deke12ga

So the Bowhunter that shot a wondering dog while legally hunting is ok? What if your family dog had gotten away? Would it be ok then? I know all dogs should be watched like children, I watch mine like one anyway. But wouldnt you like to think that maybe he would've climbed down and checked for an ID tag on the dog to try to return him to his owner? If he had shot my retriever just cause he was on public land I'd be going to jail myself. True would've been my fault that my dog was not under my control but that doesnt give that guy the right to shootmy dog. Dogs get lost, so do children, so do the elderly, so does average Joe, should we just shoot them if we catch them in the woods while we're legally hunting? I know a lot of guys that use purebred beagles to deer hunt but how can you tell the difference between a deer beagle, a rabbit beagle, or little Johnny's pet beagle?

Lanse couche couche

Didn't say it was okay, i said that in those situations you are dealing with people who don't distinguish between types of dogs. In that instance the dog was involved in a legal hunt on public land and the bowhunter was a jerk because a lot of deer hunters think that a permit and a stand means that they own the entire surrounding area. That is often the type of people you are dealing with when they are talking about ending dog hunting.

The same people who scream trespass if a dog wanders onto their property would throw a hissy fit if their kid got arrested for trespass because he wandered onto a neighboring property by accident.

deke12ga

Your right. They'd argue till they were blue in the face it wasnt their kids fault.
There have been more than one occasion I've gotten in my stand sat for an hour anda dog came by. Sometimes I get up and leave and sometimes I stay. I've actually seen deer afterward too. Unless you are in some remote place I've never heard about deer are used to dogs roaming, tractors running, orany number of things like that.
There's a local guy who runs a "hunting preserve" that put up a sign stating he'd shoot any dog caught on his property. Thought would clear him legally when he did it. It didnt and thats what got him caught growing pot on his farm was a warrant served looking for missing tracking collars that he didnt turn off.
Now lets see if we can get this thread back on topic. Sorry for that little rant.

Lanse couche couche

I have hunted a three acre brush pile with a pack of beagles and after the dogs were gone jumped a big buck that was bedded down there the whole time. I've never bought the complaint that some dogs running thru one strip of land ruins the whole days hunting for somebody. I hear this all the time from my dad who thinks that if a beagle barks somewhere in the next section over from his deer sand that his whole deer hunt is shot.

Phil from Maine

The word hound here IMO means hunting dog! I have never seen or even heard tell of a hound hunting turkeys, have you? They fly as well and a hound uses his nose on the ground for the most part ie..bloodhound. I get my thoughts from this phrase that is in the report here..

Quote:

Hounds have been used to hunt black bear, white-tailed deer, gray and red fox, raccoon, rabbit, squirrel, wild turkey, and other species throughout Virginia’s history.

It is pretty much the samething that they tried up here with bear hounds.. The truth was it was against all hunting dogs period and that looks like they are trying to do the same thing down there.Once all those animal rights groups get involved all hunting is going to get attacked. It makes no difference to them. By the wayI only hunt birds with my dog as well and we are expecting them to come back and try banning hunting dogs here again in a couple of years. Right now they are after the trappers here using the Canadian lynx as the reason. Last year 8 were caught and released unharmed and they state enough is not done to prevent them from being caught here. They are trying to piant the picture that all caught in trap are killed which is far from the case here.

Hokieman

To answer this question. The VDGIF says if it hunts it's a hunting dog. read the technical report carefully, there are underlying tones used.

Data on Complaints Associated with Hound-Hunting

The exact number and nature of hunting-related complaints is impossible to track at this time.
Although improvements are underway, the current VDGIF dispatch system does not capture all calls or data of sufficient resolution (e.g., complete categories, complaint histories) to thoroughly characterize hound-hunting complaints (R. Henry, VDGIF, personal communication).

VDGIF staff besides conservation police officers (CPOs), and staff of other agencies and organizations
that receive complaints related to hound-hunting (e.g., VDOT, animal shelters), do not have a
formal, centralized reporting system. Many calls for CPO service currently are run through local
sheriff’s offices and are not shared with DGIF dispatch (K.Clarke, VDGIF, personal communication).

