|
Post by bblwi on Dec 16, 2005 17:46:00 GMT -6
Why would a DNR person want to contribute if everyone was going to second guess what they say anyway or their accused of being too green, too soft, not knowing anything about trapping. That is why all wardens in WI go to trapper school at our fur shed. In the present situation if I was a biologist and all the trapper groups were waiting to see what the next biologist said so they could jump on them I would wait until there was a process that would take this all the way and we deal with what it is if we have input or not whether it works or not or whether it is practical or not. They will enforce the law whatever it is is. It is my responsibility to become the best trapper I can be. I have know problem working with others to help me do so. If this process would have started with a better shared and empowered outcomes by each side we probably would have learned more, have better methods and probably fewer trap change recommendations than are floating around now. I agrees with Steve MChewk on the DTM. What a cheap Hollywood deal. If the big claim to fame for the video is that you can release the animal unharmed the most straightforward answer if you are going to let them go why catch to begin with? General Public knows little about trapping but do have some common sense and also busy lives and probably see little value in catch and release trapping even with minimum injury.
Bryce
|
|
|
Post by MChewk on Dec 16, 2005 18:22:57 GMT -6
In answer to your question Bryce...why release an animal after you catch it? The fox was released because it wasn't fox season yet....unintentional catch. Kind of like catching a domestic animal or a threatened or endangered specie. I think that has alot of merit. Guys we are trappers, we see traps and animals in traps daily. I've got kids at school who have NEVER seen neither a trap nor animal in a trap. Heck they haven't even seen a coyote or mink etc. I personally think the video HAD merit for that very reason.
|
|
|
Post by bblwi on Dec 16, 2005 18:36:06 GMT -6
You answered part of the question again. If almost all people never see a fox in their lives why should we make videos of foxes in traps and try to convince them we are kind when they are so removed from the whole concept that the idea of trapping is so remote we have to remind them that we do trap. Like going to the PTA and showing a slide program of safer chemicals that kills the worms that eat sweet corn. Most people didn't know there were chemicals on the corn in the past that were less safe and they certainly didn't think we sold them corn from fields that had worms eating on the ears. Now they are more worried about everything. If the dog in the #4 trap with teeth and a broken leg and dehydrated after a week of no checking was so successful at eliminating trapping by the antis most states would not have trapping right now. If you keep up the attitude that everyone is your enemy you will never have enough ammunition to win the battle to begin with.
Bryce
|
|
|
Post by akona20 on Dec 17, 2005 3:59:16 GMT -6
The article I referred to made a number of points.
1. That Mississippi was unlikely to enact state law for BMP's until the EU imposed the trade ban on wild fur. 2. That the EU's proposed ban on wild fur was the reason BMP's were being investigated. 3. They were addressing "the legitimate public concern for animal welfare"
I also urge everyone to take note of the last few lines of the article and ponder on future directions for the NTA.
Of the the three points listed the first two are highly important and must be noted in there important context.
The third point shows how meaningless groups in context can have a vital influence on proposed legislation. Point 3 is of course absolute rubbish biut appears to be meaningful in the context of this persons argument.
Trapping is unseen by the general public and if a true survey was taken of public concerns so called animal harm in trapping would not even be on the radar.
As was pointed out in PM by a contributor the antis use or shouild I say abuse the democratic process by trying to introduce by citizen introduced referenda and pro anti politicians trying to introduce anti trapping bills on an annual basis. I guess if that is termed representative democracy then you have to live with it but the Reform group must build a policy to counter this type of abuse which is reasonably easily done.
The process by this admission of 'public concern' is fundamenatly flawed and it is about time the various states working through BMP's understood this.
I also have a problem in dealing with government employed trappers being directors of the NTA. Surely this is a gross conflict of interest.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Dec 17, 2005 7:29:33 GMT -6
"yep I target coyotes I'm a coyote trapper", and say in a month he caught 4 coyotes, but caught 9 fox and 8 skunks and 15 possum, could we trully say he was targeting coyotes?
if he lived anywhere in the US but SD or montana, I would!
I caught 27 fox, 30+ skunks and 35+ possums- plus my coyotes and we were targeting coyotes 100%.
This arguement holds no water.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Dec 17, 2005 7:32:53 GMT -6
just as a viewpoint- I caught 27 fox in APPROVED cooyte traps, with no real damage to the coyotes.
