Hokieman

If you want to know who the speaker is visit our website.

Hokieman

Richmond Times Dispatch Wed. morning edition.

More than 200 people turned out last night to urge the Charles City County Board of Supervisors to adopt a resolution in support of hunting with dogs.

The board voted 3-0 in favor of adopting the proposed resolution.

"I do support the resolution," Supervisor Gilbert A. Smith said. "I'm an avid deer hunter."

Jimmy Fitzgerald, one of the county residents who sought the resolution, said the request was made because of concerns that some newcomers to rural areas want to ban the use of hunting dogs.


ALSO IN THE NEWS

Many reply to bobwhite's calls for help

Wednesday, Jan 23, 2008 - 12:07 AM Updated: 09:41 AM

By ANDY THOMPSON
TIMES-DISPATCH COLUMNIST
The bobwhite quail may be experiencing tough times in the state of Virginia, but the game bird certainly has some high-powered friends.

Yesterday, at a meeting of the board of the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, those friends made a spirited pitch to take action against habitat loss and other factors threatening Colinus virginianus.

"For years I have been concerned, as have so many people, with the decreasing population of bobwhite quail," said former governor Linwood Holton. "I've mentioned it to several directors. This is the first time, though, that we've been able to get an organized effort, sponsored by the commission, to really take some active participation in restoring the population of this popular bird."

Holton was referring to the Quail Focus Group that the DGIF put together in December to discuss what could be done to stem the tide of population loss in the state. Holton was a member of the focus group, as was former DGIF board chairman Charlie McDaniel.

He and Holton, speaking on behalf of the focus group, recommended that the board enact a Bobwhite Quail Action Plan "encompassing management, research, education, outreach, coordination [with private and public partners], and specifically addressing environmental and other factors limiting quail numbers."

Other citizens, including members of local and regional chapters of Quail Unlimited as well as private landowners and hunters, spoke in support of the measure.

A key provision of the plan would have the DGIF establish official bobwhite quail habitats "to demonstrate the effectiveness of habitat management." Public areas, such as department maintained wildlife management areas, were mentioned as possibilities. So, too, were areas along power transmission lines.

The motion passed unanimously.

The board also heard from Virginia Tech researchers Dr. Steve McMullin and Sara Kozlowski on the findings of the recently completed hound hunting focus-group meetings. The board didn't vote on any issues regarding hound hunting but presented a timeline for action on addressing the concerns of both hunters who hunt with hounds and landowners.

According to McMullin and Kozlowski, there were a few general findings: 1) Virginia is becoming more urban and suburban; 2) New landowners who come in contact with hound hunters don't necessarily understand the culture behind it; 3) the actions of a minority of hound hunters are giving all hound hunters, and hunters in general, a bad reputation.

The next step in the process, McMullin and Kozlowski said, will be to set up a survey on the VDGIF Web site to "further gather information about issues and understand viewpoints of various stakeholder groups." After that, a stakeholder advisory committee will convene to discuss the issues and make recommendations. Once the public and interested parties review those recommendations this summer, the final proposals will be submitted to the board for a vote in October.

The final significant item of business concerned a law passed during the 2007 session of the General Assembly requiring the department to implement a boater-safety education program for all motorboat and personal watercraft operators. According to the law, if implemented by the DGIF on July 1, 2008 as written, all personal watercraft operators must meet specific boating safety education requirements (i.e. must take a class and pass a test). The requirements will be phased in between July of 2009 and July of 2016, depending on the boat operator's age.


Contact Andy Thompson at (804) 649-6579 or [email protected].

NEW61375

I don't think he really intended for you to bargain, just wanted no know what exactly you guys stood forin regards to hunter relations ona larger scale. If you honestly think we are"no matters" that proves further whyyou should not be speaking for your group. We are simplyhunters in your state askingstraight forward questions about your organization andwe get no straight forward answers and then because of your inability to be clear and say "Hey this is our stance...this is what we hope to accomplish...this is how we feel on this topic and why.....etc" you get frustrated and call us "No matters" and provide even more useless information.

Believe what you will but the "no matters" are gonna be the ones that bite you in the can, it may not be this year or next, butfrom what I have seendisplayed on this thread, if you are a truerepresentative of what the VHDA stands for,it won't take long. Thanks for taking the time to provide us all a 1 sentence response that answered pretty much 0 questions. Keep up the good work.

dogger69

It's a shame the VHDA is poorly represented. I take it all your group can do is complain and whine. Thanks for the info, I'll be sure and tell everyone in our club to read your assanine comments. You are the problem, and therefore can never be the solution. Too bad.

buckwild41

Dogger has a good take on this matter. He is a hound hunter but clearly wants to know what Hokie's folks have done to improve things. With the recent mve against SUnday Hunting I think VHDA has shot themselves in the foot. Much like Va Deer Hunter did...

