As most of us know, the Game Commission will meet in June to adopt new rules for the upcoming biennial.

ODFW was tasked with writing up a proposal for the implementation of 3932, the ban of beaver trapping on public lands with impaired waterways. Just a heads up on some of this:

First off, we had been told only beaver trapping would be banned, but the ODFW proposal now includes otter as well! The reasoning being for ease of enforcement, and by the fact that it will coincide with rules already in place that ban otter trapping where beaver trapping is not allowed. (No mention on nutria trapping btw, lol).

There is a little bit of good news though. According to our Furbearer Coordinator Sam Fino, on navigable waterways (as determined by the State of Oregon) beaver trapping will be allowed up to the mean high water mark EVEN if the adjacent land is public and normally subject to the ban.

AN interactive map will be made available to trappers to zoom in on your areas of concern to see what is off limits. Probably in early June a few of us trappers will meet with Sam and take a look at what they have come up with and put in our 2 cents worth.

I'm told that the proposed rules are already pretty much set in stone so not much we can do there. Some areas of the state will certainly be hit hard with the implementation of 3932. For me personally very little of what I normally trap will be impacted as I understand things.

I'm hoping very much that Sam has it right about being able to trap to the high water line on navigable waters! It seems like there is still some level of confusion on everybody's part.

Just go trap like you always did.
Nobodys gonna bother with all that nonsense.

Could it be any more complicated. I have never heard of a mean high water mark. There is a high water mark and there's a mean water level but what is a mean high water mark?

Another good beaver trapper I know already got checked by a game warden and asked if he was aware of the new law and trapping accordingly. It's state law and will be enforced.

The definition is that portion of a natural body of water that lies below bankful conditions. Anything above bankful begins to inundate the uplands.

Ah, Oregon speak for bankful condition. Anything above that we call floodstage.

He should have asked the warden if he had a good dental plan cause he may need it.

And here I thought that the most peaceful among us had been sent up north after the revolution. lol

The water went down on this one today,if I was in Oregon would I lose my trapground?

I think you’re misunderstanding my post. Nice beaver by the way!

The new interpretation is that even if a certain stretch of waterway is off limits to beaver trapping (technically) you can still trap them on navigable waterways if your trap is placed somewhere below the bankful stage of the river.
Nothing to do with water dropping and leaving your set exposed.

My point was It sounds unenforceable.How are you supposed to know where some arbitrary future or past waterline is.
Be easy to win in court.

If you're trapping up to as high as the water goes without flowing out into a farmers field you're golden. But just on what has been deemed navigable waterways by the state of Oregon. A small win for us.

So if the water is 5 feet deep in the farmers field if your beaver float is out where the bank is 5 feet underwater you are good?
And how are you or the gamewarden supposed to know exactly where that bank is when its under 5 feet of water?

It is an unfortunate and unneeded law forced onto Oregon trappers by Democrats. Just making it hard for trappers to go out and do what they have been doing for 100s of years. Death by a thousand cuts. A severe gun control bill just passed the Minnesota Senate. Every Democrat in the Senate voted for it, even the out state Democrats where the legislation is very unpopular. Every Republican voted against it. It is a reasonable assumption that Democrats have no respect for and in fact hate rural America and our way of life.

Not if your violence ends up causing the GW some dental problems..smh!

^^^This.

Still, Oregon trappers must count our blessings. Last state standing on the left coast that mostly have our trapping privileges intact. Notice I avoid the term “rights”. When we have our “privileges” enshrined in the state constitution I’ll change it to “rights”.

Every state owns the land under navigable water ways. Even if the land on each side is not owned by the state. Thus, mean high water is the line where state ownership may end. Alaska went thru a lawsuit or 2 to establish that here.

Martentrapper, Here in Ohio the land owner owns, on navigable water, the land under the water. The state does own the water but not the land under it. That plus on road frontage, the land owner owns right out to the center line on the road. Back when fur was worth something there were many heated exchanges with bridge trappers.

Michigan is the same and years ago I was one of those involved in a few permission disputes between trappers trespassing and those with permission! Back in the day, many road trappers plead ignorance. LOL

I give you credit for your optimisim, but I would not consider only retaining some trapping rights on certain waters a win at all, just less of a loss. We are not winning in MN when they take only some of our gun rights.

we have a very small amount of room left in Montana and some folks from Oregon are taking advantage of that fact. But not to sure they are pro beaver trappers.

In New Mexico we aren't supposed to trap on public land, a court case brought by fishermen{ I think}, the court ruled that the public water flows over public land. I trap beaver for several acequas or ditches in New Mexico I can't get a permit to trap out of season but during the season I trap beaver on public land and water!!? Here in the north the Mexican-American war never ended, Iam almost considered a year round summer person!

Here some registerd traplines have private land within the boundaries of the RTL To trap the private land you need a written permission from the landowner.The landowner can give permission to trap to someone other than the RTL trapper if he chooses.
If there is a beaver pond or lake within the private land and it is acessable from an RTL by a navigable watereay the fur in the lake and waterway belong to the RTL trapper not the private land trapper,even if no permission was given to anyone or not.
Was settled that way in a courcase here a few years ago.RTL trapper in these cases cannot set on any land only in the water(floats beaver or rat houses or beaver dam or under the ice.

In Oregon there are just a few "officially" designated navigable waterways. But the original state's definition of what is navigable holds that if a waterway was used for the transport of people or goods prior to statehood in 1859 than it is "navigable" and the state or the feds own the water and the land under it.

I therefore will hold to the original definition in my trapping and if a game warden sees it differently we will see each other in court.