# Furbearer Workgroup Issues for this Cycle



## Beaverhunter2 (Jan 22, 2005)

I got a letter from the DNR listing the issues they plan to review this cycle. I'm going from memory (the letter's at home and I'm not) but this is what Emily and I remember:

-Expanding the area open to Bobcat hunting and trapping in the NLP.

-Furbearer Registration Requirements (not sure of the details)

-Allowing year-round nuisance raccoon hunting at night with a light and dogs

-Allowing coyote hunting at night with hounds

-Allowing bobcats to be taken at night during the open season(s)

-Reviewing regulations regarding setting traps inside muskrats push-ups/feeders

-Allowing use of #3 Buck and #4 Buck at night

-Allowing night-time coyote hunting with hounds

Remember- reviewing does not mean changing or recommending approval. The Furbearer Work Group Meeting is on March 9 in St. Ignace.

Thought you might be interested.

John


----------



## gilgetter (Feb 28, 2006)

That trappers can get some public land to trap, in the northern lower. seems like with all the public land up there the state should be able to open a bit for trappers.
Id say let the rats be, with the prices for rat hides like they are, they are getting hammerd.IMO we have plenty of tools to catch rats. the rest sounds like good news for dog hunters, but what would you expect.


----------



## Dave Lyons (Jun 28, 2002)

Last time mink snaring was on the list talked with several people that were glad to hear it was on the list then it was removed. No reason it isn't back on the list this time.

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## micooner (Dec 20, 2003)

First off I would oppose the night time running and hunting of yotes and the year long nuisance hunting of *****.. but my question is who proposes these issues for review??


----------



## Black Powder Trapper (Feb 15, 2008)

Dave Mink snaring is still there but the DNR has not decided to look at it this cycle. WE can push for them to look at it next year but the DNR makes the final decision as to what is looked at.

micooner user groups make suggestions as to what is reviewed then the DNR decides what they will look at. My understanding is that they are only asking to hunt ***** around farm out buildings and corn cribs.

gill there are only two dog issues being looked at, one joint issue and four trapping issues. Does not seem unfair to me at all.


----------



## magnumhntr (Aug 18, 2003)

I thought the snaring regulations were due to be reviewed this time around? Or is that been pushed aside again?


----------



## Black Powder Trapper (Feb 15, 2008)

The cable restraint issue is temporarily on hold until we are done with the Wolf issue. It has not gone away but the NRC did not want to deal with both at the same time because of the AR groups.


----------



## SJC (Sep 3, 2002)

I can't believe they would even consider allowing trapping in "feeders". It would be an enforcement nightmare. Not to mention the fact that many places are already suffering from low rat pops. and heavy trapping pressure.


----------



## Beaverhunter2 (Jan 22, 2005)

SJC,
Actually I have copies of MDNR documents from the 80's defining feeders and push-ups as not "houses, homes, or holes" and stating that setting traps inside them is legal. If this info had been more widely distributed before the DNR was asked to interpret the law a couple years ago it would have likely remained legal and we wouldn't be reviewing it this cycle. For over 30 years I personally thought it was illegal to set inside them and it wasn't!


John


----------



## gilgetter (Feb 28, 2006)

Bobcat at nite, for dog hunting? calling, or both? or is that still open? If I remember right, and its been a long time ago, rat trappers could not set on any huts at all.anyone else remember that? I see two things happening, guys going in and taking all the rats in a area, or guys not putting the plug back in and freezing the rats out. not good either way. down this way we dont have any rats to spare.


----------



## backroadstravler (Jul 12, 2006)

The law on rat trapping use to read no traps within six feet of a muskrat house, hole, or home. That would put the hurt on the hole trappers today. I know this is a dead issue also but reciprocle agreements for out of state trapping.


----------



## gilgetter (Feb 28, 2006)

I would agree on the reciprocal agreement.I would support parity.


----------



## Black Powder Trapper (Feb 15, 2008)

Gil nothing is decided it ts just being discussed. Just because it is on the list does not mean it going to happen.

I do believe that Bobcat trapping will be opened up in zone 2 but we will have to wait and see what specific structure that will have. Adam has said that it will be conservative so I suspect a 10 day season for hunting and trapping hopefully to include two weekends but we will have to wait and see. I am not sure if public land will be open or not for trapping but this sticks in my craw also.

The furbearer registration requirements has to do with making it easier to get an animal sealed. We were not given any insight as to what that might entail but making it easier would be a good thing.

The use of #3 and $4 buck is for callers and the big hold up on this is law division.

Trapping in a feeder Adam brought up. We did not push for it to be considered because it was a 50/50 split on our survey. I believe Adam had a lot of requests for it when he was at our convention. If this goes through it will have a very specific description about what a feeder is and we will have to wait and see if you will be allowed to cut a hole or just be allowed to reach under and put a trap on the shelf.


----------



## hillbillie (Jan 16, 2011)

Is there someone or dept. that a letter or written comments could be sent by mail or e-mail?St. Ignace is a long way and alot of gas from home.


First I should ask is the workshop open to the General Public?

Personally I don't like the idea of setting traps inside musket huts or push-ups. Would also like to see a minimum distance for a beaver set from a lodge or dam say 25-30'feet(use to be 50feet)especially on Federal and State-Land.If there are areas with problem beaver the DNR could issue special permits.I also would like to have chance to trap a bobcat on zone two public land.I'm for a quota system,like our sturgeon spearing season. 
Seems like anymore, more and more people on private land do as they please anyway.
PM,s welcome
Thanks in advance for any reply's
Tom


----------



## lang49 (Aug 1, 2005)

No for running coyote at night.

