Fwd: Top Ten Reasons to Attend the 2014 Wildlife Expo

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: National Pest Management Association <npma@pestworld.org>
Date: Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 9:06 AM
Subject: Top Ten Reasons to Attend the 2014 Wildlife Expo
To: alan.huot@wildlifecontrolsupplies.com

Having trouble viewing this email? Click here

QUICK LINKS    REGISTER   EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM  EXHIBITOR PROSPECTUS  EXHIBITOR REGISTRATION HOTEL  Astor Crown Plaza New Orleans, LA    To make your reservations, please click here or call (888)696-4806. Rooms and rates are subject to availability.           Top Ten Reasons to Attend the   2014 Wildlife Expo   Join the National Pest Management Association (NPMA) and the National Wildlife Control Operators Association (NWCOA®) for an educational program that will provide both technical and business-related information to professionals who are involved in wildlife management or are considering offering this valuable add-on service. Whether you are a large company or a one-man shop, use this opportunity to grow your business by attending this unique meeting.   Register Today!  Here are the top ten reasons you should attend...  Learn about the up-and-coming technologies for the nuisance wildlife business. Hear a regulatory update on wildlife services competition.  Review OSHA workplace safety requirements. Earn CEU's from NWCOA's Certified Professional Training Courses for technicians. (More details below.) Learn new ways to increase your profits in wildlife work. Experience the largest exhibit hall dedicated to wildlife and nuisance bird management, showcasing the latest wildlife products and services. Learn how to manage mice and rats effectively. Discuss the best methods to use canines in your business. Network with your wildlife industry peers. Review the importance of having liability insurance. Click here to download the full educational program.   Certified Professional Training Courses In conjunction with the Wildlife Expo, NWCOA is offering Certified Professional Training Courses for technicians. This unique opportunity is only available at the Wildlife Expo and is normally offered exclusively to NWCOA members. The courses available are: NWCOA Certified Basic Wildlife Control Operator Training Course (16 NWCOA CEUs) Bird Barrier America, Inc. Certification Training Course (16 NWCOA CEUs) NWCOA Bat Standards Compliant Training Course (8 NWCOA CEUs) The Exhibit Hall A centerpiece of the meeting is the Exhibit Hall - the largest tradeshow dedicated to wildlife and nuisance bird management. During the program there are several events held in the Exhibit Hall that allow you ample time to meet with vendors and test out new products in an intimate setting.    Interested in Exhibiting or Becoming a Sponsor? Click here to view the Exhibitor Prospectus and to register as an exhibitor.

Forward to a friend. This email was sent to alan.huot@wildlifecontrolsupplies.com by npma@pestworld.org |   Update Profile/Email Address | Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe™ | Privacy Policy. NPMA | 10460 North Street | Fairfax | VA | 22030

--

Firearms:

Oral Arguments set for 01/30/14 (Shew v. Malloy) This is the first piece of what we have been waiting for! The Oral arguments are set for 1/30/2014 at 1:00 PM in Courtroom One, 450 Main St., Hartford, at the federal courthouse before Judge Alfred Covello. The proceedings are open to the public.(If you want a seat in the courtroom, you will need to arrive early).  
ALL PERSONS ENTERING THE COURTHOUSE MUST PRESENT PHOTO IDENTIFICATION. 
Court information: http://www.ctd.uscourts.gov/content/hartford

--

Trapper Predator Caller- Montana Outdoorsmen and Livestock Producers Battle Anti-Trapping Bill

Check out this post: http://www.trapperpredatorcaller.com/article-index/montana-outdoorsmen-and-livestock-producers-battle-anti-trapping-bill

Pistol permit applications in Newtown, Conn.

Pistol permit applications in Newtown, Conn. up 110% http://radioviceonline.com/pistol-permit-applications-in-newtown-conn-up-110/

--

Dyeing & Waxing Traps

Dyeing and Waxing Traps #WCS

We had a dyeing and waxing demo at the WCS Open House a couple of weeks ago.  It generated a lot of interest, so we decided to shoot a short video for the blog.  Enjoy!

