Please Sign In

Please enter a valid username and password
  • Log in with Facebook
» Not a member? Take a moment to register
» Forgot Username or Password

Why Register?
Signing up could earn you gear (click here to learn how)! It also keeps offensive content off our site.

Discussion Topic: On Montana’s Anti-Trapping Initiative

Recent Comments

Categories

Recent Posts

Archives

Syndicate

Google Reader or Homepage
Add to My Yahoo!
Add to My AOL

Field Notes
in your Inbox

Enter your email address to get our new post everyday.

September 23, 2009

Discussion Topic: On Montana’s Anti-Trapping Initiative

By Dave Hurteau

A initiative brought by a group named Footloose Montana and entitled the “Montana Trap-Free Public Lands Act” has been approved for signature gathering and needs a little under 25,000 signatures to get on the 2010 ballot. If passed, it would ban trapping on public lands.

Footloose Montana says they are not an animal-rights group, are not associated with PETA or the HSUS, and that they have hunters and anglers on their board. In the initiative, they make the following arguments (among others), from the Great Falls Tribune:

--Trapping conflicts with hunting ethics by indiscriminate killing of many species, including endangered, threatened and sensitive species. . . .

--Trapping does not honor the hunters' ethical code of "fair chase," or the time-honored principles of quick and efficient kill.

--Trapping creates waste. For every wild furbearer killed, many more non-targeted wild and domestic animals are killed and discarded, in violation of hunting and outdoors ethics.

--Trapping commercializes wildlife.

--Profit-driven trapping for exotic fashion markets conflicts with conservation and managing wildlife as a public trust.

Your reaction?

Comments (17)

Top Rated
All Comments
from taylorhayward wrote 2 years 20 weeks ago

I like the idea of trapping because it's a skill worth having. The question is, are there ways to make it more safe for untargeted animals, rather than just banning it outright.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from mitchw wrote 2 years 20 weeks ago

It's Montana. I'm gonna give the people of the state credit for being a little more realistic, logical, and down-to-earth than west-coasters and east-coasters are. If Montana goes the way of Oregon, Washington, California and Colorado, all hope is completely lost.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from MLH wrote 2 years 20 weeks ago

People thinking too much (or too little), not looking past their noses, and losing touch with reality. Bringing ethics into this keeps pushing the definition further to the left. Eventually hunting could become unethical. Then the eating of meat.

If wildlife agencies figure out that they can't control the wolves with hunting, that leaves trapping ... or poisoning ... or very expensive management by wildlife professionals.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from HogBlog wrote 2 years 20 weeks ago

I've said it before, and this is a perfect example... the more we (hunters) continue to build up this artificial ideal of "fair chase" and "ethics", the more those same ideals will be turned against us. It's a noose around our own necks, and every time a group of hunters bands together against a legitimate hunting practice, that noose draws tighter.

Hunting is not "fair". Never was and never will be. There is no such thing as "fair chase" in any predator-prey relationship. There's nothing wrong with that. It's about the provision of food, and in modern cases, about wildlife and habitat management.

Does it hurt the resource?
Does it present a safety hazard?
Does it promote intentional cruelty?

If not, then folks should back off and let it be. If you don't want to participate in a certain practice, then don't. It's your choice, whether it's trapping, shooting a crossbow, hunting over bait, or anything else.

+7 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bryan01 wrote 2 years 20 weeks ago

It sounds like several of these "arguments" are completely lacking in substance - do they have any evidence that trapping kills endangered or threatened species? And if so, what species and how many has it killed?

If you read the article, this Initiative was started by someone whose dog was killed in a trap and is now on a crusade to stop trapping.

I agree with MLH about the ethics issues. We as hunters do need to act responsibly, but we need to be very careful about calling other hunters (or trappers) actions unethical. For the antis to destroy hunting, they will first seek to divide it and attack those aspects of it that have the fewest participants.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike Diehl wrote 2 years 20 weeks ago

I'm not a trapper but I support the tradition and the right of people who trap to continue to pursue that tradition on public lands.

Fooey on the Footlosers.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from idahooutdoors wrote 2 years 20 weeks ago

"Trapping conflicts with hunting ethics by indiscriminate killing of many species, including endangered, threatened and sensitive species" I would like to see the stats, is this a true statement based on documented facts, or just what someone thinks must be happening??? Trapping is hard work, and when done right can be an effect means of control for various species, and a good trapper can prevent the accidental trapping of non-targeted species...most people behind these bills have no knowledge of what they want to rule over, it just sounds like the "Bambi" thing to do and makes them feel important at their wine tasting and cheese eating parties....(nothing against wine tasting and cheese eating, I like both)

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from Hunter Savage wrote 2 years 20 weeks ago

i dont even want to get started on this one . i trap enough said .

