Trapping Threatened Again in New Mexico

Last summer, we covered a story about New Mexico governor Bill Richardson banning trapping in New Mexico’s Gray Wolf Recovery Area.

Then, we noted in November that research was underway to determine the affect of trapping on wolves.  Results of that research don’t seem to have surfaced yet,  but with a new governor and legislature in the state, Richardson’s ruling could potentially be overturned.

But now we hear that “conservation” groups want to ban trapping on ALL public lands in New Mexico.

Conservation groups want wildlife officials to ban all recreational and commercial trapping on public lands in New Mexico.

The request was made this week despite a recent recommendation that game commissioners reconsider a temporary trapping ban in place in southwestern New Mexico where Mexican gray wolves have been reintroduced. The suggestion came from a small business task force appointed by Gov. Susana Martinez.

Read the full story here.

You can also find coverage of the story from the Trapper and Predator Caller blog.

Reynolds on Lynx and the ESA

V. Paul Reynolds, outdoors columnist with Maine’s Lewiston Sun Journal, and editor of the Northwoods Sporting Journal, wrote an engaging column about how the U.S. Endangered Species Act can make criminals of average folks.

William McCoy of Pennsylvania was sentenced to jail time for accidentally killing a Canada lynx in northern Maine and then, out of panic, attempting to cover it up.

As Reynolds points out:

Part of the problem is the Endangered Species Act itself. A “hanging judge” could technically have sent McCoy to a federal jail for six months and fined him $25,000. So Kravchuk can argue that her sentencing of trapper McCoy was reasonable and restrained.

He argues that biologically, the lynx population does not warrant protection under the ESA:

What she and the average citizen may not realize is that the lynx in Maine have substantially recovered to the point where federal protection has been unwarranted for some time now. In truth, the lynx remain federally protected by default: two years ago, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service seriously considered delisting the Maine lynx. That never happened, not for biological reasons, but for lack of funding and staff. A U.S. Fish and Wildlife biologist conceded as much during an interview with the Northwoods Sporting Journal.

In other words, the jailing of McCoy is, in effect, the product of governmental dithering and a law that has run amuck. Make no mistake, McCoy should have reported his incidental take of a lynx to authorities, and he should have been slapped with a fine. However, putting him behind bars for his mistake, especially in context of the bureaucratically delayed delisting of lynx, makes no sense at all. Judge Kravchuk’s threat to hand out longer prison terms to victimized ESA “miscreants” like McCoy, further marginalizes the credibility of the Endangered Species Act and, in some ways, raises questions about Judge Kravchuk’s capacity to exercise discretion in her rulings.

Read the column in its entirety here.

Eastern Timberwolf to be Delisted in 2011?

Trappers and hunters have a lot to look forward to in 2011, including the potential removal of a furbearer from the U.S. Endangered Species List, but I wouldn’t start holding my breath just yet.

The Trapper and Predator Caller blog reports that the Eastern Timber Wolf is expected to be removed from the Endangered Species List by the end of the year, returning wolf management to the hands of the individual states.  Expect numerous legal challenges from environmental groups, and a long, costly court battle.  The wolf populations in the West have been listed, delisted and relisted more than once, and the legal battles continue.  Science and politics usually don’t mix well, but a wolf delisting in the midwest would at least be a start.

Massachusetts Legislature May Ease Animal Damage Permitting Process

This fall, we covered a story about the Massachusetts legislature attempting to ease the red tape associated with trapping permits issued for animal damage control.  That bill appears to have stalled in the legislature, but Sen. Stanley Rosenberg is making an effort to move things forward again.

The legislation concerning the issuance and appeals process for landowners to obtain limited permits to trap beavers, muskrats and other “furbearing mammals” that pose a human risk to drinking water supplies has been batted back and forth between the governor, House and Senate.

In an effort to break a stalemate over a bill governing permits for beaver and other wildlife trapping, the state Senate passed a measure Tuesday attempting to collect more information about the number of permits issued each year at the local level and the impediments to obtaining those permits.

Hopefully with better data collection, the state will realize that there is a huge problem with people being denied permits from the Health Department, and legislation will be passed to ease the process.

Read the story here.

