BMPs...what comes next?

[CoonDuke]

Most feel that some states are going to push the BMP findings into law. I tend to agree with this.

The question is how are they going to go about it?

Steve,
You have said many times that if the 1.5 is banned for coon you will be trapping a lot of mink.

Couldn't a state just ban the 1.5 in water all together? Kind of a blanket regulation knowing that coon will be caught in mink or rat sets?

The same with canines. Couldn't a state look at the gray fox BMP and make the largest trap in it the ONLY trap allowable on land?

Does anyone else have these fears but me?

[Steve Gappa]

I too share your fears Todd.

Some states will ignore them, other states will adopt them as recommendations, and other states, cause its simple easy and politically correct..will pass them into law.

THe biggest problem is indeed the "suite" issue. Talking to Dave Hamilton...maybe 3 years ago...when I expressed my concerns over the loss of the 1.5 (even then, it was a foregone consclusion) he mentioned the suite concet- that is- a trpa could be approved for 1 specie and not another...even though practical knowledge was that equal amounts of both were trapped with that trap.

Specifically- fox/coon and mink/coon.

While it sounds good- and might even remain legal- how practical would it be.

If you are trapping "fox" where no fox exist- are you legal?

Would the CO go by the letter of the law or the intent? Interpretation would be paramount in the enforcement.

Would 100 dry land mink sets 100 feet from the creek be legal? Or circumventing the law?

The was a reason to have the coyote bmps first- because they were doable. All involved had a good idea of what would pass- everything from unmodified 1.75s to tricked out #4 passed- as we knew they would.

Everyone could be proud and stand up bright, shiny and tall. Life goes on- everyone is happy.

For all practical purpoase- there isn't a coyote trapper out there who cannot live and trap with the results.

The grey fox will be similar to the coon- very few traps will pass and most likely- the ones that do are limited.

one thing that bothered me- hamilton said stoploss weren't tested cause coon trappers don't use them. Yet the #11 offset is a preferred trap? Er...ok.

why not test a trap that probably would pass? God knows they tested enough

I can easily imagine a scenerio where you are correct- the smallest trap capable of beng used on the smallest animal available- will be what is approved.

My worst fear- that the bmps are living documents- I firmly believe that threshold levels with change as further traps are tested- after all, this Vets council is AGAINST trapping and so publically states. Why expect them to remain consistent?

I'm afraid the train has left the station- but I'll be damned if I'm going to walk ahead and clear the track- they want to get to the next station- do it on their own so their is no mistake who is responsible for our loss of rights.

Once the WS snare study starting becoming the norm for new snaring states- the handwriting is plain to see- folks, the doomsayers were right.

we got took.

[trappincoyotes39]

Coon duke I'm more optomistic than Tman, if you look at what Monatana is trying to adopt and read it carefully, it is a way for them to protect trapping and keep the anti heat off, it doesn't make exact statements as to what is and isn't allowable where, but more genralized just as the wording of the BMP's.
The states that may adopt them word for word trap for trap, pick and chose will be those states that take heavy fire from anti's, the worst case scenario would be to lose trapping altogether in thse states anyway, so would you rather have trapping in limited fashion or no trapping period? That is what these states game depts are looking at for sure. What we did pre BMP, was not working, states were falling one by one. The BMP will help address that, and help keep trapping in this hot iron states.
The best thing we can do is to be informed, talk with our game depts, and landowners, and keep all informed on the aspects of trapping in each of our states, the facts are different states put a higher or lower value on trapping period. The anti's research this and know and attack those lower priority states, they know they can win with emotionlisim and they where succesful. Eeven with enough pressure applied to those states Game Depts, what fire power did they have to combat these groups? What factual data did they have to show proof that trapping can be done in a humane fashion? Not alot out there until the BMP"s, like it or not that is just fact!
Again I work with CO"s and I know they do not like laws that they can't have a clear and decise conviction on! They don't like to waste time or look foolish, so alot of trapping laws a generalized for a reason, to make cases against offenders. Too many variables with water trapping or land trapping, just like many states if you catch an otter in a closed season no season who writes you out a ticket if you follow the law and report it? None do, because they know we as trappers can't control the catch in a high enough degree to hold us accountable if we follow the rules. I don't see game depts wanting to waste time and money trying to enforce laws that won't be enforceable. Meaning the wording and choices will still be there.
Again guidlines first and foremost, I'll wait and see what states inact this one trap- one specie idea, before I lose much sleep over that ever happing. The man hours needed from people over worked the way it is and then try to implament such enforcment duties? I don't see that happing, unless you have a state or two that has alot of leftover law enforcment in there budget.
Tman, I'll be the first to admitt I'm wrong if they ever change the thresholds for species already tested under what we have now! You put too much on the vet council, they have input yes, but trappers do too, if it gets to hairy why not walk away from the table? The uproar would be loud and clear if that happened.
A state could ban the 1.5 from water, but you have too ask why would they? Unless there is pressure to do so, I don't see that happening, why? Because pre BMP they could have done the same, there would have to be a good reason as to why to make such a change.

