|
Post by DaveLyons on Nov 18, 2006 23:40:50 GMT -6
What I have seen. Well in Western MI before I moved North. The 'rat pop. were low but I did start seeing a few huts on the river it had been almost 3 years since I had seen a hut on the river and bayous. This was the Grand River. The Grand River watershed flows through heavy farm country mostly large Dairy operations. The Muskegon River marsh has been down but the guys that work hard are still pulling a 1,000 rats a year plus. The Muskegon watershed flows through mainly beef cattle land and woods and peoples back yards. Now the drainages in and around that area last I was there held a lot of rats. But the rats were found only in the pickle farm drainages not the Dairy land drainages only coon in the Dairy land. Now Northern MI never had 'rats like the Grand River marshes and Muskegon River marshes. But I am pullezed a little now living up north. There are Cattails in almost every lake but still low 'rat numbers the rivers mostly talking Betsie, Platte, Manistee, and the P.M don't have many 'rats yes a guy can trap 'rat on them but a 1,000 'rats would be a huge catch. Not one of these rivers flow through what I would call farm country yeah a mom and pop farm every once in a while but not big ag. like I am use too. But where I do find the most 'rats are in very fast moving water rivers up here and anywhere there is a pool (eddy) there are 'rats but maybe a doz. per pool. Beaver numbers slim at best this in my opinion is the trappers because there is no shortage of food for beaver. But where their are beaver there is also 'rats especially if the dam has been there a few years. So why is there 'rats in the pickle farms and none in the marshes and second why no 'rats in the lakes in the North when there is a good food source?
|
|
|
Post by dj88ryr on Nov 19, 2006 8:26:26 GMT -6
Did any of you guys happen to read the article in TPC. a couple of months ago written by one of the experts, which basically stated that the high rat prices would finally prove that all the speculation on the demise of the muskrat was simply due to under trapping. What rock is this guy living under? I trapped South Jersey in the 70's and 80's, if I set 10 dozen traps it was very common to catch 80 or 90 rats the first night. naturally this would fall off after the first night, however there was no shortage of habitat to set up and I seldom left the traps in the same holes and runs more than 2 or 3 nights. This was not in the big costal marshes either, farm dicthes road side diches ect. Also some tidal creeks off the Delaware and rancocass. Today a guy would have a hard time doing that in a season in that country . These days I trap in maine and have since 92 and although I've never seen the numbers here like jersey was they have fallen off greatly in the last 7 years or so. Like Wendt said theres always been floods and drought and although there are more raptors today they could never control the number of rats we had in the 70's and 80's. Habitat loss, pesticides,heavy metal from mid west drift and here's A new one , a possible negitive interaction with the ever growing resident goose population Where are you from?? I trapped a lot of the creeks off the Rancocas( Mill Creek got hammered ) in the late 60s and 70s. You are right, you could count on 80-90 percent success rate for 2-3 nights, then just move to the next run and be back in business, those creeks having tidal flats made it easy as hell, although tidal check times had you up at all hours of the night. I can remember catching over 900 as a 15 year old most of the checking done by bicycle, my father got really tired of running me to the buyer ( I didn't skin ) every couple days. Good thing Kubiak in Robbinsville bought whole animals and didn't dock you, 5-8 dollars ea. selling whole. That was good money for a 15 year old.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Nov 19, 2006 8:47:20 GMT -6
Don't lightly dismiss raptors.
I don't know what its like up north- maybe largely unchanged- but here and in most places- the rarptor poulations has exploded.
Owls. hawks, eagles- its such an abrupt increase over 30-40 years ago- that I believe at least here on the marshes- its a right up there as possible reasons.
Its not one reason covers all. Here also, on the big marshes- we had a series of both spring and fall "1000 year" floods where the marshes were completely submerged for weeks and months at a time.
Add in the vegatation changes...
interestingly enough- the streams in this area- have always contianbed a stable rat population. Keep in mind, these are spring creeks, and also are realitively stable.
|
|
|
Post by thorsmightyhammer on Nov 19, 2006 12:45:14 GMT -6
There is only one reason I dismiss raptor Steve.
