ADC Trapper Forum

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

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


~~~ Dobbins' Products Catalog ~~~


WCS
(Please support Wildlife Control Supplies, our sponsor for the ADC Page)






Print Thread
Hop To
Page 22 of 24 1 2 20 21 22 23 24
Re: USDA Wildlife Services ITN [Re: Wildlife2] #5851417
03/20/17 01:37 AM
03/20/17 01:37 AM
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 32
AL
wildlifeus Offline
trapper
wildlifeus  Offline
trapper

Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 32
AL
They make us all look bad. Time to shut them
down.

http://komonews.com/news/nation-world/fe...-dog-03-17-2017

Last edited by wildlifeus; 03/20/17 01:37 AM.

Tim and Robb you were an inspiration. Thank you for your dedication to the industry.
Working everyday to reduce the size of the federal government.
Re: USDA Wildlife Services ITN [Re: Wildlife2] #5851662
03/20/17 10:44 AM
03/20/17 10:44 AM
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 32
AL
wildlifeus Offline
trapper
wildlifeus  Offline
trapper

Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 32
AL


Tim and Robb you were an inspiration. Thank you for your dedication to the industry.
Working everyday to reduce the size of the federal government.
Re: USDA Wildlife Services ITN [Re: Wildlife2] #5871101
04/08/17 09:42 PM
04/08/17 09:42 PM
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 32
AL
wildlifeus Offline
trapper
wildlifeus  Offline
trapper

Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 32
AL
Effective hog control? Or a waist of tax payers money? This method even contradicts their own recommendations!!!

http://www.swoknews.com/local/feral-hog-control-operation-close-parts-wildlife-refuge-today


Tim and Robb you were an inspiration. Thank you for your dedication to the industry.
Working everyday to reduce the size of the federal government.
Re: USDA Wildlife Services ITN [Re: wildlifeus] #5871207
04/09/17 12:03 AM
04/09/17 12:03 AM
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 7,004
Louisiana
Aix sponsa Offline
trapper
Aix sponsa  Offline
trapper

Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 7,004
Louisiana
Originally Posted By: wildlifeus
Effective hog control? Or a waist of tax payers money? This method even contradicts their own recommendations!!!

http://www.swoknews.com/local/feral-hog-control-operation-close-parts-wildlife-refuge-today



I've seen results of aerial gunning hogs firsthand, and I can tell you the shoot the heck out of hogs. I think it's a good way to manage them in certain locations.


Whether you think you can or canít, youíre usually right. - Ford

Winners Focus on Winning - Morris
Re: USDA Wildlife Services ITN [Re: Wildlife2] #5871644
04/09/17 02:16 PM
04/09/17 02:16 PM
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 533
Louisiana
AirportTrapper Offline
trapper
AirportTrapper  Offline
trapper

Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 533
Louisiana
Aerial gunning is very effective.


If it makes a track on this earth , I can catch it.
Re: USDA Wildlife Services ITN [Re: Wildlife2] #5871741
04/09/17 04:20 PM
04/09/17 04:20 PM
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 93
NM
H
HD_Wildlife Offline
trapper
HD_Wildlife  Offline
trapper
H

Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 93
NM
When trying to remove a massively reproductive invasive species you look at all the tools on the table.

Where habitat and terrain allows, aerial operations are without a doubt the quickest way to achieve the greatest
drop in invasive feral swine numbers.

When I was still with the agency we utilized judas hogs, in conjunction with corral trapping, making aerial hunting even
more effective in our state where density and distance between populations was greater than it is in many states that
are currently overrun by this top notch invader.

Factually the best example of a successful operation that removed feral hogs rapidly utilizing multiple methods in a coordinated
campaign was done by "pro hunt" now going by "native range." These folks are out of NZ and perform large scale projects on a
variety of levels. I remember seeing this talk at a national hog conference back then, very impressive work, not cheap, but they
were basically agreeing to a price up front and thus if they finished early, they kept more income.

Since I know "wildlifeus" (cody) is interested in talking about private versus govt. work and removing WS from the equation, here
is an example of feral hog control done by a private entity for more funds than I've seen spent on any single project in the continental
United States for them.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006320709004935

I had the pleasure of pursuing this invasive species in multiple states and most of my time here in NM when still a fed was coordinating
a program that is now close to achieving their complete eradication utilizing some of the most innovative methods available for detection
of remaining populations currently.

