Home

HB1246 amendment

Posted By: tattoo

HB1246 amendment - 02/24/2016 07:20 PM

There looks to be a Senate floor amendment from Senator Messmer to ban drones during hunting season to look for wild game. It may be offered tomorrow.
Posted By: HatchetJack

Re: HB1246 amendment - 02/24/2016 09:06 PM

http://iga.in.gov/legislative/2016/bills/house/1246#document-b0f628df
Posted By: HatchetJack

Re: HB1246 amendment - 02/26/2016 10:04 AM

As expected the amendment to alter the HB1246 has been filed:

iga.in.gov/legislative/2016/bills/house/1246#document-816d3d6a

This basically prohibits the Division of Forestry from doing their job. There are many thousands of acres in parks and nature preserves and fish & wildlife areas in Indiana that are protected from logging. The state forests were not created so tree huggers would have a free state park to roam in. We have one of the best forestry divisions in the country and this is how the politicians treat them. I ask that this amendment be defeated. Contact your state senator right now!!

Jack
Posted By: 76chevy

Re: HB1246 amendment - 02/26/2016 01:11 PM

Sorry but I support this amendment.

Our old growth forests should not be logged for profit. Pretty awful what has happened to some of the areas within the Greene Sullivan state forest. Clear cut several areas.

This proposal would not affect hunting or recreation in these areas

Sec. 6. The designation of old forest areas in state forests under
17
this chapter does not affect the following:
18
(1) Hunting, fishing, trapping, and the gathering of edible and
19
medicinal plants and mushrooms in the state forests, as
20
permitted by law and administrative rules.
Posted By: Weedhopper

Re: HB1246 amendment - 02/26/2016 02:13 PM

:rolleyes:
Posted By: pav

Re: HB1246 amendment - 02/26/2016 02:37 PM

Quote
Originally posted by 76chevy:
Sorry but I support this amendment.

Our old growth forests should not be logged for profit. Pretty awful what has happened to some of the areas within the Greene Sullivan state forest. Clear cut several areas.

This proposal would not affect hunting or recreation in these areas

Sec. 6. The designation of old forest areas in state forests under
17
this chapter does not affect the following:
18
(1) Hunting, fishing, trapping, and the gathering of edible and
19
medicinal plants and mushrooms in the state forests, as
20
permitted by law and administrative rules.
Selective timbering is good for the forest and good for wildlife. I'm with you on clear cutting, but mature timber should be removed to make room for new growth....young trees will prosper and ground level vegetation (virtually extinct in old growth forests) will thrive.
Posted By: Double B

Re: HB1246 amendment - 02/26/2016 03:19 PM

You may feel strongly one way or another but I can tell you after attending the last series of forestry meetings, we have doubled the amount of cutting in our State and National forests in the last several years. The foresters will tell you that they could be cutting more. Until you go to a meeting, you can't appreciate how many different users and groups all voice very strong opinions. Horse riders, campers, tree huggers, bunny huggers, hunters, joggers, loggers, mountain bikers, adjacent landowners, etc. I personally don't like to see the aggressive cutting we now see, but it corresponds to a big down turn in funding when a 100 year provision went away in 2008, I believe. Iirc, the state fair was similarly impacted. Is it coincidence or necessity to add revenue through state and federal land logging?
Posted By: 76chevy

Re: HB1246 amendment - 02/26/2016 03:33 PM

Agreed 100%.

I can't speak for all logging on DNR forest property statewide but what I saw at the GSF was not good for wildlife or anyone but the logging company and the DNR cashing the check. Forests planted in the 50's and 60's cut to clear ground in several locations over many acres.

Quote
Originally posted by pav:
....
Selective timbering is good for the forest and good for wildlife. I'm with you on clear cutting, but mature timber should be removed to make room for new growth....young trees will prosper and ground level vegetation (virtually extinct in old growth forests) will thrive. [/QUOTE]
Posted By: 76chevy

Re: HB1246 amendment - 02/26/2016 03:36 PM

Which begs the question. WHY?

Were they not cutting enough before to adequately manage the resource or is this just about revenue generation today like you suggested?

