IBJNews

Proposed hunting, fishing amendment to start over

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

An Indiana Senate committee passed a proposed constitutional amendment Monday that would protect Hoosiers’ right to hunt, fish and harvest wildlife – but without language to protect farming that was included three years ago.

That means the constitutional amendment process must start over.

Sen. Brent Steele, R-Bedford, who authored Senate Joint Resolution 9, also authored the proposed amendment when it passed in 2011.

“The facts haven’t changed. The numbers haven’t changed, hardly, with regard to its financial and fiscal impact both to the state and your local communities,” Steele said. “This resolution is self-explanatory. We’ve been to this dance before.”

In Indiana, a resolution must pass two consecutive legislatures before it goes to the ballot for ratification.

But the 2011 the amendment included language that extended the protection to include farmers’ rights. Steele said he changed the amendment to comply with requests from agriculture groups that he said didn’t want to fight for it.

He’s also backing Senate Bill 186, which would provide a statutory protection for farmers.

Erin Huang, Indiana director of the Humane Society of the United States, said she is concerned that poachers and others who wish to exploit the system would use it to challenge existing restrictions. She called it “a solution in search of a problem.”

“Unnecessarily putting this existing right into our constitution ties the hands of the legislature, limits its power and could invite lawsuits from individuals who want to argue that conservation laws like bag limits and season dates for a particular species infringe upon their right to hunt and fish or harvest wildlife,” Huang said.

But Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Carlin Yoder said it is a non-issue, as current regulation laws would still be in full effect.

The amendment once again passed the first round of ratification but it must still be agreed to by the General Assembly one more time before it can go to state voters.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Confusing
    I really do not understand this amendment. I am for hunting and fishing, but what are they trying to do with this? What additional rights will this give hunters? Will it allow them to hunt in a populated area? I really don't know the ramifications. Actually, I've seen more need of a right to farm, with some cities cracking down on gardens, chickens, etc.

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. These liberals are out of control. They want to drive our economy into the ground and double and triple our electric bills. Sierra Club, stay out of Indy!

  2. These activist liberal judges have gotten out of control. Thankfully we have a sensible supreme court that overturns their absurd rulings!

  3. Maybe they shouldn't be throwing money at the IRL or whatever they call it now. Probably should save that money for actual operations.

  4. For you central Indiana folks that don't know what a good pizza is, Aurelio's will take care of that. There are some good pizza places in central Indiana but nothing like this!!!

  5. I am troubled with this whole string of comments as I am not sure anyone pointed out that many of the "high paying" positions have been eliminated identified by asterisks as of fiscal year 2012. That indicates to me that the hospitals are making responsible yet difficult decisions and eliminating heavy paying positions. To make this more problematic, we have created a society of "entitlement" where individuals believe they should receive free services at no cost to them. I have yet to get a house repair done at no cost nor have I taken my car that is out of warranty for repair for free repair expecting the government to pay for it even though it is the second largest investment one makes in their life besides purchasing a home. Yet, we continue to hear verbal and aggressive abuse from the consumer who expects free services and have to reward them as a result of HCAHPS surveys which we have no influence over as it is 3rd party required by CMS. Peel the onion and get to the root of the problem...you will find that society has created the problem and our current political landscape and not the people who were fortunate to lead healthcare in the right direction before becoming distorted. As a side note, I had a friend sit in an ED in Canada for nearly two days prior to being evaluated and then finally...3 months later got a CT of the head. You pay for what you get...

ADVERTISEMENT