Please observe our rules: No profanity. No flaming. No commercial messages. No personal messages please.

Trap Line Archives
 
General Trapping Archives
 
Trap Line Home   Trap Line Forum   Trap Line Help   Trap Line Photo   Old Hollow Blog   Archives
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >
Topic Options
#13579 - 03/20/09 09:40 AM Wildlife Management -- New Solutions
Hal Offline
Moderator

Registered: 07/17/00
Posts: 10100
Loc: Blue Creek, Ohio, USA
I started a topic a few days ago which addressed the growing problem of overabundant wildlife, and how this might effect public opinion in regards to wildlife management.

But what it turned into was a simple recanting of tales of overabundant animals, with efforts to fix "blame" on somebody or some entity.

Let's not fix blame, let's fix problems.

And let's try to be reasonable. Dusty has already volunteered his services as a demigod, but that's probably not going to cut it. What actions could be taken that would be reasonable yet effective?

So tell me, what is your fix?

Hal
_________________________
Endeavor to persevere.

Top
#13580 - 03/20/09 10:01 AM Re: Wildlife Management -- New Solutions
jackson Offline
Member

Registered: 11/30/06
Posts: 278
Loc: missouri
Surprised noone has brought up the 'bounty' system for management of overabundant/nusiance animals. Our area counties use to pay for beaver tails. Some counties in Arkansas are paying for beaver tails also. I believe 'yotes are also bountied in many areas.

Top
#13581 - 03/20/09 10:19 AM Re: Wildlife Management -- New Solutions
Hal Offline
Moderator

Registered: 07/17/00
Posts: 10100
Loc: Blue Creek, Ohio, USA
It's not so surprising. Bounty systems have not proven to be effective.

Hal
_________________________
Endeavor to persevere.

Top
#13582 - 03/20/09 12:20 PM Re: Wildlife Management -- New Solutions
Dusty Offline
Member+

Registered: 12/15/00
Posts: 420
Loc: North Pole, Alaska, USA
In all fairness, I DID offer an alternative to making me dick-tater in the other thread, and I'll expand on that here. (Incidentally, I do still feel that just putting me in charge is your best choice. Lernin is hard; don't go there. Maybe I should apply for moderator status first? I really have no experience in these sorts of things.)

The solution is pretty clear - take the same approach that keeps our buildings and highways functional, and let the trained professionals handle it. That's not to say that everyone with some sort of a wildlife degree is capable of that sort of thing, nor is it to say they're capable of dictating policy. Some of them are idiots, and there's no "dictating policy to the unwashed masses 101" in any college I've been to (but I avoid the poli-sci areas). But, get a group of them together and give them clear guidelines (say, "we need more coyotes" or "we need fewer coyotes") and you'll probably end up with just what you asked for. Just leave it at that and let them do their job.

How do we get there? That's more difficult. It seems unlikely that a politician of any sort is going to try to take wildlife away from the voters - we can't even seem to get that done in AK. It's even less likely that they're going to give it up. I think about all we can realistically do is hope for some big precedent-setting lawsuit, and maybe teach our families and friends whatever we can in the meantime. Our children are our contingency plan - make sure yours are at least smart enough to know when they're not smart enough to proceed.

Top
#13583 - 03/20/09 12:58 PM Re: Wildlife Management -- New Solutions
Hal Offline
Moderator

Registered: 07/17/00
Posts: 10100
Loc: Blue Creek, Ohio, USA
I suspect this is not exactly what you mean but...

"let the trained professionals handle it."

Just doesn't have a nice ring to it. I can envision a scenario by which "trained professionals" would be the only people involved in Wildlife Management. Meaning that the average "untrained" hunter/trapper would no longer have a vested interest.

You can see this right now in Massachusetts. There was a push a while back to get some limited trapping returned to Massachusetts. The Nuisance Animal contingent, lobbied against the trappers on the very premise that they were the "trained professionals", and there was no need for the bumpkins to be involved in catching these critters. And that won the day.

