|
Post by akona20 on Jul 20, 2006 20:16:35 GMT -6
Given the fact we have a number of people here who are working in the BMP area perhaps someone might like to compare and contrast the procedures in Canada and the USA on this issue. I note especially the writings of Bruce Williams of the FIC on this matter and some of the statements by AFWA and there seems to be a number of inconsistencies between the two approaches.
|
|
|
Post by akona20 on Jul 24, 2006 14:28:31 GMT -6
I guess those who work in the area must have missed reviewing the Canadian findings.
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Jul 24, 2006 15:20:33 GMT -6
Well for one they have far more lethal kill traps mentioned for there species versus the US. 2. They took more of a closer line than the US did concerning the EU.3. They are taking it to a mandatory status, where the US is not and should not be! 4. I don't agree with running all computer models for all trap types and species, as that varies within the species. 5. They have little for the lynx and I can hardly believe the only passing trap to be #3 padded as acceptable for lynx, I'm willing to bet other trap types would fair as well, wither they didn't test other traps I have no idea.6. I don't know what there standards are for footholds if they are using the same scale as the US or not? Canada can oversee their program as they see fit, and the US will do the same. I don't agree at all with making mandatory and marking of traps, many complain about the US BMP's, what would happen if we would have takin the same road as CA?
Mandatory coon trapping would be done with cubbies and conibears only! I see they haven't yet made things mandatory for coyotes I wonder why?
|
|
|
Post by akona20 on Jul 24, 2006 18:23:23 GMT -6
Getting back to the basic question, has there been any interaction between canada and the various US states. I ask the question simply because the aim is primarily the same.
As for coyotes I some how seem to remember from the depths of my mind that a number of restraining traps have been AIHTS certified and these were a Belisle footsnare, a modified Bridger 3 and a Victor 3 Soft catch.
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Jul 25, 2006 13:35:49 GMT -6
Yes there has as the US has used some of the data on kill type traps from Canada, and I believe the US has sent some data on restraint traps to canada as well. There is a differance in the two a big differance, that being Canada is mandatory and the U.S voluntary and guidlines.
The coyote issue is this: They have approved traps listed but they are not going to be mandated in 2007 like many other speices and trap types will be then. The question would be why not the coyote in 2007? I'm betting the heat from livestock producers is having some impact with this species? Making it not mandatory in 2007? They state they will give a 3 year notice as to when mandatory will come into play, so are they looking to do much more with the restraint traps and coyotes, or leave the coyote trappers alone for awhile to use other equipment?
LEGHOLD RESTRAINING TRAPS SPECIES TRAPS CERTIFIED BUT NOT MANDATORY FOR USE IN FALL 2007 COYOTE Bélisle Footsnare Oneida Victor #3 Soft Catch equipped with 2 coil springs Bridger #3 equipped with 5/16-inch offset, doubled rounded steel jaw laminations (3/16-inch on topside of jaw and ¼-inch on underside of jaws), with 4 coil springs and an anchoring swivel centre mounted on a base plate. WOLF No leghold restraining trap certified to date BOBCAT Bélisle Footsnare So as of now if your a bobcat trapper in Canada you have kill type traps or a foot snare as your option, yet the U.S found many restraining traps I believe that worked well on bobcats? Wonder why the differance?
|
|
|
Post by akona20 on Jul 25, 2006 16:30:25 GMT -6
I am not suggesting and I never have suggested that the BMP findings should be introduced as law in the USA. However Canada has taken that route which presents and interesting scenario.
I will get back to the heart of my question and perhaps rephrase it.
If Canada has certified a number of traps for specific purposes would the USA committee(s) automatically accept those traps for use in the USA for the purpose for which they are certified in Canada?
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Jul 25, 2006 18:51:47 GMT -6
Yes I suppose they would as they have taken the kill trap information from Canada and would assume they will use them in the US as acceptable for species that are the same. We meaning the U.S has tested far more foot traps I believe than Canada has.
|
|
|
Post by akona20 on Jul 26, 2006 17:22:44 GMT -6
Well then given that trappers handbooks are being prepared in the US advising what has been accepted are the Canadian cerified traps listed as such?
|
|
|
Post by Gibb on Jul 27, 2006 14:14:54 GMT -6
Akona20, it took us almost 4 years to agree on sharing testing data(Canada/USA). We have meet and formalized data sharing and just this past June had AFWA program manager attend our Fur Institute of Canada AGM in Whitehorse. Canada has a easier task in dealing with only 13 provinces and territories, verses 50 states. It is hard to compare the AIHTS agreement to BMPs. We have for the most part already developed most of the killing data for most species. Speaking for Canada only we already had mandatory trapper training and in most areas already had laws in place for body gripping traps. The AIHTS is in fact an agreement to prevent the banning of wild fur into the EU. One of the nice facts on the agreement is that the EU must follow the same agreement when trapping in Europe including pest control. The AIHTS and BMPs are two different agreements but it boils down to keeping markets open for the flow of wild furs. Cheers Jim
|
|
|
Post by akona20 on Jul 27, 2006 21:45:07 GMT -6
Jim,
Thank you for your input.
|
|