BMPs in general

[trappnman]

Asked to take them all or leave them all- unrealistic and makes no sense.

For example- the coyote BMPs really seem to please just abotu everyone.

Why?

Think about this...Why?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Cause they are TRUE. The results mirror what coyote trappers have known for years- I read the Eastern BMP results- If I would have wrote them myself- its what I'd write.

The "labratory" results matching REAL LIFE, PRACTICAL RESULTS.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Unfortunately- the coon bmps don't seem to be that way. Starting out with the joke that #11 cause less chewing damage than #1.5 coils is ridiculus. It simply is not so. Run a coon line- use 1/2 #11 dj and 1/2 #1.5 coils.

The results are the FREAKING same!!!!!

It ain't rocket science or any sciene- its real life, practical RESULTS- not controlled "lab" results.

AND- I can reduce chewing in 1.5 DRAMATICALLY bby where and how it is set.

Now i'm not going to get into the "why didn't yo utell the BMP committee". Idid. I talked to Dave H quite a bit o nthe phone- a great guy by the way-

and his response was that would be "testing trappers not traps"

Perhaps- but don't the bmps cover correct techniques? At least the coyote ones do.

If the coon ones are common knowledge- then how about a link so we can see numbers and %.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

And how about the muskrats ones- test traps in non drowning situations? okay.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I was on the fence for years on bmps- I came down in FAVOR of them years ago and got into many debates on the old Dobbins forum concerning their place in combating antis.

But lets not cut off our nose to spite our face here- the coon bmps, if as reported- are a travesty and I can never support them.

Trappers should stand up and just say NO!-

[dj88ryr]

Unfortunately Steve, the first tests done for Coyotes were good tests, and that placed many of the original skeptics at ease, or out of the picture. I feel this was the plan to begin with, test coyotes first, something not a lot of trappers are familiar with, get the coyotes trappers to agree and say " Good Job" and then the real objective would come into play. I think you and I had this debate a couple years ago, and then you convinced me I was wrong for being so cynical, .....should have held my ground I think....

[trappincoyotes39]

I know alot of you aren't offset fans for coons or that matter coyotes on here, but they do serve a purpose, and I can tell you through the years I have lost very few coons in offset jawed traps, only on mine that have 5/16" offset have I seen many coon losses and even that runs less than 5%.
Does anyone suppose the offset dj #11 passed and had less chewing due to a coons tapered foot, thus leaving more feeling in the foot and less chewing due to the coon actually feeling his work on his toes?
Again I don't have the data in front of me, therefore I can't tell you the capture efficancy of this trap tested, we will see. The traps on any study must be set where you would normally make your sets, and I'm sure by passing some locations Tman, you can control foot chewing as you have posted, but there not testing set locations, they need to keep that vague, as not all trappers are going to set traps in the same type of terrian, a 14 year old boy might find a culvert littered with coon tracks, heck a 40 year old man the same set , catch the coon, but what does the foot look like?
So the 1.5 passes would you like to see an * that this type of trap must be set either in A,B,or C ways to be passable and legal? I know alot of you are mad and I"m sure the coyote BMP was done first because coyotes are everywhere and yes people could forsee a problem with the coon bmp before it started, same with skunk if they do one and the snare issue will be quite a deal if/when they tackale that one, but the score is the score.
I look at these other topics and a few more people trying to state the softie is the way we should go, I'm darn glad we have the bmps to keep that kind of talk subsided, and to have the data to prove there are other options for us.
Yes tman your either behind the bmps or your not, if trappers devide and you pick and choose what bmps you support because you like the outcomes and to he** with the rest, your undermining the process of creditabilty. If we fight amongst ourselves we leave the door wide open for the anti's to step on in, and say even the trappers can't agree on the outcomes of these studys there fore what good are they? At times they can be a double edged sword, but the benefits, will outweigh the few down falls. I'm done with this you all have your ideals and thoughts and thats great, I just say be proactive in change and not so negative.

[trappnman]

Are you telling me that the same exact people -the SAME EXACT people did the trapping, did the autopsies, did the SPECULATING?

