|
TC35
Jan 27, 2005 7:48:36 GMT -6
Post by trappnman on Jan 27, 2005 7:48:36 GMT -6
Apparently the WI BMP on snaring is now the accepted standard.
Washer locks- and limited washer size- 100% non entanglement situations, etc. Starts in Mid Jan so the dogs and cats aren't out there.
Very restrictive. You can click the link provided on the other thread to view the complete regulations.
Simple question- do you support these snare bmps and would you intropduce it to your state to become snaring law?
|
|
|
TC35
Jan 27, 2005 8:46:36 GMT -6
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Jan 27, 2005 8:46:36 GMT -6
I couldn't find the link, where is it located? Next this is the accepted standard by who? The IAFWA? or the State of WI? and some others who don't have snaring and want to get it in there state? Introduce it in my state? No because we have snaring on the books, and Iowa had it on there books for years. It would all depend on the circumstance, you see it depends on what your DNR or Game Dept is made of, what your trappers Assc is willing to live with or not live with to have this as a tool. How hard you lobby the agency for this tool, and if you have this tool then it doesn't mean much. I think WI trappers went to there DNR and fought for better snaring but with that ,they couldn't get what they wanted so, they went with a more restrictive deal, so they can have the opportunity to use some snares. I think both sides gave some the trappers more than the DNR, I would look at the snare issue in this way, how effective will it be? How many trappers will take advanatge of it? Your talking about areas that have no snaring, yet they want snaring, it is a joint effort between trappers and there ASSC, and the game depts, to come up with there laws in reguards to snaring. What are you willing to do to have snaring in your state? What is your game dept ready to do to ensure snaring in your state? How much meeting in the middle will there be? Where is the snaring issue as of today in MInn? Where does it look like it's going? Iowa had laws on snaring some good, some more restricive, like all snares must be staked solid, no big deal, they work better that way, loop size of 8" unless it is set within 30yrds of water then an 11" loop, deer stops are needed, no snare when extended can touch any roadside right away fence. Cable size is up to the trapper. Some say the 8" loop isn't cool for coyote snaring, well with practice and the right situations you can snare coyotes with an 8" loop. Each state will be different, unless abused I don't see many states changing what they have on there books, those that don't have snaring and want it then your comprmising with your game dept and how they view this issue as well. The more informed your legislators and game dept the better your chances for less restrictive snaring laws.
|
|
|
TC35
Jan 27, 2005 9:01:38 GMT -6
Post by trappnman on Jan 27, 2005 9:01:38 GMT -6
www.pgc.state.pa.us/pgc/cwp/view.asp?Q=163285&A=11You did not answer the full question. Please- a simple yes or no. I would like ot see if you are consistent o nthe bmp issue. The question again: do you support these snare bmps and would you introduce it to your state to become snaring law? Do you support them- yes or no?
|
|
|
TC35
Jan 27, 2005 13:39:51 GMT -6
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Jan 27, 2005 13:39:51 GMT -6
Who has labled these set of rules and regs as BMP's? Are they BMP's or state regs? Do we call then the outlawing of foot holds in states like Washington, Colorado, Mass, etc BMP's? Or are they state regulations? Voted on by the people of that state? There is a big differance from a BMP and state mandated regulations! Your trying to pass this deal in WI off as a BMP which it is not.
|
|
|
TC35
Jan 27, 2005 14:10:32 GMT -6
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Jan 27, 2005 14:10:32 GMT -6
OK I read the artical, they set it up after modeling the BMP, which is no big deal, they found it to be humane and effective. The problem lies within the Penn game commssion and the trappers assc, reguardless of BMP's or no such thing ever exsisting, these guys in both states WI and Penn, where not going to get less restrictive snare rules and regs! IN fact with out the leg work of WI I don't think the Penn boys would have anything AT THIS POINT. That is a state to state decision, thse states wanted catch and release type snaring, while many others don't care weather it's catch and release or catch and have a quick humane dispatch. Again it is the state and the issues it deals with ,then enacts and changes rules and regs, not the BMP process. A BMP is a guidline, what your showing me here is not a guideline, but a mandate to those in these states if they want to particapte in snaring, you follow there rules and regs.
|
|
Newt
Skinner...
