Can somebody give me some really strong arguments against the antis that confront trappers?

I would use the population, disease, and nuisance control. It usually baffles them and they are usually speechless.
mike

I say the same but also add the numbers of road kill they see while driving and ask what they think about that.

Those are all very good replies, its just that they'll probabally just say the opposite if they've ever logged on to a website like that www.bancrueltraps.com

If you are talking about trying a sway a hard core anti save your breath.There opposition is not based on fact and no amount of fact presented to them is going make a difference.

Good thing is most people who "oppose" trapping don't fall into this catagory.This group is just ignorant of the way trapping is conducted at the present.They will listen to reasonalble explainations about population controll,ecconomic damage,disease potential,modern trapping methods ie.animal welfare,no endangered species,renewable rescource etc.

Pick you battles,some just can't be won

We have sound data and facts on our side. They have emotion and worst-case-scenarios that they depict as fact.
If you really want to stump anti's and shut 'em down, ask them how often an animal in the wild dies peacefully in its sleep. If they think it happens often, then you are dealing with an idiot who might have enough I.Q. to tie their shoes if they don't drool all over themselves first.
They just don't understand that the natural world is a fairly tough place to make a living. The whole natural plan is set to make sure only the strong survive. Nature is not kind or cruel, just indifferent. Think about the perfection of the food chain (to which we belong) and its subtle nuances and details and you will be amazed at the complexity of it.
Ask them if they were a wild animal if they would prefer to starve to death, eaten (while possibly still kicking) by predators, or to suffer the agony and suffering of mange or rabies or some other disease or if they would prefer a sore foot for a few hours and a bullet in the head? I've seen people linger for months with cancer, I have seen the pictures of the Jews starved in Nazi death camps, and there are countless stories of people attacked and eaten by animals. Trapping doesn't sound too bad does it?
But to paraphrase Ric, "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink." Some people will never see what they don't want to.

Mike

Mike and Ric are right on point, it is the undecided person we have to educate. I know so many hunters and people who you would think are in our camp that are ignorant about trapping and would support anti trapping measures on the ballot. Those are the people we have to target. No hard core activist is going to listen, this is the voice of experience.

My usual reply against the antis is what are they wearing? What is it made of? Maybe its cotton maybe its petro-based. Then I ask if they know what animals live around them, and if they spend everyday observing animals. Most of these people have never seen a muskrat,or the needless deaths of thousands of muskrats from starvation after a chewdown. I also go religious on the antis no man has the right to take from me the things God gave me. When I'm trapping I'm sure I'm doing the will of God and I thank him often for letting me be able to persue my passions. I once knew a preacher man who was anti-hunting.Every deer season opener would find him protesting. One year after the season ended my grandfather took him to a deer yard on tug hill. The snow was over six feet. There were about 150 deer at this yard. All were starving,50 or so were dead. After seeing this the preacherman did a 180. He now hunts and promotes hunting. I think the more we can educate the public the better off we are against these anti. Most people hear just one side,their side.Show them for what they are,Ignorant. Most people will understand.

All of the above folks are on target.

There is another (probably many) argument that you can use to support the use of the foot hold trap. This argument usually will (1) go a long way towards educating a non-trapper, and (2) it really confounds most of the antis I have debated and it is:
That the successful restoration and re-introduction of otter to the several states interested in restoring them to their old ranges was made possible by the use of foot hold traps -- in particular the # 11 DLS. The use of foot hold traps proved to be the most effective, "humane" method of capture for wild otter for use in these projects. This supports the use of foot hold traps as a game management technique.

BTW (sorry I can't resist), for those of you who, oppose live market trapping, and keep on asking, "What good has ever come of live market trapping? What has it done for trappers and trapping?", otter restoration has been one of the more successful live market projects.
Adios,
45/70,
RKBA !!!

Good point. That is something I didn't know. My friends wife is anti-trapping so I am going to make that argument tonight, however since she is anti-government also, it won't mean much to her, but it might make her think for a half a second. Thanks for some good info 45/70.

I am a commercial fisherman we deal with opposition quite often ,you are better off to just be quiet, if you can't have a sensible conversation about the need for conservation not Preservation . I know it's hard to listen to what some of them have to say, but most of the trapping opposition I have ever encountered can be eased if you just explain what the reality is if these populations are not kept in check.Remember a shouting match gets us nowhere.But usually out of business.

Where can I find documentation on the reintroduction project? Im doing a paper for my english class and need to site articles.

Here is a link to the Ohio D.N.R. website that talks a little bit about the otter reintroduction. In the article it mentions catching the otter in Louisiana, that were to be released in Ohio, with foot hold traps.

http://www.ohiodnr.com/news/feb01/0213otters.htm

KPS

thanks for the link.

Ohio is not alone in the successful reintroduction of river otters. Seventeen other states conducted similar release programs since the late-70's, where nearly 4,500 otters have been relocated throughout the U.S. All of those states indicate their otter populations are increasing or stable. If footholds were so bad, then how can these programs be so successful?

Not only were footholds important for the capture of otters for release programs, but they are the only practical tool for validating the success of restoration efforts and improving our knowledge of how well they've become established in a given area (habitat use, survival, movements, dispersal, den site selection, etc. etc.). Published research points to footholds above any other device (even cage traps) as the most effective tool for live-capturing otters. Trappers know this, but the public does not.

The same arguments can be made for a slightly more "green" topic such as timber wolves. And now that efforts to restore wolves to Yellowstone in the mid-90's exceeded the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service's goal of 245 animals (currently around 700), what do we do now? It is important that responsible wildlife agencies continue to strive toward striking a balance between people who are affected (both positively and negatively) by yet another wildlife management success story. Add it to the list of beaver, deer, fisher, wild turkeys, and let's not forget, Canada geese.

Choose your arguments based on the interest of whoever you are talking to. For example, birders may not care at all about trapping until you talk to them about the value of trapping muskrats in diked wetlands to control damage, where the ability to effectively maintain water levels will make all the difference in the world as far as what bird species will show up there (shallow water, deep water, thick or thin cattail stands, etc.).

As was also mentioned earlier, and worth repeating, is that you shouldn't bother arguing with someone whose mind is closed. At the same time, don't expect someone to drop everything and run to their local trapping instructor and sign up for a course. Your objective is to raise their acceptance level, not convert them. They may not like to trap themselves, and they may never want to experience it firsthand, but if they understand the reasons why continues to be an important tool of modern wildlife management today, then you have accomplished a great deal!

C.

Kevinat,
Look at this link, complements of the sowega_catman http://espn.go.com/outdoors/conservation/s/c_fea_animals_study.html
Might find something you can use here.
Adios,
45/70,
RKBA !!!

I just ask them when they were down in the swamp last and saw any of these creatures. Then I ask them how many road kills did they see today? It usually leaves them standing there with their mouth open with nothing to say...

Dated for Search