2009.06.02
Breaking news: DGIF board rejects bear license
The board of directors of the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries has unanimously voted to reject a proposal to pull the bear tag from the state's big game license and establish a separate bear license.
The issue was among dozens of proposed changes considered by the board.
The idea had been brought forward in February by members of the Virginia Bear Hunters Association, a group of hunters who hunt bears with hounds. Some have said they feel bears deserve to be more than just bonus animals for deer hunters who luck into one of the animals. They also said they believed a separate bear tag could raise $300,000 to $400,000 annually for the game department.
Many deer hunters were critical of the bear license proposal, and plenty said they would expect the fee for the deer and turkey tags to be reduced if the bear tag was pulled from the big game license.
The VBHA seemed to expect the outcome. While they have flooded some DGIF board meetings when bear-related issues were on the agenda, only seven spoke during today's public comment period. And while several mentioned their support for the license, the bear hunters actually were more focused on criticizing expanded bow, rifle and muzzleloader seasons for bears (all of which were approved, by the way), and on what they believe is abuse of special permits issued for nuisance bears.
I'm getting ready to hit the road for the drive back to Roanoke. I'll have a more detailed report on the meeting, including on other proposals, in tomorrow's Roanoke Times.
I'm happy to see that intelligence won out over greed. Now, let's get back to enjoying the great outdoors together.
Alfie
Comment by Alfie — June 2, 2009 @ 8:58 pm
Well looks as if our good game commision has again kotowed to their drinking buddys. The stamp would have raised substantionatly more funds and all the suckers that harped about a 25dollar stamp dont mind going to the abc store and paying $40 to $50 per bottle, and their several cases of beer from the grocery store on the way to their camp, only to leave their trash in the forest of Craig, Bathe , Botetourt, Alleghany and the other countys for their land owners and forest people to pick up. On top of that Virginia is the only state having very cheap license for all trophy game -deer--bear-- turkey. Looks like a measly stamp would break them but several hundred dollars in alchohol is an absolute necessity. You have to look no farther than WV and NC to see well manged game departments that dont look out for their club friends and give away their well valued game animals.Henceforth anydeer hunter wanting to hunt my property that cant show he was in support of the stamp will be invited to hit the road and dont come back on my property. Supporters will be welcome at all times.
big al
Comment by big al esquie — June 3, 2009 @ 8:24 am
Big Al, it is obvious that you use your right as an American to free speech and us that are a true Outdoorsman unlike yourself don't hold it against you for having true ignorance when it comes to this issue. There may be a few bad apples out there but to throw in "drinking buddies" and all that pure crap is ludicrous. There are a lot of good Christian Men including myself that don't mix boozing and hunting so maybe all of us good guys can all pitch in and buy you a big box of tissues so you can sit around and sulk about not getting the little bear stamp approved.
Comment by Fred — June 3, 2009 @ 11:33 am
A special thanks to the game dept. for not approving the new bear stamp. NOT!!!!! Same as always, give in to the mighty deer hunters and let them have approximately 5 months to harvest many deer. In fact thats a great idea. Make it so they wipe out the herd and find out what its like to really have to hunt for them. Thanks DGIF 4 nothing!!!
Comment by GB — June 3, 2009 @ 4:44 pm
It's time for this state to now move on banning the sale of all attractants and feed sold with the intent of being used to illegally attract deer to a tree 200 yards from some lazy guys truck. It's also time to start notifying the Game Warden when we locate any illegal activity in the National Forest including permanent stands and screw in steps that damage trees. The integrity of a certain group of hunters was questioned over this license. It is now time for that group of hunters to help weed out the 2 week deer hunter that will shoot anything in the woods!
Comment by Gmc — June 3, 2009 @ 9:43 pm
Wow, you bear hunters paint with a broad enough brush?
Signed, a non-drinking, picking up everyone's litter, happy to not pay more for a bear stamp; Deer, Turkey, Grouse, Bear, Predator, Small Game, Waterfowl Hunter.
Comment by TScottW — June 4, 2009 @ 5:34 am
The irony of this whole stupid stamp thing is that for the last two years you bear hunters have begged and pleaded for us deer hunters to support you. You came to meetings, outdoors shows, etc. and begged us not to end hound hunting which is "in your heritage."
Now that you have your way you immediately turn on us and are calling us out. Like I have said in other posts, I supported your hound hunting even though I absolutely DESPISE it because it was a legal form of hunting and I didn't want the anti-s to get a foothold anywhere. Now that you've got your way and turned on the very same people who supported you in the first place I will campaign against your "hunting heritage" next time the survey comes up.
Have fun with your special bear stamp when you can't hunt with dogs. I'll bet half of you quit and the other half become illegal baiters.