This was the basis VDGIF said for the Hound Hunting Study. If you read the Tech Report it references old material from Texas and other states that has nothing to do with current issues in Virginia. The DGIF is wanting a total ban of hound hunting but must first pass regulations that will open the door to choke the life out of it. I say if your a hound hunter take the time and read the technical report and write the Sac and DGIF and express your concerns and support for hound hunting in Virgina. visit www.vahda.org and read our current newsletter for more info.

Bywater

Please allow me to explain the post to which Hokieman refers. I am the person responsible for writing it; though through a family misunderstanding it was posted online without my knowledge. No harm done.

I am not on any "side" in all these silly hunting disputes. Yes, silly.

As a citizen and sportsman - I have grave concerns about this Study. Because after days of review, which included fact checking, review of literature cited, and inquiries made into the personnel involved.... a pattern emerged. So I went and read the Bear Management Plan. Deer Management Plan. And I continued reading.

And folks - if y'all think this is about hunting deer with dogs you're way off base. I don't even hunt deer with dogs - this Study isn't about that. This is fatally flawed; bad science, bad writing, manipulated survey's, and animal rights.

First, if any citizen wrote emails or letters to the SAC during the Informal Survey - those letters were not counted. The only input used in the content analysis were the letters sent to the VDGIF at the urging of one citizen.

Second, the content analysis used inappropriate methodology to calculate the results; a method calculated to produce the desired outcome; which included artificially inflating numbers.

Third, the literature cited was not peer-reviewed (less than 20 studies were actual peer-reviewed). This is an unacceptably low number. The "literature" that is referred to repeatedly is that of VDGIF's own Master's Theses while they were students at Virginia Tech. Theses are not appropriate literature to cite - again - no peer review. The other literature is almost solely that of the contractor hired by VDGIF to conduct market based public opinion surveys. Market based research is NOT the same as proper, objective surveys performed by social science institutions. Market based is for-profit. This company packages their data and sells it to... whoever. In this case, the contractor focuses on recreational use of land - not hunting and fishing issues. Market based research is not the same as real science.

How does this affect hunting, and especially hunting with hounds?

Well, several ways. First, the information contained in the Technical Report is erroneous. In cases in which other states are mentioned, you will note that it is always in the context of banning or restricting hunting, and always states in which animal rights groups have also been active in a ban/restriction.

Oregon - The Technical Report mentions many times that use of dogs to hunt bear and cougar were banned. What they did NOT reveal was that cougar numbers quickly rose 36%; and hunting with hounds was reinstuted about 4 years ago - and biologists state, in writing, that hunting with hounds is the preferred method.

Similar in Washington.

They also mention that Virginia is the only state that has the Right to Retrieve. This is incorrect. Virginia is the only state that CALLS this statute the Right to Retrieve.

Many other states have such laws; other states even allow citizens to follow game onto land, to retrieve livestock, etc.

HSUS and PeTA have indeed been involved in this Study from the outset; and have sent thousands of letters demanding hunting with hounds be banned. Bow hunters are also in the crosshairs, as are other still hunters. HSUS has 3 full time lobbyists in Richmond, and PeTA has also been alerted about the Public Comment period.

I apologize for the length of this post. I could go into great detail about the Technical Report; including their faulty assertion about the lawsuit with International Paper, their obvious bias for wildlife viewing rather than hunting (any hunting), etc.

I'd be happy to answer specific questions anyone has about this report. But please know that this is not about people running deer with dogs - it is about all hunting, including retrievers (this Study applies to bird dogs and that is stated in the Technical Report).

In the meantime, it's important that all hunters, unite for just one moment and express support for hunting - because HSUS and PeTA most certainly will expres the opposite.

daleh

I guess this report has the same if not less efect than the report on hunters taking a crap in the woods and the ecological effects based on biological anti-matter.
No Way and No How is any State DNR going to consider anything that will do away with hunting.
VA SC NC GA FL AL TN KY MS are all states that have state supported field trial grounds. Especailly VA with several of these state supported field trial grounds in Amillia, Danville, Roanoke, Dick Cross atthe Lake, and Somemore around Richmond. These grounds are supported by the state department of natural resources with a healthy grant and trust fund from the field trial community. (that is the pointing dogs) There is no way that the state of VA is going to try to do away with any type of bird dog or retriever.
AlsoVA has a fall season for turkey in which a dogs can be used. They are typically pointing dogs or flushing dogs. Used to find a flock of turkeys and bust them up.
If anything the VADNR is considerding usingsome of the same rules that are now in effect in parts of GA and FL. Limiting the use of deer dogs to particular areas or restricting there use unless the owner or club has xxxx amount of acres.

