Virginia Hunting Dog Alliance

Article from Woods N Water Magizine


Hunting with Hounds - A Virginia Tradition an Issue

Should there be any doubt that hunting with hounds is an imbedded tradition in the Old Dominion, consider that the Virginia state dog is the American fox hound. Consider that none other than the father of our country, George Washington imported fox hounds into Virginia for hunting purposes. Other prominent Virginians who molded our great state and country such as Thomas Jefferson kept and hunted with hounds. Hunting deer with hounds in eastern Virginia where the undergrowth is too thick for still hunting, standing or driving has been not only a tradition but an honorable way of life for generations.
What has changed over the years to bring the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries to consider new regulations for hunting with hounds? While not a new issue, the population growth and urbanization, posted property, development, “gentleman farms” and a more negative view of hunting and hunters all have contributed to a different view of hound hunting and hunting in general. These factors along with the few hunters who disregard property rights have brought the VDGIF to the point of seeking recommendations to resolve the issue which could result in new regulatory amendments to hunting with hounds. The intensity of the issue has certainly stepped up to another level.
Many of the small acreage farms, often held by owners without a rural or hunting background are posted and can be a point of contention when dogs hunting adjacent farms chase game onto their land. The same is true with absentee landowners (some not even U.S. Citizens) and those holding “investment property”. Checking the VDGIF General Hunting Regulations regarding hunting with dogs, it is stated:

“When the chase begins on other lands, fox hunters and coon hunters may follow their dogs on prohibited lands, and hunters of all other game, when the chase begins on other lands, may go upon prohibited lands to retrieve their dogs, but may not carry firearms or archery tackle on their persons or hunt any game while thereon.”

This regulation does not specify deer hunters who comprise the largest group of hound hunters and may have the widest ranging packs of hounds, and although not specified, I suppose they are included in the “hunters of all other game”.
No matter what your stand on hound hunting I would advise a cyber trip to the VDGIF web site and check out their current thinking on “Hunting with Hounds in Virginia: A Way Forward”. There you will find the approach which the VDGIF Board decided on, I.e. A "citizen stakeholder approach: the “stakeholders” to be comprised of “landowner based organizations; bear houndsmen; deer houndsmen; raccoon and fox hunters”. Also, to create a “stakeholder” advisory group to consider issues identified by the preceding group.
To support the effort the department has formed a technical committee comprised of biologists, law enforcement officers “and others”. The names and affiliation of those on the committee are listed on the web site.
If all is not totally a tangled mess in the above committees, the next step is to involve an “independent, professional dimensions consultant” (what a bunch of politically correct phraseology). This consultant is to report back with recommendations by the fall of 2008. Are we certain this consultant will be impartial? After paying for months of consulting, surely there must be action taken based on his or her recommendations.
Let’s look at some of the means by which houndsmen, and hunters as a group can protect their rights.
We need to face the possible POLITICAL INVOLVEMENT on the issue. Unfortunately those with the most anti-hound-hunting sentiments, especially “recreational” landowners are folks of means and have some political influence. There are also groups (e.g. P.E.T.A.) with substantial monetary backing and political influence. The obvious action is to be in touch, individually and as sportsman groups with your legislators. And if you are not already a member of an organization with hound hunting interests - get involved as there is strength in numbers and even more in organized numbers.
Make sure someone from your organization is included in the VDGIF “focus group meetings” and in their “stakeholder advisory group”. It would appear that deer, bear and raccoon hunters can also become involved as individuals.
Make sure you as a houndsman or your hunt club respect the rights of landowners. Get to know the landowners in your hunt areas. Let them know you will be hunting with hounds and that there is a possibility the hounds will cross onto their property. Don’t assume that, since you or your club has to be running dogs on a certain acreage for generations that the right to do so exists with change of ownership. Do anything possible to improve the image of your sport.
Landowner rights must also be considered, whether they are old established farms or newcomers. These rights are already protected under existing laws and regulations and must be respected by the houndsman, who should, in addition to adhering to the letter of the law, show respect and courtesy to the landowner.
If you are a hunter but not a houndsman, be sure to have your voice heard on the matter, for, if the hunting with hounds is further restricted, it is another restriction on our overall hunting rights. Think of the old axiom “give them an inch and they’ll take a mile”. That is exactly how we should look at any anti-hunting proposals or actions.
As a deer hunter I do not hunt with hounds here in the western Virginia mountains but do respect the tradition, way of life and the fact that hunting with hounds in eastern Virginia is really a social event as well as a sporting event, and as such it should remain under the existing hunting regulations.
Let us hope that hunting with hounds in Virginia is truly “A Way Forward” as the VDGIF phrases it, and not a step back for the sport of hunting.

