Group Calls For Overhaul Of Wyoming Trapping Laws

[FWS]

you have dealt with a lot of animal rights folks, what drives them.

I don't doubt that most believe in their cause, but for the professionals that make a living at it their ability to continue doing that is a driving factor. And to fundraise successfully you need to create a 'devil', it goes along with that 'identity politics' theme in that Iraq thread. The professionals in those groups create these massive campaigns to suck in their donor constituencies who are the true believers in that cause. And they need to make it dramatic and present it as the 'last chance' to 'save' something.

So yeah, there are many of the true believers who absolutely believe what the pros spoon feed them, like religious fundamentalists. The pros pretty much know they're not being honest but any means to and end right ?

The groups BTW are really incestuous, the pros move from group to group, issue to issue over the years. And there has always been seed money doled out to create new groups that are really under the umbrella of some of the majors, and some you don't hear much from but have been pulling the strings behind the scenes for decades.

What we've seen lately is a shift in personnel from groups that dealt with land use or resource use issues (timber, mining, grazing, fisheries, agriculture, trade, etc.) to work on hunting/trapping issues. Lot of em' have followed the wolf issue, which has always been a profitable issue for them.

I think sometimes these folks must just hate their own personal life and take pleasure in trying to interfere in others folks lives

But that's a commonality in all kinds of issues, left, right, in between. What's it to some rural religious fundamentalist if two dudes get married ? Other than they have an absolute fundamental moral opposition to it, which the antis have against hunting, trapping, fishing, raising chickens, eggs, hogs, etc.

It's a similar mindset, "We don't like what you do so we'll use the force of law to change your behavior......."

Like with ballot initiatives, which makes for strange bedfellows, since the various groups on whatever their respective issues may be, want to and do use that process to try to impose their social engineering on whichever group they target.

As a group we should be paying more attention to the court cases that have been pitching out the various state and Federal laws that targeted other groups.

[FWS]

FWS define severely curtail nationwide please..........

Already seeing this how exactly?

If you haven't seen it you're not paying attention. I see it in state after state, and I see it as a set up for more actions in the future. Which we've seen before on other issues ...............

The EU is losing ground with people in Britain

So what ? Have you noticed that the UK is and always has been a hotbed of anti activity. And the EU isn't going to fold up and blow away.

Canada is pert of the Commonwealth and they've been slammed pretty hard on the export of seal products by the EU. The WTO hasn't been much help there either.

Wd had an anti group in SD

They no longer are in business in SD.

Groups come and go, but SD is still on their map, and we do see that out of state groups are still very active in forcing and/or creating policy changes on land use, wildlife mggmt. issues, etc.

[trappincoyotes39]

Yeh I remember when the California mt lion coalition came to SD and went in front of the judge prior to our lion season

FWS people will always try and do things I am about the realistic chances and seeing to they do not succeed where it concerns me and the area I am in. Some game depts are better setup than others to deal with things and in some states outsiders are not welcomed nor given a best foot forward in some cases either.

It remember betty olson rancher and state rep from buffalo, SD publicly bashing on antis from California over the bill that passé that allows ranchers the use of snow mobiles for coyote hunting She isn't shy and let her feelings be known.

Not talking the EU with just anti activity but overall Brits are growing weary of the EU and so are other people in other countries hooked into such.

I am sure very state is in their Map but some states they have far less chance of moving things than others. Formthe Dakota's your talking a large change in dynamics before they would ever have a chance that I do know, the mind set of people and high AG dominance through each state make it a tough sell for anti groups. How many other states do you know that have these signs when entering? These signs still up today in the state. Notice fur is listed first and also doesn't hurt tourism one bit.






here is a good read as well on what people in SD think of antis and the measures taken against them .
South Dakota Ag Groups Fight Animal Rights Legislation
by Amanda Radke Feb 11, 2013
South Dakota fights animal rights activist legislation.

My home state of South Dakota hasn’t been a particular hot spot for animal rights activist activity. However, the Humane Society of the U.S. (HSUS), which ranks South Dakota “dead last” for animal cruelty laws, is beginning to have a larger presence here.

