FWS you never mentioned this

[trappincoyotes39]

hey FWS you talk about opportunity and how you have adapted to bobcat trapping with cages etc, then I find this article

Seems you do not give the entire story?

A year-long campaign to place serious restrictions on trapping wild bobcats in California has hit a milestone, as California's governor signed a law banning the practice near national and state parks and other areas where wildlife is protected.

Assembly Bill 1213, which Governor Jerry Brown signed on Friday, establishes a no-trapping zone in the vicinity of Joshua Tree National Park, and directs the state's Fish and Game Commission to establish similar zones around other places in the state where wildlife is protected.

The new law, which takes effect January 1, 2014, also prohibits trapping bobcats on private land without the written permission of the landowner.

STORY CONTINUES BELOW

SUPPORT KCET
The campaign for AB 1213, also known as the Bobcat Protection Act of 2013, was prompted by a Joshua Tree resident's discovery of a bobcat trap on his land. Residents had been noticing a decline in the local bobcat population for some time. The discovery of the trap, along with local journalist Steve Brown's reporting on the trapping issue in the Twentynine Palms based magazine The Sun Runner, galvanized wildlife advocates in the Joshua Tree area and beyond.

The global price of bobcat pelts has risen dramatically in recent years, with good-sized pelts from male bobcats sometimes bringing four figures each. That's provided an incentive for increased trapping. Before Friday, the state's only limits on bobcat trapping were the season, November 24 through January 31, and a statewide limit of 14,000 cats trapped per season. Aside from those two limits, bobcat trappers could take and kill as many cats as they like, with one trapper boasting of catches of five cats a night near Joshua Tree.

As a result, the state reports that trappers took 1,499 bobcats during the 2012-2013 season, more than triple the statewide catch of 457 reported two years before. residents in Joshua Tree who'd gotten used to half a dozen regular bobcat visitors in lands adjacent to the park reported that those numbers dropped to near zero during the last trapping season.

In the version first submitted to the Assembly by Santa Monica-area Assembly member Richard Bloom, AB 1213 would have mandated a blanket prohibition on bobcat trapping statewide. Pressure from the hunting lobby forced compromise amendments that limited the ban's scope. In the version signed by Jerry Brown, trapping bobcats becomes illegal January 1 in the area inside the major highways circling Joshua Tree National Park, with the Fish and Game Commission directed to establish similarly straightforward no-trapping zones "adjacent to the boundaries of each national or state park and national monument or wildlife refuge in which bobcat trapping is prohibited."

Starting in 2016, the Commission is charged with considering similar protection of bobcats outside other conservation areas.

As we reported here at KCET earlier this year, the state's bobcat trapping program has been managed for decades based on 1970s-era bobcat population estimates that had actually been overturned in court. In his signing statement for the bill, Governor Brown announced that he will be working with the Legislature to find funding for new, more accurate surveys of just how many bobcats the state has left, and urged the Commission and the state's Department of Fish and Wildlife to update their allowable statewide bobcat take numbers based on those new surveys.

It's not the statewide ban that many bobcat fans had hoped for, and residents just outside the new no-trapping zones may find an increase in trapper activity after January 1. But it's a start to making sure the state regulates bobcat trapping more sensibly, and the proposed statewide bobcat survey promises to be another step in the right direction.

[trappincoyotes39]

Here in Missouri our bobcat season goes for Nov 15 to Jan 31 and no quota system. We can cage trap on state grounds or foothold trap on private ground the entire season.
In South Dakota You get a 8 weeks season with no quota yet. Hunting of bobcats is the same as trapping no limit your state only allows one to shoot 5 bobcats correct?

Alao your license fees much higher as well.


Love your annual reporting as well on all fur bearers

[FWS]

Yes we've discussed it, but as with many issues that are active we don't talk about them much, if at all, on public forums. There have been many issues like this over the years and aside from making guys aware that the issue exists we go silent because the antis are observing.

[FWS]

hey FWS you talk about opportunity and how you have adapted to bobcat trapping with cages etc,

Of course another way to look at it is that we adapted to cages too well for the antis .............

[trappincoyotes39]

1,500 cats statewide is not a large harvest, yet even with that smaller state wide harvest the antis are looking to make bobcat harvest a thing of the past. I really hope you have the people in your state that can nip this in the butt and not allow the anti faction so evident in California from getting much further on this issue.

It seems the antis in a few states like to be trend setters for other states. Good Luck.

Missouri had a cat harvest over 5,000 yet the habitat and prey base allow them to flourish well. I suppose they could go to a quota system at some point yet all that would do is allow diseases like feline distemper to run through a population causing more harm than a regulated harvest. AS the cat prices soften the harvest here will drop back around 3,000 or so statewide. I have head little alarms from the MO conservation dept over the cat harvested to this point.

[FWS]

Hunting of bobcats is the same as trapping no limit your state only allows one to shoot 5 bobcats correct?

