IBJNews

House OKs high-fence hunting bill, but fate murky

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A proposal aimed at legalizing five fenced deer-hunting preserves around the state faces an uncertain future even though it has been approved by the Indiana House.

Supporters of the bill say it is needed to resolve an eight-year-old lawsuit over attempts by the Indiana Department of Natural Resources to shut down the existing preserves where hunters pay for a chance to shoot deer confined inside high fences.

The House voted 52-39 on Monday in favor of the bill despite arguments that the shooting of farm-raised deer inside the preserves isn't real hunting.

Senate President Pro Tem David Long has blocked previous attempts at legalizing the fenced preserves. He says allowing the five existing preserves could open the state up to more of them in the future.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Hunters should be ashamed
    How does any selfrespecting hunter think that killing semi-tame deer inside a fence is SPORTING? Indiana has had a severe deer overpopulation problem for years. We conduct deer hunts in several parks every year. Why don't hunters get off their butts and go hunt them? I guess they are afraid of the challenge of actual hunting, they prefer them in a fence. SHAME ON HUNTERS WHO THINK THIS IS HUNTING!
  • Background Check
    One of these "deer hunting preserve" owners is a convicted felon. I do hope the repsonsible parties have looked into the backgrounds of the people they are supporting.
  • Stop the craziness
    First of all I am a republican and I think Ted Nugent is a nut job, so please don't lump us all into one group. Who in thier right mind would think this type of hunting is okay? How can anyone vote to approve this type of slaughter? It makes no sense. Has anyone seen the freaks these "hunting" operations produce? I think the public would be equally outraged by the "Frankenstein" animals that are bred for these hunts. They breed for rack size and other attributes these cowardly hunters prize. The whole thing is pretty sickeninig.
  • For the People
    This is a perfect example of the House not listening to the people. No one thinks this place is okay, except for the disgusting business owners and the cowardly customers who use the place. Hunting deer in a confined space is barbaric and the majority of the public do not want Indiana known as the state that allows such disgusting operations. However, the lawmakers are either too afraid to shut them down or are being paid to vote in favor of these criminals. Please don't disgrace the state of Indiana any further by allowing such barbaric operations to continue.
  • Barbaric
    Republicans (Ted Nugent types) never cease to amaze me with their “anything goes when it comes to making money. This is a sick hunt. Perhaps they should consider legalizing dog or rooster fighting while they are at it. It's considered a sport too and think of the revenue. Lets leave the slaughtering of animals to professional meat packing companies. How dumb you think these sentient creatures are? Just because they can’t scream out and beg for continued life, does not mean they do not understand they are going to die while the banging, black–stick slowly aims their way . . . but republicans like that kind of thing. They like to feel powerful and well-off hanging trophy heads on their walls or cutting the safety net for underling people. It’s all the same.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. John, unfortunately CTRWD wants to put the tank(s) right next to a nature preserve and at the southern entrance to Carmel off of Keystone. Not exactly the kind of message you want to send to residents and visitors (come see our tanks as you enter our city and we build stuff in nature preserves...

  2. 85 feet for an ambitious project? I could shoot ej*culate farther than that.

  3. I tried, can't take it anymore. Untill Katz is replaced I can't listen anymore.

  4. Perhaps, but they've had a very active program to reduce rainwater/sump pump inflows for a number of years. But you are correct that controlling these peak flows will require spending more money - surge tanks, lines or removing storm water inflow at the source.

  5. All sewage goes to the Carmel treatment plant on the White River at 96th St. Rainfall should not affect sewage flows, but somehow it does - and the increased rate is more than the plant can handle a few times each year. One big source is typically homeowners who have their sump pumps connect into the sanitary sewer line rather than to the storm sewer line or yard. So we (Carmel and Clay Twp) need someway to hold the excess flow for a few days until the plant can process this material. Carmel wants the surge tank located at the treatment plant but than means an expensive underground line has to be installed through residential areas while CTRWD wants the surge tank located further 'upstream' from the treatment plant which costs less. Either solution works from an environmental control perspective. The less expensive solution means some people would likely have an unsightly tank near them. Carmel wants the more expensive solution - surprise!

ADVERTISEMENT