Post by cambygsp on Sept 25, 2005 11:02:39 GMT -5
2005 Legislative Summary: A Wildlife Biologist’s Perspective
By Glenn Lange
TWS Certified Wildlife Biologist
The Indiana General Assembly is increasingly having a greater impact on Indiana’s wildlife populations, their habitat and the operation of the state’s governmental agencies charged with natural resource protection and management. In addition, our elected representatives are more active than ever before in attempting to legislate how our natural resources are managed. The results are both good and bad. Bills are more frequently introduced that have serious detrimental effects on our wildlife. And special interest groups with lots of money often control the legislative agenda. One thing is for sure; organizations, like the Indiana Wildlife Federation, will have to be increasingly active in the legislative process to protect and promote the proper management of our wildlife resources. The forces of clean farming agriculture, rapid and unplanned urbanization of rural areas, habitat and wildlife population exploitation, and those that want to reduce funding for wildlife management are all aligned against the common sense conservation principles of the IWF. Hoosiers interested in wildlife conservation MUST become more active in the legislature and with their legislators.
The 2005 legislative session was especially active. One of the most significant issues was legislation to allow the hunting of white-tailed deer behind fences, commonly called canned hunting. The Indiana Wildlife Federation has been steadfastly against any form of canned hunting and was one of several hunting and conservation organizations responsible for defeating this measure in the legislature. While the legislature chose not to pass legislation that would formally establish regulations setting up canned hunts, legislative action is still needed to prohibit the current forms of hunting deer behind fences that now exist. The DNR, which has in the past supported a complete ban on canned hunting, is now considering whether to develop administrative rules to regulate canned hunting.
The following is a brief summary of the most significant legislative actions that have become law:
HB 1008 – Creates a Department of Agriculture – With the exception of the Lake Michigan Coastal Program and the Lake & River Enhancement Program, transfers the Division of Soil Conservation from the DNR to the Department of Agriculture and consolidates all state agriculture related functions into the new department. It will be interesting to see how soil conservation and improving water quality will fare in the new department that is focused on promoting and expanding agriculture in Indiana. Soil conservation and the improvement of water quality had been major programs of the DNR.
SB 266 and SB 527 – Allows a meat processor to sell venison not picked up by the hunter (266) and allows privately owned cervidae to be sold (527). This legislation opens the door for illegally taken wild deer to be more easily sold in Indiana, reversing an 80-year prohibition against the selling of wildlife. Dead white-tailed deer and the resultant venison will look the same, whether it comes from the wild or from a farm. Putting a stop to markets for dead wildlife was a major component of reversing the exploitation and decline of many wildlife populations in the late 1800s and early 1900s.
HJR 4 – Constitutional Right to Hunt and Fish – This resolution starts the process for amending the state’s constitution to establish the right to hunt and fish. A proposed amendment must be agreed upon by two consecutive general assemblies and then ratified by a majority of the state’s voters. On the surface, it seems to be a good idea. Legal scholars and those familiar with wildlife law enforcement, however, are saying this type of change will make our wildlife laws much harder to defend in court. IWF will need to watch this situation closely as this issue develops in states that have already amended their constitutions and the legal ramifications become clearer.
HB 1431 – Clean Water Indiana – Develops a funding source ($3.6 million) to implement this program that provides Federal and State cost-share help to landowners interested in projects to curb soil erosion. However, the money will come from funds already allotted to the DNR from the Cigarette Tax Fund for rehabilitation of DNR facilities. No new money is allotted to this new program and this measure will reduce the funds available for DNR infrastructure repairs and rehab.
House Enrolled Act 1001 – The Budget Bill – Indiana Heritage Trust Funding (IHT) – IHT will receive $1 million per year for the biennium for the purchase of parks, fish and wildlife areas, and nature preserves. This is good news for wildlife conservationists and outdoor recreation in Indiana. No funding was provided in the previous budget.
The 2005 legislative session was also significant for what did not become law:
Senior Fishing license – failed again – would have established a low priced license for seniors that would have brought in far more federal dollars for fisheries programs.
Further Restrictions on Confined Feeding Operations – failed – would have established tougher penalties for pollution from animal wastes.
