***URGENT VIRGINIA HUNTING DOG OWNERS***
10-14-2008, 08:40 PM
#191
Fork Horn
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location:
Posts: 466
RE: ***URGENT VIRGINIA HUNTING DOG OWNERS***
ORIGINAL: rick64
That's what they (houndsmen) were asking for, enforcement of the current laws. So why all B*tchen & Moaning on Speeddog?
That's what they (houndsmen) were asking for, enforcement of the current laws. So why all B*tchen & Moaning on Speeddog?
Wait a little bit and see what they'll be saying on SD. Some interesting things are just ahead.
Bryant I'm not arguing at all. Just a little heads up for the unsuspecting.
10-15-2008, 01:43 AM
#192
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 10
RE: ***URGENT VIRGINIA HUNTING DOG OWNERS***
ORIGINAL: bryant1
Wow, I can't believe you just lumped all dog hunters into that category. You still wonder why they have no respect for you?[&:]
I thought this topic died a long time ago anyway after that anti-hunter Big Bird couldn't find anyone to argue with about doghunting...
26 more days for me and i will be dropping the tailgate and letting them run! I thank God that our southern tradition has been protected and preservedin Florida and maybea similaroutcome will happen in Virginia.
Wow, I can't believe you just lumped all dog hunters into that category. You still wonder why they have no respect for you?[&:]
I thought this topic died a long time ago anyway after that anti-hunter Big Bird couldn't find anyone to argue with about doghunting...
26 more days for me and i will be dropping the tailgate and letting them run! I thank God that our southern tradition has been protected and preservedin Florida and maybea similaroutcome will happen in Virginia.
I actually belong to a hunt club that hunts with hounds, we go in the woods, take stands and drive thedogs.We alsoobey game laws, and respect property rights. Sure the dogs sometimes cross onto someone else's posted landbut we don't jump in the truck and haul ass over there and try to shoot the deer in the middle of the road.
There is a big difference between legitimate hound hunters who go in the woods and actually drive the dogsand these road hunters who find a deer path along the ditchbank, stop in the middle ofa road with posted land on both sides drop the tailgate and turn the dogs looseand then run all over the countypothunting oneverybody else's land.
10-15-2008, 09:06 PM
#193
Fork Horn
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 217
RE: ***URGENT VIRGINIA HUNTING DOG OWNERS***
I am happy at least they will catch the road hunters and spotlighters who shoot from the road using headlights on their vehicles. might even catch some still hunters firing their guns before daylight as they walk to their stands.
10-17-2008, 08:10 AM
#194
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location:
Posts: 13
RE: ***URGENT VIRGINIA HUNTING DOG OWNERS***
Well, you seem to be changing your story. A great many people have stated repeatedly that what was needed was for law enforcement to do its job.
When this issue has come up through the years, it has been pointed out, in writing, orally, and through the legislative process, that existing law and regulation sufficed to deal with poaching or other illegal activity.
People like you have taken great delight in asserting that loopholes exist, that the law cannot be enforced, etc. The animal rights group you participate in even beats home that message.
And now you provide a link to an article pointing out that, suprise, law enforcement is going to enforce the law and apprehend wrongdoers.
It's important that law enforcement has the tools it needs to investigate criminal activity and enforce the law. Virginia law is very clear, and is well supported by current regulation. There was never a justification for the myths intentionally created. What is appalling is that these myths have now become part of the animal rights rhetoric being published all over Virginia, and are part of the AR literature. This is a grave disservice to all hunters and anglers, who never get a fair shake in the media.
I support VDGIF law enforcement; I always have. We need more CPO's, (for a variety of reasons) though in the current economic climate that is not likely to happen. I'd even support an increase in license fees if the money would go to hiring, training and retained quality officers.
But let's be VERY CLEAR about this - existing state, local and game law and regulation is, and has been, sufficient to prosecute poachers. This article comes as no surprise.
What is surprising is a previous communication to you. Here is a direct quote. You will recall that you posted that this is proof current law cannot be enforced.
