Update to DNR legal deer hunting equipment 10.11.2017

[Expatriated]

The fix couldn’t be easier: DNR just issues a statement they won’t enforce the rule on public land for this season. Then requests the legislature modify the wording sometime before next season.

They can’t figure out how to come up with a temporary solution that gets them through 3 weeks out of a whole year!? Geez. I have to think if you can’t come up with a workaround for this little issue, quite possibly you’ve been promoted beyond your ability.

 

[Mgderf]

The fix couldn’t be easier: DNR just issues a statement they won’t enforce the rule on public land for this season. Then requests the legislature modify the wording sometime before next season.

They can’t figure out how to come up with a temporary solution that gets them through 3 weeks out of a whole year!? Geez. I have to think if you can’t come up with a workaround for this little issue, quite possibly you’ve been promoted beyond your ability.

I agree it's a stupid situation, but there's a problem with your solution.
If DNR did as you suggest, and issued a statement saying they wouldn't enforce the rules on public land for this season, there would be those who say, "I read that to mean my .30-06/.303British/7.62X54R... was legal on public land. DNR said they wouldn't enforce..."

What was that about unintended consequences?

 

[Expatriated]

Well, that certainly wouldn’t be the end of the world.

But I was suggesting they simply say that they wouldn’t enforce any violations of the law that was within the rules 2 years ago.

But I’ll admit, I’m pretty radical in my views-I believe like the folks in several other states that all centerfire rifles are fine for deer, coyote, hogs, etc.

 

[ru44mag]

You've been here 4 1/2 years and have never seen someone call a thread a dupe?

Yes, he meant duplicate.

Now that you say that, I believe I have. I guess I always thought they meant dupe as it's true meaning. So, some kind of trick, or gag. Not as dup. or correctly, duplicate. As many anal English professors as we have in INGO, it never occurred to me that it meant duplicate, maybe because I didn't think others would let them get away with it. Or maybe I missed it because I've been reloading too many lead boolits and my brain is just a little foggy. My brother always said I was a little slow.

 

[ru44mag]

The fix couldn’t be easier: DNR just issues a statement they won’t enforce the rule on public land for this season. Then requests the legislature modify the wording sometime before next season.

They can’t figure out how to come up with a temporary solution that gets them through 3 weeks out of a whole year!? Geez. I have to think if you can’t come up with a workaround for this little issue, quite possibly you’ve been promoted beyond your ability.

I spoke to a DNR officer and another INGO spoke to a different DNR officer. Most officers will not be enforcing this law. I do know one DNR officer that probably would.

 

[Hookeye]

The state needs to simply say the DNR interpretation is incorrect, the Hunting Guide is in accordance with IN rifle laws.
The problem is solved.

Well, somebody still needs to find out who in the DNR tried to pull this stunt, and make sure it doesn't happen again.

 

[Hookeye]

I spoke to a DNR officer and another INGO spoke to a different DNR officer. Most officers will not be enforcing this law. I do know one DNR officer that probably would.

I hope whoever gets drug into court over this bogus DNR interpretation makes a good profit.

 

[openwell]

I hope whoever gets drug into court over this bogus DNR interpretation makes a good profit.

going to court over a wildlife violation is not pleasant and it's a no-win for conservation officers, the courts or hunters.
and by the way, unless you get a judge who hunts and understands hunting you are going to loose.
by the way, you would have trouble getting a jury to be seated to hear your arguments....................LOL
suggestion: don't like the law, do like me burn your license and kick and scream in the forum..................to make it feel better.
but nobody wins

 

[Hookeye]

The DNR view is incorrect.
I don't give a flip if the judge hunts or not.
That is not the argument.
The incorrect DNR view stems from a line taken out of context.
Easy win.

 

[Hookeye]

My guess is if one is ticketed under the bogus DNR view, the prosecutor would drop it like a hot potato.

 

[KLB]

How do you see this as being taken out of context?

It seems to pretty clearly state that rifles can only be used on private land.

 

[Hookeye]

SECTION 7. IC 14-22-2-8, AS ADDED BY P.L.110-2016,
SECTION 1, IS AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS [EFFECTIVE
JULY 1, 2017]: Sec. 8. (a) This section applies to a hunting season
beginning after June 30, 2016, and ending before January 1, 2020.
(b) A hunter may use a rifle during the firearms season to hunt deer
subject to the following:
(1) The use of a rifle is permitted only on privately owned land.

That period was previously called out as the specific test period for HP rifle.

