collapse

Advertisement


Author Topic: Found a possible illegal line?  (Read 2188 times)

Offline Kit Carson

  • WA State Trappers Association
  • Trade Count: (+8)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Dec 2015
  • Posts: 1051
  • Location: Snohomish County
  • Groups: NRA, WSTA, NTA
Re: Found a possible illegal line?
« Reply #30 on: February 16, 2019, 07:06:31 PM »
Any body grip on dry land is illegal regardless of tags or no tags
With a permit you can use body grip in water

Nope, wrong.  :pee:
Rubber padded legholds with tags and permit on dry land....Legal
rubber padded leg holds arenít body grips now are they !!! Body grips ( conibear traps ) can ONLY be in water  :bash:

Now are they? Here's the WA legal terms.

 :pee:

"Body-gripping trap" as defined by RCW 77.15.192 means a trap that grips an animal's body or body part. Body-gripping trap includes, but is not limited to, steel-jawed leghold traps, padded-jaw leghold or padded foot-hold traps, Conibear traps, neck snares, and nonstrangling foot snares.


Offline huntingfool7

  • Trade Count: (+4)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2009
  • Posts: 1528
  • Location: Puyallup, WA
  • Groups: huntingfool7
Re: Found a possible illegal line?
« Reply #31 on: February 16, 2019, 08:09:10 PM »
One was showing up out of the snow because it was sprung. Conibear for sure and on land. There were water sets as well. Can a state hired trapper use the old style traps by chance?
What is the USDA targeting?
x2  Would like to know what USDA is targeting with conibears on land.   Were the water sets conibears?

Offline 180-GRAIN

  • Trade Count: (-1)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Posts: 1508
  • Location: Arlington washington
Re: Found a possible illegal line?
« Reply #32 on: February 17, 2019, 08:41:11 AM »
One was showing up out of the snow because it was sprung. Conibear for sure and on land. There were water sets as well. Can a state hired trapper use the old style traps by chance?
What is the USDA targeting?
x2  Would like to know what USDA is targeting with conibears on land.   Were the water sets conibears?

Yes they were all conibears. It seemed like they were targeting beaver.

Offline 180-GRAIN

  • Trade Count: (-1)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Posts: 1508
  • Location: Arlington washington
Re: Found a possible illegal line?
« Reply #33 on: February 17, 2019, 08:43:04 AM »
New plot twist though! Just got another call from a warden. He said heís going up to try and check the traps. He said they usually issue permits to the USDA trappers and there is not one on file for this guy.

Offline huntingfool7

  • Trade Count: (+4)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2009
  • Posts: 1528
  • Location: Puyallup, WA
  • Groups: huntingfool7
Re: Found a possible illegal line?
« Reply #34 on: February 17, 2019, 08:44:50 AM »
I'm surprised USDA is allowed to use conibears on dry land for beaver.  Were they 220 or 330 size?

Offline Rainier10

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Old Salt
  • *****
  • Join Date: Dec 2010
  • Posts: 8497
  • Location: Over the edge
Re: Found a possible illegal line?
« Reply #35 on: February 17, 2019, 08:45:14 AM »
Oh boy, stay tuned.
Pain is temporary, achieving the goal is worth it.

I didn't say it would be easy, I said it would be worth it.

Every father should remember that one day his children will follow his example instead of his advice.


The views and opinions expressed in this post are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of HuntWa or the site owner.

Offline Special T

  • Truth the new Hate Speech.
  • Washington For Wildlife
  • Trade Count: (+13)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Aug 2009
  • Posts: 19977
  • Location: Skagit Valley
  • Make it Rain!
    • Silver Arrow Bowmen
    • Silver Arrow Bowmen
Re: Found a possible illegal line?
« Reply #36 on: February 17, 2019, 08:59:44 AM »
Tag

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

In archery we have something like the way of the superior man. When the archer misses the center of the target, he turns round and seeks for the cause of his failure in himself. 

Confucius

Offline Cylvertip

  • Conservative Heathen
  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2008
  • Posts: 1206
  • Location: Granite Falls by way of Rainier/ Tenino
Re: Found a possible illegal line?
« Reply #37 on: February 17, 2019, 09:03:15 AM »
When I have run into USDA traps in the past, they were meant to follow the rules of the WCO permits.  That was several years ago. 

Requirements for conibears changed not that long ago.  From "submerged in water" to "in water".   They can be set in a puddle, per that change, away from a body of water.

Was this in the city limits for Marysville by chance?  They had USDA on contract for problem animals. 
« Last Edit: February 17, 2019, 09:26:21 AM by Cylvertip »
May that for which I prepare never come to pass.
Don't Tread On Me!