South Dakota and North Dakota are the only states without felony-level penalties for animal cruelty. This puts a big, red bull’s eye on the backs of my state’s livestock producers. In this year’s legislative session, one bill already has surfaced that aims to make changes to the state’s animal welfare laws.

Senate Bill 171, co-sponsored by Sens. Stan Adelstein, (R-Rapid City); Dan Lederman, (R-Dakota Dunes); and Reps. Paula Hawks, (D-Hartford); and Anne Hajek, (R-Sioux Falls), states: “No person may maliciously and intentionally cause the mistreatment, torture, or cruelty of any dog, cat, or horse resulting in serious injury, serious illness, or the death of the dog, cat, or horse. A violation of this section is a Class 6 felony. No person may own or possess a dog, cat, or horse for five years after the date of the sentencing.” While not directly impacting livestock production, it could be said that this bill, if passed, will set a precedent for future rulings affecting animal owners in South Dakota.

Many are arguing that meaningful change in regard to animal welfare should be made by South Dakota residents, not outside parties like HSUS. That’s why more than 70 agricultural groups in South Dakota have teamed up to create an animal well-being leadership group.

This group is being led by the South Dakota State University (SDSU) Extension Service, along with the South Dakota Department of Agriculture, and Ag United For South Dakota. This group will focus on educating the general public and leading the discussion on animal welfare topics. SDSU Extension beef specialist Jim Krantz is tirelessly working to bring this group together, and his efforts have started getting attention around the state. You can read more about this group here.

South Dakota is taking steps to protect the interests of farmers, ranchers, hunters, fishermen and pet-owners in the state. In 2012, the state passed legislation that, “opposes any attempt for any ballot initiative or acts by the Humane Society of the United States, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, and other animal rights groups that would undermine the livelihood of agricultural producers.” This bill had bipartisan support and set the standard for future bills that might interfere with the state’s leading economic drivers.

Has your agricultural group or state developed a similar strategy toward warding off unnecessary legislation and taking charge of the animal welfare conversation? Are there any bills related to animal welfare that have been introduced in your state in 2013? If so, share this information and the local response in the comments section below.

[trappincoyotes39]

70 AG groups in a state of this size, shows they are serious about defeating outside interest and allowing the people of the state to make change not HSUS, PETA or others. When you get 70 AG groups together things happen in Pierre at the Capitol as the state is still very much AG dominate and they control the vote of who becomes the next governor. AG and hunting big business in SD and both controlled by landowners. You lose them you loose a lot of state revenue.

[FWS]

I am about the realistic chances

70 AG groups in a state of this size, shows they are serious about defeating outside interest

What that should tell you is that they're scared.................. As is agriculture throughout the U.S.

The legislation you reference is proof that the antis are indeed having an effect in SD.

[trappincoyotes39]

The legislation is not passed it has been offered and I know stan and it doesn't surprise me

Having an impact ok......... A large group is better than a small one and a large group in a smaller state even speaks louder to nip things in the butt. What groups like HSUS and PETA want and what will come from the dept of AG and SDSU will come up with will be very far apart but will be dealt with inside the state with people that have a vested interest far better approach don't you think?

Also notice how the wordage of the bill is, dog,cat horse is all that is contained in it, to go further would mean a certain death and left sitting for the 41st day in egislation.

[trappincoyotes39]

Now do I think cats or dogs should be treated in a poor manner? nope but they will make sure the wordage protects their interest in agriculture that you can bet on and make it very tough for further legislation on this issue.

[FWS]

What groups like HSUS and PETA want

What they want is to force change which is what they are successfully doing in SD and elsewhere, what previously were non issues are now issues that will get legislative attention.

Little bites, nibbling away..............

It is the history of the way they do it.

Also notice how the wordage of the bill is, dog,cat horse is all that is contained in it,

Yup, seen it before....................

[trappincoyotes39]

FWS the bill that was passed and signed by the govenor in. March was brought by the SD Animal industry board made up of livestock producers and the wordage protected such form being part of it. it includes items such as animal fighting, and other things but protects the livestock industry of the state from normal practices and most importantly the HSUS and PETA had nothing to do with the wordage or changing of text inside the bill. All states have anti cruelty laws now so we can all ret easy on that subject and move onto the next. Legislative research council predicts 2-4 felony convictions a year on this subject in the state of SD.

