…. There were those that warned of this

Ol'Nate!

That’s actually one thing that makes me laugh and also kinda ticks me off. They’ll say trapping is a savage abhorrent practice that needs to end, but then in the same breath say it’s okay for native people to continue trapping as it’s part or our history and culture….so they’re calling us savages is how I hear that.

Interesting take Ak. The sponsors of HB 3932 were quick to add an amendment protecting tribal take of beavers on public and impacted waterways. Actually pretty smart to make sure that we wouldn't come after them on that point. And we would have.

Keep giving them heck BP. We appreciate everything ya’ll have done.

Thanks Deafcaller, Stan and Jeremy are the ones that really deserve credit. I'm thinking some of us trappers oughta spring for a fifth of Eau de Musc castoreum infused Whiskey for Stan. He's really stood up and been there for us. And much more to come....trust me.

It is okay to be a savage, if you do it to survive. Even most Urban people understand killing stuff to survive. I have even had bunny huggers say what I do is O.K. because I do it to survive in the wilderness. I don't argue with them.

I'm pretty sure if I told them my culture and tradition was whacking animals for fun, they may not be quite as supportive.

What a world we live in. As a native I’d be happy to inform them that the bald eagles they so cherish taste like trash lol

If someone is trapping and utilizing the proceeds to pay bils, buy groceries, etc......aren't they doing it to survive?

… well you finally laid it out dirt … folks been waiting for that lol

….populations need to be controlled… that should suffice

Unfortunately, controlling populations is really not necessary in the wilderness this far north. Sometimes, but rarely. Damage control, not really an issue when they have few things to damage.

Beaverpeeler, sounds like you have an ace up your sleeve. Good luck in fighting this even though it is tough odds. Thanks to you and the others who are spending time and effort on this, if you lose at least you know you gave it your best shot, and can hold your head high.

I remember one Old Timer told me that he went to a ANTI TRAPPING BILL meeting and was asked to say a few words. The place was in the court house and the room was split...one side anti-trapping the other side pro-trapping. He stood up and he introduced himself as a LICENSED fur trapper of 45 years. He said he did some nuisance animal work for the public with state permission in the off season. He made it short and sweet. He asked if the state banned the legal trapping of wild fur bearers who would control the problems when they start up?
And then he directed his question to two ANTI TRAP people who he did trapping for...."Martha, who would remove those problem skunks from your shed?" And "Nancy who would remove those raccoon that were in your garden raising can with your vegetables?" Both ladies faces turned red from embarrassment. He finished up with "Wild animals have to be managed. Fur trappers will do what is necessary during the season but we need your support."

For the past two months I’ve been pretty dang busy and I soon to forget to update on all these different platforms. So for that I’m sorry. Looks like BeaverPeeler had her handled. I will make some corrections as I read through most of this conversation. I’m not the President in the Vice President. Oregon is going to loose trapping of beavers on lands that have impaired waterways. Not all waters are impaired but yes a very large portion of them are. We can still trap on private property just not on lands 5,000 acres or more that has harvestable timber. So basically the big timber companies. Can’t trap beavers on navigable waters on private to my understanding….. Oregon has like 12 navigatable rivers. 53% public lands and that’s all federal. Statistics show that ONLY 4% of Oregons beaver harvest was done on public lands. So why not. Only affects 115 trappers. But the outcome will be much more than 115 affected. Anyhow thanks for being there in Salem during the senate hearing. My mentality won’t allow me to pass this up so I have to mention it. If you and Stan would have been there during the hearing in the house us trappers had them activists outnumbered. I was pretty happy to see that. Anyhow have a good one
.

Thanks for chiming in Jeremy and for corrections in my banter where needed. HB 3932 as written is difficult to decipher at best. On the issue of navigable rivers I've been hesitant to bring it up 'cuz I wasn't sure I wanted the other side to know (via public forum) that it is something they might push for. I mentioned to Senator Floyd Prozanski my concerns about that and his understanding is/was that navigable rivers that run through private land would NOT be affected. It will apparently be up to ODFW and the Game Commission the unenviable task of mapping out open and closed areas. Navigable rivers in Oregon has long been a gray area. But any commercial activity prior to statehood in 1859 on a body of water made it an automatic qualifier. That is a lot more than 12 rivers because it would include every coastal tidewater stream as well. ( Also the task of mapping out impaired waterways is not even close to complete per my understanding. How long will it take for an undermanned state agency (DEQ) to do all the required testing)?

If the coastal streams and the Willamette and its tributaries are included as in being public to the high water mark....well, beaver trapping is essentially dead in this state.

Wished I could have been at the House hearing but my wife had a medical appointment I had to take her to.

And for the bizarro twist on all this...I trap the Willamette primarily and I have yet to ever see one single beaver dam or lodge on the 80 miles worth of it that I trap over the last 45 years. So much for beaver dams detoxifying the water!

What is the logic they are using to justify the closure of public waters?

I guess you already answered my question...............

There is no logic. It is an excuse because they don't like trapping or any other consumptive use of wildlife. Supposedly more beaver will bring back the salmon runs. No trapping will not mean more beaver where they want them because nobody put the word out to cougars they're not supposed to eat them.