No Profanity *** No Flaming *** No Advertising *** No Anti Trappers ***NO POLITICS
No Non-Target Catches *** No Links to Anti-trapping Sites *** No Avoiding Profanity Filter


Home~Trap Talk~ADC Forum~Trap Shed~Wilderness Trapping~International Trappers~Fur Handling

Auction Forum~Trapper Tips~Links~Gallery~Basic Sets~Convention Calendar~Chat~ Trap Collecting Forum

Trapper's Humor~Strictly Trapping~Fur Buyers Directory~Mugshots~Fur Sale Directory~Wildcrafting~The Pen and Quill

Trapper's Tales~Words From The Past~Legends~Archives~Kids Forum~Lure Formulators Forum~ Fermenter's Forum


~~~ Dobbins' Products Catalog ~~~


Minnesota Trapline Products
Please support our sponsor for the Trappers Talk Page - Minnesota Trapline Products


Print Thread
Hop To
Ban on fur-trapping? California lawmakers consider #6443805
01/29/19 02:28 AM
01/29/19 02:28 AM
Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 609
Desert Southwest-CA
DezertTrapper Offline OP
trapper
DezertTrapper  Offline OP
trapper

Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 609
Desert Southwest-CA
Ban on fur-trapping? California lawmakers consider shutting down shrinking industry mad

New bill would ban commercial fur trapping statewide; more than 1,500 mink, foxes and other animals killed annually.

From Jedediah Smith to Kit Carson, fur trapping has been woven into California’s history for nearly 200 years. But state lawmakers in Sacramento are considering killing off the controversial industry for good.

A new bill introduced Thursday and backed by environmental and animal welfare groups would ban commercial fur trapping statewide, bringing to a close the practice of capturing grey foxes, mink, beaver and other wildlife, killing them and selling their pelts to make coats and other clothing.

“We have to look at ourselves and say ‘is this really necessary any more?’” said Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez, D-San Diego, the bill’s author. “There are a lot of things that are part of our history that we’ve done away with.”

In 2017, the most recent year for which there is state data, 133 people in California held commercial trapper’s licenses, according to the state Department of Fish and Wildlife. Of those, 68 trapped 1,568 animals that year, including grey foxes, coyotes, beavers, badgers and minks.

Supporters of the bill, Assembly Bill 273, argue that killing the animals is cruel. They say it depletes important predators from local wildlife populations, and that the amount of money raised through the sale of trapping licenses — $15,544 in 2017 — doesn’t begin to cover the state’s costs.

“It’s an antiquated, ecologically destructive practice that doesn’t belong in 21st century California,” said Brendan Cummings, conservation director with the Center for Biological Diversity, an environmental group backing the bill. “Taking native wildlife out of their habitat and killing them for their fur no longer belongs in California,” he said. “It makes no sense economically, ecologically or ethically.”

But the commercial trappers, who once numbered more than 3,000 in the mid-1980s in California, say the push is the latest attempt by urban residents to chip away at hunting and trapping practices common in rural counties.

“The politicians are always listening to the fuzzy wuzzy animal rights activists,” said Reid Aiton, a 77-year-old trapper in Humboldt County who has been trapping animals since he was 8 years old. “They don’t trap. They don’t want you to trap. They don’t hunt, they don’t want you to hunt. This state is so out of whack.”

Aiton noted that in 1998, California voters banned steel-jaw and padded leg-hold traps when they approved Proposition 4, a statewide ballot measure.

“How can it be cruel?” he said. “All we can use now is cage traps. Nothing can be more humane than a cage trap. If you get a target animal, you humanely euthanize it. If you get a non-target animal you let it go.”

Animals trapped in cages don’t suffer because they are killed with one shot to the head, he said.

California would be the first state to to impose such a far-reaching ban on commercial trapping, if the bill passes. Aiton said that as the fur industry has reduced in size in the United States, the remaining trappers in California often sell to Russian and Chinese companies. He argued that the animals that are being trapped are common, like coyotes, and not endangered species.

“If you went to Wyoming or Montana or any of those states where they intelligently manage wildlife, they do protect species that need protecting, but they don’t protect species that don’t need protecting,” he said. “The animal rights movement here is insane. They are insane.”

The bill would not prohibit trapping animals that damage farms or property, like skunks living under private homes, coyotes killing chickens on farms or beavers building dams that cause flooding.

In a major blow to the trapping industry, animal welfare groups won a victory in 2015 when the state Fish and Game Commission banned trapping of bobcats. That move came after state lawmakers passed a bill three years earlier requiring the commission to prohibit bobcat trapping or raise license fees to cover the costs of administering the program. River otters and red foxes are also banned from trapping in California.

The groups supporting the latest bill tried to convince the commission to apply the same standard for all trapping, but it chose not to implement a wider ban so they headed to the Legislature.