[FWS]

brought by the SD Animal industry board made

Yup, seen it before.................

Here as a matter of fact.

[trappnman]

Gerald- whats your opinion on why clamming, turtle trapping, commercial fishing are so limited in MN?

I cannot imagine its to protect the sepcies

[trappincoyotes39]

I would bet on commercial fishing it is to protect the species as catfish right now is higher priced and in good demand. Snapping turtles age slow so by harvesting too many in a specific size your loosing a certain population of them, provided you have a good solid market for a lot of turtle meat. Clams love them and in rivers they bounce around as far as population goes as flooding is not real good on their beds either when it changes the river bed in the Mississippi. Nothing better than some fresh river clams cleaned out in a bucket if cold water and then deep fried. Oh yum.

[FWS]

clamming, turtle trapping, commercial fishing are so limited in MN?

The recreational interests come first there, your DNR points out that nearly the whole total allowable catch of commercially viable fish is taken by recreational fishermen. Leaving a pretty small catch available for commercial take.

It's a common story in the coastal areas, with sport fishermen demanding more of the resource, popular fish put off limits to commercials, and so on. They've been worse than the antis in some respects with their putting net bans on ballot initiatives, sponsoring bills to award themselves proprietary access, they use the same tactics as the animal rights groups a lot too, with pics of dolphins or seals in nets, some pretty extreme hyperbole, bad data, outright lies, etc, etc.

[Gerald Schmitt]

Steve, for one thing, FWS makes a good point that sports fisherman have pushed for restrictions on commercial fisherman. Or, to put in plain terms, it comes down to folks being jealous. It is wrong in my opinion for the State Natural Resource Departments to go along with this, but often they bow to political pressure.

I also think many folks in the Natural Resource Departments do not like folks making money off of natural resources. Its fine for a hobby, but if you are making money you must be doing something wrong or unethical. You see this in burdensome regulations that make it harder to make money trapping or fishing or turtling. For example. in Minnesota turtles will basically work traps for three months, June, July, and August, they quit feeding in late August, or early Sept and will not work a trap. Snapper season starts on July 1, after they are done laying eggs (primarily in June), but for some reason you can't start taking softshell turtles until July 15. So any soft shells caught have to be released until July 16. Just one more burdensome regulation to make it harder to turn a profit.

With size limits on snappers like Minnesota has (12" long shell) means most females trapped are undersized. The 12" shell is approximately a 15# turtle, so most under 15#s are released. I've kept track, females are smaller than males, I end up releasing 80% of the females due to the size limit. So the population is protected. These size limits could be implemented in any state, so a resource could be utilized instead of being wasted.

So lots of times on a decent run of snappers, say 50-100 turtles they will average 25 pounds or so, and be 80-85% males.

Steve, your familiar with the coon season in Minnesota, for awhile we had a year around season. Why did this change? Because some trappers did not like folks trapping before they started. So the DNR, again bowing to political pressure put a season back on. Even though there was no biological reason to do so.

Or look at the 220 issue in Minnesota, you think the DNR would ever put out a public statement like this: "It is unfortunate that any dogs are killed by 220s, however it is important tool for trappers, the amount of dogs killed is very small (a tiny fraction of the amount that are killed by motor vehicles) and we stand behind trappers in being able to use this valuable tool and will defend its use in the legislature".

The really sad thing is, that once these things are lost, they almost never come back. Ways of life, handed down from generation to generation are lost forever.

[Gerald Schmitt]

TC39, for sure less animal rights activities at the trapping conventions. Back in the 80s and early 90s even some of the state trapping conventions would have protesters show up. And, I believe it was at the NTA Convention in Syracuse, New York, bomb threats were made, and the FBI came around with bomb sniffing dogs. Of course, I don't know how they could detect a bomb amongst all the lures, baits and urines.

[thorsmightyhammer]

Best thing that ever happened to lake of the woods is that they stopped the commercial fishing on it. Hands down.

The lake generates more money this way by far.