I suppose you could make an argument that the most effective way to control the population of deer would be to hire trained sharpshooters. It would be more "humane". There would be less wounded deer. A couple of guys shooting every night, five days a week, 12 months a year, might be able to take care of an Ohio sized county.

Using a wholly trained professional staff, could be one solution to this. But, I'm more searching for avenues by which we can maintain a sporting aspect and a natural resource (wise use) aspect to wildlife management which allows and encourages broad participation.

Again, I don't think Dusty was advocating that only trained professionals be involved in the broader picture of wildlife management. I tjust reminded me of that possibility.

Hal
_________________________
Endeavor to persevere.

Top
#13584 - 03/20/09 01:35 PM Re: Wildlife Management -- New Solutions
Dusty Offline
Member+

Registered: 12/15/00
Posts: 420
Loc: North Pole, Alaska, USA
I think perhaps I have an overly optimistic view of what "trained professional" means. "Professional mouse exterminator" with a certificate from Bob's School-o-Mouse-Exterminatin' to prove it doesn't qualify.

Going to sportsmen is always the best first option. Not only does it let the people use THEIR wildlife, it also gives them a vested interest in that wildlife. I assume (probably incorrectly) that this is a universally known factor among "trained professionals." The vested interest thing is HUGE - look at the success of Ducks Unlimited or the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation. Those folks made real progress by giving the people a tangible interest in properly manged wildlife. That is how to manage wildlife; not declare it off-limits to everyone, or everyone but "coastal natives," or by implementing any other biologically unnecessary exclusionary policy.

What happened in MA wasn't biology or "professional" management at all - it was a bunch of people voting on things they made no effort to understand, and politicians sorting out what was left. That is the problem, not part of a viable solution.

There are indeed times when sportsmen are incapable of meeting management goals. Hiring a couple sharpshooters to keep the deer off your golf course accomplishes something that the hunters apparently haven't been able to. Put those sharpshooters in helicopters and you could make seeing a deer in the entire state of Ohio a rare thing indeed over a few weeks.

Sometimes, it is simply impossible to meet management goals with sportsmen, and you have to choose one option. ADF&G has stepped in a couple times and used helicopters to reduce populations of wolves and bears - most recently just last week. That doesn't take anything from sportsmen. Had they been shackled with regulations disallowing more effective measures, the moose population around Mcgrath would still be in the crapper and the 40-mile caribou herd would have a whole lot more wolves looking to eat them, even after several years of encouraging hunters to kill predators in those areas. There are still plenty of bears around Mcgrath and wolves on the Steese for those wanting to take some (and there are still very liberal seasons and methods to do so), but now there are also moose and caribou.

Top
#13585 - 03/20/09 03:10 PM Re: Wildlife Management -- New Solutions
halfrack Offline
Member

Registered: 01/12/06
Posts: 133
Loc: Chatham, Va.
Really there is no initiative to remove these nuciense species. If there is no bounty, no live pens, and very small profit for fur (when in season) what makes a hunter or trapper want to take these species. Say as an example in my area of Virginia. There is no bounty for coyotes in my county and a trapper can not sell to fox pens. Also, the fur for some people is not worth their time skinning these canines. Farmers have problems with these coyotes running and killing their livestock and even some people are loosing their cat to these predators. In all this there is no initiative for someone to remove these coyotes. I do trap coyotes to help my farm and several other farmers, but what about any other local person out hunting. Besides as a trophy what is the reason for the person to hunt these predators because they get nothing out of them so the coyote population keeps expanding.

I feel there should be a statewide bounty system in place with a significant budget. Many people don't approve of live selling to pens so I push for a set bounty system.

Top
#13586 - 03/20/09 03:17 PM Re: Wildlife Management -- New Solutions
Hal Offline
Moderator

Registered: 07/17/00
Posts: 10100
Loc: Blue Creek, Ohio, USA
Historically, bounty systems have not proven to be effective.