Gonzalez, who serves as chairwoman of the Assembly Appropriations Committee, said that the state shouldn’t be losing money subsidizing a dwindling industry. Her bill notes that in 2017, a total of 1,241 commercially trapped animals were reported sold, generating an estimated total of $4,531 for the trappers.

“I’m not too concerned about the displacement,” she said. “There’s not much left of the industry. I’m surprised we’re subsidizing it as a state.”

Gonzalez added that she doesn’t personally own fur and that there are many synthetic alternatives.

As a result of concerns about cruelty, in recent years, some major apparel brands have abandoned animal fur, including Burberry, Versace, Gucci, Michael Kors, Armani, Tom Ford, Stella McCartney, Tommy Hilfiger, Ralph Lauren and Calvin Klein.

Aiton, who said his family dates back to the 1850s in California, is the state director of the National Trappers Association. He said his group will try to fight the bill, but doesn’t expect to make much difference.

“If you want my opinion, trapping in California is dead,” he said. “For all practical purposes, they have killed the industry.”


https://www.chicoer.com/2019/01/28/...d4XOt-0cFYld4F_jvfQp0Y2JRmv2ImmRrI2l10WU


Member NTA
Member NRA
Platinum Member: School of Hard Knocks
Re: Ban on fur-trapping? California lawmakers consider [Re: DezertTrapper] #6443811
01/29/19 02:48 AM
01/29/19 02:48 AM
Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 609
Desert Southwest-CA
DezertTrapper Offline OP
trapper
DezertTrapper  Offline OP
trapper

Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 609
Desert Southwest-CA

SACRAMENTO – (Thursday, Jan. 24, 2019) – California Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez (D - San Diego) is calling for a statewide ban on fur trapping with introduction of Assembly Bill 273 on Thursday to end the costly program that destroys wildlife for commercial purposes.

“Not only does the cruel fur trapping trade decimate our increasingly vulnerable wildlife populations, running this program doesn’t even make fiscal policy sense,” Assemblywoman Gonzalez said. “Taxpayers are subsidizing this unnecessary commercial activity because the cost of managing this program isn’t even covered by the revenue from trapping license fees.”

Hundreds of coyotes, foxes, badgers and other fur-bearing animals are trapped each year in California so their pelts can be sold for a profit overseas. Because individual trappers concentrate their operations in limited geographical areas, they can locally deplete populations of the species they target, impairing the ecological functioning of the area and diminishing opportunities for wildlife watching in these areas.

In 2017, a total of 133 trapping licenses were sold to fur trappers in California, generating approximately $15,000 to the Department of Fish and Wildlife. Given this revenue generated by the sale of trapping licenses would only cover a fraction of the costs of even a single warden, proper management and enforcement of a fur trapping program would cost far more than the revenue generated by licenses, resulting in a de facto subsidy of commercial fur trapping.

Similarly, the minimal revenue generated by the sale of the furs of the animals killed by trappers is dwarfed by the millions of dollars that non-consumptive wildlife watching generates in California’s economy, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

In 2015, the California Fish and Game Commission voted to make California the first state to ban the commercial trapping of bobcats and it noted the program’s funding shortfall as a key role in the decision. River otters and red foxes are also banned from trapping in the state.

“California should not be subsidizing the destruction of our wildlife for the private profit of a few. This bill is an important step in ending an antiquated and cruel practice and bringing Californians wildlife management in line with the values of the overwhelming majority of Californian’s who value our wildlife alive, not as commodities to be killed and skinned for foreign fur markets,” said Brendan Cummings, Conservation Director at the Center for Biological Diversity, who are cosponsoring the legislation

AB 273 addresses the funding shortfall in the state’s fur trapping program by banning the practice in California. The measure also protects our vulnerable wildlife.

“California’s ecosystem is among the most fragile in the world, and our wildlife is already under constant threat from wildfire, drought, and development – the last thing they need is to try to survive an outdated and heartless fur trapping policy that only benefits a wealthy few overseas,” said Judie Mancuso, Founder and President of Social Compassion in Legislation, also a cosponsor of the bill. “Californians want to protect our wildlife, and this bill does just that. I urge the legislature to pass it quickly on behalf of the animals across our state, and the people who care about them.”

Commercial animal trapping can involve killing animals through strangulation, gassing and anal electrocution in order to ensure undamaged pelts. This cruel and inhumane practice has led many famous brands to commit to going fur-free, including companies like: Burberry, Versace, Gucci, Michael Kors, Armani, Tom Ford, Stella McCartney, Tommy Hilfiger, Ralph Lauren, Calvin Klein, among others.

For more information on this issue or to schedule an interview with Assemblywoman Gonzalez, contact Sami Gallegos (209) 658-7617.
https://soundcloud.com/user-5477928...on-act-of-2019-seeks-to-end-fur-trapping


https://a80.asmdc.org/press-release...s-all-commercial-fur-trapping-california


Member NTA
Member NRA
Platinum Member: School of Hard Knocks
Re: Ban on fur-trapping? California lawmakers consider [Re: DezertTrapper] #6443813
01/29/19 02:57 AM
01/29/19 02:57 AM

W
Wylee
Unregistered
Wylee
Unregistered
W



Not surprized. Oregon has a rich beaver trapping history and none of those fruit canoes care there either. Nothing we can say will persuade them. The idiocy is growing. These are the same dick holes that hang from a bridge with rope made from oil protesting oil production.

