Another Native vs. Transplant Montanan Conflict.....

[BuzzH]

JC,

Lots of good biological reasons to allow trapping...pretty much the same arguement that you make for capping a deer. Most good trappers I knew also utilized more than just the pelt. Most carcasses were used for bait for other animals.

Also, very rarely are non-target animals taken by a trapper that has more than 2 firing brain cells in their head. I wouldnt want to guess how many animals I've trapped, but its a bunch. I never caught anyones dog.

Sure, you might catch a raccoon or muskrat in a mink set...but thats not indiscriminate killing.

Its pretty obvious you never spent any time trapping, its a lot more precise than just slamming some steel on the ground and hoping you catch something. In my opinion, you have to understand the behavior of animals to a much higher degree than you do say...rifle hunting deer/elk/antelope. You have to learn how to read sign, learn the travel routes, learn what they eat, where they live...all to the extent that you have to guess, down to a single footstep, where that animal will be. Lots different than wailing away at an elk at 400 yards with a center-fire rifle.

Lots of good uses for the fur as well...cowboy hats, coats, etc. etc. etc.

If done responsibly, there isnt a thing wrong with trapping.

 

[mtmiller]

Buzz, I am very naive to trapping regs in MT. Is there a regulation on how often a trap must be vistited? My neighbor traps a lot and he has told me that a cat in a trap will be fine for a week. This seems like way to long in my opinion, but as I mentioned I am not educated on trapping at all. I know with the crappy weather lately I have not seen his pickup move and he has hundreds of traps out.

IIRC, traps in SD had to be checked every 48 hours. Is this the case in MT? I did a quick search, but found nothing on a regulation. Do you think there should be a regulation and if so, what do you think is an appropriate time?

Another question, do you think trapping on public land is a commercial activity?

 

[smalls]

I may get flamed for this, but National Forests, BLM and the ilk are supposed to be "multiple-use" lands. My wife doesn't hunt, but she loves to go for hikes in the NF around Helena. When we go we always have our dog with us, a mini-schnauzer. If my dog got it's leg in a trap, I'd be fuggin' pissed off...but the owner of the traps life would be threatened by my wife. We've seen a resurgence in trapping in recent years with some furs being bought at quite a premium (like bobcats). At some point of popularity, trapping begins to restrict the options of "multiple-use" as it presents dangers to pets and children. That said I don't think trapping should be outlawed, even on public lands, but perhaps some sort of warning or identification around/above a trap could be used (I will admit my ignorance of trapping regulations and state that I don't know what is necessary currently to mark traps).



BTW, in the woods we always keep our mutt leashed...but we rarely stick to the trail system.

If done responsibly, there isnt a thing wrong with trapping.

Don't disagree.

 

[shoots-straight]

Jose, all the things Buzz stated are true, but there's more. Trapping and hunting go hand in hand. It's kind of like the spotted owl to the environment, indicator species. The owl is a species that lets us know how the environment is doing. Well if trapping gets banned then it's an indicator of whats to follow for hunting. Trapping is the pursuit of certain species of animals. You don't go around indescriminatly catching everything that lives. You catch only what your looking for. You might catch a bobcat in a coyote set, but will never catch a coyote in a bobcat only set. If done right even lynx will not be caught in bobcat sets. Education is the key. Montana Trappers Association is working to make all new trapper take a trapper ed course. There's only one way of controlling certain species of fur bearers, that's trapping.

Also I might add, what I saw of the situation, things looked set up.
1). The traps were 20' of a main recreation road.
2). The trap was brand new, no rust, and no wax and die.
3). In the pc of the guy with his dog the dog didn't look in direst.
4). The guy happened to have cable cutters with him.
5). The guy had a video camera to film it and put it on youtube.

BTW, he is originally from California.

 

[BuzzH]

smalls,

If your dog its leg pinched in a trap, it wouldnt be any big deal. It wont bust its leg and all you have to do is take the trap off. The dog will be a lot smarter next time.

