It's hard to overestimate the significance of a July 17, 2003 action in Washington, DC for hunting sportsmen. For the first time in recent memory, there was an up or down federal vote on a hunting issue which pitted sportsmen supporters and those of animal rightist, anti-hunters. Before now we've had to rely on surrogate issues and votes to identify our supporters. Today there's a bright dividing-line distinguishing our friends and foes. The VHDOA-related Sportsmen's and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance (SAOVA) was involved in this fight.

Sponsorship of HR1472, the federal Anti-Bear Baiting Bill, developed into a major litmus test of Washington sportsmen's v. animal rightist, anti-hunter's support. Of the 27 states that allow bear hunting, 9 of them permit baiting. HR1472, introduced by Rep. Elton Gallegly (R-CA24) and Jim Moran (D-VA8), banned baiting on all federal lands and in doing so, superceded existing state law. Previously Washington's game rules were limited to migratory bird hunting. Abrogating a state’s wildlife department rulemaking authority is a precedent that can't be tolerated, regardless of how one feels about fair chase and baiting issues. The feeding and baiting of bears is already prohibited in Virginia by state game regulation.

USFWS, the Forest Service and a wide array of sportsmen groups, including Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation, the National Rifle Association, the Safari Club International, National Wildlife Federation, SAOVA and the U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance, lobbied against the bill. On the other side were the Humane Society of the US (HSUS), Animal Protection Institute and their many well-funded allies. The bill, with 170 cosponsors, was scheduled for consideration on July 15th in the House Resources Committee, but was passed over.

On July 17th, sponsors of H1472 attempted to amend the Interior Department's Appropriations Bill with language that had that same effect. As the result of the very intense, late lobbying against the bill, sponsoring legislators pulled their names from the bill and/or voted against the appropriations rider. Normally, at best, one congressman will withdraw his support from a bill, after realizing he'd made a mistake. When all was said and done, 56 legislators reversed themselves on this bill. This sort of abandonment and repudiation is unprecedented.

The rider was defeated by a 255-163 vote. An "aye" vote is an anti-hunter and different fonts delineate party affiliation. Was your representative one of the four in Virginia who voted against sportsmen?