I got some mail today , the resolution I got from WIMarshRat and submitted in my county made the 2018 agenda.

WIMarshrat are you going to the meeting?

[quote]
Here is the resolution on Colony traps I think I will submit. Anyone that wants to try and submit it in your county, feel free to do so.

Current trapping regulations do not allow for placement of a colony trap within 3 ft. of any
culvert or use in conjunction with any fencing, netting or material placement designed to
channel animals into the trap.

The concern is that current restrictions overly limit the locations to efficiently capture
muskrats. Although muskrats are an important part of native ecosystems their burrowing
and foraging activities can damage agricultural crops, native marshes, waterway banks
and levees.

Furthermore, the neighboring states of Minnesota and Michigan that share similar habitat
do not have similar placement restrictions and have not shown a negative impact on
muskrat populations.

BE IT RESOLVED, that the Conservation Congress work with the Department of Natural
Resources and Natural Resources Board to remove colony trap placement and funneling
restrictions.
[quote \]

Good Luck and Thanks for stepping up

The first year colony traps were legalized,I was aked to do a demo on them at Marshfield. I refused because of all the limitations you had to contend with. Hard to show proper use of colonies,when these things couldn't be used in Wisconsi.
Good luck,hope you are granted the best ways to utilize your colony traps.
Tom

Nice job, and good luck to you.

What's up with #4 up there in the Citizens' Resolutions?

#7 will never fly.

Remember Mike when we were at the meeting speaking on behalf of the 3 zone season for rats. Larry Meyer and others also discussed the starting time for Rats or trapping in general, mostly from 12:01 AM to another later starting time. That resolution did not get moved forward last year, maybe it is this year.

Bryce

I wouldn't mind seeing #7 restricted to elevated sets. Possible incentive to experiment on safer alternatives.?.

For the opener, hmmmm . . . sure beats the midnight opener in the public marshes.

Wonder if that's how it's worded. Exactly.

Nimzy, I might call the author to give him some ideas in case he is open to modifying resolution #7 to give it a chance of passing. Would you need four days or would a couple be enough?

Other option would to only ask for the extended check back after a certain day--something like December 1?

Either or, or both would be ok with me. Later in the season things often take longer. A “safe” extended check could be useful. IMHO. I agree with Muskrat as the way it stands it won’t survive. Sorry

#7......ask for 4 days, maybe deal down to 2-3 days? would be a win for sure

Thanks for that feedback nimzy. As far as those extended checks, I think there is concern about giving them on bodygrips at the beginning of the year unless there was the elevation stipulation. With it being the only dry land trap with an extended check, it would create incentive to run them instead of more incidental friendly traps early in the year when other user groups are frequently on the landscape. If prices rose, we would likely lose our dryland bodygrip due to the number of incidents. Most don't realize just how close we were to losing all our dry land bodygrip traps in this state. Bodygrips capable of drowning, elevated 5 ft, or used after Dec 1 need to be checked every X days. All others need to be checked daily.

Muskrat, nimzy, and Bryce--thought you guys might want to see this:
https://dnr.wi.gov/topic/wildlifehabitat/documents/committees/furbearer/fur052318.pdf

The muskrat proposal came up in the DNR Furbearer Advisory Meeting. Notice it started to get some push-back from those in the north worried about zone jumping. Looks like Ed Harvey - Conservation Congress and Scott Zimmerman -WTA were able to keep it on track, but we might need to plan for a little more work if we want to see it reach the finish line.

Yes I read the minutes the other day. I did not recall that those of us bringing forth resolutions were also supposed to be the message distribution people as well. Sort of stinks to think people feel one is trying to sneak something in without their knowing about it. This whole process is way more political than I choose to be this late in the game for me.

Bryce

This muskrat thing has been going on for a long time. Hardly a sneak.....heard he retired

As long as he's alive he'll do everything in his power to keep trappers out of "his" territory. That and he's got a couple of his boys fronting for him to keep the pot stirred.

GREED.

After I got deeper into this and put out my statements I began discovering how long and deep the resentments have been by some trappers over the split season approach. I had never paid much attention to that in the past, just trapped when and where I could based on my time allotments. The whole move to simplification gave the opportunity for the changes and for many that was what they wanted I guess. You don't know how active the bees will be until you step on their nest I guess.
It is ironic to me as a trained ecologist that we as trappers ask our departments and trained biologists, conservation staff and ecologist to draft the science to protect our consumptive harvest of renewable fur bearers but when it comes to actual trapping we throw out the science and demand that politics carry the day.
If we continue to choose that route we are destined to lose our heritage as the demographics slide away from us every day.

Bryce

^^ Well said.

Just “whom” from the north was pushing back on the north zone worried about zone jumping at this meeting?

From the document I posted...

Only 2 trappers that I (Jenna Kosnicki) know in the North even knew about this proposed split and they
were both against it. The willingness of a northern trapper to zone jump is less than the southern
trappers. Lodging and land is easier to find in the north making it easier to go there than vice-versa. I
don’t think this was properly advertised in the North part of the state prior to the spring hearings.
Right now, we essentially have one zone with Northern season timing. The central portion of the state is
really the muskrat “factory”. When fur prices are high, the prime-ness doesn’t matter much but it does
now and so this is receiving a lot of attention.

....Mink/muskrat zones led by Ed Harvey – Back to the three-zone system with the different start and end
dates for muskrats and mink. We talked about this yesterday. Around twice as many people were in
favor of this as against it. We had four resolutions come in last year. We combined these into something
that we think works. The resolution boundaries changed between 2017 and 2018 because the original
zone boundaries had some issues like splitting counties.
The driving force here is not only prime-ness but also has to do with ice and open water trapping. The
southern trappers are wearing sun screen while people in the north are frozen shut on the same date. It
may be difficult to have a season well suited for the entire state with such differences in ice formation
from north to south. The resolutions also called for more opportunity in the spring on the tail end of the
season. Most complaints currently are with the opener.
If seasons are set for the entire state with a single zone, we should focus on the central-portion that is
effectively our muskrat factory. If we did this with a statewide season the northern trappers would be
froze out every year.
If going back to the three zones (with the Miss River 4 zones), the hybrid boundaries make the most
sense. Using the Hwy 64 and 60 as straight across zone boundaries is the easiest to understand. The
committee mostly agrees to support this with the NOD representatives in opposition.
If the central and north zones had the same opener, it would reduce zone-jumping but might not suit
what the trappers in each zone want in terms of season dates. It is important to remember that mink
are more plentiful than muskrats in some areas and they may be less able to deal with a prolonged
harvest season than muskrats. The WTA supported this resolution as it was written. At the fur
harvesters committee everyone was on board with this and all areas of the state were represented. The
committee recommends moving forward with a rule proposal, but will note the concerns that have been
expressed by northern representatives