Wolverine Quota Reduced, But Trapping Opportunity Remains in Montana

The Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks Commission recently voted to continue to allow wolverine trapping in the state, but has reduced the quota from ten animals to an allowable harvest of five wolverines statewide. The quota reduction was based on biological data and recommendations from agency biologists that suggested the harvest should be cut back.

While trappers would have liked to see a quota similar to previous years, most seem to understand FWP’s concerns and want to see a healthy population of wolverines maintained into the future.

“If it’s a choice of this plan or none, obviously we trappers will support this plan,” said trapper Don Bothwell of Kalispell, who represents the Montana Furbearer Conservation Alliance.

While environmental activists argue that killing wolverines isn’t worth the price of the pelts, many don’t seem to understand the value of having the opportunity to harvest such a rare and unique creature.

Trapper Tom Barnes of Dillon said that during a span of four years he has caught two wolverines while trying to trap another type of weasel, the pine marten. Barnes said he reveled in the privilege of trapping wolverines and had both prepared for permanent display. The few hundred dollars a pelt might have fetched was not a consideration, he said.

While many trappers argue that the reduced quota is overly conservative, some groups are protesting the fact that the state allows any harvest of wolverines, and are preparing to take legal action.

Defenders of Wildlife is among nine groups that gave notice of intent to sue the federal government if wolverines do not have Endangered Species Act protection by mid-September.

Let’s hope that sound science wins out in this debate. We should appreciate the fact that the state of Montana and its department of Fish, Wildlife & Parks is working hard to protect species like the wolverine while providing a unique opportunity for limited harvest.

And as a Montana trapper, I can only hope that the opportunity to capture a wolverine remains on the horizon as I take to the forest in the coming years.

Wolf Management Stalled

Well, it doesn’t look like we’ll be seeing any hunting or trapping seasons for wolves any time in the near future.

I wrote a post a couple of weeks ago mentioning the possibility of a wolf season in the makings in the state of Michigan. Since then, the Michigan DNR adopted an updated wolf management plan, which didn’t include any hunting or trapping component, despite arguments that a wolf season might garner more public acceptance of wolves in the state.

Meanwhile, gray wolves had been removed from the Endangered Species List in the Rocky Mountains and the states of Idaho, Montana and Wyoming were preparing wolf management plans in anticipation of taking the reins from the federal government. Discussion about upcoming wolf seasons sparked renewed interest from hunters, suggesting the possibility that the wolf could be more than just a predatory nuisance to many who live in wolf territory.

The renewed hope for scientific wolf management was temporarily killed last week, though, when a federal judge ordered that the gray wolf be placed back on the Endangered Species List. How does a single judge have the power to reverse a decision made by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and agreed upon by three states, based on sound scientific facts? The Black Bear Blog asks the same question.

Simply put, I’m not optimistic about hunting or trapping for wolves in the Lower 48 anytime soon.

Trapping Controversy in Nova Scotia

The conflict between trapping and pets is often misunderstood and severely damaging to the future of legal trapping in North America.  Pets are occasionally caught in traps set for furbearing wildlife, and each incident is heartfelt and depressing, usually stirring up controversy over whether trapping should be legal or not.

In a recent news article, Nova Scotia trapper Gary Fisher attempts to explain how today’s trappers operate in the province, and describe efforts taken to avoid catching pets in traps.

“We’re really trying not to catch people’s pets. That’s the message I want to convey,” Mr. Fisher says after demonstrating three types of raccoon sets and an underwater set for trapping beavers.

Fisher is one of many trappers who are pushing for others to be more responsible about where and how they set their traps, while at the same time urging pet owners to obey the law and keep their pets from running free in wildlife habitat.

Unfortunately, not everybody listens.

The Trapping Awareness Project started in 2005 amid concerns over landowners’ rights and pets getting caught in traps. There were nine incidents a couple of seasons ago, Mr. Morse says, but in each case, the trapper or pet owner wasn’t following the rules.

Partially due to concerns about capturing pets, many in the province are trying to pass a law requiring trappers to obtain permission before setting traps on private property, which currently isn’t required unless the property is posted.