But I could not have released any of the fox.
so what, really, does a princess releasing a fox- prove? Only that she had a vested interest in the video...nothing more, nothing less.
|
|
|
Post by coyoteman37 on Dec 17, 2005 9:17:38 GMT -6
Like I said people are forgetting what trapping IS. we need to draw a line in the sand. most bioligists are just that they dont trap. they dont understand what trappers have to go through on a daily basis nor does joe public. we need to hold accountable who started this whole mess. this has played into the antis hand look at all the bickering. 35 has still not answerd my questions. 1 who a name, started this bmp crap. 2 does this person trap? 3 does this person trap full time ? 4 why is this person doing this study? 5 how many full time trappers are doing the trapping? 6 are they letting the trapper set every trap as he wants when where and why? 7 are all trap with every and all mods being used. 8 are all traps without mods being tested? 9 are the traps being tested in all four courners of the nation. 10 are the people involved rembering that most of the targets are going to be sold for fur? 11 are they also keeping in mind that trappers should not be held responsible for non-tagets. Ie dogs cats etc.. that is OWNER RESPONSIBILTY. 12 Is the study for the trappers or for the antie? 13 when this study is over was it designed to start the end of trapping? 14 who is going to lose anything in the end--only the trapper!! 15 do the people conducting the study understand that the people trapping full time NEED to have the best tools for themselves because they support a family with these tools or are they focusing on the hobby trapper? 16 WHO is paying for this study?
|
|
|
Post by SgtWal on Dec 17, 2005 19:25:40 GMT -6
Akona20, That link to Mississippi is a very good one. They do explain many of the concerns that haunt many trappers. Again looking at New Jersey, the number of trappers dropped like a rock after the foothold ban. And as stated in the article, if an EU Fur ban IS put in place the state will be forced to put the BMPs in place with the force of law. Low prices are keeping many more experienced trappers off the line now, those that remain are more the hobby level. The only exceptions are in states where some high value fur is still available. In those states where the low prices are a problem, any additional restrictions may prove fatal to trapping, driving the numbers so far down that fur trapping may no longer be a viable tool for the state managers. Our DNR is all but begging trappers to target raccoon. But our raccoons aren't worth hauling out of the woods. So trappers are turning a deaf ear to the pleas. Coyotes are a problem to the point where they can now be taken year round with land owner permission. Again no fur value. And so on, and so on. The last thing the DNR needs now is fewer trappers, but at the same time, as stated before, to keep ANY market open they may have to codify the BMPs. To me the BMPs can be compared to an amputation for an athlete. Needed to save the life but leaving the victim unable to continue the same path as before. IF the EU gets their act together, as in my EU post, they can effectivily end fur trapping in this country by driving trapper numbers down to the point where they are no longer a market factor.
wayne
|
|
|
Post by bblwi on Dec 17, 2005 20:22:24 GMT -6
BMPs may have more influence than you would like SgtWal and or be a pain in your butt but it won't be because of the EU. That is older history than the origin of the BMPs themselves. Like it our not the fur trade has moved and will continue to do so away from the EU. The BMP practices of Korea, China and Siberia differ greatly from those of the EU. They have none and want none. The big fear we should have is not traps and how many laminations, swivels, etc. is that China is building a fur farming industry that will probably eliminate most of their needs to buy North American Fur in the future. The Chinese can and will breed, feed, raise and pelt substitutes for coons, fishers etc. and have more quality,size and uniformity at a lower price than buying North American Goods. When that happens than to do ADC work for local and state governments you may make money but you will jump whatever hoops they have in store for you.
Bryce
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Dec 19, 2005 15:13:54 GMT -6
Tman I think you missed my point, I used that in terms of target versus non target and what does that all mean. You stated you targeted 100% coyotes, that proves my point that the trapper doesn't have true control with non targets nothing new their, a part of trapping. Anyone else could claim the fox, or the possum was the targeted species, and the coyotes were the non target catch. That is why in the BMP testing the only animals that count are the species being tested no non targets are looked at.
C37, it was not 1 man who said,"gee I think we need a BMP" it was a comittee of people, from all aspects that looked into the whole process. Your question 2 and 3 can be let go unanswered as not 1 person in the US started the BMP's. question 5 I don't know about all of them but the ones I know have trapped for many years part time and fulltime. Question 6 as far as the coyote and fox BMP's yes their were no restrictions of where you could or couldn't set traps, aside from something that may add injury to the trapped animal, Barb wire fencing or the such. Question 7 any traps that were tested have been pre qualified as traps used by the majority of trappers, you had mod traps and non mod traps tested. Some of the non mod traps passed the BMP"s as well. Q9- I don't know about all 4 corners but both eastern US and western US states and trappers have particpated in the testing. Q10. YES all animals were to be shot in the head with a .22 caliber and then went of for testing, nothing different than most trappers do! Q11 Yes NO NON TARGETS were kept for futher studying! Skipping 13 and 14 because that is your opinion. Q15 you are hard to please I just explained both mod and non mod traps were tested, the high end traps like the sterling, coyote cuff, montana, modifed bridgers, were all tested and passed!!!! Except for the coyote cuff#33 which since has undergone a wider offset and who knows maybe retested in the future. You have many choices to choose from so were do you get that the high end professional equipment wasn't tested or didn't pass? Q16 each state has put money into this program so I suggest if you don't like that contact the SC Game dept because they are involved I'm sure of it, in one way or the other. This is a joint effort by states and federal government.