We used to trap a piece of private near Missoula and the owner had a dog that followed us. One day he got his paw pinched in a fox trap. The dog yelped, but we let him right out and he never got pinched by a trap again.

I could use your same arguement against you...when you dont ALLOW me to trap, why should I allow your old lady to walk in the National Forest?

It sounds to me like the Montana trappers association is trying to resolve some issues...like not trapping in very popular recreation areas that have heavy use, showing anyone that wants how to get a trap off a pet, etc.

What I dont see in the article about the dickhead californian is any workable solutions.

I think the bottom line is that common sense on both sides can go a long way to avoiding problems. Theres no way I'd hang a fuggin' sign near one of my traps, the trap would be gone in 2 seconds. I think people should control their dogs and assume some responsibility of little fluffy running around the woods. And trappers should stay out of high use areas. That would solve 99% of the issues.

Miller,

Its been years since I trapped in Montana but it was every 48 hours. I rarely, I mean rarely didnt check mine every day. I was also a big fan of the conibears, and things caught in those arent alive when you find them.

 

[JoseCuervo]

JC,

Lots of good biological reasons to allow trapping...pretty much the same arguement that you make for capping a deer. Most good trappers I knew also utilized more than just the pelt. Most carcasses were used for bait for other animals.

Buzz, what is the reason for allowing the commercial exploitation of wildlife? I don't shoot deer for dollars.

Also, very rarely are non-target animals taken by a trapper that has more than 2 firing brain cells in their head. I wouldnt want to guess how many animals I've trapped, but its a bunch. I never caught anyones dog.

Is there an acceptable "collateral" damage? "Rarely" implies that it does happen. I know when deer hunting, "collateral damage" is unacceptable.

Sure, you might catch a raccoon or muskrat in a mink set...but thats not indiscriminate killing.

When you hunt deer, you generally, if memory serves me correct, try and target old age class deer. With trapping, how do you target the specific sex or age of the animal? if you can't do it, aren't you being indiscriminate?

Its pretty obvious you never spent any time trapping, its a lot more precise than just slamming some steel on the ground and hoping you catch something. In my opinion, you have to understand the behavior of animals to a much higher degree than you do say...rifle hunting deer/elk/antelope. You have to learn how to read sign, learn the travel routes, learn what they eat, where they live...all to the extent that you have to guess, down to a single footstep, where that animal will be. Lots different than wailing away at an elk at 400 yards with a center-fire rifle.

You are correct, I have never spent any time trapping unless you count mice in the house. And there, it was mostly about cutting the cheese correctly or spreading the peanut butter. There are lots of things that I have never done, but I can have a pretty informed opinion on them. I don't have to smoke crack to know that it ain't a good idea.

Lots of good uses for the fur as well...cowboy hats, coats, etc. etc. etc.

Yeah, like that will really convince me that it is a good thing so that we can provide a bunch of drugstore cowboys and Welfare Ranchers with fur cowboy hats....

If done responsibly, there isnt a thing wrong with trapping.

What is "responsible"? Was market hunting of ducks 100 years ago responsible? how can market trapping of animals be responsible?

 

[JoseCuervo]

Jose, all the things Buzz stated are true, but there's more. Trapping and hunting go hand in hand. It's kind of like the spotted owl to the environment, indicator species. The owl is a species that lets us know how the environment is doing. Well if trapping gets banned then it's an indicator of whats to follow for hunting.

Cough, cough, bullshit, cough, cough.... Trapping and hunting do not go "hand in hand". Trapping and mining or trapping and logging go hand in hand as they are both the commercial exploitation of natural resources. Just like "assault weapons and hunting" go hand in hand, the claims that "trapping and hunting" go hand in hand are the last gasp efforts of a bunch of losing trappers and assault weapon owners trying to ride the coattails and good graces that responsible hunters have created.

Education is the key. Montana Trappers Association is working to make all new trapper take a trapper ed course.