Fwd: REVISED 2014 AUCTION SCHEDULE

NAFA Auction Schedule

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "NAFA Communications" <support@nafa.ca>
Date: Oct 31, 2013 11:48 AM
Subject: REVISED 2014 AUCTION SCHEDULE
To: <ctnwco860@gmail.com>
Cc:

North American Fur Auctions Since 1670

October 31, 2013 In an effort to accommodate the concerns of the international fur trade regarding potentially conflicting events, NAFA would like to announce that its April 2014 auction will now commence on Monday April 28th and conclude on Saturday May 3rd, with formal inspection of all goods and show lots beginning on April 23rd. This is a change from our previously announced auction start date of April 25, 2014. NAFA's 2014 auction dates are now as follows: February 17 - 23, 2014 (On show February 12 - 16) April 28 - May 3, 2014 (On show April 23 - 27) June 27 - July 2, 2014 (On show June 22-26) REVISED 2014 AUCTION SCHEDULE For more details please visit our website: Auction Catalogues Auction Schedule NAFA Auction Reports NAFA 65 Skyway Ave, Toronto, ON M9W 6C7 Canada tel: +1.416.675.9320 fax: +1.416.675.6865 www.nafa.ca

Click here to unsubscribe

One national organization for trappers would be better than two

At the recent National Trappers Association Convention, I got bushwhacked by two respected members of the trapping fraternity, people whose names you'd recognize. One is with the NTA and the other is with the Fur Takers of America.

They were perturbed that I'd had the nerve to say the trapping industry would be better served if we had just one national trappers organization instead of two (Editor's Call, August 2013). In that editorial, I said two national groups was an unnecessary division of an already skimpy army, and it weakened us. I said that our dues and donation money could be more effectively spent if the two groups would either merge, which isn't going to happen, or work together more smoothly, instead of arguing between themselves and duplicating each other's efforts.

"You're wrong," the NTA and FTA guys said. "Look here, here's the NTA and FTA having a friendly conversation right here in this aisle. The NTA and FTA have been working together through a joint committee for 15 years."

They griped at me a while longer before I escaped, but neither said anything more substantial than telling me over and over how wrong I was. Neither mentioned any great strides their joint committee had made in those 15 years. You'd think they'd have led with that, but nope. Wonder why? Could it be there haven't been any great strides?

Having two national organizations might not matter when you're dealing with normal folks, but trappers aren't normal. Look at Ducks Unlimited and Delta Waterfowl, for example. In the first place, there are far, far more waterfowl hunters than trappers, so the pool of potential members is deeper. Also, duck hunters are more likely to be "joiners" than are trappers. We're the most independent of outdoor types, much more so than duck hunters, turkey hunters, deer hunters, bass fishermen or any other outdoor user group. If you're a trapper, it's pretty much required that you be an independent cuss as well.

And it's this very independence that makes us resistant to joining any group, even one that shares our core values. That's why less than 10 percent of all licensed trappers in the U.S. belong to any trappers organization at all, let alone a national one. We just want to be left alone to run our lines. So, when there aren't many of us in the first place and we're not likely to join in the second place, the result is a membership pool that's too small to split.

It's not that I think either the NTA or FTA are bad organizations. On the contrary, I'm grateful for both. It's just that maintaining two infrastructures instead of one, having two paid staffs instead of one, putting on two conventions instead of one, working with two sets of lobbyists instead of one, printing two magazines instead of one, and all the other examples of duplicated efforts between the two groups is wasting money that could be better spent on education of the non-trapping public.

Driving one car toward a common destination is always cheaper than driving two. That's all I'm saying.

Jim Spencer, of Calico Rock, Ark., is executive editor of T&PC. To contact Jim, send e-mails to modernmountainman@gmail.com. Visit his website at www.treblehookunlimited.com.

- See more at: http://www.trapperpredatorcaller.com/article-index/editors-call-sticking-to-my-guns?et_mid=639635&rid=238321499#sthash.nnUNiWiF.dpuf

Biologists Air-Drop Marshmallows to Help Control Rabies Outbreaks

Biologists have taken to the air to combat rabies outbreaks. Recently, more than 1 million marshmallow-flavored packets of a trial vaccine called ONRAB were dropped from small planes and helicopters or distributed by hand in five northeastern states. The effort is part of a test to see if the vaccine can be used to help stop rabies outbreaks among raccoons and skunks. "We want to march (raccoon) rabies all the way back to the ocean and eliminate it," said  Richard Chipman, the National Rabies Management Coordinator for the United States Department of Agriculture.

--

www.wildlifecontrolsupplies.com
"Products for Professionals"

Follow My Blog: http://wildlifecontrolsupplies.blogspot.com/

Comstock Beaver Trap Operate Up side Down Underwater !

 BEAVER SWIM THROUGH CAGE TRAPS SET UPSIDE DOWN IN AND UNDER WATER

I know there are some who may not understand the the virtues of setting a cage trap trap upside down in water, but there are many, making this trap and method of setting second to none when it comes to cage traps.

 A power door cage trap set upside will actually lift and push and animal into the trap as he swims forward, far superior to any guillotine door or gravity door ring or drop down door trap.  The power door firing up from the bottom works in tandem with the forward momentum of the swimming animal, propelling him into the trap as the door closes and locks.
 
