Deer Farmer

Go Back   Deer Farmer > Deer Farming Forum > Deer Hunting Preserves

Deer Hunting Preserves Deer Hunting Preserves Forum - information, stories, photos and discussions about experiences, issues and challenges in operating a successful and profitable hunting preserve


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes

Old Feb 9th 2015, 01:15 PM   #1
 ToddM's Avatar
 
  May 2009
  Fulton, Michigan


Read this article and tell me if I am reading this wrong


*


This article says that only the four hunting preserves that are currently hunting in Indiana will be able to hunt in the future.* LAter in the article it says "Sean Eberhart, R-Shelbyville - the author - changed the bill to allow only those preserves in existence before Dec. 31, 2014 to be eligible for the license."* Does this mean that the 12 that were forced out of business can go back to hunting too?

Niki KellyThe Journal Gazette


INDIANAPOLIS - Only four captive hunting preserves would be allowed to operate under an amended bill passed 8-4 by the House Natural Resources Committee Monday.


*


House Bill 1453 originally would have legalized shooting deer bred for large racks behind high fences for anyone who wanted to start a preserve, pay an annual licensing fee and follow modest regulations.


But the practice has been opposed by many in the hunting arena as ethically corrupt. And others worry deadly disease could spread.


*


So Rep. Sean Eberhart, R-Shelbyville - the author - changed the bill to allow only those preserves in existence before Dec. 31, 2014 to be eligible for the license.


*


Only four are currently in operation - in Harrison, Blackford, Kosciusko and Marshall counties.


But hundreds of deer farms raise deer. That industry had pushed for a complete legalization so they had more places to sell their stock to. Now they could only sell to the four facilities and out-of-state.


*


The amendment also made clear that the 100-acre minimum is for the hunting area - not overall size of the property.


If the preserve is sold, Eberhart said the license would not be automatically transferred. Instead, the new owners would have to apply for a new license. The license would apply to the same property, though. It could not move.


The issue of so-called captive hunting goes back more than a decade in Indiana. About a dozen of these facilities existed before the Department of Natural Resources ordered them to shut down in 2005.


*


But the preserve owners have stayed open under a court injunction. A recent Court of Appeals ruling said the Department of Natural Resources don't have the authority to ban the practice without legislative action.*


*


Monday's amendment also said the DNR isn't allowed to pass any rules that are more restrictive than the law.


The bill now moves to the full House for a vote.


*


*
ToddM is offline  
Old Feb 9th 2015, 02:54 PM   #2
 Bell's Avatar
 
  Apr 2014
  Greensburg, IN
With a $2,000 annual fee,

$50 tag fee for each buck,

And the 100% testing requirement will make it tough for Indiana preserves to compete with Ohio and other neighboring states as the profit margins continue to tighten in this industry. I believe that Ohio has a one time inspection fee of $1000.

We could live with a one time $2,000 inspection fee. An annual fee this high will make things tough combined with the other fees.

Hopefully before the bill reaches the senate it can be amended so that the fees are more similar to those in Ohio.
Bell is offline  
Old Feb 9th 2015, 03:59 PM   #3
 Wild Rivers Whitetails's Avatar
 
  Apr 2009
  Northeast Wisconsin

Cervid: Deer Farming
This is the kind of stuff your lobbyist can help you with. They know who the right people are to get that done.
Wild Rivers Whitetails is offline  
Old Feb 9th 2015, 04:56 PM   #4
 jerrilee cave's Avatar
 
  Feb 2013
  Markleville IN
Kind funny that the 4 preserves is a recurring theme.
jerrilee cave is offline  
Old Feb 9th 2015, 06:05 PM   #5
 
  Nov 2010
  Lanesboro, Minnesota


Why a $50 tag free? *Are your deer under DNR or Ag? *Why do you have to pay the state a fee for YOUR deer?
G O Whitetails is offline  
Old Feb 9th 2015, 06:18 PM   #6
 jerrilee cave's Avatar
 
  Feb 2013
  Markleville IN
Gary,

They are not as of the court ruling last week, just the Sboah.
jerrilee cave is offline  
Old Feb 9th 2015, 07:24 PM   #7
 
  Jul 2012
  McAlester OK
The $50 tag fee is actually a smart thing to leave alone. It gives the dnr tag money that they say they loose when we hunt high fence. To me it's a cheap price to pay to give them one less stone to throw. They also have to buy out of state license. It was actually one of the things our board at Whitetails Of Oklahoma had put in our laws when they drafted them. Just my two cents.

Anthony Salyers
Short Creek is offline  
Old Feb 10th 2015, 08:28 AM   #8
 Bell's Avatar
 
  Apr 2014
  Greensburg, IN
The judge clearly ruled that our captive deer are our private property and the DNR does not have jurisdiction. I agree with Gary. Why allow the DNR to confiscate $50 on each deer. Y'all in Oklahoma are also not required to test hunter harvested deer in your preserves. We are required to test 100% and pay for the test. My bill for each head tested is around $125.
Bell is offline  
Old Feb 10th 2015, 08:35 AM   #9
 Wild Rivers Whitetails's Avatar
 
  Apr 2009
  Northeast Wisconsin

Cervid: Deer Farming
In Wisconsin we do not pay anything for deer harvested. We pay a once a year license fee of I think it is $375. Hunters do not need licenses to hunt with us. Our deer are our deer, not captive wildlife but farmed cervids. We are under Agriculture. Recently they reduced the number to 50% of the deer killed must be tested on the hunting ranches.
Wild Rivers Whitetails is offline  
Old Feb 10th 2015, 08:42 AM   #10
 Bell's Avatar
 