[QUOTE=Hokieman;2886111]
The people have a right to hunt, fish, and harvest game, subject to such regulations and restrictions as the General Assembly may prescribe by general law. Virginia Constitution, Article XI, section 4

DGIF derives all authority from the legislature, which according to Article 1 Section 2 of the Virginia Constitution is derived from the people. The DGIF Board members all 11 are currently appointed by the Governor and serve"at his pleasure". Only the Governor sets policy for his administration, Governor Kaine has a record of being aggressively anti-gun and pro animal rights! We need the members of the General Assembly to help defend our Heritage![/QUOTE]

Call your representatives and ask them to “support the Virginia Hunting Dog Alliance and our efforts to de-politize the DGIF Board by restructuring the Board so the six positions are appointed by the General Assembly and are no longer"at will” positions.

“The DGIF Board consists of 11 members appointed by the Governor of VA, with one representative selected from each congressional district in the state. The Board meets approximately six times a year to set regulations and policy for the operation of the Department. Proposed regulations are presented at public meetings so that anyone who has an interest in them is able to voice their opinion. Once the discussion is complete, the Board votes on the regulation and sets a date for when it will take effect if it passed.”

It’s important that you understand that all hunters in virginia should do this not just the hound hunters to preserve their way of hunting for the future generations.

Let me explain, First of all if we can get six of the eleven members of the DGIF Board appointed by the Legislature… 4 House, 2 Senate and have all members of the Board serve for “good service” as opposed to “at will” they will be better able to resist the pressure from the appointing authority to follow political winds and more likely to follow their conscience. If they are required to hold a VA hunting or Fishing or Trapping license for the three years prior to their appointment you most likely will get a better group that will be more likely to follow the voice of the people.

[QUOTE=J Swan;2887808]
I think we’re talking about two different things.

I recently reunited two lost beagles with their owner. Nice dogs, nice hunter. Glad to have his hounds back. [endquote]

Yup. Me, too. Just last week, in fact – 3 beagles. And multiple deer dogs in the past.

QUOTE: Part of living in a rural area is accepting the culture and community that existed there long before you moved in. A loose hunting dog happens. ENDQUOTE.

Yes, but as a near daily occurrence? Already happened here today, and yesterday (even tho Sun), and Friday, as I already mentioned. At a certain point, for us, and even as outdoorspeople ourselves, it just becomes very annoying. We keep our animals fenced, pastured, penned. Yes, accidental loose animals happen. But not an almost daily disturbance by our animals of our neighbors’ dogs, cats, and horses. I suspect that many others have also experienced this not just once every few weeks, but one or more times per week.

I guess what I’m suggesting is, I think a cooperative approach that at least listens to landowners’ concerns may go further than a polarizing one. I’m not surprised that the calls came from central VA. The hunting season around here is so very, very long. For example, the deer season is months, whereas at my BIL’s in the mountains near Pearisburg, it’s only a couple of weeks, right?

And, as I said in my first post, I’ve never reported anyone myself and unless something serious were to happen, I can’t imagine that I ever would. Just trying to explain what may be the impetus behind the complaints that have been made.

We already know where the complaints are coming from. If you, as a landowner, are not contacting your game warden with your concerns or problems, how is he/she supposed to enforce our game laws and regs?

If I witness any trouble with hunters or anglers, I call the game warden and ask that they investigate. You should too. If law enforcement is not aware of illegal activity - how are they supposed to stop it? Is it possible that your very legitimate complaints could be resolved merely by working, cooperatively, with your game warden?

This study isn’t a cooperative approach. What was supposed to happen is that DGIF was supposed to examine the real issue of some hunters abusing the exception to trespass. They were supposed to come up with a tweak in that exception so that game wardens would be better able to do their jobs.

All the money they are spending on this study, including adding more full time desk jockeys in Richmond, is better spent adding game wardens. More game wardens means our game laws and regs are better enforced, and game wardens can work within community’s to address any concerns that hunters, anglers and the public have.

Adding another layer of bureaucracy does nothing to solve your particular problem. You’ll still have problems with illegal hunting - because 1) you don’t call your game warden and 2) even if you did, there aren’t enough of them. Though that should not stop you from reporting illegal activity.