A second advantage to the door coming up from the bottom is that as the door closes the animal's feet are located on a moving surface, the door, as it lifts the animal into the trap, meaning the animal can get no purchase to push himself back out of the trap as the doors are closing.  In conventional traps where the door comes down from the top, the animal has all four feet planted on firm ground, giving him the ability to brace and back out.  This can't happen in a power door coming up from the bottom.

Because the triggering mechanism is on the bottom when the traps are set upside down, these traps can be set in freezing conditions, even when a portion of the trap is left out of water and able to freeze in, yet still function.  When the traps are set in a dam break, with the upper door closed in a hole in the dam, water leaking through the trap, while the lower end of the trap is submerged, even if the exposed portion partially freezes in, the trigger and lower door will function flawlessly to make the catch.

Though traps can be left exposed and still take beaver readily, at times traps may require camo in the form of grass, logs, mud, brush etc.  When camo is applied to any trap with the mechanism on top, and/ or external components, care must be taken so that it is never placed in a manner that will interfere with the trigger action.  Cover can jam a trap a trap constructed in this manner quite easily, resulting in a misfire, no fire and lost animals.  The swim through trap set upside down with the trigger on the bottom can be camoed with any sort of cover without worry since all of the trigger components are out of the way on the bottom.  Even pushed into the mud, the trigger will still work as it should.
When adding camo, grass can be stuffed into the wires, logs laid on top of the trap, while mud and brush packed on top will have no effect on the mechanism, function or working ability of the trap.

By setting a trap upside down any debris that could hinder a drop down door will rest beneath the door.  These traps are stable enough to be thrown into the water without firing and yet sensitive enough to take muskrats with regularity.  When the trap is positioned on the bottom upside down, any potentially door clogging debris can be readily seen and removed.  Conversely, when drop down doors traps are placed, there is always the potential for a door to get hung up on an unseen snag on the bottom.

When these cage traps are set upside down and placed on the surface, suspended with wire, floated or on stakes, with the top of the cage just out of water, a beaver may stop and inspect the cage, but he is already over the door and in a sense partially into the trap and less likely to refuse.  Protruding doors from the top are far more visible and may act as a deterrent.       By Jim Comstock

WCS Tube Trap Cap - 3 Pack

WCS Tube Trap Cap - 3 Pack  restricts the 4.5" opening on a Tube Trap down to the size of a typical bait station. Allows you to stake the Tube Trap down if placing on the ground, or attach to a wooden structure as it comes with mounting holes.

Covert Special Ops CODE BLACK Scouting Camera

Sends pics via the AT&T network to your smartphone or computer. No monthly recurring fees, simply purchase a prepaid AT&T card for the time you want to use it  Covert Special Ops CODE BLACK Scouting Camera

Increased Coyote Activity in and around Denver Prompts Study:

After an increase in reports of negative encounters with coyotes in metro Denver, scientists from Colorado State University’s Warner College of Natural Resources are conducting research to understand how human thoughts and behavior affect coyote conflict in urban areas. The study is being led by researchers from CSU’s Department of Human Dimensions of Natural Resources and is part of a comprehensive research initiative that is integrating biological and social science information, including data on reported encounters, coyote behavior and habitat monitoring, management response and public perceptions, to help develop more effective strategies for minimizing conflicts between people and coyotes.

The researchers have collected online and mail-back surveys from more than 4,000 metro Denver residents since December 2012. The surveys were designed to assess public attitudes and experiences related to coyotes in selected neighborhoods that have seen varying levels of human-coyote conflict. A separate survey of more than 30 coyote managers was also conducted to provide details on how reports of human-coyote conflict are being handled by various jurisdictions in the area. Findings from both survey efforts are being analyzed and mapped to better understand underlying factors and patterns that may contribute to incidents such as coyote attacks on pets and aggression toward people.

“The goal is to provide a more complete picture of the on-the-ground reality of coyote management in metro Denver. When, where, and how people interact with wildlife such as coyotes in urban environments is driven by both ecological and social factors,” says Andrew Don Carlos, a research associate in the Department of Human Dimensions of Natural Resources at CSU. “Habitat and prey are important determinants of how coyotes use the landscape. We have a lot of both in metro Denver, so it’s no surprise that they’ve taken up residence in our parks, open spaces, and sometimes even backyards. People’s actions, especially those related to outdoor food attractants and pets, can increase the potential for problems to occur.”

