# Indiana to ban canned hunts



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Legislators, support canned hunts ban

Kyle Hupfer made the right call. Now, state legislators should let it stand.

Hupfer, director of the Indiana Department of Natural Resources, announced Thursday that the agency will shut down fenced hunting operations in which deer and other animals are given little chance to elude human predators before they're gunned down.

In a high-profile case earlier this year, Peru deer farmer Russ Belar was convicted of staging illegal hunts that included drugging and baiting animals.

Most legitimate hunters and the organizations that represent them oppose canned hunts. But the operations can be lucrative, charging up to $20,000 for the privilege of killing exotic and trophy animals. Which means preserve owners have ample motivation to fight the ban.

Conservationists and others who oppose canned hunts fear that lawmakers will try to reverse the DNR's decision, which won't go into effect until after the legislative session ends next year. Legislators should stay clear of the controversy.

Canned hunting makes a mockery of a legitimate pastime enjoyed by thousands of the state's responsible hunters. It should find no refuge in Indiana.

Lets hope Indiana can get this shut dowm permanently!!!!!!!

Bob

Another article on the subject

Posted on Fri, Aug. 12, 2005

M O R E N E W S F R O M 
• Outdoor Recreation

DNR chief moves to enforce fenced hunting ban

By Niki Kelly

The Journal Gazette

INDIANAPOLIS - DNR Director Kyle Hupfer put the owners of the state's hunting preserves on notice Thursday that killing animals - including white-tailed deer - behind tall fences is illegal and will be enforced starting next year.

He will wait until the conclusion of the 2006 legislative session, which usually occurs in mid-March, so that lawmakers have a chance to weigh in on the issue although he does not support them taking action.

"I hope that this represents the end of this debate and that there will be no future legislation proposed to legalize these practices," Hupfer said.

"In order to preserve the hunting tradition, we must ensure that all hunting in Indiana is done in an ethical manner and in a way that conforms with long-standing fair chase ethics."

In addition, Hupfer also signed an emergency rule into law Thursday clarifying that it is illegal to hunt exotic mammals, such as elk and zebra.

The announcement brought to an end months of preparation by the DNR on the subject, including five public hearings across the state. More than 600 people attended the forums and the DNR also received more than 1,300 e-mails on canned hunting.

There are about 350 deer or elk farms in Indiana. Of those 225 have DNR-issued game breeder's permits to breed and sell whitetail deer. The remaining 125 farms have elk and other exotic deer species.

About a dozen offer hunting opportunities.

Hupfer said Indiana law is clear that a game breeder's license "does not allow the hunting or purposeful killing of animals maintained under that license."

But he concedes that the law has not been enforced in the past and there was some ambiguity involved.

That is why he is giving the facilities that have invested money into their operations time to get their affairs in order and try to lobby lawmakers.

"To just abruptly cut them off we think would have been a little bit egregious," Hupfer said. "A number of legislators were under the assumption that this was legal as well so they can have a bite at the apple although &#8230; we believe it would be inappropriate to change this and make this legal."

The DNR will not prosecute anyone for hunting deer under a game breeder's license until next year but Hupfer said he will not ignore more basic hunting violations at preserves, such as baiting or drugging deer.

"The definite trend nationwide is to limit or eliminate these facilities," he said. "This is something that is just extremely unethical."

He went on to say that these white-tailed deer "are domesticated at this point just like a cow or a chicken or a hog and we certainly would never allow someone to start a cow-hunting operation."

Hupfer also struck a blow against an increase in hunting exotic mammals by instituting an emergency rule prohibiting such practices. A permanent rule will take six to eight months to finalize.

He said there are confirmed reports of hunting elk and zebra, with rumors about lions and bears being brought into Indiana for canned hunts.

"This stuff just sort of crept into the state. They have been operating under the assumption that because it's not a native species regulated by hunting that they can do whatever they want," Hupfer said. "What we're basically doing is closing that loophole so that it's not just open season on them."

Gene Hopkins, legislative chairman for the Indiana Bowhunters Association, said he was relieved by the decision.

"What gave me heart is that (Hupfer) has shown he is a very intelligent person. He didn't shoot from the hip. He went back and researched and found all the data and he listened objectively to the data and I knew if he did that then he would come to this conclusion," Hopkins said.

He also believes the majority of the lawmakers are against fenced hunting so it should not be difficult to protect the law.

"The sportsmen lined up against these things. This is not hunting. It's shooting," Hopkins said. "The proponents of this tried to blur the line and make it hard to differentiate. But sportsmen - hunters - do not agree with this."