I suggest that if you really do have problems with illegal hunting - you call your game warden. Oh - walking down a public roadway with a firearm is NOT illegal. If people are brandishing a firearm at you - yes, that’s illegal. During hunting season, it’s perfectly normal to see people, even juniors, with firearms. Even on our roads. That is not a legitimate complaint.

The reason seasons differ among jurisdictions is due to nothing more than wildlife management decisions that have to be made. Your season is longer because it needs to be. In some areas, there is a bounty on coyote. In others, there is not. Hunting season length is not decided in a vacuum - it is wildlife management. Factors such as herd size will be a bigger factor than what is happening over at your BIL’s place.

Sunday hunting is another issue which comes up each year - but I don’t think that is included in this study. It is legal to hunt with dogs on Sunday - but not with firearms. This is an example of how hunters are perfectly willing to compromise so that everyone is able to enjoy public lands, including hikers, joggers and bicyclists.

You seem to have the impression that hunters are the ones in control of DGIF. Nothing could be further from the truth. Just as equestrians have to constantly battle for trail use, hunters always have to fight tooth and nail for every single thing. A trail rider has to contend with complaints about horse manure on a multi-use trail, a person schooling on the xc course at a public park gets hurt because kids are playing on the xc jumps and spooking horses. Hunters have to constantly contend with shrinking land, trying to hunt safely with more and more people moving into formerly empty areas, and a gov’t that thinks its mission is to create more and more regulations; while trying to control wildlife populations. Then, if that’s not enough, they are constantly under attack by animal rights nuts dressing up in bear suits and wandering around the woods.

Every activity is being forced out by people who complain that their activity is more important than traditional activities. Every single time a traditional pastime/activity is questioned, let’s say, hunting, hunters are immediately blindsided and placed on the defensive. Equestrians have the same trouble with use of public lands, trail systems, or other sites. Because the urban/suburban public does not generally ride horses - the equestrians needs are always shunted aside, drowned out, or ignored. Finally, horses disappear; crowded out by paved parks. Even horse farms, or working farms are being crowded out because people sue horse owners, complain about flies, the smell, the noise, don’t think farms should be taxed lower than residential housing - and again, the farmer loses. If you don’t think so - you haven’t had anyone start complaining about your manure pile yet. Or trying to get you in trouble with zoning for no reason - just that they don’t like horse people.

The same thing is happening with hunting. Then, when the folks in the suburbs are completely overrun with deer, rabid fox and raccoon, or other wildlife problems - they scream for DGIF to “do something about it”.

If you’re having a problem with illegal activity, and you don’t call law enforcement, I fail to see how your problem is going to be resolved by focus groups. You still have to call your game warden and ask him/her to help.

Hope it all works out for you. I got 10$ that says this boondoggle doesn’t help you at all.

Virginia Hunting Dog Owners’ Association and DGIF’s Hunting Hounds Study

[QUOTE=Rallycairn;2886090]
Hello,

How does your group differ from the very successful, very large Virginia Hunting Dog Owners Alliance? It appears to me the groups have similar if not identical goals???

Thanks --[/QUOTE]

Rallycairn-

Hokieman responded. “Our goals are the same but our agenda ( to change the selection of the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries Board of Directors) is different.”

For months, ever since this hunting hounds study first surfaced, I and others have attempted to discover VHDA’s non-political objectives from its principals. Whatever VHDA‘s goals, they don’t parallel or complement those of the Virginia Hunting Dog Owners’ Association (VHDOA). These repeated reposted infomercials and partisan attacks all over the WWW aren’t helping our cause. This scheme to change DGIF Board appointments is a total dead end. It also isn’t going to alter the study’s direction, which a VHDA officer previously announced it was boycotting.

Mounted MFH clubs were invited to attend a private December 20, 2007 Charlottesville DGIF focus group meeting. They appeared to have well represented, although I was disappointed not to see Dennis Foster or Jim Young there. PETA and HSUS attended an invitation-only Richmond focus group meeting on December 19th. VHDOA continues to have serious concerns with this study’s design, processes and VT management, not the least of which involves the inclusion of animal rights parties in the key stakeholder advisory committee. What for, to look after the interests of deer and foxes, or to tell houndsmen that they’re abusing their dogs?

[QUOTE=Bob Kane;2889522]
Rallycairn-

Hokieman responded. “Our goals are the same but our agenda ( to change the selection of the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries Board of Directors) is different.”

