|
|
Post by HuntMeister on Jan 15, 2011 10:51:03 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jan 15, 2011 12:19:01 GMT -5
Sticky it is....
|
|
|
|
Post by hatchetjack on Dec 24, 2015 11:56:41 GMT -5
Some of you might be interested in legislation for the 2016 General Assembly. A few of the senate bills are already showing up. Of interest would be Senate Bills 7, 28, 86 and 109. I'm sure there will be many more to come. Jack iga.in.gov/legislative/2016/bills/ |
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Dec 24, 2015 14:22:42 GMT -5
Senate Bill 7
DIGESTHunting wildlife. Removes exotic mammals from the animals that may be propagated or offered for hunting at a shooting preserve. Makes it a Class C misdemeanor to: (1) engage in computer assisted remote hunting or provide or operate a computer assisted remote hunting facility; (2) use an unmanned aerial vehicle to search for, scout, locate, or detect wildlife as an aid to hunt or take wildlife; (3) release from confinement a wild mammal for the purpose of taking the wild mammal; or (4) offer for sale the taking of a wild mammal that is kept or confined on private property. Hunting wildlife. Removes exotic mammals from the animals that may be propagated or offered for hunting at a shooting preserve. Makes it a Class C misdemeanor to: (1) engage in computer assisted remote hunting or provide or operate a computer assisted remote hunting facility; (2) use an unmanned aerial vehicle to search for, scout, locate, or detect wildlife as an aid to hunt or take wildlife; (3) release from confinement a wild mammal for the purpose of taking the wild mammal; or (4) offer for sale the taking of a wild mammal that is kept or confined on private property. Removes references to exotic mammal from laws regulating game birds and exotic mammals. iga.in.gov/legislative/2016/bills/senate/7Senate Bill 28
DIGESTMaximum height of certain fences. Raises the maximum height for certain nuisance fences from six feet to eight feet. iga.in.gov/legislative/2016/bills/senate/28Senate Bill 86Handgun training. Requires a person who applies after December 31, 2016, for a license to carry a handgun to first complete an eight hour handgun safety and training program, unless the person is a law enforcement officer, a retired law enforcement officer, or an active or honorably discharged member of the armed forces of the United States. iga.in.gov/legislative/2016/bills/senate/86Senate Bill 109
DIGESTRegulation of privately owned cervidae. Provides that the department of natural resources may not regulate certain privately owned cervidae. Provides for the initial licensing by the state board of animal health of hunting preserves on which privately owned cervidae, as well as sheep and goats, are hunted. Establishes licensing requirements, inspection requirements, and fees. Exempts licensed hunting preserves and cervidae livestock operations from the licensing requirements for game breeders. Exempts licensed hunting preserves from the licensing requirements for shooting preserves. Provides that hunters on hunting preserves are required to have a special hunting permit. Specifies that the fee for the Regulation of privately owned cervidae. Provides that the department of natural resources may not regulate certain privately owned cervidae. Provides for the initial licensing by the state board of animal health of hunting preserves on which privately owned cervidae, as well as sheep and goats, are hunted. Establishes licensing requirements, inspection requirements, and fees. Exempts licensed hunting preserves and cervidae livestock operations from the licensing requirements for game breeders. Exempts licensed hunting preserves from the licensing requirements for shooting preserves. Provides that hunters on hunting preserves are required to have a special hunting permit. Specifies that the fee for the special hunting permit to take a buck on a hunting preserve is equal to the fee for a nonresident yearly license to take a deer. Specifies that the fee for the special hunting permit to take a doe on a hunting preserve is equal to the fee for a nonresident yearly license to hunt. Provides that hunters on hunting preserves are not subject to bag limits. Requires that a transportation tag be affixed to each animal taken on a hunting preserve. Prohibits computer assisted remote hunting on hunting preserves. Establishes penalties for certain violations iga.in.gov/legislative/2016/bills/senate/109#digest-heading
|
|
|
|
Post by firstwd on Dec 24, 2015 17:48:16 GMT -5
While SB 86 looks like a reasonable and logical step, I'm not initially convinced it is a good idea. When Ohio started requiring a training course for their handgun permits those accredited instructors that I knew were inundated with people trying to take a class. They could have basically charged anything they wanted and always had full classes, and sadly some did. Who decides what the requirements would be to pass the class, teach the class, and cost there of?
|
|
|
|
Post by hatchetjack on Dec 31, 2015 14:59:48 GMT -5
Without seeing the actual legislation, it appears that SB109 is an attempt to exclude DNR from any authority over high fence deer hunting facilities. Looks like it also adds sheep and goats to the list of huntable animals. Strange looking proposal but I'd rather DNR was out of the high fence business anyway. Give it all to the Board of Animal Health.
