H.R. 8828 introduced -Leghold and conibear traps

[Deleted member 20812]

As far as negotiating, I guess my point is that just because you have a bigger stick than the other guy it is not always the right thing to do to hit him with it.

I agree 110%. Neither should the small stick guy keep telling everyone to FOAD unless he’s prepared for the ramifications.

 

[Shangobango]

Out of curiosity, does it protect just your right to trap, or does it specifically protect the means by which you can do so as well?

Just the general right I am sure.

I feel like if restrictions were proposed that would affect the ability to be productive it would be part of the argument against them due to the fact that the State views trapping as a commercial enterprise here.

 

[Shangobango]

I agree 110%. Neither should the small stock guy keep telling everyone to FOAD unless he’s prepared for the ramifications.

Couldn’t agree more.

 

[VikingsGuy]

Out of curiosity, does it protect just your right to trap, or does it specifically protect the means by which you can do so as well?

"Article I. Section27. The freedom to hunt, fish, and trap wildlife, including all aquatic life, traditionally taken by hunters, trappers and anglers, is a valued natural heritage that shall be forever preserved for the people. Hunting, fishing and trapping shall be managed by law and regulation consistent with Article IX, Section I of the Constitution of Louisiana to protect, conserve and replenish the natural resources of the state. The provisions of this Section shall not alter the burden of proof requirements otherwise established by law for any challenge to a law or regulation pertaining to hunting, fishing or trapping the wildlife of the state, including all aquatic life. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to authorize the use of private property to hunt, fish, or trap without the consent of the owner of the property."

It was added by ballot initiative in 2004.

FWIW - MN Article XIII Section 12 (added by ballot initiative in 1998) reads, "Hunting and fishing and the taking of game and fish are a valued part of our heritage that shall be forever preserved for the people and shall be managed by law and regulation for the public good."

 

[VikingsGuy]

". . . trapping shall be managed by law and regulation consistent with Article IX, Section I of the Constitution of Louisiana . . ."

Worth adding the LA hunting/trapping rights are subject to, "Article IX. Section 1. The natural resources of the state, including air and water, and the healthful, scenic, historic, and esthetic quality of the environment shall be protected, conserved, and replenished insofar as possible and consistent with the health, safety, and welfare of the people. The legislature shall enact laws to implement this policy."

So, regulations as to the time, place and manner of these rights are fully constitutional in order to make sure they are "consistent with the . . . welfare of the people." Note "the people", not "hunters" or "trappers". So while these various state amendments would make blanket bans difficult (would take a popular vote to remove, just like it took a popular vote to insert) there is much room for regulation for interests beyond just the outdoorsmen.

 

[Shangobango]

So, regulations as to the time, place and manner of these rights are fully constitutional in order to make sure they are "consistent with the . . . welfare of the people." Note "the people", not "hunters" or "trappers". So while these various state amendments would make blanket bans difficult (would take a popular vote to remove, just like it took a popular vote to insert) there is much room for regulation for interests beyond just the outdoorsmen.

Precisely why I wouldn’t automatically oppose any and all trapping regulations that were proposed here.

I believe we should get in front of issues before they become problems. As of now we have no issues.

I admit that the culture here and lagging development compared to other places affords us more room to maneuver. Of course those things can change over time.

It is nice to have a constitutional leg to stand on though.

 

[BuzzH]

Those are poor comparisons.
The hardest thing is recognizing you are not in much of a position to negotiate, so demanding the other side give up more is a losing proposition. It’s like being a stranded on a deserted island and a boat comes by and asks if you need help. Your response is “what are you serving for dinner?”

I dont think they are at all...when you and rover set out on public land, off leash, to run with the wind during trapping season...assume the risk.

Dog owners that let their dogs run loose on public land are in the minority...deal with it.

BTW, where's the discussion on having leash laws on public lands?

Where's the discussion on shortening bird seasons a bit?

Yeah, no "compromise" on those...the regulations are etched in stone I reckon.

 

[Deleted member 20812]

I dont think they are at all...when you and rover set out on public land, off leash, to run with the wind during trapping season...assume the risk.

Dog owners that let their dogs run loose on public land are in the minority...deal with it.

I agree, mostly. If it’s a legal set, you’re absolutely correct. One thing that shouldn’t be overlooked, and @neffa3 brought up is the emotional appeal. Regardless of whether dog off leash people are in the minority or not, they will win the emotional battle of dogs vs traps. That’s precisely how MT came to outlaw dry land connibear sets.

 

[BuzzH]

I agree, mostly. If it’s a legal set, you’re absolutely correct. One thing that shouldn’t be overlooked, and @neffa3 brought up is the emotional appeal. Regardless of whether dog off leash people are in the minority or not, they will win the emotional battle of dogs vs traps. That’s precisely how MT came to outlaw dry land connibear sets.

Well, other than dry land connibear sets arent outlawed in Montana...

