Indiana Senate leader opposes fenced deer hunting

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The leader of the Indiana Senate says he'll kill an amendment that would allow five fenced deer-hunting preserves around the state to remain open.

Republican Senate President Pro Tem David Long of Fort Wayne said Thursday he intends to halt efforts to legalize what critics have called "canned hunts."

Long told reporters the preserves where hunters pay for a chance to shoot deer confined inside high fences are not "a good idea for Indiana." He says the practice is neither hunting, nor a form of sport.

Long says he'll remove an amendment to a bill allowing the five game preserves to remain open. A House panel approved that measure on Monday.

The five preserves have remained open under a court injunction.


  • Whatever
    Senator Long is "doing the right thing" because there is no powerful monied lobby to oppose it...I doubt he is listening to his consituency...he is listening to the money...let him do the right thing in both situations...and by the way, I am still happy about the result on canned hunts...I am just far more cynical about his motives for doing so...
  • Sen. Long will kill amendment
    Senator Long says he will kill the bill that would allow the 5 preserves to remain open. Congratulations to Senator Long for listening to his constituents and for doing the right thing on the side of Indiana's wildlife! Thanks Senator Long!
  • so, do nothing?
    So because one of these atrocious practices can be halted, but not both (abusing farm animals), we should do neither? I agree there's greater self interest and bigger lobbying budgets atwork in denying the right to tape animal abuse, but that doesn't absolve Sen Long from doing the right thing.
  • Hunting? Hardly.
    These "hunting" preserves are nothing but places for target shooting farm raised animals. People who frequent such places are likely the same ones you'd find at dog fights; they clearly aren't hunters. And simply because the 5 canned preserves have stayed open just because the DNR lacks the will to close them does not give them any legitimacy. Distilleries had to close when prohibition was enacted, and marijuana growers (once legal in this country) went out of business when laws were passed. Canned killing businesses are grotesque and inhumane and need to be closed, whatever their spurious value to a local economy (which I expect will be diminished, as customers realize that frequenting them is the equivalent of hanging out in an adult bookstore).
  • Nicely written DC Indy
    You nailed it...I agree with you, smells of great hypocrisy...the bill to protect factory farms (where animals are routinely abused)is unconscionable, the canned hunts are abominable (they should be stopped by the way)...but to allow one while killing the other by simply removing it without the chance for it to be voted on (let's just see how many hypocrites there are in that body) is indeed picking winners and losers...5 business owners do not constitute a powerful enough lobby apparently. To our state representatives...do what is right in both instances...
    • Picking Winners and Losers
      I am not a hunter and am not in favor of fenced hunts at all. I completely agree with legislation which prohibits any new ones from being started. Having said that, it is absolutely ridiculous that one elected state senator, Dave Long, has the power, with the stroke of a pen, to put five legal ongoing businesses completely out of business just because he doesn't like what they do. The House approved a grandfather clause which would have allowed the existing camps to continue operating. Remember, they were not doing anything illegal and have certainly invested many thousands of dollars in their businesses. "Canned" hunts may be despicable, but they were legal. The owners who just lost everything were victims of a canned hunt by David Long. This is one of the guys who made it illegal for anyone to film what goes on on a corporate farm, where thousands of animals are routinely abused. What a hypocrite.

    Post a comment to this story

    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

    facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
    Subscribe to IBJ
    1. Aaron is my fav!

    2. Let's see... $25M construction cost, they get $7.5M back from federal taxpayers, they're exempt from business property tax and use tax so that's about $2.5M PER YEAR they don't have to pay, permitting fees are cut in half for such projects, IPL will give them $4K under an incentive program, and under IPL's VFIT they'll be selling the power to IPL at 20 cents / kwh, nearly triple what a gas plant gets, about $6M / year for the 150-acre combined farms, and all of which is passed on to IPL customers. No jobs will be created either other than an handful of installers for a few weeks. Now here's the fun part...the panels (from CHINA) only cost about $5M on Alibaba, so where's the rest of the $25M going? Are they marking up the price to drive up the federal rebate? Indy Airport Solar Partners II LLC is owned by local firms Johnson-Melloh Solutions and Telemon Corp. They'll gross $6M / year in triple-rate power revenue, get another $12M next year from taxpayers for this new farm, on top of the $12M they got from taxpayers this year for the first farm, and have only laid out about $10-12M in materials plus installation labor for both farms combined, and $500K / year in annual land lease for both farms (est.). Over 15 years, that's over $70M net profit on a $12M investment, all from our wallets. What a boondoggle. It's time to wise up and give Thorium Energy your serious consideration. See http://energyfromthorium.com to learn more.

    3. Markus, I don't think a $2 Billion dollar surplus qualifies as saying we are out of money. Privatization does work. The government should only do what private industry can't or won't. What is proven is that any time the government tries to do something it costs more, comes in late and usually is lower quality.

    4. Some of the licenses that were added during Daniels' administration, such as requiring waiter/waitresses to be licensed to serve alcohol, are simply a way to generate revenue. At $35/server every 3 years, the state is generating millions of dollars on the backs of people who really need/want to work.

    5. I always giggle when I read comments from people complaining that a market is "too saturated" with one thing or another. What does that even mean? If someone is able to open and sustain a new business, whether you think there is room enough for them or not, more power to them. Personally, I love visiting as many of the new local breweries as possible. You do realize that most of these establishments include a dining component and therefore are pretty similar to restaurants, right? When was the last time I heard someone say "You know, I think we have too many locally owned restaurants"? Um, never...