Jack
|
|
|
|
Post by duff on Dec 31, 2015 18:40:42 GMT -5
I agree. DNR should not be in the biz of managing livestock.
|
|
|
|
Post by nfalls116 on Dec 31, 2015 19:33:08 GMT -5
Without seeing the actual legislation, it appears that SB109 is an attempt to exclude DNR from any authority over high fence deer hunting facilities. Looks like it also adds sheep and goats to the list of huntable animals. Strange looking proposal but I'd rather DNR was out of the high fence business anyway. Give it all to the Board of Animal Health. Jack Well said jack |
|
|
|
Post by hatchetjack on Jan 3, 2016 23:04:43 GMT -5
Expect the rest of the new bills to hit the hopper this week. Short session and lots of issues.
|
|
|
|
Post by hatchetjack on Jan 4, 2016 21:47:32 GMT -5
Woody - I don't think we need to worry about SB28
|
|
|
|
Post by hatchetjack on Jan 5, 2016 22:38:47 GMT -5
3 new bills today of interest -
HB1055 - Possession of firearms on state property
HB1056 - Handgun license repeal
HB1085 - Firearms and certification
|
|
|
|
Post by tenring on Jan 6, 2016 8:45:40 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jan 26, 2016 20:16:51 GMT -5
Here is a listing of bills that up for consideration iga.in.gov/legislative/2016/bills/Ones that concern Indiana wildlife ….Senate Bill 195 gives authority back to the DNR for legally owned wild animals, like venomous snakes, bears, and other animals that are bred in captivity, with the exception of captive-bred cervidae. It has already passed the Senate and is now in the House. Senate Bill 109 also gives authority back to the DNR for legally owned wild animals except for captive-bred cervidae, but it also authorizes high fence hunting. It has also passed the Senate and is now in the House. Comments on Senate bills 109 and 195 should be directed to your state representative. House Bill 1246 is primarily a DNR-related technical bill that makes a few changes to various matters. They are trying to clean up the hunter orange part so that the violation is still the same, but the season dates and hunter orange requirements are specified in rule (312 IAC 9). House Bill 1231 would authorize high-powered rifles on private land as well as give landowners another option for posting their land instead of/or in addition to using signs. Both of these House bills passed out of committee yesterday and are up for second and third reading in the House. Comments on these 2 house bills should be directed to your state representative.
Find your state representative here – iga.in.gov/legislative/find-legislators/ |
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Jan 26, 2016 21:54:06 GMT -5
If you are FOR or AGAINST House Bill 1231 which would authorize high-powered rifles.....this bill needs to go though the IDNR not legislators. This is a BAD practice that needs stopped...IMO
|
|
|
|
Post by omegahunter on Jan 28, 2016 9:59:36 GMT -5
Why don't they clean up the hunter orange to not include the counties that don't have the late antlerless season so that archery hunters can go back to total camo?
|
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Jan 28, 2016 10:07:45 GMT -5
Why don't they clean up the hunter orange to not include the counties that don't have the late antlerless season so that archery hunters can go back to total camo? You think that's going to improve the hunting then? I don't get why some don't want to wear orange. |
|
|
|
Post by omegahunter on Jan 28, 2016 10:13:03 GMT -5
Why don't they clean up the hunter orange to not include the counties that don't have the late antlerless season so that archery hunters can go back to total camo? You think that's going to improve the hunting then? I don't get why some don't want to wear orange. Personal preference. Science and fact have nothing to do with it. Where I archery hunt is fairly close to dwellings and I would just as well that the property owner be the only one that knows I have treestands back there. I won't hunt it except with archery equipment and the orange requirement has kept me from hunting that spot after firearms starts for that reason alone. |
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jan 28, 2016 10:14:58 GMT -5
Why don't they clean up the hunter orange to not include the counties that don't have the late antlerless season so that archery hunters can go back to total camo? They are.. I was told by our District 7 CO that it was not required in Warrick as it was not a late season county. |
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Jan 28, 2016 10:18:15 GMT -5
That's the best understandable reason I have heard yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Jan 28, 2016 10:20:12 GMT -5
Why don't they clean up the hunter orange to not include the counties that don't have the late antlerless season so that archery hunters can go back to total camo? They are.. I was told by our District 7 CO that it was not required in Warrick as it was not a late season county. That's not what other CO's have said.... I seen it answerd both ways |
|