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from logan.vandermay wrote 2 years 20 weeks ago

I doubt that it would pass in Montana. If it does it will be a very sad day, and everyone better look out.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from steve182 wrote 2 years 19 weeks ago

Sounds like something i'd expect on the ballot in my home state, but Montana? I'd like to think it won't pass there, but who knows.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Paul Wilke wrote 2 years 19 weeks ago

I'm guessing that he's right one one point. Trapping is the only means of selling wildlife.
However on all the other points he's as wrong as someone who's never trapped can be.
I've sold a lot of beaver, a lot of mink, a lot of muskrat, a lot of weasel (ermine) to the Hudson Bay Fur Company and collected bounty on a lot of coyotes.
Thats a lot of work, from setting the traps to running the trap line skinning and stretching, it's all a lot of work.
It is ethical, and for sure it's fair chase, it does not take animals other than those the trap is set for. There is no profit to be made trapping the family pet or some protected species.
This is someone attacking a sport ( or job) he knows nothing about.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from JohnR wrote 2 years 19 weeks ago

Some people simply have way too much time on their hands.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from nerffodder wrote 2 years 19 weeks ago

I dont think all the things they mentioned are a big deal. How many people trap? Now how often do those people kill endangered species? As for quick deaths, animals dying of natural things probaly suffer just as much.Trappers I do belive know how to prevent certian things from happening, so most of their arguuments are invalid.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from jason rieke wrote 2 years 18 weeks ago

Trapping has been around for thousands of years and can be a tradition to some people. I trapped gophers this year and had a blast. Also if you take away trapping on public land the population of some animals could grow to large. I don't believe Montana will take away trapping because if they do, alot of people would be really angry. If trapping gets taken away, then hunting will be next. Then fishing ect... I really hope trapping doesn't get taken away from Montana.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from texasjohn wrote 2 years 12 weeks ago

I use traps on occasion, both live and killer (Conibear)type traps. I've yet to catch something I didn't intend to, though I have been surprised by some of the things I did catch. Trapping, just like guns or wrenchs, is a tool, nothing more. Someone didn't like getting their dog in a trap, the dog shouldn't have been running around loose. And while I didn't sell skins I'd shot to the furbuyer, my brother used to keep himself in pocket money doing just that, first with my (borrowed).22 and later with an old 8mm Mauser that those skins paid for.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from trapper wrote 2 years 2 weeks ago

shutup and trap

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from zschreiber wrote 1 year 15 weeks ago

so now when these hunter's that are against hunting with traps get a mouse in their house what do they do? grab the shot gun or what? interesting perspective. bassically what these people are saying that they have "NEVER" made a bad hit on a critter, smells like a little b.s. to me. the sad part is that the anti'e will win in the end just because like some of you said trapping is a lost art and those who know are slowly dissappearing. and then it wont be missed until it's gone, when the rats over populate and and screw up the ecosystems in the ponds, and the farmers and the ranchers lose livestock and harvists to critters that are not normally hunted then and only then will the trapper be missed.

0 Good Comment? | | Report

Post a Comment

from HogBlog wrote 2 years 20 weeks ago

I've said it before, and this is a perfect example... the more we (hunters) continue to build up this artificial ideal of "fair chase" and "ethics", the more those same ideals will be turned against us. It's a noose around our own necks, and every time a group of hunters bands together against a legitimate hunting practice, that noose draws tighter.

Hunting is not "fair". Never was and never will be. There is no such thing as "fair chase" in any predator-prey relationship. There's nothing wrong with that. It's about the provision of food, and in modern cases, about wildlife and habitat management.

Does it hurt the resource?
Does it present a safety hazard?
Does it promote intentional cruelty?

If not, then folks should back off and let it be. If you don't want to participate in a certain practice, then don't. It's your choice, whether it's trapping, shooting a crossbow, hunting over bait, or anything else.

+7 Good Comment? | | Report
from idahooutdoors wrote 2 years 20 weeks ago

"Trapping conflicts with hunting ethics by indiscriminate killing of many species, including endangered, threatened and sensitive species" I would like to see the stats, is this a true statement based on documented facts, or just what someone thinks must be happening??? Trapping is hard work, and when done right can be an effect means of control for various species, and a good trapper can prevent the accidental trapping of non-targeted species...most people behind these bills have no knowledge of what they want to rule over, it just sounds like the "Bambi" thing to do and makes them feel important at their wine tasting and cheese eating parties....(nothing against wine tasting and cheese eating, I like both)

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bryan01 wrote 2 years 20 weeks ago

It sounds like several of these "arguments" are completely lacking in substance - do they have any evidence that trapping kills endangered or threatened species? And if so, what species and how many has it killed?

