The NRC passed most items on today's agenda:

http://www.in.gov/nrc/2354.htm

Under item #10 the proposed early archery and late primitive muzzleloader season were withdrawn. The remainder of item #10 was passed and should be in force by next year.

Another item of note: Colonel Scotty Wilson is retiring as head of the Law Enforcement Division and Bruce Stevens is leaving IDNR's Mine Reclamation Division.

Jack

P.S. I almost forgot...Draw-loc devices were also approved for archery whenever crossbows are legal.

I thought that the new/extra seasons were a done deal?

HatchetJack Based on the comments I read the vast majority of people didn't want these seasons anyway.

IMHO, it's time to let the new regs implemented last year run for a few seasons so as to be able to judge their impact.

Sorry jack but o find the PS. Crap just that . Crap. Its just an opinion and god knows I have not done anything for months. I'll get back in the game as soon as I get these other knots untied... priorities..

Thanks for the update Jack........... as always the IDNR does what it wants, all the time tellig what it calls "partners" it supports their ideas.


After the last "FIASCO" I am glad we stayed out of this round of BS!


"If it doesn't increase income........it aint important..........."

Carry on folks, deer are like rabbits, shoot em till they are gone.....

Draw locks....plzzzzz

Joe your right about our natural resources being abused for a revenue stream.. unreal..

Currently the IDNR is NOT self-sustaining. Never has been. The hope is that someday IDNR will be funded someway other than the general fund. Case in point: the NRC announced yesterday that the new fiscal year has begun and that every agency has been asked to set aside 3% to kick-back to the general fund. CO's are driving worn out vehicles, the fish hatcheries are decades past being replaced, Law Enforcement can't keep up with the retirements and general exodus of officers, and no plan in sight for upland bird restoration. You get the services you are willing to fund.

Oh, an across the board license increase will be coming soon (this year).

Jack

When a person truly considers the recreational value of a hunting license compared to other forms of recreation, I believe a hunting and fishing license is almost ridiculously cheap. But, the real issue is that sportsmen don't really care about anything other then a "give me" attitude. Now, I'm not saying that towards those of visit this site or even many other such sites, but again, the majority of sportsmen don't engage at all except to grab their fishing pole or gun. Sure, there are a few small groups that try to get involved but in today's world they are ineffective because of how politics and influence has migrated over the years. Using the State's resources to produce income for various agencies is fairly standard practice in regard to natural resources. One only has to look at how the State timbers certain lands. Jack, your assessment is very good.

How is Kentucky able to fund their DNR without using any tax dollars? They seem to provide more money and a better overall experience for their outdoor users than many other states.

Kentucky Sportsmen Pay for Conservation

The KY Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Resources is funded through the sale of hunting and fishing licenses and boat registrations. It receives no general fund tax dollars.

http://fw.ky.gov/wetlandwildlife.asp

Guys Look to Missouri They do it with a SODA tax

I would venture to say that KY sells way more licenses than Indiana. But, look at how much water, non-ag, and undeveloped land they have compared to Indiana. Corn is King here........It wouldn't matter how many licenses Indiana sold. There will NEVER be the outdoor recreation opportunities herethat KY has.

Is there more information about this somewhere? That is a division of DNR is of great interest to me.

All I know for sure is that he is leaving for a safety job in the private sector here in Indiana.

You could call or email him:

E-mail:bstevens@dnr.in.gov

Phone:812-665-2207

Raise the license fees .. double them across the board if that's what it takes.. all funds stay with DNR and habitat.

I still like the 5 dollar landowner licence with 22 DOLLARS PR money in return Thats less than a cent and a half a day for us as landowners to spend

I am pretty sure the Division of Fish and Wildlife is not funded exclusively from the General Fund. However, I do not know what percentage comes from various sources. Perhaps someone here could obtain and post a tabulation, or pie charts, of the major funding sources for F&W and a few other divisions within IDNR? It may be worth starting a separate thread.

That is good news. Those were ridiculous ideas.