Have seen folks try to shoot their way out using hunters and dogs (takes hogs but scatters hogs all over and onto property without access
leaving refuges along the way for them to hold up and repopulate before returning.

Trapping with corral traps and repeating doors takes large numbers, and when used with remote monitoring systems is a great way to extend
funds though initial investment is high.

Flying into a valley or over a drainage and being able to remove an entire sounder of 30-40+ hogs in moments is by far the most efficient way
if you have the numbers to not have you covering too much ground to find them, or have judas hogs to track on to enable detection.

I get that you argue for the private industry that I'm a part of and that WS (my former shop) isn't needed, but with hogs and aerial hunting I'd probably
avoid talking about a waste of funds when it is absolutely effective and against an invader that is one of the worst ecological disasters ever released by
humans on the landscape.

Re: USDA Wildlife Services ITN [Re: Wildlife2] #5872168
04/10/17 01:06 AM
04/10/17 01:06 AM
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,141
Virginia
5
52Carl Offline
trapper
52Carl  Offline
trapper
5

Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,141
Virginia
Well said HD. Delivered is such a way that any reasonable, thinking person can understand...

Re: USDA Wildlife Services ITN [Re: Wildlife2] #6054944
11/15/17 12:10 PM
11/15/17 12:10 PM
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 32
AL
wildlifeus Offline
trapper
wildlifeus  Offline
trapper

Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 32
AL


Tim and Robb you were an inspiration. Thank you for your dedication to the industry.
Working everyday to reduce the size of the federal government.
Re: USDA Wildlife Services ITN [Re: wildlifeus] #6057506
11/18/17 02:46 AM
11/18/17 02:46 AM
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,141
Virginia
5
52Carl Offline
trapper
52Carl  Offline
trapper
5

Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,141
Virginia

Thank you for the post wildlifeus. Sounds like the state of North Carolina has a handle on what it will take to eradicate these horribly damaging swine. I commend you for bringing this cold hard fact to our attention.

Re: USDA Wildlife Services ITN [Re: Wildlife2] #6092751
12/20/17 02:39 PM
12/20/17 02:39 PM
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 32
AL
wildlifeus Offline
trapper
wildlifeus  Offline
trapper

Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 32
AL
$28,000 for pigeon control. This contract violates USDA WS memorandum with NPMA

http://www.wxow.com/story/37094363/2017/...geon-population


Tim and Robb you were an inspiration. Thank you for your dedication to the industry.
Working everyday to reduce the size of the federal government.
Re: USDA Wildlife Services ITN [Re: Wildlife2] #6092796
12/20/17 03:44 PM
12/20/17 03:44 PM
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 93
NM
H
HD_Wildlife Offline
trapper
HD_Wildlife  Offline
trapper
H

Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 93
NM
I donít remember the Memorandum saying they couldnít
perform pigeon control, just that they were supposed to ask
clients if theyíve called private companies to try to resolve first.

Also didnít the MOU expire quite some time ago?

Iíve physically listened to supervisors in my old office telling
people emphatically they had to go with private first including
large contracts.

Iíve also seen them be told they did go with private, 2-3 companies
and they were not satisfied with results.

Is there a link showing the MOU is still in force? Donít you have
to be a member of NPMA for the MOU to work for you? (so nwcos
who donít belong to NPMA wouldnít be covered)?

Re: USDA Wildlife Services ITN [Re: Wildlife2] #6103493
12/28/17 06:59 PM
12/28/17 06:59 PM
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 32
AL
wildlifeus Offline
trapper
wildlifeus  Offline
trapper

Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 32
AL
20k for rodent work.

http://theprowersjournal.com/2017/12/troy-manor-motel-eyed-for-demolition/

They haven't signed yet so there may still be time for a local NWCO to get their hat in the game.

Either way here is clear evidence that USDA is competing against all of us.


Tim and Robb you were an inspiration. Thank you for your dedication to the industry.
Working everyday to reduce the size of the federal government.
