|
|
Post by mostinterestingmanintheworld on Aug 20, 2011 14:08:03 GMT -6
True reciprocity is impossible because the opportunities in each state are different. The closest you could get is for one to be able to do only what he can do in his home state in another one.
It's ugly in the West with so many states with unreasonable restrictions.
|
|
|
|
Post by bblwi on Aug 20, 2011 14:49:47 GMT -6
Reciprocal has become the new way to allow NR but be a gate keeper and a hallmark of restrictive use and opportunity. What could have been a great way to allow similar experiences is now a way see we are not exclusive but we have these, these and these limits and restrictions. reciprocal is now political and not science based. WI is an example as well. We have tagged species that may be difficult if impossible to get tags for as it is not easy even for a resident.
We also have very different seasons and definitions of what a game or fur bearer is versus a predator or varmint. We have some species in some states with no seasons or bag limits that are very restrictive in other states. We also have huge disparity in quality and value of even the same pelts, be that cats, coons, beaver, fox, rats etc.
I was a huge fan of reciprocal when we were working to get NR here in WI but now that I see how elitist this has become and restrictive and political I wish we would just have NR or not with the same rules that all residents have other than cost.
Bryce
|
|
|
|
Post by mostinterestingmanintheworld on Aug 20, 2011 15:35:29 GMT -6
It's more complicated in my state than just being selfish. I am completely surrounded by states that have as good or better cat habitat than I have but are so tightly restricted that even if they let me come on reciprocity it is pretty meaningless.
For instance we have a four month cat season with no limits.
On our Eastern border Utah has a 3 cat limit, on our Western border California is cages only with a 24 hour check, South it's Arizona with cages only, North it's Oregon with a 3 cat limit.
Go out one state (a days drive) Colorado cages only, Washington cages only, the only states that have anything like what we have is Wyoming and Idaho and even there we are at a disadvantage.
If we opened cats to Non residents the temptation for states with a three cat limit to launder cats over here would be enormous, they try it as it is.
There are nine western states that would be tremendously advantaged to come here and none that would offer us anything close to what we have.
If it was coons and coyotes it wouldn't be an issue but with four figure cats it would be. I watched Arizona/California/Colorado in the 70's and saw what they got out of the deal.
|
|
|
|
Post by thorsmightyhammer on Aug 20, 2011 15:39:06 GMT -6
If you think so...............But we're not gonna change the law.
Maybe not but we are talking about personal opinions here not law.
|
|
|
|
Post by scottphillips on Aug 20, 2011 16:40:42 GMT -6
Thanks for the "opinions". It is a can of worms. I just wanted some personal imput to see how trappers felt. Thanks
Scott
|
|
|
|
Post by FWS on Aug 20, 2011 19:05:15 GMT -6
I'm the only one who actually posted what the law states as it pertains to reciprocity in CA. The comments and various definitions by others is the opinion. Open MN to non residents and provide similar opportunity and CA is open to you. NV and MT won't be with their heavy handed draconian protectionism.  And again, is there true reciprocity when the residents of the cat rich states can trap in the East but never, ever will ? To provide access and opportunity to residents of those states is truly a gift since none of us in the West will go East. Me too, saw it firsthand and saw the reports of violations from F&G law enforcement where the majority of citations were issued to non residents. I saw guys from ND, SD, MI, IA, NY, PA, WY, MT and other states trapping here in the 80's. There was not reciprocal license law then and legholds were legal. And I don't know of a CA trapper that trapped anywhere back East, only in other Western states like WY, AZ, OR and UT. |
|
|
|
Post by thorsmightyhammer on Aug 20, 2011 19:21:08 GMT -6
Again, whats your personal opinion?
Protectionism without basis of biology?
|
|
|
|
Post by FWS on Aug 20, 2011 19:38:24 GMT -6
I would agree with CA's reciprocal license law.
More like protectionism with an eye to the future of retaining our legal ability to take cats commercially, which is a concern here BTW.
It smacks of hypocrisy for the resident of one state who disallows nonresidents for any species to complain of protectionism in another state where they would have the access and opportunity if their state allowed it.
|
|
|
|
Post by calvin on Aug 20, 2011 22:28:32 GMT -6
"ability to take cats comercially"....In cage traps? Real long line cat trapping opportunities in that screwball state. Figures.
Its a darn shame. Vast-vast open areas in Calif and no real trapping to speak of.
|
|
|
|
Post by FWS on Aug 20, 2011 22:40:35 GMT -6
Some guys are putting up some pretty impressive numbers with cage traps, higher than in states where traditional equipment is still legal.
I don't see much difference in cats taken with cages, legholds, snares or a rifle when they're on the stretchers.
Trapping cats and fox with cage traps isn't 'real trapping' ? And you think you can't 'long line' with em' ?
If the voters of your state decided what equipment you could and could not use would you quit trapping ? Or would you figure out how to make it work ?
|
|
|
|
Post by garman on Aug 21, 2011 5:59:35 GMT -6
gotta say from what I seen fws is right to a certain extent, you can still take good #'s of cats and greys with cages as well pick and choose more which ones you want to harvest. I believe some critters it would more difficult to do so, and cages are expensive but they have them either collapsable or so they fit in side another for easier carrying capacity.
|
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Aug 21, 2011 6:02:53 GMT -6
perhaps if the nationals quit holding conventions in MN, MN would have more of an incentive to actually work towards nr trapping, instead of just givng it lip service.
