DNR proposal for new year

[TeacherPreacher]

Got some info from a guy today about DNR proposals for coming year.
Hunting on F&W Area for small game, rabbits . squirrel: Change hunting hours to 9:00am til 4:00pm

Fishing, walleye size limit to 16" statewide.
3 hooks per line

********!!!!!!
Daily limit for sunfish statewide in aggregate, crappie, bluegill, warmouth bass, redear, green sunfish-  to 25 !!!
Michigan has had this for several years.
Don't know how accurate this is--- anyone else heard this?
Your Thoughts?
Teach

This is what he sent me:

Indiana DNR is at it again and much of it is not good. if you are a squirrel hunter you can about foget hunting them. they want to restrict small game hunting to 9 am to 4 pm. most all squirrel hunting is done during the hours they are wanting to close it. Rabbit hunting is very active in the early hours also. DNR closed our October Rabbit season in favor of giving us til Feb. 28 of each year. Now they want to take back the Feb. season on state land and close it on Jan.31 of each year.  Also, now that Rob Carter ( avid catfishing fan ) is gone they are again wanting to  limit the number of larger Catfish kept to 1 per day.  Plenty of other changes on the list below. folks if you like your sport now is the time to speak up and save it.





Indiana Division of Fish and Wildlife Issues:

WILDLIFE

1. River Otters: Establish a trapping season in designated counties with a bag limit per trapper per season with a mandatory check-in requirement
2. Wild Turkeys: Make firearm portion of fall turkey season up North (Dekalb, LaGrange, LaPorte, Marshall, St. Joseph, Starke, and Steuben counties) the same length as Southern counties;
- Require hunter orange for fall turkey hunting when it coincides with location and dates of special deer antlerless season (Dec. 26 through the first Sunday in January)
3. Deer (Urban Deer Zones): Rename urban deer zones to reduction zones,
- Modify boundaries for these zones,
- Allow baiting to be used in these zones after archery season closes,
- Increase bag limit of antlerless deer in these areas,
- Allow the director to establish these zones on an annual basis by temporary rule,
- Allow firearms in these areas (where authorized by local ordinances)
4. Deer (Shotguns): Allow the 28 gauge shotgun to be used for deer hunting during the firearms seasons.
5. Deer (Youth Season): Allow a youth hunter to take one antlerless deer in a county that is considered to be an “A” county (such as Tipton County) during the special youth deer season,
- Allow the adult that accompanies a youth hunter to carry a handgun in accordance with state law in
IC 35-47-2-1 (it authorizes a person to carry a handgun while engaged in a legal hunting activity)
4. Wild (Feral) Hogs: Clarify that Heritage or Heirloom breed hogs that are possessed, bred, and sold strictly for farming or medicinal purposes are exempt from restrictions on the possession, importation, and sale of wild hogs
- Prohibit the release of swine, wild or domestic, into the wild
- Prohibit the use of dogs to chase or take wild hogs
- Prohibit assisting in the release of a wild hog
5. Small Game Hunting Hours: Establish hunting hours for quail, rabbit, pheasant, dove and woodcock hunting on designated DNR properties from 9am to 4 pm EST/8am-3pm CST
6. Cottontail Rabbits: Close the rabbit season on designated DNR properties on January 31
7. Ring-necked Pheasants: Prohibit pheasant hunters in designated pheasant put-and-take areas from harvesting game animals except pheasants on days when pheasants are released and hunted;
- Limit birds to cocks only in put-and-take areas on Pigeon River, Willow Slough, and Winamac fish and wildlife areas;
- Remove Crosley Fish and Wildlife Area from properties where put-and-take pheasant hunts take place
8. Bobwhite Quail: Change the daily bag limit for quail on Division of Fish and Wildlife administered lands and other designated DNR properties to 2 in the North Zone and 4 in the South Zone
9. Ruffed Grouse: Suspend the ruffed grouse season statewide
10. Endangered Species List: Add long-eared bat to the state’s list of endangered species of mammals once federally listed