Preliminary results from Adams County, one of the primary sponsors of the project, suggest that a large portion of residents are experiencing regular interactions with coyotes in their neighborhoods. More than 80 percent of survey respondents in the western part of the county and within the cities of Westminster, Thornton, and Northglenn said that they had observed a coyote near their home in the past three years.
However, proximity of people and coyotes doesn’t always lead to conflict. Fewer than 10 percent of respondents said that they had been approached by a coyote, and fewer than 5 percent reported problems between coyotes and pets. No human attacks were reported.

Attitudes toward coyotes were generally mixed in the Adams County survey areas. About half of survey respondents thought having coyotes around was a good thing, while a third expressed negative reactions toward coyotes. The rest were somewhere in the middle. Overall, public interest was very high, with nearly 90 percent of those surveyed in Adams County indicating that they were at least somewhat interested in the issue of coyotes near their home.

“Coyotes are the largest predatory mammal that most urban residents will encounter, and their presence in the neighborhood tends to get a lot of attention. In these types of situations, a solid understanding of public attitudes and behaviors becomes an important piece of the puzzle,” said Tara Teel, an associate professor in CSU’s Department of Human Dimensions of Natural Resources and one of the study’s principal investigators. “Effective urban coyote management will always involve the public to some degree, and getting a sense for where residents are at on the issue is an important first step for managers.”

The survey findings will also help determine the effectiveness of current public outreach and education campaigns aimed at reducing human-coyote conflict, and will help develop more targeted education initiatives in the future. Results of the coyote manager survey indicated that providing educational information to the public was the most common component of coyote management across metro Denver jurisdictions. Ensuring that residents are getting the right messages about how to remove coyote attractants, protect their pets, and keep coyotes from losing their natural wariness of humans is critical for long-term management success.

The CSU researchers plan to have complete survey results for the entire Denver metro area prepared by the end of summer 2013. The findings will be incorporated with other data from the larger project, including information on coyote incident reports, coyote behavior, coyote habitat, and urban development, to create a model aimed at enhancing scientific knowledge about urban coyote management issues and trends.

In addition to CSU’s Department of Human Dimensions of Natural Resources, primary partners on the comprehensive coyote conflict research initiative include the City of Aurora’s Urban Coyote Safety and Awareness Program spearheaded by Mary Ann Bonnell, the USDA National Wildlife Research Center represented by Research Wildlife Biologist Stewart Breck, and CSU’s Department of Fish, Wildlife and Conservation Biology represented by Professor Kevin Crooks.

Colorado Parks and Wildlife, along with several metro Denver city and county offices, have also assisted the project by providing coyote incident reports, funding, and other logistical support. In 2012 the initiative was recognized through an award for excellence in community outreach and public education by the Denver Regional Council of Governments.

“This is truly a collaborative project that approaches human-coyote conflict management in a very comprehensive way,” said City of Aurora Senior Natural Resource Specialist, Mary Ann Bonnell. “By working across jurisdictions and combining scientific research and citizen engagement, we can develop more targeted, informed and effective campaigns that can reduce and/or avoid urban coyote conflict in most cases. That is our goal.”

AgriNews: Federal grants awarded to strengthen pest monitoring technology

AgriNews: Federal grants awarded to strengthen pest monitoring technology

Trapper Predator Caller- Appeals Court Backs Minnesota DNR on Wolf Regulations

Check out this post: http://www.trapperpredatorcaller.com/article-index/appeals-court-backs-minnesota-dnr-on-wolf-regulations

NSSF Blog- U.S. District Court Dismisses Lawsuit to Ban Traditional Ammunition

Check out this post: http://www.nssfblog.com/u-s-district-court-dismisses-lawsuit-to-ban-traditional-ammunition/