Hal
_________________________
Endeavor to persevere.

Top
#13587 - 03/20/09 03:35 PM Re: Wildlife Management -- New Solutions
Dktfireman Offline
Member+

Registered: 07/13/05
Posts: 338
Loc: New Hampshire
To control deer populations we need to make it a requirement for hunters to take one or more does before they can take a buck. Sportsmen need incentive to do the right thing sometimes. Take Minneapolis MN for example. They allow hunting in city limits in certain areas but they don't allow anyone to kill a buck, just does. When I was last there they couldn't get many hunters to jump through the hoops required and were forced to hire sharpshooters to kill deer. If they had a rule that for every 5 does you killed you could take a buck they would have had a bunch of guys doing it just for a chance to kill one or more of the monster bucks that live there.

The Mass situation makes me want to throw up. Alot of those ADC guys down there were trappers before the ban went into effect. Now they don't want the golden goose plucked at all. They really care about the resource, NOT. just the almighty buck. (that was off topic but I couldn't help myself)

The whole "professional control" issue could work in our favor if we do a good job of selling ourselves to the public. Who better to take care of problem beaver than a "professional trapper" with X number of years experience or who was trained by the whatever state trappers assoc in conjunction with the whatever state fish and game department. We just have to sell ourselves as professionals and act the part.

Who determines what a professional is anyway? If I printed cards and started a ADC business on the side then charged money for my services, does that automaticly make me a professional? Or is it training and experience that make a professional? I know thats what makes a "good" professional firefighter.
But the new guys with no experience are considered professionals as well (by the public) because they are highly trained.
My thoughts for what they are worth.
Dan smile

Top
#13588 - 03/20/09 04:04 PM Re: Wildlife Management -- New Solutions
Hal Offline
Moderator

Registered: 07/17/00
Posts: 10100
Loc: Blue Creek, Ohio, USA
"The whole "professional control" issue could work in our favor if we do a good job of selling ourselves to the public."

Not exactly. That's almost what we have right now. In many, if not most, instances a person has to pass a hunter education and/or trapper education course. And right now, in most places, we can hunt or trap critters within state regulations. Really, at this time we don't have too many people raising the issue of training or professionalism.

The point is, we're not getting the job done, professionally or not. So simply labeling ourselves "Professional" is not going to make ourselves work any harder to catch the critters. It's the monetary incentive that paddles the boat. Someday may come when a very few of us are simply paid to exterminate these animals, and the rest of us are told we can stay at home.

Hal
_________________________
Endeavor to persevere.

Top
#13589 - 03/20/09 08:06 PM Re: Wildlife Management -- New Solutions
jackson Offline
Member

Registered: 11/30/06
Posts: 278
Loc: missouri
Bring back the dogs to control wild animals. I'm old enough to remember when folks ran dogs every day during the year. When Missouri enforced the no-dog rule during gun season and cracked down on feral dogs, the deer herd shot up[no pun] out of sight. Early Americans used dogs to dig out furbearers, hunted and killed them all year. Not likely nowadays because of Animal Rights, but I never thought Missouri would put a, "shoot on site" order to kill out feral hogs, this will cease when some yay-hoo shoots uncle Rube's pigs. smile

Top
#13590 - 03/20/09 09:51 PM Re: Wildlife Management -- New Solutions
Ray M Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 03/07/09
Posts: 1
Loc: Nevada
I personnaly believe that an over abundance of animals is an excellent opportunity to get the younger generation more involved with the outdoors, i think that there are becoming less and less outdoorsman every generation. so if everyone had a way to take their kids, grandkids, nephews ect. out hunting or trapping these over abundant animals, maybe it would help the animals as well as our future outdoorsman numbers.
No dought this will not thin the numbers down to where they may need to be but increasing the numbers of animals allowed to be taken along with bounties and our kids help, it may be enough to make a dent in the issue.