FISHERIES

1. Define “Minnow”: Species of the minnow family Cyprinidae, except for exotic species identified at
312 IAC 9-6-7 and endangered species, plus Suckers, Brook stickleback, Gizzard shad, Threadfin shad;
and alewife. Live gizzard shad, threadfin shad and alewife may only be collected, used, possessed, and
disposed of in accordance with 312 IAC 9-6-8. State law changed in 2013 to require a definition in
administrative rule; a temporary rule is currently in place, but a permanent rule is needed.
2. Number of Hooks: Allow 3 hooks to be used on a sport fishing line instead of 2 and clarify that Alabama rigs and other similar devices can be used with no more than 3 hooks that have live bait or 3 artificial lures, or a combination of both. This is currently authorized by temporary rule and a permanent rule is needed.
3. Dogwood Lake (Daviess County) largemouth bass size limit: Change the size limit for this lake back to the statewide 14 inch minimum size limit (it is 15 now)
4. Kunkel Lake (Wells County) largemouth bass limit: Allow only 2 largemouth bass to be taken per day and be at least 18 inches long
5. Crappie size limit at Dogwood Lake (Daviess County) and Hardy Lake (Scott County): Add a new 9 inch minimum size requirement to harvest crappie at these two lakes
6. Commercial fishing on inland waters: Prohibit the use of wings or leads on a commercial fishing device within the Wabash River and other inland waters (does not include the Ohio River)
7. Muskie size limit change on Lake Webster, Backwater Lake, and Kiser Lake in Kosciusko County: Change the size limit from 36 inch to 44 inches for muskellunge and tiger muskellunge on these 3 lakes
8. Fishing near Williams Dam: Establish a restriction on hooks used when fishing near Williams Dam (from the dam to the Huron and Williams Road bridge in Lawrence County) from March 15 through April 20 as follows: have no more than one (1) single hook per line or artificial lure per line. Single hooks, including those with artificial lures, would not be able to exceed one-half (1/2) inch from point to shank, and double and treble hooks with artificial lures would not be able to exceed three-eighths (3/8) inch from point to shank.
9. Walleye/Sauger/Saugeye: Establish a 16” size limit for walleye north of State Road 26 on all public waters (lakes, impoundments, rivers, and Lake Michigan) with the exception of these 5 lakes: Lake George (Steuben County), Bass Lake (Starke County), Simonton Lake (Elkhart County), Wolf Lake (Lake County), and Wall Lake (Steuben County)
- Eliminate the minimum size limit for saugeye on all waters statewide, except for Huntingburg Lake (Dubois Co.) and Sullivan Lake (Sullivan Co.)
- Add sauger to the aggregate bag limit for walleye and saugeye (does not include the Ohio River)
10. Sunfish: Establish a statewide daily bag limit of 25 (in aggregate) for all species of sunfish (includes species such as bluegill, redear, warmouth, pumpkinseed, green sunfish, and others).
11. Exotic Fish: Require exotic fish that are possessed to either have their head removed, be eviscerated, or have gill arches removed from one side to ensure that they are not capable of living (since live possession is not allowed)
- Add the following species: stone moroko, zander, and Wels catfish
12. Catfish (both sport and commercial fishing): Increase the minimum size limit on channel catfish, flathead catfish, and blue catfish from 10 inches to 13 inches on rivers and streams statewide, except on the Ohio River;
- Allow not more than 1 channel catfish to be taken per day that is 28 inches in total length or longer in lakes and streams statewide;
- Allow not more than 1 flathead and 1 blue catfish to be taken per day that is 35 inches in total length or longer in lakes and streams statewide

REPTILES AND AMPHIBIANS

1. Game Turtles (Eastern snapping turtle, spiny softshell turtle, and smooth softshell turtle): Establish a season (July-March),
- Change the daily bag limit to 5 per species
- Restrict the size of snapping turtles that can be taken to only those over 12” and softshells over 13”
2. Game Frogs (Bullfrogs and Green frogs): Allow the use of an air rifle to take game frogs, with a definition of legal air rifles that could be used.
3. License requirements for taking reptiles and amphibians: Specify that a hunting license is required if a firearm (or air rifle, if allowed) is going to be used to take game frogs and turtles

[chevy hillbilly]

most guys that hunt small game work those hours...not cool

[bldfrt]

As a dude who loves to squirrel hunt I'd be bummed to hear that I can't hunt till 9 and didn't get the evening either. I'm gunna hope this is just hearsay otherwise maybe ill get more musky time I guess

[abishop]

Glad they left the limit of 14 inches at Bass Lake. It is hard enough to get a 14 let alone a 16.

[jdm]

From what I read, the hours posted for small game are for D.N.R. designated properties only. I would think if you hunt private non state owned land you would be able to hunt current hours that are legal now.

[MC_angler]

It is indeed accurate http://www.in.gov/dnr/fishwild/files/fw-Got_Input_dfw_proposals_2014.pdf

Keep in mind these are not yet rules, they are gathering input about these proposed ideas.


AND the hour restriction is for "designated DNR properties", not just any land anywhere in the state

Looks like they're serious about whacking and stacking the deer in urban areas...

