|
Post by rwh on Dec 28, 2005 19:41:02 GMT -5
Heard by word-of-mouth the MBHA suit against the DNR's bobcat management decision to allowing cat trapping in the lower revealed the DNR DID NOT base it's decision on biological data. Meaning the NRC was playing God with the decision making powers. Anyone got the full scoop on this issue?
|
|
|
Post by whitedog61 on Dec 28, 2005 20:27:05 GMT -5
yes rwh i have heard about this, I bear hunt with one of the officers of mbha and he has told me a little, it kinda goes in one ear and out the other lol the dnr did mess up in makeing the rule the way they did and yes they did cut corners, the guy I hunt with should be up soon as the snow gets good to cat hunt and ill drill his brain for some info on this and let you know, have a great day.
|
|
|
Post by rwh on Dec 28, 2005 23:34:22 GMT -5
Thanks Whitedog. In my opinion, if it is verified the DNR did not base their decision to open cat trapping in the lower...based on sound data, and instead misused their authority...the next step should be to pin point who in the DNR "waved the wand" over this deal. The governor needs to remove that individual from the state payroll. It would serve as a good lesson to DNR management that there is accountability.
|
|
|
Post by vancreek on Dec 30, 2005 12:46:35 GMT -5
rwh,i believe that this issue is still playing out in the courts,mbha filed suit last year and i asked about it a few weeks ago,i was told that they were due to be on the docket sometime soon,and i will pass on any info i get.they sued over the fact that the dnr opened trapping in zone c and d without sound biological data to sustain their action,i do not oppose trapping,but feel as though the dnr has done nothing to stop trappers for illegial trapping of cats and then getting them sealed across in zone a.i thought any trap must be checked every 24 hrs and i see alot of illegal bucket sets that are rigged for cat,i replace the safety when i cross them.snares are another abused method that i dont like,the trappers are up in arms over the mbha suit and i fear that if another ballot inisitive comes up to prevent hound hunting we will likely lose the support of the trappers,i sure do hope that does not come to pass.i suppose i should try to attend some of the dnr meeting,might make that my new years resolution.have a great day. jerry
|
|
|
Post by rwh on Dec 31, 2005 18:36:45 GMT -5
Thanks for the info Jerry. I'm starting to get the idea the use of illegal trapping methods are widespread and seldom enforced by the DNR. I do not believe our concerns are anti-trapping...it's more a lack of ethics exhibited by trappers. VC it's like you say...bucket sets, snares, and the illegal use on 220 & 330 conibear type traps are the issue, along with trappers blatantly exceeding the bag limit on cats.
|
|
|
Post by vancreek on Jan 1, 2006 18:41:19 GMT -5
the court ruling is expected on the 11th of january,if so i will post any info i get on how it swings.rwh,i hope you and your wife had a happy new year.still huntin,and as soon as i make a few catchs,i will try to post a pic.have a great day. jerry
|
|
|
Post by rwh on Jan 1, 2006 20:28:20 GMT -5
Hi Jerry...been out of action a couple days. My Mom had to go into a rest home for some rehab, so I had to go visit. Appreciate your keeping an eye on the MBHA suit. Hope you folk's had lots of fun with the little ones at Christmas time.
Rich
|
|
|
Post by vancreek on Jan 2, 2006 15:36:36 GMT -5
sorry to hear that,i hope all works out for your mom,and she gets well soon.jerry
|
|
|
Post by rwh on Jan 4, 2006 8:48:45 GMT -5
VC, my hunting buddy Fred sent me a copy of MBHA's Bear Facts with information on the bobcat suit against the DNR. In the trial the state argued a trapping season is harmless because of 4 pieces of scientific evidence...MBHA's side revealed only one of the four pieces even existed April 12, 2004 when the DNR recommended the trapping season. That one piece of evidence was a trend indicator...and Dr. Dwayne Etter, the DNR's furbearer researcher testified that a scientist needs more than one trend indicator to judge the health of a bobcat population. Bottomline here is if MBHA wins, those individuals in the DNR that misused their power and have inflicted harm to the resource (bobcat population) by their actions...need to be removed from DNR employment to make sure they do not have any more opportunities to mismanage our resources.