For months, ever since this hunting hounds study first surfaced, I and others have attempted to discover VHDA’s non-political objectives from its principals. Whatever VHDA‘s goals, they don’t parallel or complement those of the Virginia Hunting Dog Owners’ Association (VHDOA). These repeated reposted infomercials and partisan attacks all over the WWW aren’t helping our cause. This scheme to change DGIF Board appointments is a total dead end.[/QUOTE]

Thanks for your response Bob and I would like to extend a Merry Christmas to you and your family and a Happy New Year. On another note, Virginia Hunting Dog Alliance has no intentions of trying to stop the study, whats done is done, and our fight will be won or lost in the general assembly. A statement by our chairman.

This fight is not about the DGIF study, it is about a Governor that has stacked the Board of DGIF with folks that will do his will regardless of the consequences. The study is a distraction, a ruse. He has already said to “friends” that he will introduce legislation to make it a misdemeanor to leave a dog out for more than 3 days (maybe he will teach us to talk to them so they will come home more quickly)! He says he is going to end the chase seasons on all game during spring turkey, fall archery and muzzle-loading seasons. His divide and conquer tactics will only work if we Sportsmen don’t reach out to non-dog hunting sportsmen. Remember this is the same Tim Kaine that, as Mayor of the City of Richmond, used taxpayer money to send six bus loads of demonstrators to the “Million Mom March Against Guns” in Washington D.C. When confronted with the facts by the Richmond Times Dispatch, he lied about it. After they stayed on him, Kaine said he did it, but that he had the authority to do so. A week later he finally agreed that he should repay the money! Six months later a group of prominent liberals re-paid the money (but no interest).

This time Tim Kaine is using Sportsmen’s license money to fund a bogus study to distract you. The study is going to release its findings in 2008 or 2009 in time for the next Governor to deal with. But Tim Kaine already has the conclusions he wants and has told “friends” about them! He will introduce them after this year’s elections on November 6. You probably won’t hear about them in the newspaper because they will be covered up with budget stories. P.E.T.A. and the Humane Society of the US are the groups behind this effort. Animal rights activists have made this a major political issue and the Governor is going to listen to his allies.

The real issue before the Sportsmen of Virginia is the conduct of the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. Do we want a agency that defends hunters and promotes our Heritage instead of treating us as if we are all criminals? Do we want to support an agency that puts law enforcement ahead of resource stewardship? Millions have been spent for non-game programs, while quail populations have dwindled with little or no fund for research or habitat improvement. Wildlife biologist have complained that State Parks do a better job of managing wildlife resources than they are allowed to do on Wildlife Management areas!

Do we want an agency that spends our license money for their personal use and is generally wasteful of its financial resources and then cries for more money and higher license fees? For too long DGIF has promoted its arrest of game violators with press releases telling of more than a hundred criminal violations only to get convictions on four or five charges because the rest were trumped up! DGIF has many dedicated professional staff members that are our friends, but they are being driven out of the agency by poor treatment and even poorer management!

We need to return a Department of Game and Inland Fisheries devoted to promoting the sports, in the schools, colleges and universities of Virginia so that mother raising their children will want to be involved in a wholesome family oriented activity that promotes individual responsibility, self reliance and stewardship of our God given resources.

Remember that the Governor proposes, but the General Assembly disposes. This battle will be fought and won or lost in the legislature. I ask that you go and talk to your representatives in your area If you don’t go in person, phone them and see where they stand on the issues. If they won’t pledge to SPECIFICALLY support your Heritage then don’t vote for them! Elect No Strangers. They pay little attention to email messages and none to petitions. Remember to be polite and disagree only when you can be civil or be quite!

You all need to do this today! Excuses will not mean much if you have to tell your child or grandchildren that we use to be able to hunt in Virginia. The people of Great Britain have lost fox hunting, the Australians have lost the right to own guns and we have let them take God from our schools… How much more are you going to let them get away with??? More than Ten Thousand Virginia have joined the Virginia Hunting Dog Alliance and Commonwealth Sportsmen’s Alliance standing shoulder to shoulder to stop this nonsense.

H. Kirby Burch
Vice Chairman for Gov. Relations
Virginia Hunting Dog Alliance
Commonwealth Sportsmen’s Alliance PAC
P.O. Box 657
Powhatan, Virginia 23139
http://vahda.org

I would suggest that there is no advantage to making the present board members angry by continually demanding they be replaced.

So far, the board has done well with the exception that they got involved with this study and too many focus groups.

There will be decisions made long before any changes in the board selection will come about, if that ever changes, and it would be smart to be kind and polite to the board members if we want those decisions to be in our favor.