Ken McIntosh, who owns a high-fenced hunting preserve near Pierceton, said he found Hupfer's decision "pretty amazing."

McIntosh said there was no real opposition to high-fenced hunting operations such as his and said the DNR is using the few who may be opposed to the practice to "get what they want."

Characterizing Hupfer as naive and young, McIntosh said the truth will eventually be brought out.

"Kyle does not realize he's being lied to, or else he's using those lies," McIntosh said. "I think Kyle made a mistake today, in supporting the people that are fibbing to him."

McIntosh also said he believed Gov. Mitch Daniels should take action with regards to Hupfer, who McIntosh claims has been trying to put the high-fenced operations out of business since he assumed the helm of the DNR.

"Whether you agree with the decision or not, he (Hupfer) ran an open and properly deliberative process," Daniels said.

Regardless of how McIntosh feels about Thursday's announcement, he has an inventory of deer on his property, which he possesses under an Indiana game breeders license.

"We'll be fine," he said. "I'm planning on hunting. I'm not the one lying."

Assistant U.S. Attorney Donald Schmid, who successfully prosecuted Russell G. Bellar for a number of violations of federal wildlife and drug laws on his Miami County deer farm, was pleased to hear of Thursday's decision.

"The Bellar investigation and prosecution revealed many of the dangerous, unseemly and unethical practices associated with canned hunts," Schmid said. "As we did with the Bellar case, we will continue to help enforce and backstop Indiana wildlife and conservation laws through appropriate federal prosecutions involving the illegal taking or transportation of wildlife."

Rebecca S. Green of The Journal Gazette contributed to this story.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What people are saying

Those for and against high-fenced hunting operations spoke Thursday about the DNR's announcement that the operations are illegal. Here is a sampling of what those people had to say:

"In order to preserve the hunting tradition, we must ensure that all hunting in Indiana is done in an ethical manner and in a way that conforms with long-standing fair-chase ethics."

- DNR director Kyle Hupfer on his decision to ban high-fenced shooting preserves.

"I find it hard to believe that Kyle is doing what he did."

- Ken McIntosh, owner of Midwest Woodlots, a high-fenced shooting preserve near Pierceton

"I don't really know how this affects us since we've already been approved. I don't know if it shuts us down or we can go ahead since we have a license. I'm sure they'll be in touch."

- Rebecca Reed, R&R Elk Ranch and Campground in Auburn. R&R recently obtained a shooting preserve license from the DNR with plans to offer pheasant, quail and elk hunting

"Given all the political wrangling and money and all that stuff we've been through for five years, I'm kind of shocked. I'm not gloating or anything. I think we did what was right. Every now and then, the good guys win."

- Doug Allman, Indiana Deer Hunters Association, which opposes high-fenced shooting preserves

"It's funny how things work out sometimes. Sportsmen can sit back and smile for a while."

- Joe Bacon, Indiana Deer Hunters Association

"The Indiana Department of Natural Resources has taken the lead in outlawing this unsporting and inhumane practice and we hope that other states follow. Hunters and animal advocates agree that there's nothing sporting about shooting a tame animal trapped behind a fence."

- Heidi Prescott, Humane Society of the United States senior vice president in a prepared statement

And yet another

Canned hunts feature penned, drugged deer
Outdoor TV personality Jimmy Houston was a customer
by Don Jordan
Published Jan. 30, 2005. Updated 4/26/05

It probably comes as no surprise that one of ESPN's outdoors television personalities, Jimmy Houston, filmed a canned deer "hunt" at Bellar's Place. He was just one of many "hunters" who shot deer that were drugged, baited or herded into pens to be shot.

Bellar's Place is the "game preserve" or "game farm" near Peru whose owner, Russell G. Bellar, was recently found guilty, in a plea deal, of 35 counts of violating the Lacey Act, a federal wildlife protection law, providing false information to federal officers, conspiracy to violate the Lacey Act and conspiracy to violate federal food and drug laws.

During the trial in U.S. District Court at South Bend, the details of Bellar's "hunts" were fully exposed for the first time. Here is a list, compiled from the Associated Press, and articles in the Ft. Wayne Journal Gazette by Rebecca Green and Phil Bloom, Michel Koryta's column in the the Herald-Times last Monday, and from my own personal sources associated with the trial:

*A Tennessee man admitted paying $15,000 to shoot a buck with large antlers that was wounded and lying in a pen. Bellar's henchmen had to prod the deer to its feet so it could be shot. The incident was taped for a Bellar's promotional video. The man shot two bucks on his visit.