More on the Maine Lynx Lawsuit Resolution

Here’s the press release from the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife:

First Circuit United States Court of Appeals Upholds Maine’s Trapping Regulations

The First Circuit United States Court of Appeals this week affirmed a lower federal court’s ruling that denied a request from two organizations seeking to permanently enjoin Maine’s trapping regulations. The appeals court agreed that the groups failed to prove that Canada lynx as a species are irreparably harmed under the state’s rules.

The appeals court also took exception with the organizations’ request to change Maine’s regulations or create a working group to further study the issue.  The court noted that the groups “expressly disavowed such remedies before the district court” and that such “bait and switch” should be “deplored.”

The written decision by First Circuit United States Court of Appeals Chief Judge Sandra L. Lynch was received by the Office of the Maine Attorney General on Wednesday on behalf of Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife Commissioner Roland “Danny” Martin.

Also hearing the appeal were Circuit Judges Michael Boudin and Jeffrey R. Howard.

The request for permanent injunction – Animal Welfare Institute, et al. v. Roland D. Martin, Commissioner of the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (CV-08-267-B-W) – initially was filed in U.S. District Court in Bangor in August 2008. The Wildlife Alliance of Maine joined AWI as a party to this case.

In November 2009, U.S. District Court Chief Judge John A. Woodcock ruled that there was no evidence that trapping has any detrimental effect on the population of Canada lynx in Maine, and he declined to order the State of Maine to impose any new restrictions on trapping.

The Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife and the Office of the Maine Attorney General are pleased that the First Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the U.S. District Court decision.

“We thank the First Circuit Court of Appeals for its thorough examination of the U.S. District Court’s ruling, and for making the correct decision to uphold it,” said MDIF&W Commissioner Martin. “Wildlife management requires a balance between species protection and population control, and our biologists achieve that balance through research, in-the-field studies and the establishment of rules on legitimate harvesting tools such as trapping. Fortunately, the courts found that legal attempts to undermine biologists’ efforts were inadequate.”

Maine Attorney General Janet Mills added, “Special appreciation goes to Assistant Attorneys General Christopher Taub and Nancy Macirowski for their excellent advocacy both at trial and on appeal. Their arguments recognized the balancing that must take place in these cases and the values of Maine’s outdoor heritage and the interests of Maine’s sportsmen and women that must be weighed against the federal protections of wildlife.”

The Animal Welfare Institute and the Wildlife Alliance of Maine alleged that Maine, by allowing trappers to obtain permits to use foothold traps to catch non-threatened or non-endangered species, violated the federal Endangered Species Act because an individual lynx could incidentally be caught in the traps.

After a six-day hearing, however, Chief Judge Woodcock found that the groups failed to prove Canada lynx suffer serious physical injury from incidental takes in foothold traps, and therefore that the species was not threatened. He recognized that there is no evidence that trapping is having a detrimental effect on the population of Canada lynx in Maine, and declined to order the State of Maine to impose new restrictions on trapping.

Canada lynx are designated as a Threatened Species under the U.S. Endangered Species Act.

In Maine, it is estimated that there are at least 650 breeding adults and at least 1,000 total lynx. The U.S. District Court credited the evidence submitted by the Department regarding the population estimations.

Maine Assistant Attorney General Christopher C. Taub stated that the First Circuit’s decision “is significant because it conclusively establishes in Maine and other states within the court’s jurisdiction that anyone seeking an injunction under the Endangered Species Act must prove not only that the Act is being violated, but that the violation is causing irreparable harm to the species.”

Taub further noted that “compelling expert testimony, especially that of MDIF&W’s former chief wildlife biologist, Dr. Ken Elowe, conclusively established that there is no evidence suggesting that any single Canada lynx has suffered serious physical injury or death as a result of being caught in a foothold trap, much less that the traps pose any risk to the population as whole.”

Skip Trask, executive director of the Maine Trappers Association, an intervener in the lawsuit, called the decision timely and rewarding.

“We knew from day one of this lawsuit that trapping poses not threat to Maine’s healthy lynx population and it’s rewarding to know that some of the most respected federal judges in the land agree with us,” Trask said.  “Maine trappers would have been the biggest losers if this lawsuit had been successful. This decision is a huge win for the Department, for Maine trappers and for sportsmen and sportswomen across the country. As we head into the woods this fall to set our traplines, it’s a big relief to know that this unwarranted lawsuit is no longer a threat to our outdoor lifestyle.”

