Comments for the DNR

[walleye101]

Sounds to me like Blackjack has given this issue some serious thought. He is right about not worrying the antis, but avoid alienating those who have not already formed negative opinions about trapping.

[gorrilla]

I guess I'm getting frustrated with the close minded arguments towards restricting traps.

[Scott K]

I have been following this post since the beggining, humorous, and entertaining at times. Myself being an outsider to both of these issues, since I dont trap, or hunt with dogs. I can see all your concerns, and they are all good concerns! This is what I sugguest, I know by reviewing this entire post would offer some info, but what I think would help is if a trapper would spend the time to post the how to rules and educate the rest of us the correct ways of trapping, then post the wrong ways of trapping. And being nice about it, recomendations and tips to dog hunters on how to keep their pets safe when in public land hunting, where there might be some traps set.

Keeping in mind this is PUBLIC LAND FOR ALL TO ENJOY!!!

On the other hand have the hunters list concers on and tips on where they hunt that they would not like to see a trap set,( such as right off the main trail, or where ever) maybe use this forum to educate each other, rather than arguing inwich being married most of us know that doesnt get us no where!

FYI I used to hunt dogs, and used to trap, and when I did I never gave much thought about the other, but now after reading this, I should have. I guess what I am saying is I have learned something from reading this post, and think others would also!

Just my .02!

[ruster]

I have followed this post for awhile and it is with a heavy heart i have now become a part of it. Yesterday my 7 year old english cocker, Sydney, was killed by a land set conibear trap. She was easily the best hunting dog I have ever owned, great on pheasants,grouse, any bird that I hunted. A little background, I live on 40 acres about 3 miles from town. It is a rural but more houses pop up every year. my dogs are kenneled when no one is home, but are out when we're here. This dog never leaves the yard, but yesterday she did,why? who knows but she paid with her life. We looked all afternoon in a driving rain with no luck, getting more concerned by the minute. About 4:00 the neighbor called and said he found her, DEAD in a set about 1/4 mile from my house. You have no idea the hurt I felt.I know many of you will blame me for letting her roam, but that is simply not the case here and I do not care to debate that. I know I have some responsiblity in this. But there is no way this dog should be dead beacause of a moments curiosity on a spring day. I am a former trapper and support trapping, but in no way will I support any kind of land set conibears, they are indiscriminate killers of all animals that come in contact. All of this because of a careless/reckless set on private land. So, no land set conibears, anywhere, anytime, for any purpose, period. Any land sets that I find in the future I will trip, maybe saving someone else from thehurt and anger that I feel today. On another note the trapper was my daughters boyfriend, their relationship is now irrepairably damaged due to this incident. Sorry for the long post but I needed to get it out there. Thanks for listening.

[jlm]

Ruster, very sorry to hear about your dog! I realize that you are upset and for very good reason. However, I am going to encourage you to abide by the law and tampering with traps that are legally set could really get you in an un-needed bind or at a minimum, in a very uncomfortable situation if the trapper catches you. Of course if you are talking about your own private land...that is a entire different issue. You can do as you please there. Welcome to FM and again, sorry for your lost dog!

[walleye101]

Very sorry to hear of your loss. There is no reason for a set like that to be out there this time of year. What is he doing trapping year around?

[GunDr]

Eventually the PETA law makers will go after hunting.

----------------------------------------------------------

Inhumane Trapping Prevention Act (Introduced in House)

HR 1691 IH

110th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 1691

To end the use of conventional steel-jawed leghold traps on animals in the United States.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

March 26, 2007

Mrs. LOWEY (for herself, Mr. SHAYS, Mr. CROWLEY, Mr. DEFAZIO, Mr. GRIJALVA, Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts, Ms. BERKLEY, and Mr. MCNULTY) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Ways and Means, Foreign Affairs, and Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A BILL

To end the use of conventional steel-jawed leghold traps on animals in the United States.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Inhumane Trapping Prevention Act'.

