Wyoming Anti-trapping Bill

[Andouille]

So let's not talk about 1 of the things in this bill, let's talk about all 3 the way it's written.

Would you be okay with banning all trapping near trailheads, along any trail, or near any roadway?

You're misreading my intent and reading my posts through your anti-trapping ban glasses, as I've not spoken a word about bills or banning trapping. I suggest you take a step back and try to read my posts objectively if we're going to have a two-way conversation. If you can't converse with me, a trapping-agnostic and hunter, then how might you convince an anti-trapping person to consider your point of view?

 

[wytx]

Sorry but no on mandatory trappers ed, not going to back that one for every trapper.
I also agree that setting near trailheads is not the best spot.
You're not making many inroads here with your attitude , Andouille has that right.

Conibears kill dogs and can be used almost anywhere, as do snares.

 

[FAAFO]

What would anyone say if the bill was to ban all hunting within 300' of a trailhead, trail, or any road way?

I frequently hunt in a unit where you have to be a 1/4 mile from trailhead or trail before you can hunt. Not a big deal.

But regarding your OP I support that bill. Thanks for bringing it to our attention. My dog had been caught in traps set out by lazy trappers right next to popular trails.

 

[go_deep]

Sorry but no on mandatory trappers ed, not going to back that one for every trapper.
I also agree that setting near trailheads is not the best spot.
You're not making many inroads here with your attitude , Andouille has that right.

Conibears kill dogs and can be used almost anywhere, as do snares.

Honestly, I agree, I got a little defensive. I'm just shocked that there's so much support for an anti trapping bill, the same type of bill that was used up and down the West Coast to start the domino effect of cutting into hunting rights.

 

[go_deep]

I frequently hunt in a unit where you have to be a 1/4 mile from trailhead or trail before you can hunt. Not a big deal.

But regarding your OP I support that bill. Thanks for bringing it to our attention. My dog had been caught in traps set out by lazy trappers right next to popular trails.

Sorry to hear your dog was trapped, but I firmly believe that's where the ethics portion comes into trapper education. And that's really unfortunate that you've lost a 1/2 mile wide (1/4 mile each side of the road) to who knows how many tens of hundreds of thousands of acres, that's not right.
How do limited mobility or disabled people hunt that area where you have to be 1/4 mile from the road? Or is there just no option to even hunt for an older individual that can't hike a quarter mile, or a disabled person?

 

[wytx]

I applaud your compassion on this but what is the status of this bill?
Instead of being so against all of it maybe just look and see that setbacks might be just enough to pacify some anti folks.
Yes it gets a foot in the door but being so adamant about common sense trapping, not at trailheads or along marked trails will not win the fight I'm afraid.
People take dogs hunting, late season and I've seen sled dogs out training on trails.
Get off the trails to set your traps, find private ground , be ethical.

This bill will get modified if it goes forward. I don't see any private LOs or the stockgrowers' association being for limits on private property along roadways, it is still private land and those owners have rights.

 

[TSAMP]

I think optics is everything

Alot of laws wouldn't be necessary if everyone behaved ethically, but we know that isn't how the world works.

As a bird hunter with dogs, And as a trapper I've found many locations where I would love to make a set but realize the likelihood of a inadvertent catch is simply to high. I often ask myself, would I be pissed if I came across a trap right here before I set.

We can trap in ditches here in Iowa, there is just a proximity to a private driveway setback law. It seems to be an old timer thing.They set ditches with foot holds mostly and drive past to check. I dont see many people doing it.

 

[ElDiablito]

I’ve been a trapper (and bird hunter) and trapper ed instructor for 35 years. I’ve trapped in six western states.

I don’t like new regs/laws any more that anyone else. But, a prohibition on setting where there is a high probability for conflict with non-trappers may be what is needed to keep some less than ethical guys from getting it all taken away from us.

It just took one dog getting killed in NM to get all trapping banned there.

 

[FAAFO]

Sorry to hear your dog was trapped, but I firmly believe that's where the ethics portion comes into trapper education. And that's really unfortunate that you've lost a 1/2 mile wide (1/4 mile each side of the road) to who knows how many tens of hundreds of thousands of acres, that's not right.
How do limited mobility or disabled people hunt that area where you have to be 1/4 mile from the road? Or is there just no option to even hunt for an older individual that can't hike a quarter mile, or a disabled person?

I agree setting traps next to popular trails is an ethics issue. But must be addressed with laws because at the end of the day an individual’s ethics may differ from mine. And while the general populace agrees trapping next to trails is wrong, there will always be a sector that sees nothing wrong with doing as such. Thus the law.

I don’t look at the 1/4 restriction as a loss of hunting area, it’s called sharing our resources with others. In fact I would beg to differ that if this wasn’t in place likely there would be no hunting allowed due to hunter conflicts.

