IBJNews

Steele removes farming from proposed hunting, fishing amendment

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The author of a constitutional amendment to protect hunting and fishing has introduced the proposal this year without language that would protect farmers as well.

Sen. Brent Steele’s original amendment passed its first round in 2011 but needed approval this year to go on the ballot for ratification by voters. But now – with new language – the process will start over.

Steele, R-Bedford, said Monday the agricultural community asked him to remove the language that was meant to ensure livestock farming could continue, despite opposition from animal rights groups.

“I will say that it was not my idea,” Steele said. “I told them that they’ve got to get some guts. I told them to grow some horns because they’re going to get run around the pasture, and there’s no language that’s going to mollify their opposition. Their opposition will not be happy with any language.”

Steele acknowledged his original language was controversial among environmentalists and animal rights groups, who feared it would prevent future laws meant to protect land or livestock, or put limits on puppy mills.

But Steele said he believes that “if I was willing to fight and the legislature was willing to put our necks on the line and take the heat” then the language of the amendment should have been fine.

“But,” he continued, “there are some agriculture producers in this state that don’t have any guts and begged me to pull (the farming component). I think it was a mistake, but I pulled it.”

With farming left out of the constitutional amendment, Sen. Carlin Yoder, R-Middlebury, introduced Senate Bill 186, which would put the farm protections into state law instead. The goal is to give the courts guidance to interpret state laws to be sympathetic toward farming interests.

The Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee passed SB 186 on Monday.

Before the vote, Kim Ferraro, staff attorney of the Hoosier Environmental Council, spoke against the bill. Ferraro said it would favor the agriculture industry and harm the environment as well as threaten the rights of personal property owners.

“Although HEC hasn’t fully analyzed the likely impacts of enshrining hunting and fishing rights into Indiana’s constitution – rights that current SJR 9 would create, we can say, generally, that any constitutionally-protected activity is extremely difficult, if not impossible, for state and local policymakers to subsequently control,” Ferraro said in a previous press release.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Reply to Katherine
    What, your comment makes absoluteluy no sense. How is constitutionally protecting the right to hunt and fish in business's interest. He pulled the amendment at their request. Additionally, HEC is a bunch of psychos, why in the world they would even analyze how "enshrining" hunting and fishing rights is beyond me. Sportsmen and women do more to protect our natural resources than those nutjobs even think about. Pathetic, just pathetic.
  • For the People
    It seems that Sen. Steele is pretty clear that he isn't "for the people," but rather for the business. These elected officials are supposed to represent the people. Not special interests. Sounds like Steele is perfectly comfortable letting people know that he is willing to do whatever it takes to impose his will on this state. Shameful. Another reason that Indiana will continue to drive employers and residents to other states.

    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. I am so impressed that the smoking ban FAILED in Kokomo! I might just move to your Awesome city!

    2. way to much breweries being built in indianapolis. its going to be saturated market, if not already. when is enough, enough??

    3. This house is a reminder of Hamilton County history. Its position near the interstate is significant to remember what Hamilton County was before the SUPERBROKERs, Navients, commercial parks, sprawling vinyl villages, and acres of concrete retail showed up. What's truly Wasteful is not reusing a structure that could still be useful. History isn't confined to parks and books.

    4. To compare Connor Prairie or the Zoo to a random old house is a big ridiculous. If it were any where near the level of significance there wouldn't be a major funding gap. Put a big billboard on I-69 funded by the tourism board for people to come visit this old house, and I doubt there would be any takers, since other than age there is no significance whatsoever. Clearly the tax payers of Fishers don't have a significant interest in this project, so PLEASE DON'T USE OUR VALUABLE MONEY. Government money is finite and needs to be utilized for the most efficient and productive purposes. This is far from that.

    5. I only tried it 2x and didn't think much of it both times. With the new apts plus a couple other of new developments on Guilford, I am surprised it didn't get more business. Plus you have a couple of subdivisions across the street from it. I hope Upland can keep it going. Good beer and food plus a neat environment and outdoor seating.

    ADVERTISEMENT