Changes in trapping WACs now up for comments

[Humptulips]

Humptulips: the wording says cleaned. Who are we to say how that is to be interpreted. Taking the jaw is wrong on many levels. Simple as that. I don’t care how much meat is acceptable on it.
The incisor is the front teeth right up front. They take incisors out of ungulates. All predators that I know of they take the premolar. A small tooth, between the canines and the molars. (Reference bear hunting regs). The removal of which does not detract too much from the appearance of the skull. A Bobcats tooth information is no different than a bear, cougar, or wolf. The premolar is an “easy” tooth to remove. In Washington the hunter removes the premolar on bear and sends it in. In Idaho you take the bear to a participating business where an employee pulls the tooth. Heck, many times it’s the barmaid that pulls the tooth. Predators incisors are so tight together I don’t know how you would get one out without destroying most of the row. Irregardless if some other agency uses incisors, that’s a bad decision on their part.

I agree with you on the cleaned interpretation. It does need to be clarified and I urge people to comment on this language.
About the incisor. The reason I mentioned the incisor is, there is a study comparing aging incisors and canine teeth of bobcats. We will have some literature to back us up in our arguments. There is none that I know of on premolars. On top of that the literature recommends removal of the incisor for aging animals to be released so if they create a database it would all be the same by using the incisor.
Just to be clear, yes there is literature on aging premolars but from larger animals, not bobcats.
I spoke with Matsons Labs who does all of this work and they want to do canines so we will get pushback on using another tooth. I think there is a higher chance of success if we ask for the incisor then the premolar. I have 13 bobcat skulls lined up for us to practice on so we can come up with a good way to pull an incisor without damaging the rest of the teeth so my plan would be do a you tube video for everyone to learn from but we need to get this jaw destruction quashed first.

[Loup Loup]

This Bobcat tooth submission idea is totally without merit on another level.
When a producer brings in a Bobcat in the round, or a pelt, to have sealed, the WDFW person asks if it’s an adult or “kitten”. Kitten is inaccurate label, it should be :young of the year. YOY. The producer answers the question, or the WDFW can look at the cat or pelt and tell if it’s an adult or YOY. It’s obvious. By the size difference alone. They, ( every state in the union) has CITIES seal data on Lynx, Bobcat, and River otter since, I don’t know, prolly early 70s. And now somebody prolly wants a grant from somewhere and comes up with this confiscating jaws plan.
What is even more telling is the mistaking the sex of felines, (both Cougar and Bobcat by WDFW employees at time of sealing. On both cats in the round, and skins. Enough so that this sex data (all called females) on cougar is what first curbed the cougar take in central wa years ago. This missexing still goes on. I had it happen on Bobcat pelts two seasons ago. But, that’s a subject for another post.

[Loup Loup]

The correct language from me on tissue on jaws is…. Heck no!! We don’t interpret, we don’t negotiate on which teeth. It’s just no.
In Idaho their Bobcat jaw submission program was voluntary. And IDFW reimbursed the producer $5 for the jaw.
I’ll  make a call and get the skinny.
Humptulips, you and me need to talk too.

[Humptulips]

Another thing that makes aging bobcats questionable is trappers turning YOY and females loose. I don't know how they are going to get a good population dynamic when trappers turn up with nothing but big males. I tried to explain this to them but I think they just want to produce a bunch of statistics and don't really care how accurate they are.

The correct language from me on tissue on jaws is…. Heck no!! We don’t interpret, we don’t negotiate on which teeth. It’s just no.
In Idaho their Bobcat jaw submission program was voluntary. And IDFW reimbursed the producer $5 for the jaw.
I’ll  make a call and get the skinny.
Humptulips, you and me need to talk too.

If they pass the WAC as is we'll be stuck with it and you have to have the pelts sealed for them to be saleable. We are not in a position to dictate. Not really a negotiation either. We need to convince them we are right and make changes. Honestly the odds are probably not in our favor so we have to make a supremely good case.

[Humptulips]

Is this going to bother any of you guys if it goes through?