I would like to see hunters lobby the board for more game wardens in the field. I have seen no complaint that could not be resolved by a game warden with enough time to see a complaint all the way through to a conclusion, whether in the land owner’s favor or in favor of the hunter.

I urge hunters to write the VDGIF board, suggesting they hire enough wardens and that they raise hunting license fees to cover the cost.

Anyone that rides to the hunt in a Diesel Pickup, pulling a $20,000 to $50,000 horse trailer, wearing $1,500 in clothes and mounted on a $15,000 plus horse can afford to pay another $50.00 or more for a hunting license.

The same goes for the fishing license. Most fishermen are fishing from a boat, pulled on a trailer by a decent vehicle. Another $50.00 is a lot better than losing the right to fish.

If the present laws are enforced and landowners get immediate protection when they call for a warden, things will go back to normal and there will be much less antagonism between the various hunting/landowner factions.

CSSJR

If we do not wish to lose our freedom, we must learn to tolerate our
neighbor’s right to freedom even though he might express that freedom
in a manner we consider to be eccentric.

[QUOTE=cssutton;2890103]
I would suggest that there is no advantage to making the present board members angry by continually demanding they be replaced.

So far, the board has done well with the exception that they got involved with this study and too many focus groups.

There will be decisions made long before any changes in the board selection will come about, if that ever changes, and it would be smart to be kind and polite to the board members if we want those decisions to be in our favor.

I would like to see hunters lobby the board for more game wardens in the field. I have seen no complaint that could not be resolved by a game warden with enough time to see a complaint all the way through to a conclusion, whether in the land owner’s favor or in favor of the hunter.

I urge hunters to write the VDGIF board, suggesting they hire enough wardens and that they raise hunting license fees to cover the cost.

Anyone that rides to the hunt in a Diesel Pickup, pulling a $20,000 to $50,000 horse trailer, wearing $1,500 in clothes and mounted on a $15,000 plus horse can afford to pay another $50.00 or more for a hunting license.

The same goes for the fishing license. Most fishermen are fishing from a boat, pulled on a trailer by a decent vehicle. Another $50.00 is a lot better than losing the right to fish.

If the present laws are enforced and landowners get immediate protection when they call for a warden, things will go back to normal and there will be much less antagonism between the various hunting/landowner factions.

CSSJR

If we do not wish to lose our freedom, we must learn to tolerate our
neighbor’s right to freedom even though he might express that freedom
in a manner we consider to be eccentric.[/QUOTE]

We make NO apology for our position. VDGIF staff have openly stated that THEY are going to end all hound hunting in Virginia in five years. When we produce the names and times and dates of those statements we are accused of engaging in personal attacks. Only a fool would ignore the open threat! Only when a large group arose in opposition did they change their tactics. If you are really a serious, then consider the loss of 180,300 hound hunters from the ranks of 225,000 individuals that are currently licensed to hunt! I don’t think raising the hunting and fishing license is the right answer. I mean VDGIF has a track record of being wasteful with non game funds. Do you intend to defend the VDGIF history of felony abuse, of waste and subterfuge? Why would DGIF spend millions of dollars from the Hunter Protection Fund on birding trails and other non-game programs and let the bobwhite quail disappear with only a whimper. Why have they failed to maintain adequate wardens in the field? Their turnover rate is close to 20% and at times more. Why did they choose to spend thousands of dollars to set up a separate police training academy when they have participated in the one shared by all other law enforcement bodies, except the State Police. If there is a problem of enforcement, they are the agency responsible for that action! Why has the DGIF Board stopped going to the public to present proposed regulations and instead opening it to the internet, the “world wide web”? Why did DGIF Board even consider staff recommendations to prohibit the use of live duck for retriever trials. There are numerous examples. I will only provide one more illustration of their intent:

Why did DGIF staff with the knowledge and consent of the Board propose to outlaw the use of tracking collars? The one tool that enables legitimate hunters to keep track of their dogs and prevent as much as is possible dogs from straying.

Yes our agenda is clear and we will preval were others failed.

The Accu-Weather man, Joe Bastardi (spelling?) has a neat saying that I believe fits here.

He ends his forecast with "Enjoy your weather, it is the only weather you’ve got.

I say that you had better enjoy working with the present VDGIF board because it is the only board you have got.

Screw up your relationship with them and you end up the one screwed.

When you tell a man you are going to kill him, the first thing he does is try to kill you first.

Telling the board y ou are going to do them in only insures that they will try to do you in first.