Ground Sets Along Roads and Highways – Ground sets using 7 x 7 inches and larger body-gripping traps, and all snares, are unlawful within the right-of-way of county roads, state and federal highways, and interstates. Along county roads with no defined right of way these ground sets are unlawful within 50 feet from the edge of the road. Jaw spread sizes of common conibear traps: 110 - 4.5 inches 220 - 7 inches 120 - 4.5 inches 280 - 8 inches 160 - 6 inches 330 - 10 inches Setbacks and Trapping on Public Land with Ground Sets and/ or snares - The following regulations and setbacks apply to all federal and state public lands for the trapping of furbearers, predatory animals and non-game wildlife at any time. See the 2019 Wolf Regulations for wolf setbacks. • Recessing Large Body Grip Traps on Land - Ground sets using 7 x 7 inches and larger body-gripping traps must have the trigger recessed a minimum of 7 inches in a wood, plastic or metal enclosure or cubby that provides a maximum opening of 52 square inches or less.

Once again, trappers compromised while the "other side" gave up not a damn thing...seems fair, unless you think about it.

I do agree with the regulations however.

 

[BuzzH]

I am a trapper. I love it. Always have, always will.

Having said that, one guy I know in PA had his dog get its head snapped in a 220 on bare ground outside of a watercourse a couple weeks ago....no tag on the trap....public ground......Things like that dont help trappers.I have a picture, but I wont post it online because it doesnt help the trapping cause.

This dog was very lucky to be alive. Had it been positioned the other way it would have snuffed him out before he could get it off of him.

I know full well the dangers of conibear traps...I have used them for 25 years....IMHO conibears should be 1/2 way to fully submerged in my opinion. Most states that allow them require them to be submerged or partially submerged or be "In a watercourse" which, is pretty loose by definition IMHO.

I always have mine in the water partially or fully submerged because I know they typically kill without prejudice.

Strictly speaking about conibears here. Leg holds should always be allowed IMHO.

That's awesome for otter and beaver, I recall only a handful of times when I set a 330 for those species above water...when was the last time you saw a bobcat swim through a 330? Fisher?...and when I trapped Montana wolverine?

Pretty tough to catch those critters with a 330 half or fully submerged in water, at least in my experience.

 

[Deleted member 20812]

Well, other than dry land connibear sets arent outlawed in Montana...

Ground Sets Along Roads and Highways – Ground sets using 7 x 7 inches and larger body-gripping traps, and all snares, are unlawful within the right-of-way of county roads, state and federal highways, and interstates. Along county roads with no defined right of way these ground sets are unlawful within 50 feet from the edge of the road. Jaw spread sizes of common conibear traps: 110 - 4.5 inches 220 - 7 inches 120 - 4.5 inches 280 - 8 inches 160 - 6 inches 330 - 10 inches Setbacks and Trapping on Public Land with Ground Sets and/ or snares - The following regulations and setbacks apply to all federal and state public lands for the trapping of furbearers, predatory animals and non-game wildlife at any time. See the 2019 Wolf Regulations for wolf setbacks. • Recessing Large Body Grip Traps on Land - Ground sets using 7 x 7 inches and larger body-gripping traps must have the trigger recessed a minimum of 7 inches in a wood, plastic or metal enclosure or cubby that provides a maximum opening of 52 square inches or less.

Once again, trappers compromised while the "other side" gave up not a damn thing...seems fair, unless you think about it.

I do agree with the regulations however.

You are correct in that I omitted the setback/containment terminology. I was speaking to an uncontained dryland set.

I agree with the regulation. I agree in that trappers were forced to make accommodations. Was it fair, or was it common sense that could or should have been done pre-emptively?

I'm not speaking to fairness. I'm giving my opinion on what reality holds. Buddy was the dog's name as I recall. People will, as a rule, relate far more to buddy and his/her owner, than they will a trapper and the facts surrounding the injury/death to Buddy.

I'm not telling people to roll over and play dead either. If I was a trapper, I'd be lobbying someone like @shoots-straight to lead my advocacy campaign with bird dog clubs and educational talks at the local REI/mountain bike shop/etc., but that's just me.

 

[BuzzH]

Might be worth lobbying for shorter bird seasons and at least seasonal leash laws on public lands as well.

Yes?

 

[406dn]

Once again, trappers compromised while the "other side" gave up not a damn thing...seems fair, unless you think about it.

How so?

There is likely a larger share of the public opposed to trapping period, than there are trappers. So from their point of view they got nothing.

Most of the public does not think about trapping all that much. They are willing to let it occur. Anti trapping groups try continually to sway public opinion to minimal effect, for the most part.

Speaking personally, I am not anti trapping. Hell, killing baby seals on ice floes is ok with me. So when a pro trapping group tells me as a bird dog owner to piss up a rope, they are losing me as an ally.

 

[Deleted member 20812]

Might be worth lobbying for shorter bird seasons and at least seasonal leash laws on public lands as well.

