A brief history:
Initially, the FTA Trapping Devices committee, under the direction of chairman Gary Jepson, felt that the BMP process was unnecessary,
politically motivated, and a misallocation of resources. (In the mid nineties, the FTA began repeating the same statement: Address the general public on the
need for the fur harvest as a management tool.) We stood away from involvement, other than convention meetings, etc.
In 1997 the "Agreed Minute" was signed with the EU. It was non-binding, but still included language about the banning of
"Conventional Steel Jawed Leghold Traps." FTA felt that signing the minute, and conceding to EU requests, was counterproductive and dangerous.
At the FTA convention in Utah, in 1999, the FTA was deeply concerned with BMP directions and details, and as a result, passed a
"Vote of Non-Support," stating that the FTA could not support the proceedings for various reasons. In July of 1999, Dave Hamilton requested a meeting
with FTA personnel, and Gary Jepson, Jim McCallister, Roy Greenfield, and Dave Hastings met with him in Kearney, NE. At that meeting, the group expressed our
overall reservations (BMPs will engender regulations, etc.), and some specific ones as well. (These included 24-hour check recommendations, and concerns over
untested conclusions from the protocols such as trap chain length, and testing interpretations.)
The FTA’s first official involvement was in the late nineties when Dave Hastings was asked to serve on the preliminary committee for
the Eastern Coyote BMP document. The FTA was unsure about whether or not to have Dave on the committee. On the one hand, if he were involved, then the FTA would
have first hand knowledge of what was transpiring, and we would have input. On the other hand, if the BMP documents did not appear to be proceeding with trapper’s
best interests in mind, having a representative on the committee might give the results the credibility of having FTA input when no real change occurred; a
"token involvement" as it were. That convention year, the Governing Board voted to remove Dave from the committee as an FTA representative. In the
October 2000 issue of the Fur Taker, that "Non-Support" stance was published for all FTA members to read.
In the May 2001 issue, we published an editorial about "Boarding the BMP Bus" and how dangerous that might be. In June of
2001, Samara Trusso traveled to the NY convention to meet with FTA officers and discuss our differences. Grievances were discussed at length, and most left the
meeting feeling as if both parties understood, but not particularly hopeful that issues of division would be resolved soon. Trusso discussed the dollars and
efforts being targeted to "outreach" which trappers misunderstood to be monies spent to help educate the general public. The following years, however,
it became clear that BMP outreach were first, to educate state agencies with BMP principles, and second to develop trapper education materials to promote BMP
principals. FTA was asked to submit educational materials, but by that time it was clear that the intent was not for non-trapping public education.
In May of 01, FTA sent Dave Hastings to the Midwest Furbearer Symposium in Ohio for the latest round of BMP issues.
The FTA continued to insist that trappers’ issues were being ignored. The contacts suggested that the trappers just didn’t
understand. The editor agreed to have Samara Trusso submit articles to explain the issues to the Fur Taker, the first running in May of 01. In that issue, we
also ran a story about a BMP trap-testing situation that was written by a trapper who pointed out several severe problems with the testing as he saw it. In
August of 01, we began to publish a series of articles entitled "BMP Questions and Answers."
In January of 02, Gary Jepson traveled to South Carolina to participate in a meeting designed to bring everyone up to speed on BMP
issues. After that spring the IAFWA offered to place an FTA member on each of the ad hoc committees that would be analyzing data and composing written
documents. Again, a dilemma: participate and be seen as a supporter and contributor, or refuse to take part, and risk being left out of all decisions entirely.
FTA elected to take part, primarily due to an IAFWA statement that any items from these committees would be "Consensus" agreements; in other words,
all were to agree on the key items before they were to be passed on to the IAFWA. FTA appointed several committee people: Western Coyote-Roy Greenfield; Red
Fox-Jim McCallister; Raccoon-Robert Waddell; Muskrat-Dave Hastings; Beaver-Paul Dobbins; Gray Fox-Mike Marchewka; Bobcat-Rod Zullinger; Tim Julien-Opossum. Some
committees have met and some have barely begun. Consistently through this time, the FTA continued to express its reservations about the process as a whole. At
one point, it was discovered that the IAFWA had included the FTA as a contributor to the first BMP documents. The FTA respectfully requested that the reference
to FTA as a contributor be removed from the documents. We were told that it would be done.