They also want to require written permission to set traps within 1 kilometer of a dwelling, which seems to be an unreasonable request because of the high density of dwellings in many areas where furbearer population control (through trapping) is neccessary.

“In essence, if you take a map and you start to draw one-kilometre circles around properties, you discover you would need to have, in some cases, hundreds and even thousands of written permission statements in order to curb nuisance wildlife, and that is just obviously not practical,” Mr. Morse says.

“If you put too many obstacles in place, you’re going to put an end to this practice.”

And ending the practice of trapping is certainly the goal of some.  For others, they simply want to make sure that their pets aren’t caught in traps.

Ultimately, that requires the responsible actions of trappers and pet owners alike.

Be sure to read the story and check out the comments section.  Nova Scotians have as many different opinions about trapping as you could imagine!

Montana FWP Commission Keeps Wolverine Trapping Legal

Kudos to the Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks Commission for taking a stand and allowing wolverine trapping for another year. During a commission meeting this month, the FWP commission, which sets hunting, fishing and trapping regulations, denied appeals to stop the harvest of wolverines.

The wolverine is perhaps the wildest species in the weasel family, typically residing in forested wilderness areas. Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks conservatively estimates that at least 200 wolverines reside in the state, and the commission approved a harvest quota of 9 animals for the 2008 season.

The opportunity to catch a wolverine is something that makes Montana truly unique, and even though I may never get my hands on one, I feel lucky to be one of the few Montana trappers who have that chance.

Read the story here.

At the same meeting, the Commission denied requests to allow trapping of swift fox, a rare fox sparsely distributed in a few areas of the state.  Read more here.

Minnesota Ordered to Avoid Incidental Trapping of Lynx

After a brief intermission, the Canada lynx issue is back to the forefront of outdoor politics in the state of Minnesota. This past Monday, a federal judged ruled that the Minnesota DNR “promptly take all action necessary to [ensure] no further taking of threatened Canada lynx”. Basically, this means that the state must apply for an “incidental take permit” (ITP) from the federal government, which would protect the state against any further lawsuits resulting from lynx killed as a result of state regulated trapping.

This new ruling comes at the heels of two recent federal lawsuits regarding the taking of lynx: one in Minnesota and one in Maine. Both lawsuits were filed by animal rights groups, and both were settled with the agreement that the respective states file for ITP’s with the feds. Minnesota reached their agreement with very little compromise in trapping regulations, while the Maine settlement resulted in some very significant changes in the way trappers were able to operate.

Now, just months later, the Center for Biological Diversity and the Animal Protection Agency are back in Minnesota and are demanding that additional regulations be placed on trappers to prevent the taking of lynx. A simple look into the history of actions by such groups indicates that they do not back down until they achieve their view of success.

The likely result of the new lawsuit is that Minnesota will have to significantly change their trapping regulations similar to the changes implemented by the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife. Temporary regulations that both sides can agree on will be put in place while the ITP is filed, and ITP regulations will be at least as strict, if not stricter than the temporary regulations. The ITP process is supposed to take about a year, but as we all know, dealing with the federal government almost always takes more time that expected.

This new lawsuit raises a number of questions that we, as concerned trappers, should be asking ourselves. For instance, do lawsuit settlements work, and should trappers compromise their rights? How far are these groups willing to go? Is their goal really to protect lynx, or will they continue to use the Endangered Species Act to further regulate trappers and hunters until these activities are all but eliminated?

A recent quote in the Duluth News Tribune may provide some of the answer to these questions:

“If they (DNR) can’t demonstrate another way to avoid trapping lynx, it could prohibit all trapping in the lynx range. We’d be very much in favor of that,’’ said Nicole Paquette, attorney for California-based Animal Protection Institute which filed the suit against the DNR.

I think it’s safe to say that the API and other groups are determined to eliminate trapping and will use all of the legal and financial resources available until they accomplish this goal. The lynx battle will not stop in Minnesota and Maine, either. Other states that have small lynx populations, like Utah, Montana and Idaho will likely be subject to future lawsuits to influence trapping and other outdoor activities. Maine and Minnesota were likely chosen to set a precedent for future lawsuits because they provide political environments that are less hostile toward animal rights groups and provided such groups with better chances for success.

