Special Trapping Permit Requests Denied

[UrbanTrapper]

Mike and I have just had our last two Special Permit Requests denied.  Based on only these two incidents, it seems to me that the standards for Special Trapping Permits to use footholds and bodygrippers may have changed.  Is anyone else having this problem? I'm trying to analyze this. See below for a paste from my rejection email:

  Thank you for your permit application and patience while we reviewed your application. We cannot process your permit at this time because your application is incomplete and/or fails to meet the legal requirements and/or justification. Please note that we do not authorize WDFW Director Authorized Special Trapping Permits and the use of body gripping traps (outlawed under Washington Initiative 713) unless sufficient justification for lethal removal is presented to prove that an animal problem exists or the extent is sufficient to justify lethal removal per RCW 77.15.194 and WAC 220-417-040. Also, please note that the use of body gripping traps is associated with the immediate or expeditious removal of animals causing damage.

To address you questions:

1.      The WDFW website and application will be changing soon to relect “Entries must be an address AND global positioning (GPS)….”
2.       I have reviewd the 2018 permit. That permit should not have been issued or authorized because it is incomplete and/or fails to meet the legal requirements and/or justification. I will looking into this action now that it has been brought to my attention. WDFW Officer Chandler does not over oversight into the authorization of these permits. He and other officers will inspect traps once permitted.

I have attached two documents that should be provided to the landowner. Ask the landowner to contact a WDFW Wildlife Conflict Specialist for information on human-coyote interactions and nonlethal methods. 


Thank you,

WDFW – Special Trapping


From: Chip Emmons

Subject: Special Trapping Permit Resubmit Request

With all due respect, I am re-submitting this request for permit.

1.       I’m willing to reapply and add the GPS coordinates but I did provide an address for a very small property and WDFW’s webpage published standard says,

“ Location of Animal Problem: Please provide the county. Where does the animal problem exist?  Entries must be an address or Global Positioning (GPS) in decimal degrees (e.g. 47.03788, -122.89838).”

              I have been using addresses in residential areas on my permit requests successfully for several years. Has the standard changed and the webpage text is now outdated? If so I’m happy to comply with the new standard.

2.       This permit request is for the same wildlife problem that Permit #2018-485A (attached) was granted to another trapper 100 days ago on 3 December 2018.  WDFW’s Officer Chandler inspected the set at that address and had no issues.  The problem remains.  The homeowner is seeing coyotes even closer to her house now, looking in the windows/glass doors at her little dogs who do relieve themselves outside.  As you know, cage trapping of coyotes simply does not work.  What other nonlethal methods must the client employ or must she wait until she loses one of her dogs before her trapper can get a permit to use foothold traps? 

[Machias]

Interesting.  Never had a permit request denied.  I too wonder if they are implmenting more stingent controls.

[JakeLand]

You have to state that you’ve tried other means to solve the problem and you have to give the address and GPS coordinates

[UrbanTrapper]

There is a new guy named Cole involved with or doing the permits. Good news is, he is now working with me, so I will learn the new techniques I must use.  GPS for all locations is the new standard. AND even though he likely agrees, I apparently can't put "everybody knows cages don't work for trapping coyotes," anymore  Also “Cage traps are no longer effective” IS a satisfactory explanation and meets all of the factor criteria But, “because some yacht club members who live at the marina are releasing the otters, damaging my cage traps and making the otters cage-shy” is NOT a satisfactory explanation    I'm going to start writing my applications so that if PETA ever audits WDFW they might gnash their teeth but find NO legal objection (i 713) to my getting permits.  .

[JakeLand]

  keep us filled in with what “ Cole” wants or needs to be said to get permits issued
Thanks Jake

[Trapper John]

You have to state that you’ve tried other means to solve the problem and you have to give the address and GPS coordinates

   

Chip, here is the problem.....you said:  The problem remains.  The homeowner is seeing coyotes even closer to her house now, looking in the windows/glass doors at her little dogs who do relieve themselves outside.  As you know, cage trapping of coyotes simply does not work.  What other nonlethal methods must the client employ or must she wait until she loses one of her dogs before her trapper can get a permit to use foothold traps?

