Owen Sound Times Articles

Sounds like there's no appetite for self regulation by the Trappers or for accountability of the Trappers involved from the MNR's perspective. Would seem pretty simple not to sell them to people who aren't supposed to have them if that reg's already on the books. The Trapper's association is shooting themselves in the foot by not acknowledging this is a problem and working on solutions. They will continue to get crucified in the court of public opinion on social media and eventually they will have legislation pushed upon them for failing to be proactive and getting ahead of the problem.

Fenelon I’m not going to take this any farther , I’m going to be in north bay , stop by and we can talk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by be2man

Sounds like there's no appetite for self regulation by the Trappers or for accountability of the Trappers involved from the MNR's perspective. Would seem pretty simple not to sell them to people who aren't supposed to have them if that reg's already on the books. The Trapper's association is shooting themselves in the foot by not acknowledging this is a problem and working on solutions. They will continue to get crucified in the court of public opinion on social media and eventually they will have legislation pushed upon them for failing to be proactive and getting ahead of the problem.

---

Very reasonable position to take and I am sure shared by the majority on this forum.When they do not self regulate the government will do it for them and life is even more difficult.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

Very reasonable position to take and I am sure shared by the majority on this forum.When they do not self regulate the government will do it for them and life is even more difficult.

---

it seems the bulk of this problem is in certain areas of the province, certainly not everywhere

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenelon

Dano O, there is absolutely no reason why body gripper kill traps need to be set on the ground, other than it's a perceived right for trappers to do so because it's allowed in the regs. I've trapped for 35 years now and all my fisher, marten, and racoon sets are elevated out of dog range, using either a pail or box cubby on a running pole. I've never had any problem luring the target animal to run the pole to encounter the baited cubby. Any trapper that argues you'll catch more on the ground in a blind trail set, etc. has not been trapping for very long. Why would you want the animal trapped on the ground anyway, as there is a very good chance it will get damaged grade from mice, soiled fur , and possibly belly taint from the part of the carcass that was insulated from contact with the ground. How can you feel OK about leaving a baited kill trap on the ground knowing that there is a very good chance someone's dog is going to die in it? Did your neighbour's yellow Lab from two farms over read the latest copy of the regs before he did his daily walk across the property to come visit the kids and play with your dog. So you have a registered line on crown land that gives you the privelege to be the sole manager of the fur populations on that block of land. How can you possibly not think of the others who will also legally access and use that same piece of land? eg. the licenced hunter who's walking all the trails with his pointer, hoping to shoot a grouse, the hunter running two beagles on snowshoe hare, the couple from the city who are at the cottage and bring the kids and dog for a walk in the bush. The dog is legally off leash, under supervision and control by the owner, not "running at large" as specified by definition under the FWCA, but goes and investigates something that smells real good, 50 yds off the trail they're walking on. So as a trapper, you're going to argue that they should have known better and you have the right to set your kill traps on the ground?
There's a pile of non-thinking going on and OFMF is not seeing the trees because of the forest on this one. They're investing all their time and resources in an attempt to do damage control on the never -ending wave of dog kill events, while adamantly resisting any logical improvement to the regulations. They should be leading the push to revise the regs.
The public has had enough and rightly so. Social media and petitions will force regulation changes soon once MNR gets pressured. I wonder if there will be any industry left.

---

Sorry guys, I haven't checked this thread for a while. Fenelon, your response is about the same as the response I got from an Eastern Ontario trapper I visited with while hunting one day. Thanks for the detailed post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trappermatt

it seems the bulk of this problem is in certain areas of the province, certainly not everywhere

---

Trappermatt you summed it up! In Eastern Ontario I hunt with my cocker without any concerns. In Grey and Bruce county I don't hunt with a dog. Can't risk it!

I get that the Trappers association don't want to be told what to do by government, then I'd suggest you solve the problem yourselves before you get regulated.

Sometimes people do not do the right thing, even when they know it to be true, and are forced to by law, instead of by their
conscience.:ashamed: They are also the ones, that usually say, that there is too much government intervention in our lives.

Matt's right that this dog/trap issue is not a problem everywhere in the province. A trapper running a registered line up north in the boreal forest would be wondering what all the commotion is about. A baited/lured ground cubby up there is only going to connect eventually with a furbearer. It's common to see baited 330 cubby sets on the ground for lynx in many areas. The problem is in the high density populated areas of the province, mainly southern and central Ontario, or the rural limits of larger cities.
The townships that prohibit suspended land snaring are probably also the same areas in the province that are having the dog catches. Whatever changes occur will probably need to be applied to these same areas.

There are some good options available to trappers to make your sets dog proof, but the problem is they're suggested and encouraged, but not regulation. Fur Manager's has an excellent publication that shows how to make good dogproof cubbies. I really like the double pail set for raccoon that's illustrated. Two square plastic icecream pails wired mouth to mouth, with the set 160 or 220 trap in the middle of the two pails. The trap is 16-18" recessed from the pail opening. The cut hole for access to the pail can be cut any size for animal entry. A 5" hole would let any fisher I've caught in, but would stop any medium or large breed dog from getting near the trap. Most of the caught dogs appear to be larger breed retrievers, hunting hounds, etc. Only problem would be if someone was walking a small toy breed or terrier, etc. then I could still see an issue with it gaining access. If coon prices ever came back, I'd seriously look at using the new "paw catch" leghold traps that are specific for raccoon. You can set them right on the ground, even in high density dog areas like around farm houses, barns, poultry coops, etc. and you're only going to connect with a raccoon. I can't personally comment on them much as I've never gave them a try.