The 2010 general trapping season starts Oct. 31 and closes on Dec. 31, for most allowable species. Maine permits trapping of beaver, bobcat, coyote, fisher, fox, marten, mink, muskrat, opossum, otter, raccoon, red squirrel, skunk and weasel.

Since 1967, MDIF&W has made it illegal to intentionally hunt or trap Canada lynx, including restricting the type, size and placement of traps in Maine.

In 2008, MDIF&W recognized there was a gap in the clarity of its regulations regarding Conibear traps and how it could result in the incidental taking of Canada lynx. The U.S. District Court ordered MDIF&W to establish emergency rules clarifying the intent of Conibear trap restrictions to ensure that Canada lynx would be unlikely to be caught in these types of traps.

The Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife Advisory Council approved emergency regulations in two weeks, and those regulations went into effect during the 2008 trapping season.

The vast majority of Canada lynx caught in traps in Maine is not harmed and promptly released back into the wild. Major injuries are rare. Since 1999, only two lynx have been killed by legally set traps. By comparison, 22 lynx have been killed during the same time period after being struck by cars.

For several years, MDIF&W has been working with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to obtain what is known as an incidental take permit to protect the State from any further legal challenges. An incidental take permit allows lawful activities that by happenstance would result in the incidental take of an Endangered or Threatened species.

“Our effort to obtain an incidental take permit will be boosted by the federal Appeals Court ruling, particularly the affirmation that there is no evidence that trapping activity under Maine’s rules has a detrimental impact on Canada lynx,” according to John Boland, MDIF&W Acting Director of Resource Management.

Maine’s trapping laws are outlined in the “State of Maine Hunting and Trapping Laws and Rules” book that is given to hunters and trappers when they purchase a license. It also can be viewed on the Department’s website at www.mefishwildlife.com.

Maine Lynx Lawsuit Resolved

Here at TrappingToday, we’ve been following the Maine lynx lawsuit for quite some time.  You can find background on the issue by visiting the lynx issues category page here.

It finally appears that we have some closure to the issue and trappers, while having given up a lot in the process, have exited the process victorious over the animal rights activists.

Here’s an update from Skip Trask of the Maine Trappers Association:

Good afternoon – I just received word that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit has affirmed in all respects Judge Woodcock’s favorable judgment in the lynx lawsuit.  The First Circuit’s opinion is a published opinion and, as a result, is binding law in New England and persuasive precedent in the rest of the country.   The opinion makes it clear that plaintiffs seeking an injunction under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) must prove irreparable harm to the species and that courts are not required to issue injunctions to end ESA violations (even where plaintiffs prove that a violation has taken place) if plaintiffs fail to show irreparable harm.  This is a huge victory for Maine trappers.  This bogus lawsuit is no longer hanging over our heads as we start the 2010 trapping season.  This decision will make it much harder in the future for the animal fanatics to use the federal ESA to attack trapping, hunting or any other activity that could result in a threatened or endangered species being taken incidentally.  I’ll provide more details in the next MTA/MPGA newsletters.  Skip

Skip summed it up great.  It’s a huge victory and sets some very important precedent for similar lawsuits in the future.

Trapping Supplies Review, Black Bear Blog, and Trapper & Predator Caller blog have also reported on the story.

Research Underway in New Mexico Trapping Ban Area

A while back, I reported on a trapping ban instituted by New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson in the state’s gray wolf recovery area.  The ban was placed and extended with the a stipulation that a study would be performed to evaluate trapping’s potential impacts to wolves.

That study is now underway, with research being conducted by the University of New Mexico.

Most trappers and wildlife researchers should already be aware that impacts due to trapping are minimal, especially given the fact that professional biologists use the foothold trap to capture and release wolves for research purposes and introduction into new areas.

If the study is done in an unbiased manner and results are interpreted correctly, I suspect it will show that most current trapping methods would have no impacts to the wolf population.

Alaska Could Legalize Bear Trapping

The Alaska Board of Game is set to vote on a proposal to legalize the trapping and snaring of bears for the first time in the state’s history.  The proposal has some animal rights groups angry, but is supported by sportsmen and most residents in the affected areas.

……the head of Alaska’s largest sportsmen’s group said Friday the agency’s proposal to allow bear trapping is an attempt to give the public more hunting opportunities while building on the state’s aerial predator control program in which wolves and bears are killed to boost moose and caribou numbers.

