|
Post by danf on Feb 28, 2008 11:55:54 GMT -5
From what I understand, it must be *used* for ag purposes... But that's just my understanding.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Feb 28, 2008 12:40:05 GMT -5
From what I understand, it must be *used* for ag purposes... But that's just my understanding. Tree farming counts.. even if you have no plans to cut any timber for 30 years.
|
|
|
Post by Hawkeye on Feb 28, 2008 12:58:19 GMT -5
This type of thing has been my gripe since I started hunting in Indiana.most Game laws are much to vague,and open to interpretation by District and even to the individual CO. If you contact several district offices with a question ,you will more than likely get several different answers.
|
|
|
Post by jkd on Feb 28, 2008 14:04:25 GMT -5
I thought the reg was a landowner and his immediate family living with him/her, are license exempt, period. Farming has nothing to do with it...
It's the leasee portion where the farming aspect kicks in, i.e. you can't lease ground and NOT be farming it, and then claim license exemption just because you're paying money to lease the ground.
Zoning wouldn't have anything to do with it either... it's the "use" the ground is put to that's the test... you could have a little 20 acre tract with a house on it with some horses and a bit of alfalfa, and be in an area zoned R1 Residential... that's still "farming"... there are several farms like this around Noblesville and Fishers in Hamilton county... the farms were there from the 30's on, and the cities have encroached on those areas and annexed around them... you see a housing development right next to a field and old-style barn and pasture... they're not zoned Ag, but the use is agricultural...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2008 14:25:09 GMT -5
Landowners, or lessees of farmland who farm that land and are residents of Indiana, their spouses and children living with them, while hunting, fishing, or trapping on the land they own or lease. This license exemption does not apply to land owned by a business, corporation or partnership unless the shareholders, partners, members or owners are comprised solely of the members of an immediate family and farm that land. Farmland means agricultural land that is devoted or best adaptable for the production of crops, fruits, timber, or the raising of livestock; or is assessed as agricultural land for property tax purposes.
|
|
|
Post by Sasquatch on Feb 28, 2008 14:55:12 GMT -5
The above is straight out of the book. I don't how taxes and age and everything got involved. The "Farmland" part is very loosely enforced. It would be an enforcement nightmare....how much crops are considered farming, how much land, Is it cash crops or does anything count, etc. I know of folks that simply live on farmland check deer on a landowner tag every year.
I'm guessing the DNR is more concerned with relatives that live off property trying to get away with not buying tags....
|
|
|
Post by drs on Feb 28, 2008 14:55:53 GMT -5
This type of thing has been my gripe since I started hunting in Indiana.most Game laws are much to vague,and open to interpretation by District and even to the individual CO. If you contact several district offices with a question ,you will more than likely get several different answers. You're right, "Hawkeye", the laws in this state are very vague. All I know is that when I decided to hunt my own property inwhich my home is located; I called up at the IDNR and asked if I needed a Deer Licenses or Tag to hunt. The person told me that since our home was on the land and that was my legal address then I would not need a tag or license. I would STILL have to tag the Deer and check it in though but would write "Landowner" in the space provided for the Tag number. Now, I always buy a Small Game General License, and if the State want's to charge a Landowner a Fee then I wouldn't have any complaints about paying $10 for a Landowner's Tag or License for Deer. This who thread makes me think that the State really "Goofed" when they issued those Lifetime Licenses and now they are running out of money. So now they are trying to confuse everyone with some "Trumped-up" rules.
|
|
|
Post by drs on Feb 28, 2008 14:58:16 GMT -5
I thought the reg was a landowner and his immediate family living with him/her, are license exempt, period. Farming has nothing to do with it... This is what I thought, "jkd"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2008 16:45:33 GMT -5
Has to be farmed
|
|
|
Post by drs on Feb 29, 2008 8:57:51 GMT -5
Here's a possible solution to this confusion: How about the State requiring the Landowner to purchase a general Hunting License which would allow them one Deer. If the Landowner wishes to harvest a "Bonus" Deer then they would be required to purchase a $15 Deer Tag. Would this make more sense and be more fair?
|
|
|
Post by trapperdave on Feb 29, 2008 9:37:02 GMT -5
NO The farmers are already paying with the lost crops
|
|
|
Post by drs on Feb 29, 2008 9:57:20 GMT -5
NO The farmers are already paying with the lost crops How about those Landowners that grow no crops? I would think requiring them to purchase a General Hunting License (allowing them to harvest one Deer) + $15 for a bonus Deer Tag would be fair for all. Just a thought.
|
|
|
Post by danf on Feb 29, 2008 10:01:25 GMT -5
Then you start getting into the headache of enforcement of who grows crops and who doesn't... I'm sure it's enough of a headache as it is trying to track down those that tag them as landowner and actually are not. I think the purpose of the "landowner" distinction, regardless of ag purpose or not, is because the landowners are the ones paying the most taxes... The DNR, in this respect, is the one government agency that isn't trying to double dip.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Feb 29, 2008 10:05:19 GMT -5
NO The farmers are already paying with the lost crops How about those Landowners that grow no crops? I would think requiring them to purchase a General Hunting License (allowing them to harvest one Deer) + $15 for a bonus Deer Tag would be fair for all. Just a thought. If they have a woods on it then they can claim timber "crops"....
|
|
|
Post by danf on Feb 29, 2008 10:06:04 GMT -5
Grass field can be claimed as hay, too.
|
|
|
Post by drs on Feb 29, 2008 10:48:36 GMT -5
Grass field can be claimed as hay, too. There just seems there is NO easy answer! I guess the State of Indiana just wants us to stay confused. All I know is that since 1997 I have hunted and harvested Deer on my property, took them & checked them in on a Landowners permit, by writting "Landowner" on the Transportation tag & received a metal leg tag. WHY CAN'T THINGS BE CLEAR & SIMPLE???
|
|
|
Post by danf on Feb 29, 2008 10:57:51 GMT -5
Because it's a government entity that writes the rules!
|
|
|
Post by duff on Feb 29, 2008 11:00:45 GMT -5
Landowners, or lessees of farmland who farm that land and are residents of Indiana, their spouses and children living with them, while hunting, fishing, or trapping on the land they own or lease. This license exemption does not apply to land owned by a business, corporation or partnership unless the shareholders, partners, members or owners are comprised solely of the members of an immediate family and farm that land. Farmland means agricultural land that is devoted or best adaptable for the production of crops, fruits, timber, or the raising of livestock; or is assessed as agricultural land for property tax purposes. It is simple. Follow the punctuation in the first line. It says "landowner" comma or "leasee of farmland who farm the land" comma their "spouse" comma and "children living with them" can hunt, fish, trap with no state license. Excludes buisness or corporation owned land And gives a defination of farming to include all potential forms of harvesting as well as just being assessed as ag land. I don't see where the confusion is? You either own it or you lease it for farming
|
|
|
Post by drs on Feb 29, 2008 11:05:07 GMT -5
Because it's a government entity that writes the rules! That's what I thought!
|
|
|
Post by RiverJim on Feb 29, 2008 13:40:58 GMT -5
So if a fella leases the woods to a farm, grows some flowers in those woods and sells them to whoever does that give him the right to hunt free?
|
|