Top
#13591 - 03/20/09 11:41 PM Re: Wildlife Management -- New Solutions
Ldsoldier Offline
Member

Registered: 12/14/06
Posts: 917
Loc: Raleigh, NC
I've just got a couple of comments. First off, I agree with Dusty. Policy-making should be left to the trained professionals, NOT to politicians that know nothing about biology and wildlife.

Jackson and Half brought up bounties. Bounties are just not effective. They're too easily manipulated, abused, and almost always underfunded. They just don't work.

Control should be given first to the sportsmen. This is for several reasons. Number one, because that way it doesn't cost the government a dime. In fact, they make money off of it. Most DNRs are largely funded by the sales of hunting/fishing/trapping licenses. Here in N.C., the NCWRC receives approximately 1/3 of its budget from the General Fund.

Second, as has already been pointed out, these Sportsmen now have a vested interest in these wildlife. They have more of a desire to keep the ecosystem balanced. With balance, everything prospers. Its when it starts getting lopsided that you have problems.

Third, in most places, the government just could not afford to pay the salaries and equipment costs for full time "wildlife management" positions. You ask any of the USDA beaver trappers down here how busy they are. They can't keep up. And I don't have to tell anybody about the financial fiasco our nation is currently in. The money just ain't there.

We also need to apply common sense. The deer management system for Cleveland, OH will not necessarily be the same as the system for Pender County, NC. This is where the "professionals" come in. Let people that know the area, and know the numbers make the decisions. Personally, I think to insinuate somebody's gonna shoot 5 does before they shoot a buck is silly. Most people won't shoot 5 deer all season, even down here where our deer season spans 4 months (not including the urban archery season). Giving a certain quota, sure. But lets keep it realistic.

Finally, probably the most important part of a good wildlife management plan would have to be education. Not only educating the "wildlife managers," (hunters, trappers, etc...), but educating the public.

However much I love the principles taught by the cartoons my two year old daughter watches, I cringe to see animals portrayed as humans, acting completely different than they would in the wild. In one of his recent articles in T&PC, Hal speaks of a woman that is not worried about a dairy strike because her milk "comes from the grocery store." While I think all that read that article got a good chuckle, there is a sad undertone of reality there. How many of our children today grow up thinking food comes from Walmart and clothes come from Target or Belks. I take every opportunity I have to go into a classroom, to show somebody a trap, to take in a pelt.

These are things that we all take for granted, most of us grew up in the outdoors. Think about it, how many kids do you know can drive a tractor? Now, how many of your grandparents peers could drive a tractor before they could drive a car? Sorry, I did not mean for this to go this long. Oh, Dusty, I'd vote for ya. Just give me a Cabinet spot laugh

Top
#13592 - 03/23/09 03:32 PM Re: Wildlife Management -- New Solutions
M. Bennett Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 04/10/06
Posts: 19
Loc: Eastern Shore of Maryland
Hal, I understand and agree about bounty systems being ineffective historically. These were fixed price bounties and therefore when the populations reached a certain low level efforts declined.
To anyone's knowledge has a sliding scale bounty system ever been tried and to what end?

Top
#13593 - 03/23/09 04:44 PM Re: Wildlife Management -- New Solutions
Hal Offline
Moderator

Registered: 07/17/00
Posts: 10100
Loc: Blue Creek, Ohio, USA
That's an interesting idea, and it might work if you were talking about really eradicating some kind of animal via a constantly increasing bounty. But, I don't think anybody, including me, necessarily wants to see any of these animal extirpated again. So when you eventually lower the bounty, people are going to quit the pursuit, just as they do today when fur prices drop. Then the population will build back up, and they'll have to raise the bounty again, and pretty soon they'll figure out an average, we'll have talked ourselves around in a circle.

Besides this, you still have the problem of funding. Who's money are we going to spend? The tax payers, I reckon. And when I think about that, I get dragged back down the road that: If, the taxpayers are going to invest their money, they may choose instead to simply hire "highly trained professionals" rather than invest in something as haphazard as a bounty system.

