Minnesota and non resident trapping

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

Back in 1986 or so, the MTA (then), and Michigan coon hunters assoc. went together to generate the fur harvester license.

It took some time and a lot of persuasion to get the DNR & the budget office to go along with us. We showed then a "NEW" license and the monetary gain.

Along with restrictions we (MTA & MCHA) came up with. Non resident trapping/hunting for fur was the issue mostly.

Our fur take here was usually Oct.25 in the U.P., Nov.1st. in lower northern and Nov.10 in the lower third of the state.

The question came to mind, when would a non-resident be able to start trapping/hunting fur? A suggestion of Nov.15th.-opening day of deer rifle season state wide.

It passed with great delight associations wide. The fee for Nonresident was $151. Now all that's changed to let non's come in same day as residentials.

Now if I wanted to go to another state and state hop I could. Providing that state allows it.

Its called a Reciprocal law! Its quite simple if you work out the details with the stat.

So, from what I am reading, Minnesota doesn’t want help or financial assistance from non-residents to help fight their next anti-trapping battles. Too bad. Why should the NTA or FTA help Minnesota out if called upon with donations from NTA and FTA members since most members are not allowed to trap in Minnesota.

Sorry, that's not true reciprocity. If it was, there would be no extra burden like a late start for non-residents and the price for a licence would match the state the trapper came from.

Example.....If you come here to Pa., We charge you 81.90 for a licence and you start when we do. If you are a true reciprocity state, you charge us 81.90 and we start when you do, which you dont.

Yep, that's how look at some states and act accordingly.

If I have the extra money, only after "friendly" states get my support do I consider supporting them.

grandpa trapper,,yes they want your help and donations, they just dont want to give you anything back in return for your support.

teacher, no im not saying one person stopped the process, but he sent that letter as a representative of the mta, and the mfzta was already against the change, so with both state associations against the change, why would the dnr entertain it?

Fossil2- the letter to which you refer was after the 1st vote, to not allow NR trapping. The letter asked that the national organization of FTA, which the MTA donates a large sum to, does not promote a stance of a state level issue that is contrary to the stance of the organization that supports it. I have been told the FTA felt it was a national, not state, issue (see my previous post in this thread) and moved forward with their agenda. My view at the time shared it was a national issue and off went a significant check to the FTA.

However, the President of the MTA was representing the member's majority vote in his organization as members should have expected of him. And applauded him. If it did not jive with your personal belief, being in the minority of the membership, should be irrelevant to his letter. Now the membership has demonstrated a change in mindset, it would be appropriate for the current President to write a letter to the FTA and NTA asking them not to fund a resistance to NR trapping as it is contrary to the MTA's position.

There still exists some hard feelings by some for the FTA running contrary to the MTA after that letter. And when increasing our funding to the FTA (at their request) it was brought up in the last year; this was voiced. The NTA apparently did not feel it was a National Issue and did not contribute. At the time I personally disagreed with them, wrote a letter and cancelled my membership. Only this year did I join again.

This issue has in whole or part, led to the start of two trapping organizations in Minnesota who felt the MTA was not doing enough to prevent NR trapping on one hand, and promote NR trapping on the other. To my way of thinking combined what I observed firsthand during lobbying efforts, this has further delayed the meaningful change on several issues because members of legislative committees as trying to please everybody to stay in office, and the easiest way is to change nothing. Most often accompanied by a canned excuse of "it would be too difficult" without so much as exploration.

United we stand, divided we fall. Yet most trappers fly the Gadsen Flag in their heart if not on their porch. To fully promote trapping, we need to temper our own perfect (aka personal) agenda and back burner some things, and move forward for the greater good. Pride is often one of the greatest qualities of a trapper, and the chief reason we don't agree with each other. Just look at the inflammatory speech to each other on this website as BOGMASTER recently pointed out.

The MTA increased their financial support to the FTA substantially in the October 2019 or January 2020 board meeting. We are keeping the greater good in mind, and surely the FTA is a presence of protection and paving the road of our future. We are seeing some joint activity between the FTA and the NTA to bury a friction that caused the one national organization to divide into two. Across the nation folks are seeing the necessity. There is enough people/organizations to hate you just because you are called a trapper; no need to alienate each other.

Who are the ones doing the dividing, is the million dollar question.

As usual, I am lost in the language and terminology. But what I did manage to sift out is that the trappers in the forest section don't want us guys from the farming section of the state or anyone else for that matter, to come up and trap "their animals"? Is that correct? If so, then that's like saying I don't want anyone else to come down and catch "my fish". My area is full of lakes and tourism supports a large portion of our economy and brings in millions to the area. So what is so different between trapping and fishing or hunting? Attitudes like this cause nothing but problems for everyone but the few who make the rules. Why should I care if someone comes over to catch a few animals if they are willing to pay for a license and dump a little money into our economy? I mean the state has no issues taking money from a NR for fishing and hunting. I honestly see no difference between the two.

There is very little chance that this will ever go anywhere.



There are a lot of trappers in MN that have the same feeling I have on this.

1 I dont have money or time to trap another state.
2 I have plenty of places to trap at home.
3 what am I going to trap that I cant at home???? Possum
4 other than Bobcats or Martin why would you want to buy a nonresident license to trap Mn
5 this is really my #1. I have seen the out of state guys here with their hounds "running coyotes" they say. 99% of the time they are on a cat track with a tree dog not a running dog. I really dont want to see more of those guys here, and they would be.


