NOTICE TO BMP

[sinrud]

Some Trappers are Pro BMP and some Trappers are Anti BMP. This is a personal choice. HOWEVER - we can all agree improper language and recommendations are wrong period. We have spent two years in contact educating the BMP on Improper language. Their has been no change and, in fact, the problems have escalated. Because of this we have sent the following letter to the IAFWA/BMP. It is our hope that others will share their concerns with them as well.

Gordon Batcheller, BMP Chair
NY State DEC
625 Broadway
Albany, NY. 12223-4754

Date: 3/18/06
RE: Letter dated 12/21/05

Mr Gordon Batcheller,
Although I appreciate you responding to my letter dated Nov. 17, 2005 it failed to address the issues presented.
These issues refer to documented language and equipment exclusions based on improper language and exclusions of certain cable types.
Since the I.A.F.W.A./B.M.P. has failed to recognize and correct these issues in a timely manner we are compelled to proceed with legal action either through a Legislative process or legal counsel with the assistance of trappers and state and/or national associations.

The I.A.F.W.A./B.M.P. has been aware of these problems since June of 2004. Shortly after receiving your letter I received a phone call from the IAFWA in house attorney, Carol Bambery, suggesting a conference call. I was informed this conference call would take place after my letter was reviewed and discussed. This apparently has not been done in the past three months and the I.A.F.W.A. / B.M.P. continues to promote improper materials which shows an intent to disregard such issues.
The Raymond Thompson Company, Thompson Snares is the oldest, most recognized and respected snare manufacturing business in the world. Established in 1925 this company, through it’s research and development, created what is known as the Modern Steel Snare bringing snaring and capture techniques out of the dark ages. This company continues to design and develop new equipment necessary to keep up with the ever changing functional requirements set forth by agencies.
Failure to consult with this entity has resulted in libelous, misleading, bias and unwarranted language and an exclusion process resulting in continued loss of business to this and other legitimate manufacturers, viable and reasonable equipment and unfair restrictions on the trapping community. To exclude consultation with this business, other equally responsible businesses and the professional trapping community in general is synonymous with the auto industry excluding design engineers in their process. While the process may be somewhat scientific the resulting product is riddled with fault.

Furthermore we understand the reason for the conception of the B.M.P. and who its’ benefactors are. The B.M.P. was created based on an unwritten “gentlemen's” agreement between the U.S. and European Community in an effort to promote U.S. Fur Trade within the European Community. The majority of European countries have no such programs and, in fact, have little or no control regarding trap methods. Major funding for this project is through the International Fur Trade Federation and the U.S.D.A. The Fur Trade Federation is interested in Fur Sales rather than Trap Methods. We also recognize the fact that the B.M.P. has been driven well beyond the scope of the original purpose.
While it is true the I.A.F.W.A./B.M.P. recommendations are to the discretion of state agencies the influence of the I.A.F.W.A./B.M.P. is enormous. Many state agents are members of the I.A.F.W.A. and these recommendations are considered as approved and accepted. This is much like the unwritten gentlemen’s agreement between the I.A.F.W.A./B.M.P. and the European Community. This results in states adopting such recommendations into regulatory requirements.
By distributing findings to state agencies based on faulty information and highly selective devices creates a false impression that non tested devices are not acceptable. When this occurs many perfectly qualified and proper devices become restricted simply from lack of testing resulting in loss of effective equipment selection having no connection with humane methods whatsoever and may very well reflect on Fair Trade Law. In June of 2006 Samara Truso noted “One of the goals of the I.A.F.W..A. is to create “standardized” and uniform equipment”.

The use of written materials continuing false, misleading, bias, libelous and preferential language has gone on since the B.M.P. process began. The advice and instruction of a very small selection of device makers has also been induced within the program creating studies in favor of a very small group.

Furthermore, many trappers and state / national organizations have concerns pertaining to the I.A.F.W.A./B.M.P. are as follows:

Exclusion of trappers advice and input.
Recommendations are not made available for review by the trapping community.
Failure to consult with all primary device manufacturers.
Creating equipment design criteria which is best left to the manufactures.
Failure to check accuracy of information.
Selective advisement for a small group of manufacturers.
Recommending unreasonable time check requirements on trap sets.

Once again, we enclose accurate information for your review and samples of our current design developments.

We are requesting immediate response to these issues. Without this we can only proceed in a manner best suited for correcting these issues.

cc: Don MacClauchlan / I.A.F.W.A. 444 North Capital St N.W. Suite 725 Washington D.C. 20001

Cordially,
R.L. Sinrud


Raymond Thompson Company
Thompson Snares

[trappincoyotes39]

These issues refer to documented language and equipment exclusions based on improper language and exclusions of certain cable types.