Hal
_________________________
Endeavor to persevere.

Top
#13594 - 03/23/09 05:05 PM Re: Wildlife Management -- New Solutions
M. Bennett Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 04/10/06
Posts: 19
Loc: Eastern Shore of Maryland
The Feds are spending $1,000,000.00 ++++ a year here to "eradicate" nutria.

Top
#13595 - 03/24/09 01:33 AM Re: Wildlife Management -- New Solutions
Dusty Offline
Member+

Registered: 12/15/00
Posts: 420
Loc: North Pole, Alaska, USA
The MD nutria efforts are interesting and apparently very effective. I'd call this a model for proper management: They've identified a problem (coastal damage, NOT the mere presence or even abundance of nutria), formulated a plan, tested the plan in a refuge, a somewhat controlled environment, and are now implementing it in a broader area. Kudos to them.

The costs seem reasonable to me. $1M/yr is pretty low when we're talking about coastal erosion.

It's also interesting that private land access seems to be a significant barrier to success. The last thing you want to do in a project like this is leave refugia behind.

Could they do it better with a bounty system? Perhaps. Would local trappers (who seem to be doing the actual trapping anyway) have more or less access to that problematic private land if not under the guises of USFWS/MD DNR? Would a bunch of kids running around catching a nutria or two help or hinder progress? Would the public, obviously willing to fund "professionals," also be willing to fund a bounty system?

Top
#13596 - 03/24/09 05:32 AM Re: Wildlife Management -- New Solutions
M. Bennett Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 04/10/06
Posts: 19
Loc: Eastern Shore of Maryland
Dusty...we need to talk privately. mad

Top
#13597 - 03/24/09 06:26 AM Re: Wildlife Management -- New Solutions
bblwi Offline
Member

Registered: 07/31/00
Posts: 288
Loc: Kiel, WI
Population control is a reactive way of lowering a wildlife population. The population attained higher numbers and more expansive range due to many factors of which preferable habitat would be number one in my opinion. We are creating more good habitat for several species, such as deer, coon, opossum, mnay rodents (WI examples) and thus we also create food sources for predators with higher recruitment levels in with their young.

Controling habitat creation is probably more expensive and less likely an option than harvest with our modern societal and cultural goals and backgrounds.
Who will be granted the opportunity for harvest is an on going scientific and now political and social issue. Auto insurance firms lobby for reduced deer numbers, sportsmen's groups lobby for more deer to hunt and farmers beg for damage control monies or permits or both. Most other citizens really don't want to be involved much but do enjoy wildlife until they have incidents.
The problem with incidents on an individual basis is that they are not the result of huge increases in numbers typically but the result of an individual in the wrong place at the wrong time. We also have an ever increasing amount of man made sanctuaries if you will that are also prime habitat. Couple that with fewer harvesters and soon to be many less millions of dollars avaiable for public paid control we probably will see increases in populations and incidents. We also may see more disease and other control mechanisms become more common.

Harvest alone typically does not drop numbers below biological carrying capacities. Add to that social carrying capacities that want further reductions in prime habitat areas and populations are almost always problematic.

Bryce

Top
#13598 - 03/24/09 06:32 AM Re: Wildlife Management -- New Solutions
Newt Offline
Member

Registered: 07/31/00
Posts: 508
Loc: Port Republic,South Jersey & C...
Just how many Nutria did that 1 millom dollars catch ?
If I heard right it cost about 1500 dollars per Nutria.
You put a $500.00 bounty on Nutria and you would get the job done faster and cheeper.
Just another Goverment waste of money.

Top
#13599 - 03/24/09 11:52 AM Re: Wildlife Management -- New Solutions
Dusty Offline
Member+

Registered: 12/15/00
Posts: 420
Loc: North Pole, Alaska, USA
So PM or email me. I'm a long way from MD and only know what I've read. Or just post it here - what's the scoop, man?