"My name is Robert Everidge, and I am the Game Warden Supervisor for the area you have described in your previous e-mails. The running of dogs out of the hunting season has become more and more popular within the District these days. As the Communications Officer has advised, it's close to impossible to stop this from occurring in the off season. The fox season, with landowner permission can be open all year and the dogs can't read posted signs. We, as Game Wardens check these groups weekly and try to keep them off the roadways and out of posted property with their vehicles.
The only recourse to the problem would have to start with our Game Department board and the Legislature of Virginia. Our board information is available on our web site at http://[email protected] .
Thank You for your concern to this problem. Please let me know if you have any questions or if I can assist you in the future.
Sgt. Robert Everidge
Department Of Game and Inland Fisheries"
So I will attempt to be very clear again. Though I strongly support law enforcement, I do take exception to a purposeful failure to enforce the law. One of VDGIF's many obvious problems is that it is an agency that has some issues. That's ok - no agency is perfect.
As I have said and written for years, existing Virginia law and regulation fully support prosecutions of abuses of the RTR, and existing law and regulation are sufficient to prosecute poachers and other offenders.
When this issue has come up through the years, it has been pointed out, in writing, orally, and through the legislative process, that existing law and regulation sufficed to deal with poaching or other illegal activity.
People like you have taken great delight in asserting that loopholes exist, that the law cannot be enforced, etc. The animal rights group you participate in even beats home that message.
And now you provide a link to an article pointing out that, suprise, law enforcement is going to enforce the law and apprehend wrongdoers.
It's important that law enforcement has the tools it needs to investigate criminal activity and enforce the law. Virginia law is very clear, and is well supported by current regulation. There was never a justification for the myths intentionally created. What is appalling is that these myths have now become part of the animal rights rhetoric being published all over Virginia, and are part of the AR literature. This is a grave disservice to all hunters and anglers, who never get a fair shake in the media.
I support VDGIF law enforcement; I always have. We need more CPO's, (for a variety of reasons) though in the current economic climate that is not likely to happen. I'd even support an increase in license fees if the money would go to hiring, training and retained quality officers.
But let's be VERY CLEAR about this - existing state, local and game law and regulation is, and has been, sufficient to prosecute poachers. This article comes as no surprise.
What is surprising is a previous communication to you. Here is a direct quote. You will recall that you posted that this is proof current law cannot be enforced.
"My name is Robert Everidge, and I am the Game Warden Supervisor for the area you have described in your previous e-mails. The running of dogs out of the hunting season has become more and more popular within the District these days. As the Communications Officer has advised, it's close to impossible to stop this from occurring in the off season. The fox season, with landowner permission can be open all year and the dogs can't read posted signs. We, as Game Wardens check these groups weekly and try to keep them off the roadways and out of posted property with their vehicles.
The only recourse to the problem would have to start with our Game Department board and the Legislature of Virginia. Our board information is available on our web site at http://[email protected] .
Thank You for your concern to this problem. Please let me know if you have any questions or if I can assist you in the future.
Sgt. Robert Everidge
Department Of Game and Inland Fisheries"
So I will attempt to be very clear again. Though I strongly support law enforcement, I do take exception to a purposeful failure to enforce the law. One of VDGIF's many obvious problems is that it is an agency that has some issues. That's ok - no agency is perfect.
As I have said and written for years, existing Virginia law and regulation fully support prosecutions of abuses of the RTR, and existing law and regulation are sufficient to prosecute poachers and other offenders.
ORIGINAL: Bigg~BirddVA
Well Jeepguy here's what enforcement is up to these days for the hound hunters. I talked to the officer and got a lot more but it's not going out public. All I'll say is change is coming and the doggers days of running and gunning are numbered.
BTW way they are already issuing tickets for the fox hound loophole for those letting hounds out and claiming it's now a fox dog. If they are not in compliance with the law, they get a ticket. Here's the law.
Fox. - There shall be a continuous open season for hunting with dogs only. The hunting or pursuit of foxes shall mean the actual following of the dogs while in pursuit of a fox or foxes or managing the dog or dogs while the fox or foxes are being hunted or pursued. Foxes may be killed at any time by the owner or tenant of any land when such animals are doing damage to domestic stock or fowl.