What cable types? Was not your snare tested in the latest BMP"s? 1x19 was tested in 3 ways 1x19 with NWRC cam lock, 1x19 washer lock, and the 1x19 THOMPSON relaxing lock.

The Raymond Thompson Company, Thompson Snares is the oldest, most recognized and respected snare manufacturing business in the world.(opinion) Established in 1925 this company, through it’s research and development, created what is known as the Modern Steel Snare bringing snaring and capture techniques out of the dark ages. This company continues to design and develop new equipment necessary to keep up with the ever changing functional requirements set forth by agencies.
Failure to consult with this entity has resulted in libelous, misleading, bias and unwarranted language and an exclusion process resulting in continued loss of business to this and other legitimate manufacturers, viable and reasonable equipment and unfair restrictions on the trapping community.

What losses have you incured? How many people can call themselves snare manufactures? The BMP's are not a list that is set in stone and if not on the list made illegal accross the board. Why should the BMP committe need to consult you? If a state decides to make law changes or have the law on the book of snaring being illegal and make snares illegal are they liable to you? I think not. The BMP's can not test all traps or snares and like other groups that test products not all get tested nor do all acheive the 5 star rating. It doesn't in itself make your products illegal or anyone else who has a product for sale illegal. I bet many could name unfair restrictions placed on them by STATE's changing game laws and trapping laws, nothing to do with the BMP"s as they are not restricting anyone. Some states you can bait game others you can not, some you can snare in others you can not, the people of each respective state makes their laws not the BMP committe.

Recommendations are not made available for review by the trapping community.
Failure to consult with all primary device manufacturers.
Creating equipment design criteria which is best left to the manufactures.
Failure to check accuracy of information.
Selective advisement for a small group of manufacturers.
Recommending unreasonable time check requirements on trap sets.

Why does the BMP need to advise all device manufactures? If you see on the trap side they list the trap tested and also state,any device that meets the specifications is considered a BMP device, regurdless of brand or source of modifications.

They also state other commercialy availble traps,modified traps, or other capture devices not yet tested may perform as well as, or better than, the listed BMP traps! Does that sound like they are looking for every state to pass these as written law?

In June of 2006 Samara Truso noted “One of the goals of the I.A.F.W..A. is to create “standardized” and uniform equipment

First off I think you meant 2005 as the quote, also don't try and take this out of context, What she meant is for trap manufactures to come to a clear and consise method of trap branding meaning, if they make a #2 size trap that they all have the same dimensions to be classified as such and so on. The problem lies in no uniformity and a #3 foot trap can run the cambit when it comes to size of the trap. I can tell you a #3 Montana is not like a #3 bridger in size, and a #4 Longspring and a #4 Victor Jump is far from being the same size. I see no problem with allowing some tolerances in size but to be uniform would help trappers and exspecialy new kids/adults getting into trapping to know their state rules and regs and conform by having traps labeled as such and not have to measure or worry is that a legal trap in my state.If a #3 is the limit then a person buying any #3 knows it is a legal trap in their state!

Also trappers having NO input is bunk, as what has been tested so far came from a polling of trappers and the list was made using the most widely used models for each species to date. Also new and unique capture devices are looked at as well. This is a living document and should be treated as such, and as time, funding, and equipment allows more should/will be tested. The sky is falling attitude is unwarranted in my book and I also relize your looking out for the betterment of your company can't blame you, but to state you have not had the door opened for you or your equipment is false, as your snare was tested.

To promote a lawsuit will be a real kick in the pants for all trappers as the anti's would love to see nothing more than us all argue amongst ourseleves, what with the NTA issue, the BMP"s heck who needs PETA and HSUS we are our greatest downfall, as they sit on the sidelines needing to do nothing more than watch and count their contributions.

Lawsuits are a dime a dozen and to look at that as a postive way of change isn't going to help trappers one bit, may fatten your pocket but the downfall will be at the exspense of trappers. I can also tell the high end traps tested where a big part of respected trappers wanted them to be and that is how they ended up on the table to be tested.

Look at the value these BMP's have brought, really sit back and think that organizations came into this and to see trapping as something other than a dirty stepchild and what it will bring to trapping and the information that has been gathered to date, I see it as a big compliment to trapping and that far outweighs in my book the petty negatives and the "what about me" attitudes of some.

[dj88ryr]

trappincoyotes35 said:

Why should the BMP committe need to consult you?

Because he is trying to be involved and may have a lot more knowledge on this particular subject than the committee. The fact that the committee is unresp[onsive further proves the point that many more trappers are starting to realize, this process is a FARCE!!!
Those lending their name to it are no better than Solman and Wills and the directors who continue to allow the fleecing of the NTA. You have all sold your souls.

