Fatcow Icon
County may toughen rules on hunting with dogs
by Hollie Nivens
21 months ago | 1929 views | 8 8 comments | 18 18 recommendations | email to a friend | print
Richmond County is looking at tightening the rules on hunting deer with dogs.

In 1986, the General Assembly approved an amendment that prohibited the taking of deer with dogs in certain parts of Richmond County. In 1995 that rule was expanded to include other areas of the county.

Monday night Tom Carr, a resident of Richmond County, spoke to the board about the problem.

Carr’s situation is that the law can’t protect enough landowners. He has been effected by trespassing of individuals who need to get their animals and deer have been shot on his property.

“It’s not just me, other individuals have had similar situations,” Carr said.

Bill Webb has had to take time to help hunters get their dogs of whom he didn’t authorize to be there in the first place.

“I’ve had my quail hunting interrupted by deer hunters,” Webb said. “Wouldn’t it be neat if we take a negative thing like this and turn it into a positive.”

Webb is looking at being able to set the regulations, and let the deer hunters pay for hunting. That will bring money to Richmond County, in the form of hunting preserves.

“I’d like for a group of hunters to implement a county wide regulation for the taking of buck deer,” Webb said.

Richmond County Sheriff Dale Furr agrees there is a problem.

“These people don’t mean to trespass but they have no choice. A lot of the hunters don’t live in Richmond County and they don’t care about destroying property.”

The board was in favor of talking about extending the area where deer hunting with dogs is prohibited. The next meeting is June 7 at 6:30 p.m. in the Richmond County Administrative Office Building.

In other action:

n The Board of Commissioners have been asked to consider an agreement with Plastek to match a One North Carolina Grant. The match would be through Richmond County’s Property Tax Grant Program. This would provide a 60 percent annual grant for five years. Depending on the investment the grant could be as high as $462,000. This incentive will allow the creation of 250 jobs with the company, and all were in favor of the idea.

“Without the support of the governor and the board of commissioners, it would not have been possible,” said County Manager Rick Sago.

Plastek has also asked the board of commissioners to hold a public hearing to let the citizens of Richmond County know about their intention to apply for up to $750,000 or half of a $1.5 million grant to rehab the building they purchased. The grant must be applied for by the local government then reimbursed to the company. Richmond County will not have any money in the program and the grant must be made by the company in a 50 percent split. No one opposed the request and the issue will be addressed at the next meeting.

A public hearing was held on a petition to make Northside Fire Department in charge of fire protection services for a portion of Fox Road. The residents in the area are under the Hamlet jurisdiction but is more than seven miles away. The closer station is Northside at about three miles.

Russ Wilson, a resident of Fox Road, would like this change to take effect. The 66 percent of people that needed to sign the petition did and they have agreed to pay the taxes required.

“A few years ago, I had some neighbors in the Hamlet district that had a fire. They called the Hamlet Fire Department and had to wait 30 minutes for them to arrive, and Northside Fire Department and Hoffman Fire Department couldn’t do anything until the HFD arrived.”

This item was not opposed.

In other action:

Planning Director Jamie Armstrong gave updates on the planning board and geographic information systems.

A contractor started on April 30 on the removal of the old Safie Mill. The large tower, a smoke stack pillar and the wall dividing the two tracts are remaining, Armstrong said.

“Residents are complaining about not being able to breath, smoke in their home and having severe problems,” Commissioner Pam Dillman said.

The demolition must be done by July 30.

Sago, reported on the most recent projects and provide an update on the economic development activities.

Progress Energy has invited the commissioners to a tour of its new powerplant on May 25. The Fox Road water line meeting will be Friday.

Newly appointed Chief Executive Office Victoria Whitt for Sandhills for Mental Health discussed the quarterly report and the fiscal year 2010-2011 request.

“We are not asking for an increase it funds,” Whitt said.

The Sandhills Center has not requested an increase in county general funding in the past six years. No one opposed this request. She took over in November, and was offered the full time position in February.

A resident has requested the renaming of a section of road their home faces, the road off Trevor Andrews. The petitioner had obtained 100 percent of the required signatures. They now want the road to be called Butch Sinclair Drive. All were in favor of this request but will be ruled in the next meeting.