Sgt wal : bryce answered your question really well, it's not the EU you need to worry about ending trapping and trapper numbers are about as low as they have been for many, many decades, supply and demand takes care of that and if some country wants to supply fur to those who need for warmth issues, we can never compete with fur farms. Wild fur is a luxury item and will continue to be so for the most part, if you want cheap durable goods then mass production and uniformity is a much cheaper way to go.
Look at hog farms, used to be alot of farmers had a few to make some money, now you make money on hogs by mass production and that keeps the price per lb down and they make it on the mass volume of sales. A country who wanted to supply the worlds needs of fur for warmth could do so. The wild fur would still be a luxury, but less would be needed and only the best of the best would have much for offering price wise, as anything less than the hard to get could be had at a much cheaper cost through mass production of fur.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Dec 20, 2005 9:07:22 GMT -6
you would think with all the input from "experienced" trappers, it would have provided at least a hint as to correct protocal for coons.
But as we know, thats not the case.
ALL BMPS ARE NOT CREATED EQUAL.
And to give ALL a blanket endorsement, lessens the quality of ALL the bmp results.
Its like this:
Experienced trappers says "Dec 17 was a Saturday."
We all nod and say, by gosh, it was.
THen they say- "and furthermore, Dec 19 was a Monday"
Hey- thats true also- these guys know their stuff!
and then "and Dec 26th will be a Tuesday"
Hey, by gosh, thats amazing... wait a minute....
until you actually check the facts, and see that a couple of correct statements, doesn't make EVERY following statement correct.
Am I the worlds leading coon expert? not hardly...
But..I know what day of the week it is....
And when someone tells me different, I say- Hey, you don't have a clue- and saying you do- based on past results- means NOTHING.
And in my opinion- the coon bmps mean NOTHING compared to real life coon trapping.
a simple truism- GIGO. For those that don't know what this means- its simply Garbage In, Garbage Out.
If your protocal was WRONG- and other protocals were ignored- its GIGO.
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Dec 20, 2005 16:02:14 GMT -6
And when someone tells me different, I say- Hey, you don't have a clue- and saying you do- based on past results- means NOTHING.
Past results is called experiance correct? Otherwise how do you gain experiance?
And in my opinion- the coon bmps mean NOTHING compared to real life coon trapping
Real life coon trapping wouldn't get the 1.5 a passing score either. Look how most coon trappers set their traps to take coon,mink and rats, it is either staked solid to the bank or on a drowning wire. Those that drag do so for some reasons, I did to allow the coons access to higher ground due to ever changing water flows when I trapped them, but most don't drag coons.
The drowning is a non issue at this "time" in concerns with the BMP, so it is a non issue with the states as well. The states will continue on as they have with there past rules and regs, I say that with a strong opinion. Find your 1,000 year coon guys and ask them if their taking the time to drag those coon or staking solid or running drowning wires, I bet the majority are not dragging their coons. There finding sign, gang setting, and don't care if there is cover or no cover available there running and gunning, staking solid or drowning there catch.
|
|
|
Post by robertw on Dec 20, 2005 20:22:19 GMT -6
Trappincoyotes35;"And in my opinion- the coon bmps mean NOTHING compared to real life coon trapping"
The BMPS will NEGATIVELY affect coon trapping and harvest in some of the the higher coon producing states (Iowa, Nebraska, Indiana and Minnesota come to mind) especially in regard to check times (especialy on drowning sets) and the usage of conibears and snares.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Dec 21, 2005 9:19:48 GMT -6
Robert- aren't you a laison between the BMP committee and the FTA?
-------------------------------------------- sorry- drowning is NOT a non issue with the bmp committee.
Drowning is VERY much an issue- as the bmp committee refused...you read that right REFUSED to endose drowning as a dispatch method for coon- stating that it NEVER will be an OPTION because they did not consider it HUMANE.
Not only that- they REFUSE to endorse HOLDING COON IN WATER as HUMANE. THUS none of the bmp tests were conducted on coon held in the water.
BTW- I'd have to consider those desgining the coon bmp protocal as being very inhumane- why delibrately make protocal to indice coon to chew? Seems common sense like to try to use protocal that DOESN't promote immediate chewing. Sigh.
Ask those 1000 a year coon men- how many are 1) snaring (that covers most of Iowa) or 2) using bodygrips on land.
Now- the few true 1000 coon men out there using footholds for traps in water- cause I'll flat out GAURUNTEE you that there is no man out there taking 1000 coon a year in dryland footholds- if they are either 1) using drowning sets (like we do in the upper midwest on 3 day checks) or 2) holding the coon in water.
