Senate committee holds DNR agency bill after questions about fund transfers, deer permits and dam authority

The Senate Natural Resources Committee on April 10 heard extensive testimony on SB 224, the Department of Natural Resources agency bill, then voted to hold the measure for further amendment and review.

Will Haines, legislative director for the Department of Natural Resources, told the committee the bill is structured to meet a governor-directed 25% regulatory-reduction target by Jan. 1, 2029, and would remove duplicative or unused statutory language, move some administrative-code definitions into statute and clarify permitted uses of several funds. "SB 224 seeks to comply with the 25% regulatory reduction requirement ... to ensure the 17 DNR divisions and 3 DNR bureaus operate effectively while being good stewards of the natural resources taxpayer dollars," Haines said.

The bill contains multiple substantive changes that prompted sustained questioning from senators and stakeholders. Among the provisions discussed most at length were: repeal of a localized deer-landowner assistance program and the Game Bird Habitat Restoration Fund; an increase in the reporting threshold for damage-to-property reporting to $2,000 to align with federal standards; a new emergency provision allowing DNR to act on low-head dams to protect life or property (operating under an emergency-waiver process); new easement/fee language setting per-lineal-foot rates for some utility easements on DNR land; and the creation of a timber-equipment and maintenance fund that would take a portion of net timber proceeds.

Brendan Kearns, president of the Wabash River Heritage Corridor Commission, warned that language in SB 224 would redirect royalties that currently fund the commission. "Right now 100% of those royalties goes to the commission," Kearns said. He said the draft would shift 80% of royalties to the DNR oil and gas division and leave 20% for the commission, and he asked members to consider a 60/40 split to avoid crippling the commission's small grants and operations. DNR staff later offered updated figures for committee members: Haines said royalties from wells under the Wabash River produced about $180,000 in 2025, roughly $240,000 in 2024 and $185,000 in 2023, with 102 wells contributing.

Industry and conservation groups also testified. Ray Moistner of the Indiana Hardwood Lumbermen's Association praised reinvestment in equipment but said the proposal to divert 50% of net timber-sale proceeds to a new equipment fund "is excessive by every measure" and risks starving the forestry fund that supports county services and private-landowner assistance. "If you add 50% to that, that leaves only 35 to go to the existing forestry fund," Moistner said, urging a more modest reinvestment benchmark.

Conservation and land-trust witnesses supported a liability amendment offered to protect landowners who provide public access. Andrea Huntington, executive director of the Indiana Land Protection Alliance, said the amendment "provides clear and reasonable liability protection" and would encourage private investment that expands public access. John Ketsenberger of The Nature Conservancy said similar language would put nonprofits on a legal footing closer to state parks and local governments and said he would support a 60/40 compromise on the Wabash royalties.

Several senators raised concerns that repealing a dedicated Game Bird fund could reduce targeted spending for upland game-bird habitat and that moving fees between accounts (for example, an out-of-state license $20 fee) needed clearer statutory direction about intended uses. Senator Clark said upland-game hunters could lose a dedicated funding stream if transfers are not clearly protected. Senator Yoder asked whether language removing penalties for guiding without a license was intended to decriminalize unlicensed guiding; committee staff said they would follow up with the relevant section references.

On low-head dams, members sought assurance the emergency removal authority would be constrained and coordinated with local governments. Haines said the provision would operate under the emergency-waiver process typically initiated by counties and that DNR already has similar authority for certain dikes, levees and traditional dams.

After extended questioning and multiple witnesses urging changes, the committee chair concluded there were enough outstanding concerns to hold the bill and allow member amendments. The committee did not take a final vote on SB 224; the chair said the panel would schedule another hearing to consider amendments and asked members to submit specific changes for committee consideration.

The committee adjourned after the decision to hold the bill; members and DNR staff said they would follow up on outstanding questions about fund balances, the hunting-guide language and several drafting clarifications.