Damn, I wish I had a dollar for every time I have heard Fat-Assed ATV Riders claiming that their "Association" is working to "edjumacate" the 1% of Fat-Assed ATV riders who give the rest of the Fat-Assed crew a bad name. If the best argument you have is that you are going to begin edjumacating new members, you have already admitted the past didn't work.

There's only one way of controlling certain species of fur bearers, that's trapping.

Why do you need to "control" certain species??? I am pretty sure the species can "control" themselves.

 

[Big Fin]

Wow, it amazes me that hunters would question trapping.

This comes from a guy who paid for his first year of college trapping beaver and muskrats in northern Minnesota, and all my high school "running money" came from the same. Trapped bobcats while going to college in Reno, and made decent money doing it in my spare time. As such, I am probably biased, but at least informed.

If you buy into the argument that hunting has some biological/management value by controlling populations, I find it hard to reconcile while you would view trapping any differently. Maybe those questioning trapping don't view hunting as having any biological/management value.

If you worry that trapping is cruel, which it is not, if done by anyone who has the slightest clue about trapping, why are you not concerned about pain possibly inflicted by fishing, especially catch and release, or hunting? After all, we all know animals don't die instantly in many hunting situations.

Seems as though many have fallen for the BS they see on TV, and formulated opinions about trapping without having a clue how it works. For those who don't understand, I provide the following.

Leghold traps do not kill by breaking legs. They restrain the animal by clamping down on the pad of the foot. Blood circulation is stopped and the foot goes numb. The animal stays there until such time the trapper arrives and kills it with his weapon.

Leghold traps in water sets for mink, beaver, otter, and muskrat are set to drown the animal almost immediately. Very little struggle. You show up, and the animal is dead in the water.

Conibear traps are set in water. At least in MT, are not allowed on land, unless they are the smallest of small varieties, which I can put my hand in without getting hurt. These traps kill instantly. The beaver puts his head in the trap, springs the trigger, and instantly has a broken neck.

Snares wrap around the neck of the canine and within minutes, they are choked to death.

Q: Are there some guys who don't know WTF they are doing, and they use too big of a trap for a dry land leg hold set? Yup.

Q: Do some idiots break the law and set big conibears on dry land? Yup.

Q: Are some guys so stupid as to set a snare where a dog might walk by? Yup.


But, are those any different than the following questions:

Q: Are there some hunters who don't practice with their weapons and make poor hits, causing animal loss, or unnecessary sufferring?

Q: Are there times when the hunter does everything right, but the animal moves, the wind drifts the bullet/arrow, etc. yet an animals may suffer longer than we wished?

Q: Are there stupid assed hunters that violate laws and make the rest of us look like a bunch of jerks?


If someone sees big differences in the questions asked above, I would be interested in knowing what those are.

Some will tell me that a hunter eats what he kills, where as a trapper does not. I hope hunters eat what they kill, but unfortunately, know many who don't. Is there something wrong with the guy who uses the money from trapping to buy his groceries, rather than eating what he killed/caught?

I come from a family of loggers, but am probably the most outspoken critic of much logging that occurs on national forests. Yet, done properly, and with full understanding and consideration of all aspects affected, I support logging, and other utilization of renewable natural resources, which if done properly, is exactly what trapping is.

If some have developed their own personal hatred for wise utilization and conservation of renewable resources, whether for legal commerical use or personal consumption, well, we are just gonna have to disagree on that. Don't waste you time trying to change my opinion, as both of our opinions are just that, opinions.

Glad to hear those of you who state you don't know much about trapping and are asking questions. Those making bold, and IMHO, uninformed statements seem to be following the path that so many hunters complain about when uninformed folks bash hunting.

Any hunter criticizing legal trapping ought not to be running around talking about anti-hunters being uninformed idiots, because when he looks in the mirror, he is seeing the same.