SEC. 2. DECLARATION OF POLICY.

It is the policy of the United States to end the needless maiming and suffering inflicted upon animals through the use of conventional steel-jawed leghold traps by prohibiting the import or export of, and the shipment in interstate commerce of, such traps and of articles of fur from animals that were trapped in such traps.

SEC. 3. PROHIBITED ACTS AND PENALTIES.

(a) Prohibited Acts- It shall be unlawful for any person--

(1) to import, export, or transport in interstate commerce an article of fur, if any part or portion of such article is derived from an animal that was trapped in a conventional steel-jawed leghold trap;

(2) to import, export, deliver, carry, or transport by any means whatever, in interstate commerce, any conventional steel-jawed leghold trap;

(3) to sell, receive, acquire, or purchase any conventional steel-jawed leghold trap that was delivered, carried, or transported in violation of paragraph (2); or

(4) to violate any rule made by the Secretary under this Act.

( Penalties- Whoever knowingly violates subsection (a) shall, in addition to any other penalty that may be imposed--

(1) for the first such violation, be imprisoned for not more than 5 days or fined under title 18, United States Code, or both; and

(2) for each subsequent violation, be imprisoned for not more than two years or fined under title 18, United States Code, or both.

SEC. 4. REWARDS.

(a) General Rule- The Secretary shall pay, to any person who furnishes information which leads to a conviction of a violation of any provision of this Act or any rule made under this Act, an amount equal to one-half of the fine paid pursuant to the conviction.

( Exception- Any officer or employee of the United States or of any State or local government who furnishes information or renders service in the performance of his or her official duties is not eligible for payment under this section.

SEC. 5. ENFORCEMENT.

(a) In General- Except with respect to violations of this Act to which subsection ( applies, this Act and any rules made under this Act shall be enforced by the Secretary, who may utilize by agreement, with or without reimbursement, the personnel, services, and facilities of any other Federal agency or any State agency for purposes of enforcing this Act and such rules.

( Import and Export Violations-

(1) IMPORT VIOLATIONS- The importation of articles in violation of section 3(a) shall be treated as a violation of the customs laws of the United States, and those provisions of law relating to violations of the customs laws of the United States shall apply thereto.

(2) EXPORT VIOLATIONS- The authorities under the Export Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. App. 2401 et seq.) (as continued in effect under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act), including penalties, shall be used to enforce the provisions of this Act relating to the export of articles in violation of section 3(a).

© Enforcement Authorities- Any person having authority to enforce this Act (except with respect to violations to which subsection ( applies), may, in exercising such authority--

(1) detain for inspection, search, and seize any package, crate, or other container, including its contents, and all accompanying documents, if such individual has reasonable cause to suspect that in such package, crate, or other container are articles with respect to which a violation of this Act (except with respect to a violation to which subsection ( applies) has occurred, is occurring, or is about to occur;

(2) make arrests without a warrant for any violation of this Act (except with respect to a violation to which subsection ( applies) committed in his or her presence or view, or if the individual has probable cause to believe that the person to be arrested has committed or is committing such a violation; and

(3) execute and serve any arrest warrant, search warrant, or other warrant or criminal process issued by any judge or magistrate of any court of competent jurisdiction for enforcement of this Act (except with respect to violations to which subsection ( applies).

(d) Forfeiture-

(1) GENERAL RULE- Except with respect to exports to which the provisions of the Export Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. App. 2401 et seq.) (as continued in effect under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act) apply, and imports to which the customs laws of the United States apply, pursuant to subsection (, any article of fur or conventional steel-jawed leghold trap taken, possessed, sold, purchased, offered for sale or purchase, imported, exported, transported, delivered, received, carried, or shipped in violation of this Act or any rule made under this Act, shall be subject to forfeiture to the United States. Those provisions of law relating to--

(A) the seizure, summary and judicial forfeiture, and condemnation of property for violations of the customs laws of the United States,

( the disposition of such property or the proceeds from the sale thereof,

© the remission or mitigation of such forfeitures, and

(D) the compromise of claims,

shall apply to seizures and forfeitures incurred, or alleged to have been incurred, under the provisions of this subsection, insofar as applicable and not inconsistent with this Act.

