Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: TUESDAY, February 7, 1995 TAG: 9502070065
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: C-4 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: DAVID M. POOLE AND DWAYNE YANCEY STAFF WRITERS
DATELINE: RICHMOND LENGTH: Medium
At one point, things got so bad that even his mother called him, ``wanting to know what in the devil has got into me.''
But the Fincastle Republican says he's learned his lesson.
``I won't introduce any more dog bills,'' he says.
The bill that Trumbo's office has been hearing so much about - ``hundreds of calls, on both sides'' - hasn't been the state budget or any of the other hot-button issues before the General Assembly this session.
It's been Trumbo's bill about hunting dogs.
The problem, Trumbo says, is simple enough: Virginia law allows hunters to go onto posted land to retrieve their hunting dogs if the hounds run amok. But some unethical hunters, Trumbo says, have used the excuse of ``retrieving'' their dogs to run willy-nilly over posted land.
Sometimes, Trumbo says, they'll even have their buddies wait on the other side of the posted land, armed with a rifle and a walkie-talkie.
``These hunters would radio to their buddies on the other side of the land that the dogs were running and to be ready to shoot as soon as they were off the posted land,'' Trumbo says.
Irate landowners complained to Trumbo, who responded by introducing a bill he thought would correct the situation.
Except it didn't.
Trumbo's bill would have required hunters who think they might be following their dogs onto posted land to send written notice to the landowner in advance - in effect, forcing them to alert landowners that they'd be hunting in the vicinity.
Trumbo's thinking was that would serve as a deterrent to these ``unethical hunters.'' Instead, it riled up both landowners and ordinary hunters.
The landowners, he says, feared having hunters knocking on their door at odd hours to deliver written notice. And the hunters saw a burdensome regulation that would crimp their sport.
``Well, the next thing you know, my phone is ringing off the hook from bear hunters, coon hunters, fox hunters and even my Momma wanting to know what in the devil has got into me,'' Trumbo wrote in the legislative report he authors for the weekly newspapers in his rural district that sprawls from Bath County to Pulaski County.
``I tried to explain the problem,'' Trumbo wrote, ``but it all came back to dogs. Dogs seem to have the likeness of a young child. Young children can roam all over the place without permission, tear things up, and everyone smiles, and coos and points and says 'how cute.' It is the same with dogs. No matter how much landowners don't want dogs trespassing on their land, they don't want anyone to help them keep the dogs off their land.''
So Monday, Trumbo withdrew his bill.
But he claimed a moral victory nonetheless. ``I've made everybody aware of the problem,'' he says.
Reading for the law passes
Del. Morgan Griffith's bill to make it easier to become a lawyer by ``reading for the law'' has passed the House of Delegates and now awaits action in the Senate.
The Salem Republican says he became interested in the program because he once tutored a disabled man who was unable to attend law school. Used to be, the state required someone reading for the law under the tutelage of a senior lawyer to study for three years before they were eligible to take the bar exam - the same amount of time that law school takes. But recently, the state upped the requirement to four years, which Griffith believes is an unnecessary burden.
His bill would restore the three-year requirement.
It passed the House by an 82-16 vote.
Here's how Western Virginia's delegates voted:
For: Ward Armstrong, D-Martinsville; Richard Cranwell, D-Roanoke County; Allen Dudley, R-Rocky Mount; Morgan Griffith, R-Salem; Thomas Jackson, D-Hillsville; Lacey Putney, I-Bedford; Jim Shuler, D-Blacksburg; Victor Thomas, D-Roanoke; Vance Wilkins, R-Amherst; Clifton ``Chip'' Woodrum, D-Roanoke.
Against: Tommy Baker, R-Radford; Creigh Deeds, D-Warm Springs; Roscoe Reynolds, D-Martinsville.
U.S. 58 on the fast track?
Lawmakers from Southside and Southwest Virginia have fretted for some time that the widening of U.S. 58 - an issue that tied the legislature in knots a few years back - is no longer a top priority for the Virginia Department of Transportation.
They've responded by inserting language into the House version of the state budget that would require the appointment of a U.S. 58 manager, who would report directly to the commissioner of transportation.
The House budget also calls for this manager to develop a plan for the ``acceleration of the program.''
U.S. 58 runs along Virginia's southern border from the Cumberland Gap to Hampton Roads.
All aboard
The Senate version of the state budget gives the Commonwealth Transportation Board the OK to continue a study on setting up rail passenger service from Bristol to Richmond and Washington.
The House version of the budget is silent on the subject. The differences will have to be resolved over the next few weeks.
Keywords:
GENERAL ASSEMBLY 1995
by CNB