|
Post by SgtWal on Jul 21, 2006 9:12:30 GMT -6
Just a brief check on where we all stand.
|
|
|
Post by Wiley on Jul 24, 2006 11:05:15 GMT -6
These polling results are meaningless unless they are conducted after a complete understanding of both the pros and cons on the issue. I refuse to participate in these types of forum polls because of their limited value.
~SH~
|
|
|
Post by akona20 on Jul 24, 2006 14:26:51 GMT -6
Have to disagree with you there. If folks are uninformed on the matter who is to blame?
The trapping organisations? Those undertaking the studies? The trappers who are refusing to get involved?
For example did the departments give a comprehensive handout with each licence this year?
The add in the latest FHA Journal by ALWA for US trappers is hardly a rousing piece of information, more like a little self drum beating.
|
|
|
Post by SgtWal on Jul 24, 2006 15:39:57 GMT -6
Just a little check on how we see them TODAY.
Like Scarlet O'Hara said " Tomorrow is another day." I may try this again in 6 months or so to see if things change.
wayne
|
|
|
Post by SgtWal on Nov 1, 2006 16:06:37 GMT -6
Interesting, that with all the posting on here the results run 5 to 1 on the negative side.
wayne
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Nov 1, 2006 22:39:09 GMT -6
Yeh seeing how it is based on a whopping 20 votes and we know nothing on who voted or what they trully know about BMP's or have been led to believe without having done any research.
|
|
|
Post by SgtWal on Nov 2, 2006 14:45:09 GMT -6
This IS the BMP/Wildlife Managment board, and of the roughly 80 posts available around 50 are BMP related. With all you have presented and done to promote the BMP's, on this and other forums, I would have thought the numbers would have been more equal. UNLESS, there are informed people out there who, for whatever reason, just don't like them. As to the numbers about 10% of those looking at the thread voted. Assuming many were returnees who couldn't vote, that may be a low estimate. No poll, however scientific, questions every possible person who may be impacted by the subject. Polls aimed at a specific narrow range of participants tend to be deliberatly slanted to get a preconcieved result. Like asking only PETA members about hunting with dogs. If you feel this is that wrong then post your own and see what answers YOU get.
wayne
|
|
|
Post by sinrud on Nov 23, 2006 16:04:45 GMT -6
What's the object of this pole? Seems to me about 90% of the trappers know about 10% of the BMP agenda and process while 90% of the BMP people know about 10% of trapping process etc! I have a thought (oops!) - If ya don't like what goes on - do something about it. If ya don't know what's going on - get educated. Sinrud
|
|
|
Post by SgtWal on Nov 23, 2006 19:22:41 GMT -6
The goal was to get a feeling from all, even the lurkers, without getting into a fight over symantics. You would think that with all that's posted here both pro and con, that most folks would have a fairly firm idea on how they feel. Since only about 10% of people feel strongly enough to actually write letters or make calls on an issue, I was thinking that the response would come close to reflecting the visitors attitudes in general. With all the give and take to see such a lopsided result seems to indicate that the BMP's just ain't selling. At least among the trappers on this site. Also the idea that those that oppose your side are just uneducated in the issue is a common slur used to belittle and insult your opponent. After all, all smart, educated, and informed people support me.
wayne
wayne
|
|
|
Post by robertw on Dec 17, 2006 9:32:38 GMT -6
Might be time for a new poll to see if opinions have changed.
|
|
|
Post by SgtWal on Dec 18, 2006 18:25:48 GMT -6
Good idea. Would anyone like to write a list of questions? I tried to be neutral in wording but still cover all the levels.
wayne
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Dec 19, 2006 16:40:51 GMT -6
First should be how much research has one done on the bmp's?
Then has the BMP's to date effected your ability to trap?
Do you see the BMP's as a plus or minus down the road when dealing with anti trap legislation?
Does having an org like the IAFWA backing and promoting trapping in the national press with the BMP"s to you a good thing or a bad thing?
|
|
|
Post by robertw on Dec 19, 2006 21:53:00 GMT -6
Sgt Wal, Your questions in the origional poll were neutral and unbiased.
TC37, While your questions have merit they are slanted to one side. You would also need to ask.
1) If BMPs are adopted in your state as regulations do you believe they will negatively affect the harvest of furbearers in any way?
2) "Scientific proof" of animal welfare / injury scores now exist from the BMPs, will the Anti's use this information against trapping?
These are two of the most common concerns that I hear voiced by trappers about the BMPs.