I'll get the popcorn for this thread, should be a good one with lots of civil debate and well thought and informed points

[sprkplug]

I'm curious as to the reasoning behind the proposed sunfish limit. Is it due to input from anglers wanting bigger fish, or has the DNR noticed a decline in sunfish populations and/or quality?

[TylerRyan]

I think they used to have a 25 fish limit on Sunfish....the one that gets me is the one fish limit on catfish over 28" long....why?   I still have trouble remembering all the regulation changes from last year. 

[MC_angler]

I think they used to have a 25 fish limit on Sunfish....the one that gets me is the one fish limit on catfish over 28" long....why?   I still have trouble remembering all the regulation changes from last year.

Large catfish are easy to exploit and with exploding pay lakes, many states are going to the "1-over" catfish rule to protect large spawning individuals

as for remembering, that's why they make that handy-dandy regulation booklet!

[Border Jumper]

It is indeed accurate http://www.in.gov/dnr/fishwild/files/fw-Got_Input_dfw_proposals_2014.pdf

Keep in mind these are not yet rules, they are gathering input about these proposed ideas.


AND the hour restriction is for "designated DNR properties", not just any land anywhere in the state

Looks like they're serious about whacking and stacking the deer in urban areas...

I'll get the popcorn for this thread, should be a good one with lots of civil debate and well thought and informed points

Yes it should be a good one. 

[TylerRyan]

Whats paylakes got to do with it?

[MC_angler]

Whats paylakes got to do with it?

In a lot of states, pay-to-fish lakes are exploding in popularity. Folks will go out, set trotlines for catfish, and transport the big ones to a private pay lake. Which IMO is unethical, but unfortunately very legal in many areas. As a result some populations of big catfish get fished down very quickly


In general there's increasing focus on catfish as a trophy fish rather than a food fish, with catch-and-release tournaments and new tactics. States are starting to catch onto that and a lot of folks are pressuring DNR's to put in protections for big cats, especially flatheads and blues

[MarshallPrime]

Most of it doesnt effect me, I hope they have solid reasons for making the changes...changes for changes sake doesnt make sense.


However, I fully support the 25 fish limit on sunfish.  When I see people walk off the ice with 50, 75, whatever number of fish, I just never get it.  25 is plenty. 

[TylerRyan]

It's illegal to transport fish to a different body of water or to sell them without a license to do so in Indiana.  Many of the reservoirs and state owned ponds I fish here in Central Indiana don't offer spawning habitat for catfish anyways and the populations are maintained by annual or bi-annual stocking by the DNR.  I think limiting the taking of large catfish could cause an over abundance of them in lakes where they do spawn and really hurt the panfish population.  It's a double edged sword really...

[TylerRyan]

Most of it doesnt effect me, I hope they have solid reasons for making the changes...changes for changes sake doesnt make sense.


However, I fully support the 25 fish limit on sunfish.  When I see people walk off the ice with 50, 75, whatever number of fish, I just never get it.  25 is plenty.

I agree.  I wish they would tell us why they make changes to the regulations instead of just making them.  With as much as we spend on fishing and hunting licenses, entry to DNR parks, etc, I think we have a right to know.

[MC_angler]

It's illegal to transport fish to a different body of water or to sell them without a license to do so in Indiana.  Many of the reservoirs and state owned ponds I fish here in Central Indiana don't offer spawning habitat for catfish anyways and the populations are maintained by annual or bi-annual stocking by the DNR.  I think limiting the taking of large catfish could cause an over abundance of them in lakes where they do spawn and really hurt the panfish population.  It's a double edged sword really...

It is illegal to transport both native and non-native fish from one waterbody to other PUBLIC waters... but it's not illegal for private bodies of water.  I see nothing in the regulations booklet prohibiting live transport of fish, except for shad, alewives, and invasive species. You are correct, you cannot sell fish, but a pay lake is not selling the fish, they are charging for access to fish in that lake.

As for too many big catfish, it's almost impossible to get that high to hurt panfish populations in large bodies of water, and channel catfish are actually stocked in some small ponds to improve size structure of bluegills

[wax_worm]

I am all for the panfish limit, IF they actually enforce it.  To many use the spawn to catch 100's of gills in a day and they are all the biggest males in the lake.  It is not good for the fisheries, so putting a limit on what any one person can take would help.  The rule says SUNFISH....perch are not part of the sunfish family, so are they included in the 25?