Despite their relatively small numbers and meager financial resources, trappers and other hunting/fishing/outdoor groups are not backing down from these suits without a fight. Groups like the Minnesota Trappers Association, National Trappers Association, Fur Takers of America, Minnesota Outdoor Heritage Alliance and Safari Club International are all working to fight this battle to the best of their capacity.

There’s little question that the trappers and sportsmen have science on their side. Only a handful of Canada lynx, which are at the southern tip of their geographic range in Maine and Minnesota, have been killed in traps over the past few years, which pales in comparison to the number that die of natural causes, the greatest of which is usually starvation due to lack of food resources. If the number of lynx killed incidentally by trappers were significant, the states would undoubtedly implement their own measures to protect these lynx populations. A plethora of data collected over the years shows that factors influencing lynx numbers are independent of and not influenced by trapping activities. However, the Federal Endangered Species Act can sometimes trump sound science, and groups using the ESA to restrict the activities of others often know or care little about wildlife management and populations dynamics.

If you’re interested in supporting trapping and sporting groups in the fight against lawsuits like these, I would encourage you to join and become active in your local and national trapping associations and other groups that work to preserve this unique heritage while ensuring the long term viability and health of furbearer populations.

See a list of trapping organizations here.

See the news stories below:

Judge orders Minnesota DNR to reduce accidental lynx trappings

Minnesota DNR told to put a stop to trapping Canada lynx

Division Among Hunters and Trappers Weakens Sportsmen

Unity among hunting, fishing and trapping groups is a very important aspect of preserving the outdoor heritage enjoyed by participants in these activities.  Being a hunter, fisherman and trapper myself, I find it hard to understand why trappers and hound hunters can’t seem to get along in many areas.

I hate to pick on any one state in particular, but Michigan has recently been the battleground for heated debate between trappers and houndsmen.  As far as I can understand, houndsmen don’t like trappers because their dogs occasionally get caught in traps.  Trappers counter that hounds are often on private land where their owners don’t have permission to be hunting.  Now obviously houndsmen often can’t control precisely where their dogs will end up, and trappers can’t prevent certain types of traps from capturing hounds.  Maybe if each group were a bit more understanding of the other, there would be room enough for both to engage in their preferred activities.

Unfortunately, trappers and houndsmen continue to fight.  In 2004, the Michigan DNR proposed a bobcat trapping season in the Michigan’s northern Lower Peninsula, and were taken to court by bear hunters, claiming that negative affects on the bobcat population were not considered.  Now do you really think the hunters suing the DNR really thought the bobcat population was in trouble?  How such an argument can be made with a straight face is puzzling to me, considering that the same hunters who target bears in the northern Lower also hunt bobcats in January and February. 

After a judge ruled in favor of bear hunters and stopped the trapping season in 2006, the ruling was challenged and a higher court overturned the decision.  Looks like bobcat trapping will once again be legal in the northern Lower.

While all of this fighting is going on between hound hunters, trappers and the DNR, I bet the animal rights groups are sitting back and smiling, knowing that division among sporting groups makes their goal of ending all forms of hunting and fishing much easier to achieve.    

In an ideal situation, trappers would support hunting groups and hunters would support trapping interests.  United, both groups could come together as a stronger opposition to those aiming to destroy both. 

Trapping Near Trails: Avoid the Controversy

The issue of trapping on public trails has been a hot topic in the news lately.  It seems like every few weeks a story comes out about a hiker’s dog being killed in a trap, refuelling debate about how trappers should operate.

New York State recently adopted emergency trapping regulations that made it illegal to set traps that could kill dogs near public trails in the state.  The Nevada Board of Wildlife Commissioners also recently enacted regulations prohibiting trapping within 1,000 feet of designated hiking trails, and prohibiting trapping near trails in Alaska’s Chugach State Park is currently being discussed.