(2) ENFORCEMENT- Such duties as are imposed upon the customs officer or any other person with respect to the seizure and forfeiture of property under the customs laws of the United States may be performed with respect to seizures and forfeitures of property under this subsection by the Secretary or such officers and employees as may be authorized or designated for that purpose by the Secretary, or, upon the request of the Secretary, by any other agency that has authority to manage and dispose of seized property.

(e) Injunctions- The Attorney General of the United States may seek to enjoin any person who is alleged to be in violation of this Act or any rule made under this Act.

(f) Cooperation- The Secretary of Commerce, the Secretary of the Treasury, and the head of any other department or agency with enforcement responsibilities under this Act shall cooperate with the Secretary in ensuring that this Act, and rules made under this Act, are enforced in the most effective and efficient manner.

SEC. 6. DEFINITIONS.

In this Act:

(1) The term `article of fur' means--

(A) any furskin (as such term is used under Note 1 of chapter 43 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States), including any raw furskin classified under heading 4301 of such Schedule; or

( any article, however produced, that consists in whole or part of any such furskin.

(2) The term `conventional steel-jawed leghold trap' means any spring-powered pan or sear-activated device with two opposing steel jaws, whether the jaws are smooth, toothed, padded, or offset, which is designed to capture an animal by snapping closed upon the animal's limb or part thereof.

(3) The term `customs laws of the United States' means any other law or regulation enforced or administered by the United States Customs Service.

(4) The term `import' means to land on, bring into, or introduce into, any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, whether or not such landing, bringing, or introduction constitutes an entry into the customs territory of the United States.

(5) The term `interstate commerce' has the meaning given such term in section 10 of title 18, United States Code.

(6) The term `Secretary' means the Secretary of the Interior.

SEC. 7. RULEMAKING.

The Secretary may make rules to carry out this Act.

SEC. 8. EFFECTIVE DATE.

This Act shall take effect one year after the date of its enactment.

[BLACKJACK]

ruster, sorry for your loss!!

What part of the state do you live in? What was that guy trapping this time of year??!

Now I guess we know why bans on connibear traps are proposed!!

[walleye101]

GunDR

So what are you suggesting by your post about legislation to ban leghod traps? Is there a point to be made in this discussion about appropriate use of 220s?

[J48jake]

Ruster,

I am sorry for your loss, but by no means should they ban use of 220's on private land. If it was your land that the boyfriend was trapping on you should have discussed those things with him before you gave him permission. And as for setting off traps when you go by them, it is illegal and was made illegal due to PETA doing that same thing. Trap tampering is one of the few laws that protects the trappers. I know I may have sounded harsh in this post but I am very against congress telling me what I can and can not do on my own land.

[GunDr]

This original thread did not only deal with traps, but I included here beacuse it has turned to dealing with traps. And, seeing there are leaders in the trapping community here on this thread, they may find some interest in it.

Since this tread started, I've been sitting on the sideline, and reading everyones' opinions.

I feel this is an analogy to the restriction of firearms, or even drunk drivers. The trap, the gun, or the car, are only inanimate objects. Neither of them pose a threat, when used responsibly. But when they are not, it's those objects that get blamed.

To blame a trap for a loss, when it's been placed during tresspaasing, or out of season, is like blaming the gun for a shooting.

I've seen many examples given here, that go a long ways to prevent a accidental death to a pet. But with all the training in the world, won't prevent those from being unethical. How many times have you seen drivers convicted of multiple DUI's.