Offline Cougartail

  • Political Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Longhunter
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2012
  • Posts: 826
  • Location: Eastern Washington
Re: Found a possible illegal line?
« Reply #38 on: February 17, 2019, 09:14:42 AM »
When I have run into USDA traps in the past, they were meant to follow the rules of the WCO permits.  That was several years ago. 

Requirements for conibears changed not that long ago.  From "submerged in water" to "in water".   They can be set in a puddle, per that change, away from a body of water.

Was this in the city limits for Marysville by chance?  They had USDA on contract for-profit animals.

The original text of I-713 was "in water".

Offline 180-GRAIN

  • Trade Count: (-1)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Posts: 1508
  • Location: Arlington washington
Re: Found a possible illegal line?
« Reply #39 on: February 17, 2019, 09:18:44 AM »
When I have run into USDA traps in the past, they were meant to follow the rules of the WCO permits.  That was several years ago. 

Requirements for conibears changed not that long ago.  From "submerged in water" to "in water".   They can be set in a puddle, per that change, away from a body of water.

Was this in the city limits for Marysville by chance?  They had USDA on contract for-profit animals.

Nope it was up by Acme.

Offline Cylvertip

  • Conservative Heathen
  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2008
  • Posts: 1206
  • Location: Granite Falls by way of Rainier/ Tenino
Re: Found a possible illegal line?
« Reply #40 on: February 17, 2019, 09:28:35 AM »
When I have run into USDA traps in the past, they were meant to follow the rules of the WCO permits.  That was several years ago. 

Requirements for conibears changed not that long ago.  From "submerged in water" to "in water".   They can be set in a puddle, per that change, away from a body of water.

Was this in the city limits for Marysville by chance?  They had USDA on contract for-profit animals.

The original text of I-713 was "in water".


Yeah, the change was on the wording of the WCO permits.
May that for which I prepare never come to pass.
Don't Tread On Me!

Offline Humptulips

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2010
  • Posts: 4893
  • Location: Humptulips
    • Washington State Trappers Association
  • Groups: WSTA, NTA, FTA, OTA, WWC, WFW, NRA
Re: Found a possible illegal line?
« Reply #41 on: February 17, 2019, 02:49:49 PM »
Prior to 2000 there was  a WAC that specified traps with a jaw spread of greater then 7 inches had to be submerged in water so 280s and 330s had to be submerged. Sometime after I-713 passed that WAC was deleted and the wording of the Initiative was substituted which is "in water" . USDA does not have to abide by any provisions of I-713. If they do it is voluntary.
Confusion about the word bodygripping is understandable because the common usage has always been a description of conibears type traps. The legal description in WA though includes all traps except cage and box traps, suitcase type beaver traps and common rat and mouse traps.
Bruce Vandervort

 


* Advertisement

* Recent Topics

Nevada Draw by BeerBugler
[Today at 05:26:20 AM]


Wetside morels by HighlandLofts
[Today at 01:13:23 AM]


WTS WTT brand new in box Mossberg Patriot package 30-06 fluted barrel DBM WS by wrchinook
[Today at 12:45:44 AM]


pronghorn management meetings by Bushcraft
[Yesterday at 11:28:36 PM]


Sheep tags by huntnphool
[Yesterday at 11:26:30 PM]


thoughts by wheels
[Yesterday at 11:03:07 PM]


Well, did ya? by go4itlab
[Yesterday at 10:24:39 PM]


2019 Boat Restoration: Outboard 22 May 2019 by Crunchy
[Yesterday at 10:24:10 PM]


Kelly Hill bear down by RockChuck
[Yesterday at 10:23:50 PM]


Meet Chloe by Westside88
[Yesterday at 09:59:23 PM]


20" spring bear by Limhangerslayer
[Yesterday at 09:28:54 PM]


work for the BSA by Special T
[Yesterday at 09:28:48 PM]


Letís see some Montana bucks by greenhead_killer
[Yesterday at 09:09:48 PM]


Drift boat anchor rope length? by Bullkllr
[Yesterday at 09:04:07 PM]


Witt. Remington 700 factory stock. by jdb
[Yesterday at 09:03:00 PM]


Hanson Fish Co Group Buy #3 - Coho and Spot Prawns by Shannon
[Yesterday at 08:16:21 PM]


Washington State Stuck It To The RV'ers! by Birdguy
[Yesterday at 08:03:34 PM]


For Sale- Ruger M77 Mark II 7MM Mag. Stainless Skeleton Stock by Tree Farmer
[Yesterday at 07:35:33 PM]


Who lives in Arlington by Stein
[Yesterday at 07:35:11 PM]


What is this guy? by ctwiggs1
[Yesterday at 07:30:58 PM]