[Steve Gappa]

the states that lost trapping would have lost trapping if bmps were under way or not.

only once before, today on another forum, have I ever read that bmps would have saved trapping in Mass, Co, CA, etc.

and saying its so, still doesn't make it so- Dave Hamiltons opinon not withstanding.

[SgtWal]

Right now in parts of Canada an animal caught in a set that was not meant for that species has to be turned into the state. A raccoon in a mink set must be turned in, and vice versa.
In Indiana the hearing process starts AFTER the draft change is written. For us the DNR sets up a working group that writes the language. Those meetings are open to the public but no public comments have to be taken or considered by the group unless the group votes to accept them AT THE NEXT MEETING.
Just because a hearing in held doesn't mean that only trappers will show up. Or be in the majority.
Unless well documented and compelling testimony is presented to the Administrative Judge that chairs the meetings, the chance of changing the outcome is thin.
If, and I mean IF, the governments were serious about defending trapping as a business they would have pursued a complaint in the WTO over the preposed ban by the EU. But they did not.
Again the hobby trapper with his dozen traps is willing to sell out the full timer with his several hundred so he can still "trap in some form". This difference in who's ox is getting gored is what has allowed the BMP's to move ahead like they have.
Trapping is in deep Shite, and the trappers are acting like the gun owners when the assault weapons were the target. They weren't getting shafted because they weren't after that Purdy Side by Side of Grampa's so they stood silent.
The hobby trappers are doing the same thing to the fulltimers. Selling out their business and lifestyle, to save their hobby.
Sorry for the rant, but I have pushed in the State House for bills before, and I have worked to protect my turf in the meetings I mentioned above and know what we are setting ourselves up for.



wayne

[trappincoyotes39]

Wayne with all respect, you can not compair Canada to the US, right now no one in Australlia can own a firearm, that is there choice and there deal, same as Canada. Canada has a tottaly different working group on the whole BMP issue they went along with the EU! The US has there own agenda and findings with our BMP studys. The EU is not the major deal, we where going this route with EU or not, or we sure should have been! I'll state again the OL' way wasn't getting the job done! Look at how many states lost trapping since 1990? Our creditabilty wasn't there after the antis got through spouting there lies! The votes where counted and the states lost!
The fedral Gov, has no control over resident species, each state has the right to manage those species how they see fit! So the government couldn't intervene.
If you have a strong DNR and you have good biologist you shouldn't have much to worry about! Most know the benefits of trapping, most states don't want to take there money and fund wildlife damage control, they want there budget to be spent on things that add revenue to the state fishing, hunting, and they see the benefits of private trappers and what predator control does for all wildlife.
Those that don't then the BMP either way isn't going to change there minds and they'll run as they have been doing.
Where do you get the notion that "hobby trappers are seling out the fulltimers?" What is a full timer and what is a hobby trapper? Each person can see that different.
I can tell you to devide up trappers, with the numbers out there and pit the big boys verusus the weekender isn't going to serve any good purpose I can think of!
Breaking ranks would be a big downfall of trapping, pitting one against the other? Everyone is in the same boat I think, we all want trapping to thrive and be around for 100's of years to come, and in this day and age there will be some change, just as when toothed traps where made illegal, I'm sure there where plenty that said, oh my trapping is done for.
I saw great benefits from the BMP's so far, we have proven what we have been saying there are more alternatives than just a rubber jawed trap, we have proven that the injury can be as low or lower with what we have and a few modifications! That is a big win for trappers, one that has worried many for along time.