We must work with the board. It is the only board we have got.

CSSJR

If we do not wish to lose our freedom, we must learn to tolerate our
neighbor’s right to freedom even though he might express that freedom
in a manner we consider to be eccentric.

[QUOTE=cssutton;2890285]
The Accu-Weather man, Joe Bastardi (spelling?) has a neat saying that I believe fits here.

He ends his forecast with "Enjoy your weather, it is the only weather you’ve got.

I say that you had better enjoy working with the present VDGIF board because it is the only board you have got.

Screw up your relationship with them and you end up the one screwed.

When you tell a man you are going to kill him, the first thing he does is try to kill you first.

Telling the board y ou are going to do them in only insures that they will try to do you in first.

We must work with the board. It is the only board we have got.

CSSJR

If we do not wish to lose our freedom, we must learn to tolerate our
neighbor’s right to freedom even though he might express that freedom
in a manner we consider to be eccentric.[/QUOTE]

An appeaser is someone that feeds a crocodile in the hope that he will be eaten last!
Sir Winston Churchill

I am not an appeaser.

I am a person who thinks it foolish to take a knife to a gunfight.

And a dull knife is even worse.

So I ask the question:

Do you think a sitting governor is going to volunteer to give up his right to appoint board members to a commission in which he has admitted interest in?

A candidate for governor might run on the promise that he would make that change, but what are the chances a sitting governor who did not run on that plank will give up the right to appoint? The right to appoint is one of the most coveted powers of the executive branch.

By the way, I made a contribution to your organization and never received an acknowledgment, a membership card, or anything. Not even an email.

As I have donated to many interest groups and have always received a thankyou of one sort or another, is it reasonable for me to assume that my check has gone astray and that I should stop payment?

CSSJR

If we do not wish to lose our freedom, we must learn to tolerate our
neighbor’s right to freedom even though he might express that freedom
in a manner we consider to be eccentric.

[QUOTE=cssutton;2890581]
I am not an appeaser.

I am a person who thinks it foolish to take a knife to a gunfight.

And a dull knife is even worse.

So I ask the question:

Do you think a sitting governor is going to volunteer to give up his right to appoint board members to a commission in which he has admitted interest in?

A candidate for governor might run on the promise that he would make that change, but what are the chances a sitting governor who did not run on that plank will give up the right to appoint? The right to appoint is one of the most coveted powers of the executive branch.

By the way, I made a contribution to your organization and never received an acknowledgment, a membership card, or anything. Not even an email.

As I have donated to many interest groups and have always received a thankyou of one sort or another, is it reasonable for me to assume that my check has gone astray and that I should stop payment?

CSSJR

If we do not wish to lose our freedom, we must learn to tolerate our
neighbor’s right to freedom even though he might express that freedom
in a manner we consider to be eccentric.[/QUOTE]

The people have a right to hunt, fish, and harvest game, subject to such regulations and restrictions as the General Assembly may prescribe by general law. Virginia Constitution, Article XI, section 4

DGIF derives all authority from the legislature, which according to Article 1 Section 2 of the Virginia Constitution is derived from the people. The DGIF Board members are currently appointed by the Governor and serve"at his pleasure". Only the Governor sets policy for his administration, Governor Kaine has a record of being aggressively anti-gun and pro animal rights! We need the members of the General Assembly to help defend our Heritage!

On another note I want to thank you for your contribution and support. We are growing faster it seems than we can keep up but I will personally look into you getting a membership card. As stated thanks once again.

There have been several references to the effect that someone on the VDGIF board or one of their representatives has said that it is their intention to end hound hunting in VA in 5 years.

I have googled that until my eyes glaze over and the only reference I can see to that statement is the comment by Mr. Burch that VDGIF or someone connected with them said it.

Does anyone here on this forum have the exact direct quote?

I think this is important. Before we condemn the VDGIF board, we need to know who said it or whether more than one said it, or hopefully that it is a big mistake and no one said it.

CSSJR

If we do not wish to lose our freedom, we must learn to tolerate our
neighbor’s right to freedom even though he might express that freedom
in a manner we consider to be eccentric.

[QUOTE=cssutton;2890735]
There have been several references to the effect that someone on the VDGIF board or one of their representatives has said that it is their intention to end hound hunting in VA in 5 years.

I have googled that until my eyes glaze over and the only reference I can see to that statement is the comment by Mr. Burch that VDGIF or someone connected with them said it.

Does anyone here on this forum have the exact direct quote?