CT News Junkie | Second Challenge To CT’s New Gun Law Filed

CT News Junkie | Second Challenge To CT’s New Gun Law Filed

LIST OF TRAITORS

 LIST OF TRAITORS

Subject: LIST OF TRAITORS 

Over the weekend, we came four votes away from the United States Senate giving our Constitutional rights over to the United Nations. In a 53-46 vote, the senate narrowly passed a measure that will stop the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty. The Statement of Purpose from the bill read: To uphold Second Amendment rights and prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty. The U.N. Small Arms Treaty, which has been championed by the Obama Administration, would have effectively placed a global ban on the import and export of small firearms. The ban would have affected all private gun owners in the U.S., and had language that would have implemented an international gun registry on all private guns and ammo. Astonishingly, 46 of our United States Senators were willing to give away our Constitutional rights to a foreign power. Here are the 46 senators that voted to give your rights to the U.N.  Notice that ALL are either Democrat or "Independent." Baldwin (D-WI) Baucus (D-MT) Bennet (D-CO) Blumenthal (D-CT) Boxer (D-CA) Brown (D-OH) Cantwell (D-WA) Cardin (D-MD) Carper (D-DE) Casey (D-PA) Coons (D-DE) Cowan (D-MA) Durbin (D-IL) Feinstein (D-CA) Franken (D-MN) Gellibrand (D-NY) Harkin (D-IA) Hirono (D-HI) Johnson (D-SD) Kaine (D-VA) King (I-ME) Klobuchar (D-MN) Landrieu (D-LA) Leahy (D-VT) Levin (D-MI) McCaskill (D-MO) Menendez (D-NJ) Merkley (D-OR) Mikulski (D-MD) Murphy (D-CT) Murray (D-WA) Nelson (D-FL) People this needs to go viral. These Senators voted to let the UN take our guns. They need to lose the election. We have been betrayed.  These 46 Senators Voted to Give your 2nd Amendment Constitutional Rights to the U.N. Reed (D-RI) Reid (D-NV) Rockefeller (D-WV) Sanders (I-VT) Schatz (D-HI) Schumer (D-NY) Shaheen (D-NH) Stabenow (D-MI) Udall (D-CO) Udall (D-NM) Warner (D-VA) Warren (D-MA) Whitehouse (D-RI) Wyden (D-OR

  

Connecticut Governor Malloy Office Threatens Veteran With Arrest For Questioning Gun Ban

http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/04/connecticut-governor-malloy-office-threatens-veteran-with-arrest-for-asking-questions-about-his-new-gun-ban-2/#.UWSC11MvwDM.gmail

SAVE THE DATE !!!

2014 WILDLIFE EXPO  JANUARY 8 - 11

NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA

Mark your calendars now for the trade show, industry specific sessions, educational programs and networking with your fellow wildlife control operators. 

The host hotel, the Astor Crowne Plaza, is located in the world renowned French Quarter of Louisiana -- at Canal Street and Bourbon -- by Brennan's Restaurant.

--

Alan A. Huot, President

ahuot@wildlifecontrolsupplies.com
Wildlife Control Supplies

P.O. Box 538
East Granby, CT 06026
860-844-0101   860-413-9831 (FAX)

www.wildlifecontrolsupplies.com
"Products for Professionals"

Follow My Blog: http://wildlifecontrolsupplies.blogspot.com/

Fwd: NTA Alert

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Beth" <ntamemb@kiva.net>
Date: Mar 21, 2013 12:28 PM
Subject: NTA Alert
To: <ntaom@kiva.net>
Cc:

 

California could lose bobcat trapping. The California Trappers Association has hired a lobbying group to fight AB1213.  There is much work to be done and they need our help.
 
Donations are being accepted:
Make payable to the California Trappers Association
in Memo note - Fight AB1213
Send to-
Reid Aiton
PO Box 1339
Blue Lake, CA 95525

 

 

P-I-T Inline Wolf Shock Spring - 175 lb.

P-I-T Inline Wolf Shock Spring - 175 lb.

Polar Bears in Peril

(CNN) -- A U.S. plan to give new protection to polar bears was voted down Thursday at an international conference on endangered species.

The American delegation at the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) meeting in Bangkok, Thailand, had sought a ban on the international trade of polar bear parts. The ban was opposed by Canada, home to the world's largest population of polar bears, as well as Norway and Greenland. It failed with 38 votes for, 42 against and 46 abstentions.

"Unfortunately, politics seem to have overtaken science," Dan Ashe, director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the head of the U.S. delegation to the Bangkok conference, said in a statement.

Polar bears have been listed under Appendix II of the CITES accords, which applies to species that are not currently threatened with extinction but may face it without restrictions on the trade of their body parts. The U.S. had proposed moving polar bears to Appendix I, which applies to species threatened with extinction and effectively bans trade in their body parts.

The U.S. says that shrinking Arctic ice habitat, a product of a warming climate, puts polar bear populations in a precarious position. Two-thirds of the world's polar bear populations could face local extinctions within 45 years due to habitat loss, the National Resources Defense Council says.

Largest polar bear gathering in world

"We are obviously disappointed that the CITES membership failed to give greater protection to polar bears by limiting permissible trade in polar bear pelts and other body parts," U.S. Deputy Secretary of the Interior David J. Hayes said in a statement. "We will continue to work with our partners to reduce the pressure that trade in polar bear parts puts on this iconic arctic species."

Conservation groups were outraged at the vote.

"It's a sad day for one of the world's most iconic creatures," Philip Mansbridge, CEO of Care for the Wild International, said in a statement.

"The world once again had a chance to take action to safeguard polar bear populations and failed," Jeff Flocken, North American regional director of the International Fund for Animal Welfare, said in a statement. "Each passing year that this iconic species is not protected to the fullest, is another year closer to losing the polar bear forever."