Rich
|
|
|
Post by vancreek on Jan 4, 2006 17:53:31 GMT -5
i agree with you,although the year prior everything was set up all the mbha,upbha,tomh,and mucc had to do was get on the same sheet of music,they didnt and suggested that the dnr keep things the same with same bag limits,the info was submitted to all of their board of directors and they did nothing.i know of some who are no longer directors or care to even be active in these organization and believe it is a tragic loss,all do to politics played by some.i wish there was some way that these groups could do more to unite all of us sportsman instead of divideing and spiting into clicks.wisconsin bear hunters have their act together and work on behalf of all their members,raise more money at their banquets,and if this could happen we would be better off for the future of hounding.i hope that this suit will expose the dnr for what they are doing,mismanagement of natural resourses,but i dont know how the ruling will be decided.i hope the judge is not an anti,i guess we will see.have a nice day. jerry
|
|
|
Post by rwh on Jan 4, 2006 19:59:16 GMT -5
Jerry, I agree with you 100%. MUCC, MBHA, UPBHA are stagnant and cannot hold a candle to the Wisconsin Bear Hunters Association. Based on what I read, the judge in the MBHA suit against the DNR was petitioned by the state to drop the case and she refused...forcing the matter to trial. I believe the DNR is going to lose the case. For what ever it's worth, if the DNR does lose I plan on writing my state rep and our state senator requesting they do their part in holding the DNR game managers directly involved in this thing to be held accountable. Actually, the governor ought to scrap the NRC, too. With an election year coming up this could get kinda real. Letters-to-the-editor in newspapers around the state would do a lot to motivate state politicians to hold them accountable.
|
|
|
Post by vancreek on Jan 14, 2006 12:10:40 GMT -5
looks as though the 11th was the date for rebuttal arguements.the mbha had a meeting today so i hope to have more info.i doubpt that the judge will make a ruling before the end of the month.maybe whitedog has more info,if so i believe he will let us know.jerry
|
|
|
Post by whitedog61 on Jan 14, 2006 17:10:06 GMT -5
hey guys I dont have much to report, but ill try to get ahold of my friend in mbha and see what he has to say, as far as hunting goes i tryed a track couple days ago, it looked good, but the old dogs says it was 2 days old, he never would open on the track, so I lost the hole day messing with that old track, now the snow is hard enuff for me to drive my toyota across any open field, or pretty much any where i want, have a great day.
|
|
|
Post by whitedog61 on Jan 25, 2006 7:28:38 GMT -5
well I talked with a friend of mine, with mbha and he says it dont look good and that mbha isnt going to spend any more money on this law suit, he did say it will how ever change the way they(dnr) do things from now on and that it would take a pile more money if they pushed for a win, he say the way courts and lawers do thing it could be wraped up in court for years and it sounded to me like they was going to step down do to the large amount of money it would take for a win, I hope this helps the way things are done from now on but, with goverment its hard, they are so backwards and the goverment is so hard to fight it isnt even funny, now I hear the trappers are blameing the hound hunters for the new rules the dnr passed on the snares, I would think if the hound hunters where to push any thing it would be to get all types of leathel sets off dry ground not what the dnr did, I just dont understand the trappers, I guess they feel they should have the hole state to them selves, I feel the trappers are very selfish, all we the hound hunters ask for is dont kill are dogs and they could care less, all they say is dont do this or dont do that and we can get along, well they have to not do this and not do that as we ask and they cant seem to meet in the middle, I could under stand some of this BS if fur prices where high like they where 20 years ago, when snares and conibars where illeagle to set on dry ground or above the ice, which they where intended for to be set under the ice, but no you give a pig something and he all ways wants more, you mark my word, some day some thing very bad is going to happen, one of these days some bodys child is going to get hurt realy bad in a snare or conibar trap or killed, till then we have to keep a very close eye on are children and dogs, what a shame.
|
|
|
Post by rwh on Jan 25, 2006 9:18:38 GMT -5
Thanks for the info Whitedog. Leave it to MBHA to start something it can't finish. Sounds like their lawyers would have advised them...what they were getting into and what it would take. Over here in the western U.P. it's looking like the trappers over harvest has about come to an end...there isn't much left. Fisher numbers are way down (and porcupines numbers are back big time) cats are hard to come by (here), not many beaver left...which comes from the modern day practice of taking the last beaver from the pond and not leaving any for seed...and of course the exploding wolf population also gets it's share, too...coyote numbers are about half what they were last year (here), maybe because they don't do well around all these wolves. Throw in the high price of gasoline used to run a trap line and it looks like the trappers won't have much to enjoy in the immediate future.
|
|