[sinrud]

Daniel Boone...

Thank you for your opinion and input. I do not have time to respond to every issue brought up but you have several questions needing a response so I offer it as follows:

These issues refer to documented language and equipment exclusions based on improper language and exclusions of certain cable types.
While page 79 of BMP Education Manual states “modern cable devices are made from stranded steel cable, page 78 mentions only 7x7 and 7x19 multi strand cable. The exclusion of 1x19 single strand cable creates false and misleading assumptions and is inappropriate.
Cable Devise:“A device designed to capture a furbearer by use of multi-strand steel cable.”
Fact: Cable devices have been made of 1x19 single-strand cable for over 80 years.
Non-Powered Cable Device: “A trap using multi-strand steel cable that closes when an animal passes through it without the aid of a spring or other powering device.”
Fact: Non-powered Cable Devices have been made of 1x19 single-strand cable for over 80 years.
Powered Cable Device: “A trap using multi-strand steel cable designed to catch and hold an animal with the aid of a powering device, such as springs.”
Fact: Powered Cable Devices have been made with 1x19 single-strand cable for over 80 years.
Snare: “A restraining device made from a cable and a locking mechanism.”
Fact: This simply allows the word “snare” to be used for a cable device.
Snare: “A term used for cable devices, and old style snares made from other materials.”
Fact: This definition is completely bias, prejudicial and misleading! It allows for the word “snares” to be consistent with cable devices while it claims a “snare is not made of multi-strand cable. A cable device is defined as using multi-strand cable while it is also states snares are made of other material.
False and prejudicial statements within your Education Manual has been presented to state agencies which will most likely adopt said statements within their Education Manuals and Regulations causing our losses to continue to grow and we will most likely be forced to take legal action.
Several state regulations say “Modern snares are made of multi-strand steel cable”. (Also false)

What cable types? Was not your snare tested in the latest BMP"s? 1x19 was tested in 3 ways 1x19 with NWRC cam lock, 1x19 washer lock, and the 1x19 THOMPSON relaxing lock.
This was done in January of 2006 and would not have been done if we hadn’t educated them in cable types! "Relaxing Locks"! If you call 10 states for deffinitions on a relaxing lock you will get at least 4 deffinitions!

What losses have you incurred?
It is NOT OUR LOSSES we are concerned about - it’s the LOSS OF VALUABLE TOOLS TO THE TRAPPERS! We neither expect any financial gain or profit from any possible legal action. In fact we will most likely encounter considerable cost.

The BMP's are not a list that is set in stone and if not on the list made illegal across the board.
Neither was the “gentlemen' agreement” which conceived the BMP! That agreement, in my opinion, was set in Quicksand.

Why should the BMP committed need to consult you?
If you read the entire post you would realize “consulting” is not with only us. However, if a high school student took Chemistry in high school it doesn’t make him a Chemical Engineer. If he continues to mess with chemicals he will eventually blow himself up. If the BMP (and states) take a crash course in Snares, the results will be the same but the harm falls to the Trappers!

If a state decides to make law changes or have the law on the book of snaring being illegal and make snares illegal are they liable to you? I think not.
States can and do pass laws based on information. When this information is false it becomes a major problem for those the law was intended.

The BMP's can not test all traps or snares and like other groups that test products not all get tested nor do all achieve the 5 star rating. It doesn't in itself make your products illegal or anyone else who has a product for sale illegal.
Wile this may be true the study results would be presented as just that (Test Results) NOT RECOMMENDATIONS!

I bet many could name unfair restrictions placed on them by STATE's changing game laws and trapping laws, nothing to do with the BMP"s as they are not restricting anyone. Some states you can bait game others you can not, some you can snare in others you can not, the people of each respective state makes their laws not the BMP committed.
States are highly influenced by BMP RECOMMENDATIONS. Many state agents maintain membership in the IAFWA. Most members of a group play Follow the Leader.

Why does the BMP need to advise all device manufactures?
So manufactures can advise the BMP on devices and design!

If you see on the trap side they list the trap tested and also state,any device that meets the specifications is considered a BMP device, regardless of brand or source of modifications.
They also list exact material dimensions and other manufacturing criteria.

In June of 2006 Samara Truso noted “One of the goals of the I.A.F.W..A. is to create “standardized” and uniform equipment.

I stand corrected on the date - it was 2005 (type error). After two hours of discussion some concerns were mentioned about “trap size” standards and the concept of “a uniform type of cable” as well. She was unaware of 1x19 not being multi strand much like most everyone else I discussed this with.

