I don't want any leading from government officials and so called experts making any laws that affect my or your personal life. I am a free American citizen and I should be able to travel and pursue and enjoy anything that anyone else can do legally. If I so choose to skydive or smoke a pipe or trap hunt or fish ; the government or other people should not be looking for me to break their law . Mind your own business. You are just as big of a sinner as I am. Worry about your own things in life and be happy with what God gives you. Keep the government out of the problems. Settle your problems, one on one and don't try to control the big picture. Try to find happiness for your fellow man. Don't worry about if he is one step ahead or behind. The only one in total control is the good Lord. He will bring you peace and happiness.

Right,get rid of all borders everywhere,let all people go and do what they want where they want,let God sort them out lol.

I am sure the people that settled this country were not dependent upon the government. Now we are hoping the government will tell us how to be civilized and jail us with their laws and taxes. Freedom in this earthly world is living with Jesus Christ in the spiritual world.

The people that settled this country created the government and its laws and taxes. Good or bad, that's the way it happened.

"....................certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men,"

The last free people were the Indians before contact.
And it was brutal.
There are no truly free people today.
Civilization ended that.

Well said, Boco.

In Butcher's Union Co. v. Crescent City Co., 111 U.S. 746, 762 (1884), J. Bradley in his concurring opinion, stated in part, " The right to follow any of the common occupations of life is an inalienable right, it was formulated as such under the phrase 'pursuit of happiness' in the declaration of independence..."

In Vivian I. Volvar, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Fishers Island Lobstermen's Association, Inc., Fishers Island Conservancy, Inc., Movant-Amici Curiae (2003), United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, citing several SCOTUS rulings, stated, " The right to pursue a lawful calling has long been recognized as a fundamental right, see, e.g., Allgeyer v. Louisiana, 165 U.S. 578, 589, 17 S.Ct. 427, 41 L.Ed. 832 (1897)
( The 'liberty' mentioned in [ the Fourteenth Amendment ] is deemed to embrace the right of the citizen to be free in the enjoyment of all his faculties; to be free to use them in all lawful ways; to live and work where he will; [ and ] to earn his livelihood by any lawful calling; to pursue any livelihood or avocation."), and one that is protected by the Privileges and Immunities Clause. see Hicklin, 437 U.S. at 524, 98 S.Ct. 2482 ( Clause protects nonresident against discriminatory regulation of ability " to ply their trade, practice their occupation, or pursue a common calling within the State."); United Bldg., 465 U.S. at 219, 104 S.Ct. 1020 ( " Certainly, the pursuit of a common calling is one of the most fundamental of those privileges protected by the Clause. Many, if not most, of our cases expounding the Privileges and Immunites Clause have dealt with this basic and essential activity.") (citation omitted)." See, Allgeyer v. Louisiana, 165 U.S. 578 (1897); Hicklin v. Orbeck, 437 U.S. 518 (1978); United Building Trades v. Mayor of Camden, 465 U.S. 208 (1984).

These are known as your Freedom of Choice - aka your "pursuit of happiness," and it applies to your constitutional rights as a lawful commercial fur harvester.

Gabby, you gonna be the first to head over to Wisconsin and take advantage of this forgotten right..or you just hoping to stir the masses enough that someone else will do your bidding..? Asking for a friend

Midlander, don't you have one single contribution to make to the betterment of fur harvesting? I am at least trying to educate people to the legal fact that they have rights under the constitution if they qualify for them. I'm telling everybody what those in positions of authority don't want you to know and understand. What I am telling you goes much further than just applying to commercial fur harvesting. This information applies to all forms employment.

What are you hiding by your deflections? Are you afraid of competition? You don't think you are good enough to out trap a nonresident on your own turf? What you should be asking about is why aren't the NTA, the FTA, or the NTF fighting for your constitutional rights to work as a commercial fur harvester, predator control operator, beaver control operator, or just a general nuisance wildlife control operator in any State in the Nation that accords (allows) that same right to their own citizens?

COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISE definition | Cambridge English Dictionary
1 week ago - a business or activity that is involved in buying and selling goods and services, in order to make a profit:

Selling fur is revenue. Revenue minus expenses is profit. No intention to make profit equals hobby.

IMHO engaging in a commercial activity does not make you a commercial trapper (Commercial enterprise).

"A hobby is any activity that a person pursues because they enjoy it and with no intention of making a profit. People operate a business with the intention of making a profit. Many people engage in hobby activities that turn into a source of income. However, determining if that hobby has grown into a business can be confusing."

IRS

Gabby, no disrespect intended, but I get the feeling if there was anything to what you are saying, it would have been fleshed out a long time ago. It feels like a sovereign citizen post to me, quoting all kinds of bs about the constitution and not needing drivers licenses and free 'travel' and bla bla bla...and at the end of the day, they get their arse thrown in jail.

Dirt, I have that same identical quote. Do you understand that what the IRS is stating there is that a commercial activity that is engaged in with no intention or attempt to be profitable is a not-for-profit hobby. One that is engaged in the same commercial activity, that is intentionally attempting to be profitable and is profitable three out of every five years, including the current tax year, is a for-profit business venture. That is from your same source - the IRS. So an activity that generates an income stream is a commercial activity. And based on the evidence you and I have both presented a commercial activity can be engaged in as a not-for-profit hobby, or it can be engaged in as a for-profit business venture. BUT, the one thing it cannot do because it generates an income stream is a recreational activity! Irrefutable legal fact. Since you like to look things up in your dictionary, look up the word "avocation" and apply it to this discussion then get back to me. The best description of commercial fur harvesting are the words "avocation" and "business venture."

Midlander, why would it have been fleshed out a long time ago? What is that "sovereign citizen" comment all about? Are you mentally stable? I am quoting SCOTUS rulings - irrefutable legal facts until some other SCOTUS ruling overturns them. And what is wrong with quoting the Constitution or the Fourteenth Amendment? Am I educating you about things you don't want to hear?

If you get a chance,Gabby,you could check your messages…

"These factors are whether:
The taxpayer carries out activity in a businesslike manner and maintains complete and accurate books and records.
The taxpayer puts time and effort into the activity to show they intend to make it profitable.
The taxpayer depends on income from the activity for their livelihood.
The taxpayer has personal motives for carrying out the activity such as general enjoyment or relaxation.
The taxpayer has enough income from other sources to fund the activity
Losses are due to circumstances beyond the taxpayer's control or are normal for the startup phase of their type of business.
There is a change to methods of operation to improve profitability.
Taxpayer and their advisor have the knowledge needed to carry out the activity as a successful business.
The taxpayer was successful in making a profit in similar activities in the past.
Activity makes a profit in some years and how much profit it makes.
The taxpayer can expect to make a future profit from the appreciation of the assets used in the activity.
All factors, facts, and circumstances with respect to the activity must be considered. No one factor is more important than another."

My source does not say what you quoted.

"Livelihood" is the word that is the right found by Scotus. A man has a right to earn a livelihood.

Hate to tell you this but a hobby can be a recreational activity.

Mentally stable...guess it depends on who you ask
Ill be patiently waiting to see someone take the states to task on this issue.....
Nuff said from me....

" I am wondering how many people on here believe that fur trapping is recreational like a lot of State fish and game departments say it is? If so, why? What do you think makes it recreational?"

"Hobby Law and Legal Definition
A hobby is defined as an activity engaged in for pleasure or recreation, rather than for profit. A hobby may be a profitable activity, without profit being the main reason for participating in the hobby."

People seem to think that if you engage in a commercial activity somehow that makes you a commercial enterprise. Some trappers are engaged in a commercial enterprise, but the vast majority are not. When managing an activity primarily for recreational trappers ( the majority), it appears the courts will not apply the livelihood standard to the activity.

Does any of this mean that income from the sale of fur is not taxable and does not need to be reported as income?

Hobby income is supposed to be reported, Just not on a schedule C. Business Income