Rich- DGIF spent over 70,000 on a study that was biased of hound hunting from the start. You had landowners who were anti on hound hunting, you had hound hunters who were oppurtunist and you had animal welfare who wanted to ban it altogether. VT did a poor job of picking an audience who was willing to really focus on hound hunting and come up with a solution.

Rich you are talking the "nature" of deer hound hunter complaints, but I am talking "numbers" you are gonna have extreme in nature type calls in every type of hunting, especially with the large amount of hound hunters that are out there in virginia.

The study is done. We can Monday morning quarterback it all day long and will solve nothing. Does VHDA have any solutions besides enforcing the existing laws or no changes to the existing laws? Many hunters say just enforce the existing laws. I make a plan and point out the existing laws and many do not like it. DGIF is attacked for its complaint numbers. DGIF states they are going to do a better job of tracking hound-hunting complaints and some are not happy with that. Yes, there are extreme complaints in every type of hunting and yes, since there are more hound hunters than let's say waterfowl hunters there will be more complaints made against hound hunting. Again, this gets us no where. VHDA claims to have 35,000 members is that an accurate number? Most likely not since there are no paying members. Many members of the clubs listed on VHDA did not even know their club joined VHDA. What I am trying to say is some times numbers are only numbers and don't tell the whole story. You can fight the process and the solutions will be imposed or we can help guide the process and become part of it and maybe the solutions are something we all can work and live with and hound hunting continues on for another century. We are at that crossroads.

Rich thanks. You are now attacking VHDA. Since I am a board member and can attest to the actual number of members of VHDA and since weither they pay to be or not that is irrelveant. FACT IS Rich you might have controled it in your county or area but the other CPO wardens didn't do their job, this looks bad on them for not enforcing laws on the books already that you yourself pointed out that you was going to enforce this year. get off your soapbox. I and many others have lost faith in your DGIF BOARD and that will take time if ever to be mended. if DGIF knew the problem they should have fixed it instead of lumping all hound hunting groups into the fix. AS a coonhunter I am ticked off but as a hound hunter I stand up with each of them VHDA represent. As we represent all hunting dog owners in Virginia.

this whole godawful study was based on complaints overwhelming the CPO's and other law enforcement agencies from dog hunting right? so numbers do matter right? I am pointing out that those numbers were incorrect and trying to make sure the numbers for next years total complaints are correct this time around.

George - Yes, we are trying to do a better job logging the complaints. Before the study was even conceived we were also looking at the trends in other states such as Florida and Georgia. So, it was part numbers and part of what was happing else where with the sport that concerned DGIF. Plus as you know DGIF was in turmoil from a previous administration. The agency I believe is trying to get back on track. You do make a good point about the numbers. It is difficult at times to determine if the complaints are founded or not. We are trying are best.

Many of you may be suspicious as to why I have posted on this site. I will tell you that last year I was diagnosed with cancer. This changes your life in many ways. It changes your whole outlook on life in general. As of right now I have been 1 year in remission. I could live to be 100 or the cancer could return tomorrow. I have always loved the sport of hunting and being outdoors with nature. I would like to know I did my part to help secure the future of hunting. I am not on here to try to offend anyone. I am just trying to offer you another point of view and what it is like to work as a CPO. What worries me is some of the ethics I see in all forms of hunting not just hound hunting. I truly enjoy talking with hunters and especially seeing kids on the hunt any hunt. I have a 10-year-old boy and I just hope that when he is my age he can still pick up a gun or bow and hit the woods. Anyway, I am not trying to speak from a soapbox, but trying to have a meaningful dialogue with those I work for. Most hunters rarely have access to a CPO. What I don’t want to see is Hunters v. CPOs, but rather for us to work together to protect all hunting. I have poured my life into my work at the expense of my family just like many career CPOs. We are getting busy and it is getting harder to keep up, so if you need any assistance you have my personal email address. I’ll try to drop in from time to time. I wish everyone a safe and happy hunting season.

"As for the groups releasing a large number of dogs on very small acreage, it happens quite frequently. We make a few cases on these groups every year, they just consider it the price of doing business."

Thats a simple fix also you find a violation such as this, arrest and bond them. Your right you hand them a 100-300 dollar ticket they can pay off it is a joke, and probably cheaper than most hunting club dues you arrest them and get them put under a 500 bond and let them sit in a cell until bond/court it no longer becomes a price of doing business. I dont know exactly what yall's policy and procedure permits, but alot of these complaints and issues are easily fixed with the right amount of wardens and enforcement. That is why so many folks have screamed better enforcement of the laws on the books, A club as a whole can only do so much, if they kick the member that is a problem out, they are either going to go to another club or hunt ilegally. That is where yall come into play.