Also trappers having NO input is bunk, as what has been tested so far came from a polling of trappers and the list was made using the most widely used models for each species to date.
If polling trappers for popular equipment is “input” then Trappers have a very limited say. Suppose the Health Department ran a poll on the 4 most popular meats resulting in, Hamburger, Pork Ribs, Chicken and Chuck Steak. They run E-Coli test on this and discover Hamburger has a higher content of E-Coli so require higher temperatures to cook it. Meanwhile meats like Porter House, Rib Eye, etc., being not tested, cooked medium rare are loaded with E-Coli. Recommendations based on limited studies are not a good thing.

The sky is falling attitude is unwarranted in my book and I also realize your looking out for the betterment of your company can't blame you, but to state you have not had the door opened for you or your equipment is false, as your snare was tested.
We are looking at TRAPPER RIGHTS TO CHOOSE RELIABLE EQUIPMENT. The “door” of 1x19 (not our company) was not opened until we began a proper education program to the BMP and States. While they now recognize 1x19 as a “different” type of cable the language continues to remain unchanged!

To promote a lawsuit will be a real kick in the pants for all trappers as the anti's would love to see nothing more than us all argue amongst ourselves, what with the NTA issue, the BMP"s heck who needs PETA and HSUS we are our greatest downfall, as they sit on the sidelines needing to do nothing more than watch and count their contributions.
Are you saying improper language and continued exclusionary processes should continue? We are not against the BMP and its’ value to the trap industry - we are against the current Methods and Procedures.

[SgtWal]

>>Also trappers having NO input is bunk, as what has been tested so far came from a polling of trappers and the list was made using the most widely used models for each species to date. Also new and unique capture devices are looked at as well.<<

www.furbearermgmt.org/documentcenter/1992_ownership-use_of_traps.pdf

Again the ONLY survey referenced is 10 years old. I see no listing of the updated survey you reference as to the most up to date information being used.
Please post the url for this more recent study, as I would very much like to see how much it changed from before.
I have heard that a new survey may be underway NOW, but nothing before that.


wayne

[trappincoyotes39]

Mr Sinrud 1x19 was not put into the manual as it has not been done being evaluated as of yet! They can't put a passing score on something they don't have all the data on!
Next you say no input yet you state you are one of the reasons 1x19 was tested, sounds like input to me? Also you think no snare manufactures were involved in this process at all? I know what 1x19 is and I use alot of it, do I know where the wires got crossed nope, but their is an ongoing study to see how this cable type shakes out. Also plenty of states with good Game Depts know what 1x19 cable is, some may need educated and those states are the ones the BMP's will really help out in.

Also fine line between strands and cores etc. The 1x19 was tested in 3 ways, yet you give no mention of that until I brought it up?

The language can not be changed until the results are in. How can it be inproper without having all the data collected and printed? How long have you had this conversation with the BMP committe? How long have you been looking for 1x19 to be tested?

I have your "snare" and I would define it very much a relaxing lock, as it doesn't stay closed unless direct pressure is kept on it. The cam lock with teeth is more like a "cinch" it bites into the cable and doesn't release much on it's own, not like a reverse washer lock or the lock on your "snare" you can pull it down but the second pressure is not applied it has some backoff.

I understand you wanting to see your product tested as you offer something that no one else does that is non galvinized cable and 1x19 is your main stay, but to say that a law suit is needed when 1. Your snare was tested. 2.You had input and someone had to listen. 3. The results of this study have not been gone through. 4. The education manual has been in the works much longer than the cable restarint issue. 5. That the manual just like hunters ed manuals change and new important information is added on a regular bases, to me is jumping the gun looking for a fight.

If you think a lawsuit will speed up the process and get you the end result your looking for then by all means go get um' tiger. l think this will work itself out much as the other BMP's have if given time. This everyone on the BMP's is out to get trappers crap gets old. No facts behind it what so ever.

[sinrud]

Daniel Boone...

I apologize for not having time to respond to your post! We are leaving on the 29th for a week long trip to solidify contacts with DNR, Federal, State, Private and Non Profit entities. Every one of these entities use exclusively 1x19 cable and recognize it as the most effective material available! What can I say? (If the Gov. insist on this cable type why should someone like the “BMP” decide to dissect it?) I will respond when I return. In the mean time if you wish to e-mail please do so.

Sounds to me like you were on the BMP committee or involved with it - am I right?

[trappincoyotes39]

I have done some things with the BMP, I also use 1x19 but I use galvinized in 5/64 and 1/16th for coyotes I still prefer 5/64ths 7x7 for beaver. My snares are setup to kill coyotes quickly, I use filed cams,choke springs, and give them enough cable to exert the pressure from the spring.