*Deer at Bellar's 1,200-acre shooting preserve were routinely drugged and moved into small pens where clients could shoot them.

*Bait was routinely used to attract deer to within easy shooting range of clients.

*Bellar's employees routinely chased deer away from fences so videos of client "hunts" would not reveal the fencing.

*Deer skins, antlers and meat were routinely sent across state lines, including deer meat from the drugged animals.

The guilty plea agreement included a $575,000 fine and restitution of costs, but Bellar gets to keep the deer on his "farm" and all his equipment, including the tranquilizing gear. And, Bellar has yet to be sentenced. Federal prosecutors expect him to get two years in prison, but the judge has yet to decide. Bellar was permitted to go on a vacation with his wife before sentencing.

Now comes news that one of Bellar's pals, a state legislator from Macy, Republican William Friend has introduced a bill in the General Assembly that would remove operations like Bellar's from Indiana Dept. of Natural Resources regulation and place them under agricultural regulation, thus classifying white tail deer as agricultural animals just like pigs and cows.

Friend has had business dealings with Bellar and runs a meat packing business. He received campaign donations from various groups, all of which share at least one of Bellar's addresses. The convicted animal abuser has also made donations to several other Republicans, including our Gov. Mitch Daniels who got $10,000. Some Democrats got in on Bellar's largesse too. Former Gov. Joe Kernan got $2,000.

This is at least the third time Bellars and his buddies have tried to get their despicable operations legalized through the Indiana General Assembly. This time, with both houses of the Legislature and the governor's office controlled by more "game farm friendly" Republicans, close observers fear the shooting preserve owners will get what they want.

I personally don't believe all Republicans support this legislation, but unless they start screaming at their state representatives, it is going to look that way.

So far as Jimmy Houston's practice of filming "canned hunts" inside Bellar's is concerned, what's new? Practically all of the outdoor hunting programs and many of the big fishing TV stars go to these places. They get invited by preserve owners, like Bellar, and do their shooting free with success guaranteed.

The game farmers and shooting preserve owners believe that their operations are the future of hunting in America. Maybe they are. They certainly will be the future of hunting in Indiana unless each person who reads this story is outraged and disgusted by it and is willing to call, write or email a state legislator.

Here's where you can find those addresses and phone numbers: http://www.in.gov/legislative/legislators/

Update: Senate Bill 1780 which would have classified captive cervids as "livestock" and placed these animals under agricultural regulation instead of wildlife regulations, died when Democrats walked out of the Indiana General Assembly. However, the gamer "farmers" and their allies have tacked an amendment onto an obscure bill making its way to the House Ag Committee which would accomplish their aim. I will keep you posted.


----------



## mr.trooper (Aug 3, 2004)

GOOD! Iv never like the pukes that run such operations.

Fair Chase is the ONLY way to hunt. Otherwise its not hunting...just shooting.


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

Thanks for the update Bob. Hats off to Indiana! Another state ahead of North Dakota in commercial hunting ethics. (why are we so far behind?)


----------



## MossyMO (Feb 12, 2004)

Yesterday afternoon a watched a pathetic show with a buffalo "hunt". First a rancher took a guy with a rifle out in his pasture and let him pick out a bull to shoot, and then they went back out with a guy and his bow. They had the kahoona's to say how much tougher it was with a bow cause of how much closer they would have to sneak up to get a shot. Then thanking the rancher for getting them such a nice rifle shot. These idiots were in the pasture, stalking grazing buffalo. No different then sneaking up on a rancher's cow and dropping it. These guys put the show together and acted like it was a hunt and what they just harvested (assassinated) took skill. Many times through the show you could see the fence in the background and when they shot the buffalo with a bow, the fence posts and barbed wire were about 15 to 20 feet behind the buffalo.

My father-in-law has a buffalo ranch; he does this several times a year. He doesn't call it hunting; I believe he refers to it as bringing one in to the meat locker.....

I'm thinking next week these guys will be premiering on TV their challenging Angus hunts.......... :******:


----------



## Shu (Oct 21, 2003)

Congrats to Indiana!!!! It's about time someone deals with these operations. The guys that run these operations are low, but the "hunters" that go there are much lower. What the he!! are these people thinking? They are so insecure with themselves that they have to go "hunt" an animal behind a fence that is drugged or wounded??

