T'man:
"When you have those responsible for determining the regulations, conducting studies that impact those regulations- isn't the vested interest pretty obvious?"When you have private trappers conducting studies that "MIGHT INFLUENCE" future regulations FOR THEIR BENEFIT, yes, the vested interest is pretty obvious. How do you like that spin?
Beats the hell out of the sideline grenade lobbers who bitch about an INEVITABLE PROCESS "after the fact". Know anyone like that? Two can play the "catagorization games" Gappa.
As if the US would have never faced another trapping regulation without BMPS. LOL! As if nobody would have ever conducted trap testing research that would have been used by someone to "INFLUENCE" regulations. LOL! Once again, bitching about the smoke of a train that has long since past. Really accomplishes alot doesn't it Steve??
A more logical approach would be to try to ban any future trap testing and try to pass the "red faced test" explaining the reason for such a ban to the wildlife management agencies ("we might not like some of the results"). [Sarcasm]
My participation in the bmp study was no more responsible for determining any trapping regulations than any private trappers participation in the bmp study.
Regarding a "PERCEIVED BIAS", ironically, I have fought our own "wildlife management agency personel" on trapping related regulations ON BEHALF OF THE PRIVATE TRAPPERS numerous times so get off your "quest for motive" that is contradictory to the private trapper. I told you, that dog won't hunt and it won't. Actions speak louder than "CHEAP TALK".
Want to walk on my fighting side, just accuse me of not defending the private trappers rights particularly when we (ADC trappers in SD) have been criticized by our own agency for not considering the agencies stance on certain issues (72 hour trap check and breakaway locks). Nothing pisses me off more than these "CHICKENSH*T" allegations of my having any vested interest other than what is best for the private trapper considering my history. I went through that same bullsh*t with certain disgruntled SDTA members who tried to create AN ILLUSION OF WILDLIFE AGENCY BIAS (imagined) when I was an NTA director.
Who do you think led the battle in getting a 72 hour trap check in western SD??? Does that particular piece of "REGULATION" sound more conducive to private trappers or to wildlife management personell including conservation officers??
Who do you think led the battle in getting breakaway locks to replace deer stops??? Does that particular piece of "REGULATION" sound more conducive to private trapeprs or to wildlife management personell including conservation officers who have to enforce those "MORE COMPLICATED" regulations??
Silence.................
I'm absolutely amazed that you would even throw that empty allegation (having a bias other than what would be in the best interests of the private trapper) out there considering all I have done for private trappers. I also hate the idea of having to sell myself regarding what I have done for private trappers but you put me in the defense mode.
Get off this lame attempt to discredit anyone who looks objectively at bmps as having some inherant bias or MOTIVE other than what is in the best interests of private trappers. It only detracts from your arguments and screams of desperation on your part. Use some logic on this issue and deal in facts rather than speculation. Dont' be one of those who "discredit" because their arguments are empty.
I participated in the COYOTE studies to prove what we have been stating all along is true and that is that properly modified traps are every bit as "ANIMANE" as the padded public pacifiers. We proved it. Is that a good thing or a bad thing? Well, so why the hell disregard that good data with your coon bmp blaming???
If you are going to be objective about bmps, you need to address the good with the bad. I never stated that bmps were perfect but they are what they are.
Tell me, have we seen more states use bmps to defend modified traps and use the snare data to get snaring back in their state, or to regulate 1 1/2 coils out of existance FOR ALL FORMS OF COON TRAPPING??
Huh T'man?
Answer the question...........
I can find a lot more about bmps that has been positive for trapping than negative.
T'man:
"I just find it interesting, and let this statement stand on its own- that the only two men here really promoting the bmps, with all the faults and all- are two gov't trappers both who participated in the bmps.""RED HERRING"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!DIVERSION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Hahaha! WOW, some revelation that is?
How the hell do you get "PROMOTING BMPS" from "DEFENDING CERTAIN ASPECTS OF BMPS"?? That's quite a leap there Skippy!
You have quite an imagination or an ability to spin, I'll hand that to you. Right back to the old two camps again huh? You're either blaming bmps for any future trapping regulations or your "PROMOTING THEM". LOL!
I just find it interesting, and let this statement stand on it's own - that the few men here really "BLAMING" the bmps, with all their positive results disregarded, are coon trappers who didn't see their pet traps fair well regardless of the protocol tested.
And that folks- is vested interest.
How do you like them apples? Ready to ban me yet?
As if the number of "DEFENDERS OF CERTAIN ASPECTS OF BMPS" vs. the number of "BMP BLAMERS" on this forum is indicative of a cross section of views on bmps. LOL! Yet another "ILLUSION"!
A safer bet is that only a few of us are stupid enough to argue about it.