[poutpro]

Your loss is just another example where trapper education is needed. There is no reason to be trapping on land right now because the furs are no good. If he were going for beaver, the 330 traps need to be in water.

[tealitup]

Could he be trapping for Predator control on private land -

[walleye101]

Quote:

---

I feel this is an analogy to the restriction of firearms, or even drunk drivers. The trap, the gun, or the car, are only inanimate objects. Neither of them pose a threat, when used responsibly. But when they are not, it's those objects that get blamed.

---

This is exactly what I have been saying all along. There is no need to ban 220s, only apply some reasonable restrictions on their use. I like your firearms anology. I do not support gun bans but there certainly are all sorts of restrictions on how they are used. You and I have the right to own and use guns in a resposible maner. But when you abuse those restrictions and use guns irresponsibly there certainly are consequences.

Same applies to alcohol and vehicles. Neither are a problem when used responsibly. But when abused there are consequences.

[gorrilla]

First, I have to ask I have to question on an open enrollment site like this, is it possible the cocker never was killed? Is this someone trying to "prove" their agenda by creating a story? If it is true then I am sorry.

If your dog was really killed then I can relate to your loss, and it sucks it happened.

Several points I have to bring up.

Why was the guys setting 220's near your property when he is aware of your dog?

Why don't you have your dog in a kennel when its not supervised, or better yet have an underground fence installed...

Why aren't we trying to ban cars???? It seems to me it could have just as easily been hit on the road 1/4 mile from your house.

Does the boy have permission to trap on the land, and did you have permission to have your dog on the land at the time???

Seems like a lot of unaddressed topics before the lynch mob chases down trappers.

Its an emotional topic if it did happen, but we need to know the whole story before we "get a rope..."

[ruster]

Gorilla,

Rest assured this did happen, I wish it hadn't but it did. I live in the Bemidji area, I'm sure the trapper had permission to trap the land, however, there is no reason for a land set this time of year. One of the reasons I own 40 acres is so I don't have to have my dogs kenneled 24/7. This dog was not a roamer/wanderer, but on this day, for whatever reason she left my proberty, maybe she smelled the traps bait? The wind was from that direction. I'm not looking for a ban on conibears, just some more stringet restrictions on the land sets that are potentially deadly for dogs and other not targeted animals. I sure don't have all the answers but I don't want any of you guys to go thru what I have in the last couple of days.

[protrapper]

Sorry for your loss. But it could have been prevented. The trapper from your story was in the right, and you were in the wrong. The dog knows no better. Just cause you own 40 acres in a rural area does not give you the right to let your dog run free. Thats why theres leash laws in place. Most folks in rural areas and CO's frown on free ranging dogs stray or not. In my neck of the woods one warning to the owner and the next time it's shot. I know that's extreme but thats how some folks feel. I don't myself. But my cousin lives near Pengilly and his two labs got loose one day a few years ago and a farmer over a mile away shot them both no questions asked. Again sorry for your loss accident or not it doesen't heal the pain of a good friend trust me I know first hand.

[ruster]

My dogs do not "run free", there are no leash laws in our township. I was inattentive for a moment and I accept responsibility for that. My dog was killed by a baited conibear land set, no cubbie,etc. In my opinion that is is reckless/careless set. Possible even illegal. So if this happened when we grouse hunt this woods in the fall/winter whose fault would it be? Mine because I didn't have my dog on a leash while hunting? Sorry can't follow that logic.

[jigging-matt]

Protrapper, So if a guys dogs accidently get loose it is okay to just shoot them, even if it is the first times the dogs have ever gotten loose. Would hate to live in your area. I can see if they are a continuous nuisance to the farmer, but one time??? So if the Farmers livestock gets out can you shoot that too?

[gorrilla]

Ruster, first of all I'm a big dog fan myself. I'm also a former trapper too.

But most importantly for my dog, I have been putting in an underground dog fence for myself, my parents, my friends. If you need one put in this summer let me know I live near Breezy Point. They are way cheaper than a new dog.