Ends this let them out and go home and watch TV while the dogs run all over the county.
Well Jeepguy here's what enforcement is up to these days for the hound hunters. I talked to the officer and got a lot more but it's not going out public. All I'll say is change is coming and the doggers days of running and gunning are numbered.
BTW way they are already issuing tickets for the fox hound loophole for those letting hounds out and claiming it's now a fox dog. If they are not in compliance with the law, they get a ticket. Here's the law.
Fox. - There shall be a continuous open season for hunting with dogs only. The hunting or pursuit of foxes shall mean the actual following of the dogs while in pursuit of a fox or foxes or managing the dog or dogs while the fox or foxes are being hunted or pursued. Foxes may be killed at any time by the owner or tenant of any land when such animals are doing damage to domestic stock or fowl.
Ends this let them out and go home and watch TV while the dogs run all over the county.
Northern Neck News article.
From the Wild
By Sgt. Rich Goszka Virginia Conservation Police
More enforcement of Hunting laws
If any of you have been following the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (DGIF) Hound Hunting Study many of you will know that one of the many recommendations the citizen committee of this study has recommended is that DGIF law enforcement enhance their enforcement of our laws and regulations. Many Virginia Counties east of the blue ridge have passed resolutions supporting hound hunting and also requested the enforcement of existing laws and regulations, including one recently passed by the Richmond County Board of Supervisors. The Virginia Hunting Dog Alliance, which many local hunting clubs in the Northern Neck have joined, has also called for DGIF to enforce the existing laws rather than create new laws.
From the Wild
By Sgt. Rich Goszka Virginia Conservation Police
More enforcement of Hunting laws
If any of you have been following the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (DGIF) Hound Hunting Study many of you will know that one of the many recommendations the citizen committee of this study has recommended is that DGIF law enforcement enhance their enforcement of our laws and regulations. Many Virginia Counties east of the blue ridge have passed resolutions supporting hound hunting and also requested the enforcement of existing laws and regulations, including one recently passed by the Richmond County Board of Supervisors. The Virginia Hunting Dog Alliance, which many local hunting clubs in the Northern Neck have joined, has also called for DGIF to enforce the existing laws rather than create new laws.
10-17-2008, 10:16 AM
#195
Spike
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 39
RE: ***URGENT VIRGINIA HUNTING DOG OWNERS***
i just finished my purchase of a not so fine horse and 12 fox hounds{pen broke and pen run} im gonna start foxhunting.seemscpo's are giving tickets out for chasing out of season per some loophole they have found
thats why i bought the horse
i dont need tracking equipment any more i can follow from start to end.man this is gonna be fun,i might even get one of those red jackets,maybe a bugle to blow,and one of those funny little hats.
i may even look into a couple coonhounds and an old mule to follow with,talk about old school.
HOKIEMAN i understand you coon hunt.i may need your help.you ever fox hunted?
Many deer hound hunters are using the fox chase season as the loophole in the law to run their deer hounds illegally. Under 29.1-516 of the Code of Virginia it states that the hunting or pursuit of foxes shall mean the actual following of the dogs while in pursuit of a fox or foxes or managing the dog or dogs while the fox or foxes are being hunted or pursued. The following of fox hounds means to travel behind the dogs during the chase.
Virginia’s right-to-retrieve law it states that fox hunters and coon hunters, when the chase begins on other lands, may follow their dogs on prohibited lands.
i may even look into a couple coonhounds and an old mule to follow with,talk about old school.
HOKIEMAN i understand you coon hunt.i may need your help.you ever fox hunted?
10-17-2008, 10:33 AM
#196
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location:
Posts: 13
RE: ***URGENT VIRGINIA HUNTING DOG OWNERS***
I'm not quite sure what you intended to convey in your post. Perhaps I too was not clear.
My point is that there was never a loophole, and this is yet another example of backpedaling by an agency that seems to have been caught with its pants down.
It is unacceptable for law enforcement to respond to a citizen complaint with a shrug and a suggestion to contact politicians, when the FACT is that law and regulation exist to apprehend a wrongdoer.
