|
Post by bobwendt on May 3, 2007 6:27:07 GMT -6
not here. the reason farmers want trappers is to eliminate coons, beavers, coyotes, and muskrat that dam creeks, burrow, eat crops and kill livestock. lol, and they expect us FREE! we have no interaction with turkey and deer or duck hunters here, except they steal out traps and catches. the dnr here does not recognize any furbearer as a negative at all, none! they even protect the coyote!! and I`ve yet to have a hunter or a hunters group thank me for trapping or offer me even one penny for my services. the only place that happens is in the western sheep areas or the ms. programs. d.u. of course has proven the benefit of predator control but rank and file duck hunters either don`t see it, don`t care or too cheap to offer tapping wages to trap around duck production areas in the spring, save the d.u. research areas. I know of no movement in the turkey or other bird ranks to offer anything promotoing trapping. robert w. is in on the ground floor of some inovative programs in the deep south, but they aren`t even a drop in the oceon at this point .
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on May 3, 2007 6:41:25 GMT -6
then you have a shortsighted view Bob. Perhaps the reason your area and others have so many problems with hunters that are non trappers, is that no one bothers to work with such groups.
Here in MN ands WI- its the norm- which is why those other groups often help trappers when needed.
I see much more of a correlation between wildlife populations and good habitat, than with predators.
You would think with Sollman being from and living in Indiana, with his skills as the top trapping lobbiest in the world, that Indiana would nave no problems...
|
|
|
Post by SteveCraig on May 3, 2007 7:17:39 GMT -6
" Perhaps the reason your area and others have so many problems with hunters that are non trappers, is that no one bothers to work with such groups."
This is true to an extent. The FTA Chapters do a pretty good job, but that other group seems to push to restrict traps and trapping.
More and more farmers are "leasing" there farms to deer hunters from the bigger cities. These guys are so far removed from the land that they have no clue how the coyote is affecting their leases and alll the good a trapper does for them. You want to trap,.........you pay! It is happening all over Indiana. Makes me sick.
|
|
|
Post by robertw on May 3, 2007 7:24:58 GMT -6
"These guys are so far removed from the land that they have no clue how the coyote is affecting their leases and alll the good a trapper does for them."
This is exactly TRUE, The solution would be for the COs and DNR employees to promote and explain that wildlife managment / trapping is needed to maintain healthy populations of white tailed deer, turkeys and other upland game birds. They should also explain that the trapper IS providing a service and IS entitled to fair compensation for his time.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on May 3, 2007 7:34:35 GMT -6
you keep bringing up "fair compensation" for time.
I don't expect the state nor farmer ot pay me for fur. THats my choice- either trap for fur or not.
As far as ADC- if its a problem, they will hire you- if its not, they won't.
Should the state pay deer hunters extra for every deer they shoot? How about coon hunters? How about fisherman that fish for predatory fish?
|
|
|
Post by robertw on May 3, 2007 8:21:00 GMT -6
Steve, You trap gophers or chipmunks or what ever for hire. Why is that different from beaver or coon that do not have enough market value to pay operating expenses?
There are MANY state ran beaver bounty programs that pay from $5 to $50 per beaver. Why do these programs exist? Because the beaver are not worth the cost incurred to harvest them! Nutria are also a furbearer, care to long line them for the fur value alone?
Even the state of Minnesota pays some very serious $ to private beaver trappers. I know of at least TWO MAJOR beaver contracts in your state.
For a growing number of "fur" trappers there is no difference between "ADC" and "FUR" trapping. They trap during the prescribed season for hire. There simply is not enough trappers to meet the demands placed on them and they have to be compensated for their time. The value of the fur does not begin to cover the expenses of harvesting these animals.
The other thing that alot of people DO NOT UNDERSTAND is that these "paid" trappers are often paid to ONLY trap certain species and the land owner does not want other species trapped so these sets are passed by. An example is many of the Timber companies, they want beaver trapped but....Will not tolerate you dry land trapping and the possibility of you catching a hunters dog who is paying for the privilege of hunting that property.
There are also other issues...More states are going to longer extended deer seasons. A majority this land is leased land to hunting clubs, these clubs or land owners want animals harvested but only after the prescribed deer season....Often in a very narrow time frame of what remains of the prescribed trapping season. Not on your time schedule but on theirs. Some states actually have 120 day trapping seasons but....80% of the total harvest is occuring in the last 30 days of season.
In the last two years there have been an increased number of large hunting clubs requesting trapping services (and the states are issuing the permits!) out side of the prescribed trapping seasons. This trend is growing dramatically and will likely continue to increase (especially when the results of some studies now being conducted are released)!