Comment by Scott — June 4, 2009 @ 8:19 am
I don’t have a dog in this hunt. I would not have purchased a bear license if it had passed. I am not a bear hunter; I’ve seen several bear over the last few years while hunting other game and have actually had the opportunity to harvest a few. But pulling the trigger simply did not flip my cookie. I am curious why the “staff” of VDGIF opposed the separate bear license. Could someone shed some light on the staff’s recommendation? Sorry for the ignorance, but I have not been keeping up with this issue.
Comment by Stephen — June 4, 2009 @ 9:46 am
Stephen -- The main thing the "staff" publicly focused on was the desire to hold off on such a major change at a time when it is reviewing its entire license structure. They hope to have a plan at the end of the year.
What could that plan determine? Maybe that the current system is fine. Or maybe that some changes, including separating tags -- as many states do -- is more appropriate.
There is no doubt concern about the precedent of pulling out a tag for only one species. Now, if that species were relatively rare and tags needed to be carefully doled out (think tundra swan) it would be one thing. But the current system is working OK for bears from a biological standpoint.
I say only "OK" because hunters are actually not killing enough bears. (For biologists' desires; houndsmen worry that too many are being killed.) Charging a premium for a bear-only tag would reduce hunting pressure. Does that make sense now?
So, what about separating all of the tags? Say, charge a resident fee of $10 each for bear, turkey and deer tags. That's a total of $30, which is more than the current combination is coming in at. But will the agency sell 207,000 of each? (They sold 207,000 resident big game licenses this past year.) No. So would whatever combination they do sell lead to a revenue increase (which they would want) or a revenue decrease? That's up to the bean counters to try to figure out.
These are practical considerations, but the staff also no doubt was looking at social implications. Feedback from average hunters made it pretty clear that they were not happy about that proposal, for reasons clear in comments on the DGIF online comment forum and on this blog.
I keep being reminded of the Jackson River debacle. That was fishing, but there are parallels.
For those who might not be familiar with the Jackson story, in the mid 1990s the recently dammed river was a great and popular trout fishery, one protected by catch-and-release rules while the fishery became established. Well, a few fishermen started calling for futher restrictions -- the outlawing of bait, the use of which they said was responsible for the release mortality of too many trout. Those calls weren't without some merit. Still, many local residents and Average Joe anglers (plenty of whom were already unhappy with losing their warm swimming river and with the new trout fishery being shoved down their throats) believed that the agency had bowed to the desires of a few "elitist" fly anglers. When the DGIF board bucked the agency staff and a majority of public sentiment to approve the bait ban, all hell broke loose. The DGIF quickly backpedaled on the restrictions but the damage was done.
The houndsmen did show up in good numbers at public meetings, and did flood the agency with form letters. But it was clear public sentiment was heavily against this idea.
So, it was a combination of biological concerns, revenue considerations and public sentiment concerns that led to this thing not happening.
mt
Comment by Mark Taylor — June 4, 2009 @ 11:04 am
I am glad to hear this! I am saddened by the attitude I am seeing on this blog by bear hunters in our great state. Quoting Big Al Esquie "Henceforth any deer hunter wanting to hunt my property that cant show he was in support of the stamp will be invited to hit the road and dont come back on my property." That's the right attitude to have sir! Deny hunting opportunities to others because you have a difference of opinion. Deny a first time hunter an opportunity to kill his or her first squirrel, deer or whatever.
I think that you will find that the hunting community in Virginia will be less likely to stand by your (bear hunters) side when an animal rights group goes after your hounds. I heard alot of bear hunters at the meeting I attended at Glenvar Middle state that they wanted to raise the black bear to the elite status it deserves, it's already a magnificent creature. If bear numbers are increasing in the state then the structure we currently have must be working! I see plenty of bear hunters on the Parkway in December, so you wouldn't be out there if there weren't plenty of bears to chase. Lowering hunting opportunities is not what we need to be doing in this day and age, we need to be increasing opportunities and focusing our energy getting kids out from in front of the TV and in the woods and on the water. We are all hunters last I checked! All this has accomplished is that it has driven a wedge between us. PETA and HSUS are always watching.
Comment by Jim Basham — June 4, 2009 @ 12:52 pm
Jeez, it was bad enough having to put up with arrogant bear "hunters" flying down the road and running across my property at will, regardless fo what I was trying to do on my own land atthe time. Now I will haveto endure pissed off arrogant Bear Hunters who want to teach me a lesson, can't wait, could be a long fall. Maybe I iwll get lucky and they will harrass the road hunters/poachers and not me.
Comment by John Kemp — June 4, 2009 @ 3:03 pm
I take exception to being labled an outdoor boozer, baiter, poacher, and litter tosser as Al suggests while knowing that not all bear hunters closet is as clean as he suggests. If they are so avid about getting thier precious bear stamp compromise and give them one for thier special season (just like early muzzleloading season)while leaving the bear tag on the hunting license and bear season running the same dates as it is now.
