Where are we then?

[trappincoyotes39]

Well, I say- since the antis have had all the input- I'LL CHALLENGE IT!

Not a true statment at all.


And the Vets Council and the makers of the Olsen Scale can certainly be classified as antis-

You have no facts to back this do you?


lets sum up- the bmp committee refuses to touch the water issue, makes protocal to ENSURE the coon will chew the maximum amount the maximum number of times..and then they act apologetic that the traps failed?

The water issue is one that would take years if ever to resolve if dealt with by both sides. The olsen scale does a great job at measuring seeable and forensic injury, when dealing with critters held in water you would need a whole different scale and how does one agree with what is and isn't hypotherimia and other issues?
So the best part to all really is tell let the holding in water go. Drowning could be acheived and I think some studies and testing have been done on this issue in the past, but cost wise unless there is more money put into it all it would be hard to do real good unbias drowning test. It would take people or sensors to gauge time of catch to time of death. Which would be desirable for factual outcomes.

[trappnman]

And the Vets Council and the makers of the Olsen Scale can certainly be classified as antis-

I would think that since the Vet council is opposed to trapping- that they could be considered antis? That their statements to that purpose could be considered anti statements.....at least to.

So the truth should be circumvented because of TIME restraints? If you don't have the time to do it right- don't do it!

[robertw]

Trappnman;"lets sum up- the bmp committee refuses to touch the water issue, makes protocal to ENSURE the coon will chew the maximum amount the maximum number of times..and then they act apologetic that the traps failed?"

Just a clarification.

There are multiple "BMP Committees", the "Ad-Hoc" committees were only formed to write the fricking BMP document after the testing was complete.

The Ad-Hoc committes had nothing to do with writing ANY PROTOCOL involved with the trap testing. Neither did EITHER NATIONAL TRAPPING ASSOCIATIONS (to my knowledge).

Trappnman;"makes protocal to ENSURE the coon will chew the maximum amount the maximum number of times."

Just so we are clear on this issue, I AGREE with this statement (in general) and have argued this point many times to no avail.

Hope you all excuse me from this discussion as I will not be able to participate in it further.

[Steve Gappa]

What committee did the protocol is unimportant. What IS important is that it is the protocol ACCEPTED as a working thesis by the BMP committees (s).

But thanks for the clarification.

[MChewk]

I know its been discussed before....BUT can we get an explanation on how the Olsen Scale was created SPECIFICALLY for TRAPPING BMPS? Has the OLSEN Scale ever been implemented in any other studies? If so what, where, when? And if this is the first time used.....couldn't there be some changes, things altered from data/problems occuring......(OBVIOUSLY like our coon bmps)? I ask this because we are always changing adapting new ideas methods to become better more efficient....WHY CAN'T BMP DO SAME THING?

[Steve Gappa]

the olson scale was NOT creating for trapping purposes- yet it was adapted for such purposes.

very good questions Mike- I always hear (and much from Hamilton) that trappers TRIED to get changes (in various things, including the thresholds for coon bmps) but were always voted down.

Doesn't there come a point where we draw a line in the sand? If we cannot trust the bmp TRAPPERS to stand up for what is right- WHO can we turn to?

My line is the summations and protocal of the coon bmps.

[trappincoyotes39]

mchewk the olsen scale has been used by others for trap testing purposes for the last 15 or so years, NWRC,aphis and usda has reports on trap testing and using the olsen scale to gauge injury.

[bblwi]

Much of the BMP debate in my opinion is due to a serious and or significant lack of trust between and or with the groups involved in the testing as much as the actual testing and how it was conducted. It appears more and more likely to me that a trust will not be formed in the near future that will resolve many of the differences and or lesson the fear, distrust and jealousy.
I fault our national organizations for not having the leadership to direct this more and better. I fault them as much or more then the IWFA etc. We as trappers have the most to gain or lose in this BMP process. We have organizations that won't publish financial records due to the fact they feel that information would give advantage to our AR enemies. If that is the posture of leadership it is no wonder we lost a strong position early in the BMP process. The FTA I have only been a member of for a few months but their stance is similar as that of the NTAs. I do not know if they arrived at their decision the same way or not.
In many ways the nationals actions are counter productive to actions that many states would like to take. One has to ponder whether supporting nationals that are almost actively campaigning against some states desire to move ahead is in ones best interest.
Sometimes the constant action like one sees on the Tiresome Capital One add of just constantly saying NO is not not the right action.
I can certainly understand the reason for the do nothing action as it is by far the easiest action to take. Is it always the best? Time will tell. It may well be that in the near future that national organizations that try to umbrella too many issues may not be effective or maybe more importantly wanted or desirable. Most states want to manage their resources from within and would also work with those groups that utilize those resources.

Bryce