A. Current night time firearms restictions make the humane take of coyote difficult at best.

B. Safety/Trespass issues are magnified. Multiple people pursuing an animal they can't possibly tree in the darkness creates a multitude of safety issues.

No to night time bobcat hunting.
-There is no reason to increase hunting opportunity for bobcat until we have fair/equitable trapping opportunities.

With regard to year round hunting of nuissance **** at time- yes, but private land only.


----------



## SJC (Sep 3, 2002)

Beaverhunter,
How would they define a "feeder", or a "push-up". I think it would just legalize trapping in houses and create a grey area for enforcement. Some places I have trapped you can't find a house bigger than a bushel basket. Most of these would fall under what I hear most describe as "feeders". 

I catch between 300-500 rats a season thru the ice without tearing into huts. With a little ambition and elbow grease, they ain't that hard to catch with the current regs. When the ice gets too thick to make it worth while, the rats and me get a much needed break. With rat prices the way they have been lately, it would put more people in the marsh for the wrong reasons. Inexperienced slobs with ideas of easy money would not be good for trapping.


----------



## 9 (Jan 17, 2000)

lang49 said:


> No to night time bobcat hunting.
> -There is no reason to increase hunting opportunity for bobcat until we have fair/equitable trapping opportunities.
> .


Absolutely correct!!! In my honest opinion, we need parity not only between States but FAR more importantly PARITY between ALL USERS of the same natural resources WITHIN our State!


----------



## gilgetter (Feb 28, 2006)

Good comments.Dale I understand that nothing is final.The wind is howling, the back roads are pure ice, this box will get a work out today.just tryen to see how others feel about what has been proposed.

A question for you, If I may. does the MTPCA or MMIT have a position on parity between the states for trapping?


----------



## Black Powder Trapper (Feb 15, 2008)

gilgetter said:


> I would agree on the reciprocal agreement.I would support parity.


This is not a dead issue but does require legislation before the DNR or NRC can do anything.


----------



## Black Powder Trapper (Feb 15, 2008)

Gil We support equity with other states which means that if we can go there and trap that they can come here and trap. Restricted animals otter, fisher, bobcat and martin would be not be permitted for out of state trappers.

I do not think bobcat hunting at night will fly at least not right now. Our DNR is very conservative about restricted species. I find it hard to believe that the DNR will increase the opportunity to harvest cats other than expanding the area.

Anyone can attend the meeting the leadership of the user groups does most of the talking at the front table but they do ask for comments from the general public. They do not ask for formal written comments but you could contact Adam Bump in Wildlife.

All these comments are welcome we appreciate and want your input. I will not be able to attend because they changed the date and I have a Trapper Ed Class scheduled that day for a school but John Caretti will be there. The more people who show up the better.


----------



## Beaverhunter2 (Jan 22, 2005)

The meeting is the 9th of March. We'll post what we hear asap.

John


----------



## gilgetter (Feb 28, 2006)

Any good news? will I be able to trap next fall?


----------



## Beaverhunter2 (Jan 22, 2005)

Sorry- I've been busy.

-Expanding the area open to Bobcat hunting and trapping in the NLP: It sounds like the DNR will propose adding an additional tier of counties south of the current area and expand it west to the Lake Michigan shoreline. 11 day trapping season (footholds only; public and private land) that aligns with the season in the rest of the NLP. Season scheduled to include two weekends. 11 day hunting season that aligns with the existing NLP hunting seasons. 

-Furbearer Registration Requirements: It sounds like the DNR is going to recommend shortening some of the registration periods (especially otter) to be a certain number of days following the end of the season in which it was taken. The group suggested 10 days.

-Allowing year-round nuisance raccoon hunting at night with a light and dogs: They will recommend this. It's essentially cleaning up the regs to what was intended. (They can already run the ***** at night in a nuisance situation- they just can't use a light to shoot it out of the tree. 

-Allowing coyote hunting at night with hounds: They will recommend this.

-Allowing bobcats to be taken at night during the open season(s): They will not recommend this. They don't want to make two changes that potentially will increase harvest at the same time.

-Reviewing regulations regarding setting traps inside muskrats push-ups/feeders: They are not recommending any change at this time. They may reconsider when populations and the water levels rise and pressure declines.

-Allowing use of #3 Buck and #4 Buck at night: Wildlife Division has no issue with this. Law Division does. We'll be raising this issue with the NRC.


John


----------



## Fur-minator (Nov 28, 2007)

Beaverhunter2 said:


> -Furbearer Registration Requirements: It sounds like the DNR is going to recommend shortening some of the registration periods (especially otter) to be a certain number of days following the end of the season in which it was taken. The group suggested 10 days.


Is there a reason they want to shorten the timeline? In my experience it is very difficult to get hides registered.





Beaverhunter2 said:


> -Allowing coyote hunting at night with hounds: They will recommend this.


 
Just curious, without treeing a coyote how will they get a shot in the dark at a coyote chased by hounds? Maybe someone can enlighten me on the need for this.


----------



## gilgetter (Feb 28, 2006)

dont sound bad. as far as cat trapping goes, are they saying all public? land or some public land?

Mark has a real good Question,Just how would a person go about runnig coyotes at nite.


----------



## griffondog (Dec 27, 2005)

Just curious, without treeing a coyote how will they get a shot in the dark at a coyote chased by hounds? Maybe someone can enlighten me on the need for this.[/QUOTE]

You can already run your dogs at night just say your **** hunting.So why have all the little loopholes you have to jump through. More ways to run your dogs. Your not going to be shooting them.

Griff


----------



## Beaverhunter2 (Jan 22, 2005)

Fur-minator said:


> Is there a reason they want to shorten the timeline? In my experience it is very difficult to get hides registered.