The Richmond County Humane Society made a request to increase their vaccination fee for rabies from $6 to $8. This request was approved by the Richmond County board of health at their April 8 meeting. No one opposed this request.

A request was made for board approval of the Juvenile Crime Prevention Council City Plan. It is requesting $167,331 of program funding. The local county matching funds are budgeted through non departmental contributions. This will be discussed in the next meeting.

A request for the board to authorize advertisement for public hearing on proposed budget for fiscal year 2010-2011. The board may wish to set the public hearing date on the next schedule meeting.

The board approved a proclamation to designate Saturday at Peace Officers Memorial Day, and this whole week as National Police Week. The board also approved the proclamation designating May as Older Americans Month.

Hollie Nivens can be reached at (910) 997-3111 ext. 19 or by e-mailing at hnivens@yourdailyjournal.com.
Comments
(8)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
ncsuhunter
|
May 13, 2010
no dogs...

you may have misspoken, but there's alot more out there that actually feel that way. It seems that your "anger" stems against those that are trespassing and destroying your property. Why is it that you can't/won't catch them and prosecute them for BREAKING THE LAW? I have ZERO tolerance for that kind of behavior from doghunters or still hunters alike. But coming on here and calling for an all out ban for all doghunting because you won't take the necessary steps to catch the ones that are trespassing and vandalizing your property is ridiculous. Stop running people off and start prosecuting them. Law enforcement, both sherriff and gamewarden, can and will put a stop to that kind of behavior. If you can't get them to assist you then go over their heads, but don't come on here and group all doghunters into the same group and cry for a ban of our sport. As I said before I respect the property owners I hunt around and if I saw someone trespassing and destroying personal property you bet your butt I'd turn them in.
nodogsinrichmond@yahoo.com
|
May 13, 2010
ncsuhunter:

I mispoke about my deer on my land in anger. I know that I do not "own" the deer. I would be happy if any of my neighbors or their kids killed a nice buck at any time. No, I don't have cameras out to know what deer I have and how many. What i do know is that when property is clearly marked NO TRESSPASSING, I shouldn't have to worry about dogs coming through and disturbing a still hunt. I also shouldn't have to worry about replacing locks that have been cut or running people off of my property when it is clearly marked NO TRESSPASSING. What is boils down to basiclly is respecting the property of others. I know that a few bad apples can ruin a good thing for everyone. I aslo know a lot of people that dog hunt and that do it by the book. Why should I have to get a grip, I've done nothing wrong other that say that they are my deer. I understand that you are upset though, shooting off your moth because you are mad, I guess i would be mad too if my favorite pastime was getting taken. Maybe you can learn to Kayak or play the piano.
BKB3124
|
May 13, 2010
Everyone's got a side to this argument. I understand both sides. Everyone needs to understand that the Board of Commissioners made a unilateral decision to approve a resolution make deer hunting with dogs west of Hwy 220 and north of Hwy 74 WITHOUT hearing any of the opposition. On such controversial issues as this, there should have been a public hearing to allow both sides to argue their points before adopting any resolution. But then again, perhaps it was perfectly orchestrated so that there would be no opposition. Perhaps a little deal-making behind the scenes?? We still live in a democratic society. Just for the record, I've been a member of a dog hunting club for 30 years and I'm also a landowner in Richmond County. I hunt deer with dogs and I still hunt for deer, both in Richmond County. Never in my 30 years have we as a club been associated with nor accused of damaging any property, trespassing, harming others or interupting another's hunt of any kind. We take the greatest pride in doing things the right way and have a longstanding tradition of doing such. Our club was founded by residents/landowners of Richmond County almost 60 years ago, many of whom have since died but the heritage and tradition continues on through their relatives, all of whom are landowners and residents of Richmond County. A few bad apples or isolated incidences do not set precedent of how most of us "dog hunters" operate. Yes, there are timber companies that hold some leases but there are also many independent landowners that are lease holders as well (I know, I pay our leases). I disagree. I know what we pay per acre for our leases (it increases every year) and I don't think still hunting clubs will be able to afford most of these leases. I know our members who still hunt only (yes, us dog hunters only and still hunters only all in the same club, all get along just fine) can not afford this (I've already asked them). I do buy things other than hunting licenses in Richmond County such as food, gas, supplies, clothing and accomodations, all in Richmond County. While I do own land in Richmond County and pay taxes on it, I do reside in another county but do spend a lot of money in your county and take care of every piece of land including our leased land and other's land with the greatest amount of care and respect. Don't think for a minute that the people behind this just detest dog hunting. I expect there are some personal financial interests behind this as well (just read the article's reference to hunting perserves for deer).There is more to this than meets the eye.