Posts: 41
|
TC35
Jan 27, 2005 15:35:11 GMT -6
Post by Newt on Jan 27, 2005 15:35:11 GMT -6
NO
These snare regs are the begining of the END to snaring in ALL states.
They are nothing but a LIVE CATCH SNARE.And those of you in the live catch market.Know that 3/32" 7x7 wont hold a coyote "long". Thats why those who snare for the live catch market use eather 1/8" 7x7 or 3/32" 1x19 and even 7/64" 1x19.
|
|
|
TC35
Jan 27, 2005 15:46:48 GMT -6
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Jan 27, 2005 15:46:48 GMT -6
So Newt who is to blame for this? The BMP Process? or would it be the very states that came up with this configuration? The states Game Depts? Bad work on the end of the trappers assc in these states? WHO do we put the blame on? I mean this is what this thread is all about right?
|
|
Newt
Skinner...
Posts: 41
|
TC35
Jan 27, 2005 16:03:35 GMT -6
Post by Newt on Jan 27, 2005 16:03:35 GMT -6
The trappers. I have preached to the PA trappers about this. But they would'nt listen. NOW I hope that I am wrong. But what's it gona look to someone finding coyotes running around with chewed off snares around there necks ? How about the ones that are found dead with a chewed off snare around there festered up and infected necks ?
|
|
|
TC35
Jan 27, 2005 16:11:57 GMT -6
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Jan 27, 2005 16:11:57 GMT -6
I understand your point and to be truthful if all I was offered was this deal, I would say thanks but no thanks will push foward with our agenda to get practical and time proven snare methods passed. My point is BMP or not, this outcome would have been the same, they chose to take what was offered, WI had the benfit of Iowa and Michigan snare laws to have the game dept to look at and try to get more practical things passed, they choose to go there route, and they have snaring albeit it for a short period of time and with many restrictions. PA did the same, know they have coyote snaring but in a catch and release way, sometimes paitance is better than running and gunning.
|
|
Newt
Skinner...
Posts: 41
|
TC35
Jan 27, 2005 16:18:41 GMT -6
Post by Newt on Jan 27, 2005 16:18:41 GMT -6
Yea!!! They'll have Catch and Release all right!!!
|
|
|
TC35
Jan 27, 2005 23:05:28 GMT -6
Post by DaveLyons on Jan 27, 2005 23:05:28 GMT -6
Very Interesting post. In my opinion the trappers of Wis. have cause the countries Trappers many problems with there snare BMP's. When will a state test the lethal snare? A lethal snare is no different then the 220 or 330 or any kill trap of that matter. Me personally I like quick dead coyotes since MI has yet to change to the WI method of snaring I am happy but the word isn't good in MI. What really ticks me off is if snaring is going to be restricted to private land only then WHO cares when I snare. And if I can snare fox and coyotes WHY can I not snare coon or mink!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Dave
|
|
|
TC35
Jan 28, 2005 7:13:17 GMT -6
Post by trappnman on Jan 28, 2005 7:13:17 GMT -6
WI, Ohio, WV, now PA and then ?
All based on bmps becoming law.
My point is simply this- exactly like the snaring bmps- the coon bmps are not the be all, end all in research.
both severely restrict rights with no real research backing it up..On snaring- one simply has to point to Iowa. I cannot imagine a state that gets more hunting dogs in it- yet Iowa has the least restrictive snare laws anywhere.
Why could Iowa...or SD...etc be the shinng example?