So when it comes to us voting, I don't care or if pushed I vote No. Sorry it's just how I feel, and no amount of talking will change my opinion.

So the money the trappers in the other 49 states donate to FTA and NTA goes to MN also? That's really fair!!!

Why do they claim to be running coyote? Is it illegal for non-residents to run cats?

For 20 plus years I was a member. Whenever I brought NR trapping up all I was given no real discussion except we are working a on it. Several years ago they discussed different start dates and several species being off limits to NR. As understood it most trappers could live with that plan. Why did that plan disappear. Minnesota has changed it’s Martin and Fischer season To run with Christmas in the middle of it. This was pushed for by northern trappers with the MTA agreement. ( basically eliminates southern trappers from participating if they have a family). We are now required to have bads on our snares because the DNR wanted them up north to eliminate or reduce accidental wolf catch’s. Northern trappers responded they were ok with it as long as everyone else in the state had to use them also. MTA leadership what was your response? Beav run for MTA president you would have plenty support.

"membership has demonstrated a change in mindset"

when the mindset was against nr trapping, the mindset had the support of the mta. now that the mindset has changed, wheres the support? all we get is "working on it", "not the right time", etc. same old same old.

i continue to support the mta, buy my tickets, have a life time membership, etc. i just dont appreciate the run around, and if theyre against nr trapping, then say so, same as those of us that say we support it.

actually been a good conversation,proud of ya's.

This thread is like a bad rerun.

Minnesota stands alone in the trapping world. They could use support from other states wit the wolf and lynx issues. They should do everything they could do to give other states the incentive to help out not allowing other trappers to trap here will hurt mn next anti lawsuit

What EVERY Minnesotan that is against N.R. trapping doesn't seem to get is that there are 51,205,760 acres of federal land ( 6.8% of the state ) that belongs to EVERYONE in this country to use for legal recreational and commercial activities. Minnesota trappers against N.R.trapping are holding these lands hostage, as if they own sole rights of use as trapping grounds! Total B.S., whenever you guys need help think about how your stance on this issue is going to hurt you.

You need a fur bearer license (trapping) license to possess a bobcat. We get tags for them. If you're a non resident you cant have a trapping license, so you can't possess a bobcat. It's a really touchy subject, and I don't agree with it. When these out of state guys are running in an area that has very few coyotes (lots of wolves), and a high number of cats, it really gives away their intentions.


You cant go deer hunting without a license and tell everyone you're hunting coyotes, that wouldn't fly with the game warden.






Really there's nothing here for anyone out of state to trap if...
1 We dont allow cities tags - martin, Fisher, cats.
2 we block spring beaver.
3 non resident have a later start date.

Aside from trapping with a family member for a couple days what would be the point? I doubt any warm weather guys would chop through a foot of ice to set beaver traps only to find out someone cleaned the pond out on the first weekend of season.

.

So let's say its changed.


You can have a license. Its $150, and you can't trap wolves, cats, Fisher, martin, or otter. You can not trap spring beaver. You start 2 weeks after the residents, and it is a limited season - only a few weeks. Your season also runs during the two weeks of rifle season when there's thousands of people in the woods.

Are you still going to buy a license???? No
Why would the DNR push to make it legal there's no money in it for them. So ten licenses are sold that's $1500 that does nothing for the DNR. They will never push for this to happen.

then dont block the cites species, dont block spring beaver, and let them start same time as a resident. whats their reasoning for not wanting southern minn trappers in THEIR area either? ive been there and done that, during the fur boom years. equipment destroyed, traps and fur stolen on an epic scale, and even death threats. seems nothings changed in all these years.

In 1990. I brought up and attempted to have non resident trapping in MN. Low and behold it is 2020. 30 yrs have passed. I live in Ohio now. I have pretty much excepted the fact I will never see reciprocal trapping in Mn. That’s fine. MN will never see a dime from me to support any Non trapping legislation that may come before them. All the comments above about what might happen. Is the same things that where said 30 years ago. So there is your answer.

Other states do the same, try hunting in a designated wilderness area in Wyoming as a non resident. It's not right but the feds give the states wide latitude in management of those lands.

Pat, you are wrong. You don't need a trapping license to hunt cats you need a small game license to hunt cats, non residents can and do.

The reason non residents would come here would be to trap a "trophy species". Does anyone know how many non resident licenses states like Idaho and Montana sell? I am guessing only a handful of guys would come up to trap a Marten, Fisher, Bobcat and hopefully Wolf someday. I bet less than 30 Marten and Fisher would be taken by non residents a year but it would be the adventure of a lifetime for some guys to run a snowmobile or snowshoe line. I wish they could come here and enjoy it.

fossil 2 and a few others made the best attempt to push it thru. But unfortunately lack of support from the MN trappers. It fell thru. Very selfish act of the MTA administration. I am done. Before I say something that will get this thread axed

Sorry, but that was what was being kicked around a couple years ago.