Bywater

Hey - another quail lover! Hello! I am doing some modest habitat restoration on my farm; and last year was very happy to see (mostly hear) some quail on my land. It's so hard to get rid of all that fescue, but I do have a lot of native grasses in one pasture and that's where I found a nest. Made me very happy.

You're right, no one is going to do away with hunting. If nothing else, it's a wildlife management tool. Hunting for sport/recreation however, is another matter.

In the conservation 'world', there has been a shift. From conservation to preservation. And there is also an increased emphasis to focus on nonconsumptive use as a source of funds instead of hunting/angling. For the first time, US Fish and Wildlife funds can be used for things OTHER than hunting and fishing. This is money that states are given to assist in funding their agencies.

In Virginia, VDGIF's mission changed about 10 years ago; to emphasize nonconsumptive use. (kayaking, boating, walking trails, etc.)

This is more in line with what urbanites prefer to do - not hunters and anglers. Which is ok. However, using this model hunting is not treated as a recreational activity. But as a managment tool only to be used when population reachs an excessive level, or there is a nuisance animal.

Hunting as wildlife damage control -not as sport.

This is the model that groups like Sierra Club or The Nature Conservancy use and promote. Leave wildlife alone unless they start causing a lot of damage - and then only allow hunters to come in and kill a few - and then leave.

As it pertains to bird dogs - again, you face the same "issues" as the rest of us. You're just not under the microscope yet. Your dogs are not leashed, work in adverse conditions, and can possibly trespass onto private land to retrieve prey. (even if the "land" is water/marsh). One of the "complaints" people have is seeing hunters with guns. It scares them.

Anyway - it's worth checking out some of the animal rights forums and see what they're talking about. It's also worth noting that next legislative session a local animal rights groups will be attempting to pass legislation concerning hunting dogs. (ALL hunting dogs). They do not distinguish between bird dogs, scent hounds, or sight hounds.

The Technical Report is intended to be used as a reference. It is flawed, and so will any proposals that refer to that document.

PeTA has a whole "fact sheet" on bow hunting. They want it banned. HSUS has fact sheets on hunting with hounds - all of which is inaccurate. The ONLY information on hunting that is being sent to VDGIF is anti-hunting.

What VDGIF may have intended with this study is merely to establish a minimum acreage requirement for deer hounds. However, they have opened a Pandora's box and HSUS, PeTA and other groups are circling.

Consider this also. HSUS has been focusing on Virginia because of the horrible Michael Vick case. The animal rights group I referred to is based in the same area of the state. So is PeTA. This part of the state is where hunting dogs have been stolen and their tracking collars removed. (dogs were never found). It's also where a PeTA employee was caught stealing a deputy's hunting dog. It's also where these "complaints" originated. It's all in Southside Virginia.

There are over 7 million people in Virginia, and a smattering of complaints over the past few years. No one even knows if these complaints were legitimate.
VDGIF has spent over 250,000 on this study.

Bigg~BirddVA

Bedded down is the key word. You trying to tell me that the buck was going to get up in daylight later on that day after he's heard dogs go by and feed through the woods? You and I both know better. When deer are chased and they associate deer dogs with humans they go into the nocturnal mode. That's why chasing illegally out of season starts this process before it should be in happening. BTW there are documented studies with tracking collars that deer hound hunted deer (does only) utilize twice their normal range, and return up to 24 hours later. I think we both would agree a big buck is more cautious than a doe.

I despise the slob hound hunter. And 99% of the slob hunters seem to be deer hound hunters. It stops cold right there. What little issues the others cause is a drop in the ocean to the deer doggers. I really hate to see all of them lumped together too as the true fox hunters are getting shafted by association with the deer doggers. Bird dogs, rabbit dogs and even coon dogs are no issue. I would have rather the report call it like it really is.

A min land size would fix most of it. The RTR gone, training in other hunting seasons gone and 90% of the issues would be over. I could live with an occasional intrusion. This almost every time I go out is getting old.


I had a pack of dogs come behind me turkey hunting and growl at the blind I was in. They had puppies and they looked like lost pets. I let them go on as I saw a similar looking dog by a house on the property edge. Not everyone will drop the hammer on every dog. I haven't seen them since so they probably were pets.