I do agree- the WI regs are a major blow to effective snaring. Personally- I doubt if you will ever get more relaxed options. Life and politics is good at taking away opportunities- selodm giving any back.
|
|
|
TC35
Jan 28, 2005 8:22:39 GMT -6
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Jan 28, 2005 8:22:39 GMT -6
Why could Iowa...or SD...etc be the shining example. I'll tell you why, because they have good trappers assc, and trappers that won't settle for just a bone! They want the meat with the bone and have good dialog with the DNR and G,F,&P in there respective states, there close to there legislators, and there people who sit on the game commision boards. Again when I say laws are state to state they really are, and it is up to who has power and what base of people they worry about pleasing. I feel the more connected/rural a state is the more the people in power, can relate too and want to please the farmer/rancher, and outdoorsman. With Iowa, you have Ron Andrews and others working for trappers, and Iowa has never been one to change there game laws without a real proven need, alot of there laws are old, some could be updated, but unless they see a real need proven to them to make things better meaning for the sportsman, they won't open the books. Education is key too, you have alot of great snaremen in Iowa and SD, and you don't here of alot of problems with snaring in these states either. The snare deals in these states you like to call BMP"s, I wouldn't call them that as not a single other snaring tool was tested, that I know of. There was no other snaring mentioned as being a viable option, they wanted all critters to be alive, that was there whole criteria for there snaring to pass in these states. That is close to saying you can use up to 280 conibears on land but they must keep all animals alive, a BMP? No a state mandate as to what they want, which is very limited liability. These trappers took the deal offered. It all comes down to the states, that is a fact.
|
|
|
TC35
Jan 28, 2005 9:03:53 GMT -6
Post by nib420247 on Jan 28, 2005 9:03:53 GMT -6
yes, it is a fact that all states have the right to choose all there own regs, but without the bmp's, would they have decided to use those laws, or would the trappers have had a chance to vote on what they wanted? that we will never know for sure, and in my state of NY, we cant snare, but if we could, I'd want the choice of atleast a 1/8 in cable, atleast a camlock, entangelment, or it wouldent be worth it to me, but I would still fight to get it as an option for someone else who thought it was an option, and at very least, they should be able to choose a bad or a deer stop and why cant they snare beaver, coon, and mink. Why only canines? Does PA have that many canine? is there that many canine trappers there? I know there are lots of yotes in NY near zags but dident think there were many in PA ;D
|
|
|
TC35
Jan 28, 2005 9:06:09 GMT -6
Post by trappnman on Jan 28, 2005 9:06:09 GMT -6
I give up. You are so inconsistent and yet try to play the credibility game.
I asked you a simple question- do you back this coon bmp and support it.
Can you possibly answer that particular question?
Yes or no.
Yousay you want an honest debate- then quit sideskirting the question-
Yes or no?
Do you support this bmp study- that is now becoming the model for the nation it appears-
Yes or no?
|
|
|
TC35
Jan 28, 2005 9:11:38 GMT -6
Post by trappnman on Jan 28, 2005 9:11:38 GMT -6
Since all states dept are involved in the BMP prosess- nay, endorses them- your words...I take it that this includes PA?
If you- I would say the PA game commission knows what a BMP is?
If so- I take theri definition as lited in their regulationms.
THEY call it a bmp study- cause that is what it was.
Didn't test everything- wow- so a BMP test should test EVERY OPTION?
Have you read the results of the WI tests to know what exactly they tested? Many methods and many snare types were tested over a multi year priod. Out of this- came the RECOMMENDED snares were as you read.
Most other locks and methods failed the humaneness test. Kinda like...oh, coon traps did.
So you are going to try to avoid the question by claiming this wasn't a bmp study?