Whatever had been going on before, there were apparently still nutria at least 50 years after their introduction, and they were causing problems. Leaving it to trappers was making nutria. Maybe something else would have worked, maybe not. This strategy apparently can work, given the resources.

I think a better question than how many nutria is, how much habitat will $1M buy? That was their goal - saving habitat. It wouldn't matter if they spent the whole million on declawing the one very destructive critter they found - they had a goal and found a way to accomplish it. What would you rather your state spend that $1M on - soccer balls for inner-city youth? It's amazing how little we value our resources, and at the same time wonder why nobody else values them.

Top
#13600 - 03/27/09 10:20 PM Re: Wildlife Management -- New Solutions
bmocbert Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 03/13/09
Posts: 12
Loc: New Castle, IN
Well, I am sure to draw some criticism for throwing this out there, but here goes. I believe an effective measure to better manage a paticular species that has numbers that have gotten out of control and caused a negative impact on other animal species through predation or on humans through crop, livestock, or property in general damage would be to have special season extensions to paticuarly fall during the breeding and immediate post breeding time frame of the species being targeted. This would of course have to be well governed, enforced, and studied. But I think it could be a very effective conservation tactic if applied in a regulated manner and ceased upon achievment of what would be considered acceptable numbers. However, if the targeted species held no appeal as one pursued for food, fur, or trophy value and was simply harvested and disposed of for the betterment of all, would surely draw a massive outrage from the animal rights loonies that already cause us enough headaches. Its just like anything else though, you take the good with the bad. - Roger :rolleyes:

Top
#13601 - 03/28/09 06:26 AM Re: Wildlife Management -- New Solutions
Newt Offline
Member

Registered: 07/31/00
Posts: 508
Loc: Port Republic,South Jersey & C...
---------"I think a better question than how many nutria is, how much habitat will $1M buy? That was their goal - saving habitat. It wouldn't matter if they spent the whole million on declawing the one very destructive critter they found - they had a goal and found a way to accomplish it. What would you rather your state spend that $1M on - soccer balls for inner-city youth? It's amazing how little we value our resources, and at the same time wonder why nobody else values them."--------

But how many more acres of habitat would have been saved. At $500.00 a head than $1500.00 a head ? Where I went to school that would have been 2/3 rds more.
OH, by the way were not talk'n about soccer balls here. Stay on the subject. Again I think you even got that wrong. I would think basket balls would be the right ball for inter-city youth.

Top
#13602 - 03/28/09 08:55 AM Re: Wildlife Management -- New Solutions
Ric Offline


Registered: 07/22/00
Posts: 3689
Loc: Wellington,OH=USA
Let's get back to Hal's question.What can be done to fix these imbalances?

Roger gives an example of a control practice that does work.

Now, how would you sell the necessity of such measures?

Vested interest can not be stressed enough.People are generally selfish to one extent or another.Said another way ,if there is nothing in it for them wildlife population control(reduction) will hold little interest or be opposed by most people.

Education of the general public and consumptive users would be necessary.Give the public a sound reason why populations need to be reduced and most will understand.

No,this will do nothing to change the beliefs of the ARA but they are not our target.You are not going to change the mind of a dedicated ARA.Sadly you will find just as much resistance from sportsman groups to these measures.

A strong "Natural Resources Management" entity governed by science and immune to political interference would be necessary.This entity should not focus entirely on management. They should also work to develop markets for wildlife products.Making it economically feasible for those wishing to participate to do so without public funding

Top
#13603 - 03/28/09 11:58 AM Re: Wildlife Management -- New Solutions
Hal Offline
Moderator

Registered: 07/17/00
Posts: 10100
Loc: Blue Creek, Ohio, USA
Those are good points. But I have to challenge Newt's math from above. (He should get a job as an investment banker. smile )

Let's do this with a simple story problem. Let's say Sally had three nutria. The Nutria Buyer came along. "I'd like to buy nutria from you," the Nutria Buyer said. "How many nutria do you want?" Sally asked. "All of them," the Nutria Buyer replied. "And how much money will you give me for my nutria?" Sally asked. "All of it," the Nutria Buyer replied. That seems like a fair trade. Now let's say the nutria buyer had $1500. $1500/3 = $500. That's a profit of 500 dollars per nutria.