In January of 02, we published an article by Tom Tyree as the trapper in a BMP test in NY, where bodygrippers on the ground were tested
for coons—Tom’s results indicated significant refusals by larger coons to the smaller (160) bodygrippers. In March of 02, we published an editorial
suggesting that the BMPs would lead to "more government" and that is not better. That month, the FTA granted a certificate for free tuition for the
Trappers College to Dave Hamilton, MO DNR. (To date, he has not attended)
In June of 02, Dave Hastings attended the IAFWA conference in Council Bluffs, and published a report soon after. In July of 02, we
published an article about circumstances affecting coon chewing—particularly the use of a PVC pipe on a stake/cable system. (Suggesting that coon chewing is
not a product of a particular trap, so much as the circumstances of his capture, and his nature.) In August of 02, we again published BMP Q & A articles,
strongly encouraging trappers to respond and submit comments and questions.
In September of 03, we ran a "Guest Editorial" and an ad paid for by the IAFWA to promote BMPs. With the ad, we included text
stating that this was a paid ad, and not the position of the FTA. In November of that year, we published the "FTA Position Statement" in the magazine
(No direct trapper response to editor.)
In January of 04, Gary Jepson and Dave Hastings attended the IAFWA meetings in Louisiana. In March of 04, we published our notes from
the Louisiana meeting.
Robert Waddell represented the FTA in perhaps the most contentious ad hoc meeting in Missouri, regarding the raccoon BMP. With the help
of Robert Colona and others, Waddell held the line for trappers (while consulting Gary Jepson and Dave Hastings), and left the meeting feeling as if we had
finally gained something concrete by our participation. All the other ad hoc committees met by phone and in person during the remainder of the year.
In the summer of 05, it became clear that the IAFWA intended to superimpose the Wisconsin snare data onto the Eastern Coyote BMP, and
also into the Western Coyote and Red Fox. Also, "final" drafts of the w.coyote, coon, and red fox BMPs were sent to ad hoc members, with a very short
time to reply, and instructions that any comments at this point were not to be over substantial items, but rather spelling, etc.
Gary Jepson and Dave Hastings attended the IAFWA regional conference in North Dakota in May, and discussed with Gordon Batchellor that
the snaring, etc, should not have been imposed over the "consensus" objections of the ad hoc members. Emotions ran a little high, and no resolution
was reached. A week or so later, Batchellor contacted Hastings and expressed his feelings that our concerns did have merit and assured us that an agreement
would be reached.
Also in May, it became apparent that the IAFWA was publishing a final draft of a Trapper Ed curriculum. FTA contacted Samara Trusso,
asking to see the curriculum (Which had not seen by the FTA to date.) We were told we would have to wait until it was published and in the hands of state
agencies. It was, however, clear that the documents that were intended for national Trapper Ed programs included many items that the FTA had been vehemently
opposed to, and had brought those objections to the IAFWA an repeated occasions. In addition, we were told anecdotally that FTA was listed in the credits of the
curriculum as a contributor to this. We could not confirm, as the documents were not shared with us.
Due to an egregious error in some part of the IAFWA process, the draft documents of the 3 ad hoc committees were sent in error—they
were full of details that trappers were led to believe would not be included, and the IAFWA had asked for "sign-on" by members to data that had yet to
be shown. FTA Governing Board discussed this in June at the GB meeting, and voted to wholly support a "refusal to sign on" to the ad hoc documents. As
an ad hoc member, Robert Waddell officially notified the IAFWA of this resolution, and of his inability to "sign on" to the coon BMP.