If you read the article, this Initiative was started by someone whose dog was killed in a trap and is now on a crusade to stop trapping.

I agree with MLH about the ethics issues. We as hunters do need to act responsibly, but we need to be very careful about calling other hunters (or trappers) actions unethical. For the antis to destroy hunting, they will first seek to divide it and attack those aspects of it that have the fewest participants.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from mitchw wrote 2 years 20 weeks ago

It's Montana. I'm gonna give the people of the state credit for being a little more realistic, logical, and down-to-earth than west-coasters and east-coasters are. If Montana goes the way of Oregon, Washington, California and Colorado, all hope is completely lost.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike Diehl wrote 2 years 20 weeks ago

I'm not a trapper but I support the tradition and the right of people who trap to continue to pursue that tradition on public lands.

Fooey on the Footlosers.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from taylorhayward wrote 2 years 20 weeks ago

I like the idea of trapping because it's a skill worth having. The question is, are there ways to make it more safe for untargeted animals, rather than just banning it outright.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from MLH wrote 2 years 20 weeks ago

People thinking too much (or too little), not looking past their noses, and losing touch with reality. Bringing ethics into this keeps pushing the definition further to the left. Eventually hunting could become unethical. Then the eating of meat.

If wildlife agencies figure out that they can't control the wolves with hunting, that leaves trapping ... or poisoning ... or very expensive management by wildlife professionals.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Paul Wilke wrote 2 years 19 weeks ago

I'm guessing that he's right one one point. Trapping is the only means of selling wildlife.
However on all the other points he's as wrong as someone who's never trapped can be.
I've sold a lot of beaver, a lot of mink, a lot of muskrat, a lot of weasel (ermine) to the Hudson Bay Fur Company and collected bounty on a lot of coyotes.
Thats a lot of work, from setting the traps to running the trap line skinning and stretching, it's all a lot of work.
It is ethical, and for sure it's fair chase, it does not take animals other than those the trap is set for. There is no profit to be made trapping the family pet or some protected species.
This is someone attacking a sport ( or job) he knows nothing about.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from JohnR wrote 2 years 19 weeks ago

Some people simply have way too much time on their hands.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from nerffodder wrote 2 years 19 weeks ago

I dont think all the things they mentioned are a big deal. How many people trap? Now how often do those people kill endangered species? As for quick deaths, animals dying of natural things probaly suffer just as much.Trappers I do belive know how to prevent certian things from happening, so most of their arguuments are invalid.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Hunter Savage wrote 2 years 20 weeks ago

i dont even want to get started on this one . i trap enough said .

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from logan.vandermay wrote 2 years 20 weeks ago

I doubt that it would pass in Montana. If it does it will be a very sad day, and everyone better look out.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from steve182 wrote 2 years 19 weeks ago

Sounds like something i'd expect on the ballot in my home state, but Montana? I'd like to think it won't pass there, but who knows.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from jason rieke wrote 2 years 18 weeks ago

Trapping has been around for thousands of years and can be a tradition to some people. I trapped gophers this year and had a blast. Also if you take away trapping on public land the population of some animals could grow to large. I don't believe Montana will take away trapping because if they do, alot of people would be really angry. If trapping gets taken away, then hunting will be next. Then fishing ect... I really hope trapping doesn't get taken away from Montana.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from texasjohn wrote 2 years 12 weeks ago

I use traps on occasion, both live and killer (Conibear)type traps. I've yet to catch something I didn't intend to, though I have been surprised by some of the things I did catch. Trapping, just like guns or wrenchs, is a tool, nothing more. Someone didn't like getting their dog in a trap, the dog shouldn't have been running around loose. And while I didn't sell skins I'd shot to the furbuyer, my brother used to keep himself in pocket money doing just that, first with my (borrowed).22 and later with an old 8mm Mauser that those skins paid for.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from trapper wrote 2 years 2 weeks ago

shutup and trap

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from zschreiber wrote 1 year 15 weeks ago

so now when these hunter's that are against hunting with traps get a mouse in their house what do they do? grab the shot gun or what? interesting perspective. bassically what these people are saying that they have "NEVER" made a bad hit on a critter, smells like a little b.s. to me. the sad part is that the anti'e will win in the end just because like some of you said trapping is a lost art and those who know are slowly dissappearing. and then it wont be missed until it's gone, when the rats over populate and and screw up the ecosystems in the ponds, and the farmers and the ranchers lose livestock and harvists to critters that are not normally hunted then and only then will the trapper be missed.

0 Good Comment? | | Report

Post a Comment