To reduce what they believe is after-season take. The DNR plans to increase the number of registration events like when they had a biologist at the Clare Fur Sales. I haven't had too much trouble. I call and make an appointment. Two weeks after the season closes IMO should be enough keeping mind that you don't have to wait until the season closes. If you get your Zone 3 otter in December (like I did last season), it was registered in January. Under the proposed regs I would have had until April 10. So far I don't need to register anything this season.  Hopefully this weekend!



gilgetter said:


> dont sound bad. as far as cat trapping goes, are they saying all public? land or some public land?
> 
> .


Uh...."Public land". I assume ALL public land open to trapping in the new area will be open. They didn't mention any places in the new area that would be closed. Are there places you think they might want to close?

John


----------



## gilgetter (Feb 28, 2006)

As the DNR has fussed about cat trapping on public land, I was expecting them to come up with a plan to open a few areas to trapping and to leave some closed. time will tell.


----------



## Beaverhunter2 (Jan 22, 2005)

The DNR originally restricted NLP bobcat trapping to private land to limit the increase in the number harvested. They limited it to footholds to drive a daily check and reduce the risk of over-limit 'cats being killed. There was a lot of concern that adding trapping could put the population at risk.

The harvest surveys have shown that trapping is significantly more effective than hunting for taking bobcats. The 2010 Survey shows that in the NLP there were 53 hunter-days spent per bobcat taken. There were 32 trapper-days per 'cat. Also, hunters had a 17% success rate and trappers had 25% success. This is the problem we face trying to get more equitable access to the resource between hunters and trappers. If the DNR were to simply open public land and give trappers the same seasons as the houndsmen and the callers the odds are pretty good it would have a significant impact on the population.

This is what I think has caused the DNR to keep kicking that can down the road. The only way they can bring equity of opportunity without risking over-harvest is to reduce the length of the hunting seasons or establish a quota system. Both option have issues- politically and otherwise.

John.


----------



## Gary A. Schinske (Jul 10, 2006)

When you look at hunting bobcat and trapping bobcat the success rate for harvest is going to be greater for trapping than hunting but that does not tell the whole story. If you are a caller you have to be there while a trap works no matter if you are at work or what ever. If you are a good hound hunter you are out there to enjoy your dogs, so you are going to run cat without harvesting them, or being quite selective which cat you harvest. Then you have the guides who post about taking 10, 19, 30+ during a 59day max season if they have clients every day. The last groups is the one that could put the most hurt on a cat population in a new area. How many trappers would travel hundreds of mile to possibly harvest a bobcat that might bring $150 at auction? How many guys with paid clients will travel hundreds of miles to harvest bobcats that they are getting $1500 to $2000 a piece? Look at the survey of 2010 and you will see that the number of harvested cats for hunting was only 10 or 11 less than trapping. Looking at select data can make the facts anything you want. I would hope the DNR looks at the entire picture and does not bend to political pressure.


----------



## gilgetter (Feb 28, 2006)

This is what I think has caused the DNR to keep kicking that can down the road. The only way they can bring equity of opportunity without risking over-harvest is to reduce the length of the hunting seasons or establish a quota system. Both option have issues- politically and otherwise.

John.[/QUOTE]

Population is so fragile, Why not just close the season?after all the resource is the prime consideration? or is It? Trappers have asked to use cage traps, I asked bump myself, acted like he was gut shot.

I would hope the DNR looks at the entire picture, and does not bend to political pressure

I would hope the same gary. BUT I sure aint going to hold my breath. not with the money you mentioned, on the line.

Im glad to see there mite be some change comming, Its long over due. I look at the way the farten season, thats HALs terminoligy.was handeled. That dont leave me with any warm fuzzy for the furbearer folks in lansing.

As one member on this site once said, watch the money.I think that is still good advice.


----------



## Beaverhunter2 (Jan 22, 2005)

Gary A. Schinske said:


> When you look at hunting bobcat and trapping bobcat the success rate for harvest is going to be greater for trapping than hunting but that does not tell the whole story. If you are a caller you have to be there while a trap works no matter if you are at work or what ever. If you are a good hound hunter you are out there to enjoy your dogs, so you are going to run cat without harvesting them, or being quite selective which cat you harvest. Then you have the guides who post about taking 10, 19, 30+ during a 59day max season if they have clients every day. The last groups is the one that could put the most hurt on a cat population in a new area. How many trappers would travel hundreds of mile to possibly harvest a bobcat that might bring $150 at auction? How many guys with paid clients will travel hundreds of miles to harvest bobcats that they are getting $1500 to $2000 a piece? Look at the survey of 2010 and you will see that the number of harvested cats for hunting was only 10 or 11 less than trapping. Looking at select data can make the facts anything you want. I would hope the DNR looks at the entire picture and does not bend to political pressure.


Gary, The guides aren't likely to have that significant of an impact in the new area with an 11 day season. Most of their clients work and while the guides may have their weekends full, I'm sure there are week days they don't have anyone. Also, if they are hunting in the new area, those are days they will not be able to hunt in the old ones. I'd love to see some regulation on bobcat guiding, but as far as their impact on the population they are already part of the equation in the UP and the original areas in the NLP. Guiding in those areas is nothing new. And you also need to remember that what the trappers in the NLP did in 11 days took the hunters a month or two depending on the area. Trapping is more effective than hunting in taking bobcats.

Here's a link to the 2010 Harvest Survey for those who would like to see it. When 2011 comes out I'll post that, too.