The FTA decided at the June meeting that the issues of 1--snaring, 2--ad hoc problems, and 3--the unviewed Trapper Ed Curriculum, the
FTA must take direct action. At this time, drafting began on the letter to the governors of all states who had state agency biologists on the FRTWG. The letter
briefly outlined our objections, and asked Governors’ offices to please look into this, and to hold all proceedings until discussions could be held. Copies of
the letter were also sent to FTA members in the states in question, and the cover letter encouraged trappers to also sign the letter, and forward it to their
Governor personally.
At this time the NTA wrote to the head of the IAFWA demanding that proceedings on the ad hoc work come to halt as well. Shortly after,
Gordon Batchellor, in response to NTA’s letter, formally told the NTA that the ad hoc drafts had been sent out in error. He apologized in that letter, and
indicated that the process would back up and new drafts prepared.
Several phone calls were made by FRTWG members to FTA contacts to express their shock over the FTA’s letter to Governors’ offices.
Several Governors responded to Pres. Andres’ letter, and indicated that they had read the concerns, and were working with their respective DNRs to examine the
problems. Many trappers contacted Pres. Andres to congratulate him on the letter, and to encourage him by copying and sending many more letters, from trappers.
Several directors of DNRs have contacted Pres. Andres in response to the letter. To date, none have addressed FTA’s concerns—rather,
they all argue that their biologist is a "good guy" and that the BMPs are a good thing.
The FTA continues to repeat the same concerns as those expressed in the late nineties:
BMPs as a blanket policy will create additional burdensome regulations in many states;
BMPs continue to include specific pre-determined agendas of state officials;
BMPs, particularly snaring data, has potential to drastically curtail snares as a wildlife management tool;
BMPs continue to proceed with bureaucratic "inertia" that does not include meaningful trapper inclusion;
BMPs repeatedly include FTA as a contributor to things that FTA had no input on, with the apparent motive of creating the appearance of
trapper input;
BMPs continue to include people and policies that "endorse or deny endorsement" to items of brand name, with little or no
consciousness of violations of fair trade and business ethics;
BMPs continue to include people who have personal best-interest agendas, ranging from state agency personnel with controversial issues
of choice, to private businessmen who stand to gain by recommending their own products, and disallowing the products of others;
BMPs continue to carry the potential to produce data that can rhetorically be manipulated by those who would ban trapping altogether;
BMPs continue to fail to address the real target constituency: the general public.
Ultimately, it is the belief of the FTA that the BMP process is likely to bring about a compromise of the harvest of animals, and a
reduction in the efficacy of trapping as a wildlife management tool.
BMP—Best Management Practices. Herein we refer to Trapping Best Management Practices as developed by
the IAFWA
IAFWA—International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. The IAFWA is a national and
international group of state level biologists, and others.
FRTWG—Fur Resources Taskforce Working Group. A committee of the IAFWA designed to cover fur related
issues.
Ad hoc committees—herein we refer to the specific furbearer ad hoc committees. The Latin terms ad
hoc simply mean a committee formed for a one-time specific purpose. Currently a list of specific furbearers which each have a committee—Western Coyote, Red
Fox, Raccoon, Beaver, Muskrat, Gray Fox Bobcat, Opossum, etc.
DNR—the Department of Natural Resources in a given state. Each state tends to have its own name for
their respective branch—Fish & Wildlife, Fish & Game, Game & Parks, etc. DNRs tend to encompass all natural resources, such as timber, minerals,
etc.
Consensus—the term simply means "a general agreement."
EU—European Union
AIHTS—Agreement on International Humane Trapping Standards (1997)
USDA—United States Department of Agriculture. Partial funding for the BMPs came from a Congressional
appropriation, through the USDA
CSJLT-Conventional Steel Jawed Leghold Trap
BADs—Break Away Devices. Some snares are equipped with devices which will break away, allowing a
captured animal to be released at certain pound limits. Intent is to release large non-target animals such as deer, moose, or livestock.
CRDs--Cable Restraint Devices—term used by state officials to designate snares that are designed to
hold an animal without killing it. (Intended to exclude snares that may kill animals.)
CITES—Convention on International Trade of Endangered Species
For more information you may contact members of the BMP Committee:
