Buried deep inside a 456-page bill that aims to reform or eliminate dozens of superfluous boards and commissions in Indiana is a stunner: inclusion of the Indiana Natural Resources Commission, the high-profile board that establishes rules governing everything from deer season dates, fishing limits, and license fees.
The bill, Indiana House Bill 1003, passed the state’s House of Representatives last week by a commanding 67-29 margin and now heads to the Senate, where opponents hope to either kill it entirely or strip out the Natural Resources Commission from its authority. A coalition of Indiana conservation groups is mobilizing to save the commission from either abolition or being absorbed by the Indiana Department of Natural Resources, the agency the commission generally guides through its rule-making authority.
“While we support efforts to modernize and streamline state government and would welcome a discussion on the structure and function of the NRC, the NRC is not a redundant layer of bureaucracy that should be eliminated,” the group of 10 state and national conservation groups wrote legislative leaders last week. “For Indiana’s hunters, anglers, and outdoor enthusiasts, it is our primary portal for public input and the ‘seat at the table’ that ensures our voices are heard in the governance of our wildlife and wild places we cherish.”
The bill is scheduled for a hearing in the Senate’s Rules and Legislative Procedure Committee as early as this week.
Eliminating the DNR’s Rule-Maker
House Bill 1003 intends to reform what could be called the civil-society strata of Indiana state government. Over the past decades, the legislature has created boards, commissions, and advisory bodies that have either outlived their purpose and exist in name only, or function at a low wattage, with little public input or production. A memo from the state’s Legislative Services Agency last August identified hundreds of state-sanctioned committees that had either met infrequently or not at all over the past number of years. It included the Advisory Committee on Oral History of the Indiana General Assembly, Commission on Social Status of Black Males, and the Indiana-Ireland Trade Commission.
The guiding principle of the list of 65 commissions listed for elimination or consolidation in HB1003 is that the functions of the bodies are either redundant or obsolete, and further, that they don’t have specific rule-making authority.
But the state’s Natural Resource Commission, which has half its members appointed by the governor, which meets regularly, and which has served as the designated rule-making body for the state’s fish-and-wildlife agency since the 1960s, hardly fits that definition, says Bob Matthews, who covers natural resource policy in Midwestern states for the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation.
“Some of the commissions [identified in the legislation] seem to be marginal and have met inconsistently, if at all recently,” says Matthews. “The Natural Resources Commission isn’t like that. At all. Its meetings are well attended by a wide range of groups, and it’s the only forum in the state where hunting, fishing, and other conservation groups can voice their opinions in an open, transparent forum. But more importantly, it’s the rule-making body for our DNR. The other boards in the bill are advisory in nature or meet infrequently, so it’s hard to know why the Natural Resources Commission would be included.”
It’s equally hard to know what might happen with Indiana’s fish-and-wildlife rule-making if the commission was abolished.
“This is where things get a little murky,” says Williams. “The NRC would sunset, probably in September. In the interim, there might be some framework for rule-making, but it appears the authority would be held by the [Department of Natural Resources] agency serving at the pleasure of the director.”
That director is Alan Morrison, appointed to the role by Gov. Mike Braun a year ago. Morrison is a former Republican state representative for 13 years and chair of the House Environmental Affairs Committee. Morrison also served on the House Committee on Natural Resources that has oversight authority over the DNR.
A source close to the legislation, who asked not to be publicly identified due to potential repercussions, suggested the abolition of the NRC would result in “a tidy consolidation of power in the DNR director position.”
Putting Public Resources in Jeopardy
The current chairman of the Natural Resources Commission, Bryan Poynter, says he learned of HB1003 shortly after it was introduced in the Indiana Assembly. He’s baffled by its intent, largely because for the past 20 years as commission chairman, he’s encouraged public engagement.
“The structure of the commission, along with the governor and the director of the DNR, form the legs of a three-legged stool,” says Poynter. “It’s been a very effective and stable arrangement, because the commission has served as a filter and a buffer.”
Poynter points to recent work to establish a bobcat season in Indiana.
“That started as a legislator’s initiative, then went through the [DNR] science-based wildlife managers, then came to us to collect public input,” says Poynter. “There were some robust discussions, with everybody from hard-core hunters and trappers to those who couldn’t believe we would condone killing a fluffy kitty. But that’s our role, and over the last 20 years — at least — we’ve created equity and transparency that has given our decisions broad public and legal standing.”
The current Natural Resources Commission has 12 members. Half are citizens appointed by the governor and confirmed by the legislature. Three additional members are pulled from state agencies, another is the director of the Department of Natural Resources, another is a representative of the Indiana Academy of Sciences.
If HB1003 passes with the NRC provision, Hoosier State conservation leaders aren’t sure how the state wildlife agency might serve as both rule-maker and administrator of those rules.
In a widely circulated letter to Braun and legislative leaders, conservation groups said one outcome could be less public involvement in fish-and-wildlife issues.
“It is unclear what problem is being solved in this legislation by eliminating the commission and directing its authorities to the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) other than to make it harder for the public to be more directly engaged in natural resource issues,” the coalition of conservation groups wrote. “Our organizations and our members directly pay for, regularly use, and actively support our public lands, wildlife management and natural resources, and we did not ask for this change.”
The group notes the RNC acts as a “critical due-process safeguard” for Indiana’s citizens, and suggests that the state will face more lawsuits and procedural headwinds if the commission is dissolved.
Read Next: ‘These Are Billionaire Executives Looking to Silence Public Criticism.’ Proposed Florida Law Would Limit Conservationists from Disparaging the Sugarcane Industry
The bill’s “attempt to eliminate the NRC would undo more than a half century of history and trust that has been built in the conservation community with the state and DNR,” according to the letter. “It would jeopardize the significant gains we have made in conserving our public and shared resources — our wildlife and wild places.”
Indiana’s Senate Committee on Rules and Legislative Procedure could hear HB1003 as early as this week. The bill, with or without amendments, could go to the Senate floor as early as next week.
Read the full article here