The trap was legally set if it was a 220. It sounds to me like the trapper was in the right on this one if it was before March 15th. That is the end date for raccoon, oppossum, fox, etc. After that date he can still legally catch nuisance animals or non prime coyotes.

Personally I don't usually make this set especially this time of year. It does sound legal, BUT I question its intended catch a little. Fishers and martens are closed, bobcats are closed, Otters are closed,fox don't like tight quarters of a 7 inch body grip opening usually. The only things that keeps it legal are the possibility of the intended quarry being coyotes, skunks, or beavers or feral nuisance animals like feral cats/dogs.

To me the non target risks might be too high at that time of year in that part of the state, but I can't tell unless I know the whole situation. He may have had a reason to ethically set the trap. I do believe he should have the legal right to do it. I also believe its possible he could need some better education on trapping. Not sure yet...

Skunks WILL get nailed often on 220's. Most of us trappers don't want them there though (who wants to try and reset springs with a stink bomb wrapped around in it).

On certain sets a 220 will catch beavers. Are they ideal? Far from it. They are quite small for a big beaver and unless guarding a bank den or tight funnel area in water, they aren't likely to work well, especially baited(w/meat ?) on dry land.

Coyotes are a rarety to ever hear of in a 220. They like space in a set and can be nabbed much better with legholds and snares due to their cautious nature.

The problem with the fault here is on private property I BELIEVE you should be able to set a 220 at any time and leave the discretion to the trapper. If you have feral cats predating your local rabbits and ground nesting birds, problem solved. Deer running trouble making dogs, its a shame, but who can predict that. I'm not saying your dog was a deer chaser, but there are plenty in the state. Just ask the local wardens or look around SE of Bemidji. On public land there should be little risk of dogs running out of sight of owners this time of year either IMO. If your are a responsible dog owner you should keep an eye on your pooch during walk on public land. Do I always? I can't see him 100% of the time, no. But I try to keep very close tabs on him and realize the risk is I don't...

Its a shame you lost your dog. Really.

Its also the risk one takes when a dog isn't properly supervised or contained.

Did the trapper have an ill advised set at a weird time of the year? Maybe, but I'd still have to hear of his intended target and see the type of set. As well as see the actual proximity to your yard before I'd decide...

The problem with this crap being debated on websites or in legislature is nobody gets to see the whole picture and both sides. I think people need to be educated of the trap, aware of there pets, and not hate the tool.

Could we greatly reduce all pet losses by fencing all properties, not driving cars, never setting traps again??

Sure, but of course that's not practical. Since the trappers numbers are relatively small it doesn't seem to effect many people directly if they are restricted or banned, right? WRONG...

Why can't people see that taking away rights from responsible trappers is WAY WRONG...

If you are a hunter or fisherman, you need to worry more about protecting rights of something that does a lot of good to protect the resource and offer numerous people enjoyment of the outdoors, bonus incomes, and utilization of renewable resources as well a the best most efficient predator control means left. It does matter to more than just the trappers. It matters to PETA, Humane Society, etc.

This should concern you, because your nuts if you don't think your sport is next. Poor birds, poor deer, poor fish, poor pets is there way of thinking. Don't give them a foot hold.

Sorry about the long post, my fingers are out of breath...

[ruster]

Dog was killed on 3/31/2007. Trap was about 350-400 yards from my front door, about 25 yards from my property line.

[walleye101]

Quote:

---

First, I have to ask I have to question on an open enrollment site like this, is it possible the cocker never was killed? Is this someone trying to "prove" their agenda by creating a story? If it is true then I am sorry.

---

Maybe it is possible that no dogs have ever been killed in these kind of sets? Possibly the whole issue of dogs being killed in 220s has been made up? And those of us asking for some reasonable restrictions on the use of a very dangerous non-selective killer set are all PETA members?