Re: Ban on fur-trapping? California lawmakers consider [Re: DezertTrapper] #6445018
01/30/19 02:36 AM
01/30/19 02:36 AM
Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 609
Desert Southwest-CA
DezertTrapper Offline OP
trapper
DezertTrapper  Offline OP
trapper

Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 609
Desert Southwest-CA
If this was any other state, folks would be having a fit.

I guess we truly are on our own out here.

But beware, this stuff spreads like cancer, your state may be next.


Member NTA
Member NRA
Platinum Member: School of Hard Knocks
Re: Ban on fur-trapping? California lawmakers consider [Re: DezertTrapper] #6445029
01/30/19 04:02 AM
01/30/19 04:02 AM
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 28,747
Eastern Shore of Maryland
HobbieTrapper Offline
"Chippendale Trapper"
HobbieTrapper  Offline
"Chippendale Trapper"

Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 28,747
Eastern Shore of Maryland
Perhaps the trappers out there should block off a highway, turn over a couple cars and set them on fire chanting they want legislators in a blanket.

The state was lost years ago but nobody did anything when it was a snowball.


-Goofy-
Re: Ban on fur-trapping? California lawmakers consider [Re: DezertTrapper] #6445078
01/30/19 07:15 AM
01/30/19 07:15 AM

W
Wylee
Unregistered
Wylee
Unregistered
W



Dezert trust this will happen in Oregon...just a matter of when. The powers in current control of the state care more about whos pees in what bathroom than a "barbaric" form of hunting.

Re: Ban on fur-trapping? California lawmakers consider [Re: DezertTrapper] #6445144
01/30/19 08:59 AM
01/30/19 08:59 AM
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 3,011
ohio
T
tomahawker Offline
trapper
tomahawker  Offline
trapper
T

Joined: May 2009
Posts: 3,011
ohio
How is the government subsidizing it? She claims it’s costing the government, how so?

Re: Ban on fur-trapping? California lawmakers consider [Re: DezertTrapper] #6447804
02/01/19 01:15 PM
02/01/19 01:15 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 21,096
St. Louis Co, Mo
B
BigBob Offline
trapper
BigBob  Offline
trapper
B

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 21,096
St. Louis Co, Mo
And the ones pushing this will scream the loudest when their beloved Fluffy/Fido get's carried off by a 'Yote right in front of them?


Every kid needs a Dog and a Curmudgeon.

Remember Bowe Bergdahl, the traitor.

Beware! Jill Pudlewski, Ron Oates and Keven Begesse are liars and thiefs!
Re: Ban on fur-trapping? California lawmakers consider [Re: DezertTrapper] #6447879
02/01/19 02:56 PM
02/01/19 02:56 PM

O
Oh Snap
Unregistered
Oh Snap
Unregistered
O



The Californication legislature has ran all the business off. I am not surprised that they are eliminating the last remaining free enterprise. The premiere welfare state lives and who was that offering up the bill, what was her last name?

If your an illegal why would obey any law anyway!

Last edited by Oh Snap; 02/01/19 03:08 PM.
Re: Ban on fur-trapping? California lawmakers consider [Re: DezertTrapper] #6447909
02/01/19 04:07 PM
02/01/19 04:07 PM
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 11,217
Armpit, ak
D
Dirt Offline
trapper
Dirt  Offline
trapper
D

Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 11,217
Armpit, ak
[b"]“It makes no sense economically[/b]" Eventually, we will all face this truth used against us. frown


Who is John Galt?
Re: Ban on fur-trapping? California lawmakers consider [Re: DezertTrapper] #6447918
02/01/19 04:16 PM
02/01/19 04:16 PM
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 4,591
MN
D
Donnersurvivor Offline
trapper
Donnersurvivor  Offline
trapper
D

Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 4,591
MN
Democracy is a scam, nothing more than a majority of uninformed monkeys using their power to crush the rights of others. This all started with voter referendums and it wont end until we all live in the concrete jungle getting our food and clothing from corporate farms.

Re: Ban on fur-trapping? California lawmakers consider [Re: tomahawker] #6447920
02/01/19 04:18 PM
02/01/19 04:18 PM
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,097
Washington State
H
humptulips Offline
trapper
humptulips  Offline
trapper
H

Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,097
Washington State
Originally Posted by tomahawker
How is the government subsidizing it? She claims it’s costing the government, how so?


They say license sales don't pay for department management of the trapping program. I'm not sure about CA but in WA that consists of one person who splits her time between trapping and small game. Trapping is the smallest of potatoes in the budget.

Previous Thread
Index
Next Thread