I quit caring a long time ago but has anyone approached the DNR or MTA about trying it for ONE season and then re-evaluate the number of licenses sold and animals harvested? That would provide some sound data on the ACTUAL impacts rather than speculation.

the reason those restrictions were being "kicked around", was trying to appease the mta, and gain at least some small bit of support, in whatever way we could. you keep saying noone would come here anyway, so why all the opposition?

160 user,,,trying it for one year wouldnt be too difficult at all. on the dnr's end, one or two additional pages on their website for license purchase for non residents, online purchase only for nr's, no addtions to the ELS system, etc. good thought.

pat fundine,,49er is correct on the cat laws. many are taken every year by nr's. do you not know our own game laws concerning cats, or did you intentionally mis-state them here for some reason?

There is no site tag required for Bobcats for anyone in MN.
Non residents can legally hunt and run Bobcats with hounds under a small game license.



When your on your favorite crappie or walleye spot and someone pulls up, what do you tell them?

That was my understanding as well since I know some folks who run cats from out of state.

Being opposed to non-resident trappers is for the same reason folks who own lakeshore on public waters oppose anyone else (the public) having access to public waters.

Patfundine, you are one of those people that don't " get it ". You responded to my post but missed the point. You assume that I would follow your logic and not buy a license for reasons you stated. Your position on N.R .trapping doesn't allow any non resident to make a choice to trap on Federal Lands located in minnesota. The point being these lands belong to ever citizen in the USA!

Then why can’t I metal detectors on federal lands? Or need to “draw” a permit to use certain ones like the BWCAW? Why can’t I hunt on NPS lands? I get your point but this isn’t a “one size fits all” deal.

Wow, I didn't realize how touchy this subject was and have learned alot in just a few short pages. I still don't agree with not allowing NR to participate. And as far as not wanting to go out of state to trap? Everyone has a dream, maybe not the same as yours but a dream no less. My brother and his neighbors in NE have had problems with coyotes for years. Hunters have educated many coyotes to the point of making night hunting or trapping about the only alternative. They have had problems trying to find a good trapper, issues I won't go into. I have a dream to help out my brother, that is why I would like to trap out of state. As of now, about the only way I could do that is to move out of state.

Scout, I joined the MTA in 1972. Nothing has changed in the almost 50 years I have been a member.
Tom

Sorry to hear this Bogmaster. Not what I wanted to hear but what I needed to know. Thanks.

This, lol

Pat, I dont see the need to limit anyone else just because I might not have the time or money to trap in another state, but it would be nice if I could leave to trap.
I too have plenty of places to trap at home, and possibly no one knows more country in my locale that I dont quite have the time to get to than me, especially now in a down market.
I dont care why someone else might want to buy a non resident license, it's about alliowing them the chance so that I can enjoy reciprocity elsewhere. No out of stater is going to out trap me on my home ground without alot of homework first.

I dont care for the hound guys period, but it's because I watched first hand, a fella walk in to someone cat set looking for a track to put his dogs on. That should be a killing offense, but here we are, Minnesota nice. That was some garbage dog guy from southern MN too.

Put all this in your pipe and smoke it.

Leslie Huerd, Studliest man alive.

and KEEP OFF HIS LAWN.

lol

In the 2012-2013 trapping season, MN sold approximately 10,000 licenses. This year we wont break 6,000. Do you honestly thing even if we had a hundred or two nonresident licenses sold it would make a difference in harvest numbers? It's not speculation, it's basic math and the math says there will be no impact to populations.

I was wrong about the cities tags.


That being said, I still have not changed my opinion of not caring one way or the other, unless forced to vote. No matter how much support for or against nonresident trapping it still comes down to money. The DNR will not push for something that will not make them money.



Let's say you own a grocery store, and the cart boy wants you to start stocking a .10 cent pack of gum so his cousin the cart pusher across town will come to the store once a year to buy a pack. You have to order a case just for him, take up shelf space, pay someone to stock it, pay someone to rotate the old ones out. It will never happen.

Like everything else today, we have chosen to only think about ourselves. It will only lead to our demise. While it may be slow, it will come. Greed is a terrible thing and all the guys who want to make sure no one gets their beaver, fisher, martin are peeing in to a tornado with the hope of staying dry. Trapping is slowly fading away right in front of our eyes, as we are too short sighted to see that there is strength in numbers. I truly don't understand the mindset of not trying to grow our numbers and support (kids and non residents) while those who would love to shut us down grow in numbers every day. If we stay on the same path, and they will be successful in shutting down trapping or limiting it so badly, that most will voluntarily quit. And we'll have no one else to blame but ourselves.

X 2

Same ole same ole

The answer to your question is yes, 20scout.
Mostly greed combined with a good dose of fear.

But that was your number one reason in your earlier post.

"Sorry, guys, Mike Kelly and I are fishing here and you should probably leave since we have already caught them all.
You are, however, welcome to stay and try your luck but you might find your efforts to be in vain.."

" Oh, sorry, Warden, I thought you were another fisherman. I have my license but I'm not sure about Mike...better check him."

And Mike Kelly feels "the wheels of the bus go round and round" as MnMan tosses him under.

BOGMASTER- I do believe there was NR trapping allowed in 1972. In some ways the question may be more, what would have changed but has not due to the MTA's activities since then.

During one point of the fur boom, Minnesota sold 25,000 trapping licenses. There was a miniscule number of non-resident license purchased. Mike Tucker whom was president of the Commercial Trappers of Minnesota had the numbers during the meeting I spoke of on page 1 of this thread. I cannot find that organization on the internet anymore.