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/d..._and_trapper_harvest_in_Michigan_388072_7.pdf

Gil, There is no need to close the NLP season. The track study data the DNR presented at the FBWG meeting suggested the NLP bobcat population is increasing. (And we intend to use this info to our advantage.) The area they are most concerned about the population declining is the UP. And they are always going to tread slowly and carefully when it comes to the limited species. Look how long it took us to get the second Zone 2 otter, the Zone 3 otter, and the current NLP bobcat trapping season. We almost had a bobcat quota system for the NLP last reg cycle (to equalize the harvest) until the UPTA gave the DNR an excuse to not move on it. This will likely be our main issue next cycle.

You guys should consider coming to these meetings. You'd have a chance to ask questions and raise your concerns. Also, Dwayne Etter's presentation on the NLP Bobcat Study was very interesting.

While we're discussing it, which would you prefer:


Adding Public Land Trapping in the NLP
Extending the NLP Bobcat Trapping Season in Areas C & D

Without a quota, the DNR is only likely to move on one or the other since both would likely increase harvest.

I think I'm going to suggest to our Board that we do another member survey in preparation for the next furbearer cycle when this one is over. The landscape has changed on some of the original issues since the last one.

We talked a bit about cage traps at the meeting. One trapper said he had areas he wanted to trap '***** but they had wandering pets- even though the locations were more than 150 yards from a building. Some guys suggested dog proofs. The DNR said the cage trap restriction was to reduce the opportunity for violators to use them to create a "black" live market providing live ***** to hound hunters. Are you talking about cage traps more than 450 feet from a building for bobcats or just in general?

John


----------



## gilgetter (Feb 28, 2006)

Study John. Alot of info there to take in,slow as my ol brain is it takes me a bit, If ever, to get a grip of all of the facts layed out. Im sure I will ask some questions.

As far as cage trapping, I was talking about away from barns a such, what is it? 450 ft from a building. I see no other method that is more sure fire for catch and release than a cage trap. I dont see cages as the most effective way to catch cats. But they are better than nothing.

From what I read in the papper you will be trapping beaver a work soon? dont understand why the critters did a U-turn around lenawee county. We Have narry a one around here.

Me In a meeting, thats rich. I think Im in the non-meeting phase of my life now.


----------



## Gary A. Schinske (Jul 10, 2006)

If you were going to spend $1500 to $2000 for a guided cat hunt, I think it is a strong possibility that you will take some vacation. Some trappers would do the same but not the majority. I think you are underestimating just how effective a good pack of bobcat hounds can be in a "virgin" area. If someone cat take 30+ cats in the UP now with a 59 days season, there is no doubt in my mind that pack of cats hounds in Lake or Oceana County cat take 3 or 4 cats a day and still be on time for happy hour. Also, if they get their season in February when the cats are breeding, the potential for increased harvest really goes up. Sometimes sound scientific management of our resources takes a good dose of common logic/sense rather than only a big dose by a numbers interpreter. I have been to Furbearer Work Group meetings before and in my opinion they represent the DNR telling those in attendance their opinions and views, BUT they take very little back from what those in attendance have to say. Just look at how long it took for the DNR to admit their bear population estimates were over stated by 100% (18,000 down to 9,000) when at the meetings the hunting community repeatedly said their estimates were way off. My intention is not to bash the DNR. Whether you want to believe it or not a lot of decisions have been made for political reasons rather than sound scientific management facts, and some of the best DNR folks are not listened to and sometimes thrown under the bus. At least I think that has been what has happened in the past. I hope the new Administration and Director starts doing things differently. So far, things look encouraging.


----------



## Seaarkshooter (Nov 5, 2009)

I say having the ability to trap bobcats on public land in the NLP is more important to me than extending it for those fortunate enough to have private land to do it on. Whatever manor they do it by, whether quota or lottery, does not matter as much either as long as I have a chance no matter how small. Plenty of people in this State get a bear under lower odds than what I think I would get. The difference being though that they get to use public land to do it. Whatever, or whomever, it opens a cans of worms with I say its time to address. I think time has passed enough to show we have learned cooler heads always prevail when looking at these issues.





posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## Beaverhunter2 (Jan 22, 2005)

Gary A. Schinske said:


> If you were going to spend $1500 to $2000 for a guided cat hunt, I think it is a strong possibility that you will take some vacation. Some trappers would do the same but not the majority. I think you are underestimating just how effective a good pack of bobcat hounds can be in a "virgin" area. If someone cat take 30+ cats in the UP now with a 59 days season, there is no doubt in my mind that pack of cats hounds in Lake or Oceana County cat take 3 or 4 cats a day and still be on time for happy hour. Also, if they get their season in February when the cats are breeding, the potential for increased harvest really goes up. Sometimes sound scientific management of our resources takes a good dose of common logic/sense rather than only a big dose by a numbers interpreter. I have been to Furbearer Work Group meetings before and in my opinion they represent the DNR telling those in attendance their opinions and views, BUT they take very little back from what those in attendance have to say. Just look at how long it took for the DNR to admit their bear population estimates were over stated by 100% (18,000 down to 9,000) when at the meetings the hunting community repeatedly said their estimates were way off. My intention is not to bash the DNR. Whether you want to believe it or not a lot of decisions have been made for political reasons rather than sound scientific management facts, and some of the best DNR folks are not listened to and sometimes thrown under the bus. At least I think that has been what has happened in the past. I hope the new Administration and Director starts doing things differently. So far, things look encouraging.


I'm not sure how 30+ in a 59 day season translates to 3-4 per day but I guess we will see. We will also see if the DNR takes back what they heard at the Furbearer Workgroup Meeting, The people present took the DNR's proposal of an 11 day season and suggested a few modifications. If those changes are implemented then we will know they have listened.

