So can anyone tell me why the Peoples Republic of Minnesota will not allow a non resident to trap here unless they own property? I would like to do some trapping in a few other states but since MN will not allow non residents to trap here, then many other states will not allow someone from MN to trap in their state. I can buy a non resident small game license to hunt coyotes in Nebraska but only for two days. Coyotes are also considered an invasive species with no season but yet I still not allowed to trap them. I can shoot them but not trap them. I'm sure other states have something like this but can anyone tell me why MN does this? Is it greed or what?

I'll make the popcorn, guys. Who wants some?

Salt and Butter???

Yes please!

Because MN is a "progressive" state. At this rate, I don't think any of us will be allowed to trap here much longer (Resident or non resident)... ala California.

OK, there's far more to the Non Resident issue but the above still stands.

But there are still quite a few states we can go and trap without penalty. Apparently some have figured that us residents are held captive here.

In the end ,if you follow the "why's", restrictions (of any kind) against non residents always seems to start with greed by your fellow trappers.

i blame the Minnesotan trappers--tell me why thats wrong??

Because the Mn trapper association is against it. They want your out of state money only when they are fighting anti law suits

Its kinda wrong pcr2. Every time NR trapping gets promoted by some Minnesota trappers their association and their associations lawyer, get in the way. Many of you should recognize their lawyers name.

If non-resident trapping is allowed- at the very least resident season starts sooner and their is equal reciprocity between the two states. Also non-resident liscense cost more

I personally can find enough to do in my own backyard and don’t need someone else’s turf to entertain myself. Not a big fan of non-resident trapping

Probably wont matter much for awhile. If you cant sell your fur how many animals will you trap and what will you do with them?

If there is no market at all I doubt many people travel to trap or set more than a half dozen traps

Had a guy at work yesterday ask me if I would get him a coon this fall to eat.

I have a friend wanting a fresh beaver. Because of the Tv shows he sees.

YEP LIKE 10-15 Times more!!

Well WE or should say "I" got non resident trapping In WI . It was a long hard fought battle and I made some enemies along the way but I knew the right people and we got It done.
I went over the heads of our association. Our WTA president was the main stumbling block glad he's gone. The only thing I haven't got changed Is the Non resident set back as to opening day. If a person has the nads to leave home and trap In another state He or she should have the same opportunities as the resident trapper.

From what I saw in MN, the DNR and the Minnesota Trapper's Association were neutral on the issue. Whenever I attended an MTA annual meeting, they took a vote from the membership on the issue. It was NO to non-resident trapping at the meetings I attended. It sounded like the DNR listened to the MTA members and went along with their decision.

there were 2 votes by the mta, the second one was in favor. the mta president at that time, sent a letter to the fta, i believe on mta letterhead, urging the fta to NOT support n.r. trapping in minnesota, and to NOT donate to the cause. dont lump minn trapers into one group on this issue. and the fta DID donate generously to our cause.

The meeting I attended was quite a while ago. The general membership voted NO at that meeting. I was not aware that the MTA president sent any letters. So, you are saying one person stopped non-resident trapping in MN?

The current MTA vote is to lobby for non-resident trapping with some limits on CITIES species. To be honest, I don't remember the limits exactly, but I think marten and fisher were not going to be available to non-residents in what the organization agreed to support.

Minnesota Forest Zone Trappers Association (MFZTA) is adamantly against non-resident trapping and have stated there will be no compromise on their stance. They are not hot on having trappers from the Farmland Zone in their northern forests either; evident by a rule those folks can join but not vote.

It has been the opinion that the legislature has not been conducive to expanding trapping opportunities in the state and that has been the voiced reason no sponsor was sought out.

A legislator did pipe up about authoring a bill proposal within the last year. I never heard it moved. I suspect this, and most anything worth time, got swallowed in the pissing match called COVID legislation. If they can't get to a bonding bill I would not expect anything much to get done.

Before I was on the MTA board I attended a meeting at the Senate building to forward the matter. I was not representing ANY organization at the time. MFZTA and Commercial Trappers of MN were there as well as Lestico (at the time attorney for MFZTA and MTA) and the MTA's current lobbyist "Bill" (who co-represented MFZTA at THAT time, but no more). An argument broke out between the two organizations present, resulting in me having a nearly private conversation with Senators Inglebritson (R) & Tommasoni(D). Yes, it was bizarre. The senate DNR committee had just switched to Republican Control, but my read on those two was they mostly agreed and knew each other very well. They too did not feel it was right time as the anti's were quite active but they by no means shut off a proposal. The two were most concerned that the MTA and MFZTA could not get on the same score on this. Commercial Trappers scheduled the meeting and wants the doors open to non-residents.

Commercial Trappers is the smallest if still in existence; I do not know. MFZTA claims 300 members and certainly has the ear of Tommasoni and Bakk in the legislature. MTA had 2,000ish as of last Saturday's board meeting.

IMO the bill never gets off the ground because most legislators, lobbyists, and attorneys in the ring feel that opening to door on ANY trapping legislation will lead to a short and successful campaign to further take our tools of use away; notably snares and 160/220s. Again, that is MY OPINION ONLY as an observer but have heard that come out of the mouths of people who spend time at the capital.

I recognize the view of many, especially veterans, is "These United States" (remember "One Nation Under God") and Minnesota cannot deny non-resident fur takers from this country. They can charge them unfair license fees but there must be access as it is interstate commerce (international actually). In fact that is in line with the amendments to The Constitution of The United States of America.

In discussions in early 2020 by the Board of Directors of the MTA the furtherance of this issue was one of the many voiced reasons to retain our own and separate (from MFZTA) lobbyist. A decision that we knew would be a significant financial burden that will require fund raising if it is to have longevity. Hence the new drive for donations to the Legal Defense Fund of the MTA.

John Backman
District 1 Director, Minnesota Trappers Association

Northern trappers can go alone on th next lynx lawsuit also