Let's get to the meat and potatoes of this issue shall we? I get bored with mindless discrediting drivel but it does remind me why I abandoned these trapping boards..........
Gappa:
"I was told entanglement, holding coon in water, etc- was inhumane so not on the table."You can argue the issue of what is and what is not "ANIMANE" forever and never reach consensus and that is where the process turned to the science of stress regarding body temperatures, etc.
The facts of the matter is that when restraining raccoon in COLD WATER, I repeat COLD WATER, you are dealing with hypothermia which elevates stress.
If you have a dead raccoon due to hypothermia, you have the lowest score possible for a "RESTRAINING" trap set. Pretty hard to make the argument that you "RESTRAINED" an animal properly when it's flatlined due to hypothermia.
"HE'S DEAD BUT HE AIN'T CHEWIN' BY GAWD!"
Is that "NOT ANIMANE"?? To some people yes, to others no. I don't believe animal stress and people stress is the same. We can argue that point forever but we will get outvoted by the general public and that is a fact.
To be quite honest, I think the argument of holding a raccoon in water to keep him from chewing is stupid "IF" you have the water depth to drown him. No need to argue that point with me because I see nothing wrong with drowning a coon and will fight to the bitter end for the PRIVATE TRAPPERS ability to drown a racccoon WHICH DOESN'T HAVE A DAMN THING TO DO WITH "RESTRAING TRAP" BMPs.
T'man:
"So no grenades Wiley- genuine apallment at bogus tests and protocol- and I offered my thoughts LONG BEFORE THIS WAS ALL A DONE DEAL."Once again, you paint with your broad brush as if ALL bmp protocals were BOGUS. Be specific to coon because there is very little that is bogus about the coyote protocals.
Is the raccoon protocol bogus? Not in my opinon. If I am going to restrain coon, I want them on land not in the water and there is many traps to do just that.
Even the latest Fur Taker magazine showed some new innovations to prevent coons from chewing.
T'man:
"Since I haven't yet bestowed the status of Gods onto the BMP committee, I find it within my rights to tell them that their version of "humane" is based on the Bambieesque version offered and rammed through by the Vets Council."You have every right and I totally support your right to voice your concerns about any particular aspect of bmps but I will criticize you the minute you try to lump that criticism into ALL BMPS IN GENERAL.
T'man:
"As far as the NTA experts doing this or that- thats neither here nor there.
Obviously they aren't that expert if they didn't find that holding coon in water on short chains eliminated chewing."They were expert enough to realize that a death by hypothermia gave the "RESTRAINING TRAP" the lowest score.
T'man:
"Any dollar amount. Hold a coon in six inches of water on 2 inches of chain. No chewing. Fact. And this is both PRACTICAL and easy to do, if your aim is to eliminate coon chewing. and there are similar ways that work as well."Two inches of chain??? LOL! Hell the swivel and two rivets are damned near that long. Who the hell uses a 2" chain???
Any dollar amount. Hold a coon in 6" of COLD WATER on a short chain. HYPOTHERMIA and possible death. NO CHEWING BUT THE LOWEST SCORE POSSIBLE IN A "RESTRAINING" SITUATION.
The goal of a "RESTRAINING TRAP" is not just to eliminate chewing but also to "RESTRAIN" as opposed to killing from hypothermia. If you take "RESTRAINING" out of the equation, just send them down the slide wire and drown them.
T'man:
"The argument was never that THIS DIDN'T ELIMINATE chewing, the argument was that IT WASN'T HUMANE."The argument was that death to hypothermia had the lowest score in a "RESTRAINING" situation. The argument was if you want them in the water, drown them but that has nothing to do with a "RESTRAINING" bmp.
T'man:
"When you DEFINE protocol, when you make MANDATORY certain setting conditions, when you FORBID common practices...my friends, you are testing methods."When all of the traps tested have to use the same protocol, the same setting conditions and the same testing methods, you are testing traps.
T'man:
"In the case of the coon bmps- the protocol could not have been designed, could not have been more defined to one end- as to have coon chew the maximum amount of time."If that was true, no traps would have passed. Some did and others failed miserably.
They would all pass a "DROWNING" bmp but there was no such thing.
T'man:
"Now- you can accept those type of protocols and that kind of results, or you can say wait a minute...
me- I'll say wait a minute."Me, I will accept them because "DROWNING" and "DEATH TO HYPOTHERMIA" has nothing to do with "RESTRAINING".
T'man:
"The bmp committee DID have plenty of input- they choose to ignore it."That is absolutely untrue. They didn't ignore it, they simpy reached a different conclusion than you did. That doesn't mean they ignored it.
I have yet to hear any of the wildlife biologists say they wanted to prohibit drowning raccoons. They were simply testing "RESTRAINING" traps to see which would result in the least amount of damage.
Still buddies? LOL!
~SH~