Nothing says "from 2017 on" or "incorporated into the prev established season of..."

It is directly referencing a time period that NEVER has/had anything to do with PCR.
While not called HP rifle test period in this chunk of law, that doesn't mean that's not what it is.

It's obvious.

If somebody however can't see that..............they need not be trying to send bullets after deer..........which are harder to see

 

[AGarbers]

Here's another take on it:
http://wildindiana.com/the-dnr-screwed-up-new-rifle-law/

 

[Hookeye]

I think the law is fine, the Hunting Guide follows the law............and the DNR did not screw up, instead pulled a d*ck move.

Do agree, the sportsmen and CO's are stuck in a mess not of their making.

Hopefully it gets righted soon.

The DNR should get a black eye over this, but we have a new LE director.........and thumping him in the cheek isn't right.
So.............the correction needs to have certain appearance.

 

[Willie]

Here's another take on it:
http://wildindiana.com/the-dnr-screwed-up-new-rifle-law/

The author blames only the DNR when it was an admitted mistake by the legislature. He also has it bass ackwards in the guide said one black duck and we can kill two. Unless he wrote this article way before the DNR press came out, which I doubt, it has been communicated across the board. Several news outlets broadcast it. I sent out a mas email to my 6,000 members and it is all over FaceBook.

No Offense AGarbers but I get tired of some outdoor writers who main mission seems to be bashing the DNR.


.

 

[two70]

The author blames only the DNR when it was an admitted mistake by the legislature. He also has it bass ackwards in the guide said one black duck and we can kill two. Unless he wrote this article way before the DNR press came out, which I doubt, it has been communicated across the board. Several news outlets broadcast it. I sent out a mas email to my 6,000 members and it is all over FaceBook.

No Offense AGarbers but I get tired of some outdoor writers who main mission seems to be bashing the DNR.


.

Defend the DNR all you want but they unarguably got the rule wrong, either in 2016 or with this new interpretation in 2017 since the language did not change. Further more, it was the DNR that decided to change the interpretation this late in the year/close to the season causing absolute chaos. Even if you maintain that the new interpretation is the correct one, we survived the 2016 season with the incorrect interpretation so we could have likely survived another one before making the change early next year. Not to mention the DNR could have prevented the whole thing by following the demands of hunters in the first place. The DNR deserves far more blame than they are getting in this.

 

[AGarbers]

The author blames only the DNR when it was an admitted mistake by the legislature. He also has it bass ackwards in the guide said one black duck and we can kill two. Unless he wrote this article way before the DNR press came out, which I doubt, it has been communicated across the board. Several news outlets broadcast it. I sent out a mas email to my 6,000 members and it is all over FaceBook.

No Offense AGarbers but I get tired of some outdoor writers who main mission seems to be bashing the DNR.



.

I think if you re-read the article, you will see that he is placing the true blame elsewhere, somewhere higher up, at least that's my take. I can tell you as a retired LEO, Brent is a strong supporter of the ICOs and led the battle to get their pay to match the ISP last spring.

 

[Rookie]

I went hunting last night at Mississinewa. At the hunter check in, they have a 8x11 paper saying something along the lines "as of 2016 rifles are allowed on private land" right in the center of the box. Up to the right (NOT nearly as visible) on a half sheet of paper "as of 2017 no PCC".

At first, I thought they hadn't posted anything until I looked for it. It's almost like they're setting you up for failure.

 

[bwframe]

I think the law is fine, the Hunting Guide follows the law............and the DNR did not screw up, instead pulled a d*ck move.

Do agree, the sportsmen and CO's are stuck in a mess not of their making.

Hopefully it gets righted soon.

The DNR should get a black eye over this, but we have a new LE director.........and thumping him in the cheek isn't right.
So.............the correction needs to have certain appearance.

I've believed the DNR have been up to some trickery on this from the beginning. They want us to think it is the fault of legislators because it is modern day common that legislators get blamed for everything and have terrible ratings. It is not the legislator's duty to understand every tiny nuance of things they may not participate in.

It was the DNR's job to steward this through, that is what they are paid for. There is NO excuse for this getting to any vote being wrong as it supposedly is.

It is also very suspect that there is no emergency provision to be made to accommodate already published regulations and common knowledge of rules that were not subject to change.

This smells bad and it's not getting any better. They work for us. Heads need to roll...

 

[kolob10]

Another indication of declining quality, integrity, and intelligence of elected officials in some areas of government. We are experiencing the death of accountability among public officials!