The recommendation of a short season in the new area is based on science. The data suggested it could support it. Significant numbers of trappers (and hunters) have been asking for it for years but the DNR said they would not act on the request until they had completed a population survey and then only if the data supported it. The study was completed in 2011 and the data analysis was performed in 2012. Increasing opportunities for bobcat trapping in the NLP is the number two issue from our members survey (second only to improved cable restraints). Based on what you have been saying I wonder are you opposed to expansion of the open area in the NLP for bobcats? You've never said so when we've discussed this topic in the past.

Gary, you have been to Furbearer Workgroup Meetings, but it's been a while, hasn't it? Six years ago I said the FBWG was the biggest waste of $150 in gas I'd ever experienced- but I still have gone to every one I could. I think it's important for sportsmen to be part of the process. And after the past few meetings, I'd spend the money and go back tomorrow if there was another one. Maybe you should consider trying them again.

Gil, We can certainly survey our members to see if cage traps are an issue they want us to spend our time on, but I'm still a little confused. Are you hoping/planning to use them for bobcats or just in general? I have yet to catch a bobcat during the Area C season but I have released 24 over the years that were caught in coyote sets. They were unharmed- or at least they seemed to be based on the speed with which they ran and how quickly they climbed trees. Most were caught in #2 Monty RJs (laminated and 4-coiled) and the rest in MB650s (laminated) and forged jaw Duke 1.75 Offsets. If I was concerned about catching the neighbor lady's cat I might use a cage trap, but if it was only to avoid over-limits of bobcats I'd just use footholds and release those I couldn't keep. It's not fun but it's certainly doable. (Even I've been able to do it without a scratch although there were some tense moments a few times...:yikes: )

Time for bed. Between working and beaver trapping I'm beat!

John


----------



## Seaarkshooter (Nov 5, 2009)

Beaverhunter2 said:


> .
> 
> The recommendation of a short season in the new area is based on science. The data suggested it could support it. Significant numbers of trappers (and hunters) have been asking for it for years but the DNR said they would not act on the request until they had completed a population survey and then only if the data supported it. The study was completed in 2011 and the data analysis was performed in 2012. Increasing opportunities for bobcat trapping in the NLP is the number two issue from our members survey (second only to improved cable restraints). Based on what you have been saying I wonder are you opposed to expansion of the open area in the NLP for bobcats? You've never said so when we've discussed this topic in the past.
> 
> ...


Nope, I think the expansion of the open area in the NLP for bobcats is fine, especially in light of all of the increasing reports from hunters and trappers of cats seen in those areas. Its sound science to manage their numbers and that's just the way business should be run. 

However, I also believe, in an unscientific and purely speculative sense, that there are a great number of trappers which would like to see cat trapping opened up to public land in order to have *their first and only chance* so far of trappping and keeping one of these animals without a trip over the mighty Mac. That's my beilief and I think a questionaire result would show that. It may seem like I may have sounded unsupportive in general expansion but this is the answer I have for your posted question of which I would like most. I understand it may be at odds of a prioritized need with the DNR to manage cats correctly right now.

So, if anyone would like to sell me some swamp land for holding that unsupported belief, great! My question is then, does it have beaver and how often do the cats hold up there? With its purchase would be my best chance to keep one because the 20 acres I have to trap privately don't cut it being high and dry with the only cats showing up there because they have been baited or like the brush pile for rearing young.


----------



## Gary A. Schinske (Jul 10, 2006)

Yes John, I am for expanded bobcat trapping in the NLP. While not as successful as you, I carried that ball with Chuck Turk years ago. At the end of my last post, I stated that it now looks encouraging with the new Administration and Director. I hope that carries over to the Furbearer Work Group Meetings, and you are correct; I do need to attend those to see if they are different. I have always felt that when heads of organizations change, those departing need to stay in the background to let the new administration operate without any shadows. That is what I have done, and you have been very successful in various ventures for trappers. Thank you for everything. Other comments I will make in a PM before people start thinking we do not like each other, which is totally not true. 
I totally agree with Dennis that letting hunting take place on all land and trapping only on private land is extremely unfortunate for the trapper. Look at Lake County and compare the private land to the public land.


----------



## FREEPOP (Apr 11, 2002)

Beaverhunter2 said:


> The DNR originally restricted NLP bobcat trapping to private land to limit the increase in the number harvested. They limited it to footholds to drive a daily check and reduce the risk of over-limit 'cats being killed. There was a lot of concern that adding trapping could put the population at risk.
> 
> The harvest surveys have shown that trapping is significantly more effective than hunting for taking bobcats. The 2010 Survey shows that in the NLP there were 53 hunter-days spent per bobcat taken. There were 32 trapper-days per 'cat. Also, hunters had a 17% success rate and trappers had 25% success. This is the problem we face trying to get more equitable access to the resource between hunters and trappers. If the DNR were to simply open public land and give trappers the same seasons as the houndsmen and the callers the odds are pretty good it would have a significant impact on the population.
> 
> ...


Thanks for sharing that John, it brought an answer to a lot of questions I had. Still doesn't make me like it but "Oh well".

Thinking on this brings to mind fishing and how it would be handled differently if it were. After all, foot holds and hounds men both have the option of releasing the animal, more than likely with greater survival rate than fish. Yes there are sections that are flies only and none with bait only but that is a whole different game than hounds and traps. IMO, the exclusion of bobcat trapping on public ground is a huge injustice to the taxpaying outdoors people of this state. 