[Ranger482v]

I am all for the panfish limit, IF they actually enforce it.  To many use the spawn to catch 100's of gills in a day and they are all the biggest males in the lake.  It is not good for the fisheries, so putting a limit on what any one person can take would help.  The rule says SUNFISH....perch are not part of the sunfish family, so are they included in the 25?

Perch are not included in Michigan for your 25 fish creel

[bret]

If you are concerned about any of the proposed rule changes or have ideas of your own....I would suggest you send the DNR your thoughts and ideas.  It's important they hear our voices.


[DNR] DNR seeks input on fish, hunt, trap regulations
 
Start Date:  1/2/2014 Start Time:  12:00 AM
End Date:  1/2/2014 End Time:  11:59 PM
 
Event Description
The DNR Division of Fish & Wildlife wants to hear your ideas on fishing, hunting, trapping and other fish and wildlife related regulations in Indiana, including special permits.

 From Jan. 2 to Feb. 28, the public can use a convenient online form to contribute ideas and provide input on issues the DNR has identified for consideration.

 The form is at wildlife.IN.gov, at the “Got INput?” box near the middle of the page.

“Got INput?” allows the public to comment on ideas put forward by the DNR Division of Fish & Wildlife as well as requests for rule changes from citizen petitions.

 The program also allows members of the public to propose their own ideas on any fishing, hunting or trapping topic.

“This is an opportunity for people to let us know what changes they would like us to consider,” said Gregg McCollam, assistant director of the Division of Fish & Wildlife. “This process also allows us to get much-needed feedback on issues that the division is in interested in moving forward.”

Got INput users must register with a username and a password.

 Input and ideas can also be mailed to:

 DNR Division of Fish & Wildlife
 Attn: Got INput
 402 W. Washington St., Room W273
 Indianapolis, IN 46204

 After Feb. 28, the Division of Fish & Wildlife staff will evaluate all comments and determine which proposals to forward to the Natural Resources Commission for consideration.
 

 

Contact Information:
Name: Michelle Cain
Phone: (317) 234-8240
Email: [email protected]
 

 
 






 

[pgaschulz]

GOOD.....support the DNR that's why we have them!

[high_flags]

The 25 Panfish limit is great. I think most have wanted this for a long time.  Places like the slough has had it for awhile. 

I think I will send my input in to the DNR....Thanks for the address

[taxi1]

However, I fully support the 25 fish limit on sunfish.  When I see people walk off the ice with 50, 75, whatever number of fish, I just never get it.  25 is plenty.

Ditto I agree although I'm not sure it should be across the board as in some lakes have too many slow growing bluegills. That said, if it's not practical to list lakes that do and don't have bag limits, I don't have a problem with a 25 fish limit across the board. I do know it seems every time proposals are posted there are anglers who want this.

The think that gripes me are the people that catch as many as they can just to brag and end up giving them away to people that don't buy fishing licenses. I talked to an angler from northwest Indiana that did just that in the fall one year on Clear Lake in Steuben County.  He would catch as many big bluegills as he could when they were vulnerable in the fall inn the the hole across from the Marina. It didn't matter when I showed up, he was already there day in and day out. Bragged to me how many hundred he had take out in a couple of weeks time and had the nerve to tell me he hated to clean fish and just gave them away. To me really big bluegills are a special resource and he had taken fish that could have been enjoyed by other anglers.  Clear Lake can take some of that as it is a big lake but smaller lakes can't.

I also had a biologist tell me that they would get calls complaining about how few bluegills were on the beds in the channels of a couple of lakes, and that they used to get 200 to 400 on a trip. The biologist replied, "Well you probably caught them all." 

[taxi1]

I'm curious as to the reasoning behind the proposed sunfish limit. Is it due to input from anglers wanting bigger fish, or has the DNR noticed a decline in sunfish populations and/or quality?

Don't know but I do know lots of anglers have wanted this for some time and it's been struck down. Unfortunately one explanation given several year ago was the simplistic the more bluegills caught the more food to go around and the better it is for the population. Tony, you and I know it's not as simple as that, and studies by the Illinois Natural History have shown one can bring down the average size of bluegills by over harvesting the large males. Then there are the sneaker and cockhold males and you actually have a mating and courtship ritual that rivals a lot of other animals in the animal kingdom. You and I manage our ponds for large bluegills and we know it's not simple!

[taxi1]

I agree.  I wish they would tell us why they make changes to the regulations instead of just making them.  With as much as we spend on fishing and hunting licenses, entry to DNR parks, etc, I think we have a right to know.

