Sen. Stuart a one-man wrecking crew for DGIF

[Coke]

Sen. Stuart a one-man wrecking crew for DGIF
by Bill Cochran
http://www.Roanoke.com


Sen. Richard Stuart, R-Montross/Stafford, is introducing bills in the 2012 Virginia General Assembly that would change the way the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries does things, and not for the better. Here’s a look at them:

SB 17: The DGIF worked hard to win the title Conservation Police Officer in 2007 for its enforcement staff. With this bill, Stuart wants to change the name back to Game Warden, which doesn’t do a good job of reflecting the duties, responsibilities and abilities of the agency’s enforcement people. It would cost a small fortune to swap all those logos on vehicles and uniforms.

SB 25: This bill would make it the duty of the governor to appoint the director of the DGIF, replacing the current method of giving that responsibility to the agency’s 11 board members. Stuart’s way would make short-term political appointments more likely, rather than filling the position with a career wildlife manager. This has come up in the past, often the work of people who have a beef with DGIF.

SB 26: It is a common practice for a Conservation Police Officer to stop a hunter, angler or boater to check licenses, safety equipment and fish or game limits. Not so if this bill is approved. An enforcement officer could make such checks only when there is reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. Bag and catch limits only could be checked after an arrest is made. The bill also would take away the authority of marine police to spot check catch limits of commercial and recreational anglers. This bill would put handcuffs on enforcement officers rather than crooks.

SB 18: While this bill doesn’t have direct ties to the DGIF, it would adversely impact the management of saltwater resources by removing Virginia’s membership in the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Compact. The compact works for the wellbeing of marine resources through a multi-state, cooperative effort. It moves slower than many recreational fishermen would prefer, but it is not without success, such as last year’s effort to help safeguard menhaden, a vital food source for many sport fish. It would be foolish to boot the compact without having a better system ready to replace it.

[skeeter202]

Sounds like he has been caught...... I have no problems with the conservation officers as long as they do not make a target out of you . I think that if they check you they should write your number down and leave you alone the rest of the day unless they see you doing something and most of them do . just my 2 cents....

[Kight21X]

<table width="90%" cellspacing=0 cellpadding=0 align=center><tr><td>Quote, originally posted by skeeter202 &raquo;</td></tr><tr><td class="quote">Sounds like he has been caught...... I have no problems with the conservation officers as long as they do not make a target out of you . I think that if they check you they should write your number down and leave you alone the rest of the day unless they see you doing something and most of them do . just my 2 cents....</td></tr></table> +1

[Lea]

Anytime I have been checked by Conservation Officers, they have left me alone for the rest of the season...and in some cases, years. This includes Officers on the Chowan in NC, too. Great folks, all of the ones I have met!

Senator Stuart sounds like a total jerk...

[pumatrac]

I'd have to read the full bills to really get a feel for them. The devil is in the details and often bills contain items that have nothing to do with the intent of the bill. With that said, on the surface, SB 26 would make sense to me. What do the checks do now? They assume legal, law abiding people are criminals from the start. The Game Wardens changed their name to reflect that they have full police powers. Being able to search boats and check licenses is not in keeping with other police without due cause. How would you feel driving down the road and get pulled over to check your drivers license and car for no reason? I've always gone for the personal freedom way of doing things, but hammer the person who willfully breaks the law when caught. jmo

[billybass]

I have to agree with Reid here and play some more devil's advocate....

SB 17: You say the DGIF won the title of Conservation Police Officer back in 2007. Did the public complain back then about the small fortune it cost to to swap all those logo's on vehicles and uniforms? I'm pretty sure the cost of the badges and stickers was of no concern to the DGIF when they were winning a name change.

SB 25: Are you saying it's in the 11 board member's charter that they must hire a "career wildlife manager" to this position? If I wanted to live my life based on the assumption that appointed leaders are going to hire the wrong people then why appoint them in the first place. If on the other hand you just don't like the people being hired then maybe you should submit a resume.

SB 26: I think Reid covered that pretty well. But let me ask, when did the deer folks hunt and the fish folks catch start deserving more protection than people in this country ie: your wife, husband, parent, child.....? I don't see anyone jumping up and down for the right for LEO's to make stops and searches on a whim.

SB 18 Here's the first line in Article 1 of this compact, "The purpose of this compact is to promote the better utilization of the fisheries, marine, shell and anadromous, of the Atlantic seaboard by the development of a joint program for the promotion and protection of such fisheries, and by the prevention of the physical waste of the fisheries from any cause."

I thought "the promotion and protection of such fisheries, and by the prevention of the physical waste of the fisheries from any cause" was already the job of the DGIF, why do they need to spend more of my tax dollars to be part of a group so they can tell us what their job is in another place?

Just playing devil's advocate, but the more I read up on this the more I think the Senator might have something here.

[headhigh]

Well said Bill!

[Lea]

SB 17...I see what you are saying. Will have to read further on other points....

SB 25...Confused. I would hope they would appoint a manager who is fully knowledgeable and caring for whatever length of time the appointment is to last.

SB 26...Agree

SB 18....Agree

[BassCatVa]

I think that Sen. Stuart might be on to something. There has been a steady decline in hunting licenses in Va. for years. Need to find out why..
In my particuliar area the game wardens seem to exhibit a great deal of of "Zeel and Zest" in playing the "Gotcha" game.
Breaking off the game warden function into a separate section will allow for better monitoring of their activities both as a section and on a individual bases.

The remainder of the Department, biological, etc, do a excellant job and are to be commended for their hard work and dedication.

I would like to see a requirement that any interaction between a hunter or fisherman with a game warden that a "Contact Card" must be presented to the person from the game warden. On this contact card would list the date, time, game wardens name, badge number, etc.
There would be a section on the card to list the demeanor, attutude and any other data pertaining to the game warden(s).
Also, why was the stop neccessary.

[Big Johnson]

<table width="90%" cellspacing=0 cellpadding=0 align=center><tr><td>Quote, originally posted by BassCatVa &raquo;</td></tr><tr><td class="quote"> I think that Sen. Stuart might be on to something. There has been a steady decline in hunting licenses in Va. for years. Need to find out why..
</td></tr></table>

IMHO....as an avid hunter in Virginia since I was old enough to carry a gun, I see that a great deal of the decline in license sales is due to inaccesibility of hunting lands. While there is always Nat. Forrest, State Forrest, and WMA's to hunt, these lands have become very over-crowded during the seasons and the resulting hunting pressure has heavily affected the abundance and quality of animals.

Landowners, who in generations past welcomed hunters, are now very reluctant to allow nimrods on thier lands. I think part of this is due partially to a large section of society no longer accepting hunting as an ethical sport or necessity for food, and partially due to the unethical behavior of previous hunters allowed use of the land.

Other landowners have found the benefit of allowing hunting clubs exclusive rights to the land use in trade for monetary compensation that helps to or completely takes care of their property taxes for the year. Thus, the explosion of hunt clubs across the state. By gaining numbers of dues paying members these clubs can afford to lease the land rights for the exclusive use of thier members, who in turn may provide useful land management and maintenance.

Personally, due to personal experience, I don't like hunt clubs. Too many are unethical and unsafe and result in extreme overharvesting of game. But that being said, a well manged club that enforces ethical behavior and practices good game management policies can be a benefit to everyone involved.

I've never really had a bad experience with a Game Warden. I've had them sneak up into hunt camp to have a look around, but wind up sitting down by the fire for a cup of coffee. Often, I've picked up some valuable information this way. One the water I've been stopped and checked, but never harrased. I've even been asked if I was fishing a tourney and the subsequent checks were made quickly as to minimize my loss of time fishing.

I do agree with the right to search comments made earlier. Just because I'm on the water or in the woods is not probable cause that I'm breaking a law. I've often been tempted to say "no, you can't look in my livewell, or cooler without a warrant" just to see what happens. But my lack of desire to spend the night in a cell with my new boyfriend has kept me at bay.

Just my 2 cents.