Any guy who lets a bobcat stay in a trap for a week, better hope no other trapper finds out, as most trappers I know would call him out, or turn him in. It is that kind of BS that gives some anti-trapper the evidence to conclude all trappers are idiots. Sorry there are guys like that Miller, but like hunting, and other aspects, idiots exist.

Happy Trapping!

A weekend worth of fun.
View attachment 7162

This hide now resides as a pillow in my man cave.
View attachment 7163

 

[BuzzH]

JC,

Just so you know, there are limits imposed on the number of animals a trapper can take for most species. So, its not indiscriminate. Further, any trapper worth a squirt of piss further limits his take to never deplete a viable population of fur bearers in his trapping territory.

When I trapped I never took all the available fur bearers I could have. Left plenty to ensure a viable population.

Just like Bigfin said, theres no reason you can give me that would view trapping as being any different than hunting.

Controling a population of deer is no different than controling a population of fur bearers. All fur bearers can over-populate themselves very quickly. Nothing wrong with taking excess deer and nothing wrong with taking excess fur bearers.

The idea of trapping needs no defense...only more defenders.

Heres a link to the MT trapping regs:

http://fwp.mt.gov/hunting/trapping/default.html

Bigfin, I think you can still use 220's and 330's on dry land, but there are some new regs where you can set them. I used both 220's and 330's for bobcats...smashes them flat.

 

[BuzzH]

Bigfin,

Heres a set for bobcats with a customer that fell victim to a 330...

Same set took another customer...male fisher:

Finally, one of the last legal lynx ever taken in Montana. I think the quota in the state was 2...one on the east and one on the west side of the continental divide. This one closed the season on the west side. A few yeats later you couldnt legally trap them.

I always kind of liked this picture too, didnt really take many trapping pictures when I trapped. Wish I would have.

Beaver in a 330 on the dry land...just like I planned it. Notice he didnt even move the sticks I used to stabilize the springs...dead instantly.

 

[Wyodeerhunter]

cool pics buzz. would love to get into trapping but do not have the time to give it a respectable try.

do you still have the lynx? way bad ass.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Wow, it amazes me that hunters would question trapping.

It amazes me that more hunters don't question things, instead, their blind obedience is amazing to me. Shouldn't we question more in life?

This comes from a guy who paid for his first year of college trapping beaver and muskrats in northern Minnesota, and all my high school "running money" came from the same. Trapped bobcats while going to college in Reno, and made decent money doing it in my spare time.

We all did things in "collage" that we shouldn't have.... It doesn't make you a bad person, usually, it just means you had too much to drink....

If you buy into the argument that hunting has some biological/management value by controlling populations, I find it hard to reconcile while you would view trapping any differently. Maybe those questioning trapping don't view hunting as having any biological/management value.

How does trapping (or hunting) provide any biological/management value in controlling populations? If you want to control populations, Mother Nature is pretty damnned efficient. Put a few wolves in the state, you got populations controlled. Doesn't make any sense to see pictures of dead Bobcats, Lynx, Wolves, Coyotes and then have people saying we need to "control" other species.... Explain the "biological/management" value of trapping predators and then having to trap prey to "control" species.

If you worry that trapping is cruel, which it is not, if done by anyone who has the slightest clue about trapping, why are you not concerned about pain possibly inflicted by fishing, especially catch and release, or hunting? After all, we all know animals don't die instantly in many hunting situations.

The only reason to care that trapping is cruel is because of the bad press that floats around.

Seems as though many have fallen for the BS they see on TV, and formulated opinions about trapping without having a clue how it works. For those who don't understand, I provide the following.

I have yet to see a news story about commercial exploitation of wildlife for industrial uses, so, it seems like my BS opinion must come from actual thought, introspection, and likely, superior intellect.

Leghold traps do not kill by breaking legs. They restrain the animal by clamping down on the pad of the foot. Blood circulation is stopped and the foot goes numb. The animal stays there until such time the trapper arrives and kills it with his weapon.

