You are correct. I have a close relative that is heavily involved with anti-trapping groups. She told me they are hoping that if the dems take control of the Senate and this will give them free reign to introduce more federal anti-trapping legislation and encourage the new administration to side with them. It appears Biden is on their side. It also appears they may be changing their tactics and going after federal land as in Oregon and choosing Deb Haaland for the Dept. of Interior who will be in charge of over 247 million acres of public land across the West. If trapping is outlawed on BLM land there goes my trapping since I do all of it on BLM land. Every anti-trapping bill in the past, that I am aware of, has been introduced by Democrats. This doesn’t look good. It looks like this beaver thing in Oregon is going to be a test for other trapping in your state and then the nation.

I think part of the reason that Deb Haaland was chosen is that it furthers Biden's campaign pledge of a diverse cabinet. Since she is native American that fills one ethnicity spot for them.

Her record as having supported anti-trapping efforts in the past is very troubling. But we're not sitting on our laurels here. We have things we are working on. Deb still has to do things according to law and major decisions that affect federal lands is up to congress. As you point out, we need to root for success in Georgia.

Any speculation when this bill will be introduced?

Interesting that a state representative is proposing legislation to ban beaver trapping on federal lands. Generally speaking, states are in charge of managing wildlife within their boundaries and can regulate what happens on federal lands. That said, this legislation could potentially impact more than half of the State of Oregon as roughly 52% of Oregon is in federal ownership, what that ownership breakdown is by agency would be worth knowing. In my experience with beaver management, a hands off approach creates long term issues that are not positive both for the beaver and the habitat that supports the beaver. I think this legislation is short sighted and does not consider the long term negative changes that will occur with a total ban on beaver trapping. A more logical approach would involve targeted protection to meet habitat objectives along with targeted management of beaver to address inevitable damage issues to infrastructure and ultimately habitat degradation due to over protection of beaver. Habitat degradation will ultimately lead to reduced carrying capacity of beaver in these areas and reduce or eliminate the role that they hope beaver would play to meet habitat objectives.

Good points all Torch. We have some national forest lands that have been off limits to trapping beaver for as long as I've been a beaver trapper..((a very long time). You would think they would b crawling with beaver by now. Not the case. It all comes down to habitat and if you don't have new seccessional vegetative growth in the riparian zones, proper stream gradients, etc. you don't have beaver habitat.

Good habitat not only tolerates (beaver) harvest but is helped in long-term population stability by reduction of overcrowding and the potential for disease and fighting mortality.

Perhaps the unfortunate fires from last summer in Oregon will create some of that new successional growth. We had a large fire here about 10 years ago and the beaver numbers are starting to climb. The area that burned was dominated by mature forest with little quality beaver forage. This area is now 90,000 plus acres of young forest with abundant amounts of food and water. Some of this same area had been off limits to beaver trapping 70 years ago and wildlife managers at the time noted that the beaver populations in the closed areas were in worse shape than the areas that trapping occurred, and forests were much younger at that time. The beaver numbers will explode in this area and I can only imagine the amount of re-engineering they will accomplish in the years ahead. The number of beaver that could be annually harvested from this area is hard to estimate, however it would be substantial and sustainable for decades. In addition, the beaver would still do what beaver always have done, re-engineer the landscape and create an abundance of new wildlife habitat.

We're lucky to have stan in our corner bringing awareness to all of us here. I enjoy reading his emails and knowing what's going on.

Our good friend and Oregon legislative watchdog Stan Steele sent an email today informing of us of three 'red flag' house bills to be considered in our next legislative session.

HB 2676 (Rep. Nosse District 42 Portland) Prohibits sale, offer for sale, display for sale, trade or the distribution for consideration of fur product in state of Oregon. Class A misdemeanor-$6250 fine -364 days of imprisonment or both.

HB 2843 (Rep. Marsh district 5 Jackson county)
Prohibits taking of beavers on federally managed land, in waters of this state as waters flow through federally managed public land or in pond, lake, or water storage facility on federally managed land.

HB 2844 (Rep. Marsh and Sen. Gorsek)
Removes beavers from "Predatory Animal and Rodent" classifications from Wildlife Damage Statutes and Administrative Rules. Restricts removal of damage causing beaver on federally managed public lands with few exceptions and removal can only be accomplished by federal personnel. Instructs Oregon Dept of Fish and Wildlife to publish annual report related to taking beavers and make report available to public. ODFW rules must be made on or before Dec. 31, 2022.

Guys..time to step it up is imminent. Good grief!

Carl weren't you paying attention in the past. There are many things the president and their minions can do outside of congress to effect the use of BLM lands.

Good luck in your fight to keep what you have and keep up the fight and your good works.

Personally, I'm not overly concerned with that. States have been largely granted jurisdiction over hunting and fishing regs on federal lands.

Under various statues, federal agencies are required to cooperate, consult, or coordinate with states in ways that stop short of full delegation but basically stay out of the local decision making except for migratory bird regs and the endangered species act.

Point being, Deb Haaland will not be able to change current protocol without congressional approval...IMHO.