We have to be fair to the DNRs that it's not their fault their hands are tied when it comes to the timber wolf.

But it's good to debate the management of mismanagement or otter in WI or I even believe my home state to get a clear picture of what is/will happen when the timber wolf is removed.

49er you never were never afraid to look at how one item impacts a completely different item and thus why I always enjoyed having the MN guys participating in a WI thread.

Back to your original questions on amount of beaver. I have not seen 15-16 numbers but based on DNR estimates, WI beaver trappers harvested ~25K beaver in 2014-5. http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/WildlifeHabitat/documents/reports/beavtrapques2.pdf

To give Brian a little color on his question... In 13-14, the north killed more incidentals(165) than legally harvested via permits(156)if I don't include tribal harvest. No doubt in my mind that tribal harvest didn't come close to those that were floated so I think it is a fair comparison. For south/central their ratio has been hoovering between 15-20%.

Interestingly enough, the following year we started to see a significant change in how the state viewed the harvest quota for otter. I would give you a graph, but I am lacking each zone harvest for 15-16 and 12-13 time period. Regardless, this doesn't include where 49er was taking the conversation. See, with our recent quota adjustments, we have been able to get our "turned in" incidentals to get more inline which means we will need to have a new reason to increase harvest more.

Those that fall under SSS or in this case, float don't get counted so our ratio appears on the surface to be inline. Now just like with otter, wolves need to brought above ground to get good data.

Thus the importance of really pressuring zone 6 to transfer those SSS into the resource bucket. Then being able to get into the heart of wolf country in a small area and seeing if it reacts the same way. All those years of hiding this figure on otters is hurting us today. Hopefully, we don't make that same mistake with wolves.

So where is 49er leading too?

Our beaver harvest numbers must be inflated based on the sheer lack of incidentals LOL

If we break this down a bit it roughly looks like this
1995-2003 an average of 14K permits issued per year with about 2100 otter harvested or about 14.5% success with maybe 40-70 incidentals in the mix

2004-2014 4,000 permits issued roughly 1,000 tagged harvest or 25% success rate with roughly an average of 300 incidentals per year or about 30% of legal or 23% of total reported harvest.

It does appear that the number of permits issued relates strongly with total tagged harvested otters. A better indicator to me than incidental harvest.
It also shows that many that received permits tagged and harvested otters. Many that formerly were issued permits and now don't have permits maybe where the big increase in incidentals comes from as when there were more permits that probably covered a lot more trappers that also were catching otters.

What we don't know is how much of the incidental increase is due to a higher compliance over time of reporting incidentals as that process is less intimidating now than previously.
Permits create a situation where there will always be trappers who were not successful in getting permits and catching otters. The real issue is what percentage of the harvest will be incidentals with different scenarios.

I know this may be adding complexity to the whole issue but improving the otter system might benefit from more zones like there are for fisher, wolves and now with deer at the county level and thoughts of dividing those into public and private so that could be 100 plus. It is safe to say in my opinion that the otter population has a lot of variation and in smaller zones than what we currently have. If we had say 6 to 10 zones we may be able to increase the number of permits and maintain a stable population with more opportunity for harvest by more trappers. I know that moves us a way from simplicity and also gives some advantages to those who would live in areas with more otters but then that is life and life is neither fair or equal it just is.
With the research that has been done I am sure that there is data to show higher and lower concentrations of otter.

Bryce

Ahh back to simplicity....Resources are complicated by nature! If they were not, we'd have all the answers.

Simplicity is not natural. Just a misdirected idea, redesigned to suit agendas.

No offense Bryce, you weren't the one that manipulated its context.

Bryce, reread Boco's post.

There is a very telling number in relation to incidental otter in one of Justin's post and how important it is. In fact two telling numbers unless one of them is overestimated.

Bryce, did you see the state is looking at going to two zones for otter? I am fine with it, but I would prefer they break the north into two zones to match beaver for a short period of time. Then pressure one zone to calibrate our data. I think it would help flush out what is being floated.

Well if Boco is anywhere nearly correct in his guess about the number of unreported incidentals than the season issues, bag limits etc. are the fault of us as trappers as we skew the system to lower populations thus fewer permits, tags and harvest. If the DNR indeed does go to two zones then to me that will cause more attention to be on the lower population estimates and thus fewer permits etc. The larger the area the data covers with more variation the more likely the lowest common denominator will come into play.

Bryce

^^^^^BINGO^^^^^

Bryce, do you really believe we have had a decline?

I am convinced the opposite is true. All based on the work they are doing on wolves. See, it appears they have learned from the mistakes of the past. That same knowledge is giving them confidence on otter.

How else do you explain the dramatic about turn they have done on quota for otter? When the state is pushing for a quota not seen in the state, what does that tell you?

At a glance it would tell me there is new blood that is looking outside of the old paradigm

It does not matter what I believe what matters is those that make the decisions what do they believe or what information do they have to make their decisions. If we as trappers voluntarily choose to not report incidentals for whatever reason we then are a root cause of fewer permits and lower harvests that are recorded and those are the ones that are used to make decisions.

Bryce

I agree with that now Bryce, but not sure that was always the case. For a while, those incidentals brought less permits and more restrictions. Remember, they believed they were destroying habitat and forcing remaining otters together making them more prone to being incidentally caught.

Add in a survey that showed otter were disappearing from the landscape, and that created a pretty big paradigm for them to overcome. I am not sure they could handle the true number at that time. The thousands of otter that came out of the population model when they force fed the surveys to make them work have never been returned.

To this day, fur trappers still have restrictions on them that WS is exempt from. Why? They took out 99 otter last year...many during pupping season. If restrictions need to be in place for fur trappers, they should be in place for them as well. What other things would I be adding to the list, had they had the true number? Trigger restrictions?

Not sure if you been following the test but the opposite of what theyexpected is happening. We would of had even more incidentals. Luckily, we have made the turn. Right now, we only punish ourselves by not turning them in. I kicked myself today for not picking up the one on the side of the road. It was gone when i came back through.

For so long around here getting a nuisance permit was difficult. Created a culture of SSS. Tough changing minds but I won't stop trying. Again, only hurting ourselves by not working to combat. We can't make the same mistake on wolves. To bad a judge is forcing them down the same path.

Many trappers don't turn in those incidentals because of the hassles & drilling they receive from the wardens. Kinda the same many go through when registering their fur. Unless you have a good relationship with your local warden(s), it's almost like your guilty of a crime as soon as you walk in the door.
Then you spend an hour or more answering questions trying to prove your innocence. I know several trappers that won't even trap tagged species for that very reason. Sad, but true.

Whenever I see fingerprinting or blame.
I think of The old expression It takes two to tango.

Incidentals are a chess match. Sometimes its a stalemate.

There was talk in one of the threads on a resolution to create salvage tags to get more people turning them in by making consistent and easier to turn in. Time to bring it back?

I will take it on since it was lost last time in the shuffle, but also because it will be a tough sell with some of the PTB. With the go wild system, people will be worried about a few playing the system.

I will say it fits the goal of working to transfer incidentals into resource bucket. Where are our friends in the north to add a little color? What are the must haves to make it a valuable addition. Can they get the education to the masses up there?

That attitude / paradigm is exactly why we are failing. Realize that things get tossed because of simple risk/ reward decisions. Incidentials are an inconvenience to trappers, period

Turning in incidentals doesn't have to be difficult or complicated!

It starts with education and moves to quality of experience. Get it right, the word will spread and people will comply

Nimzy, Quality of experience is dead on.
Justin, it's worth a shot, but it would be a tough sell. Like you said, people will play the system.

As much as I hate the term, quality of which experience?