# Bobcat trapping lawsuit



## 22 Chuck (Feb 2, 2006)

Heard that the bear hunters won. There will be no bobcat trapping on state land in the Lower.


----------



## Northcountry (Feb 4, 2004)

http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1176512#post1176512


----------



## 2-BIG (Oct 17, 2002)

I don't think the hound hunters won anything, I think they may have lost the support of a whole lot of good people that jumped in and helped bail them out in the past!:rant: I wonder if they would voulentarily give up bobcat hunting all together since they think that the population is in such a serious decline in the NLP that a trapper shouldn't be allowed to harvest the SAME bobcat with a trap that they harvest with hounds? UNLIKELY!


----------



## Linda G. (Mar 28, 2002)

It was NEVER legal to trap bobcats on state land in the lower peninsula...the season last year was legal ONLY on private lands...the season we won't have at all this year, that is.


----------



## s&a smolen (Feb 20, 2005)

Yes, Linda is right, no state land trapping or federal (Huron/Manistee), private land only, 10 day season with paw holds only, one cat. If there ain't enough cat for this season they need to go to a quota. Good point, 2 - Big !

S.S.


----------



## Northcountry (Feb 4, 2004)

One point that I think is significant, is that the hound hunters generally ply their trade in large, public land areas. This is obviously an assumption I am making, giving them credit for trying to avoid tresspass on private tracts during the chase.

So now, if they continually hunt the same large public tracts then indeed, they may be noticing the slow decline in 'cat numbers that they are complaining about. Theyre burning up their locations- its an elementary concept.

So the cats are much more abundant on private land tracts, as trappers have noticed. All the land trappers I know have seen alot of sign and caught incidental cats in their private land coyote sets.

Trapping allows pin-point targetting and harvest, in the PRIVATE LAND areas where the cats are abundant. I think the houndsman are applying their "decline in numbers" in a broad brush stroke, painting the entire NLP, but its actually just a localized problem that they themselves have created.


----------



## steelhead1 (Jan 2, 2005)

Northcountry said:


> One point that I think is significant, is that the hound hunters generally ply their trade in large, public land areas. This is obviously an assumption I am making, giving them credit for trying to avoid tresspass on private tracts during the chase.
> 
> So now, if they continually hunt the same large public tracts then indeed, they may be noticing the slow decline in 'cat numbers that they are complaining about. Theyre burning up their locations- its an elementary concept.
> 
> ...


Excellent point. The problem is that it's to obvious. It's much easier to put the blame on something else.


----------



## wmduckman (Jan 25, 2003)

look there's phone numbers to call at the bottom of the media release.



> From Bill Walker of MBHA:
> 
> Media Release May 16, 2006
> 
> ...


----------



## Hamilton Reef (Jan 20, 2000)

Ruling halts trapping of bobcats in northern Lower Peninsula

Sunday, May 21, 2006 By Bob Gwizdz

LANSING -- An Ingham County judge has sided with state hound-hunting groups and permanently enjoined the Department of Natural Resources from allowing trappers to take bobcats in the northern Lower Peninsula. 

Circuit court judge Beverley Nettles-Nickerson ruled that the DNR failed to use sound scientific evidence in support of the trapping season and that the season is likely to cause impairment to the bobcat population. 

The Michigan Bear Hunters Association had filed a suit seeking an injunction prior to the trapping season, which was allowed for the first time in recent history during the 2004-2005 season. Although the bear hunters -- they are largely houndsmen who hunt bobcats during the winter when bear season is closed -- failed to stop the first trapping season, they won the case when it proceeded to trial.

The DNR declined to comment on the case, saying only that it was reviewing the judgment. 

Bill Walker of the Bear Hunters Association said his organization was not trying to hog the resource, but was concerned about the DNR's unwillingness to put strict limitations on the bobcat harvest. 

"We hope the DNR and the (Natural Resources) Commission will take some steps to tighten up the regulations on bobcats," Walker said. 

Walker said he thought the DNR's decision to open bobcat trapping in the northern Lower Peninsula was done with good intentions. 

"Hunting and trapping opportunity is a good thing," he said. 

But unrestrained access to bobcats could cause harm to the population, Walker said. He believes some sort of limited entry system, such as a license lottery, would better protect the bobcat population. 

"It might end up being an elk-hunt situation where you have a lot of people apply but only 200 or so get to do it," Walker said. 

Last winter, hunters and trappers took 265 bobcats in the northern Lower Peninsula; 182 were taken by hunters and 83 by trappers. 

The DNR has 21 days to file an intention to appeal the judgment, though no decision has been made yet. 

NRC member Bob Garner said he was surprised by the decision and hopes the DNR will appeal the case. 

"We had asked those questions (about harming the bobcat population) before the commission made the decision and we thought we were OK on this," Garner said.


----------



## Hamilton Reef (Jan 20, 2000)

Aside from the sportsman hunting/trap bobcat debate, the anti-trapping PETA groups are celebrating with the double win. The got their desired split between sportsmen and the no-trapping of bobcats. Both at no cost to their budget.


