ILNews

Humane Society, ASPCA target confined-hunting bill

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Two-legged and four-legged lobbyists will head to the Indiana Statehouse on Tuesday to oppose a bill that would lift a ban on hunting animals in fenced areas.

The Humane Society of the United States and the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals will mark the fifth annual Humane Lobby Day from 9:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. Those groups and other Indiana residents will make their objection known to House Bill 1194, which would permit the hunting of farm-raised deer and game birds on “hunting preserves.”

The bill, which was referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources, did not advance. It would have allowed hunting without a license and without bag limits in settings opponents call “canned-hunting” environments. The measure was authored by Reps. Matt Ubelhor, R-Bloomfield; Bob Heaton, R-Terre Haute; and Heath VanNatter R-Kokomo.

Attending Humane Lobby Day will be Erin Huang, Indiana director for the HSUS, Vicki Deisner, state legislative director for ASPCA, service dog Tia, and research and rescue dog Coal.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Don't we have bigger issues to concern ourselves with?

  2. Anyone who takes the time to study disciplinary and bar admission cases in Indiana ... much of which is, as a matter of course and by intent, off the record, would have a very difficult time drawing lines that did not take into account things which are not supposed to matter, such as affiliations, associations, associates and the like. Justice Hoosier style is a far departure than what issues in most other parts of North America. (More like Central America, in fact.) See, e.g., http://www.theindianalawyer.com/indiana-attorney-illegally-practicing-in-florida-suspended-for-18-months/PARAMS/article/42200 When while the Indiana court system end the cruel practice of killing prophets of due process and those advocating for blind justice?

  3. Wouldn't this call for an investigation of Government corruption? Chief Justice Loretta Rush, wrote that the case warranted the high court’s review because the method the Indiana Court of Appeals used to reach its decision was “a significant departure from the law.” Specifically, David wrote that the appellate panel ruled after reweighing of the evidence, which is NOT permissible at the appellate level. **But yet, they look the other way while an innocent child was taken by a loving mother who did nothing wrong"

  4. Different rules for different folks....

  5. I would strongly suggest anyone seeking mediation check the experience of the mediator. There are retired judges who decide to become mediators. Their training and experience is in making rulings which is not the point of mediation.

ADVERTISEMENT