To address the disability access they can access it on foot or horse. If they can’t do neither well guess what there are plenty of other areas they can go mark the land with their 4 wheeler or truck. We don’t need to manage land the lowest common denominator.

 

[go_deep]

I agree setting traps next to popular trails is an ethics issue. But must be addressed with laws because at the end of the day an individual’s ethics may differ from mine. And while the general populace agrees trapping next to trails is wrong, there will always be a sector that sees nothing wrong with doing as such. Thus the law.

I don’t look at the 1/4 restriction as a loss of hunting area, it’s called sharing our resources with others. In fact I would beg to differ that if this wasn’t in place likely there would be no hunting allowed due to hunter conflicts.

To address the disability access they can access it on foot or horse. If they can’t do neither well guess what there are plenty of other areas they can go mark the land with their 4 wheeler or truck. We don’t need to manage land the lowest common denominator.

I appreciate you seeing that 1/4 mile restriction as sharing a resource, but there's no sharing there, you how no legal right to recreate on that portion of public land the way you'd like to.

 

[go_deep]

I never bought into the hunters are their own worst enemy, but I have been proven wrong on that.

 

[FAAFO]

I appreciate you seeing that 1/4 mile restriction as sharing a resource, but there's no sharing there, you how no legal right to recreate on that portion of public land the way you'd like to.

So you want no restrictions on public land?

 

[go_deep]

So you want no restrictions on public land?

Appreciate the word play but I specifically referenced your comment about hunting, that's it. If you could have hunted there before, then they took that right away, you lost out, period, no sharing, your banned, illegal, not allowed there anymore.

 

[Andouille]

Honestly, I agree, I got a little defensive. I'm just shocked that there's so much support for an anti trapping bill, the same type of bill that was used up and down the West Coast to start the domino effect of cutting into hunting rights.

Right on, I'm fairly certain everyone on Rokslide is on the same team; pro-hunting access and I definitely agree that banning trapping is one of the first steps towards banning hunting.

I live in AK, where hunting and trapping are going strong, but I follow the concerning developments in CO hunting and trapping regulations because my folks live there. Bans that happen in CA, CO, or WA, or other states just provide additional ammunition for similar bans in more pro-hunting states.

For context, I have two dogs that go off-leash on State (illegal) and Federal (legal) lands and I strictly enforce a no-chasing wildlife rule. Keep in mind that most Federal land allows off-leash dogs. Wildlife chasing dogs are a minority, and not a point you can use to counter anti-trapping advocates, because they probably have off-leash dogs. In arguing against trapping bills, you cannot rely on arguments in favor of the minority (trappers) against the popular will of the majority (non-trappers); that's an uphill battle (aka pissing up a rope). Education of both belligerent trappers and the public is the best approach.

 

[Andouille]

I never bought into the hunters are their own worst enemy, but I have been proven wrong on that.

Speaking of hunters as their own worst enemy, do remember the hunter dude who caught a wolf and paraded it around town before killing it? The overall effect was to mobilize the masses against wolf hunting and hunting in general. Trapping near trailheads has a similar effect on the general public.

 

[go_deep]

Speaking of hunters as their own worst enemy, do remember the hunter dude who caught a wolf and paraded it around town before killing it? The overall effect was to mobilize the masses against wolf hunting and hunting in general. Trapping near trailheads has a similar effect on the general public.

The unfortunate thing is that's not a representation of 99% of outdoorsmen and women, but that's the impression thegeneral public gets we are when a headline like that drops.

 

[wytx]

So reading this bill only gives WG&F the ability to establish set backs.

 

[go_deep]

So reading this bill only gives WG&F the ability to establish set backs.

Yep, they figured it would be easier to pass with generic language rather than specific distances at specific places.
I feel like this is even worse, now there could be setbacks placed anywhere, for any distance, for most any reason they could dream up.

 

[pacoalcracker]

Its all the fault of the residents of Montana, Wyoming and Idaho that their states are being ruined by out of staters that don't hold the same values that they do. Who sold them the land and homes for big profits and continue to do so? It's called reaping what you sow. Expect a lot more of it. Oh, and stop bitching about it. You won't stop them. Look at Hawaii as a case study of what its going to look like in 30 more years. Residents were priced out of the state and demographically changed. It will just take a bit longer for those larger states.

 

[go_deep]

Its all the fault of the residents of Montana, Wyoming and Idaho that their states are being ruined by out of staters that don't hold the same values that they do. Who sold them the land and homes for big profits and continue to do so? It's called reaping what you sow. Expect a lot more of it. Oh, and stop bitching about it. You won't stop them. Look at Hawaii as a case study of what its going to look like in 30 more years. Residents were priced out of the state and demographically changed. It will just take a bit longer for those larger states.

Appreciate that insight...