No other law enforcement agency would be permitted to engage in that behavior. VDGIF must be held to the same standard. No citizen, whether a fellow hunter or anyone else, must be dealt with in that manner.
I do not approve of Rick Hutson's behavior, but I do feel sympathy for him if he has been treated this way by law enforcement. Especially since the TRUTH is that if the CPO's had been properly trained, and responded as they are obligated to, he would not have problems with illegal activity on or near his land.
Again, there is no loophole, and the law is clear. It always has been. The agency can backpedal and hem and haw to save face if they want.
When there is a cluster of illegal or suspicious activity, the normal course of action is for law enforcement to apply pressure in that area, until the lawbreakers are apprehended.
Rick Hutson's complaints did not result in an appropriate response. Though to be fair to VDGIF, credibility may be involved.
There was never a need for the Study, all the politics, and for people to have to devote time, money and effort to have a few criminals arrested.
All that was ever needed was for VDGIF to stop being passive. This attitude does nothing but embolden the criminal element.
And in this case, the animal rights groups are having a field day and some sportsmen are actively assisting them. Which is a real shock.
My point is that there was never a loophole, and this is yet another example of backpedaling by an agency that seems to have been caught with its pants down.
It is unacceptable for law enforcement to respond to a citizen complaint with a shrug and a suggestion to contact politicians, when the FACT is that law and regulation exist to apprehend a wrongdoer.
No other law enforcement agency would be permitted to engage in that behavior. VDGIF must be held to the same standard. No citizen, whether a fellow hunter or anyone else, must be dealt with in that manner.
I do not approve of Rick Hutson's behavior, but I do feel sympathy for him if he has been treated this way by law enforcement. Especially since the TRUTH is that if the CPO's had been properly trained, and responded as they are obligated to, he would not have problems with illegal activity on or near his land.
Again, there is no loophole, and the law is clear. It always has been. The agency can backpedal and hem and haw to save face if they want.
When there is a cluster of illegal or suspicious activity, the normal course of action is for law enforcement to apply pressure in that area, until the lawbreakers are apprehended.
Rick Hutson's complaints did not result in an appropriate response. Though to be fair to VDGIF, credibility may be involved.
There was never a need for the Study, all the politics, and for people to have to devote time, money and effort to have a few criminals arrested.
All that was ever needed was for VDGIF to stop being passive. This attitude does nothing but embolden the criminal element.
And in this case, the animal rights groups are having a field day and some sportsmen are actively assisting them. Which is a real shock.
10-17-2008, 01:16 PM
#198
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location:
Posts: 13
RE: ***URGENT VIRGINIA HUNTING DOG OWNERS***
Well, the joke is on us.
If there is anything to be learned from this Study, it is that too many of us are not abiding by the ethics we insist everyone else conform to.
Presenting a picture of sportsmen as puerile, obscene, and vindictive idiots is no way to prove to the public we can be trusted with loaded weapons.
People seem to think that these internet forums are the same as a private conversation. I have spent a lot of time monitoring this Study, and have seen references to this and other BB's by animal rights groups. Sportsmen underestimate the level of sophistication, education and commitment of these groups. While plenty of them spout off on the Internet with their ignorance, do not assume their leadership is lacking in intelligence.
I like to tease my friends and fellow sportsmen just like anyone else. Good natured teasing; done in a spirit of friendship (and maybe a little jealousy).
But the conduct by both "sides" on this issue is downright embarrassing. There is nothing sporting about it.
Passion for a sport is good. Vendettas are not. This has become a vendetta. I'll have no part of it.
My participation will remain as that of a person interested in solutions and preserving hunting for ALL sportsmen.
If there is anything to be learned from this Study, it is that too many of us are not abiding by the ethics we insist everyone else conform to.
Presenting a picture of sportsmen as puerile, obscene, and vindictive idiots is no way to prove to the public we can be trusted with loaded weapons.
People seem to think that these internet forums are the same as a private conversation. I have spent a lot of time monitoring this Study, and have seen references to this and other BB's by animal rights groups. Sportsmen underestimate the level of sophistication, education and commitment of these groups. While plenty of them spout off on the Internet with their ignorance, do not assume their leadership is lacking in intelligence.