Anytime trapper numbers go up, theft and territorial behavior goes up. That was apparent when COVID caused a spike this spring beaver run. The CO's around here were actually working that pretty hard.

SUCHLIKE hit it on the head IMO. We are perhaps more hindered by trappers fighting trappers that we are by antis. At any rate, we should be able to reduce that more than we can the effect of antis.

What EVERY Minnesotan that is against N.R. trapping doesn't seem to get is that there are 51,205,760 acres of federal land ( 6.8% of the state ) that belongs to EVERYONE in this country to use for legal recreational and commercial activities. Minnesota trappers against N.R.trapping are holding these lands hostage, as if they own sole rights of use as trapping grounds! Total B.S., whenever you guys need help think about how your stance on this issue is going to hurt you.

I know it is not pertinent to the issue of NR but you may want to double check your figures. MN is 86,000 square miles which is about 56 million acres. The way you have that written MN is over 95% federally owned. Your 6.8% may be correct but then that would be 3-4 million acres not 52 million. Just an FYI.

Bryce

Mike and I are good friends and have often fished together. I was only intending to have a little fun with him with no ill intentions. I would never throw him under a bus as you suggested.....maybe under something a little smaller like a bicycle.

Ringbill, NR trapping hasn't been allowed since the 20s.

BobMo could give an exact year.

Spot on! Too many "mine, mine, mine" greedy weasels out there for that. If you can't out trap a NR coming into your area, lol....

How come the guy that wants to trap in another State is not greedy? That was my motivation when I did it. Is the guy that takes this issue to court to get a Judge to change it greedy?

We are all greedy. Allocation fights are always about greed. There are winners and losers, but both sides are greedy. Give it a rest!

Its not greedy to expect a trappers organization to treat you the way your trappers organization treats them. Its the POS people who are scared of a little (and VERY LITTLE IT WOULD BE) competition for "Their Animals" holding back everyone else. No grandson from Ia can't come trap with grandpa from Mn, Some trapper from Wi living on the border can't catch a couple coons across the street, etc... Bunch of babies!

I have no desire to trap Mn, never have had but is total BS they are such babies that I couldn't if I wanted to. Anyone can come to our state and trap with the exact same regulations as the residents, as it should be in every state!

Yes, I do feel it will make a difference. Not really on animal harvest but as a way of showing people opposed or on the fence that there is nothing to fear. As I said, I quit caring years ago but I offered this up as a suggestion to take forward and try it. Most people can swallow change for 1 season but to make it permanent is a big change and people don’t like change.

Bryce, I stand corrected, you are right. There are 3,469,211 federal acres in minnesota, 6.8% of the roughly 52 million acres in your state. I might have been a little agitated last night when I posted those figures.This is a touchy subject for me ,as it seems to indicate greed and fear towards fellow trappers, from other states in OUR country.

I'm glad MN doesn't allow non residents to trap In MN. If they did they would be reciprocal and they would all head to ND to trap rats. LOL

Does Minnesota allow a NR to be MTA president. I nominate the beav he would get it done

I'm going to the Horicon.

Better to have brought out the salt to sprinkle on some old wounds that have not healed.

It's easier to become a US Boarder Agent and work in a airport in Canada, then after a year you can trap here

I'll skin your rats for you.

Fur trapping is dying a death from a 1000 cuts. Low fur prices, over regulation, low trapper recruitment. As much as I hate to say it our industry is in trouble, and may never come back. I would bet that 80% of the trappers actively trapping are age 50 or older. Just look around at a convention.

To me its, simple, I am in favor of any legislation that creates more opportunities for trappers, or reduces burdensome regulations. Opening Minnesota up would create opportunities for more trappers.

I would guess that you may have 20 - 30 non resident licenses sold, it would have zero impact on the resource. Southern Minnesota is hardly being trapped now, 1000s of good mink and coon locations 20 feet from your truck door won't see a trap this year. Any trapper that knows what they are doing and wants to trap hard should be able to take a 100 mink per week, and move on to fresh locations until freeze up, and hardly have any competition.

I read through this thread and see the same arguments that I have seen for the past 30 years. So when someone tells you that: "you need to be patient", or "the timing isn't right, maybe next year", it rings a little hollow.

I've always supported non resident trapping, it has cost me some customers, but so be it. More to life than money.

I will say this about the MTA, it has done its part and more to support both the NTA and FTA. When these groups need financial support, the MTA has been there to help. We have a strong association and have fairly good trapping regulations, especially being a liberal state. So to folks that wish ill will to the MTA, please consider that folks on both side of this issue are part of the association. And all have done their part to keep our association strong.

125 per week. haha. hope alls well gerald.

Tim, you have to remember, Gerald's getting a little long on years lol.

yeah but hes shorter on years than i am.

What I have heard, they sure heck don't want anymore mn hunters/trappers coming there way also. Don't talk to pleasant about the badger state hunters and trappers either.
I'm talking land owners.

Blue platers! Pretty normal to despise non-residents here too. Ask Beav about the Flatlanders (now FIBS).

Gonna feed me too?