WAC 220-417-040 add: common rat and mouse traps cannot be used to trap
furbearers

Just so people don't freak out this is not up for passage. This was an item suggested from within the Department but never made the cut and was not recommended by the Director. It is not on the CR-102 and it has to be for the Commission to pass it. The public has to have 30 days to comment and without it being published for comment it won't happen.

[Loup Loup]

Thanks for the info Humptulips, and your time.
But again I’d rather go on record as saying “ no, it’s a bad idea” than giving them a different bad idea to pivot to. As then they can go back to the office and say they have the sportsmen’s buy in. Then ten years from now they can rewrite history and say “hey it was the sportsmen’s idea”.

[Frank The Tank]

How does the language of checking a trap every 24 hours, how would this affect the 72 hr rule for things like drowning colony sets for muskrat and the like that would be considered a "kill" trap under current regs?

[Frank The Tank]

Would the language of  72 hr check of "Kill traps" like muskrat colony etc in the current reg/manual be left, or would this be removed under this guise and also be moved to 24 hours?

[Humptulips]

Would the language of  72 hr check of "Kill traps" like muskrat colony etc in the current reg/manual be left, or would this be removed under this guise and also be moved to 24 hours?

72 hour check on killing traps remains unchanged.

[KNOPHISH]

Is the jaw submittal only for trapped bobcat?

[JakeLand]

Is the jaw submittal only for trapped bobcat?

any bobcat taken by hunting  or trapping and cougar

[Humptulips]

Is the jaw submittal only for trapped bobcat?

any bobcat taken by hunting  or trapping and cougar

I don't believe cougar are included in jaw submittal. For some reason a tooth is OK for cougar.

[Humptulips]

I just thought I would emphasize how important it is to comment on this. I know there is some disagreement in what might be acceptable so some of us may be writing slightly different opinions.
I will note however if the Commissions takes our comments to heart, they will not be able to simply rewrite the WAC and pass it. They have to allow 30 days public comment on any new WAC before passing it so they will have two choices pass or no pass. No matter how you think this should read any change results in no new WAC. Sure, they can send it back to be rewritten and bring it back up at a different meeting but in my experience, they won't want to take the time to handle this on its own.
Also, I think it is unlikely Commissioners will read your comments. Someone will and they will keep a running total on for and against. They will likely take note of a lot of against comments if they get a good argument at the Commission meeting.

Comment here and e sure and be specific on the WAC you are commenting on:
https://publicinput.com/3yearseasonsetting

[Frank The Tank]

My comment I posted:  Re: Bobcat jaw submission.  As a fur buyer who works extensively with hunters and trappers, the method to support this data collection is overburdensome, and has negative downstream effects economically.  Many states the require teeth submission use incisors.  There is no need to use canines specifically.  Submission of canines renders the jaw/skull useless in any form, which leads to waste.  Secondly, "Cleaned and air-dried" is an ambiguous statement that would be left to the individual biologist's interpretation and wildly different acceptance.  The proposed change is also ambiguous in general.  Must the lower jaw be separate, or can the skull/lower jaw remain intact?  The reading of this means that the hunter/trapper could be forced to keep in possession a hide that is not sealed, therefor forcing them to be in violation.  Suggestions:  Work with Washington State Trapper Assoc leadership to best meet WDFW data collection.  move from Canine to incisor in order to allow less wastage of this precious resource. Allow licensed Fur Buyers to be trained and submit incisors with required documentation that removes administrative/biological burdens hunters/trappers. A hunter/Trapper could then present this documentation to the biologist/WDFW staff with pelt for sealing. 

[Dysfunctional Vet]

I went over and left comments for the trap check and bobcat jaw. I’m not as versed in all the issues as some folk, but personally I’ve been chasing bobcats for years with a bow and if I’m ever lucky enough to harvest one (trapping or bow) I’d like to keep the skull intact. Looking forward to the rendezvous next weekend, I know I’m new and I took trappers ed online, I don’t know how to set traps “correctly” or how to read sign “correctly” but I can help in anyway I can.