Virginia subcommittee rejects Marsden proposal to bar releasing hounds near roads; fee change also contested

Senator Marsden introduced a two-part bill intended to reduce conflicts between hunters and property owners by banning the release of hunting hounds on or within 15 feet of VDOT rights-of-way and by removing an exemption that prevents charging some landowners a $3 fee to improve federal Pittman–Robertson funding eligibility. "This bill does is prohibit you from releasing a hound within 15 feet of a roadway on VDOT right away or on the on the roadway," Marsden said, adding the measure is not intended to end hound hunting but to address a recurring pattern of roadside releases.

During committee questioning, Ryan Brown, executive director of the Department of Wildlife Resources, said the administration had no formal position but noted that "Virginia grants more extensive license exemption allowances than most other states," and that other states sometimes limit exemptions to the landowner’s residence or family members.

The hearing drew extensive public comment. Jake Taber of the Virginia Farm Bureau said he opposed removing landowner exemptions and warned of unintended consequences for deer-management programs, noting the department "would have given the department over $15,000,000" under an alternative bill he favored and that hunter participation has fallen nationally over recent decades. Several hunting-club representatives and individual hunters urged caution about using photographic evidence as the primary basis for criminal charges; John Morris, a retired law-enforcement officer, told the committee he feared fabricated photos could lead to wrongful prosecutions.

Animal-welfare and shelter representatives took a narrower view: Daphna Nakhmanovich of PETA and Dora McGuire of the Richmond SPCA urged action on welfare grounds—arguing dogs left near roads are injured and shelters are burdened—but both declined to endorse the fee portion of the bill.

Senators raised procedural and constitutional concerns about relying on photographs as prima facie evidence and debated whether the Department of Wildlife Resources already has tools or local community committees to address many incidents. Marsden said the bill was narrowly targeted and suggested the committee could consider amending the fee provision.

A motion to report the bill was made and seconded. The clerk recorded the roll: Senators French, Hackworth, Srinivasan, Williams Graves and Perry voted No; Senator Marsden voted Aye. The motion failed, Aye 1, No 5. The subcommittee did not advance the bill to full committee.

The record shows strong divisions between landowners and hunting interests over enforcement and evidence standards, and between animal-welfare advocates and hunting organizations on the fee provision. The sponsor said he would be willing to work on amendments if the bill is reconsidered in committee.