[vatreefarmer]

I've never had a bad experience with a CPO, I'm sure they happen but again, I've never had one. Do you realize the enormous amount of territories these guys are responsible to cover? And keep in mind that when they walk upon a hunter that they are alone with no backup around. Their encounter is with someone who is known to armed and if poaching, could be facing some serious penalties. Talk about scary...

I wrote to a buddy of mine who is a state senator and asked him to keep politics out of the game dept. I have a lot more faith in an 11 member board to make the right decision than I would in a political appointment by the Governor. I can only imagine what would happen if an anti-hunting Governor were to be elected.

[Portajohn]

Interesting items presented. This past summer I sent two emails to my representative on the DGIF board, Mr. Curtis D. Colgate. Never received a response. If you want to get your blood pressure up, google DGIF Board Members and read all about them. They have been described as ll board members who serve at the pleasure of the governor. Seats on the board often go to people who campaign for them or who contribute heavily to the governor's election. My representative, Mr. Colgate has only lived in my region for 7 years, is a managing partner of an investment firm in the tourism business. Digging a little deeper I find that he has contributed heavily to the election of a couple of folks in the Commonwealth. Bottom line here is that by being licensed fishermen, we have waived our right to a probable cause determination, thus giving any law enforcement official the right to check our licenses, boating safety items, and livewells any time. As a retired Magistrate I don't agree with such blanket authority, but them's the rules.


Modified by Portajohn at 5:46 AM 1/27/2012

[BassCatVa]

Follow up on the Game Warden Issue. This was taken from the Fredericksburg "Free Lance Star" newspaper.

Sen. Richard Stuart expects a crowd Monday morning for a hearing on his bill that would strip much of the police authority from state game wardens.
His bill essentially says that conservation officers cannot stop people to check whether they’re complying with game laws without first having witnessed some suspicious activity.
Stuart, R–Stafford, says the fact that game wardens now can stop and check fishermen and hunters for no reason is a violation of the Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches.
“They’re not game wardens anymore,” Stuart said. “They are a uniformed police force with police powers. If they’re police, they should have to operate under the rules of police.”
That bill will be in the Senate Courts of Justice Committee on Monday morning.
It’s related to two other bills that Stuart postponed for the year in a Senate committee last week. The bills have proved controversial, with emails flying that suggest Stuart’s interest in restricting game wardens might be retaliation for game citations given to his friends or family.
Stuart said that isn’t so.
“Contrary to the emails you’ve gotten from certain folks, this is nothing to do with me personally,” he said to the Senate Agriculture, Conservation and Natural Resources Committee.
One bill postponed for the year would have had the governor, rather than the Board of Game and Inland Fisheries, appoint the director of the department.
The other would have removed from the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries the authority to enforce fishing and boating laws in certain tidal waters.
Stuart yanked those two bills, he said, with assurances from the DGIF that there will be more control over and training of conservation officers.
All three bills were sparked, Stuart said, by problems with a game warden in Westmoreland County.
“The reason I filed this bill, over the last few years we seem to have difficulty with the law enforcement side of Game and Inland Fisheries in the area that I represent,” Stuart said.
He said a game warden in the Northern Neck had threatened hunters and made unreliable reports, and was eventually transferred. Three months later, Stuart said, hunters in Westmoreland reported to him that they’d been harassed by a group of game wardens.
“We had what I can only describe as Gestapo action in Westmoreland County. We had 10 uniformed officers come into that county, driving seven or eight brand-new Tahoes, and they chased hunters for seven days straight,” Stuart told the committee. “I had one retired police officer tell me he was checked three times in one day. [That] certainly looked like retaliation to me against my constituents who had complained against this warden, and that gave me a great deal of concern.”
Stuart said that DGIF officials have assured him they are working to alleviate the concerns he has with oversight of conservation officers.
“I think both of them would tell you that they know there is a problem, that they are getting on top of that problem, they are working diligently to resolve that problem,” Stuart told the committee. “I am satisfied, in working with these individuals, that they’re on top of this thing. To me it’s important that we get on top of this and these folks get trained so they know how to treat people. Let’s see if we can’t resolve this without any action from this committee.”
Because Stuart was asking the committee to continue his bills to 2013, no one else testified.