If we didnt have the remnant rat population and habitat that we used to raptor's would have a negligible impact.
Those brothers that lived north of me rumor has it took in excess of 10000 rats a year of their property in the backwaters of a large river. Those backwaters are no longer there. Alot of food missing from the chain.
Is it possible that mink kill as many rats a raptors? They do here.
We have a tremendous population of redtail hawks and more than a few eagles. But they arent concentrated like they are in your area where they most likely winter.
|
|
|
Post by billkasten on Nov 19, 2006 15:40:01 GMT -6
Food for thought : What impact have otters had. Here in Pa. we can't trap em but they love our muskrats . The state spent alot of money relocating them , There in the water most of the time .
|
|
|
Post by bobwendt on Nov 19, 2006 15:43:54 GMT -6
from wghat I hear otters are heck on rats, but we lost ours prior to otter restocking, o at least initially I don`t think you can blame it on otters anymore than any other predator
|
|
|
Post by Steve Gappa on Nov 19, 2006 19:58:10 GMT -6
steven- its not the wintering that hurts- although these past few years, the hawks have not migrated. Eagles are the only ones that winter here per se.
I see 100s of hawks in a normal day. Young rats are easy prey.
Not the only cause, but Im convinced its right up there.
------------------------------------------------------------
Mink and rats. I've often wondered how many rats a mink truly takes. I'm guessing beyond the kit stage, not many. Based on observed actions of each, I'm guessing a full grown rat is a match for most mink. fishaddict- yo umight know- what to diet studies reveal. I'm not a open up the stomach kind of guy any more, but when I used to, I didn't find rats inside mink.
On otter, I have no doubt they too eat rats- but then again, I've studied scat quite a bit, and have seldom seen hair and to the best of my recollection, didn't see hair that looked "rat like".
Here again, a study result would be interesting.
|
|
|
Post by coyotewhisperer on Nov 19, 2006 20:12:33 GMT -6
I'm a novice rat trapper. Didn't have them near town when I was a kid although I trapped lots of mink as a kid. Now the opposite. I saw rats all summer swimming everywhere. Last spring I couldn't keep them out of my beaver foothold sets. My five day vacation thats what I focused on and was pretty dissapointed with the catch. There is sign everywhere some scat tons of tracks I even found some dens although they were a few inches above water it was clear rats were going into them and no catches since setting wednesday so what gives? Can a few creek rats make sign like there were a ton there? Everyone tells me I have mink but the last three years you would think at least one would have gotten into a coon pocket. It's like the rats I scouted all summer just up and dissapeared.
Jeff
|
|
|
Post by HappyPlumber on Nov 19, 2006 20:13:55 GMT -6
What wbg said I think is partially true about geese but for a different reason. We have the Sheboygan County Marsh, about 10 thousand acres that used to be a muskrat heaven. For quite a number of years the DNR has been managing it for the County to get rid of the cattail bogs that break loose and plug up the dam and then have to be removed manually (costs money!!). They drain the marsh every few years to allow the cattails to reroot and then the raise the water level in the marsh so the duck hunters have more water to float their boats for hunting. This has been going on for 30 years or better. This year they actually sprayed part of the marsh to kill the cattails. I think the draining and spraying has succeeded in lowering the rat population in the whole Sheboygan River system for the benefit of duck hunting. Some of these so called managment things would be better off if they didn't try to micro-manage everything. My woods-swampland is surrounded by corn/soybean land. This land was sprayed with something that caused a haze to hang in the air for three days that the neighbors had to keep their windows closed that whole time because breathing in the smell caused them to get nauseated and be sick. The farmer said it was an herbicide and wasn't a problem. At the same time I noticed dead coon and muskrats in the trout stream running through my land. I gave a dead coon to the DNR to test for what it died from. They said there was nothing really wrong with it and that it had the beginning stages of parvovirus. 50 years ago my Dad sold atrozine to the farmers as a herbicide. I am a retired plumber for 12 years and the last year I also carried a well pump installers license, for continueing education to maintain the license I went to a class where they told me that 50% of the wells in Wisconsin were polluted with atrozine (a carcinagen) 50 feet down in the ground and going down at the rate of 1 foot a year. So all the people with the know-how don't really know much anyway. The smarter we get, the more our environment suffers. We don't want to pay the price for progress. HP
|
|
|
Post by Steve Gappa on Nov 19, 2006 20:16:35 GMT -6
coyotewhisper-
on streams, rats are very localised to small areas. If you have a lot of sign over a stretch of creek, you have a lot of rats. If good habitat, and a lot of little feedbeds, most likely each bed is used by only a few rats from that immediate area. Most small feedbeds for example, give me 2-6 rats.