I know this whole concept is hard to understand when we live in states that annually sell thousands of trapping permits....Ever consider what it is like in the states that have not sold 500 resident and non-resident permits annually for more than ten years?
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on May 3, 2007 8:27:56 GMT -6
gophers are a problem for the farmers. They see the direct results in poorer hay, longer haying times and on eqiupment.
Shrews are BIG WILDLIFE PROBLEM. tHEY ARE VORASIOUS PREDATORS OF SMALL MAMMALLS, ETC. YET- IF i WANT TO TRAP THEM, I'M ON MY OWN. bECAUSE THEY ARE not CAUSING RECOGNIZABLE PROBLEMS FOR THE LANDOWNERS. (sorry caps)
Yes, and I've done dnr contracts myself- WHEN the beaver are causing specific problems.
for me its gophers causing problems, and if in other places its beaver- then its beaver. And if they ARE a problem, there are solutions. If the solution costs more than its work, then its not a problem.
Every time you raise the point, you do it on general threads where you state, correct me if I'm wrong- that the state or private interests should pay ALL trappers to trap.
Take coyotes for example here for 99.999999% of the farmers, they are no problem at all.
So why would they pay me to trap them?
|
|
|
Post by rn on May 3, 2007 9:00:16 GMT -6
All or almost all private land here is leased to hunting clubs, and as Robert said, most if not all want you to wait until February (my season closes February 28) and only trap beaver (on 99% of properties) becasue even though deer season is over they do not want the high prices rabbit and hog dogs caught in land traps soft grip or not.
Most expect you to trap beaver, coyote, coon ext after the close of small game season Feb 28 and before the start of Turkey season around March 15 I think.
As Robert indicated and I have witnessed it first hand, a trapper goes to ask for permission (here in MS) and it turns into a beaver removal job with no other species allowed, 90% of the time, the other 10% are so far away I can not afford to do it for free or without fair compensation.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on May 3, 2007 9:18:41 GMT -6
then tell them NO.
If I don't want the job, I price it high. That way, if I don't get it great, and if I do, its worth my while.
now- if those hunting clubs thought other animals were a problem for them- they would allow trapping of that species. Since they don't, then one can only assume that coon, coyotes, etc are not considered a problem. If they are indeed a problem, sooner or later they will seek a solution. Until then, its their problem, not yours.
Now you can see WHY I live where I live- low income and all. Income, past a certain stage, means really nothing to me- its the total life experience.
90% of what many of you have to deal with, is non existent here. That doesn't mean I don't understand the problem, its just that I don't have to deal with it.
When I graduated from college, the jobs were not here. We made a VERY conscious decision to stay here, where we wanted to live, where our environment was part of our total life enjoyment.
|
|
|
Post by Wright Brothers on May 3, 2007 9:33:45 GMT -6
This thread and smart trapping thread reminds me of a song that sticks in my head at least once a year. Lets all sing together now. ;D
Times are hard You're afraid to pay the fee So you find yourself somebody Who can do the job for free When you need a bit of trappin' Cause your man is out of town That's the time you get me runnin' And you know I'll be around
|
|
|
Post by mustelameister on May 3, 2007 10:17:49 GMT -6
Typical nuisance call outside of trapping season here in southern Wisconsin is for beaver, raccoon, skunk or groundhog.
Compensation is any of the following: money, permission to trap next season, or barter for whatever. Bartering becomes fun, because one's man's junk is . . . my treasure?
The Wisconsin Trappers Association has a booklet containing all the trappers in the state who will respond to nuisance calls, listed by county. It's also listed online, via the WTA website.
Every year there are more farms being leased to out-of-towners for deer season. Gaining trapping permission on these farms isn't too difficult, so long as I'm out of there for the traditional 9-day deer season. I have never been asked to pay a fee to trap during the regular season.
However, when I inquire into compensation for nuisance services, I find that roughly 90% of the landowners are surprised to find out they are responsible for compensating the trapper! Most of them think I'm paid by the county, or city. And at that point, roughly 1/3 of the contacts decide to "take care of the problem themselves."
Some I hear back from, some I don't.
I usually have no problem with that issue, so long as it's only been a waste of my time over the phone. However, if I take the time and expense to drive to a potential job, and then am refused because of compensation, it sometimes gets ugly. Especially since I insist over the phone the job will be compensated.
Best memories of that situation: Years ago I got this call from a homeowner on a nearby man-made lake who had a beaver problem. We discussed the situation over the phone, and I stated clearly my compensation was $100 a beaver. No beaver, no payment. He said no problem.
I get there, after a 40-minute drive, and sure enough, he's got grandfather oaks getting chewed on along the shoreline. One of them is past the point of no return. And his house? It's a summer home, and looks to be in the $400,000 ballpark.
