Paul attended our Rendezvous and talked about Montanas experience with the animal rights people and wolf trapping. We were lucky to have him stop by.
Thought I would post an editorial he had published I saw today. Pretty smart guy. Glad he's on our side.
http://m.missoulian.com/news/opinion/columnists/managing-wildlife-should-include-tool-of-trapping/article_c8351566-afdf-11e1-8d80-001a4bcf887a.htmlManaging wildlife should include tool of trapping
June 06, 2012 8:15 am • Guest column by PAUL C. FIELDER
Wildlife management is a very complex subject. Montanans and sportsmen expect our wildlife to be managed professionally, not emotionally. Professional wildlife biologists throughout the world and within this state recognize that regulated trapping is an important wildlife management tool used to control and harvest some species of animals.
The Wildlife Society (the international organization of wildlife professionals) and our Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks wrote detailed policy statements to specifically support this “trapping is a management tool” principal. As a retired wildlife biologist, I encourage trapping critics to review these policy statements so your opinions can be based on some professional, factual information, rather than just emotions.
Regulated trapping, similar to regulated hunting, is a biologically sustainable, safe, effective and ecologically sound method of capturing individual animals without impairing the survival of furbearer populations or damaging the environment. Trapping is part of our cultural heritage and provides income, recreation and an outdoor lifestyle for many citizens through the use of a renewable natural resource. Trapping is important in animal damage control, wildlife research and in suppressing some wildlife diseases.
Montana law dictates that our FWP is responsible for the conservation of wildlife populations and furbearer trapping is regulated by state laws. Like hunting, furbearers are trapped to allow public harvest and managed for sustainable populations that are in balance with their habitats. Regulated trapping does not endanger wildlife populations. “Populations” is the key word there. Trappers provide FWP with wildlife information (age, sex, abundance, distribution and reproductive data) which is important for optimum management of many furbearer species.
Licensed trappers help control wildlife populations before they become major problems. My collection of newspaper headlines from states that banned trapping include: “Eliminating trapping escalates beaver complaints and cost the public,” “Coyotes blamed for killing 22 pets in Lakewood (WA), Skunk and raccoon rabies in the eastern US,” “Coyote drags toddler from front yard,” “Wildlife officials feel consequences of trapping ban,” to list just a few.
Critics of trapping often seek support for their cause by referencing extreme cases or quoting half-truths to appeal for an emotional response. One such example of misleading information is Anja Heister’s April 27 letter in the Missoulian in which she claimed that studies showed that 86 percent of lynx mortality was from trapping. In reality, a single study in northern Alaska showed that intensive trapping resulted in a catch of 44-86 percent of the lynx in that study area. Lynx are abundant, not endangered, and are actively harvested in Alaska. Lynx harvest is illegal in the lower 48 states and regulations minimize incidental catches. Lynx capture rates in one Alaskan intensive harvest area are not comparable to Montana. Actually, a recent Montana study found that predation (31 percent) and starvation (28 percent) accounted for most of our winter lynx mortality. Heister’s letter contained misleading information about other furbearers which I would love to debate, but cannot adequately do so within the limits of this short article.
Heister is the executive director of an animal rights group dedicated to stopping trapping in Montana. She gets paid to try to raise money for her organization by promoting emotional anti-trapping articles. She lacks a wildlife background or the qualifications to talk professionally about trapping, but she can talk emotionally about it. Heister’s group unsuccessfully tried to put a trapping ban initiative on the 2010 Montana ballot. Their effort was vigorously opposed by most of Montana’s agricultural and sportsmen’s groups and wildlife professionals because those groups recognized that trapping is an important wildlife management tool in Montana and that our wildlife populations need to be managed by professionals, not emotions.
Paul C. Fielder of Thompson Falls is a retired wildlife biologist and publicist for the Montana Trappers Association.
