No committee meetings of import this week but I did notice that HB1208 passed the House and is in the Senate Natural Resources Committee. This bill requires DNR to establish a lottery for an additional 100 antlered licenses as the prize.

Now 100 licenses won't make much difference in the greater scheme of things but I have learned that once that camel's nose is under the tent you never know what to expect.

Contact your Senator now if you enjoy the one buck rule.

http://iga.in.gov/legislative/2015/bills/house/1208#document-bbf02d55

Hatchet

P.S. This thing passed the House by a whopping 93-1 vote. Passed Senate Natural Resources Committee by 6-0.

Doubt that my legislator will listen, but I sent an email asking for a no vote.

Talk to a few folks today and this one is a done deal...

I can't type the words that I would like to use to describe many of our legislators today.

Yep. Show me the $$$

For accuracy's sake, it doesn't "require" the Department to do the lottery, it allows it. The effect is probably the same though.

Seems like a lot of work for $3K. Anybody know where this came from? Seems odd. And why the overwhelming, nearly unanimous, agreement.

Maybe I'm reading this wrong but it says that a chance to participate in the lottery is $30.00 and that 100 tags will be awarded.

It doesn't say anywhere that 100 chances is all that will be sold. They could sell as many chances as people are willing to buy @ $30.00 per.

If you sold 10,000 chances @ $30.00 per, that is $300,000.....

(5) A provision stating that the season for the deer hunt for
which a license is awarded under the lottery is the first week
of January

lol


good luck finding a buck in january lol

jjas, OK, I see now.

So this is a revenue generator? I wonder if there will also be a tag fee. $30 to get in the lottery, then a tag fee on top of that seems reasonable. If it's a done deal, then let's make it pay.

I say YES there is tag FEE...unless your a Lifetime lic. holder or a Landowner!

You are correct in that wording is "may hold a lottery" not "must hold a lottery". Director and the deer management team may decide it is not needed. By the way I also heard that the deer biologist position is still unfilled and they begin interviews next month.

This legislation came from Representative Arnold who is a deer hunter. I believe he was acting on behalf of a constituent request. DNR did not comment on this one.

Jack

Did a quick bill track on this and it is going to the Senate floor tomorrow for final reading. Once it passes it will go to Gov for signing. Not much chance of stopping it now.

Jack

And this is much of what is wrong with wildlife management today. Someone doesn't get their way with the DNR, they run to a legislator who then acts often without thinking or even caring how the DNR or sportsmen majority thinks or wants. It's the classic two wrongs don't make a right. But again, this is what has become of todays world and idealistic legislators who often times have little or no idea about a situation or circumstance. Simple pathetic on both accounts in my opinion.

If that's the case, I would be interested in two things....

1. How much revenue did it generate?

2. Will the names of the "winners" be posted for the general public to see?

In regard to your second question, yes they would have to provide those names under the freedom of information requirement. You might have to file a request to get the names but they would have to comply, just like they do with the landowner permits.

I'm sure there are many people who would want to see the names on that list......

1. No idea until such a lottery takes place.
2. See 1.