I find it interesting that several people have PMed me in support of this subject. They have confirmed as well as debunked some of my suspicions. Funny though, all have been supportive of getting NR trapping allowed but yet no one who is against it has PMed me to try to explain their side. Overall I do see that MN trappers do NOT support one another like they should be and there for do NOT support trappers in general including other states. From what I have gathered I can understand both sides of the story but can not agree with the nay say'ers. It's been mentioned that with the down market, what few NR trappers there would be wouldn't make a noticeable impact. I like the suggestion of trying it for a year but feel it might take a few to get a good idea of how things would work out. I'm not apposed to NR's not being allowed to trap some animals or a different starting date as residents. But even with a trial period, I don't see the other states allowing me to trap as a NR unless this trial period is more than just a one year thing. So far what I have heard from those who appose it haven't really persuaded me with a good enough reason. "Because I say so" or "I don"t want to" isn't a good reason in any discussion. Forgive me if I am wrong but from what I see is a few people who not only don't want NR's to trap in their area but don't even want their neighbors (other residents) allowed to. Change is coming weather we like it or not. Best to get ahead of it so we have some control before we loose everything!

Like I said, approach the DNR with a 1-3 year trial basis. That is a step in the direction you want to go and change is easier when done in baby steps. I no longer have a dog in this fight. It won't bother me at all to see NR trapping here and I will never trap out of state. I was merely offering a suggestion that MOST may be agreeable to.

I guess my biggest concern is that both of my sons and my grandchildren live out of state and they can't come home and go trapping with me and I can't trap where they live either. My youngest son used to go with and help me trap when he was growing up and I would like him to be able to do it again along with his son before I croak.

Rob, the DNR doesn't make law and it will take a law change from the legislature.

Doug, with having children that live out of state, I have the same fear as you.

I wonder how many States that claim to allow NR trapping have reciprocity restrictions? We don't. Maybe you should work on removing those restrictions? Maybe FTA and NTA can strong arm those States?

Either let Non- residents in or don't. What rules another State has is irrelevant. OH wait, I forgot about FAIRNESS.

I will bet back when ND had rats and there a rat market, ND had as many MN residents trapping, as people from any other state. They just did it with out a license or got a ND resident license.

^ right there tells the true story of mn outdoorsman. Neighboring state hate to see them come.
Yep! Right there again show the what a true mn trapper/hunter is. They are what some here have expressed and experienced. Neighboring (SD/ND) landowners hate to see them come.

snowy finally sees his moment, lol

Crawl back under your rock bud, lol

That would be really nice!! Hope it happens.

Is it a law or a regulation??

Legislators have to change laws here in PA.
DNR changes the regs.

Didn't one of the 3 or 4 MN Associations get a bunch of money from somewhere to try to get this passed? It rings a bell but can't remember all the details.

Yes Les,Snowy shows up whenever something anti MN. comes on. We have seen this before.
Must be MN,envy on his part.
I am pretty sure some probably do cross the line and break the law.But I doubt it is a one way street. A law breaker is just that--someone who can't follow the laws. I doubt it is just some Minnesotans that are that way.
Tom

^ just truth and facts. Yes, maybe not all bad from mn but those that break the law and are slab outdoorsman have given mn outdoorsman a bad name. There has been many on here that have posted about your states issues of sportsman. Maybe when things like this are posted it might help to make you people better when coming to other states.

Wasn't long ago one from mn said, they hunt geese and just let them lay when they hunt out of state.

A slob is a slob,no matter where they are from.
Tom

Yep, thats what we all do Snowy, just run around from state to state blasting stuff and leaving it lay. Good God!

^ maybe you as an honest person can make the difference for the ones in your state to become better as an out of state outdoorsmen.

And yes, I meant slob, just not as perfect as those from mn. They are perfect in their own eyes I guess.

For the record I support NR trapping, but wante to comment on the trial basis. Would it be like the new rules on break away devices on snares? If you got your letter explaining the regulation change recently the last sentence is classic. "There will be opportunity for additional public comment WHEN this regulation becomes permanent". How about taking comments and considering them before making the rule permanent?

Snowy,you have a habit of anti Minnesotan posts.
Did someone in Minnesota hurt your feelings at some time?
Tom

No, some great people from mn but have seen enough law breaking and slobs that are in the outdoors from there. I had an old friend that called today that said he bought a house in the cities. We just absolutely hate to see them here in mt I couldn't even imagine being right next door to your state. WOW.

Just posting the truth and facts what land owners have told me and what I see.

I would hope you try to make your image better for mn outdoorsman instead of saying there isn't an issue. All of you honest trappers and outdoorsmen from mn could make a difference if you wanted too.

funny ive never heard of anyone from minnesota crossing borders illegally. i sure remember finding dakota traps set in minnesota along the western border back in the day though. the one time i trapped south dakota rats with my son, every land owner was glad to see us, and we were routinely stopped along the roads and asked to trap "their" rats for them.

There were guys from MN trapping SD for rats as residents and then filtering up into ND in the spring. Some were investigated for falsifying residency. Some where on here. They claimed they were just trying to help too.

Or possibly your butt?

Boy this pop corn feast is getting more and more salty every night.


Those Mn boys all give their shot birds to Mr Culvert every night up here at least.

It's set in Statute it will take an act by the legislature to change it.

"popcorn is a winter snack. It's grilling season for crying out loud" Crying and whining what many of us choose to do.