----------



## lwingwatcher (Mar 25, 2001)

It is a shame that there is further division amongst outdoor enthusiasts in this state. Chalk one up for the anti's....and at the worst time with the dove vote coming.

I don't hunt or trap cats but can't hunters size a cat before it gets killed (or even run) and aren't traps non-discretionary?


----------



## Northcountry (Feb 4, 2004)

lwingwatcher said:


> and aren't traps non-discretionary?


Foothold traps are used by wildlife managers to capture, study, relocate and release animals with no (or extremely minimal) physical harm. Bobcats in particular do not fight the trap much at all...and their large, furry foot provides alot of protection. I can honestly say that I have never heard of a bobcat hurt by a foothold trap.

That said, they are excellent candidates for release if the trapper decides that they do not want to kill the animal, for whatever reason. The animals can be judged from an arms length (plus 12", I suggest  ), which is superior to the opportunity that houndsmen get, I think.


----------



## griffondog (Dec 27, 2005)

Did you notice how Bill said we needed a elk like lottery with only 200 lisc. Sounds like the best of both worlds. They still get to run their hounds on the cats plus the price of guided hunts goes up with the limited lisc.

Griffondog


----------



## lwingwatcher (Mar 25, 2001)

Northcountry said:


> Foothold traps are used by wildlife managers to capture, study, relocate and release animals with no (or extremely minimal) physical harm. Bobcats in particular do not fight the trap much at all...and their large, furry foot provides alot of protection. I can honestly say that I have never heard of a bobcat hurt by a foothold trap.
> 
> That said, they are excellent candidates for release if the trapper decides that they do not want to kill the animal, for whatever reason. The animals can be judged from an arms length (plus 12", I suggest  ), which is superior to the opportunity that houndsmen get, I think.


Ok, I learned something. An arms length would indeed be closer than the height of whatever tree the cat climbed.


----------



## fairfax1 (Jun 12, 2003)

Folks.......I know zero about hunting/trapping bobcats. Let's get that out of the way quickly.

But, my take on this case is that it was a "scientific" decision coming from the majority of DNR biologists that recommended 'no trapping'. The NRC overrode the Department's biologists.

The court overrode the NRC. 
Isn't that a good thing? 
Don't we want educated experienced biologists to guide us on wildlife resource management? Not political appointees?

Who brought the lawsuit that eventually overturned the NRC is probably irrelevant....hound-hunters, PETA, or the Dixie Chicks.....what seems important is that a court recognized that wildlife managment should be sciene-based.


----------



## Justin (Feb 21, 2005)

fairfax, this wasn't even close to a scientific decision. If it was, there would be no hunting season for cats. Hunters took more than double the number of cats that trappers took last season. This is a simple case of greed.


----------



## griffondog (Dec 27, 2005)

Fairfax

When the bobcat lawsuit was first filed I talked to as many hound guys at the Outdoorama show as I could find about the lawsuit. All told me they were just conserned that to many cats were going to be harvested. Alot of guys told me they don't kill cats,they just want to run their dogs.

Now here comes the part that cracks me up. One guy had 20 cats shot over his dogs but he didn't shoot any so, he was just running his dogs. Three guys had a total of 37 cats shot over their dogs. 

Why can't the trappers keep a few cats when people who are guiding hunters have no controls on them. Trappers turn cats loose all fall out of coyote sets to have the same cats shot out of a tree on a guided hunt.

Griffondog


----------



## 2-BIG (Oct 17, 2002)

I copied this from another trapping discussion board so I do not know if it is true. Does anyone here know if this is a fact?
"I just discovered that the Michigan Bear Hunters Association's lawyer, Fred Dilley, was also Rodney Coronado's lawyer in his trial for torching the Michigan State University's lab and the offices of 2 animal researchers, and releasing the mink on a mink ranch, in 1992.

Dilley is probably so tickled over the MBHA's and ALF's victory, by stopping bobcat trapping in lower Michigan, he wet himself.

By the way, reading some news articles about Dilley, he's been giving speaches to hunting groups about the case. He seems less like an attorney handling the case, and more like an advocate for the cause. 

Now, ask yourself why an attorney who is an environmental activist, and who defended Rod Coronado for ALF terrorist activities, is advocating the end to bobcat trapping in Lower Michigan, not just to a judge, but to the membership of these organizations."
I really hope this is just someone B.S,ing!


----------



## Northcountry (Feb 4, 2004)

Interesting bedfellows, I'd say.

MBHA's lawyer also defending one of the worlds most infamous animal-rights activists and terrorists?

I performed a quick search on the net and found the same connections.


----------



## LarryA (Jun 16, 2004)

I have a question. If you are charged with a crime or are going to court do you want one of the nation's top lawyers?

"Dilley is listed in a peer-reviewed reference book titled the Best Lawyers in America."

Also, if you are charged with a crime do you want to be lumped with everyone your lawyer has represented in the past? 

It is pretty bad trying to discredit a group because they have the same nationally reknowned attorney as a convicted criminal.


----------