Such publicity isn’t a good thing for trappers, and the resulting legislation isn’t necessarily a good thing either.  Regulations like the ones discussed above arise directly as a result of incidental pets being captured in traps, and can sometimes limit responsible trappers from operating in order to control the problems caused by a few. 

The solution is for us as trappers to educate each other and make sure that the only sets we make near public trails are certain to be dogproof.  It’s true that most areas have leash laws and trappers may be operating in a legal manner when a pet is allowed to roam and is killed in a trap.  But sometimes being legally ‘in the right’ just isn’t enough, and can give a bad reputation to trappers everywhere.  Most of these new regulations are a direct result of political action taken by pet owners who have had a bad experience with traps.

The simple fact is that using common sense and not setting potential pet-catching sets near hiking trails is the best way to prevent damaging the reputation of the rest of the trapping community, and should keep trapping regulations from becoming tougher near public trails.

The Lynx Issue Revisited

 

Sportsmen and property rights advocates take notice: the Canada lynx issue is far from over, and much of the controversy of the status of this species in the United States may just be in its infancy. 

Today, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service reversed seven rulings of additional protection for species under the Endangered Species Act, including one which denied critical habitat designation for Canada lynx in the state of Maine. 

The original decision regarding critical habitat designation was made because the Fish and Wildlife Service determined that landowners in the state were already managing their land to the benefit of lynx, and that critical habitat designation would do nothing to further protect the species. 

However, the decision not to list critical habitat has been called to question, after an investigation recealed that Julie MacDonald, who oversaw the USFWS, pressured scientists to alter their findings in a number of cases. 

This unfortunate incident will cause the Service to take another look at the critical habitat designation ruling, and may result in more government control over private land designated as lynx habitat.  Stay tuned.

Read the AP story here

Read more about lynx issues in Maine at Tom Remington’s Black Bear Blog

Settlement Reached in Maine Lynx Trapping Lawsuit

Well, here it is.  After a few months of back and forth, the State of Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife has settled a lawsuit with the California-based Animal Protection Institute, which sued the state under the premise that state-approved trapping activities threaten Canada lynx. 

State Agrees to Restrict Trapping to Protect Threatened Lynx

Sportsmen Settle Suit and Protect Trapping in Maine

The results of the settlement have been sort of a mixed bag for trappers.  On the one hand, trapping in northern Maine can continue.  On the other, however, trappers have had to give up some important tools and methods, even though trapping has only resulted in two dead lynx in Maine, compared to 11 killed by automobiles. 

As a result of the lawsuit, the use of conibears on the ground has been prohibited, except in certain cases.  Furthermore, the most effective coyote traps (traps with a jaw spread of over 5 3/8″) are no longer allowed in northern Maine. 

One of the many problems I see with this is that restricting the use of these traps will make it harder for trappers to catch coyotes, and coyotes compete with lynx for a common food source, especially during winters with little snow. 

The bottom line is that research has shown that lynx populations are driven primarily by the snowshoe hare cycle, and most lynx deaths are a result of starvation.  In addition, fishers have been documented killing a number of lynx, and the state has taken measures to reduce fisher catch because of concern for declining fisher populations.  So we’re changing laws that may result in an increase in species that cause detriment to lynx populations.  But hey, we reduced the chances of killing 2 lynx over the next 10 years by restricting the rights of trappers.  Smart.

See more on the issue from Tom Remington’s Black Bear Blog here and here

New York DEC Adopts Emergency Trapping Regulations

To avoid the potential for trappers to incidentally harm or kill dogs with bodygripper traps set on or near the ground, the New York Department of Environmental Conservation has adopted emergency regulations that will restrict the way many trappers operate.  The regulations deal mainly with dog-resistant cubby sets, blind conibear sets, and mandatory trap setback distances from public trails. 

The New York State Trappers Association supported the regulations, and encouraged their trappers to make sets that avoid the potential to catch dogs even before the new rules were in place.  The regulations were already in the rule-making phase, but the DEC adopted them as emergency rules to avoid potential conflicts with pet owners in the upcoming trapping season.

See the full story here