At the moment I think I like the idea of a quota system. I feel it's quite simple now, with cell phones, smart phones and internet access. In the winter, everyone checks to see if the quota has been met at sunset everyday. If the quota has been and they are unable to pull or fire traps that night, they just have to release any the next day that they have in traps. We can't use body grippers on them anyway. The dog guys can still run but they can't shoot, remember, to them it's about working their dogs not the kill  As for potential clients the hound guys have? Screw the hound guys, it's a state resource that's supposed to be shared to it's residents equally, just as the land owned by the state should be. They can continue to train their hounds throughout the year, except during the quiet season.


----------



## gilgetter (Feb 28, 2006)

That cage traps have been an option all these years, that have been ignored by the DNR. I would prefer footholds, but what ever gets us public land trapping Im for.When I see the regs in black and white printed in the 2013 hunting and trapping digest, I will say well done, and thank you. I know you and gary both have worked hard on this issue.I just think It has taken far to long to get to a point where we MIGHT get public land back.


----------



## gilgetter (Feb 28, 2006)

Screw the hound guys 

When I say that, I have all ya'all crawlen all over me. tellen me in PMs and such Im a evil bastard.tryen to hurt my feelings. O,well. I agree john screw em all.


----------



## FREEPOP (Apr 11, 2002)

Bottom line is if overharvest of a species is a concern, I would think a quota system would be the first method to explore. 
The last option I could conceive would be to prohibit a group the consumption of a public resource on public property and only allow consumption of said public resource to be on private property.


----------



## 9 (Jan 17, 2000)

This crap with the houndmen just keeps going round and round! When will the core of the problem be dragged out from under the rock and out in the daylight so everybody can recognize the "real issue"!

It's my honest opinion the "REAL ISSUE" is that the houndsmen in MI do not want trappers setting ANY type of trap on public ground and begrudgingly allow catching devises of different levelsb of ineffectiveness to be used on private ground. They don't want body grips, snares, cable restraints, or footholds used where they run dogs regardless of the animal. Using a specific animal in their arguementis nothing more than camouflage!

Some years ago a property owner and his wife came to me and ask if I'd trap coyote on their deer hunting property. When I said it was too far for me to go they ask if I'd teach them how to use our useless CRs. They didn't know the MI CR background but they'd heard I used to snare a lot of coyote so could I show them how to snare coyotes. No, I wouldn't nd explained my feelings toward the post-2005 CRs. They ask if I would teach them to use the MI CRs.

This I would and did do after they had recieved their MI legal CRs.. This was several years ago and as we've come to understand the ineffectiveness of the MI CRs they lost coyote after coyote but did in fact have some waiting for dispatch. The property owner was happy but tempered bybthe knowledge of all the ones that got away.

Now You're probably wondering what the heck has this got to do with bobcats and houndsmen. Well here ya go! The local houndsmen heard of the property owner's limited success on coyote so the houndsmen apparently wanted to share the coyotes with the property owne*r who had denied them access* to run hounds on his property.

Now the houndsmen "sweep" the property when the owner isn't there and they remove all of the CRs. Once the CRs are removed, the hounds are allowed to run the entire area.

Here is an example of the most hound-protective/friendly type catching devise not satisfying the houndsmen. If today's houndsmen will trespass to remove our MI CRs, what do you think they'd do finding their dogs hooked-up in a bunch of tricked-out #3 Bridgers on State land or private ground??????

So which animal is the REAL problem? The coyote, the fox, the bobcat, or their hound??????


----------



## FREEPOP (Apr 11, 2002)

Very true Seldom.
Unfortunately those of us that tow the line have to pay for those that don't. Happens too much in life.

There was a group around about a month ago. I saw them as I was leaving. I got about 5 miles away, turned and went back. I told him I had traps out. His eyes lit up "Snares?!" I said, "Yep, when you asked the landowner for permission, I'm sure he told you because he was with me when I set them." Lots of action after that :lol: A survey after that showed two properties they had permission on, totaling a couple hundred acres. The largest 3 landowners in that section had never been contacted which totaled 800+ acres.

P.S. I didn't have any snares or CRs up but I did have 160s and 110s  I don't think it's illegal to lie about snares, is it?


----------



## gilgetter (Feb 28, 2006)

the core of the problem will ever be addressed.Most here think we are out numbered, and we should not call out fellow sports men.no matter what they do.


----------



## Beaverhunter2 (Jan 22, 2005)

gilgetter said:


> the core of the problem will ever be addressed.Most here think we are out numbered, and we should not call out fellow sports men.no matter what they do.


We're not outnumbered. I hear there are about 700 coyote runners in MI. There are over 6000 trappers. Unfortunately houndsmen are very active and put a lot of money into the defense of their sport. Only about 1000 trappers are even members of any trapping association.

A lot of the issues that we have resolved were a long time coming and others we have been working on we've been going after for years as well. I'm not by nature a patient man, but I've learned that steady, gentle pressure usually gets you what you want. It's sort of like picking nightcrawlers. If you get it before it gets set in its hole- its a quick catch; but if it gets dug in yanking it usually only gets you half of a worm. If you just keep the pressure on, you'll eventually gets you the whole thing.

JMO

John

BTW Gary and I are "Buds". Our friendship is strong enough to survive passionate discussions and even disagreement.


----------



## gilgetter (Feb 28, 2006)

Why only a thousand or so trappers are members?I wonder how could a person go about getting more members.I wonder why when suggestions are made, very little or no action is taken.I wonder why Ohio, New York,Wisconsin,minnesota and pennsylvania have the type of associations they have and michigan has four. I wonder why if we are not outnumbered we have chosen to take a back seat? 

John while you are taken your time picken the fat juice crawler, some **** hole takes a gil net and gets all the fish.