Canada, which has 16,000 of the 20,000 to 25,000 polar bears left in the wild, says polar bear populations are not threatened and the animal does not meet the Appendix 1 criteria.

"The polar bear does not have a small wild population, it does not have a restricted area of distribution and no marked decline has been observed," Environment Canada says on its website. Canada also says polar bear parts coming from the country are taken in subsistence hunts, not by commercial operations.

"Harvest quotas are based on principles of conservation and Aboriginal subsistence, and are not market driven; an Appendix I listing would have no conservation benefit," the website says.

But the U.S. argued that parts from polar bears are traded among 70 countries and that trade encourages kills that, coupled with the habitat loss, put stress on populations that will cause them to shrink.

About 800 polar bears are killed by subsistence hunters each year, the U.S. says. Hides can sell for $2,000 to as much as $12,000, the FWS says.

"As polar bear hide prices have skyrocketed, more bears are being offered at auction, and hunting levels have increased," Ashe said in the statement.

"Prices for polar bear pelts have doubled over the last few years, and the signs are that trade is increasing. All the evidence says that it is simply unsustainable so it is foolish and negligible of us to allow it to continue when polar bear numbers are diminishing," Mansbridge said.

"It's terrible to think that we are postponing protecting such a magnificent animal so that hunters can continue to have their payday," he said.

Hayes pledged that the U.S. wouldn't give up on trade restrictions.

"We will continue to work with our partners to reduce the pressure that trade in polar bear parts puts on this iconic arctic species, even as we take on the longer term threat that climate change poses to polar bears," he said.

15th Annual New England NWC Seminar

WCS is wrapping up the wildlife control tradeshow Spring season by attending the 15th Annual New England Nuisance Wildlife Control Seminar on March 16th, being held at the Ramada Inn in East Hartford, CT. The CT NWCO Assoc. really knows how to conduct an excellent one-day event for wildlife control operators and WCS has been attending since the early days ! For more information be sure to visit www.ctnwcoa.com

GC300 Electronic Game Caller by ICOtec

Product Code: GC300

Price: $69.99                                            

The NEW GC300 is compact, durable and extremely effective for such an affordable unit. You can’t go wrong with this predator call if you are a beginner or a more experienced hunter that prefers a more convenient option. Requires 4 AA Batteries - not included.

CT Legislator Proposes Foothold Trap Ban for Child Safety

Once again, the absolute "Cream of the Legislative Crop" of legislators in CT, State Representative Diana Urban of the 43rd Assembly District has proposed further restrictions on foothold traps, all in the name and under the guise of child safety.

Rep. Urban has a habit of trying to solve problems which DON'T exist, all the while wasting legislative time and resources the State of CT can ill afford. Contrary to the States experts at the DEEP.

Without going into a long litany of reasons WHY this is BAD legislation. Just a couple of points, there has never been a bona-fide event of a child being harmed by a legally set foothold trap NATIONWIDE.  In the State of CT the number of  investigations conducted by the ENCON police regarding trapping (of any nature) is less than 1% annually, with an even smaller % resulting in a summons.

Please see below the legislation Rep. Diana Urban proposes:

General Assembly		Committee Bill No. 5566
January Session, 2013		LCO No. 3200
		*03200HB05566KID*
Referred to Committee on CHILDREN
Introduced by:
(KID)

AN ACT CONCERNING CHILD SAFETY BY RESTRICTING THE PLACEMENT OF LEGHOLD TRAPS.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Assembly convened:

Section 1. Section 26-72 of the general statutes is repealed and the following is substituted in lieu thereof (Effective October 1, 2013):

(a) The commissioner may, after notice and public hearing conducted in the manner prescribed by section 26-67, issue regulations governing and prescribing the taking of all species of fur-bearing animals by use of traps within the state. Such regulations may (1) establish the open and closed seasons, (2) establish the legal hours, (3) prescribe the legal methods that may be used, including size, type and kind of traps and the type and kind of bait and lures, (4) designate the places where traps may be placed and set and the conditions under which the placing and setting of traps will be legal, (5) establish the daily bag limit and the season bag limit, and (6) assess a reasonable fee, or develop a comparable equitable plan, for season trapping rights on state-owned property. Assignment of such rights for specific areas may be determined by drawing or by the order in which requests therefor are recorded as received in the office of the commissioner when there is a set fee for such areas, or the method of high bid may be used.