Re: USDA Wildlife Services ITN [Re: wildlifeus] #6104088
12/29/17 03:08 AM
12/29/17 03:08 AM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,307
Central IA
TRapper Offline
trapper
TRapper  Offline
trapper

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,307
Central IA
Originally Posted By: wildlifeus
$28,000 for pigeon control. This contract violates USDA WS memorandum with NPMA

http://www.wxow.com/story/37094363/2017/...geon-population


Yep it is against me for sure...we did a small netting job in la crosse back in earlybaugust

Re: USDA Wildlife Services ITN [Re: Wildlife2] #6121885
01/12/18 12:13 AM
01/12/18 12:13 AM
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 21
Western Oregon
T
trprsam Offline
trapper
trprsam  Offline
trapper
T

Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 21
Western Oregon
WS out of beaver game in Oregon SStatesman Journal

Re: USDA Wildlife Services ITN [Re: Wildlife2] #6122015
01/12/18 01:42 AM
01/12/18 01:42 AM
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,141
Virginia
5
52Carl Offline
trapper
52Carl  Offline
trapper
5

Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,141
Virginia
Sam, did you read that article in the Statesman Journal which you included in your post?
Do you know that salmon require cool, flowing water for their eggs to hatch? Does that sound like something that a beaver pond would provide?
Do you know that spawning salmon do not feed, therefore making the "providing food for fish" a moot point?
In your wildest dreams, would you expect placing a culvert pipe under a beaver dam would solve a beaver nuisance problem?
How many trees would need to be protected by tree guards to solve a beaver problem?
With the suspension of Wildlife Services activities, and with all of these "inciteful alternative" suggestions by an organization which has shown little in the way of evidence that any of them have ever been outside, let alone ever spent any time in a beaver swamp, do you think that you now have a shot at some nuisance beaver work for the state of Oregon?




Last edited by 52Carl; 01/12/18 01:44 AM.
Re: USDA Wildlife Services ITN [Re: 52Carl] #6122088
01/12/18 02:30 AM
01/12/18 02:30 AM
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 21
Western Oregon
T
trprsam Offline
trapper
trprsam  Offline
trapper
T

Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 21
Western Oregon
That has long been one of the arguments against beaver trapping in Oregon(and other places, presumably), that without ponds created by beaver, young salmon and steelhead have no rearing ponds and calm waters to grow up in. It may have some validity in the coastal mountain streams draining to the Pacific Ocean. I dont know all the places WS does beaver trapping in Oregon, but I do know a lot of it is done in the Willamette Valley on farms, private ponds and lakes, and "Urban Waterways", i.e. sloughy creeks that run through a lot of towns around here.

Salmon and steelhead face many problems on the West Coast, I am not sure if this is in the top ten. But is is an angle that various anti trapping orgs have been trying to use for a long time. I already get quite a bit of beaver work here and I'm not sure how this will affect guys like me int the future, but I will be watching it for sure. In the short term it might help private guys get more work. Long term? Who knows. I know this thread is about keeping ADC work private, but a govt. agency that does trapping can be an ally in the fight to keep trapping rights. Oregon has by far the most "liberal" trapping laws on the West Coast, so we are a target for sure. We will see how it plays out.
Maybe Justin could weigh in, this area is his old stomping grounds, I believe.

Re: USDA Wildlife Services ITN [Re: Wildlife2] #6131476
01/20/18 03:14 AM
01/20/18 03:14 AM
Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 579
Desert Southwest-CA
D
DezertTrapper Offline
trapper
DezertTrapper  Offline
trapper
D

Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 579
Desert Southwest-CA
Question. Why does the article state that M44's are used? I've never heard of that for beavers?

Re: USDA Wildlife Services ITN [Re: Wildlife2] #6133316
01/21/18 10:00 PM
01/21/18 10:00 PM
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 21
Western Oregon
T
trprsam Offline
trapper
trprsam  Offline
trapper
T

Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 21
Western Oregon
Lol. Bad info in a newspaper article. Who'd a think it? Assuming they meant WS uses m44 for coyotes.

Re: USDA Wildlife Services ITN [Re: Wildlife2] #6151750
02/08/18 07:57 PM
02/08/18 07:57 PM
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 32
AL
wildlifeus Offline
trapper
wildlifeus  Offline
trapper

Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 32
AL


Tim and Robb you were an inspiration. Thank you for your dedication to the industry.
Working everyday to reduce the size of the federal government.
Re: USDA Wildlife Services ITN [Re: Wildlife2] #6152064
02/09/18 01:15 AM
02/09/18 01:15 AM
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,141
Virginia
5
52Carl Offline
trapper
52Carl  Offline
trapper
5

Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,141
Virginia
Wonder why this work wasn't bid out. My understanding is that USDA cannot participate in a bidding situation.

Page 22 of 24 1 2 20 21 22 23 24
Previous Thread
Index
Next Thread




Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.2