I also wonder if you and gary are going to set a date?LOL


----------



## Black Powder Trapper (Feb 15, 2008)

We are always looking for ways to bring more members into MTPCA. The board is talking about doing a NTA drive like we have in the past and this has worked. We will listen to any ideas on how to increase membership or anything else. If you look at percentages 1/6th is not a bad percentage as memberships go but we need to find ways to attract more. When ideas are proposed MTPCA does look at and discuss them all but most of these are Board decisions and the majority does make the decision so individual suggestions may not make it. If anyone is in disagreement with our direction I would encourage you to seek a position on the Board of Directors.
Multiple Associations seem to be becoming more the norm today Minnesota now has two if you google it you will find both. I have also read that Wisconsin has another one starting up but I have not been able to confirm that yet. These start up for different reasons but the biggest one is a group has a disagreement about something and when a decision does not go in a groups direction they decide to form a new association rather than work within the association to change the direction. Everyone that I have talked to in Michigan about this has told me that is how it happened here. This is sad but in Michigan we are working closer than ever MTPCA and MMIT are talking about the possibility of getting back together. We are also working very close with NGLFH. This is one of my personal issues and I have been working on this since I joined MTPCA and will continue to do so.
I do not think we are taking a back seat to the dog groups. It is true that the dog groups have had more influence than the trappers in many cases but this is due to the fact that the trappers have not been as active as the dog groups with the DNR, NRC and Legislature over the years. These three groups are the decision makers. Gary, John and several others started to actively work with the DNR and NRC before I joined MTPCA and when I joined one of the first things I started doing was to work with the DNR and NRC and these relationships are starting to make a big difference. I would say at this point our standing is equal. We have a lot of ground to get back and it will take time but we are making progress. One area that we lack in is working with the Legislature and we are starting down that path. Trappers and dog groups both think that everyone should see things from their perspective and that is simply not the way it works. The dog groups have been more active working with the decision makers than the trappers have and that is why we have been in the position we have been in. This is changing and will continue to change.


----------



## gilgetter (Feb 28, 2006)

very well put. Not bad for a ol trapper.you been hangen around them college boys?

I fail to see how a 1/6th percentage can be considered a good thing.I dont think we can get them all, but I would look at anything less than 50% as failure, and the goal much higher.I think If the right offers are out there, I think we could get some new members. that 3 for one deal is a real good start.Am I right that the MTPCA is a 501c3 group?One point I have tryed to made in the past. dont make folks think all you want is there money.folks think there getting a good deal are far more apt to join something.

Let me throw this out there,I dont know the price of a Jr. membership off the top of my head, would this work?any kid that traps on a Jr trapping lincense gets a membership with a magazine for 5 bucks, and into all fur sales free. no lot fees, nothing.

Are there folks that mite take advantage of that? probley, but if you want to get kids started, I think thats a good way

I put those other states out there as an example of what we should and can have here.we have some great leaders in our state to include your self. At the time we all get on the same page, It will be katie bar the door, but I dont see that happining any time soon. I would like to be wrong, but dont think I am.

hound hunters? I think freepop said it best, screw em.


----------



## Black Powder Trapper (Feb 15, 2008)

Thanks for the complement I think LOL

The 1/6th came from something John C posted a while back. He quoted some research that talked about different organizations and the percentage of participants that belonged to the organization. I agree that it is unacceptable and we need to work to change it. We do have a Junior Membership at $10.00 and I will bring up adding a magazine to it and lowering the price and get feedback. This would be a by-law change and would have to be voted on at Convention. I do not think that the board will add a free lot number . We had that once with no commission and people took advantage of it. The Junior would come and sell 400 muskrats and such.

I will say that right now the board is being slow to add items that cost us money that we can not recoup. I also know that you contend that there is more than enough money in our treasury and my position is that we need more. I will explain my rational. We have received estimates that if we have to fight a Ballot Proposal it would probably be a couple million.We would not have to come up with all of it but this is and always has been my concern. We do not need one or two million but we should have more than we do. We should know in a month or so if they collected enough signatures. I can not talk about it but rest assured that the BOD is already doing things and working on this. 

We are not a 501C3 and probably will not become one. The last time someone looked into it if I am remembering correctly there were not enough advantages and many sportsmen organizations were loosing their status because of changes in the rules.

I agree completely that we all need to get on the same page


----------



## gilgetter (Feb 28, 2006)

Secret squirrel routine?The BOD going to wait till the last minute to tell the membership whats going on? that makes perfect sence. It always works out when you make mushroms out of the membership, feed them crap and keep them in the dark.

My thinking on the kids is this,anyone who has kids knows that when the kid is involved, the parents are also.bring in the kids the parents and the money will follow.

If what you allude to comes to pass 1/6th sure aint gonna cut it. was I ya'all I would be maken some changes most ricci tic. but Im sure the BOD has thing well in hand.

and yes it was ment as a complement.


----------



## micooner (Dec 20, 2003)

Heads a little foggy from reading all of the previous stuff, whats a BOD? As far as getting youth involved I think it is a real uphill battle whether it be trapping or cooning with the big, bad hounds lol. Lower membership fees probably won't cut it. I find it amazing that this bobcat stuff is so divisive between my fellow trappers and houndsmen. JMHO Oh yea this is for Gil and Freepop "screw the trappers" oh wait I trap to Ha HA


----------



## Black Powder Trapper (Feb 15, 2008)

The BOD is the Board of Directors and I was not talking about the Dog Groups and Bobcats I was referring to the Wolf issue.