[trappnman]

right now no one in Australlia can own a firearm,

absolutely False- figures by akona20 on Dobbins show more guns bought each year than turned im and destroyed.

[trappincoyotes39]

From what I new it was illegal to buy firearms there, if misinformed so be it, can they buy new firearms or those that have already been manufactured?
My whole point being different countires have different rules, we should be worrying about the good ol' USA, because I can tell you other countries are worried only with them selves, and what moves them up the social and economic ladder.

[trappnman]

then make your point without making up facts.

seen elsewhere " unless your state adopts bmps, you will continue the same"

well, duh...

[foxtail]

Wayne does bring up an interesting point though, Canada or not.

Mark my words, if they push that crap, like I feel they will at least try to do, they WILL make the law state that any animal caught in a set intended for another species, has to be turned in to the DNR.

We all know how that will work.

We all will have no choice but to turn in to the local CO, all animals now made illegal by the rediculous new laws, only to have them ride around for a few days in the back of a DNR truck until they are rancid and worthless. Then they are wasted. I have heard of this with oyyers in MN. Southern MN. Steve's and my area of southern MN.

It will happen.

If you don't think the COs have time to fool with it, you are nuts.
All it would require is for a CO to check your sets a couple times and never hear from you to turn in illegal catches and they will sit and wait for you.

[SgtWal]

There are clearly 2 camps on this. Those who totaly trust the various levels of government to look at the BMP's as a reason to let trapping continue as it is, and those who lack this trust in the government agencies so empowered.
The F&W folks have a duty to control and management the wildlife for the good of the people. Population levels, diseases, animal damage, and other factors are all part of the issue.
Not a single one of these is totally dependent on a bunch of muddy trappers running around the woods.
Every one can be dealt with by chemical intervention, government trappers, natural attrition or some combination there of.
If the "Army of free trappers" fails to resolve these issues to the degree needed, they are no longer valuable, and no longer needed either.
Should this "Army " be handicaped to the point where the harvest is seriously restricted, the "Army" is no longer effective, and no longer needed, and ripe for disbanding.
The low fur market is already holding down the harvest, how much more before other methods become necessary, or mother nature levels the field on her own?
I see the BMP as a restriction. And we don't need many more.


wayne

[trappincoyotes39]

I work closely with a few CO's and I can tell you most are overworked and under paid, the last thing they want or need is more on there plate! As far as turning in animals that are caught in the wrong trap, what do you suppose you DNR or game dept would do with a few 1,000 critters? Do you think they would want to deal with them? Answer is NO, look at Iowa had otters turned in for years, they will now have there first otter season next fall, why because they no there population is substainable to allow it, and deregulates them to a furbearer and less enforcement needed, frees up more time for the CO"s.
Dollars and cents, thats what this boils down to, Game depts, and DNR don't want to have to spend a big portion of there general budget on ADC type work, above and beyond those states that have programs in place.
Most states see the true advanatge of having liberial trapping seasons or no seasons on problem critters, because they know the trapper plays a big role in controlling those species and does it at very little cost to your state!
They will make the law state, tell me who and when this law comes into effect in your state? What day did you hear that will take place?
The F&W folks have a duty to control and management the wildlife for the good of the people. Population levels, diseases, animal damage, and other factors are all part of the issue.
Not a single one of these is totally dependent on a bunch of muddy trappers running around the woods.

I disagree, Iowa went to a program a few years back where there whole ADC make up is nothing but private trappers! Many other states have done the same, you take a test pass it, and your in buisness. You charge what the ,market will bear and the only part the Iowa DNR plays into it, is a referance for work and regualtion on your year end paperwork. Otherwise those muddy trappers are taking the workload.