“I think it is all in the same direction in trying to do proactive predator and prey management,” said Rod Arno, executive director of the Alaska Outdoor Council, when asked about agenda items added to a special meeting beginning next week in Anchorage. The meeting will be open to the public.

The proposal wouldn’t impact the entire state, only places where special seasons were set by the Board.

“This change will legalize public trapping of black bears in areas where the board establishes bear trapping seasons,” said Fish and Game Deputy Commissioner Pat Valkenburg.

While the plan targets black bears, some brown bears, also known as grizzlies, are expected to be trapped incidentally. Under the proposal, trapping may be closed by emergency order when unspecified numbers are reached.

Alaska would be the only state other than Maine to currently allow bear trapping.  In the state of Maine, trapping bears using cable foot snares is legal, but using steel foothold traps was outlawed several years ago in an attempt to appease animal rights activists in the state and beyond.

The proposal sounds like a good one, providing additional opportunity for Alaskans to manage their black bear population while adding recreational and economic opportunity to the area.  In a world where we seem to be losing more and more hunting and trapping opportunities every day, Alaska seems to be bucking the trend.  Hopefully it works.

Read the full story here.

UPDATE:  On October 14, 2010, Alaska Public Radio Network reported that the Board of Game has put the decision to legalize black bear trapping in some units on hold until 2012 to allow more time for public comment.

The state’s game board has put a decision on black bear snaring on hold until 2012.   The proposal before the board’s special meeting in Anchorage would have allowed for black bear trapping with snares in six Interior game management units.

Fish and Game officials had asked the board to defer the decision until the board of game meets in Ketchikan later this year to give the public time to weigh in on the issue. The Board agreed to that plan.  The next board meeting on Southcentral issues takes place in March of next year.

New Mexico Governor Bans Trapping in Wolf Recovery Area

Amidst a slew of propaganda from animal rights activists and members of the media, New Mexico governor Bill Richardson ordered the New Mexico Game and Fish Department to impose a six month ban on trapping in the area along the New Mexico-Arizona border where gray wolves were introduced beginning in 1998.

The ban halts trapping in the area until a study can be completed to evaluate the impacts of traps on wolves.  It’s assumed that after the study, the Game and Fish Department will impose new restrictions on trapping to minimize potential impacts on the wolves, if trapping is allowed to resume at all.  Just how they are going to carry out this study without actually ‘hurting’ more wolves is beyond me.

The New Mexico trapping ban is just the latest in a long line of recent trapping bans and restrictions all across the country, aiming to ‘reduce impacts’ on ‘endangered species’, many of which have been introduced by the government that’s restricting trapping to protect them.

Another interesting observation is the fact that trapping of all types is being banned in the area, not just trapping activities that could impact wolves.  For instance, under the executive order it will be illegal to trap with underwater sets for muskrats, or to use live cage traps for bobcat.

It should be interesting to see how the New Mexico trapping ban plays out, especially since the state will have a new governor after the upcoming elections.  We’ll be sure to keep you posted on any new developments.

Click here to read Richardson’s executive order

Here are a couple of related news stories:

Richardson orders temporary wolf-trapping ban

NM governor suspends trapping in wolf area

Here’s a map of the recovery area where the trapping ban will be enacted:

Montana Trap Ban Will Not Make Ballot

The initiative that could have ended trapping as we know it in the state of Montana will not be on the ballot this November.  With the deadline past for supporters of I-160, the effort to ban trapping on public lands in Montana, to gather enough signatures to put the question to the voters in November, signature numbers have fallen short.

Although the animal rights groups came very close to gathering the number of signatures needed to qualify the question for the ballot (20,318 of a needed 24,337), the shortfall signifies that there isn’t enough support (yet) for a ban on traditional trapping practices in the state.

Trappers dodged a bullet this time around, with Montanans for Effective Wildlife Management leading the charge to educate the public on why the trap ban would be a terrible idea.  Coming this close to getting the needed signatures, however, means that these groups will most certainly be back, and hopefully Montanans will be ready to fight them off again.

Trapping in Montana is a time honored tradition and a well-regulated wildlife management tool in the state even today.  The trap ban would have hindered the ability of Montanans to manage wildlife populations, control predator numbers and prevent animal damage.