I think this is important. Before we condemn the VDGIF board, we need to know who said it or whether more than one said it, or hopefully that it is a big mistake and no one said it.

CSSJR

If we do not wish to lose our freedom, we must learn to tolerate our
neighbor’s right to freedom even though he might express that freedom
in a manner we consider to be eccentric.[/QUOTE]

You are more than welcome to email Mr.Burch at this address and ask him any questions you would like. info@vahda.org

I think that since so many here have seen the statement that the VDGIF or someone associated with them made the remark that the people on this forum should be allowed to judge for themselves how serious the matter is.

For me to write Mr. Burch and get the information does nothing for all of the others who are probably as curious as I am.

CSSJR

If we do not wish to lose our freedom, we must learn to tolerate our
neighbor’s right to freedom even though he might express that freedom
in a manner we consider to be eccentric.

By the way, I had another thought about the attempt to replace the VDGIF board with persons selected by the legislature.

We know who is on the board now. We have no idea who the legislature would appoint. NAOVA graded the legislators and by their grade, 9 I believe are very sympathetic to the HSUS cause as well as one senator.

So in fact, the legislature might well appoint members who are even more likely to listen to the AR’s and fellow traveler crazies.

We have what we have and they are a known quantity, so we need to work with them. Threatening to kick them off the board is not working with them.

CSSJR

If we do not wish to lose our freedom, we must learn to tolerate our
neighbor’s right to freedom even though he might express that freedom
in a manner we consider to be eccentric.

[QUOTE=cssutton;2890835]
I think that since so many here have seen the statement that the VDGIF or someone associated with them made the remark that the people on this forum should be allowed to judge for themselves how serious the matter is.

For me to write Mr. Burch and get the information does nothing for all of the others who are probably as curious as I am.

CSSJR

If we do not wish to lose our freedom, we must learn to tolerate our
neighbor’s right to freedom even though he might express that freedom
in a manner we consider to be eccentric.[/QUOTE]

Lets see if this is what your looking for?

By REX SPRINGSTON
TIMES-DISPATCH STAFF WRITER
The western Hanover County forest was cold and damp – a miserable place for some people, but for hunter Emmett Gray it was heaven.

Sharing his excitement were Petey, Cindy, Chopper and Vicki – Walker hounds caged in Gray’s pickup truck and howling for a chance to chase deer.

Hunting with dogs has thrilled man and beast for centuries.

“The adrenaline when you have a pack of dogs coming to you, and you hear brush breaking, and that deer’s coming. . . . The excitement is just outstanding,” said Gray, a semiretired businessman.

Some say the tradition could be headed for extinction in Virginia, an assertion Virginia’s game agency vehemently denies.

The Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries says it is increasingly hearing complaints, often from people new to rural life, about noisy hounds straying onto their land, often followed by hunters retrieving their dogs.

“I think it is safe to say that it has escalated every year for the last several years,” said Mike Bise, acting director of the agency, which regulates hunting.

Much of the concern is anecdotal because the department’s records are not detailed enough to show trends in dog-hunting complaints.

So the department, assisted by Virginia Tech researchers, is conducting a study to determine how serious the problem is and possibly to suggest solutions. Preliminary findings should be available next summer.

The study has some hound lovers howling.

Kirby Burch of Powhatan County, who led Virginia’s parks agency under Republican Gov. George Allen, believes Gov. Timothy M. Kaine, a Democrat, is pressuring the game department to restrict or ban hunting with dogs.

“Our worst-case scenario is . . . they are going to end hound hunting within five years in Virginia,” said Burch, who represents a group called the Virginia Hunting Dog Alliance.

“Nothing could be further from the truth,” Bise said. “We are only doing this because we are concerned about the future of hound hunting . . . We want to find a way to modify it if necessary – and I underline heavily, ‘if necessary’ – but we want to protect the sport.”

Kaine spokesman Gordon Hickey said: “The governor is not putting any pressure on the game department” to ban or restrict the hunting.

In Virginia, hunters can go on private property – even on land bearing “no trespassing” signs – to retrieve their dogs. They don’t need permission, but they must leave their guns and vehicles behind.

Many landowners don’t like having strangers on their property, and the noisy dogs bother people and pets, said Jeff McDermottt. The semiretired investment banker lives on 40 acres on Robins Neck in southeastern Gloucester County. He represents dozens of landowners there opposed to what they consider uncontrolled hound hunting.

“It’s almost impossible to turn loose hounds and not have them go all over everybody’s property who doesn’t want them” in that area, he said.