And that takes care of the rest of them.
No big numbers coon man stakes solid on the bank at water sets- like the protocal insists- for 3 reasons
1) set is ruined 2) visible coon on the bank 3) loosing coon to chewing
And thats just the way it is in the real world of coon trapping.
and btw- how many true 1000 a year coon men do oyu think are out there? I think you would have fingers left if counting on your hands....
|
|
|
Post by robertw on Dec 21, 2005 10:57:03 GMT -6
Trappnman;"Drowning is VERY much an issue- as the bmp committee refused...you read that right REFUSED to endorse drowning as a dispatch method for coon- stating that it NEVER will be an OPTION because they did not consider it HUMANE. "
There is more at stake here than understood at first glance.
In MY opinion it is in trappers best interest that drowning sets ARE NOT ADDRESSED in the Raccoon BMP. This was an extremely controversial issue amongst the BMP Committee members and this was decision was not reached easily.
Suffice to say that both National Trapping Organizations (FTA & NTA) representatives agreed with this approach in the BMP.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Gappa on Dec 21, 2005 14:27:07 GMT -6
Don't care if they agree with it or not. Cause- bottom line- its still an OPINION.
I disagree with it- always have, always will.
And if drowning is a verbooten issue- how about holding in water?
|
|
|
Post by robertw on Dec 21, 2005 20:04:52 GMT -6
How about holding in water?
Well..I approached Dave Hamilton about this (because it is a common and widely used practice) and Dave's explanation was that they could not evaluate or recommend this practice as they were afraid that it would be very easy for the Anti's to make this look bad in a video showing a raccoon in the water with ice floating past him.
With the current trend by many DNRS to be politically correct it all comes down to the welfare of an individual animal being more important than the welfare of the entire species. In other words it is ok for the entire population to die of distemper or parvoe but you can not cause a single animal any discomfort when trying to manage the resource.
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Dec 21, 2005 20:24:07 GMT -6
With the biologist that we have in the DNRs it all comes down to the welfare of an individual animal being more important than the welfare of the entire species. In other words it is ok for the entire population to die of distemper or parvoe but you can not cause a single animal any discomfort when trying to manage the resource
In some cases not all by any means. Depends on the game depts and who they have on board and which area of the US your talking about. Political aspects come into play in alot of game depts, but then that isn't all bad in all states either.
In MY opinion it is in trappers best interest that drowning sets ARE NOT ADDRESSED in the Raccoon BMP.
I second that as well, many think because it isn't talked about or is tested that all this will come to be written law, amny talk about the game depts and what they will do becuase they have "so much" riding on the BMP's, I say many won't rock the boat much and we will not see much regulation in states that view trapping in a good light, and those that will use the BMP's I feel are/were headed in that direction without the BMP's. I contend the data will help strengthin those states that have good people in place and are looking out for the people and welfare of all game in their states. No matter how you slice it public perception and the people working in the DNR's and Game Depts are crucial aspects into it all.
|
|
|
Post by robertw on Dec 21, 2005 22:38:22 GMT -6
Trappincoyotes35, I edited my above posting from what you origionally copied. I hadn't worried about anyone interpreting it in anything but a generalization.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Gappa on Dec 25, 2005 9:59:14 GMT -6
So the coon bmps don't want to rest protocal other than their own, the bmp committee doesn't want to test drowning and they also don't want to touch the holding in water issue.
I think the "don't talk about it, don't tell about it" line is ridicculus. Plain and simple. No other word describes it. If animal welfare is the aim of the bmp studies- such statements decredit this aim. Everyone is afraid of the freaking antis- I'm afraid of all the "trappers" that know better.
And one thing I have to say- I have NO respect for any coon trapper that went along with this coon protocal- you sir- should just have said NO.
Said- its bullshlt and I'll have no part in it. Said- loud and clear- COON CHEW- and heres what we do about it...
I think the coon bmp committeee should stop jumping every time the vets council say to jump.
Some people say- if trappers had all the input- the antis could challenge it.
Well, I say- since the antis have had all the input- I'LL CHALLENGE IT!
And the Vets Council and the makers of the Olsen Scale can certainly be classified as antis-
Well, at least they still are targeting coon- which is about the only reality they have left.
The more I hear about the coon bmps- the more I think the whole thing stinks-
lets sum up- the bmp committee refuses to touch the water issue, makes protocal to ENSURE the coon will chew the maximum amount the maximum number of times..and then they act apologetic that the traps failed?
Please- how freaking stupid do you think we are.
Waste of money, waste of time, waste of effort- all for a "study" that isn't worth the paper is might someday be printed on.
Bottom line- the coon bmps are based on fantasy, not reality.
|
|