Whenever I have seen changes made solely by the IDNR there is usually an explanation from what I have seen. Maybe you've seen otherwise?  However what we are talking about here are proposals that have been brought forth by sportsman, they are taken under consideration by the IDNR, and either accepted or denied.

[taxi1]

If you are concerned about any of the proposed rule changes or have ideas of your own....I would suggest you send the DNR your thoughts and ideas.  It's important they hear our voices.


[DNR] DNR seeks input on fish, hunt, trap regulations
 
Start Date:  1/2/2014 Start Time:  12:00 AM
End Date:  1/2/2014 End Time:  11:59 PM
 
Event Description
The DNR Division of Fish & Wildlife wants to hear your ideas on fishing, hunting, trapping and other fish and wildlife related regulations in Indiana, including special permits.

 From Jan. 2 to Feb. 28, the public can use a convenient online form to contribute ideas and provide input on issues the DNR has identified for consideration.

 The form is at wildlife.IN.gov, at the “Got INput?” box near the middle of the page.

“Got INput?” allows the public to comment on ideas put forward by the DNR Division of Fish & Wildlife as well as requests for rule changes from citizen petitions.

 The program also allows members of the public to propose their own ideas on any fishing, hunting or trapping topic.

“This is an opportunity for people to let us know what changes they would like us to consider,” said Gregg McCollam, assistant director of the Division of Fish & Wildlife. “This process also allows us to get much-needed feedback on issues that the division is in interested in moving forward.”

Got INput users must register with a username and a password.

 Input and ideas can also be mailed to:

 DNR Division of Fish & Wildlife
 Attn: Got INput
 402 W. Washington St., Room W273
 Indianapolis, IN 46204

 After Feb. 28, the Division of Fish & Wildlife staff will evaluate all comments and determine which proposals to forward to the Natural Resources Commission for consideration.
 

 

Contact Information:
Name: Michelle Cain
Phone: (317) 234-8240
Email: [email protected]
 

Thanks Bret!

[bret]

I had an interesting conversation a couple weeks ago with a C.O.  I asked him if there would ever be a limit of 25 for panfish?  He did not have all the info but thought some lakes would benefit from it while others seem to keep producing even with high panfish harvest.  He said he checks MANY fisherman during spring and summer with coolers full of panfish....hundreds of fish!  And many times the same fishermen multiple times.  One guy bragged to him that this was his 5th cooler full this week!

He said the spring/summer boat fishermen really slaughter the panfish!....ice fishermen don't even come close.

[ispoman]

Key word, proposal. I pretty much set my own rules if i catch a short walleye but its not too thin in the bucket she goes. Regulations are just suggestions to me

[sprkplug]

Don't know but I do know lots of anglers have wanted this for some time and it's been struck down. Unfortunately one explanation given several year ago was the simplistic the more fish caught the more food to go around and the better it is for the population. Tony, you and I know it's not as simple as that and studies by the Illinois Natural History have shown one can bring down the average size of bluegills by over harvesting the large males. Then there are the sneaker and cuckhold males and you actually have a mating and courtship ritual that rivals a lot of other animals in the animal kingdom. You and I manage our ponds for large bluegills and we know it's not simple!

Ain't that the truth Cecil! I will be following this proposal closely, with a keen interest in the impact it might have on the fisheries, should it pass. Like you, I believe a blanket proposal leaves something to be desired, but realize that it's  difficult, if not impossible, to evaluate and govern each of the state's many lakes independently.

[MC_angler]

Whenever I have seen changes made solely by the IDNR there is usually an explanation from what I have seen. Maybe you've seen otherwise?  However what we are talking about here are proposals that have been brought forth by sportsman, they are taken under consideration by the IDNR, and either accepted or denied.

Correct... plus simple logic tells you they make changes for a reason. Why on earth would the DNR go thru all the time and effort just to make changes simply for the sake of changes? They're underfunded and overworked as is, and get grief over just about any regulation they do put forth, so it'd be madness to just arbitrarily make a change for no reason

[MC_angler]

Ain't that the truth Cecil! I will be following this proposal closely, with a keen interest in the impact it might have on the fisheries, should it pass. Like you, I believe a blanket proposal leaves something to be desired, but realize that it's  difficult, if not impossible, to evaluate and govern each of the state's many lakes independently.

When I lived in Minnesota (a state that does a lot of independent lake management compared to Indiana) anglers would complain about OVERregulation and the legislature actually was lobbied by the pike spearing lobby to arbitrarily cap the number of lakes with special pike regs at 100 (out of 4,000+ lakes with pike) down from about 130 lakes. Can't please everybody I guess