Quote
Originally posted by Double B:
You may feel strongly one way or another but I can tell you after attending the last series of forestry meetings, we have doubled the amount of cutting in our State and National forests in the last several years. ...
Posted By: HatchetJack

Re: HB1246 amendment - 02/26/2016 05:45 PM

Every DNR biologist and forester will tell you that loss of habitat is the reason we lost our grouse in Indiana. The early successional habitat needed by grouse and other woodland species was lost because Democratic governors starting with Evan Bayh restricted the amount of logging in state forests. Old growth forests exist AND are protected in the state parks, state preserves, and state fish & wildlife areas where little or no logging is allowed.

The protesting of logging began with Mitch Daniels and the process of allowing habitat management in the state forests. It continues with Mike Pence. And no they were not cutting enough in state forests for nearly 30 years. The biologists warned us all and we did nothing.

Excellent article on the loss of habitat and birds in Indiana forests.

http://www.ruffedgrousesociety.org/UserFiles/File/OtherSilentSpring.pdf

The Ruffed Grouse Society is currently in litigation with national forests in Ohio and Indiana with the USFS for not creating the young forests needed to provide habitat for grouse. This is in direct violation of their own forest plan.


http://www.ruffedgrousesociety.org/USFS%20petition#.VtDVOfkrKM8

Jack
Posted By: Den57

Re: HB1246 amendment - 02/26/2016 06:13 PM

^^^ This
Well said Jack!!!
Posted By: trapperDave

Re: HB1246 amendment - 02/26/2016 08:50 PM

Ditto!
Posted By: Double B

Re: HB1246 amendment - 02/27/2016 10:30 AM

So were we cutting over 15 million board feet pre Mitch? 30 years ago were we cutting more or less? I am asking for info not to argue, but it looks like a lot more cutting than I personally have ever seen. Last grouse I flushed was in a hard cut over in Crawford County probably 8 years ago. I get it, but I believe other drivers are at work here to produce revenue, not just grouse habitat restoration. Lots of groups sue over logging to get their point across....that's the remedy, other than going to meetings and reading prepared statements.
Posted By: HatchetJack

Re: HB1246 amendment - 02/27/2016 03:11 PM

We were barely cutting at all before Mitch. I think there were 2 forest plans during Mitch's tenure. Both were significant increases over 20+ years of Democrat rule of DNR (upper level staff are appointed by the Governor).

All the science is on the side of the Forestry Division. Now I disagree with parts of the current plan calling for upgraded campgrounds and RV parks and rental cabins. But I leave the science to the scientists. In other states (Michigan and Wisconsin) 100 acre clear cuts are welcomed. We don't have that kind of ground and smaller 5-10 selective cuts work fine here in Indiana. The current proposed forest plan can be reviewed here:

http://www.in.gov/dnr/forestry/files/fo-State_Forest_Strategic_Plan_2015_2019.pdf

The bottomline is that 10% (or more) of the state forests are already preserved and protected from logging. This fight has been going on for a long time and I don't expect it will go away.I also disagree with funding the Division from the logging but Pence has pushed them in that direction. Lots of good info on the forestry home page:

http://www.in.gov/dnr/forestry/

Jack
Posted By: HatchetJack

Re: HB1246 amendment - 02/27/2016 05:55 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwOaYe3jp34
Posted By: HatchetJack

Re: HB1246 amendment - 02/27/2016 06:12 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9PCo3Yi1H0
Posted By: HatchetJack

Re: HB1246 amendment - 02/27/2016 06:13 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmRRaNl1GSA
Posted By: huntsemall

Re: HB1246 amendment - 02/27/2016 07:28 PM

Just some FYI...# of openings in acres - 413 (down 34% from 2014) and the average size opening across the Division was 2.7 acres.
Posted By: Double B

Re: HB1246 amendment - 02/27/2016 08:13 PM

Good stuff thanks for the links. Yeah I do see the advantages and have succsessfully hunted logged areas. I do have some areas that I like that are really mature and they are special too though. I saw a lot of activity with brush hogging forest openings this year and that was nice. Controlled burns too. I guess the forest lands that were picked up originally were regenerating and also pines planted by the CCC in the 30's and that helped grouse back in the day, but then it has really matured. Some mass clear cuts of large pine acreage in the Hoosier this fall and winter going on too. Those clear cuts will be gnarly soon. Seems like they are hitting it pretty hard, compared to say 10 years ago but we adjust, as do the animals. It has made hunting better is some areas.
Posted By: HatchetJack

Re: HB1246 amendment - 03/01/2016 01:44 PM

Bill passed WITHOUT the forestry amendment!!!

48-2
© 2024 Hoosier Hunting