Yes?

Depending on the area, possibly/probably yes to both. You know as well as I do that seasonal leash laws will do very little to alleviate any conflict between trappers and folks running their dogs off leash, so it's a feel good effort at best. Not saying it isn't worth doing, but IMO effort would be far better spent on educational campaigns with user groups.

People with dogs off leash are annoying as hell, and I'm not trying to run a trap line. If I was trying to run a trap line, I would avoid areas that have a lot of off leash doggers at all costs. I tell people all the time to leash their &^%$ing dogs when I'm trying to trail run or ride my bike.

As to your question about shorter bird seasons, what is the conflict? Why is it happening? There's a lot of nuance in there to consider before I'd just say "sure, shorten seasons", just like I'd say to pump the brakes a bit before someone wanted to eliminate trapping in areas where I chukar hunt.

If I was a trapper, I'd probably feel alienated too. Same as houndsmen and other facets of hunting that have suffered legislative attacks. None of my commentary was intended to condemn trappers in any way. It was merely meant to offer a different perspective as someone who has known and interacted with a number of trappers over the years in different capacities. If it came across differently, my apologies.

Good luck.

 

[brymoore]

I trap bobcat, beaver and marten. Beaver and marten aren’t issues for dogs. Bobcat trapping can be an issue. I watch to see if “civilians” are using an area before I trap it. They’ll normally have a dog with them. The last conversation I want to have is that a dog was killed in my snare or Conibear. If I think there might be an issue, I’ll go elsewhere even though I have every right to trap the spot.

 

[BuzzH]

How so?

There is likely a larger share of the public opposed to trapping period, than there are trappers. So from their point of view they got nothing.

Most of the public does not think about trapping all that much. They are willing to let it occur. Anti trapping groups try continually to sway public opinion to minimal effect, for the most part.

Speaking personally, I am not anti trapping. Hell, killing baby seals on ice floes is ok with me. So when a pro trapping group tells me as a bird dog owner to piss up a rope, they are losing me as an ally.

Come on...you cant really be that obtuse.

A problem occurred like JLS said, buddy got pinched in a 330, IIRC (my memory being nearly as sharp as a steel trap). To that point in time, there was ZERO regulation on 330's. So the trapping community, compromised on regulations regarding 330's to protect, or greatly reduce the chance of unrestrained, unleashed pets running wild on public lands, from getting pinched.

That's not giving anything up?

Yeah, and bird seasons didnt change in 30 years either...

 

[SAJ-99]

I dont think they are at all...when you and rover set out on public land, off leash, to run with the wind during trapping season...assume the risk.

Dog owners that let their dogs run loose on public land are in the minority...deal with it.

BTW, where's the discussion on having leash laws on public lands?

Where's the discussion on shortening bird seasons a bit?

Yeah, no "compromise" on those...the regulations are etched in stone I reckon.

Unfortunately, I have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[BuzzH]

Depending on the area, probably yes to both. You know as well as I do that seasonal leash laws will do very little to alleviate any conflict between trappers and folks running their dogs off leash, so it's a feel good effort at best. Not saying it isn't worth doing, but IMO effort would be far better spent on educational campaigns with user groups.

As to your question about shorter bird seasons, what is the conflict? Why is it happening? There's a lot of nuance in there to consider before I'd just say "sure, shorten seasons", just like I'd say to pump the brakes a bit before someone wanted to eliminate trapping in areas where I chukar hunt.

Well, getting somewhere now, admitting that a majority of dog owners are irresponsible, dont follow regulations/laws and a majority of the problem...versus a small handful of irresponsible trappers.

That I agree with.

I'm also not really in favor of shortening bird seasons either, for the most part. But, I think the compromise is that if bird hunters want to maintain long seasons well into trapping seasons...then they have to assume the risk for that luxury.

 

[Deleted member 20812]

Well, getting somewhere now, admitting that a majority of dog owners are irresponsible, dont follow regulations/laws and a majority of the problem...versus a small handful of irresponsible trappers.

That I agree with.

I'm also not really in favor of shortening bird seasons either, for the most part. But, I think the compromise is that if bird hunters want to maintain long seasons well into trapping seasons...then they have to assume the risk for that luxury.

Not disagreeing with any of this. Every time Buddy gets caught, it's another nail, regardless of where you stand.

 

[SAJ-99]

Might be worth lobbying for shorter bird seasons and at least seasonal leash laws on public lands as well.

Yes?

Most people on this board have an apathetic view toward trapping - neither positive or negative. They probably generally support the idea, but you tell them they have to put their dog on a leash or shorten the bird season. That is a great way to turn people against the idea. Now, the general public, most of them are probably against trapping from the start. Good luck telling grandma that she has to keep her dog on a leash in the NF because some trapper is trying to catch a bobcat.
You can pout on the internet about the unfairness of it all, but you are just putting nails in the coffin of the sport.