Her dog has not been attacked !  You can not trap an animal just because it is there doing no damage.....period.  That is why they are turning you down.  If the coyote grabbed her dog and dig body damage where she had to bring it to a Vet, then you would get the permit.  You can't go after it just because it is there. For starters it's unethical ........ it hasn't done anything wrong but look in the window.  Who knows maybe it smelled the stake she was having for dinner??    Second; you can catch them in a cage trap.  It works but you have to put a lot of time and effort into it.

Sometimes you have to tell people "Sorry" there is nothing I can do "Because the coyote is doing nothing wrong."  It is doing something normal (traveling the neighborhood looking for his buddies to party with or looking for dinner).  You don't have to trap and kill everything just because its there.  I've been in business for what almost 40 years now.  I've turned down a lot of job like this that the home owner want you to trap the animal just because its there.  I wish more WCO's where more ethical than unethical, money isn't everything.
Just my 
JC 

[Special T]

Lol I doubt UT is doing it for the $...

I hope he let's the lady know that this is what happens when you ban foot hold traps. Let's call it a teachable moment...

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[lewy]

I was also just denied in Stevens county on the familys ranch (coyotes are brutal in calving season) reason was there are wolves in the county I can see were this is gunna go

[Trapper John]

I was also just denied in Stevens county on the familys ranch (coyotes are brutal in calving season) reason was there are wolves in the county I can see were this is gunna go

   

Yes Sir, you are right. 
JC 

[JakeLand]

I was also just denied in Stevens county on the familys ranch (coyotes are brutal in calving season) reason was there are wolves in the county I can see were this is gunna go

its stupid! And this is why even if Someone would have proof of several wolves on the west side of the state they wouldn’t show wdfg it would just hamstring us more   

[Humptulips]

Looks like a new guy. I e-mailed him about the GPS coordinates part which there is no WAC mandating GPS over an address. Hope he calls me.

The law says the permits are written to " To abate damages caused to private property, domestic animals, livestock or timber" so you have to show some damage to that doggy seeing the coyotes through the window. Possibly you could find a pet psychiatrist that could show damage from psychological stress.

[Skyvalhunter]

Good luck to you

[Humptulips]

I shot a letter off last night to DFW and they have backed off on the requirement for GPS coordinates for now. They prefer GPS coordinates but they will not deny a permit if you put in an address but will manually look up those coordinates and add them to your permit for you.
The other part about requiring damage be shown to have the permit application approved, I think we will have to be a bit more imaginative when it comes to writing the justification. For instance if you say raccoons in the back yard and because of prior experience with traps I can't catch them. That permit will be denied. If you say raccoons defecating in back yard creating an unsanitary condition that costs to clean up and cage traps ineffective. Probably approved.
As for coyotes looking in the window at Fifi the dog, you better be able to find some actual damage or the permit will be denied.

[Machias]

Thanks Bruce!  I always give good imaginative reasons.    Actually around here in the Spokane area I turn down probably 15 to 20 coyote trapping jobs a year.  The little farms are just not safe enough to use a padded foothold.

[huntingfool7]

There is a new guy named Cole involved with or doing the permits. Good news is, he is now working with me, so I will learn the new techniques I must use.  GPS for all locations is the new standard. AND even though he likely agrees, I apparently can't put "everybody knows cages don't work for trapping coyotes," anymore  Also “Cage traps are no longer effective” IS a satisfactory explanation and meets all of the factor criteria But, “because some yacht club members who live at the marina are releasing the otters, damaging my cage traps and making the otters cage-shy” is NOT a satisfactory explanation    I'm going to start writing my applications so that if PETA ever audits WDFW they might gnash their teeth but find NO legal objection (i 713) to my getting permits.  .

Is that hazing document (in your first post) written by HSUS the new standard? 

"There is speculation in the literature that hazing is not effective with problem coyotes, especially for coyotes that have attacked pets or exhibited bold or aggressive behavior towards people (Timm et al. 2004).
 However, there is no published data to demonstrate either the effectiveness or the lack of effectiveness of hazing."

-and regarding the study in CO. -

"(Lethal control of coyotes was reserved as an option for human attacks only.)"

LYNSEY A. WHITE, Urban Wildlife Specialist, The Humane Society of the United States, Gaithersburg, MD, USA ASHLEY C. DELAUP, Wildlife Ecologist, City and County of Denver Parks & Recreation, Denver, CO, USA

The same HSUS that aims to end hunting, trapping, pet ownership, etc.