[trappnman]

I nreality- the CO in most states have very little to do during most of the year.

which is why the practice was during deer season duck hunting and a few other popular openers- the cOs would accumulate mega, mega comp time to be used in large blocks during the rest of the year.

A good system for all- until someone bob hooed tey weren't getting overtime, and despite the objections of most of te wardens participating in the comp time program- it was eliminated. Which gives us less coverage diuring "peak" times and far too much during te offseasons.

But thats neither here nor there and has absolutely nothing to do with the arguement.

The biggest problem with the game departments of just about every state is that the people have little or nothing to do with hunting, fishing, trapping...they come from outside out rhelm and they are clueless.

its pc and easy for them to think they are doing good and to saqitsify tep ublic- they wil ladopt the bmps.

Look at the silliness NY is having, WS with the "cable restraints", now Montanas...on and on.

To think that many states won't adopt the bmps in their entirety is being unrealistic to the realities of the modern world.

Its going to happen.

Mr Hamilton while a decent guy- is also protecting his job and justifying his involvement over the years. His pollyanna approach to how states will react to bmps- while rosy, might not be entirely accurate. Not exactly an unbiased opinion. Far from it.

Whiule the "suite" concept sounds like a neat loophole- its going to close quick- aka Canada and the foothold on coon.

whats happening in the real world is this- trappers were against the bmps from the get-go. Many were persuaded that the bmps would save trapping and more to the point- WERE TOLD WE HAVE NO CHOICE.

Whats happening now is simple- reality set in and the handwriting is plain to see.

The snare results from WS while the worse thing for snaring- might have been the catylist that are turning trappers back to their original thought-

BMPS= bad news for trappers.

I have come full circle- I was against them, then for them- now I see whats coming down the road.

Many trappers I have talked to say the same.

I hope I'm wrong. But recent events show I might even be understating whats going to occur.

[trappincoyotes39]

To think that many states won't adopt the bmps in their entirety is being unrealistic to the realities of the modern world.

What is the outcome of this? If a state decides to do what your hypothetical guess comes too? There going to word the rules and regs to benefit each state! Look at the wording of the Montana deal, they leave plenty of room in there, it's not cut and dry there is leaway to change and adopt things that will benefit trappers, while protecting themselves from alot of anti pressure.
Why is it all of the sudden, now that BMP's are being conducted that we hear "oh boy thats it for trapping where done?" Why wasn't this rhetoric talked about before the BMP"s? Oh it was in many states that lost there right to trap!
The whole BMP process was to give scientific data to prove what a trap will do to the species and how well it works, how can that be conceived as a negative? This is what we as trappers have been saying for years, but now it is backed by science! The outcome would be better how if no BMP"s where done? Explain how we would combat the anti's in court? How would we get the majority of the middle to see our side? How could we keep trapping in many states, without BMP"s?
Everyone wants to look at this and say oh the BMP's are going to regulate us, until your state comes under attack from the ANti's, Tman, a state like MInn is ripe for an anti trapping bill to do well, you have alot of people in Minnieapolis and the outskirts and othe towns where the vote could go against trapping, you look at the states that lost trapping and the population dynamics, and it shows just how well versed the antis are in picking and choosing there targets.
The BMP's in my mind will stop much of the anti trapping bills, due to the science not only with legislators, but more importantly the middle class general public! It's all about getting the info out to those that matter on these issues, the science is there, to read and absorb.

[trappnman]

Its a logical next step for the ANTIS to push the states into adopting the bmps- and then, since the bmps are a "living" document... its the next step to push for more restrictive, humane bmps.

You have consistently say that states won't adopt bmps , that they are just"guidelines"- but now your view is that TO adopt them will save trapping in states? And they are a good thing because of that?

my oh my....freudian slip?

[trappincoyotes39]

TMAN, I said, hypothetical! I don't see many states adopting the BMP's as a whole, I see them as guidlines and I see many states reverting back to the data as needed against anti pressure.

