|
Post by hatchetjack on Jan 23, 2024 21:38:24 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by hatchetjack on Jan 25, 2024 13:53:04 GMT -5
Livestream of Senate has begun.
Looks like a couple have amendments (calling for more studies) will be introduced.
HJ
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Jan 25, 2024 14:55:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by hatchetjack on Jan 25, 2024 14:56:18 GMT -5
Looks like we spotted them at the same time!!!
|
|
|
Post by hatchetjack on Jan 25, 2024 15:09:21 GMT -5
Looks like the amendments failed and the SB241 has passed 2nd reading.
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Jan 25, 2024 15:22:51 GMT -5
Looks like the amendments failed and the SB241 has passed 2nd reading. Them amendments seemed to be a little over kill but there was good intentions I believe.
|
|
|
Post by hatchetjack on Jan 25, 2024 23:52:12 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by hatchetjack on Jan 26, 2024 0:01:23 GMT -5
SB189 regarding use of drones to recover game also passed 3rd reading. It now goes to the House.
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Jan 27, 2024 9:40:53 GMT -5
Is the next reading on Monday?
|
|
|
Post by hatchetjack on Jan 27, 2024 14:10:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by hatchetjack on Jan 29, 2024 17:22:45 GMT -5
SB241 (Taking Bobcats) passed 3rd reading in the Senate. Bill now goes to the House for their approval.
HJ
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Jan 29, 2024 17:46:33 GMT -5
Where can I find the rule process(step by step)and timeline for when a rule is first entered into discussion to when it becomes a new DNR rule?
I seen it in the past but can't find anymore. I believe the timeline is 18 months but not completely sure of the steps.
|
|
|
Post by hatchetjack on Jan 29, 2024 18:51:49 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Jan 29, 2024 19:32:49 GMT -5
Yes....I believe that's what I seen before. Thanks I am trying to understand how and when the Bobcats study that Senator Baldwin spoke of today comes into play. He said the current bill requires DNR to do a Bobcat study like what was asked of in the failed amendment last reading.
|
|
|
Post by hatchetjack on Jan 29, 2024 23:43:24 GMT -5
You might ask him. Plenty of time before the House Natural Resources meets.
Senator Scott Baldwin 200 W. Washington St. Indianapolis, IN 46204 Phone: 800-382-9467 or 317-232-9400 Email: Senator.Baldwin@iga.in.gov
Another resource might be the DNR biologist who might do the study. His or her boss would be Amanda Wuestefeld. Probably Geriann Albers the furbearer biologist.
|
|
|
Post by hatchetjack on Feb 5, 2024 18:14:56 GMT -5
HB1383 is being heard right now (6:15 PM).
Gonna be rammed down our throats....goodbye wetlands in Indiana.
HJ
|
|
|
Post by esshup on Feb 6, 2024 18:15:32 GMT -5
HB1383 is being heard right now (6:15 PM). Gonna be rammed down our throats....goodbye wetlands in Indiana. HJ GOOD! It's not all wetlands that will be gone, and all the true wetlands that would be affected by the change won't ALL be flattened. It's only affecting wetlands that don't connect via any waterway or ditch (that stays wet all year long) to a navigable waterway. After the state designated wetlands on private property that actually aren't wetlands, without the property owners permission, without compensating the property owner, THEN made it impossible to do ANY sort of work within 50 feet of the wetland, it's about time some common sense has won. I feel that what they did is waaaayyyy wrong. Let me ask a question, since I had to have a wetland delineation done on a property where they wanted to build a 6.5 acre pond and have a 10' wide stream going through an area that is now considered to be a wetland. The area that is now considered a wetland has close to 20" DBH Walnut trees growing in it, close to 24" DBH White Oak trees growing in it, and other hardwood trees that are not known to grow in wetlands. The area is not connected to any ditch, nor does it get water from any ditch. It doesn't hold water all year long, and it doesn't even hold water long enough for cattails to grow in that area. The people have owned the property for 60+ years. The people built a 3/4 acre pond in that area in 1997, and built a small building next to the pond with electric and running water. Now that area is considered to be a wetland and no soil disruption can be done there, not even directional boring to put a pipe under the ground and attach it to the pond from the proposed pond. So the project is on hold until the Army Core of Engineers signs off on the deal, which I was told they won't. So, after the customer spending close to $15K in studies and engineering fees, as it stands now the project is on hold, OR I have to re-design the stream so it runs close to 500 feet in length vs 200 feet in length. So that adds a goodly amount of $$$ to the project. My question is how can an area be considered to be a wetland with those types of trees growing there?
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Feb 6, 2024 18:30:39 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by hatchetjack on Feb 6, 2024 19:10:02 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Feb 11, 2024 6:52:20 GMT -5
|
|