No, those are tags for taking bobcats under a hunting license, and they are for personal use only. Under a trapping license cats can be taken by shooting or cage traps, there is no limit and the pelts can be sold.

I really hope you have the people in your state that can nip this in the butt

You are aware that the bill was last year right ? What's active are the provisions that are to be implemented by the commission, and it's not something any should be discussing on a public forum that is monitored. The author of that article being one of them who monitors trapping sites, who is himself an activist. The article is from his blog on a local PBS station.

It seems the antis in a few states like to be trend setters for other states.

It's actually more the national groups like, HSUS and CBD, who come into states to target issues, shop around for incidents they can exploit and write the legislation to be sponsored by whichever legislator they can recruit to carry it.

It's pretty much how they operate, here, there, and everywhere. And have for decades on issue after issue, many of which you're completely unaware of because they're 'not your issue'.

If it were only CA based anti groups we'd not see the legislation or ballot measures we have. They have neither the grass roots nor the financing to do it for the most part, and several of those groups, here and out of state are basically front groups for HSUS and Co., which is another example of how they operate, in the US and internationally.

Another thing to recognize is that, as I've pointed out before, trapping, hunting, and fishing are the latest targets for those groups that were formed AFTER the campaigns on big issues like timber mggmt. , water use, grazing, mining, development, and so on have become less lucrative and new issues were needed to keep up the cash flow. They sucked in a lot of the pros from prior issues/groups, I recognize the names of those involved.

Depending on the issue they probably get funding from HSUS and Co.

[trappincoyotes39]

Yes I am aware of HSUS and what they will try, my point is in ozone states they gain traction far quicker and with less cost than others.

I really hope you as a Californian can help beat these guys back, but your state is far easier Pickens than others as HSUS and some other groups which have California ties or bases have found out and in some states they just do not go to, for the cost and lack of approval is still overwhelming for them.

Fir example Missouri just passed a amendment to the state constitution to protect the farmers and ranchers "loose term" from a lot of anti BS by rewording the protection and inaliable right to farm and ranch in the state, this will cause anti groups a lot more time and money in order to try things as the wording helps to further protect the people of the state on issues such as a farming and ranching go.

[FWS]

my point is in ozone states they gain traction far quicker and with less cost than others.

Kinda the opposite here, it costs them a lot to push anything in CA. Ballot measures here might have become more expensive than they're willing to pay for on small issues.

I really hope you as a Californian can help beat these guys back,

Been there, done that, spent a lot doing so in the past, on this one my time and effort has been limited by needing a bit of surgery and more importantly, that my dad is nearing the end so my efforts went to him so he'd have a better quality of life, and take the pressure off mom. Got him out and about as much as I could, fed him well, find him the stuff to make it easier, safer, for him etc.

Add in several other issues I was already working on that pay.

but your state is far easier Pickens than others

In the sense that CA has an initiated ballot measure process, but they do face a fight on legislation and on our issues we usually win.

Remember that CA gets targeted a lot because of the abundance and diversity of natural resources and the activities/businesses that depend on them. So you'll see or hear more about them, but it's going on all over.

Bobcats, BTW, are not a new issue, nor is the attempt to eliminate their take or trade. That battle has been ongoing for 45 years, this is just the latest scuffle.

[trappincoyotes39]

Not because of resources but because they can get the votes needed to pass things due to population makeup wouldn't you think?

groups like HSUS really do not care about much except winning and that brings in more money for the so called cause, why spend money in some states where a costly ad campaign will have little results for them due to the population and mindset of the people.

Other sates have the same process as Calirfornia but groups like HSUS just have a harder time getting any traction in some of them.

I feel every state should be pro active and be looking for ways to limit the activities of such groups from doing harm to our natural resources.

[FWS]

Not because of resources

Sure it is, remember when I said you're not aware of things because they were 'not your issue', that's the case here. You really don't know how much has gone on here because of the sheer diversity of issues that are not issues elsewhere because they don't have the resources.

You're just speculating, I'm speaking from experience from direct observation and having worked on a lot of issues for years.

groups like HSUS really do not care about much except winning

Oh yes they do, even an unsuccessful campaign has it's rewards for them, in public exposure and strategically.

Other sates have the same process as Calirfornia but groups like HSUS just have a harder time getting any traction in some of them.

Only in a couple, but that can change as the demographics change and it will...................

Even in states like SD the shift in population is to urban/suburban voters, because that's what the trend has been nationally for decades and those are the people moving to SD as businesses go there.

Same thing happened in CA.

[trappnman]

I truly think that getting trapping recognized as a right under a states constitution, is pretty good protection from ballot initiatives- I know its not a be all to end all, but it does place that constitutional barrier in front of any anti trapping referendums

[FWS]

that getting trapping recognized as a right under a states constitution, is pretty good protection from ballot initiatives-

Thing is that none of those laws really protect methodology/method of take, ie; no real protection for the equipment. Nor do they really protect the limit to which one can trap a species.