|
|
|
Post by bblwi on Nov 19, 2006 20:26:20 GMT -6
2006 observations and insights From 1988-1998 I trapped about 5-7 miles of wad-able rivers here in Eastern WI. I would catch about 20-30 rats per mile of river each and every year. The population would shift from one area to another many times based on crops for the year. Harvest was extremely consistent. Starting about 1998 I saw a very large drop off and it has stayed that way for 7-8 years. This year I waded about 4.5 miles of that river again. One area of about .75 miles had about the same population as 1988-98. All the rest were still about 30-40% of those historic averages. This year I trapped some rats in northern WI in non agricultural watersheds and with no farmland nearby. Flowages and forest. My catch was very good. Three other trappers trapping on flowage and I was able to catch 169 in 5 days.
I like many feel it is a combination of many things. 1. Drainage of wetlands and channeling. Development and row crops. 2. The above cause flash-flooding as the same amount of rain as 40 years ago falls on impermeable surfaces and rushes to rivers etc. 3. Chemicals. Bob I feel that Round Up "glysophate may be more likely to be a culprit than Atrizine. The timing is about right for the rapid increase in usage. (used on about 80-90% of all soybeans in US and now more corn and even alfalfa. 4. Here in WI I believe increased predation is a major issue. We have a growing and expanding coon population due to corn coming north. We have an increasing and expanding otter population coming south. 1 million ferrel cats, how many dogs, plus the raptors and that includes the owls. There is also man and his/her harvest, but man does more with environment than harvest in my opinion. I feel that with more coons, otter and other predators that rats along streams (which are narrow cover areas) along with mink, coyote etc. get really hammered. In the bigger marshes I see a wider size and age range which to me means that there is better survival in those areas with just more area for predators to cover. Sort of like the large block areas for waterfowl management, versus the small areas which offer less safe areas. In Northern WI we have less Ag and less total predators as there are at least fewer coons, ferrel cats, dog and also less day-time raptors, hawks, etc. This to me gives the rats a better chance at holding their own.
Bryce
|
|
|
Post by cowman on Nov 19, 2006 20:38:40 GMT -6
Bryce, in the 70's when we had tons of rats, we had very few coon. Now anyone can catch 100 coon in 2 weeks. I asked Grony once about the fewer rats and he said it was coon predation too. I was checking traps in a small marsh today, had 3 rats in a colony trap, but a coon managed to drag it onto a hut and eat one thru the wire! As I was slopping out of there, I spotted a coon sleeping in the side of a hut, and banged him. A huge old boar just ate his last 'rat! It was sweet revenge
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Nov 19, 2006 20:52:58 GMT -6
thats very true- in the 50s, 60s even 70s- coon were almost rare around here. A very good dog man might take 35-30 and that was a super year. We never even considered them in water traps- didn't have to.