We chat. I ended the discussion by suggesting he make sure no pets have access to the shoreline for at least a couple of weeks while I'm trapping, since the beaver appeared to be living elsewhere and coming here for snacks only, might take a while.
He then asked if the $100 price tag was firm. I don't like those sort of questions at that point in the job. I said yes it is. He said that after talking to me, and thinking about the beaver, he could probably fence the trees off and they would go somewhere else.
Okay fine I replied. But don't call me back. And if you do, the price is doubled. Turned around, headed back to the truck, but kept my manners.
Been awhile now, but it might've been 2 or 3 weeks later, you got it. Come get the beavers. And yes, I'll pay $200 apiece. As I recall, I know I took 4 beaver out of there, might've been 5 or 6. And I got paid $200 apiece.
The calls that kill me are the sweet old widows who don't have but social security coming in, are too old to fix anything anymore, and they've got critters in the basement, or attic. Must have a soft spot, 'cause I usually wind up doing those jobs for barter, sometimes a pie, sometimes some tools, whatever.
I'd never make it in the ADC business.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on May 3, 2007 10:20:09 GMT -6
good point MM- my last 2 beaver jobs were for a single beaver each- one paid $600, one paid nothing.
|
|
|
Post by bobwendt on May 3, 2007 10:34:20 GMT -6
tman, but you will trap coyotes for $18 each in season. see how silly that is from a financial standpoint? your costs far exceed 18 bucks a coyote. I don`t care if you walk or ride a bycycle. you still have to buy traps and stretchers and knives and lureand misc. and eat at least TWO meals a day. even seasonally for a month or two.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on May 3, 2007 10:40:42 GMT -6
you bet I will Bob- plus those $18 coon. We've been down this road before- the prices I recieve for fur might not exceed YOUR costs with your high overhead, but they fit me just fine.
See the trapping smart thread.
I know what my expenses are (they go into my Sch C each year) and I know what my profit is from fur- and the profit far outweighs the expenses.
I don't trap problem animals, I don't trap the "last one"- I trap on MY schedule and for MY expectations.
So far, its working out just fine....
Now- I freely admit- I make more on muskrats then coyotes and more on gophers then muskrats...but for everything, there is a season.....
|
|
|
Post by bobwendt on May 3, 2007 11:49:39 GMT -6
my expenses are cheaper / animal than yours, betcha! and yes we have been down this road before and our differences ( I refuse to call black and white on paper figures an "opinion) are 100% apart. you notice out of respect for your trapping smart thread request, I did not post.
|
|
|
Post by Rally Hess on May 3, 2007 12:42:19 GMT -6
RobertW, Good post. Change is in the wind all over.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on May 3, 2007 19:00:10 GMT -6
Bob- grant me the intellegence to understand black and white on paper.
|
|
|
Post by bobwendt on May 3, 2007 19:38:30 GMT -6
I know you can add and subtract, but I question if you write down everything. I had a guy tell me once he doesn`t count vehicle as he has to have one anyway and pay insurance and plates and etc anyway. nor assn dues or meetings as he goes for enjoyment. but he sure didn`t tell me how the value of the vehicle went to heck. the same guy didn`t count many misc and nothing for traps either, since he had them already. that kind of thing. but why go there again. we`ve both wore it out. you say yes, i say no.
|
|
|
Post by DaveLyons on May 3, 2007 20:32:01 GMT -6
This is my opinion about deer and snares. Farmers love you because of the snares, deer hunter hate you. Both place in MI I have lived the deer yard up in the winter time. The coyotes follow the deer.(But don't tell the deer hunter coyotes eat deer they won't believe you) Anyway I have had some very bad deer days(Most in one day 10) I had to come up with a snare that would handle this type of deer herd. After many hours talking with a few buddies I went short snares(6-8Ft) in entanglement with cam locks and 90BAD's anchored waist high. Dead coyotes released deer but one fawn. The anchor has to be solid as a brick wall.
Never released a live deer from a snare. There released pole comes in a small box usually cost about 99 cents for 50.
I tried to take a few snared deer home but after trying to gut them and the smell that came from the deer I quite trying and just let the coyotes eat them as I kill them off the dead deer.
And for those that say use common sense for coyote snare have never snared in heavy lake effect snow. Coyotes do not cut the own trail in deer country. The coyotes let the deer cut hte trail then follow the deer. This is once the snow is 18-20 inches and more. Which can fall in less the 8 hours in Northern Mi.
Dave
|
|
|
Post by Rally Hess on May 4, 2007 5:34:31 GMT -6
Dave, Good post. Sounds like winter stressed deer to me. Deep snow deffinately makes a huge difference.
|
|