If this is such an important issue to trapping, then BOTH nationals should get off their arses, and start working towards the goal.
|
|
|
|
Post by thebeav2 on Aug 21, 2011 6:48:17 GMT -6
Don't shift the blame to the national organizations for Mn not having a reciprocal agreement. It's the trappers of MN that have to get It done.
|
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Aug 21, 2011 7:12:32 GMT -6
of course it is- no one is blaming the nationals for anything in Mn- and I never stated such.
what I said, was that the nationals should work toward uniform reciprocity rules because its gotten to the point of silliness and more and more states are getting more picky, on what IS reciprocity. Look at WI and MI for heavens sakes.
but in my personal opinion, they should NEVER come here for a NATIONAL CONVENTION as long as we are 100% against NR trappers per our laws. That might put enough pressure on the cogs to spin the wheels. (and that landowner thing is bogus- IMO it was passed to take the pressure off that one aspect of NR trapping, that of land ownership and not being able to trap. but its limited to exactly your own land- no state, no federal, even on a lake- you can trap ONLY the actual lake footage you own.)
but I do put the blame on the nationals, for sitting silent on the issue.
Both could have a meeting of the minds type meetings, to TRY to get some uniformity, or at least civility. To TRY to get the various states trappers orgs to at least discuss it.
and Joel does have a good point on the cats in NV- but where does it stop? on martin and fisher? Cats? otter- Mn has a 4 otter limit- WI has a tag once in a blue moon- whats to stop WI people, from claiming WI otter in MN?
or coon? WI has a 2 week set back- should IA then limit their coon season, to whenever a Iowan can start in a particular state?
MN doesn't have many grays- should I be limited on grays in another state?
the combinations are limitless- where does it stop?
As long as I'm standing on the chair, let me bring up SD again. you can pooh pooh it, but I believe 100%, that the little kid bullshite dished out constantly, CONSTANTLY by a few on forums, led to the new regulations. You keep poking someone, they poke back.
and I'm not defending their actions- I'm understanding it.
but if you think berating other states for their laws by berating the trappers in those states serves a positive purpose, and bodes well for future laws and regulations, then carry on....
this is a national issue, and needs national leadership.
|
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Aug 21, 2011 7:54:30 GMT -6
Some guys are putting up some pretty impressive numbers with cage traps, higher than in states where traditional equipment is still legal.THat prooves nothing but population densities are better there than in some areas where traditional and more tool selection is legal. One could do well on catcs in cages in aprts of texas as well and even in your godly domain CA give a good cat trapper more than one tool and he could beat up on most cage only trappers year in and year out. CA is a place I would never go to trap period, why would anyone? Outside of high cat prices not much else than many other states for sure. You have good populations becuase of the protectionist atitude of many in your state. Again limit anyone to 1 tool and he will be less effective in the long run than someone who can use multiple tools to be more slective and more productive. WS can still you other means in your state as well and why do you think that is? Outfit each WS trapper a pile of cage traps for coyotes and see if the take drops off and if livestock depredation is better or worse? CA is not a nirvana IMO by any stretch A state that wants to be on the cuttign edge of limitation. 
|
|
|
|
Post by thorsmightyhammer on Aug 21, 2011 8:38:19 GMT -6
If you are going to single out joel, you'd better single out fws as well.
If we could ever go to CA we would be limited to 5 cats, a guy like bob wendt would be limited to none.
Absolutely no base in biology but hey when it come to the ESA or lead bullets we are supposed to believe the science(and I am the hypocrite here).
|
|
|
|
Post by thebeav2 on Aug 21, 2011 8:53:35 GMT -6
Just what we need Is more government (National organizations) getting involved In State Issues. I blame all MN trappers for letting this happen.
Two week set back on coon give me a freaking break. But at least I'm working to get It changed. What have you done to clean up your situation?
|
|
|
|
Post by FWS on Aug 21, 2011 8:55:25 GMT -6
Because we live and work here. I have no interest in living in another state, to do so would be a serious step down in outdoor opportunity for me.
No, we have lot's of suitable habitat, both public and private land, that has a large carrying capacity. 'Protectionism' has little to do with that since most of the best cat habitat is not suitable for development.
We can use more than one tool in commercially harvesting cats, a rifle, and it's legal to hunt at night with the aid of a light, which is very effective. Can use hounds too for those so inclined.
Only in very limited circumstances. And try not to tell me how things work here because you are not qualified to do so.
WS can only use legholds for endangered species protection and only to protect human life in extreme circumstances (as was written into the initiative) they can't be used for livestock protection.
All depends on what you do................. If you want a lot of hunting and fishing opportunity in great diversity it's a good place to be. Guaranteed I have more opportunity year round than you do in MO or had in SD.
The mild climate is rather nice too, as is having the Pacific ocean (which means $$$'s to me) within view of my deck.
|
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Aug 21, 2011 10:01:33 GMT -6
why so against the nationals taking a leadership role? not leaving anyone out- CA has silly regs as well for NR- but my point was that, in my humble opinion, of ocurse, that joel has a point about cats in his state. I simply acknowledged that point. beav- why, since both MI and WI are reciprical states that border each other, are neither allowed to trap the others states? you can say the coon setback doesn't matter, but it does- its still a regulation against NR trappers, different only in degree from every other state that has special regs for NR. what % of a seasons take on coon, are taken in that first 2 weeks by WI trappers? glad you are working hard to get it changed- last time you posted on it, it was just the way it was............. |
|
|
|
Post by FWS on Aug 21, 2011 10:57:56 GMT -6
Only for those whose own state regulations disqualify them..............
But as I pointed out, for either CA or NV providing open access and opportunity to nonresidents is a gift rather than reciprocity, since no CA or NV guys will bother going East.
And the cage trap regs. in AZ, CA, CO and WA were certainly not by our choice. We fought those initiatives and the other legislative attempts for years before that, at great expense in time and personal moneys. And I doubt we'll see those laws overturned, rather we'll see more laws like them.
Funny thing is that if NV residents could trap in CA, even with cages, some of them would. As they did in the 70's and 80's before the reciprocal law and with legholds legal.............
|
|