Various Gun Control Measures – failed – would have established unnecessary restrictions on the legal use of firearms.
By Glenn Lange
TWS Certified Wildlife Biologist
The Indiana General Assembly is increasingly having a greater impact on Indiana’s wildlife populations, their habitat and the operation of the state’s governmental agencies charged with natural resource protection and management. In addition, our elected representatives are more active than ever before in attempting to legislate how our natural resources are managed. The results are both good and bad. Bills are more frequently introduced that have serious detrimental effects on our wildlife. And special interest groups with lots of money often control the legislative agenda. One thing is for sure; organizations, like the Indiana Wildlife Federation, will have to be increasingly active in the legislative process to protect and promote the proper management of our wildlife resources. The forces of clean farming agriculture, rapid and unplanned urbanization of rural areas, habitat and wildlife population exploitation, and those that want to reduce funding for wildlife management are all aligned against the common sense conservation principles of the IWF. Hoosiers interested in wildlife conservation MUST become more active in the legislature and with their legislators.
The 2005 legislative session was especially active. One of the most significant issues was legislation to allow the hunting of white-tailed deer behind fences, commonly called canned hunting. The Indiana Wildlife Federation has been steadfastly against any form of canned hunting and was one of several hunting and conservation organizations responsible for defeating this measure in the legislature. While the legislature chose not to pass legislation that would formally establish regulations setting up canned hunts, legislative action is still needed to prohibit the current forms of hunting deer behind fences that now exist. The DNR, which has in the past supported a complete ban on canned hunting, is now considering whether to develop administrative rules to regulate canned hunting.
The following is a brief summary of the most significant legislative actions that have become law:
HB 1008 – Creates a Department of Agriculture – With the exception of the Lake Michigan Coastal Program and the Lake & River Enhancement Program, transfers the Division of Soil Conservation from the DNR to the Department of Agriculture and consolidates all state agriculture related functions into the new department. It will be interesting to see how soil conservation and improving water quality will fare in the new department that is focused on promoting and expanding agriculture in Indiana. Soil conservation and the improvement of water quality had been major programs of the DNR.
SB 266 and SB 527 – Allows a meat processor to sell venison not picked up by the hunter (266) and allows privately owned cervidae to be sold (527). This legislation opens the door for illegally taken wild deer to be more easily sold in Indiana, reversing an 80-year prohibition against the selling of wildlife. Dead white-tailed deer and the resultant venison will look the same, whether it comes from the wild or from a farm. Putting a stop to markets for dead wildlife was a major component of reversing the exploitation and decline of many wildlife populations in the late 1800s and early 1900s.
HJR 4 – Constitutional Right to Hunt and Fish – This resolution starts the process for amending the state’s constitution to establish the right to hunt and fish. A proposed amendment must be agreed upon by two consecutive general assemblies and then ratified by a majority of the state’s voters. On the surface, it seems to be a good idea. Legal scholars and those familiar with wildlife law enforcement, however, are saying this type of change will make our wildlife laws much harder to defend in court. IWF will need to watch this situation closely as this issue develops in states that have already amended their constitutions and the legal ramifications become clearer.
HB 1431 – Clean Water Indiana – Develops a funding source ($3.6 million) to implement this program that provides Federal and State cost-share help to landowners interested in projects to curb soil erosion. However, the money will come from funds already allotted to the DNR from the Cigarette Tax Fund for rehabilitation of DNR facilities. No new money is allotted to this new program and this measure will reduce the funds available for DNR infrastructure repairs and rehab.
House Enrolled Act 1001 – The Budget Bill – Indiana Heritage Trust Funding (IHT) – IHT will receive $1 million per year for the biennium for the purchase of parks, fish and wildlife areas, and nature preserves. This is good news for wildlife conservationists and outdoor recreation in Indiana. No funding was provided in the previous budget.
The 2005 legislative session was also significant for what did not become law:
Senior Fishing license – failed again – would have established a low priced license for seniors that would have brought in far more federal dollars for fisheries programs.
Further Restrictions on Confined Feeding Operations – failed – would have established tougher penalties for pollution from animal wastes.
Various Gun Control Measures – failed – would have established unnecessary restrictions on the legal use of firearms.