No- you cannot say that.

Therefore- to give each study the same credibility rating is really going out on a limb.

Its entirely logical to support 1 study and not another.

We do this DAILY.

If one loaf a bread is stale and the other loaf is fresh- are the two equal? No.

as good an analogy as any.

Now- lets talk credibiltiy.

A #11 offset for coon? as both a water and land trap? Either or- that is a statement that has NO credibility.

You bet- no injuiries...but few coon.

if you can't show me the numbers- where are you getting your info?

Are these test samples like earlier- 20-30 in a sample? Or less?

See- here is the thing- there is no way- and trappers on the councils argued vehemently for this point- that 1) thresholds should be the same for different species 2) drowning was hunane.The trappers were outvoted by the vets....and, isn't the US Veternarian organisation..whatever it is called- against trapping and in fact have made statements saying just that.

And their word on thresholds, etc is our bible?

No- a lot of thinking trappers don't buy into this.

The BMPs procedures are against drowning- it isn't humane enough on semi aquatics like coon, mink, perhaps otter, perhaps muskrats.

Do you also support that?

[trappnman]

you have lost few coon in BIG OFFSET TRAPS.

Can you not see why in success in these traps does not translate to the smaller traps?

And tell me- what is the chewing rate in the #3, #4 offsets? I talked to hundreds of coon trappers- and they all concur on the answer-

chewing rates in #3s on up on land is HORRENDOUS.

[trappincoyotes39]

Before any trap passes or fails it is sent to "wildlife vetranarians" for animal assesment!The data is then sent to IAFWA staff to be vailidated and gone over, and read the interpretation. The ad hoc group plays a role in the drafting of the BMP, taking into account capture efficency, animal welfare, selectivity and to be practical. The draft is also looked at by state wildlife agencies and they can comment on the draft as well.
The ad hoc groups have trappers and experts from both the NTA and FTA on them as well.
The TWG technical working group is comprised of State furbearer biologist, and some others.
This has been a give and take thing from day one but remember the study is to find the most up to date and best equipment possible for trappers to use for each species. If you change the injury thresholds then what is the point? What good would come from the coon BMP?
The drowning issue, just because it has not been dealt with at the BMP level, does not make it doom and gloom, your forgetting each state has the right to manage there wild life as they see fit. If states want to allow drowning then they will do so, without any further discussion. I have zero problem with drowning critters, none what so ever, I have zero problem with you using a 1.5 for coons, it is the State in which you live to decide if the BMP's will become laws on the books, not the IAFWA or anyone else for that matter, state to state.
My feeling on the drowning thing is it will resurface, I'm guessing the cost involved would be much greater to test than those test that have been conducted so far, therefore I don't see the TWG spending alot of time on it now. They spend well over 450,000 a year as it is!
Yes I have chewing on my coons in my sterlings, coyotes cuffs, etc but I'm not targeting those coons, they are incidentals plain and simple, you would go broke trying to make money off the numbers of coons I have in my area. Therefore that point is mute.
I also recall the thresholds at first where looser as far as the score goes, but most agreed to make them a bit higher.
The critters are not sent to joe vet down the road, they are sent to the same places for testing, because they where weeded out and found to be as nuetral as one could be trusted to be. Yes there are other vets that sit on this deal and I'm sure they are anti trapping, but we have out share on our side as well fighting for our rights as well.
I took part in the western coyote/fox BMP, and can tell you I did what was asked of me and so did my technicin as well ,to the letter. After they that they go for injury anylasis.

[trappnman]

THE VETS DETERMINED THAT THE THRESHOLD SCORES WOULD REMAIN THE SAME. THE SAME VET GROUP THAT IS OPPOSED TO TRAPPING.

TRAPPERS OPPOSED THE SAME THRESHOLDS.

Shows you how much input we have.

I'll flat out GUARENTEE you that the same Vet group who oppose different thresholds

IS VEHEMETLY OPPOSED TO DROWNING COONS AND IT WILL NEVER BE AN APPROVED METHOD.