Fishing is a Constitutional right in CA, but it is subject to regulation.

[trappincoyotes39]

No and for the most part what YOU mentioned is set by the state game depts. Hence South Dakots having NO closed trapping seasons on many species yet it doesn't have a major impact on their reproduction or population status....... Coyotes,Red Fox, beaver west river, muskrats west river, Badgers,coons in fact only mink,weasels and bobcats have a season in the western half of South Dakota and that data through the years shows trapping has no real negative impact or the season would be put into place.

What does have positive impacts is timely control at certain times of the year for those people suffering damage or loss from these types of critters. hence the reason they have no closed seasons in place.

I have brought this up to other states that having a season on trapping coyotes is well just silly, most states allow year round Hunting of such but not trapping for fear it may impact other species, just an excuse to protect things that do not need it, as clearly shown in Western SD that having no season on coyotes doesn't effect the coon population much at all. More of a thing they do not want some getting a jump on others come fur time. Western SD is not lacking coon because of a year round open trapping season on coyotes or coons,

I was asked by the Missouri Dept of Conservation what I thought of snares ? I said I used them for many,many years and are a productive tool for coyote harvest and control, far better IMO than cable restraints as they are a more efficient use of cable and yet they keep finding more tools to incorporate to harvest deer, yet when it comes to an ever increasing coyote population they will not look at it the same way. People should keep their dogs under control and the use of snares even for 60 days out of a year would be a welcome harvesting tool for coyote trappers. So much more than cable restraints. One guy agreed but said hard to do that in a state with a large roaming dog population. Easy don't allow dogs to roam onto others private property.

Each state has challenges but some it all starts with the game depts makeup and how willing they are to go to bat for multiple users groups or cater to just a few..........

regulation is alway there but it can be far more liberal in some states compared to others due to the makeup of the people of that state and how they tend to vote inside of those states. The SD ranchers have the ear of the a governor and the GFP don't think for a second they do not. They are the biggest group to keep happy or some what happy. Hence the reasons state like SD and ND are some of the most trapper friendly states there are, along with Wyoming and Montana. These states will not be changing dynamics anytime soon. That is a fact.

[FWS]

state like SD and ND are some of the most trapper friendly states there are, along with Wyoming and Montana. These states will not be changing dynamics anytime soon. That is a fact.

It's been happening for a while now,

As an example.............

U.S. Census: Montana cities continue population gains; Missoula County tops 109K


"The trend continued to move to urban areas from rural areas, with continued gains on the west side," said Mary Craigle, bureau chief of the Census and Economic Information Center at the state Commerce Department.

Craig Wilson, a political science professor from Montana State University-Billings, agreed.

"We're seeing the same trends we've seen since World War II," he said. "The first of these is the general movement from east to west. The second is the movement from rural to urban, which is extremely significant.

"The real significance of these movements is you have a gradual shift of political power from east to west and from rural to urban because both the (state) House and Senate have to be proportioned based on population."

This is what happened in CA, the political power base shifted from rural to urban, same thing happened in WA, OR, FL, AZ, CO, AK, and is happening, already happened, in MO.

As things shift HSUS and Co. go back and target states they've tried in before, such as OR and Maine, who each are facing ballot measures on issues that were on the ballot previously. And they have established a presence and have been actively working on issues in those states you mentioned, we've already seen their front groups trying to get trapping on the ballot in MT, they're in WY, they've already forced reactionary legislation in SD, passed ballot measures in MO..................

People should keep their dogs under control

That argument doesn't really work as it pertains to incidental captures, in fact, trappers need to show concern and make the effort to mitigate that. That's just political reality.

Each state has challenges but some it all starts with the game depts makeup

It's about the diversity of natural resources too, states like SD and ND do not have anywhere near the diversity of species or habitat types, nor the diversity of user/interest groups as exists in CA, they just simply don't. And that affects the 'makeup' of the agency, which has a Hell of a lot more responsibilities.

[trappincoyotes39]

Then keep the responsibilities and I will live in states that are trapper friendly and have less on their plates

Montana is and will be run by the ranching community for the foreseeable future. Those gains are self limiting as YOU stated not as many people like living in cold and snowy conditions, except those born and raised there.............

Just remember the government needs ranchers and farmers within them a lot of ground can and would be,locked out from outside hunting and fishing opportunities and those are things that people decide on when choosing to live in one state or the other. many might live in larger towns but many of them also rely on access to private ground for outdoor recreation............. Not all states have millions and millions of acres of public grounds, so their voices carry weight and will continue to do so for many years. That is political fact as well.

WE had a dog issue on a state owned area in SD dog ended up dying in a conibear trap, the GFP said the guy was in the wrong for not having his dog on a leash not the trapper which would be portrayed in some other states by their game depts...........

The story gained little reaction outside of rapid city and went away fairly quickly for most.........