I was having dinner with a guy from Bismarck that was bragging to me about his buddy that sets up people on these kind of hunts in ND. He told me he could call his buddy and have him "let out" a big bull elk for me if I wanted. I just about came across the table at him. I told him that's the most stupid idea I'd ever heard of.


----------



## Boy (Jan 24, 2005)

ND should follow suit and ban them as well.


----------



## djleye (Nov 14, 2002)

I have said it many times, There is hunting and there is shooting. Never confuse the two. I have hunted with guys that have taught me a lot but I still hunted. I have also hunted on trips where I have scouted for others ad I have been on trips where others have scouted for me, but we do not, nor do I understand how you could enjoy "shooting" with out the rest of the hunt!!!! :eyeroll: :eyeroll: uke:


----------



## Boy (Jan 24, 2005)

DJ, I think I know what you mean, but here is an example of hunting that is more like shooting. Prairie dogs!


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

I don't think shooting dogs at 200+ yards is like whacking a standing tame elk at 50+ yards, with absolutely no chance of the elk heading for cover.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Good for Indiana. They have the ball rolling and I wish the rest of the nation would follow their lead. I would even welcome the help of bunny huggers in bringing this about. We can rip each other after wiping out a common enemy. One step at a time. If we could stop leasing we could increase hunter numbers to a point we would be a real political influence. That is if 50 percent would get off their duff.


----------



## MossyMO (Feb 12, 2004)

I can not blame land owners for wanting to get the most income from their investment into the land they have, it is their bread 'n butter. But, I can blame the outfitter that leases it, outfitter's are a pimp's. Think about it.


----------



## MossyMO (Feb 12, 2004)

and I am not saying land owners are "selling their souls". Times are tough and they are working with what they have invested into, doing their best to make ends meet. Outfitter's are using their commodity and profitting from it. I wish the NDG&F could find a way to reimburse the land owner for hunting rights for the public.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

MossyMO said:


> I wish the NDG&F could find a way to reimburse the land owner for hunting rights for the public.


There lies the problem. Public perception of landowner rights. Wildlife is a public resource, that no one has the right to sell. Hunting rights, are every citizens right, not just the rich. When you pay a landowner, you are paying for something you already own. I would do whatever I can for the average landowner, but I don't have any time for those that charge to hunt.

I hear different stories from different landowners. One that I work with says his ten year average profit was $60/acre. Others cry they can not make it. One fellow I went to school with said he had to charge to hunt to make it. He had paid for four people to elk hunt Montana, just returned from Vegas, has a two year old boat and a new fifth wheel. Do you have it tough like that? Oh, he had to show off his 67 Chev Camero that he had custom rebuilt in Minneapolis for a paltry ???? Can't remember, but it was over $20,000. And he wants me to pay for the deer the state owns????? I don't think so.

I don't know what taxes are on a section of land, but he told me I could hunt it if I paid the taxes. I asked, and not seriously, if that would be exclusive rights. He said, oh no I couldn't do that, how would I make ends meet. I have no respect for this guy or any like them. No the state should not pay them for "hunting rights". Do you pay for the right to free speech??? The animals are held by the state as a public resource. Anyone who charges you for it is steeling from us all.


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

> I wish the NDG&F could find a way to reimburse the land owner for hunting rights for the public.


 They do. It's called PLOTS. I get a check every spring.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Dick, you know I thought about that, but the payment is so low that it is more like a courteous thank you than paying someone something like the $100 a day per gun. I am not wild about the Plots because I have seen half sections of land that were black with only a sliver of grass running along an ephemeral stream bed. I have no doubt that yours looks like some of the best I have seen.

Years ago, and perhaps they still do Wyoming had a $5 tag attached to the license for big game. When you shot an animal on someone's land you would tear off the tag and leave it in their mailbox. They then turned them all in at the end of the season. Some landowners collected over 100 such tags. It would reward the landowner with the best habitat. I wouldn't mind a $20 tag for deer hunting. I feel this is rewarding a landowner for good habitat stewardship, not paying to hunt. It may look the same to some of you, but I do see a difference.

I am one of those old geezers that normally drops off a ham at the door when I arrive. Some friends think I am old an corny, so I guess I will opt for gift certificates. Sometimes I invite them out to the campsite for supper. It might sound corny too, but I'm not to bad of a cook. Normal suppers in camp for me is fajitas, shrimp fried rice, steak and baked potato etc. I'm more extravagant in camp than at home. 
I don't mind being courteous, but I do mind paying exorbitant prices for animals that are a public resource.


----------