(b) No person shall set, place or attend any trap upon the land of another without having in such person's possession the written permission of the owner or lessee of such land, or such owner's or lessee's agent, and no person shall set, place or attend any trap not having the name of the person using such trap legibly stamped thereon or attached thereto, provided the owner or legal occupant of such land or such person as such owner or legal occupant designates may set, place or attend any legal steel trap in any place within a radius of one hundred feet of any permanent building located on such land. No person who sets, places or attends any trap shall permit more than twenty-four hours to elapse between visits to such trap, except that if such twenty-four-hour period expires before sunset, the person who set such trap shall have until sunset to visit the trap. Any person who sets, places or attends any trap shall report each incident of the trapping of a nontarget animal to the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection within twenty-four hours. No person shall place, set or attend any snare, net or similar device capable of taking or injuring any animal. As used in this subsection, "nontarget animal" means an animal of a species not intended to be taken.

(c) No person shall place any leghold trap on or within one hundred feet of the real property comprising a public or private elementary or secondary school, licensed child day care center, as defined in section 19a-77, that is identified as a child day care center by a sign posted in a conspicuous place, state park, municipal park, municipal playground, public boat launch, roadside rest area, public picnic area, public campground, blazed trail or state hiking trail. As used in this subsection, "leghold trap" means a device designed to close on the foot or leg of an animal with sufficient force to hold the animal until the person tending the trap returns, and includes, but is not limited to, a steel jawed leghold style trap that is either padded or unpadded. Nothing in this subsection shall prevent any person duly authorized by the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection from setting a leghold trap within one hundred feet of such areas listed in this subsection to control nuisance wildlife.

(d) The pelt of any fur-bearing animal legally taken may be possessed, sold or transported at any time. Upon demand of any officer having authority to serve criminal process or any representative of the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, any person in possession of any such pelt shall furnish to such officer or such representative satisfactory evidence that such pelt was legally taken or acquired.

(e) No provision of this section shall be construed as prohibiting any landowner or lessee of land used for agricultural purposes or any citizen of the United States, or any person having on file in the court having jurisdiction thereof a written declaration of such person's intention to become a citizen of the United States, who is regularly employed by such landowner or lessee, from pursuing, trapping and killing at any time any fur-bearing animal, except deer, which is injuring any property, or the owner of any farm or enclosure used for breeding or raising any legally acquired fur-bearing animal who has a game breeder's license issued by the commissioner or a fur breeder's license issued by the Department of Agriculture, from taking or killing any such animal legally in his or her possession at any time or having in possession any pelt thereof.

(f) No person shall molest, injure or disturb any muskrat house or den at any time.

(g) Any fur-bearing animal legally taken alive may be possessed by the person taking the animal, provided the person shall notify the commissioner in a writing signed by the person stating the species and sex of such animal, the date and the name of the town where such animal was taken and the specific address where such animal will be kept. Any representative of the department may at any time inspect such animal and the enclosure or other facilities used to hold such animal and make inquiry concerning the diet and other care such animal should have and if, in the opinion of the commissioner or such representative, such animal is not being provided adequate or proper facilities or care, such animal may be seized by such representative of the department and be disposed of as determined by the commissioner. Fur-bearing animals taken alive, as provided in this section, shall not be sold or exchanged, provided the person who legally possesses such animal may apply to the commissioner for a game breeder's license or to the Department of Agriculture for a fur breeder's license and when so licensed such person may breed such animal and the progeny thereof, and such issue when three generations removed from the wild may be sold or exchanged alive or dead.

(h) Any trap illegally set and any snare, net or similar device found placed or set in violation of the provisions of this section shall be seized by any representative of the department and, if not claimed within twenty-four hours, the commissioner may order such trap, snare, net or other device destroyed, sold or retained for use by the commissioner.

(i) Any person who violates any provision of this section, or any regulation issued by the commissioner shall be fined not more than two hundred dollars or be imprisoned not more than sixty days, or both.

(j) Whenever any person is convicted, or forfeits any bond, or has such person's case nolled upon the payment of any sum of money, or receives a suspended sentence or judgment for a violation of any of the provisions of this section or any regulation issued hereunder by the commissioner, all traps used, set or placed in violation of any such provisions or any such regulation may, by order of the trial court, be forfeited to the state and may be retained for use by the department or may be sold or destroyed at the discretion of the commissioner. The proceeds from any such sale shall be paid to the State Treasurer and the State Treasurer shall credit such proceeds to the General Fund.

This act shall take effect as follows and shall amend the following sections:
Section 1	October 1, 2013	26-72

Statement of Purpose:

To restrict the placement of leghold traps within one hundred feet of areas where children are likely to encounter such devices.

[Proposed deletions are enclosed in brackets. Proposed additions are indicated by underline, except that when the entire text of a bill or resolution or a section of a bill or resolution is new, it is not underlined.]