  Apr 2014
  Greensburg, IN
Every day it seems that we lose more of our freedoms bit by bit across this country. Our captive deer were deemed by both the Harrison county judge and the Indiana appellate court to be our private property. Why allow them to confiscate $50 for each buck? We are not taking animals from the taxpayers herd and selling them. We have leverage. Why not use it?
Bell is offline  
Old Feb 10th 2015, 09:27 AM   #11
 Jack's Avatar
 
  Apr 2009
  Vaughn, MT 59487

Cervid: mule deer,whitetail,elk,goats,bighorn & stone sheep


It's always about the money in my opinion and the loss of habitat when we place our fences up with the DNR.* Here in Montana our DNR issued a tag for harvest and*took money when we sold a deer.* We all got along in those days.* Like some of you on here I felt they were our deer why would we pay the DNR for a tag.* We got that reversed which in hindsight might have been a mistake.* I feel now if we had left the DNR keep their hand in our pocket they wouldn't have turned against the industry and we might still be in business here in Montana.*


We all know disease isn't the real*issue.* Any other livestock group has had disease issues like MAD cow disease in cattle or scrappie in sheep and when the disease protocol satisfied the safety of the disease and animals*that industry was able to move forward.* This has not been the case with our industry and CWD is always used against the industry no matter what health protocol is in place.* The main reason is the DNR stirs the pot at every chance against this industry.* The DNR is on every board and has never said a good word about the industry no matter how we try to fix any disease problem*or how many*more restrictive disease rules we place or allow on this industry.
Jack is offline  
Old Feb 10th 2015, 02:17 PM   #12
 Four Seasons Whitetails's Avatar
 
  Oct 2009
  upstate ny

Cervid: Whitetail Deer
Short Creek1010231423538649



The $50 tag fee is actually a smart thing to leave alone. It gives the dnr tag money that they say they loose when we hunt high fence. To me it's a cheap price to pay to give them one less stone to throw. They also have to buy out of state license. It was actually one of the things our board at Whitetails Of Oklahoma had put in our laws when they drafted them. Just my two cents.

Anthony Salyers




This is the smartest move in reality. Sucks but like Jack says, They thing..and are..that they are getting something from us then they will not push so hard to be rid of our industry. Not right maybe but sometimes fighting fire with fire helps. Tim said years ago that Oklahoma works with their high fence hunts/hunters, How nice would that be huh
Four Seasons Whitetails is offline  
Old Feb 10th 2015, 02:59 PM   #13
 Wild Rivers Whitetails's Avatar
 
  Apr 2009
  Northeast Wisconsin

Cervid: Deer Farming
The hunters we get would not be spending any money in Wisconsin if they weren't here for a high fence hunt. They are from out of state and coming for one reason. That is money the state would lose if we were out of business. That money gets distributed to area businesses when we buy goods, or to our vet, or our meat processor. DNR isn't losing any money in our state. As for habitat, the little bit of acreage behind high fence in the state is insignificant. Someone could put up a high fence just for their own use as well. So the reality is that high fence hunting operations have zero impact on local public hunting.
Wild Rivers Whitetails is offline  
Old Feb 12th 2015, 10:33 AM   #14
 Jack's Avatar
 
  Apr 2009
  Vaughn, MT 59487

Cervid: mule deer,whitetail,elk,goats,bighorn & stone sheep


Acres were an issue in Montana as our harvest facilities were fencing in 1000 to 2500 acres at a time*and it was a growing part of our industry.* It was stated by the DNR we were taking away lots of habitat for their wildlife.* Our State*and the DNR*didn't care about the money being spent by our out of State people which was also a lot of money.* My own harvest facility did account for half of the animals*my taxidermist got in each year.* We did about 250 out of State*clients a year as did other big harvest facilities.* Our animals went to meat processors.* This industry brought in lots of out of State money.*The problem with the DNR is they consider this industry a direct*competitor and we are commercializing wildlife even though we own these animals outright.


It always made me laugh because we had to get an environmental assessment to get our farms started but land developers could move into prime animal habitat and put homes up.* Then the pet dogs would kill or move the deer and elk out.* That double standard was always driven by our DNR against the deer industry.*
Jack is offline  
Old Feb 12th 2015, 10:40 AM   #15
 
  Nov 2010
  Lanesboro, Minnesota


I agree Jack. * DNR should pay us for the feed their wildlife eat. *On the Iowa DNR website, they say that 78% of a deers yearly food source comes from corn and soybean fields. *Do the math. *What does the deer cost a farmer every year? *How does that effect the economic impact of a state, when those dollars are lost?*


Gary
G O Whitetails is offline  
Reply

  Deer Farmer > Deer Farming Forum > Deer Hunting Preserves

Tags
reading, wrong



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Discussions
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ai gone Wrong daywoodwhitetails Deer Breeding 11 Jun 3rd 2014 05:49 AM
informative site some might like the reading dearjohn Deer Health 0 May 30th 2011 05:23 PM
Reading the Ol' Stud -vs- New Kid thread. ahiggins Deer Farm Management 5 Jan 25th 2011 01:59 PM
Thought some enjoy reading this IndependenceRanch Cervid Community 4 Nov 19th 2010 01:30 PM
the book Obama is reading Tundra Ridge Whitetails Cervid Community 7 Apr 9th 2010 05:50 AM


Facebook Twitter Google+ RSS Feed