Bryce

Bryce,popcorn is good any time,as is ice cream.No microwave popcorn here.
Tom

mjm,,,i never said i was there to help anyone. i said we were ASKED to help. i do remember one minnesotan that claimed residency the next year because they own property in south dakota, and he used to be on here. no, theres nothing right about that. so, what weve decided here is that minnesotans, a few, sneaked into dakotas after rats, and that dakotans sneaked into minnesota after mink. i never sneaked anywhere for anything, and dont appreciate being lumped together with those that did. ive also never left a goose behind anywhere, or left trash behind, like alot of our nr ice fishermen do here in minnesota.

Newsflash for ya fossil2, residents and non-residents alike leave trash behind whether it's ice fishing or camping or just flicking cig butts out the window. You just effectively lumped all non-residents together as litterbugs after saying you don't appreciate be lumped together with slobs.

i said ALOT, not all, nr ice fishermen leave trash. i did not lump them all together.

Well now you have.

https://www.fccnn.com/sports/outdoors/2175816-halstad-minn-man-plead-guilty-trapping-bald-eagle

i just stated above that i remember one. you miss that post?

I too trapped SD for a year and land owners thanked me for being there and killing rats. They said the locals couldn't keep up and some from Montana were dumb.

This is probably the longest Minnesota NR thread I've ever seen without a poof. Thanks for the reading material for the evening.

boone, yup, you missed that post. page 6. 3 posts above you.

LOL,Wade.During the course of this,I have written but never posted 4 other replies. I try to never get a post--POOOFED.
Tom

Creative editing software must have been inserted in your puter there Tom.

so this is what happens when there is no summer convention in Mn.

Our fellow trappers got the non resident trappers run out of SD. They tried to do that In ND but some prominent land owners put a stop to that.
I trapped 2 counties In ND and I never ran In to a resident trapper. Well there was one local trapper that was running maybe 30 sets and we never had any problems. The land owners were just siting out at night with a sixer and a 22 and killing rats for the fun of It.
I was getting gas and this pick up pulled up to get gas. I just happened to look In back of his truck there must have been 40 rats In there. I asked If he was a trapper. He said no but him and his wife had fun shooting them. He asked me If I wanted them and I took them. Then I got permission to trap all of is ground.He said that as long as he had owned the land no one had ever trapped It.

Election year. Write incumbents and challengers. Tell them you want their support for trapping. With email this takes seconds to accomplish. If 1000 trappers in MN did that each year it would have a lot more effect of change than voicing your opinion to other trappers. Think of it as planting the seed and fertilize it every year. You can pick the same topic (maybe NR) or a different (no more loss of tools like a 220). Or even straighten out some of the misinformation (ie... the MN Dog-liar's posts). Best yet, invite them to join you on a trap check.

For those of you in the metro-suburbia areas the chances are when your legislators came to office they did not know that people still trap. So the probability is their first knowledge will come from anti-trappers who are darn good at lobbying for their interests. First seed planted usually survives in a freshly turned field.

The point I am making is there are easy steps to actions that make a difference.

We let coyote hunters hunt free no border states allow us the privilege . Reciprocal is my idea as fair

2, So why the dog in the fight?

3.4 It would be nice to visit Family and run along on their line, my guess there would be way more NR that would just want to tag along. Fur prices will never be what they were or a very good reason for a NR to trap Minnesota.

Why does someone constantly have to beat this dead horse? We've had this discussion a million times and it always ends the same way!

It would be nice if a moderator would just delete this thread and all others like it.

So it would be nice to limit the free exchange of ideas and thought?

Why? Here's one reason: the Minnesota residents that would like to trap here in WIsconsin with friends and/or family on public and private lands other than what they might own would sure like to see this horse brought to life.

I am curious. I did not read back thru this thread but I’d imagine this has come up. In other non reciprocal states if you lease land can the outsider trap or do you have to actually own the land to be trapped on?

Osky

I am curious. I did not read back thru this thread but I’d imagine this has come up. In other non reciprocal states if you lease land can the outsider trap or do you have to actually own the land to be trapped on?

Osky


To my knowledge the only nonreciprocal "states" that Wisconsin does not allow nonresident trapping on public and/or nonowned land are Hawaii, Minnesota and Washington D.C.

I do not believe leasing land here in Wisconsin would allow a Minnesota resident to legally trap on that property.

From the Wisconsin trapping regulations: Landowner Provisions: The owner or occupant of any land and any family members who live with them do not need a license to trap coyote, beaver, fox, muskrat, raccoon, woodchuck, rabbit and squirrel on the land year-round.

Many States have all types of NR restrictions that people forget to mention during these discussions. Many draw systems often favor the residents not just in trapping but hunting also. Usage fees also impact some people’s choice to go to another states. I pay $265 to hunt deer in MO when a resident pays little to nothing for a tag (free on their own land) if I want to hunt I pay it I like MO so I pay it.

Serious question here. If Minnesota resident buys a lifetime small game or sportsman's license it includes a trapping license. The lifetime license is good for life, irregardless of where you live. So, how would that affect a trapping license?

True Law… the nonresident deer only tag in Montana this year was well beyond 800.00 very close to 9 all in.