BB
ncsuhunter
|
May 13, 2010
"I want my deer to be on my property"

That sentiment is EXACTLY where the problem lies. First off, they aren't YOUR deer. They belong to the state. I bet you are one of those that gets all upset if a neighbor shoots a buck you've been watching because you thought he was "yours". Get a grip man.

Secondly if you have problems with people trespassing as much as you say you do, catch them and prosecute them, because that's ALREADY against the law. Oh and I've seen my share of bird dogs get a pretty good ways away and even seen a few that would chase a deer so they can and do get away from their owners. There's bad apples on both sides of the tree. Still hunters trespass just as much as doghunters, don't get me started on the ones that drive down the road and shoot out of their windows or shoot at the bushes shaking in the woods. You have a right to hunt your land the way you want to, I respect that. If you have problems with people trespassing on your land, catch them and prosecute them to the fullest.
nodogsinrichmond@yahoo.com
|
May 12, 2010
All I can say is It's about time. As a landowner in western Richmond county, I constantly have dog hunters driving around my gates, messing up my roads and generally trespassing to get their dogs off of my land. They drive deer off of my land to be killed elsewhere. I know that dogs can't know where property lines are, but enough is enough. I want my deer to be on my property, not driven across the road to be shot by some fellow from Charlotte. As far as the landowners making money by leasing the land, these landowners are the big paper companies. They are going to make their money regardless. If dog hunting clubs don't lease the land, new still hunting clubs will. As far as buying hunting licenses, I buy one too, that doesn't give me the right to drive deer off of my neighbor's land so that I can shoot him. You need a better argument than that. Also, duck and bird hunting dogs don't run for miles with no supervision, chasing game all over the country. Retrievers and bird dogs hunt in specific areas, and in most cases are under control of the owner. Who cares what kind of club dues you pay. I own the property and pay way more in taxes every year than your club dues or your so called other fees to the state. What other fees? A couple more things and I'll stop. How can I interrupt your hunting If your dogs are on my land? Maybe I'm simple but I don't get that. What in the world does this have anything to do with Turkey hunting. Those guys don't drive dogs across my land. In closing, this couldn't come soon enough. I hope that it is a trend that will continue statewide. Let me be the first to thank any and all leaders that have anything to do with this getting passed.

Sick of Dog Hunting
supportive
|
May 12, 2010
There is a lot of people out there who hunt using dogs, and it is good for the economy. They pay the state every year for hunting license and the land owners make money by leasing out their land. And the majority of them take care of their dogs and if a dog goes into someone else’s yard they are polite to the land owner when trying to catch the dog. Not all deer hunters that use dogs do it wrongfully. So all of them don't need to be punished. If there is a certain club that is causing more problems then others, they need to be addressed. All of them shouldn't be punished because a few people don't use their common sense. And if dog drivers have to stop hunting, the population of deer will go through the roof. They will damage farmers crops, people’s flowers, and will cause more wrecks, which will result in peoples automobile insurance going up. Every law should be looked at closely and from all sides before it is passed. Because this law will affect people in more ways then they may think it will now.
louisblong
|
May 12, 2010
Man, you have kicked a hornets nest here, look for plenty of re-buttal, but don`t panic, most of the people who will complain don`t vote but they sure hollar.

pouisblong
wellwell2010
|
May 12, 2010
Richmond County is looking at tightening the rules on hunting deer with dogs. There are other things in this county that need to be taken care of. While you are at it make sure you get duck & bird hunting with dogs.The hunters pay enough as it is wil club dues and fees from the state. Lets see what other fees Richmond County can put out there. Most of your hunters do their part to take care if they cross your land, they don't man too just getting their dog. And they sure don't mean to interrupt any other hunting that is taking place maybe you interruped their hunting.? What almost forgot Turkey hunting don't forget that.

Weather
Sponsored By:

Lottery
Sponsored By:

Stocks
Sponsored By:

Gas Prices
Sponsored By:

Featured Businesses
Recipes
Sponsored By: