Sunday, June 10, 2012
110 Stabilizer - Deep Water (38")
The same stabilizer seen in Bob Noonan's mink video, great for the bottom edge sets. Holds the trap securely, easy to retrieve captured mink or muskrats. 110 Stabilizer - Deep Water
Wednesday, June 06, 2012
Wolf Symposium held in Oregon
All
This message was forwarded to be by Ed Medvetz, MY-T Enterprises:
For those of you that attended the May 12, 2012 Wolf Symposium I think you will support the views listed below. For those that missed it I hope it is informative.
The plan if for another Symposium in Central Oregon in May of next year.
Thanks to the Chapters in the mid west region and others that supported this symposium.
Joe Ricker
Mid West Director
OHA
Subject: FW: Wolf Symposium Overview
Importance: High
Importance: High
This from a friend and fellow OHA, SCI member, Dan>
> To all:
>
> Just a follow up note to summarize the information presented at the Oregon Animal Damage Management Council's Wolf Symposium held in Albany on Saturday, May 12th. It was a very well organized and informative meeting with approximately 250 people in attendance. Participants ranged from the anti-hunting groups to ranchers, outfitters, sportsman, hunters, state police, county sheriff, and others from Canada, Alaska, Oregon, Idaho & Montana.
>
> It is hard to relay 8 hours of information in an email that would do just to those dedicated individuals who are attempting to inform Oregonians of the coming storm regarding wolves in Oregon. I will try to relay the most significant and meaningful topics and issues that were discussed.
>
> As far as the individual speakers and their presentations were concerned, I was most impressed by David Allen, the President of RMEF. He is a very down to earth guy who spoke, not from a prepared speech, but rather from his gut. In a nutshell, he stated the following regarding wolves in the lower 48:
>
> 1) They are here.
> 2) They are not going away.
> 3) The future is now.
> 4) They are wildlife just like elk.
> 5) Their primary prey or food preference is elk and each wolf will consume an average of 25 elk per year.
> 6) In 1995, all parties involved in the reintroduction were aware and agreed to there coexistence with other wildlife. However, at that moment and place in time, science and honesty prevailed in the agreements and consensus that the maximum number of wolves would be 15 breeding pairs and 150 total wolves. There is no longer any integrity or respect among the original partners.
> 7) There is no attempt, desire, or intention to control the wolf expansion by the USFWS. The only hope for curbed expansion is for local state control.
> 8) Dr. Davis Mech, Wolf Biologist, estimates in 2008 there were over 2,000 wolves in the tri-state area.
> 9) They expand their numbers by approximately 30% every year.
> 10) They will/can travel up to 43 miles in a 24 hour period looking for a food source.
> 11) The world famous Northern Yellowstone Elk herd numbered 20,000 in 1995. (1 year prior to wolf reintroduction). The winter 2012 count posts a staggering decline with only 4,100 elk left!
> 12) The famous Bitter Roots herd has been reduced over 80% with devastating future consequences of an aging herd with little or no calf and yearling survival.
> 13) The Lolo herd in northern Idaho has been decimated to less than 20% of its 1995 level.
> 14) The once famous moose numbers from Jackson Hole, WY to Butte, MT are gone.
> 15) The next battle is Grizzly bears.
>
> Dr. Val Geist of the University of Calgary had the following to say:
>
> 1) Refusal of American scientists to review the historical knowledge of wolves and why they were eradicated, greatly reduced in many parts of the world in the past may lead to severe disease outbreaks or other catastrophic problems.
> 2) Problem wolves must be immediately discharged to prevent any abnormal human-wolf conflicts.
> 3) France had approximately 3,000 people who indirectly died from wolf related disease and illness.
> 4) The Utopian view of the modern wolf, being a loving social creature who lives only in the deep dark forest, is the result of the Walt Disney movie generation.
> 5) Wolf related disease is currently held in balance due to Alaska and Canada's aggressive predator control measures.
> 6) Wolf scat that is near or in the vicinity of domestic activity raises grave concerns of humans contracting tape worms that can lead to fatal brain cysts.
> 7) Humans have historically been on the menu of wolves.
>
> The ODFW's Directory Roy Elicker had the following to say:
>
> 1) The Oregon wolf plan is the single biggest program in the Department has worked on. I am guessing that means their biggest expenditure item also.
> 2) The wolf budget is currently at $608,000 and is continuing to outgrow funding.
> 3) There are 29 "known" wolves in Oregon.
> 4) Wolves have been spotted in 9 different Northeast Oregon GMU's.
> 5) There are currently 4 established packs: Wenaha Pack, Imnaha Pack, Walla Walla Pack & Snake River Pack with possibly 2 other packs forming in the Minam River area and the Umatilla River area.
> 6) Currently there are no known breeding pairs. The Oregon wolf plan ultimately calls for 14 breeding pairs. This is the alarming part: Without documented 3 year period of established multiple breeding pairs we cannot manage their numbers.
> 7) The Wehana GMU elk numbers are currently 1,800 and way below the MO of 4,250.
> 8) The Wenaha GMU is referred to as the "predator pit" by ODFW personnel.
>
> Mr. Casey Anderson of the Ox Ranch in Idaho had the following to say:
>
> 1) Only 7% or 10% of wolf livestock depredation is documented and/or compensated.
> 2) They have GPS collar data that shows wolf/cattle harassment on a continental and escalating basis.
> 3) One wolf pack had a 210 square mile area that they would roam and patrol.
> 4) Every known wolf needs to be captured & collared to allow 100% tracking and data collection of all wolf expansion & activity.
>
> Mr. Steven Mealey, retired director of Idaho Fish & Game and acting Vice President of the Boone & Crockett Club, had the following to say:
>
> 1) The North American Wildlife Conservation model as we know it is in jeopardy.
> 2) The universities are now graduating biologist with an interest in wolf conservation and expansion and moving from a consumptive to a retention based regulate management style.
> 3) RED FLAGS:
> a) Declining hunter participation
> b) Declining deer & elk populations
> c) Increasing predator population
> d) Overstressed winter ranges
> 4) Two must-do's to protect collapse of the NAWC model:
> a) We must recruit more young hunters.
> b) We must maintain healthy and plentiful ungulate populations to encourage hunter participation.
>
> In conclusion, I am convinced that this is only the beginning of our troubles in Oregon. We already have a top heavy predator problem with just cougars and bears. Throw approximately 250 to 500 wolves in the Northeast corner of the state and we can predict what will happen. One expert was quoted as saying that within 4 to 7 years we will have wolves harassing the elk preserve in Jewell.
>
> For myself in this regard, I will continue to recruit and support youth participation in our hunting heritage and traditions. Also, I intend to write letters to all of our legislators, hunting associations and others to ask for and promote funding to expand the GPS wolf collar program. The closer we monitor these buggers the further and sooner we will be able to push them back. I appreciate your concern in this manner and look forward to future hunting adventures and memories. Please consider joining and/or supporting the following associations who are all working together to continue to provide hunting opportunities in Oregon. OHA, SCI, RMEF, FNAWS, OCA.
Saturday, May 26, 2012
Urban Fox Conference being held in U.K.
The Urban Fox Conference Friday the 23rd of November 2012
As he debate continues over the urban fox, wrong information is put out into the public domain creating some very mixed messages and understanding.
The Urban Fox Conference 2012 will be held on Friday the 23rd of November 2012 at the Churchgate Hotel, Old Harlow, Harlow, Essex.
The conference will be educational and informative in order to dispel any 'untruths'.
Expert speaker's from leading universities and goverment agencies are lined up to enlighten all.
This conference is directed towards anyone who may come into contact with urban fox related issues such as Environmental Health Officers, Police Wildlife Crime Units, Landowners, Local Authorities etc.
Subjects being debated and discussed will all be urban fox related such as laws, legistlation, risks posed, parasitology, human/pet/livestock interaction etc.
The Urban Fox Conference 2012 will be held on Friday the 23rd of November 2012 at the Churchgate Hotel, Old Harlow, Harlow, Essex.
The conference will be educational and informative in order to dispel any 'untruths'.
Expert speaker's from leading universities and goverment agencies are lined up to enlighten all.
This conference is directed towards anyone who may come into contact with urban fox related issues such as Environmental Health Officers, Police Wildlife Crime Units, Landowners, Local Authorities etc.
Subjects being debated and discussed will all be urban fox related such as laws, legistlation, risks posed, parasitology, human/pet/livestock interaction etc.
Anyone attending this event, please let us know ??
Tuesday, May 22, 2012
Trap-Alert Special Offer
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Alan Huot" <alan.huot@wildlifecontrolsupplies.com>
Date: May 22, 2012 10:01 AM
Subject: Trap-Alert Special Offer
To: <alan.huot@wildlifecontrolsupplies.com>
From: "Alan Huot" <alan.huot@wildlifecontrolsupplies.com>
Date: May 22, 2012 10:01 AM
Subject: Trap-Alert Special Offer
To: <alan.huot@wildlifecontrolsupplies.com>
| Having trouble viewing this email? Click here |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
Wildlife Control Supplies | P.O. Box 538 | East Granby | CT | 06026 |
Thursday, May 03, 2012
Raccoon Behavior
Raccoons feed mainly at night. The mere sight of a raccoon out, moving about, during daylight hours does not necessarily constitute a problem. In the absence of other factors, healthy raccoons can be seen out during daylight hours.
They eat fruit, nuts, berries, small animals and insects, and also will feed on pet food, garbage, and garden crops.
Female raccoons look for den sites in late winter. Litters of one to seven young are born in April and May. Young raccoons open their eyes about three weeks after birth, and often announce their presence with mewing, twittering or crying sounds. They nurse for about six weeks, then leave the den to follow the mother until September or early October when they disperse and establish their own territories.
They eat fruit, nuts, berries, small animals and insects, and also will feed on pet food, garbage, and garden crops.
Female raccoons look for den sites in late winter. Litters of one to seven young are born in April and May. Young raccoons open their eyes about three weeks after birth, and often announce their presence with mewing, twittering or crying sounds. They nurse for about six weeks, then leave the den to follow the mother until September or early October when they disperse and establish their own territories.
Thursday, April 26, 2012
Senator seeks to allow goose kills near NY airport after multiple collisions with planes
Hello,
Too Many Birds in the NY air space
Shared while visiting FoxNews.com:
http://soc.li/IiZbZ4l
The problem of birds living near some of the nation's busiest airports is coming under renewed scrutiny after two emergency landings in a week.
This email is a direct message from a friend who wants to share an item of interest with you.
This email message is powered by Gigya's sharing technology. If you no longer wish to receive messages that are sent via Gigya's service, please click here to remove your email address.
Gigya Inc., 1975 Landings Dr., Mountain View, CA 94043.
Too Many Birds in the NY air space
Shared while visiting FoxNews.com:
http://soc.li/IiZbZ4l
The problem of birds living near some of the nation's busiest airports is coming under renewed scrutiny after two emergency landings in a week.
This email is a direct message from a friend who wants to share an item of interest with you.
This email message is powered by Gigya's sharing technology. If you no longer wish to receive messages that are sent via Gigya's service, please click here to remove your email address.
Gigya Inc., 1975 Landings Dr., Mountain View, CA 94043.
Tuesday, April 24, 2012
Canine Distemper
Canine distemper is a common disease and is usually fatal. Raccoons with distemper act tame or confused, and eventually lose coordination, become unconscious and die. Distemper cannot be transmitted to humans or immunized pets. The mere sight of an animal, i.e. raccoon or fox, out during the daytime DOES NOT necessarily mean they are sick in the absence of other factors.
Sunday, April 15, 2012
Friday, April 13, 2012
Trapping around People and Pets by Tim Julien
Trapping around People and Pets
What’s
changed? Changes in wildlife populations in and around
public areas and or are public areas around wildlife. The bridge you
have always trapped under for mink and Raccoons now is in sight of
two subdivisions, complete with eight-year-old boys and free roaming
or temporarily escaped pets.
The
landscape has changed and people habits and values are always
changing. For sure we know that you have no idea who else is there.
Legal
or Right, there is a difference. Even if a method is
legal to use the choice to use it is the trappers, as well as the
consequences. Yes I can and I have a right to do it will not carry
very far in the court of public opinion. Recently 3-20-12, I learned
that the latest ploy to ban traps is to demand that Children be kept
safe from Traps. There is no documented case anywhere anytime that a
child has ever been captured in a foot hold trap, yet the CT
legislature thinks it necessary to create laws to protect children
for the danger of these traps and therefore they must be banned?
Comes down to public opinion, to protect your right to use these
tools we must protect them for Public Opinion. Some regulatory
agencies understand the need to protect these tools and will stand up
to say while others have been beat up so bad over the years that they
take the path of least resistance. We need to think about why and
where we use devices so that we maintain the choice to use them.
Because:
Even
if you are Legal you might be Wrong in the Court of Public Opinion.
Many unfair regulations have been enacted based on a single event.
One emotional accident can cause unfair changes affecting many
aspects of wildlife management. Indiscrete drowning of a raccoon has
caused a lot of regulatory changes in CT. And the outlawing of
bodygrip traps in NE was all about a domestic animal being captured
in an illegally set trap…… by an illegally roaming Dog.
How
to decide if People or Pets might be exposed to your equipment.
Today’s
technologies provide many options, however Personal interviews should
not be excluded from your investigations. You must speak to those
other than the one doing the hiring; an agenda might cover relevant
facts. After you have gathered information, verify it!! That is
where technologies come in. Trail cameras are available at all price
ranges. Some send the pictures to you VIA text messaging. It pays
to delay and evaluate. Google Maps and other software are available
free and can be used to provide a very detailed overview of the area
around the complainants’ site or potential trapping area.
Farmer
says “Sure I need them coyotes gone and there are no pets around my
house.” A quick Google map review shows a subdivision of fifty new
houses at the far end of his 600 acre property. Safe to set? Sure,
but now you have information on where to set and what type of set or
trap to use. Reverse the situation and assume the neighborhood
called you to help trap Coyotes killing dogs in the neighborhood.
Back up out of the neighborhood, seek permission from land owner to
set traps on the 600 acre farm away from the other pets to target the
offending Coyotes. In the neighborhood you can assume other dogs and
pets are free roaming and would limit the types of traps possible to
use. Trap on the farm away from the neighborhood and use the most
effective traps available for Canine….Footholds. If it is not a
possibility, then you can choose to use a species-specific trap such
as the Collarum and set in the
backyards targeting only canines.
So the
main points are to know the attributes of your equipment, i.e. is it
species specific and what species might be exposed to the device.
.
Learn How to minimize the real risk and the
perceived risk.
Set
construction; such as covering a groundhog hole to prevent the
entrance of Cats or Dogs and still maintaining the effectiveness of
the 220 or 160 you placed in the hole. Cover with a half-bucket or
simple sheet of hardware cloth. A very simple cheap way of using
effective tools and avoiding domestic animals in downtown suburbia or
on the remote trapline.
Capture Specific Targets Animals
while avoiding others with:
- Set construction.
Considering
the physical space and motions of target animal to limit other
possible captures. i.e. Set made off the ground will avoid all
canines. Traps that are small and very close to attractant will
effectively capture Fox and avoid all large domestic Dogs (Labs).
Set with a step down (Trench) will be available to canines and
avoided by livestock.
b.
Equipment available.
Species-specific
devices, i.e. Collarum,, Dog
Proof traps of varied designs are new and very effective. Learn
about them and their uses. Snares are one of the oldest tools
available and most misunderstood. Definitions and legal wording of
regulations prohibit some of the most advanced tools today. They can
be as passive as putting a collar and leash on an animal by the
simple action of an animal walking down a path. The animal is
restrained by the act of the collar closing from the pressure of its
body against the cable. The closing can be stopped at any place on
the cable with a stop. As an example a snare can be placed in a
trail and the coyote or Dog walks along and its head goes thru the
snare and the upper part of its body makes contact with h lower edge
of the snare loop and the loop closes. The closure stops at the
“stop” or the neck of the animal. Now it is on a leash. If
nothing is there to entangle, or jump over, or put continued pressure
than the animal is there live, to deal with upon arrival. In a
city/urban environment that means a twelve to 24 hour check and
release or removal of the animal. In a remote area with no chance of
capturing a domestic animal the animal is alive and vulnerable to
predation by eagles, Lions, Larger predators. In the rural areas
that do not have the risk of non-targets then a lethal snare would be
a much more humane option, however back in the city, around People
and Pets, a Non Lethal Snare, some times called a cable restraint is
an absolute must use. Learn about snares, there components and
attributes that make them lethal verses non lethal as the situation
calls for..
c.
Baits and Lures.
Understand
the intended reaction of lures/baits from animals and how this can be
used to lessen the attractiveness to others, i.e. sweet lures are
less attractive to Canines and still very attractive to other
predators like Skunks and Raccoons. If you are targeting an
aggressive Coyote in spring, a blended flat set with Gland Lure and
coyote urine will be very aggressively be worked by a Coyote. A food
lure set (dirt hole) would be a maybe, at best for an aggressive
Coyote, however very attractive to Raccoons, so if your target was
the Coyote it would be better to use the Gland Lure/Urine combination
verses a food lure. Trapping with cages are much more forgiving if a
non target is captured, however if you are trapping Raccoons in or
near areas that are also frequented by people and pets why not use a
newer DP from Duke, a Lil Griz or Dagger and eliminate the chance of
capturing a Dog, legal or not.
Please
provide your thoughts and ideas that might help share this message to
WCO’s and Fur Trappers.
Tim
Julien
Wednesday, April 11, 2012
Mole FAQs
Now that Mole Season is upon us, here are a few Frequently Asked Questions about moles!
- How long do moles live? Moles may live for up to 7 years, however, more than 85% die in the first 3 years.
- What and how much do moles eat? Moles are opportunistic feeders and consume almost anything they can catch. Earthworms are the main component of their diet, however, insects and mollusks make up the majority of the other prey. Moles usually eat three times a day. An adult consumes about 1/8 pound of food per day.
- When are moles most active? Moles have 3 periods of activity: 2-7 am., 11-4 pm., and 8-ll pm. Times may vary with location and with the time of the year. For example, males are more active in February and March to search for receptive females. On the other hand, females are more active in May and June when they need more food for nursing their young. Moles spend nearly half of their time sleeping.
- What is the typical litter size and how many litters will a female have per year? Litter sizes range from 2-8 with an average of 4. Gestation period is thought to be around 28 days. If conditions are not favorable, the female may reabsorb the embryos she is carrying. Most experts believe that a female may have up to three litters per year.
- How do moles communicate? Smell is very well developed in moles. Both males and females produce glandular secretions that empty into the urinary tract. The amount and composition of these secretions changes during breeding season.
- How many different species of moles occur in the US? There are 7 species of moles. The two most common are the eastern mole (Scalopus aquari-cus) and the star-nosed mole (Condylura cristata). Both occur east of the Rockies.
- Can moles swim? All moles can swim it’the need arises. They have been observed to swim up to an hour and to cover a distance of over a half mile. The star-nosed mole is semi-acquatic and often obtains its food underwater. Members of this species are usually found in low- lying areas near water. In fact, their tunnels may exit into ponds or streams.
- How do moles dig? The front legs are greatly enlarged and point at right angles to the body. While digging, the legs are swept from front to back in a horizontal plane. This power stroke moves the body forward and either dislodges the soil or pushes it outward forming the tunnels. Moles can dig at approx. 18 ft. per hour.
- Do moles have different tunnels? Yes, they usually have two types – surface tunnels and deep tunnels. Surface tunnels have visible, raised portions above the ground. These are particularly common in recently disturbed soils, sandy soils, and in terrains where food is found just below the surface. Surface tunnels are more easily dug but appear to be more temporary, especially when their prey goes deeper in the soil due to drought or cold temperature. Deep tunnels ranging from two inches to five feet are more commonly used. This requires the mole to place mounds of dirt above the surface of the lawn.
- Are the number of mounds a good indicator of the number of moles in a given area? No.
- How are moles controlled? There are several ways of getting rid of moles. These include trapping, poisoning, and using chemicals to eliminate potential food sources such as earthworms and insect grubs from the soil. Most people find the latter two methods unacceptable because they are either too dangerous to use or they have long-term adverse effects on the environment.
- What is the best mole trap to use? The first factor to consider is efficacy. Will the trap catch moles ? A very important second factor is safety. Many traps have dangerous features such as the sharp spears or a device that acts as a strong choker. Because many of these products protrude above ground, they are a potential danger to children and pets. Many operators/consumers are concerned about cost. This is especially true if many traps are needed. Another factor is longevity, basically, will the trap offer several seasons of service ? All of these factors should be considered when choosing a mole trap.
Check our Mole Control Products!
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Virginia Legislature Urged to Oppose TNR
On February 27, TWS wrote to members of the Virginia House of Representatives Agriculture Subcommittee in strong opposition of SB 359, which would allow the establishment of trap-neuter-release (TNR) programs in Virginia and exempt program participants of the legal responsibilities of cat ownership. TWS is concerned about the effects of implementing TNR as the accepted method of feral cat control because of the serious harm it poses to native wildlife and potential negative effects on human health. Feral cats are non-native predators that prey on native wildlife and can be a vector for spreading diseases and parasites to human and wildlife populations. On February 8, The Virginia State Senate passed SB 359 but the measure was later rejected by the House after receiving oral and written testimony in opposition to the legislation.
Environment Committee MEETING Sun Hunt, etc.; Animal Rights msg
Environment Committee MEETING AGENDA Wednesday, March 21, 2012 1:30 PM in Room 2D of the LOB
III. BILLS FOR FINAL ACTION
1. S.B. No. 83 (RAISED) AN ACT AUTHORIZING BOW AND ARROW HUNTING ON SUNDAY UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES. JFS
2. S.B. No. 92 (RAISED) AN ACT CONCERNING THE DISPOSAL AND COLLECTION OF UNUSED MEDICATION. JFS
3. S.B. No. 267 (RAISED) AN ACT CONCERNING CLEAN AND ALTERNATIVE FUEL VEHICLES. JF ◊ Finance, Revenue and Bonding
4. S.B. No. 347 (RAISED) AN ACT CONCERNING THE STATE'S OPEN SPACE PLAN. JF
5. S.B. No. 348 (RAISED) AN ACT CONCERNING WATER CONSERVATION. JF
6. S.B. No. 351 (RAISED) AN ACT CONCERNING CERTAIN CEMETERY EROSION MITIGATION EFFORTS WITHIN THE COASTAL BOUNDARY. JF
7. S.B. No. 376 (RAISED) AN ACT CONCERNING THE COASTAL MANAGEMENT ACT AND SHORELINE FLOOD AND EROSION CONTROL STRUCTURES. JF
8. H.B. No. 5116 (RAISED) AN ACT REQUIRING THE LABELING OF FOOD PACKAGING THAT CONTAINS BISPHENOL-A. JFS
9. H.B. No. 5117 (RAISED) AN ACT CONCERNING GENETICALLY-ENGINEERED FOODS. JF
10. H.B. No. 5121 (RAISED) AN ACT CONCERNING THE USE OF ORGANIC PESTICIDES ON SCHOOL PROPERTY AND AUTHORIZING MUNICIPAL REGULATION OF THE USE OF PESTICIDES ON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. JF
11. H.B. No. 5258 (RAISED) AN ACT PERMITTING THE POSSESSION OF REINDEER YEAR ROUND. JF
12. H.B. No. 5261 (RAISED) AN ACT CONCERNING THE HUNTING OF DEER WITH A PISTOL. JFS
13. H.B. No. 5304 (RAISED) AN ACT CONCERNING CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS PAID IN LIEU OF FINES FOR HUNTING AND FISHING VIOLATIONS. JFS
14. H.B. No. 5412 (RAISED) AN ACT CONCERNING THE OPERATION OF CERTAIN VESSELS REGISTERED WITH MARINE DEALER REGISTRATION NUMBERS. JF
15. H.B. No. 5413 (RAISED) AN ACT CONCERNING INVASIVE PLANTS. JF ◊ Appropriations
16. H.B. No. 5446 (RAISED) AN ACT CONCERNING THE PAYMENT PROCEDURE FOR THE STERILIZATION AND VACCINATION OF CERTAIN DOGS AND CATS AND PROVIDING FOR ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICER TRAINING. JF
Important that members in the District Branford, Durham, Guilford, Killingworth, Madison & North Branford call/e-mail Senator Meyer as soon as possible to support bow hunting on Sundays. Call, e-mail other members of the committee (below) paticularly if you Rep./Sen. is on the committee. How to Find Your Legislators: http://www.cga.ct.gov/maps/townlist.asp
Animal Rights Forwarded message.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Julie Lewin <jlewin@igc.org>
Date: Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 5:54 PM
Subject: Call Sen Meyer NOW to stop Sunday bowhunting
To: Julie Lewin <jlewin@igc.org>
CALL SENATOR MEYER MONDAY TO
STOP SUNDAY BOWHUNTING
Give your street address to show you're a constituent
Dear ERP Friends,
Our State Senator Ed Meyer is poised to support Senate Bill 83, which opens the door to Sunday hunting. He has huge influence on the fate of this bill, because he's Senate Chair of the legislative committee that's considering it. THE VOTE WILL BE NEXT WEEK OR MONDAY MARCH 26. He will stop the bill if he hears from enough of you and other constituents.
DEEP's hunting division and the hunters' lobby have tried for decades to legalize Sunday hunting. This bill would cross a fatal threshold, so further expansions are assured. I lobbied against Sunday hunting for years in the statehouse and helped defeat it multiple times. I know well Sunday hunting proponents' strategy.
The excuse, of course, is deer overpopulation, BUT:
- Bowhunting is extremely unproductive, so clearly the intent is actually sport, not to reduce deer density in any statistically meaningful way.
- It's the cruelest form of hunting by far. Its "crippling rate"—wounding without recovering the animal—is often estimated at 50% by hunters themselves. This condemns wounded deer to horrid slow deaths.
- Hunters already have 6 days a week! Their and DEEP's fervent goal is to legalize full Sunday hunting with all weapons in all state forests and private lands where the owner allows it.
"SB 53 Authorizing Bowhunting under Certain Circumstances" would allow bowhunting on privately owned land in zones DEEP determines have high deer densities. DEEP's past the bills would have authorized all Sunday hunting, so they've adopted this strategy to get there.
For more info call me at 203-453-6590. Thanking you, Julie Lewin
********
Meyer@senatedems.ct.gov; Maynard@senatedems.ct.gov; Andrew.Roraback@cga.ct.gov; Richard.Roy@cga.ct.gov; Bryan.Hurlburt@cga.ct.gov; Clark.Chapin@housegop.ct.gov; Terry.Backer@cga.ct.gov; Paul.Davis@cga.ct.gov; Dan.Fox@cga.ct.gov; Jack.Hennessy@cga.ct.gov; Geoff.Luxenberg@cga.ct.gov; Robert.Megna@cga.ct.gov; Philip.Miller@cga.ct.gov; Edward.Moukawsher@cga.ct.gov; Mary.Mushinsky@cga.ct.gov; Kim.Rose@cga.ct.gov; Diana.Urban@cga.ct.gov; Roberta.Willis@cga.ct.gov; Christopher.Wright@cga.ct.gov; Elissa.Wright@cga.ct.gov; Kevin.Ryan@cga.ct.gov; Fred.Camillo@housegop.ct.gov; len.greene@housegop.ct.gov; Tony.Hwang@housegop.ct.gov; Lawrence.G.Miller@housegop.ct.gov; Craig.Miner@housegop.ct.gov; John.Piscopo@housegop.ct.gov; John.Rigby@housegop.ct.gov; john.shaban@housegop.ct.gov;
Saturday, March 10, 2012
Alan Huot thought you might be interested in this article
 | |
|
Saturday, March 03, 2012
State Rep. Diana Urban
When CT State Rep. Diana Urban couldn't get the Environment Committee to promote her "Ban the Leghold Trap" bill she took it to the Select Committee on Children which she co-chairs !
Now never mind that there has never been a bona-fide report to a law enforement agency of a child being threatened or harmed by a leghold trap, Rep. Urban sees fit to waste the legislatures time with a non-issue. That a child has never been harmed by a leghold trap in CT is testament to the DEEP's already restrictive regulations governing these devices.
When are the citizens of North Stonington & Stonington going to wake up and stop sending Ms. Urban back to the CT legislature which she uses to promote her own personal animal rights agenda ?
Thursday, March 01, 2012
Ban the LegHold Trap bill in CT Legislature
CT Legislator Diana Urban has introduced a bill in the legislature which is a thinly disguised attempt to Ban the LegHold Trap ! Rep. Urban has promoted this personal agenda for several years, although this time is taking a different approach and introducing the bill through the Committee on Children versus Environment where bills of this nature are found typically.
Although there has never been one documented instance of a child being harmed in any way by a legally set leghold (foothold) trap in CT, Rep. Urban wants to apparently SAVE them from even the thought of anything happening ! BRAVO !!!
While CT faces high unemployment, foreclosures, violence in our cities, poverty, etc. the list goes on, Rep. Urban chooses to focus her attention on an issue where there IS NO PROBLEM !!
General Assembly
Raised Bill No. 5324
February Session, 2012
LCO No. 1438
*01438_______KID*
Referred to Committee on Select 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, 2012):
(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 thousand five 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, public road, public highway, 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 thousand five 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, 2012
26-72
Statement of Purpose:
To restrict the placement of leghold traps within one thousand five 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.]
14th Annual New England Nuisance Wildlife Control Seminar
Welcome to the 14th Annual New England
Nuisance Wildlife Control Seminar.
Presented by
Connecticut Nuisance Wildlife Control Operators Association.
7:00-8:00 Registration
8:00-8:45 Chuck Phillips, Access Distribution – Chimney Caps
8:45-9:15 Jim Pace, Christian-Baker Ins. Co.- NCWO Insurance Updates
9:00-10:00 Neal Earl, ATF – Explosive Pest Control Devices Regulations
10:00-10:15 Break/ Visit Vendors
10:15-11:15 Rick Shadel, CWCP, S&S Professional Wildlife- Moles, Voles & Shrew
11:15-12:00 Rick Jacobson, CT DEEP – NWCO and DEEP Updates
12:00-1:00 Lunch/ Visit Vendors
1:00-2:00 Janette Dion, Express Verizon Wireless – Using Technology to Your Advantage
2:00-3:00 Jim Dreisacker, Westchester Wildlife, LLC. – Bat Exclusion
3:00-3:15 Break/ Visit Vendors
3:15-4:15 Don LaFountain,CWCP, Integrated Wildlife Control – Beaver Control
4:15-5:15 Rick Shadel, CWCP,S&S Professional Wildlife – Charging What You’re Worth
5:15-6:00 Alan Huot, CWCP, Wildlife Control Supplies – Tools of the Trade
Todd Moran, Trap Alert – Electronic Trap Monitoring
Thank you for attending the 14th Annual New England
Nuisance Wildlife Control Seminar.
We hope to see you again next year.
Friday, January 27, 2012
Alan Huot thought you might be interested in this article
| |
|
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Hawaii Builds a Predator Fence
Hawai'i Builds First Predator Proof Fence in U.S.
Hawai'i has erected the first predator-proof fence in the U.S., which is successfully keeping mice, rats, dogs, cats and mongooses from eating seabird eggs and chicks on the northwestern shore of the island of Oahu. Hawai'i's Department of Land and Natural Resources, the Hawai'i Chapter of the Wildlife Society, and other community groups collaborated on the project, which marks a significant milestone in a continuing battle to recover endangered bird species threatened by predation by invasive species.
The 2,040 foot long, 6.5 foot high fence consists of a high-tech metal mesh which can keep terrestrial predators from ground–nesting seabird nest sites. The FWS funded the $270,000 fence, which was installed last March around 59 acres of the Ka'ena Point Natural Area Reserve. Following installation, biologists conducted an extensive effort to trap and remove predators from within the enclosure. The initial results are encouraging, with chick survival at its highest for some species since the 1990s. The overhanging fence keeps animals from climbing over, and an underground mesh skirt keeps predators from tunneling underneath. Two more fences are being installed in the state, including one which is designed to keep out carnivorous snails. Eventually biologists hope to reintroduce the endangered Hawai'ian petrel (Pterodroma sandwichensis) and Newell's Shearwater (Puffinus newelli) to the reserve. The fence will also benefit native plants as well by keeping rats from eating native plant seeds.
Sources: E&E Publishing (Landletter, December 15, 2011), Hawai'i Division of Forestry and Wildlife
Horse Slaughter Ban Lifted
Horse Slaughter Ban Lifted
On November 18, 2011 President Obama signed into law the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2012 (H.R. 2112). The legislation, in part, eliminated the "backdoor ban" on horse slaughter by removing language that prohibited funding for inspections, required for the horse slaughter industry to operate. While the bill does not prohibit the expenditure of funds on inspections of horse slaughter facilities for human consumption, it also does not allocate money for it. The U.S. Department of Agriculture would have to allocate funding out from its own budget in order to provide inspections, which the agency says it will do if slaughterhouses open.
A recent report from the Government Accountability Office, which prompted the reversal, found that the ban was backfiring since it only shifted slaughter from the U.S. to Canada and Mexico where U.S. humane slaughter laws could not be enforced. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and the Humane Society of the United States support the reversal because the consequences of the ban have proven detrimental to horse welfare. However, some animal rights groups want bans implemented on horse slaughter in the U.S. as well as on the live export of horses for slaughter. The American Horse Slaughter Prevention Act of 2011 has been introduced in support of this aim in both the House (H.R. 2966), and the Senate (S. 1176).
The Wildlife Society (TWS) recognizes the ecological damage caused by wild horses and burros (WHB) and supports euthanasia as a humane method for removal of unadoptable horses, as detailed in its Position Statement on Feral Horses and Burros in North America. Agencies charged with managing WHB populations, such as the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), rarely employ euthanasia. However, with nearly 40,000 WHBs now roaming BLM-managed lands and virtually no natural predators to control populations, herds can double every four years, creating a pressing need for realistic management options. With horse slaughter no longer banned in the U.S., federal agencies have the option of employing euthanasia in the form of humane slaughter of WHBs for human consumption. The BLM currently has a policy against selling horses for slaughter, though that policy is shaped by public opinion.
Sources: Animal Law Coalition (November 18, 2011), Cable News Network (November 30, 2011), Christian Science Monitor(November 29, 2011), The Washington Times (November 30, 2011), BLM
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)