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Dec 20, 2006 14:53:58 GMT -6
1) If BMPs are adopted in your state as regulations do you believe they will negatively affect the harvest of furbearers in any way?Without the BMP's and anti trap legislation in your state where could you be as far as trapping? Without the support of the IAFWA a well thought of org by many user groups, and also containing the very people who in a latest opinion poll as those with the most trusted knowledge by the general public, where could/would trapping be? Here is the latest press release from IAFWA on BMP's and trapping. Then I ask what has any trapping org released in the last year as to the pro's of trapping in the national press? FROM THE IAFWA WEBSITE NEW EDUCATIONAL GUIDES OFFER TRAPPERS THE MOST HUMANE, SAFE PRACTICES
Washington, D.C. (August 16, 2006) — As part of an unprecedented effort to continue to improve trapping programs' “Best Management Practices,” a focus on animal welfare, efficiency, selectivity, practicality, and safety, the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies announced the release of new education guides. “Best Management Practices” are based on the most extensive study of animal traps ever conducted in the United States . These new guides are in addition to others released in March.
"This second installment of Best Management Practices for animal traps continues to signify how important it is to continue improvement in furbearer management programs throughout the United States ,” says Gordon R. Batcheller, Certified Wildlife Biologist with the New York Department of Environmental Conservation Division of Fish, Wildlife & Marine Resources. “These new guides, with the support and involvement of state fish and wildlife agencies, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and expert trappers, BMPs define the "state of the art" in animal trapping based on extensive research. The development and use of BMPs by trappers is very important to sustaining furbearer conservation programs throughout the United States ."
The purpose of the Best Management Practices (BMP) process is to scientifically evaluate the traps and trapping systems used for capturing furbearers in the United States . The results of this research serve as a reference guide to wildlife management agencies, conservation organizations, tribal nations, researchers, trapper organizations, individual trappers, and others interested in the continued improvement of traps and trapping systems.
The new BMPs include guides for opossum, gray fox, and bobcat. Each of these can be found online at www.fishwildlife.org/furbearer.html . The goals of these educational tools are to: Promote regulated trapping as a modern wildlife management tool; identify practical traps and trapping techniques that continue to improve efficiency, selectivity, and the welfare of trapped animals; provide specifications for traps that meet BMP criteria for individual species in various regions of the United States; provide wildlife management professionals with information to evaluate trapping systems in the United States, and; instill public confidence in, and maintain public support for, wildlife management and trapping through distribution of science-based information.
Trapping BMPs use the latest traps and trapping technology and are based on scientific research and professional experience. Trapping BMPs identify both techniques and traps that address the welfare of trapped animals and allow for the efficient, selective, safe, and practical capture of furbearering wildlife.
“As wildlife management agencies across the nation continue to face impediments to managing furbearer species through trapping, it is critical that agencies have the type of science based information on trapping, provided by BMPs, to allow them to maintain regulated trapping as a viable wildlife management tool,” says Bryant White, Furbearer Research Coordinator of the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. “Likewise, this work is an important component of our understanding with the European Union (USA/EU Agreed Minute and Annex) for improving the welfare of trapped animals, and also sustaining the trade in wild furs.”
Trapping is a highly regulated activity. Anyone who traps must follow strict rules established and enforced by state fish and wildlife agencies. Restrictions on species that may be harvested, harvest seasons, trap types, trapping methods, and areas open to trapping are some examples of the guidelines and regulations that state agencies regularly review, implement, and enforce. Trapping is an element of many wildlife management programs. In some cases, local populations of furbearers are controlled, thereby helping to minimize human-wildlife conflicts and mitigate habitat changes brought about by certain furbearer species.
Using the proper techniques and equipment mentioned in the BMP guides, trapping has many benefits for wildlife conservation. Trapping contributes to the protection of threatened and endangered species by controlling predators, and is also is used to relocate animals and restore populations in areas where conditions are suitable for the species to thrive. Scientists collect important ecological information about wildlife through the use of trapping. Preferred habitats, migration patterns, and population indices for some species of wildlife are determined through mark and recapture programs and by monitoring regulated harvest levels. In addition, trapping can help reduce the exposure of humans and pets to rabies and other diseases. Trapping is widely recognized by the wildlife conservation community as a beneficial outdoor activity, providing food, clothing, cosmetic items, artists' supplies, and other products.
The guides, which can be found at www.fishwildlife.org/furbearer.html , were created using a collaborative approach that included the work of experts from state and federal wildlife management agencies, expert trappers, and statisticians.
The Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies—the organization that represents all of North America's fish and wildlife agencies—promotes sound management and conservation, and speaks with a unified voice on important fish and wildlife issues. The Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies is the collective voice of North America 's fish and wildlife agencies at every level of government. The Association provides its member agencies and their senior staff with coordination services that range from migratory birds, fish habitat, and invasive species, to conservation education, leadership development, and international relations. The Association represents its state agency members on Capitol Hill and before the Administration on key conservation and management policies, and works to ensure that all fish and wildlife entities work collaboratively on the most important issues. The Association also provides management and technical assistance to both new and current fish and wildlife leaders.
|
|
|
Post by sinrud on May 4, 2007 10:13:21 GMT -6
Want to know what I think about the BMP program? Let’s look at their last “scientific” study on the use of snares! Three states, WI. - PA. and SD. were involved. Each state had 5 trappers with 36 snares each. Five different snare “devices” were used: (1)7x7 cable with a 1-1/4” AC 180° bend washer break away at 325 lbs; (2) 1x19 Cable with a 1-1/4” AC 180° bend washer break away at 325 lbs; (3)7x7 cable with a camlock and break away pin; (4) 1x19 cable with a camlock and break away pin; (5)1x19 Thompson Snare with a relaxing lock and breakaway at 285 lbs. I received an “advanced” copy of the report and promised I would not pass on the results, BUT, what I can tell you is this!!! NOT A SINGLE THOMPSON SNARES WAS USED IN THIS STUDY!!! All the Thompson snares went to South Dakota and, for some reason (?), while they were included in the study results, they were not used. Studies like this have been going on for 10 years!!! - all under authority and stamped as “scientific”. This approach to studies is extremely bias, prejudicial, misleading, corrupt and meaningless for the purpose it was intended!!! I have a serious problem with this type of process - and so do you! If you don't like it - DO SOMETHING! If it doesn’t bother you I suggest you find another interest where this sort of manipulation doesn’t matter! Dick Sinrud, Thompson Snares
|
|
|
Post by robertw on May 4, 2007 13:09:07 GMT -6
Dick, Several of us DO care. You are not the first to witness this.
I'm sure Wiley or TC 37 will be posting shortly explaining how the BMPs are not being done a BIASED manner....
|
|
|
Post by garman on May 4, 2007 13:47:14 GMT -6
I agree, although I am not as knowledgeable on the study of the BMP's, I have attempted looking on websites, study journals through grad. schools, etc, finding nothing on how they were done or who we contact on information, or our concerns as trappers. I understand maybe these things have been addressed on this site before, looking through the archives I can find nothing,(not that I cannot miss these things) but I believe the information we need here is who to contact with concerns and who do we hold acccountable as interested parties to see the study data. I guess that is the solution based side to me, the question I always ask myself is Do I care about this? YES; How Can I help? and Who do I need to contact?
|
|
|
Post by sinrud on May 4, 2007 19:36:06 GMT -6
Garman, The parties responsible for BMP issues, studies and “recommendations” etc. Is the BMP COMMITTEE! Namely: Committee Chair; Gordon Batcheller, <grbatche@gw.dec.state.ny.us> Phone: 518-402-8885 BMP Fur Biologist; Bryant White, <bryant.white@mdc.mo.gov> Phone: 573-882-9909 ext. 3316 These are the ones to address your concerns to - along with various state legislators etc. and cooperating agencies. Who is doing their best to help with these issues? - The FTA. President, Charles Andres; <muskratchick1@aol.com> Phone: 812-949-1053 FTA V. President, Gary Jepson: Phone: 701-863-6535 FTA Editor, Dave Hastings;<ftaeditor@yahoo.com> Phone: 308-728-7780 U.S. Sportsmans Alliance Tony Celebrezze; <tcelebrezze@ussportsmen.org> Phone: 614-888-4868 Your state Trappers Association (MN) President, Gary Meis; <garymeis@ecenet.com> Phone: 320-838-1570 I know it’s hard to find published information - it’s because (my opinion) they (BMP) prefers it that way. However they do have a web site. Sinrud
|
|
|
Post by garman on May 5, 2007 5:39:55 GMT -6
hey thanks sinrud, I will be looking at things and doing what I can do. GLM
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on May 6, 2007 7:01:57 GMT -6
All the Thompson snares went to South Dakota and, for some reason (?), while they were included in the study results, they were not used.
Please explain further?
|
|