Osky

Patfundine,
Did they recently change the law to forbid nonresidents from cat hunting Minnesota? I know a couple friends who used to go there and hunt them every year. But neither have in the last few years. Had thought of doing it myself just because I've never hunted that far east. But their season is the same time as my season here and so I've never done it. Haven't looked into it in a few years, but nonresidents used to be able to go there and cat hunt.

Nothing like bringing up a contentious, divisive post on Christmas eve, lol.

HO! HO! HO!

I'm very thankfull that someone had to drag this 3 year old thread back up.

To bad the mask and vax threads of that time period were all deleted. Those really would have spread Christmas cheer. Lol.

Just because someone has no desire to go out of state to trap doesn't mean someone else shouldn't be able to. I personally feel that I should have that privilege even if I never make that decision to do so. The past years have not been about making money trapping but the adventures that go along with it. We don't many any money deer, elk, antelope, duck, goose, pheasant, etc hunting or fishing, yet we still do it for the sport. My opinion is that not allowing NR trapping is just a selfish act to keep all others from enjoying our resources.

We have come a long way over the years and we have a ways to go still. Still some that think if they don’t do what you do they make it into a problem. My thought is if you do it and I don’t good for you why should it bother me if it’s allowed it seems decisions have already been made.Hypocrites abound let’s try not being one.

It would be nice I would love to trap with my grandson in both Mn and Wisconsin.

Well said Jerry. We as sportsman (and women) need to stick together. Just because I don't enjoy the same sport as others doesn't mean I shouldn't support one another. We bicker umungst ourselves and the liberals fan the flames. We lose our privileges one small piece at a time eventually losing so much that it's no longer fiezable. We need to take back some of what we have lost before we lose it all.

Sorry for your predicament. Too bad other people can't see past their nose. Fortunately my grandkids moved back to MN. I don't expect my youngest who finished college this semester will live in MN.

So every year when she or her kids can't meaningful trap with me I'll say a Christmas thanks to those who deprive me if the experience.

PF whether you like it or not this isn't going away.

page one
I see we lost some members early with this "territorial dispute"
as they have de-registered

I still don’t get the fear ! If a NR can come here and roll cold and out hustle you who’s fault is it exactly ?

One Association has drug its feet so badly and spent more effort to stop it , then promote it !

One association actually requires you oppose it to be a member.

Only the fledgling CTM actually introduced language supporting it and paid a Lobbyist to make the effort.

Why would trappers oppose other trappers ? Why forbid grandparents from taking there NR grandchildren ? Why is anyone against taking there NR friends on the line ? Why support ,not being to trap out of State on a friends line ?

Sure would be nice for MN residents to offer a guide service to out of state residents and obtain extra income during down markets. Nothing better than willfully restricting resident trappers.

Pat, you could barely catch a cold, I can understand why you feel threatened by NR trappers coming in.

OUCH!

Shots fired. LOL

None across the bow either! Just below the water line without warning.

Funny they both want the same thing really. LOL

Whats the big deal,if you want to trap in Minnesota-move there,pay your taxes and trap there.
Same if you want to trap somewhere other than Minnesota-Move to where you want to trap.
Its a free country go live where you want to trap.
I get why people dont want aliens coming to their territory and taking the profits home.

MN will honor your Lifetime license including the trapping portion. Not all States allow you to have residency rights in there State without giving up your residency rights in another State.

If trapping were predominately profitable, where people were actually earning a seasonal income, they couldn't block them. Nice Hobby though. Ho! Ho! Ho!

So many different factors to consider do you have a registered line up there or how does that work up there. Populations, public lands, permissions all have a impact on trapping in the states.

I do pay my taxes in MN. Unfortunately being a MN resident disallows me from trapping in other States. In fact , every surrounding State !

How is the issue dead ? MN Association has approved pursuing NR trapping !

I said trap with my grandson, moving to the california of the midwest is never going to happen.

This thread is 3.5 YEARS old. If there are updates and changes start a fresh thread with all the info.

I’m just glad that SD is no longer the red headed stepchild anymore on here.

If there was a memo you chose what threads were relevant I must of missed it !

If you are not interested don't click on it, rather simple.

Check your Spam folder. Seriously, if there are updates or changes I would suggest a new thread. Typically people don't read through old threads for 5 pages looking for updates.

Seems to be getting some attention despite the age of the thread !

I've paid taxes in three states this year so far

I do pay my taxes in MN. Unfortunately being a MN resident disallows me from trapping in other States. In fact , every surrounding State !



I agree with Boco. If it's that important. Move

Steven, work in SD, you won't have that problem.

Yeah,

Mostly because of the biased, behind-the-scenes
censorship which took good care of that, didn't it ?

w

I did plus a few more.

While I don't care if y'all jabber on on this thread, I do agree with 160 that there should be a new thread if it's true that MTA is pursuing non-resident trapping. How did that come about? Did they finally fire their lawyer? lol.

Who said the MTA is looking to pursue it?

It came up in a recent survey but I haven't heard anything new in to regards to wheather or not it'll have any merit. There are politicians who say it'll never happen and judging by the current situation at the capital it might still be stagnant. I'm not giving up hope that one day we will allow NR trapping here again.

Originally Posted by Northernbeaver

Sure would be nice for MN residents to offer a guide service to out of state residents and obtain extra income during down markets. Nothing better than willfully restricting resident trappers.