Hokieman

You answer me these questions. Who was there to support the hunting dog community when all this was and is continuing to go on. I don't see any group of bow, rifle, muzzloader, etc standing with us, why did you assume we would support your Sunday Hunting. Your trash talking to the hunting dog community calling names and making aqusations that include all in their lies about us. Now when the shoe is on the other foot we are to blame, I am one person I can't resolve any issues over a public forum. join our alliance come to a meeting. That was the ideal of my first post not to debate and give details of our agenda to anti dog groups or whiny hunters who hollar foul.

Hokieman

I encourage him and others to visit our website and read it.

Hokieman

If you had went to our website and read the links you would have seen our mission statement, agenda, what we support, and a question and answer page. Its to bad your quick to judge like the others.

NEW61375

I'm not sure if you meant this for someone else sinceI have not been making accusations or calling names,actually I have been asking you somesimple, to the point questionsbut since you quoted me I will address it.

If the best way you have to answer a question is to talk circles around it and then answer it with a question rather than an answer the VHDA public relations dept. isin big trouble.If we all continue to seperate ourselves into groups we simplyare weakening the whole (bow, dog, muzzleloader, etc.). I have know idea what groups supported you or what groups didn't maybe you could have informed us. But if you think that that justifies you not supporting Sunday Hunting for the average VA outdoorsman(not some group) then I believe your stance is not in line with mine and probably many others. I have never spread any liesnor have I said anything negative about your organization, I have simply asked you some questions about what they fight for and why, too which you have yet to repond, unless you consider calling me a "whiny" hunter a response.

Check my posts I actively support our right to hunt with dogs in VA but that is not all I support as a VA outdoosman. My club is a dog club and we work hand in hand with our local wardens, landowners, and residents to maintain good relationships and present a positive imagein addition to working with other clubs in the areaand communicatingabout the recent dog hunting"study" by the state and upcoming meetings regarding the topic. Does that mean I will blindly followanorganizationbecausetheir name sounds like something Imight support? Of course not.

I agree,there is no sense going round and round, if you didn't want to answer the questions, or couldn't,or preferred that someone else from the group handled them you could have simplyreplied to me"You can contact this person via(phone #, e-mail, etc) or through our websiteand I would have definitely used that option.For now I think I have all of the info I need, thanks andgood luck.

EDIT: See next post.

NEW61375

So I visited the site and it is very well put together. They seem to be following many bills before the house and senate and they openly state wheter they support or oppose them there.I was surprised there were many I strongly agreed with but also a few I am not sure why they oppose. See below: (read entire list here)-----> Legislation 2008


HB 1456 Hunting; persons with bow and arrow or crossbow may hunt on Sundays. Summary as introduced: Hunting with bow and arrow or crossbow. Allows persons who hunt with a bow and arrow or crossbow to hunt on private lands on Sundays. VHDA Strongly Opposes any form of Sunday hunting. This bill is merely an attempt to put the camel's nose under the tent.


SB 263 Retrieving hunting dogs. Summary as introduced: Retrieving hunting dogs. Requires the revocation of the hunting license for the current and the next hunting seasons as well as the forfeiture of the firearm or bow and arrow of any person who is convicted of carrying such weapons on another person's property while he is retrieving his hunting dogs. VHDA STRONGLY OPPOSES

SB 524 Hunting on Sunday. Summary as introduced: Hunting on Sunday. Allows a person to hunt or kill any wild bird or wild animal on Sundays. Strongly Oppose


Like I said the site is very well put together and they do state what they support and don't support and while I onlylisted a couple I didn't agreewiththere are alsomany that seem worthwhile, see link above. They also have an area to send questions, so I will and I will ask about a couple that I am curious about and see what they say.

While reading it appears thatmany of the ones they areopposed to are ones that require moreresponsibility on folks with large #'s of dogs (such as businees licenses, stiffer fines on dogs impounded frequently, higher impound fees, etc.) While I don't think it is a bad idea to hit people in the pocket for not controlling their animals and Ifeel we should require more reponsible dog handlingI can understand the VHDA opposition to some of these things simply to protect the dog owners because most of the people involved are dog owners or closely affiliated. The flip side of that is I think they could gain more support fromthe "middle" ground hunters(those thatare notcurrently for or against dog hunting)if they showed they were interested in people being held accountable for mishandling dogs/irresponsible dog huntingand some of the other things that give dog hunters a bad image (running dogs all year, loosely adhering to trespass laws, clubs not policing themselves).JMO

Hokieman,

Probably not for mebut at least I looked at it and I know you linked the site in your first post I just assumed you wouldn't mind fielding some questions since you brought it to an open forum like this. The site was very informative, no hard feelings.