Leghold traps in water sets for mink, beaver, otter, and muskrat are set to drown the animal almost immediately. Very little struggle. You show up, and the animal is dead in the water.

I have had a couple of close calls with drowning. In the Salmon River, the Payette River, and in the Snake River below Hell's Canyon. I can assure you, just because you weren't there to witness it, there was a HUGE amount of struggling.

Q: Are there some guys who don't know WTF they are doing, and they use too big of a trap for a dry land leg hold set? Yup.

Q: Do some idiots break the law and set big conibears on dry land? Yup.

Q: Are some guys so stupid as to set a snare where a dog might walk by? Yup.


But, are those any different than the following questions:

Q: Are there some hunters who don't practice with their weapons and make poor hits, causing animal loss, or unnecessary sufferring?

Q: Are there times when the hunter does everything right, but the animal moves, the wind drifts the bullet/arrow, etc. yet an animals may suffer longer than we wished?

Q: Are there stupid assed hunters that violate laws and make the rest of us look like a bunch of jerks?

Are you somehow advocating that because there are dumbshit unethical hunters that we have to tolerate dumbshit unethical trappers? I can't make that leap of inclusion. As hunters, we should be trying to push the dumbshits out of the sport of hunting, same for trapping.

If someone sees big differences in the questions asked above, I would be interested in knowing what those are.

Why should Hunters be forced to align with Trappers, Assault Weapon Owners, ATV Riders, Loggers, Pot Growers, Game Farm Owners, Corn Flinger Makers, and other assorted Riff-Raff?

Some will tell me that a hunter eats what he kills, where as a trapper does not. I hope hunters eat what they kill, but unfortunately, know many who don't. Is there something wrong with the guy who uses the money from trapping to buy his groceries, rather than eating what he killed/caught?

How can it ever be acceptable to sell wildlife?

I come from a family of loggers, but am probably the most outspoken critic of much logging that occurs on national forests. Yet, done properly, and with full understanding and consideration of all aspects affected, I support logging, and other utilization of renewable natural resources, which if done properly, is exactly what trapping is.

And why have there been ANY changes in the way logging (or grazing, or mining, or etc....) is conducted? Because people actually QUESTIONED the way things were being done. Do you think loggers would have voluntarily quit cutting all the way down to thru the riparian buffers if it weren't for people questioning (and filing lawsuits ) to do the right thing?

If some have developed their own personal hatred for wise utilization and conservation of renewable resources, whether for legal commerical use or personal consumption, well, we are just gonna have to disagree on that. Don't waste you time trying to change my opinion, as both of our opinions are just that, opinions.

Is there any amount of pictures of Dubya's irresponsible energy policies that Oak, Miller, Buzz, and others have posted of the drilling of Colorado and Wyoming that will show you "wise utilization" doesn't work well for hunters?

Glad to hear those of you who state you don't know much about trapping and are asking questions. Those making bold, and IMHO, uninformed statements seem to be following the path that so many hunters complain about when uninformed folks bash hunting.

My guess is something like 90% of "those" are uninformed, and will always be uninformed, but, if hunters do blantantly stupid things, the 90% will be against us without needing information. Aligning with trappers, Assault Weapon Owners, ATV Riders, Loggers, Pot Growers, Game Farm Owners, Corn Flinger Makers, and other assorted Riff-Raff might be one of those things.

Any hunter criticizing legal trapping ought not to be running around talking about anti-hunters being uninformed idiots, because when he looks in the mirror, he is seeing the same.

Who claims anti-hunters are uninformed?

 

[JoseCuervo]

JC,

Just so you know, there are limits imposed on the number of animals a trapper can take for most species. So, its not indiscriminate. Further, any trapper worth a squirt of piss further limits his take to never deplete a viable population of fur bearers in his trapping territory.

Excuse my cynicsm, but haven't we heard how Welfare Ranchers are the best custodians of My Public Lands because they are the ones that make a living and a lifestyle off grazing on My Public Lands? Why are trappers better custodians than Welfare Ranchers?