----------



## FREEPOP (Apr 11, 2002)

micooner said:


> Heads a little foggy from reading all of the previous stuff, whats a BOD? As far as getting youth involved I think it is a real uphill battle whether it be trapping or cooning with the big, bad hounds lol. Lower membership fees probably won't cut it. I find it amazing that this bobcat stuff is so divisive between my fellow trappers and houndsmen. JMHO Oh yea this is for Gil and Freepop "screw the trappers" oh wait I trap to Ha HA


Screw the hound people if the quota is filled and they have clients the next day. They can still run their dogs and clients can shoot pics. Plus they can run year long minus the quiet period. 
BTW did you notice my avatar? Wanna buy a guided rabbit hunt?


----------



## Black Powder Trapper (Feb 15, 2008)

FREEPOP said:


> Screw the hound people if the quota is filled and they have clients the next day. They can still run their dogs and clients can shoot pics. Plus they can run year long minus the quiet period.
> BTW did you notice my avatar? Wanna buy a guided rabbit hunt?


Freepop When we were looking at the quota idea we were going to split the tags down the middle so the hunters had half and the trappers had half but the DNR and UP Trappers did not want it. The DNR said it would cost to much to set up and operate while the UP Trappers were worried about a quota system being pushed in the UP by the DNR after it was set up down here. I do not think we will see that any time soon.


----------



## Seaarkshooter (Nov 5, 2009)

micooner said:


> Heads a little foggy from reading all of the previous stuff, whats a BOD? As far as getting youth involved I think it is a real uphill battle whether it be trapping or cooning with the big, bad hounds lol. Lower membership fees probably won't cut it. I find it amazing that this bobcat stuff is so divisive between my fellow trappers and houndsmen. JMHO Oh yea this is for Gil and Freepop "screw the trappers" oh wait I trap to Ha HA


Micooner, It wasn't too long ago (20 years) that I enjoyed my hound running more than anything else in the world and would have had a hard time understanding the trappers view on some things. However, now that I am verifiable trapping nut case like many here, I see things clearer, much clearer. 

Many of these hard issues and critical viewpoints from a few of us are the result of mileage from riding alongside other travelers on the road that have had a less than courteous driving record you might say. Be it as it may, I don't think the majority of either group have a bunch of bad apples in them. I have met a few houndsmen that I didn't care for because of their inability to control the hunt or respect others property lines, but I have also (almost) met a few sticky fingered trappers that steal or set illegal traps with no regard for the law. Either way, I am not impressed and have no qualms calling the RAP line on either. 

My hope is that someday the truely rational, innovative and influential leaders of both sports can find more equitable middle ground in helping the DNR and NRC deal with our limited outdoor resources so we can both enjoy the same parcels of ground together. The real wolf, in my opinion, is knocking door to door in my suburbia right at this second with intentions of taking both of our sports to the archived shelves of the Smithonian. Many living beyond the city lights don't realize a real threat is growing to both our sports and division is not going to keep the wolves from their doors either. Only the collective cooperation from us all will. 

Sporting groups need to put their differences aside and work them out now before the distraction allows the millions of uneducated soccer moms being told baloney about how living in balance with nature can be done Walt Disney style decide our fate and we all end up carrying nothing but box taps or only running our dogs in lap dog playgrounds.


----------



## FREEPOP (Apr 11, 2002)

Black Powder Trapper said:


> Freepop When we were looking at the quota idea we were going to split the tags down the middle so the hunters had half and the trappers had half but the DNR and UP Trappers did not want it. The DNR said it would cost to much to set up and operate while the UP Trappers were worried about a quota system being pushed in the UP by the DNR after it was set up down here. I do not think we will see that any time soon.


Seems like a fair distribution of the resource. Wait, they'd lose the, monopoly of the state land  
I am curious how much money it would take to set up and operate such a system. Being a cumbersome state entity, it is probably 5x as much as a private company could do it. Other states do it, so there may be examples to research. Don't they have a quota system for the Black Lake sturgeon spearing?


----------



## gilgetter (Feb 28, 2006)

micooner said:


> Heads a little foggy from reading all of the previous stuff, whats a BOD? As far as getting youth involved I think it is a real uphill battle whether it be trapping or cooning with the big, bad hounds lol. Lower membership fees probably won't cut it. I find it amazing that this bobcat stuff is so divisive between my fellow trappers and houndsmen. JMHO Oh yea this is for Gil and Freepop "screw the trappers" oh wait I trap to Ha HA


I have run hounds all over this state.hunted with some great dogs, and some good men.I have given thought of getting another hound.But when the hound groups put a end to my trapping rights for cats, they can go straight to hell.May not be much I can do about it, but I sure aint gonna pretend its OK.


----------



## Black Powder Trapper (Feb 15, 2008)

FREEPOP said:


> Seems like a fair distribution of the resource. Wait, they'd lose the, monopoly of the state land
> I am curious how much money it would take to set up and operate such a system. Being a cumbersome state entity, it is probably 5x as much as a private company could do it. Other states do it, so there may be examples to research. Don't they have a quota system for the Black Lake sturgeon spearing?


You are correct in Wisconsin the system is run by a private company and if Michigan did it it would probably be set up with a private company also. However if the MDNR does not want it and the UP Trappers Ass. does not want it we will not get it. There is one bright light on this now though. With the potential Wolf Management Season this is one way that the MDNR is looking at controlling the number of wolfs taken. Once the system is set up it cost a lot less to add an animal so we will have to wait and see what the MDNR does. Adam actually mentioned the possible use of this type of system to control the wolf take if there was a season at the wolf meeting in Gaylord but they were looking at other ideas also.


----------



## FREEPOP (Apr 11, 2002)

Cool, we'd have to make a call to someone in India. In my best New Delhi accent "How many bobcats you shot today?" 

Remind me to do the impression around the camp fire this year


----------