Comment by rd — June 5, 2009 @ 10:36 am
Seems to me that shooting a terrified bear out of a tree with a pack of hounds waiting for it at the bottom isn't much sport. How about we get rid of the dogs and see what great hunters you are. Bet you can't find jack squat without following Ol' yeller around all day. Bear hunters don't shoot any huge bucks that they happen to come across either huh? Get off your high horse guys and come back to Earth with the rest of us "regular" hunters.
Comment by Billy Eastridge — June 5, 2009 @ 2:23 pm
You know…. As I read over all these comments I am deeply disturbed.
Hunters should not be lashing out at each other this way!
Yes, we all have our opinions, our ideas, and our deep-seated beliefs when it comes to this great sport of hunting. And yes, unfortunately, we also have our predjudices. I will admit that I have probably spoken out too harshly against the dog hunting crowd during the “heated debate” concerning the proposed bear tag. But as I contemplate all these comments what really bothers me is that we as hunters are not unified. As a group of people who share a common love of this great sport we must stick together! The famous words in Patrick Henry’s speech come to mind….. UNITED WE STAND, DIVIDED WE FALL. To all of my Fellow Hunters out there I say these words ring true today for the future of hunting! The anti-hunting crowd would love to see us bicker and divide. Our Strength and our loudest voice comes from our unity. If there is discord within our own ranks the Anti- hunters will take advantage of that weakness.
No, we will not all see eye to eye all the time but we still must respect each other’s decision to participate in the hunting method of choice. We should not be bashing each other and making accusations that apply to an entire group of hunters. To stereotype any hunting group and say they are litterers, drunks, etc, is ridiculous! It’s even more ridiculous to insinuate that the VDGIF would condone such behavior!
I hope and pray that all of those who share the love of the hunt will consider what is best for the sport as a whole and not only their private agenda. Yes, I may not agree with, or want to participate in certain types of hunting…… running deer or bears with dogs, forced game movement with drives, etc.etc. But these are legal activities and I respect any hunters decision to use these methods if he so chooses. And although those hunters and I may never hang out or hunt together I would hope we could band together when needed to protect our sport.
And as far as the VDGIF goes I think they have a done a GREAT job of managing our precious natural resource of fish and game. All of their decisions may not be popular but you can’t please everyone all the time. The game department must make decisions that consider the betterment of a species and not just the interests of specific groups. I believe the successful efforts of the VDGIF are clearly evident to anyone who spends time in the outdoors in our beautiful state. Our game and fish populations are thriving like never before, (at least for most species). I spend a lot of time on the water and in the woods and I am experiencing success in my hunting and fishing that gets better every season!
Just some things to think about guys………
And to ALL the Virginia hunters out there I am wishing you great success in the upcoming season
Comment by Ralph Barton — June 9, 2009 @ 12:42 pm
Ralph, I am a member of the VBHA and I have also voiced my opinions rather strongly. I have stayed out of the comments since the license proposal did not go through, there is no use beating a dead horse.I went to Richmond for the meetings when the proposal was made and June 2nd when the recomendations were voted on, because I felt that was a comittment I should make for what I believed in. I truly appreciate your views and I wish people knew how truly a real, honest, respectful, bear hunter loves their hounds and DOES respect other peoples chosen means of hunting. I grew up hunting and have done it all, I just moved into bear hunting in the past 15 years after having a chance all my life. I also didn't agree with all that went on until I started hunting with the group I hunt with now. Mark Taylor knows this group and has hunted with some of us and did an article about hunting with us.We may not agree on some things, but in the end we WILL all go down the same road. We have had dogs shot and collars removed, but I can't hold this against one group any more than a group can lump all bear hunters together. If any one group wants to do away with another groups way of hunting they are not true sportsmen/women, they are the worst enemy we have within our own ranks. I thank you for your comments and also hope, agree or disagree, we stick together. In the end we should very much ALL be out there to enjoy the blessings of our outdors.
I also wish the best to all hunters out there for the right reasons.
Thank you Mr. Barton for your comments.
-- Well put, CRS. Great response to Ralph's insightful input.
I really think when it comes down to it the vast majority of us will stick together to preserve what we hold dear. As with so many issues, it can be the people at the far fringes of both sides of the argument who speak the loudest. And, as with so many issues, the best answer is rarely on the far side of either argument. It's somewhere in the middle and it's up to the majority of folks to help determine where that middle ground is.
Thanks to everybody who took the time to relate their opinions -- and I value even those opinions on the far ends of the spectrum! -- on this interesting subject. I suspect this won't be the last engaging debate we have here.
mt
Comment by CRS — June 10, 2009 @ 7:15 pm