Its a logical next step for the ANTIS to push the states into adopting the bmps- and then, since the bmps are a "living" document... its the next step to push for more restrictive, humane bmps.
Ah, what have the antis' been trying to do for the last 35+ YEARS? without the BMP"s? THEY HAVE BEEN TRYING TO OUTLAW TRAPPING! Sorry about the caps there, but what is the positive for the antis'?
It's more logical to think the antis where running up hill, before the bmps concering one state after the other, all we had was hearsay and trapper testimonies on this matter, now we have Biologist, science, and the data to back up the claims, that the traps we use and tested are infact humane on many levels and with sound science backing this up, tell me again how this is a bad thing?
Do you think peta and hsus is going into court to claim the traps we use are cruel and serve no purpose, with the data we have from 2 highly reguarded places doing the necocropys on these animals? Also having many biologist and yes vets backing this up?
That sounds like a big hill to climb, and what is there hard data to prove otherwise? A few pictures and a few non targets caught?
I'll take what we have ina court of law over anything they can bring now, post BMP studies.
You beleive what you want you bash the BMP's thats your right to do so, I'll fight for BMP's and will see the outcome, state to state it will either be a big help or a big failure, but you can't fault the people that are trying to ensure trapping is around for many years to come.

[3n]

tc35 check out the Montana HB 603 Update thread on trapperman.

[trappnman]

so you are publically saying that trappers that support bmps care more about trapping and do more to promote trapping than those opposed to bmps?

Pretty bold statment- and one I find offensive and arrogant and untrue.

[trappincoyotes39]

3N I read the Montana wording and know were do I see verbatum the BMP's being addressed in there entirety, and what is the entirety of the BMP's?
I see vague wording to give the power to Montana Game and Fish, as far as check laws, thats up to Montana, but they leave themselevs open without any checl law period, I would think all trappers could live with 72hr law, just so the anti's couldn't use that as fire power if they would decide to go after a state like Montana next. Trapper ED, I have no problem making that mandatory, states have mandatory Hunters Ed, that did nothing but ad creditabilty to all hunters. Just my thoughts on that issue. Being a hunter Ed instructor.
I 'll post you some information that was done by Media smart from Minnieapolis,MN on joe publics thoughts on trapping.
What purpose the public finds most acceptable for trapping. Relocation 90%
Population Control 70-80%
For food 60%
Subsistence 70%
Reduce garden crop damage 55%
Make Money 30%
Fur clothing 15%
Recreation 14%
This is from 3 states.
Next: Who the public trust most for information on trapping.
State Fish and Wildlife 60%
Animal Orgs like HSUS 35%
Vets 15%
Media 12%
Trappers 8%*
Peta 12%*
Notice the ones with astericks.

so you are publically saying that trappers that support bmps care more about trapping and do more to promote trapping than those opposed to bmps?

Where did I state that? What I'm saying is that trappers need to organize and be strong, not on each side of the fence, common ground is needed, without it, we will loose, fighting amongst the ranks serves no purpose for the betterment, the people invovled in the BMP process, care just as much about trapping and there not out to undermine it!
I'm done trying to show the benefits, I say black, you say white. Lets read the documents as they come about. Trappers as a whole hate change of any kind, but we have had change through out history, and each state controls there own outcome.

[Stef]

Right now in parts of Canada an animal caught in a set that was not meant for that species has to be turned into the state. A raccoon in a mink set must be turned in, and vice versa.

Not true 100%....LoL

Let me explain it

The raccoon here in Québec is not on the list that the trapped animals need to be given back to the warden.
Let me explain it.... Raccoon is in the same list as muskrat, snowshoeshare etc...
This mean... If you trap a raccoon in a fox trap and the animal is not injured ( no chewed foot etc...) the coon has to be released. On the other hand... if he's injured, you can keep it
I don't know why but all of mine seem to be injured

Another example, a fisher in a fox trap.... if he's injured, top shape and even half dead... fisher needs to be released and if dead.... need to be given to a wildlife officer for confiscation.

Stef