunting preserve. During the trial, attorneys for the deer farmer argued the deer were not wildlife under Indiana statute, and therefore not subject to regulation by the state’s Department of Natural Resources.
Blinzinger said the emergency rule effectively bans the hunting of white-tailed deer by specifying cervidae – the species group that includes deer, elk and moose.
“With the inclusion of deer in this rule, with no distinction as to wild or otherwise, the director has, in effect, barred the hunting of any deer, the taking of any deer in the state,” he said.
The emergency rule bans the hunting of any exotic mammal belonging to the cervid species, as well as 31 other species, according to documents.
In his statement, Blinzinger cited several organizations with memberships that he said either “back” or “support” the lawsuit, including the Indiana Deer Hunters Association, the Indiana Bowhunters Association, the Indiana Sportsmen’s Roundtable and the American Kennel Club.
A spokesman for the Bowhunters Association hotly denied that his membership supports deer farm hunting.
“It goes beyond despicable,” said Gene Hopkins, legislative director of the Indiana Bowhunters Association. “They try everything they can do to create a line or make an association that is untrue. All these groups … have disassociated themselves from this and will continue to disassociate themselves. We do that with knowledge from surveying our members. The last time we asked this question of our members, one was for it. He happened to be a deer farmer who recently joined, I guess, so he could vote in our surveys.
“When we say the IBA supports the ban on canned hunting, it’s not just us as officers, but with our membership’s full support. To try to put our name in here is obviously trying to associate our group with this lawsuit. We will not be associated with the lawsuit. I want our name taken off anything that is associated with this.”
Officials with the American Kennel Club, headquartered in New York, said they knew nothing about the lawsuit.