Pat, you could barely catch a cold, I can understand why you feel threatened by NR trappers coming in.

Guide service for a couple marten?
Non residents should feel comfortable coming here on their own merit,..it's a bit of a quest of such, no need to commercialize that aspect.

Who said anything about marten?

Well, gee, two marten /fishers,..four otters,...have at it,..not my issue.

2poor did.

I bought a lifetime small game and firearm deer license before moving to Wisconsin. When I contacted the DNR I was told I'm still not allowed to trap. I can still get a trapping license printed though

Again, the MTA members supported NR trapping by a paper ballot vote. It’s been so long I can’t even recall year it passed by a simple majority.
No real action has been taken. My personal opinion is someone would prefer to slow walk it until death ! No move with a Republican majority and now scared to introduce legislation with a Democrat majority.

Interesting Angela doesn’t like this NR Thread yet moves it to the top !

Gary Leistico

https://www.leisticoesch.com/

2011

MN will honor your Lifetime license including the trapping portion. Not all States allow you to have residency rights in there State without giving up your residency rights in another State. [/quote]

I bought a lifetime small game and firearm deer license before moving to Wisconsin. When I contacted the DNR I was told I'm still not allowed to trap. I can still get a trapping license printed though[/quote]

I know of someone with a lifetime MN Sportsmans licence who lives in ND. He runs a line along the MN/ND border and has never had any issues.

Depends on the state

Do some research on trapping guide services around the country, they don't all focus on CITES animals.

A MN trapper, willing to put in the effort, could make an extra 15,000.00 a year as a guide for NRs. Peanuts to some, an amount that makes the difference to others.

I’m a bit confused here. You’re proposing to require a guide to trap in MN like when hunting in some States or in Canada?

That why I avoid Minnesota, land of the socialist liberals

You are quite confused ! He mentioned if NR trapping is allowed a guy could supplement his income by assisting a less experienced NR wilderness trapper obtain his goals. Might be trapping Cats , Fisher , under ice Beaver etc. I know several guys currently guiding NR hunters behind hounds chasing Cats.
Guiding Bear hunters is also popular supplemental income for some experienced trappers.

It’s unique in MN that NR hunters can harvest Bobcat (5), but not allowed to trap a single cat.

No he is not

So it’s not but it really is then, I got it! Seems it always boils down to the same thing really.

You guys do what you want it’s your State I’m just trying to get clarity.

Uniquely , we own land in NW Iowa , pay taxes on said land, but can’t trap on it despite MN allowing NR landowners to trap on land they own !

Whoa there, I have no problem with this thread. I did find it funny it got dragged back up on Christmas eve is all. I absolutely think that MN should allow NR trapping, it's ridiculous that they don't.

I thought from your previous post that there was some new development with the MTA on the NR issue and if that was the case felt a new thread was warranted, but apparently that's not the case.

Why would there need to be a new development ! Personally I am still hoping the MTA take the last membership vote seriously !

Taking the last membership vote seriously and trying to get NR trapping allowed would BE a new development. If MTA polled the membership and the majority of them want NR trapping then yes, MTA should absolutely support it.

Angela , that vote was probably 7 years ago ! So not exactly a new development !

The wishes of Membership were clear though !

In the intrests of clarity,isnt there more than one trapping organization in minnesota that represents trappers there?.One supports Non res trapping and one does not?Which one has the most members?
When the poll was taken did it include results from both organizations members separately or together?

Yes Cory I understand that.

When you said..... "How is the issue dead ? MN Association has approved pursuing NR trapping !"... I took that to mean that the MTA leadership was currently pursuing NR trapping.

I misunderstood you.

The way things are in Minn. the residents will be lucky to be trapping in a few years.

Where did I state that? I stated that as the current law reads it is illegal for a MN resident o guide non residents and subsidize their income during a down market. It is also illegal for people to give any hands on, on the line instruction.

The talk of guiding kind of muddies the waters a bit is what I was asking. Lessons or trapping adventure might not raise any red flags like the term guiding does. The term guide seems premature at this point but I understand the need of more income in rural areas every dollar makes a difference, been there done that.

Yes guides are “required” in some states, reservations and Canada if that was the angle to get NR into the state then that would be another story. Hence the confusion or lack of clarity.

We went through the same BS for years in SD even after NR trapping went through the the big stink was the rules became the problem even though other states had similar restrictions and some have added new rules or went to resident only draws. I don’t pick on MN like I said it’s there state their rules but the low blows just keep coming often from people that have less to offer. Most of the ones that get nasty don’t have a dog in the fight and have no plans to trap where they are complaining about often.

A Doc friend I hunt with went on a remote trapping adventure up in Canada on a registered trapline he enjoyed it very much.

I have been guiding recreational hunters and fishermen for years. Good luck guiding recreational trappers.

I don't believe it's unique to Minnesota, but certainly applies to MInnesota residents here in Wisconsin due to their nonreciprocity with regards to trapping.

https://dnr.wisconsin.gov/GoWild/nonresident.html

Maybe you can join this one?

The primary purpose of the MFZTA shall be to achieve the best possible fur-bearer environment, promote high-quality trapping and to protect our trapping heritage.

To achieve these purposes, the following shall be promoted:

• