IBJNews

Senate cans hunting plan

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A proposal aimed at legalizing five fenced deer-hunting preserves around Indiana has failed in this year's legislative session.

Rep. Matt Ubelhor of Bloomfield said Thursday that his bid to protect the hunting preserves was blocked by the Senate.

Ubelhor says he believes the step was 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.

Senate President Pro Tem David Long says he doesn't believe that the preserves offer true hunting and that the courts should decide whether the preserves are legal before the Legislature gets involved.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • This is NOT HUNTING
    Please tell me what is "sporting" about killing semi-tame deer in a fenced in encloser? This is not right, and that is why IT SHOULD NOT BE LEGAL! Indiana has had a deer overpopulation problem for years. Every year, several parks have legal deer hunting to thin out the population. Why don't these "so called hunters" go hunt deer there? Or are they not tame enough for you, or in a fence, where they have no place to run????????? And the 5 that have operated so far, MUST BE SHUT DOWN!
  • Score 1 for the Buck
    Thank goodness for this. This "sport" is so un-sportsman like it's ridiculous. I can't believe any man (or woman) would feel proud to have a trophy from this kind of operation. Thank you State Senate!!

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. From the story: "The city of Indianapolis also will consider tax incentives and funding for infrastructure required for the project, according to IEDC." Why would the City need to consider additional tax incentives when Lowe's has already bought the land and reached an agreement with IEDC to bring the jobs? What that tells me is that the City has already pledged the incentives, unofficially, and they just haven't had time to push it through the MDC yet. Either way, subsidizing $10/hour jobs is going to do nothing toward furthering the Mayor's stated goal of attracting middle and upper-middle class residents to Marion County.

  2. Ron Spencer and the entire staff of Theater on the Square embraced IndyFringe when it came to Mass Ave in 2005. TOTS was not only a venue but Ron and his friends created, presented and appeared in shows which embraced the 'spirit of the fringe'. He's weathered all the storms and kept smiling ... bon voyage and thank you.

  3. Not sure how many sushi restaurants are enough, but there are three that I know of in various parts of downtown proper and all are pretty good.

  4. First off, it's "moron," not "moran." 2nd, YOU don't get to vote on someone else's rights and freedoms that are guaranteed by the US Constitution. That's why this is not a state's rights issue...putting something like this to vote by, well, people like you who are quite clearly intellectually challenged isn't necessary since the 14th amendment has already decided the issue. Which is why Indiana's effort is a wasted one and a waste of money...and will be overturned just like this has in every other state.

  5. Rick, how does granting theright to marry to people choosing to marry same-sex partners harm the lives of those who choose not to? I cannot for the life of me see any harm to people who choose not to marry someone of the same sex. We understand your choice to take the parts of the bible literally in your life. That is fine but why force your religious beliefs on others? I'm hoping the judges do the right thing and declare the ban unconstitutional so all citizens of Wisconsin and Indiana have the same marriage rights and that those who chose someone of the same sex do not have less rights than others.

ADVERTISEMENT