Co-Sponsors:

REP. CAMILLO, 151st Dist.; REP. WRIGHT E., 41st Dist. REP. KUPCHICK, 132nd Dist.; REP. HENNESSY, 127th Dist. REP. ROSE, 118th Dist.; REP. URBAN, 43rd Dist.

H.B. 5566    

LEED Certification for OvoControl™ P

LEED stands for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design and was developed by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) to set a benchmark for design, construction, and operation of high-performance green buildings. Customers, especially those responsible for larger facilities and structures, have requested LEED certification for OvoControl.

Based on USGBC and San Francisco Department of the Environment guidelines, OvoControl P was recently classified as a "Tier 3" pesticide product. This represents the "least-hazard" class and does not require notification of building residents prior to use. See the "Hazard Assessment" for details.

OvoControl continues to collect certifications, endorsements and other accreditations as property and facility managers continue to adopt the bird-friendly product for larger scale pigeon control.

NAFA Fur Collection - March 30th

I have confirmed that not only will there be a NAFA Fur Collection on March 30th from 9 am. - 1 pm. at the WCS facility in East Granby, CT., but that Jim Comstock a nationally known trapper and trap manufacturer will be giving a Beaver demo using his Comstock Cage traps as well as bodygrips.

We will also have professional fur handler, Andrew Huot doing fur processing demos, sharing his tips & tricks throughout and showing attendees how fur should be put up to maximize your efforts.   Jay Johnson, owner of Critter Cop wildlife control will be displaying his fur garments and accessories that he produces.

And last but certainly not least, a representative from CT DEEP will be on hand to tage fur prior to it being shipped to auction.   This is a "can't miss" event if you have fur you'd like to send to NAFA, and/or just socialize with other trappers or improve your skills.

Remember:  March 30th, 9am - 1pm., NAFA Fur Collection, WCS, 877-684-7262  

EPA Moves to Ban 12 D-Con Mouse and Rat Control Products / Action Will Prevent Thousands of Accidental Exposures Among Children Each Year

Release Date: 01/30/2013

Contact Information: Dale Kemery (News media only) kemery.dale@epa.gov 202-564-7839 202-564-4355; EN ESPAÑOL: Lina Younes younes.lina@epa.gov 202-564-9924 202-564-4355

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is moving to ban the sale of 12 D-Con mouse and rat poison products produced by Reckitt Benckiser Inc. because these products fail to comply with current EPA safety standards. Approximately 10,000 children a year are accidentally exposed to mouse and rat baits; EPA has worked cooperatively with companies to ensure that products are both safe to use around children and effective for consumers. Reckitt Benckiser Inc., maker of D-Con brand products, is the only rodenticide producer that has refused to adopt EPA's safety standards for all of its consumer use products. 

"Moving forward to ban these products will prevent completely avoidable risks to children, said James Jones, acting assistant administrator for EPA's Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. "With this action, EPA is ensuring that the products on the market are both safe and effective for consumers."

The agency has worked with a number of companies during the last five years to develop safer rodent control products that are effective, affordable, and widely available to meet the needs of consumers. Examples of products meeting EPA safety standards include Bell Laboratories' Tomcat products, PM Resources' Assault brand products and Chemsico's products. 

The EPA requires rodenticide products for consumer use to be contained in protective tamper-resistant bait stations and prohibits pellets and other bait forms that cannot be secured in bait stations. In addition, the EPA prohibits the sale to residential consumers of products containing brodifacoum, bromadiolone, difethialone, and difenacoum because of their toxicity to wildlife. 

For companies that have complied with the new standards in 2011, EPA has received no reports of children being exposed to bait contained in bait stations. EPA expects to see a substantial reduction in exposures to children when the 12 D-Con products that do not comply with current standards are removed from the consumer market as millions of households use these products each year.

For a complete list of the homeowner use rat and mouse products that meet the EPA's safety standards, visit:http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/mice-and-rats/rodent-bait-station.html. 

For a complete list of Reckitt Benckiser Inc.'s non-compliant products, visit: http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/mice-and-rats/cancellation-process.html#cancellation.

The EPA's final Notice of Intent to Cancel will be available in the EPA docket EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0049 atwww.regulations.gov. After Federal Register publication of the Notice of Intent to Cancel, Reckitt Benckiser will have 30 days to request a hearing before an EPA Administrative Law Judge. If a hearing is not requested, the cancellations become final and effective.
Information on Rodenticide products and EPA's review is available at:http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/reregistration/rodenticides/

More information on preventing and controlling rodents is available at:http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/controlling/rodents.htm 

--