Bad part about it is the "REAL BLEEDING " hasn't really started yet.....

Not a sad day at all......... Eberhart and his cronies are in a VERY bad position. Now they have to figure out how to control the NEW business, and, how to define "humane slaughter" to the public. I'm setting back LMAO.............

Under Eberhart's plan(bill) all of this is taken from IDNR and sent to Dept of AG.......general fund dollars, soccer moms will pay for it.....

Everyone needs to send Mr Eberhart a tube of Preperation H, he is going to need it.

Remeber that saying "be careful of what you aske for.........you might just get it"? He now OWN's it.

Nah, he'll serve a few more terms and leave with a pension and go work in the private sector for one of his "Cronies" that's been filling his wallet to get this crap passed.

The guy who gets this stuff passed rarely ever gets stuck with it. This is the same kinda guy who'll campaign saying he supports smaller government. Meanwhile, like you guys said, the taxpayer will pay for all of this. But hey, business will prosper and for the millions in taxpayer money spent on this, the good people of Indiana will get what, a hand full of jobs out of it working at these places? Oh and I'll bet they'll be high paying jobs with benefits too? Not

HS Strut.............

We get what "we" vote for........ National or local...... we get what we deserve!


A week ago Mr Eberhart wanted to delay a vote, tooooooo many media types hanging around and the general public.

This Monday he get's blind sided 1/2 hour before his meeting by a judge's rule.


Now he (Eberhart) has to delay the vote to decide what is needed to make this palatible to the public.

Eberhart no longer has the "threat" to IDNR of moving regulations of captive deer the Department of Agriculture, the judge just moved it there!

And he directed the Legislature to make it work........

I see a butt pucker.......


Any legislator who votes for high fence hunting takes ownership of shooting presrves and deer farming.

Does anybody see any correlation between allowing these high fence penned hunts, to proceed, and grow, while at the same time, trying to severely reduce the State's wild herd?????? Less wild deer/bucks for people = more $$ for the pen raised deer pimps……..

That thought had occurred to me.... :rolleyes:

I'd like to think that close to 100% of us would stop hunting all together before we'd shoot a deer out of a pen. I'd hope that's the case. But the antler hype and hardons may be too much for some.

It all creates an interesting situation. Of course, these whitetail deer ALL come from a wild herd somewhere in their genetic past. But, apparently once fenced in, somewhere upon a time, they then become privately owned. Forget the deer for a minute. Let's play this out. So, apparently I can't catch some paddlefish and put them in my pound and start a private "caviar" "farming" business. Why not? Where does the "wild" end and the "private domestic" start. Of course this can taken to extremes in regard to any animal walking the face of the earth that has become domesticated and privately owned. And then, what is the definition of a "pen". For instance. Size, configuration, habitat density, animal husbandry rules. And, of course, what are the intended rules for identification of domestic, privately owned animals that are not readily identified, unless tagged or otherwise, that intermix with a wild herd or flock. IF the department of ag does its job, they have a lot of issues to assess and deal with. Of course, it is unlikely the department of ag will effectively deal with this because truthfully it's not in their expertise wheelhouse to do so.

This amongst many other examples of the world today suggests one thing very strongly. "Everything" for the sake of business.

JB,
The point I was making is we only have 2 choices typically. As a country and state, we are divided...divided by two parties. I don't like either side. So To your point that we get what we vote for, I despise both parties, so I either vote for the lesser of two evils or don't vote at all. I don't believe this is what our forefathers intended.
I also don't have the opportunity to vote this eberhart cat out because he's not on my ballot/district. So no, I didn't vote for him. I did not choose him.

Another can of worms the legislature and the judge might have to deal with in the future. I own chickens a domestic animal and I want to have **** fights, they are MY chickens. As with deer I don't have to take them to a slaughter house for humane slaughter..... same could be said for dogs and dog fighting.

Not that I want either but we are talking domestic privately owned animals here.

Agreed, neither party is to be admired.

Even if you could (like I can) Democrats didn't even field a candidate this past election (or the one before that I believe)... He is in as long as he wants it or he does something wrong that he has no choice but to resign...

Sad but true...

Bryan:

If you want to get his attention or him out you need to find a republican in his district to run against him in the primary. Legislators are not beaten in the general election, they get beat in tmary where no one votes. You also make the encumbent spend money in the primary, which they hate!

DNA on here can help you if you are truely interested.

A few years ago the Speaker pro tempe of the Senate was defeated by an "outsider" of the republican party in the primary. No one thought he could be beat........ All he did was campaign at churches.

You're right that incumbents are mostly beaten in the Primary due to crossover voting...

I have a day job (soon to be night) so I could never run against him because it would require me to quit to commit to being politician full time which I cannot do at this time... I don't even own a suit.... Have no real reason to own one

Besides I am not a politically correct person and will say whats on my mind and not be apologetic about it either...

So, next question:

Is there a realistic opportunity to attack this from the angle which poses the REAL threat?...meaning live animal trafficking.

The fact there is still not a reliable CWD test on live animals feels like leverage. The fact Indiana has had at least three high fence facilities test positive for bovine TB in recent history adds clout. Then there is the Pennsylvania to Indiana deer escape in Jackson county that made headlines.

If these high fence facilities were forced to only sell what they grow... from their own resident herds....that alleviates much of the disease concerns.

It is true that in counties like I live in (Morgan) the real election is the primary. It's almost entirely republican so if a democrat does run, they will get about zero votes. So what we are doing in Morgan County if we vote out an incumbent is just electing another big business friendly union busting person by a different name. It has zero effect.

PAV, You bring up a great idea. I said on here a couple years ago that anyone who claims to be in favor of capitalism is gonna have a hard time telling these guys what they can or can't do with their money or property. But we can certainly make it a pain in the rear to operate such business.
I prefer we don't have it at all...but if it's going to exist, we need to make sure they can't be infecting anyone elses herd or the states deer

Good points Pav, but we had a summer study committee in which IDNR and sportrsmen brought in the leading experts in the country to educate the legislators and the ignored the testimony. Mr Eberhart asked the question to one of them, "So if we are probably going to have CWD some day why not allow shooting preserves today." The answer was fast and direct, "I know i'm going to die some day but I'm not going to do anything to rush it." Eberhart went back to texting......

Eberhart does not care about our natural resources, he is looking at revenue and the taxes it will generate, typical politician.

If the bill was changed to do just that Pav and only allow the four that are in business then I would call that a partial victory and would support it... As much as I would hate too that could be the best way forward for all parties...

Also I would like to see added to the bill that must carry a hefty liability policy cause if they would escape and cause an accident I would hold them accountable for it....

Agree with the second part….. If the deer stay in the pen, they are under BOA. If the deer escape, they would get thrown in the DNR's and taxpayers lap to take care of the issue AND EXPENSES!!!! AND, the owner foots NONE of the bill….That needs to change if it passes….

According to the series of articles that the IndyStar did there are approximately 382 high fence hunting areas and farms.

Does anyone know how many of these places allow hunting?

In Indiana .... 4

4 at the present operating ,as many as 8 others have shut down but may open again if grandfathered. Or it may be open to anyone with 100 acres under high fence.

As far as the deer farmers at near 400 farms this is not true. In many many cases the owner/operator has his family under different permits, now why would someone do that? TAXES! When the deer is sold that is income, so if I put in my son, daughter, cousin's name they must file as "individual" income. See how it works?

jbwhttail So we have no idea how many farms really exist?

What ever the amount, it is way to many....