Just like Bigfin said, theres no reason you can give me that would view trapping as being any different than hunting.

We don't allow the commercial sale of game we hunt. Seems different than trapping.

Controling a population of deer is no different than controling a population of fur bearers. All fur bearers can over-populate themselves very quickly. Nothing wrong with taking excess deer and nothing wrong with taking excess fur bearers.

How does "excess" come to be? Because we decided to "control" all the wolves, bears, and lions to allow "excess" deer and elk to roam? Won't populations "control" themselves via carrying capacity, predator/prey relationship, and periodic disease? Why do populations need "controlled"?

 

[Stillookinfor200]

I DO hope you're right Buzz about the organizational skills of "anti" trappers, and their political strength in general, (at least in Mt) Just dont let your guard down, as we all know, it sometimes doesnt take but a few people to "blindside" what we thought was all but written in stone. Just a few of ....the right (or wrong should I say) people. I do believe there are some legitimate (not legitimate to my beliefs, but legitimate as far as possibly detrimental to trapping in the NW) threats that will arise sooner than later. Sure hope Im wrong, I usually am (or considered so by others)

Nice beavers guys.

 

[BuzzH]

JC,

If you dont like trapping, thats fine.

The thing is though, its highly regulated and most all pelts are required to be tagged with a CITES tag. Fur buyers are also required to be permitted.

Its not a free-for-all like you're making it sound and the commercial aspect of it is tightly regulated by both state and federal regulation. Been part of the economy of the US for a very long time.

Again, I'm not asking you to change your opinion, but for the benefit of others I think its important they know the truth.

 

[Big Fin]

Quite a response Jose. I give you credit for your creativity and humor, but you fail miserably in facts and understanding of the topic at hand.

But please, continue..............

 

[BuzzH]

JC,

You're wrong...we do allow commercial sale of the game we hunt. Go check ebay, you can buy antlers, horns, mounts, hides, capes. Cant sell the meat...but wait...actually you can in some states. Check the Arizona regs.

Tell me what the difference is between selling a legally harvested bobcat pelt with a CITES permit and an elk cape? Not much, other than the sale of the bobcat pelt is state and federally regulated whereas the elk cape is not. Both would fetch a similar amount of cabbage.

 

[Stillookinfor200]

JC....You strike me as being a "Conspiracy theory" kinda guy, not that you are, but thats how you come across, so many things boil down to lazy, "welfare" land owners, dont they?

YOU ARE, at times, a one man Army, I have never thought of myself as a...what was it? A lemming, or a follower of what ALL of my fellow hunters believe in?

Refer once again to the defenition of Hypocrite....That may be of help.

BTW, starting next year, the "second half" of my life will be rewarded with "leisure time" for all of the 80 hr weeks I have put in, ohhhh, Ill still be making money, but Im not sure it will feel like work.

Worked hard....now Im gonna play hard, no reason for you to feel sorry for me about that. but I appreciate your compassion.

 

[JoseCuervo]

JC,

If you dont like trapping, thats fine.

Not sure if I like it or don't like it, but if the best justification so far is that it provides DrugStore Cowboy's and Welfare Ranchers to have fashionable headwear, I am likely leaning toward not liking it.

Its not a free-for-all like you're making it sound and the commercial aspect of it is tightly regulated by both state and federal regulation. Been part of the economy of the US for a very long time.

Dams on the Lower Snake River have been part of the US Economy for a long time, doesn't mean I have to tolerate them.

Again, I'm not asking you to change your opinion, but for the benefit of others I think its important they know the truth.

Can you actually, in layman's term, explain to me the biological/control aspects of trapping?

 

[JoseCuervo]

Quite a response Jose. I give you credit for your creativity and humor, but you fail miserably in facts and understanding of the topic at hand.

Big Fin,

Take more time if you need to read, digest, and look up some of the bigger words

Are there actually facts where I "fail miserably"?

But please, continue..............

I always do......