I like to tease my friends and fellow sportsmen just like anyone else. Good natured teasing; done in a spirit of friendship (and maybe a little jealousy).
But the conduct by both "sides" on this issue is downright embarrassing. There is nothing sporting about it.
Passion for a sport is good. Vendettas are not. This has become a vendetta. I'll have no part of it.
My participation will remain as that of a person interested in solutions and preserving hunting for ALL sportsmen.
10-17-2008, 02:12 PM
#199
Fork Horn
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location:
Posts: 466
RE: ***URGENT VIRGINIA HUNTING DOG OWNERS***
Well Bywater either you don't read well or understand what you read or both. Maybe you missed a forum somewhere. The officer I talked to in Richmond last Sunday said they had a test case coming up. Test case usually means new use for the law or first use of the law. Regardless since no one ever mentioned this law before it's safe to assume no one knew of it. Probably the same case for VDGIF.
VDGIF discovering an obscure law on the books doesn equate to me changing my story. I doubt credibility is an issue. I've had lots of conversations with them. Some communication they innitiated. Gee where and who do you think I got the story from Hokieman posted over on Speeddogs? It's obvious from your ramblings here you don't have a clue. You have to love the way the doggers try to discredit you, anyway they can. Nice try but you failed at that too.
There was a need for the study. It was the beginning of things to come. You do know what's ahead don't you? I would tell you but I'm not credible you know!
VDGIF discovering an obscure law on the books doesn equate to me changing my story. I doubt credibility is an issue. I've had lots of conversations with them. Some communication they innitiated. Gee where and who do you think I got the story from Hokieman posted over on Speeddogs? It's obvious from your ramblings here you don't have a clue. You have to love the way the doggers try to discredit you, anyway they can. Nice try but you failed at that too.
There was a need for the study. It was the beginning of things to come. You do know what's ahead don't you? I would tell you but I'm not credible you know!
10-17-2008, 02:46 PM
#200
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location:
Posts: 13
RE: ***URGENT VIRGINIA HUNTING DOG OWNERS***
Ahem
Do not assume you are conversing with a person unacquainted with law. You may believe it is "safe" to assume no one knew of it, but you are mistaken. VDGIF did not suddenly discover an obscure law or regulation.
The rest of your post borders on outright paranoia. I am not a "dogger", and I have no interest in your ongoing feud with those people. I'm not particularly interested in anything they have to say either.
You are free to call my posts "rambling", but I like to think that I am the type of person anyone would be glad to have hunting on their land. Respectful, honest, forthright, and friendly.
Maybe if more of us acted that way hunters would not have to be defending their sport all the time.
I'm afraid your credibility is lacking due to your own writings, do not blame me for it. Anyone who would encourage a woman to write editorials stating she is afraid hunters are going to rape and murder her is beneath contempt. Your name is plastered all over the Internet, including posting comments to your own editorials.
Please, Mr. Hutson, don't make such a fool of yourself. If you are not concerned with your own reputation, at least consider the possibility that your actions portray bow hunters in a negative light.
In other words, try thinking of someone else for a change.
Do not assume you are conversing with a person unacquainted with law. You may believe it is "safe" to assume no one knew of it, but you are mistaken. VDGIF did not suddenly discover an obscure law or regulation.
The rest of your post borders on outright paranoia. I am not a "dogger", and I have no interest in your ongoing feud with those people. I'm not particularly interested in anything they have to say either.
You are free to call my posts "rambling", but I like to think that I am the type of person anyone would be glad to have hunting on their land. Respectful, honest, forthright, and friendly.
Maybe if more of us acted that way hunters would not have to be defending their sport all the time.
I'm afraid your credibility is lacking due to your own writings, do not blame me for it. Anyone who would encourage a woman to write editorials stating she is afraid hunters are going to rape and murder her is beneath contempt. Your name is plastered all over the Internet, including posting comments to your own editorials.
Please, Mr. Hutson, don't make such a fool of yourself. If you are not concerned with your own reputation, at least consider the possibility that your actions portray bow hunters in a negative light.
In other words, try thinking of someone else for a change.