Sally's friend ,Suzy, hears about Sally's good fortune. Sally works her little tail off and catches 300 of those nasty nutria. The Nutria Buyer comes along. "I'd like to buy nutria from you," the Nutria Buyer says. "How many nutria do you want?" Suzy asks. "All of them," the Nutria Buyer replies. "Hot dang!" Suzy yells, as she does the math. 300 * $500 = $150000. "You owe me one hundred fifty thousand dollars," Suzy says. "No," the Nutria Buyer replies, "I will give you all the money for all the nutria." $1500/300 = $5. Suzy made a profit of 5 dollars per nutria.

Don't get the cart ahead of the nutria.

Hal

(Edit: Math edit. Hal)
_________________________
Endeavor to persevere.

Top
#13604 - 03/30/09 01:30 PM Re: Wildlife Management -- New Solutions
cjstrapping Offline
Member+

Registered: 01/16/06
Posts: 239
Loc: NorthWest Ohio
Would the "big" outdoor magazines offering articles on subjects like this help? Many of us trappers receive trapping magazines that may discuss issues like this. But, rarely do you see trapping related articles in Field & Stream, Outdoor Life and Sports Afield. I'm just thinking about the general public reading. Sure, Anti's will not read, and many hunters and fisherman might not care, as far as trapping, and may be against it, but I'm talking about the "in-betweens" that are on the fence. I know when I go to the Doctors office, Hospital or Dentist, I see the above mentioned magazines, either on racks in Gift Shops, or in waiting rooms....I've never seen a Trapping Magazine. I guess my point is, would solutions or more articles appearing in these "big" three magazines have any positive impact for us trappers? Would it sway which side of the fence they are on? Are these magazines purposely avoiding trapping related issues for fear of repercussions? Heck, maybe on way off base, I don’t know.
Often I see people post on forums “I’m going to try my hand at trapping for the first time this year, and need some help.” People will offer up what they can in the way of help, but no one ever asks “what got you interested?” Should the “what got you interested” be something we should seek, and key in on that?
Just random thoughts, I guess.

Top
#13605 - 04/06/09 12:10 PM Re: Wildlife Management -- New Solutions
animalpest Offline
Member+

Registered: 08/18/05
Posts: 197
Loc: Western Australia
So you put a bounty on a head of any animal (a nutria or whatever.)The bounty is for a particular state or region. So what is to stop captured animals from going from one area to another because of the changed bounty? What, it doesnt happen? Oh please, I can recite 5 research articles and a couple of good books that will tell you bounties dont work because of this and one other reason. And that second reasons is the other money factor. So foxes here were worth $20 bucks each. So people farmed them. When they got scarce in an area, the "hunters" moved elsewhere and allowed numbers to build back up. No meaningful reductions occurred.

Now when certain animals were a problem in a certain area, it was funny that these animals were taken from "non-problem" areas where there was lots of them and moved to the "problem areas". Managing it is an impossible nightmare.

Bounties have never worked anywhere because there is a financial incentive to "work/milk" the system.

Use of professionals can work, but like everything else, the "industry" created can become a monster, feeding on itself. Beware.
Mike

Top
#27333 - 01/08/20 10:12 AM Re: Wildlife Management -- New Solutions [Re: Hal]
Archive Offline


Registered: 03/12/03
Posts: 1486
Dated for search.

Top
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >

Moderator:  Archive 

 
Sullivan's Line - Trapping Books, Videos, and Other Products for the Trapper.
 
Design and Production by Sullivan Promotions
Copyright 2000-2017  Sullivan's Scents and Supplies - All rights reserved.