|
|
|
Post by billkasten on Nov 20, 2006 5:49:12 GMT -6
Another preadtor no one has mentioned is the Bald Eagle .Our Game Commission restocked them back in the late eighties or early nineties and there population has done nothing but increase .I know there a fish eater but given the oppertuneity I'm sure they'd eat a little red meat to balance there diet . A good friend a good mink trapper caught a gray fox on the river and wondered what all the poeple standing on the bridge were doing .They were wacthing an eagle eat it. We really need more predators don't we. The only thing I'm 100% sure of is that a muskrat has a host of enemys Man included . Its alot more then any one thing but if atrizine causes strileity in muskrats I'd like to read a study on that. I know habitat loss is one of the factors that enter into it also. Bob does the warning lable on atrizine say anything about its negitive affects on mice ?
|
|
|
Post by Steve Gappa on Nov 20, 2006 7:09:52 GMT -6
Bill- we've been mentioning raptors from the beginning.
Here for sure, Bald Eagles are very much part of the mix. MN has the largest lower 48 Eagle population, and one of the biggest if not biggest concentrate of those is in SE MN. Even Goldens are "common"
|
|
|
Post by HappyPlumber on Nov 20, 2006 10:17:48 GMT -6
The owl's feed at night and so do muskrats. What easy pickins for the owls. How many rats can an owl eat in a week. I would think a rat would be easier to catch than a rabbit. Well owls are protected and rats aren't. HP
|
|
wbg
Demoman...
Posts: 182
|
Post by wbg on Nov 20, 2006 18:41:07 GMT -6
DJ ; Im from medford , sounds like your from willingboro or maybe bordentown? Most of my tidal trapping back then was in lumberton, hainesport area on the rancocass as well pensauken creek and believe it or not the cooper river near camden. But really most of my trapping was farm dicthes. I used to catch a large ratio of blacks, they brought good money then, now there less then browns. I think part of the problem in determining the cause of muskrat decline is that many people just have not ever seen truely large numbers.
|
|
|
Post by dj88ryr on Nov 20, 2006 21:05:57 GMT -6
wbg, Yep I am from Willingboro, we stuck to the tidal flats 80% of the time, but also hit those drainage ponds that each park had several of, they were loaded as well, but the catch there would drop off after a couple nights, but the tidal flats just kept on hopping from run to run, it never ended. A partner and I caught over 1400 one season, ( the first year I had a car ) Those were good times, and with what we were getting paid back then, I was living large for a 17 year old. I know all those areas you trapped well, even had a girlfriend out in Medford at one point.
|
|
|
Post by bobm on Nov 21, 2006 8:28:04 GMT -6
I've asked a couple of wildlife biologists about the relationship between farm chemicals and the muskrat population and they don't think it's impact is significant as the life span of a muskrat is so short. They believe that it doesn't live long enough to accumulate enough chemical in it's system to affect it. Most of them believe that it has more to do with the loss of wetlands since the 70's. I do know that the area that I live in has about 1/2 of the wetlands it did when I was a kid. Though one may wonder why the wetlands we do have still seem devoid of them, it seems to me that it was relatively safe and easy for rats to migrate to new wetlands years ago as the distance between them was mighty small, thereby making is quite a bit safer for them to move into new territory. If you couple the increase of certain predators (mink, raptors, racoon, otter, etc.) along with the reduction of wetlands, it seems to make some sense to me why the population is what it is. One thing that is interesting to me is the mink population over the past 10 years. Maybe guys were trapping them by the hundreds years ago and I just didn't know about it but, it sure seems that the mink have been at abnormal highs when one looks at some of the mink catches by a few of the guys in this area. Though they certainly deserve credit for extremely hard work, even they admit that their success was due to a high population.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Gappa on Nov 21, 2006 10:08:20 GMT -6
Bob M- the biggest change to our wetlands here is the change in vegatation.
I have no record of historical mink catches in my area, but like coon, during the middle 1900's they weren't very abundant. A good mink man then trapping fulltime a couple of weeks to freeze up and then parttime, would hit 30-40 mink.
Same with the coon. I look back- and think of the lack of coon we had in the 50s- 60s and just shake my head. I mean you could trap creek rats all reason, and never see a track or catch an incidental.
Now- its a #1 thought.
|
|