Some people speak of hunting with dogs as a revered Virginia tradition practiced by George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, McDermott said.

“They also practiced slavery, but that doesn’t make it right. Things were different in the 1700s in Virginia than they are in 2007.”

McDermott favors a system similar to one adopted in Georgia in 2003. Georgians can hunt deer with dogs on leased land of 1,000 acres or more, or on the owner’s land, with permission, if it’s 250 acres or more. Confining the hunting to large tracts minimizes the chance of dogs straying onto others’ land.

The Georgia law also requires a landowner or hunt-club representative to get a permit to hunt with dogs, in addition to the regular hunting license. The dog permit can be revoked for habitual trespassers and other troublemakers.

“I mean to tell you, it worked like a charm,” said John Bowers, assistant chief of Georgia’s Wildlife Resources Division. “We don’t have very many dog-deer-hunting problems any more.”

Even hunters are satisfied, Bowers said. “When this law got passed, the sky was falling and we were putting them out of business. There’s no more talk of that.”

Last hunting season and thus far into this one, Virginia’s game department received more than 900 complaints related to hunting with dogs. Some may have involved hunters legally retrieving dogs on private property.

Many complaints go to local sheriffs. Because of that and other issues, no records are readily available to prove that dog-hunting complaints are going up.

“We don’t have the actual numbers . . . but we certainly do have a feel for that just because of what we’re hearing from our officers,” Bise said.

The problems mainly involve hounds used to hunt deer and, to a lesser extent, bears, officials say. Unlike bird dogs and retrievers, which are under close control, the hounds often stray out of sight.

In Hanover, Gray released Petey, Cindy, Chopper and Vicki, and the barking dogs dashed off into the woods. Gray followed with his Browning 12-gauge shotgun.

Gray belongs to the Newfound River Hunt Club, which owns or leases 2,500 acres near Coatesville. The group rarely has a problem with its neighbors, he said.

Gray called to the dogs – “Hike! Hike!” – and they occasionally trotted back to learn which direction he wanted them to run.

“They’re very intelligent animals,” Gray said.

The question now is whether Virginians can be as smart in helping an old sport survive in a growing, modern state.
Contact Rex Springston at (804) 649-6453 or rspringston@timesdispatch.com.

Well yes.

That confirms exactly what the problem is.

We have here a statement by Mr. Burch.

We do not have a statement by any member of the VDGIF or any game warden.

Nor any legislator.

That is the problem. We need to know who Mr. Burch is quoting. Who made the statement is very important as to how we tackle the problem.

Was it the janitor at VDGIF or was it a board member. It makes all the difference in the world as to how you handle it.

I tried to read that story carefully, but I may have missed something. If I did, please point it out for me and the others who read this.

CSSJR

If we do not wish to lose our freedom, we must learn to tolerate our
neighbor’s right to freedom even though he might express that freedom
in a manner we consider to be eccentric.

[QUOTE=cssutton;2890857]
Well yes.

That confirms exactly what the problem is.

We have here a statement by Mr. Burch.

We do not have a statement by any member of the VDGIF or any game warden.

Nor any legislator.

That is the problem. We need to know who Mr. Burch is quoting. Who made the statement is very important as to how we tackle the problem.

Was it the janitor at VDGIF or was it a board member. It makes all the difference in the world as to how you handle it.

I tried to read that story carefully, but I may have missed something. If I did, please point it out for me and the others who read this.

CSSJR

If we do not wish to lose our freedom, we must learn to tolerate our
neighbor’s right to freedom even though he might express that freedom
in a manner we consider to be eccentric.[/QUOTE]

I see were your going. Yes we need to know who inside the DGIF said this so we can confirm or deny it was said and by doing so we can watch this wardens years of duty go down the drain as the dgif board fires him as fast as they did Carlton Courter. I’ll tell you what, you want to see if the board is honest just ask them one question weither or not that mt.lions are in virginia. I have treed several in my years hunting bear and coon but you can’t get the dgif to say they are here. they lie to everyone.

Mountain lions?

I don’t know why we are talking about mountain lions. I missed the point.

I do understand that there are wild hogs in VA.

In the parks even. I wonder if that is an interesting topic for the forum.

Does anyone here know anything about wild pigs? I have not seen any myself. But I never have visited any of the parks where I have heard they can be seen.

Are you allowed to shoot them?

CSSJR

If we do not wish to lose our freedom, we must learn to tolerate our
neighbor’s right to freedom even though he might express that freedom
in a manner we consider to be eccentric.