[Jameson]

Ruster, so, ah, um,.... How old is your daughter?

[gorrilla]

Ruster, these details would have been nice in the original post.

I also would be mad at the guy for not communicating to you his intentions, or better yet, he should have not set on an obvious site close to your house/commonly free roaming dog(within your yard and not fenced).

Obviously he knew of the dog and possibility this could happen. Sounds like bad judgement on his part. One guys dumb move shouldn't have to be regulated by the government. Your original post of suggesting illegality on his part or your resulting vow to illegally harass and tamper future trapping sites on other land seems like a big overreaction to the situation though.

Don't let some boneheads like this, bring down the rights of responsible trappers!!!!

[ruster]

Gorilla,

Sorry if I did not supply enough info in my original post for you to properly (Contact Us Please) the situation, I was pretty much foaming at the mouth in anger. I have calmed down somewhat but I do believe I will forever be against baited land set conibears because of this experience.

Jameson, I'm pretty sure my daughter is too young,smart,atheletic and good looking for anybody who frequents this site.

[walleye101]

When I first started posting on this topic I nievely believed that some common sense could prevail in finding some reasonable solutions to a very real problem. After reading the opinions here I am not so optimistic. There are people defending the actions of trappers using this set any time, and anywhere, regardless of the risk, just because it is (currently) a legal set. At the same time blaming the unfortunate dog owners for being irresponsible, even though their activities are also legal.

With this kind of convoluted logic, and total resistance to any resonable common sense restictions on how this trap is used, I expect we will eventually loose the use of this tool altogether. That is extremely unfortunate.

Anyone want to buy about four-five dozen 220 conibears?

[tealitup]

Quote:

---

Jameson, I'm pretty sure my daughter is too young,smart,atheletic and good looking for anybody who frequents this site.

---

Never a more true statement

[gorrilla]

I guess as usual when these topics go on for this long, they get bogged down with too much BS.

Its a shame because its one of the few spots I've seen lately where trappers could enlighten a few people that the "public" woods is for everybody not just bird hunters with dogs. If someone has a dog and knows how to properly hunt and supervise it, no problem. Likewise, if a trapper owns a body grip trap and uses common sense in placing it, no problem.

The problem I see is its always possible to find several extreme examples of some (Contact Us Please) on both sides.

I don't think this is a case for restrictions, just taking off the blinders and realizing the whole world wasn't made for Rover to run and play wherever he might go without consequences. If your looking for that, learn to keep your dogs on your own property or at least keep watch over them when out in public...

It seems this website if filled with many avid smart fishermen, but often I think the lack of woodmanship and arrogance of some makes it hard to talk about hunting or trapping on here...

[ruster]

Gorilla,

You and I will probably never agree on this subject and thats ok. At least we have a place to discuss it and hopefully everyone on all sides of the issues learns from each other. Thats what i like about this site.

[BLACKJACK]

Quote:

---

There are people defending the actions of trappers using this set any time, and anywhere, regardless of the risk, just because it is (currently) a legal set.

At the same time blaming the unfortunate dog owners for being irresponsible, even though their activities are also legal.

With this kind of convoluted logic, and total resistance to any resonable common sense restictions on how this trap is used, I expect we will eventually loose the use of this tool altogether.

---

Very well stated and so true!!!

Education is the key here, for both trappers and hunters/dogowners. All it takes is a few dead dogs in connibear traps, set by a few bad apples, to sour the whole situation. My guess is that the bad apples/trappers that set 220's where they could catch dogs run in two catagories a) the beginning, enthusiastic trapper that doesn't know any better and the old timer that doesn't give a rip and is in it for the few extra dollars. The beginning trapper can be solved by education, the don't give a rip guy has to have a penalty hanging over his head to make him stop.

All I know is that after my bad experience, I never hunt ditches/cattails close to roads anymore, its too easy for trappers to drive along and set traps in cattail runs.