Sorry-
So- yes or no?
|
|
|
TC35
Jan 28, 2005 9:59:44 GMT -6
Post by nib420247 on Jan 28, 2005 9:59:44 GMT -6
I think anyone who reads the regs, should come up with the same conclusion, BMP's were mentioned in the reg's for PA, thats all you should need to believe that these WILL become laws in the future. I would have said the same thing in the 60's when the gov. started doing studies on car safety, use of seatbelts, etc. you seen how that went, right, do you think everyone should have to wear a seatbelt? everyone? what about my Charger...made before the law, should I have to put some in? how about the emissions laws, should I have to pass that test cause some tree hugging hippie says its dangerous to the environment? Should I have a choice or should I be told this is the only way, period? As far as I'm concerned, screw the BMP's, or ANY LAW that makes me change my ways, because of what someone else thinks! Should I be able to say that I think people in California should have to wear motorcycle helmets? NO, I dont live in CA, and I dont ride a bike, so what position would I be in to say what is or isnt right, none, nore do I think anybody should have any say in what I do as far as trapping in my state, unless your a trapper from my state I dont think what you say should be used to make a conclusion about anything in my state. If you trap coon in virginia with #1 longspring and think it would hold any of my coon you are mistaken, and I woulden't tell you you should use 1.75 for yotes in kansas, because they are very diff. areas and call for diff. traps, procedures, stakeing, bait, etc. all with different outcomes. basically I'm sayin that unless the BMP's were conducted in my area, with my traps, in my sets, and the animals were checked by me and passed my standards for humaneness then I'd say make them a rule of thumb, maybe, law that everyone should follow, NEVER! you would have to be ignorant to say a yote from Texas is the same as one from NY, or a coon from NY is the same as one in WA, so how come the yotes get diff bmp's and coon dont? or how could they be judged the same way? with your so perfect bmp's they count broken teeth, how foolish is that, could a different trap not broke the tooth in the same circumstance? how do you know that that yote didnt break its tooth on a rock before he steped on the trap, or pulled a muscle chasin a rabit before he decided to take the easy meal in the dirt hole, you dont and that is a flaw when you dont start off with the same thing you will never end the same, you cant compare apples to oranges, yotes to coon, and you cant compair my coon in my traps to your coon in your traps,
|
|
|
TC35
Jan 28, 2005 13:56:16 GMT -6
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Jan 28, 2005 13:56:16 GMT -6
As far as I'm concerned, screw the BMP's, or ANY LAW that makes me change my ways, because of what someone else thinks. Nib, that is the attitude that will get trapping outlawed in states! Ask those in Washington, Colorado etc. Sadly public perception can be our biggest enemy or can be our biggest friend, it is up to us to decide, with the screw you attitude, I know where there going to fall with you! It is what the people in your state percieve you as and your equipment and the way they perceive your methods and techniques, and then voted upon that will decide the outcome of trapping in every state! You can have fact/scientific based studies or you can do the ol' number 2 slapping your hand, see what one will win over more votes? Educating the people in the middle and showing them the facts from BMP's will help trapping in many, many states. Some states may never have to worry about it, because there rural and will always be rural states, where the anti's don't like to tread much. Tman your BMP in WI, was not a unbias testing procedure, they didn't go into looking for the best snaring tools or techniques period, I think they went into it looking for the best Live snaring techniques to use, and yes with that tool and what they wanted and to test that system up on animal welfare issues, your not going to have alot of passing equipment. I also bet if they test the collarum, that would pass as well, what that STATE WANTS FOR SNARING! Newt said it best the trappers in WI and PA are there own worst enemys, by taking the live snaring and leaving all the rest on the table, but and that is a BIG BUT, that was up to those people involved in those 2 states! If another state wants snaring and wants to use this tool, for dead critters, then don't settle for anything less, or don't bother at this time! A bmp test will test many different sizes and modifications of traps, you have seen this with the Coyote BMP both East and West and the coon BMP !These are living documents, because they will be added to as new tools and more tools are tested!
|
|
|
TC35
Jan 28, 2005 14:22:59 GMT -6
Post by trappnman on Jan 28, 2005 14:22:59 GMT -6
is that a no?
|
|
|
TC35
Jan 28, 2005 18:17:42 GMT -6
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Jan 28, 2005 18:17:42 GMT -6
yes tman I would say that to be a NO!
|
|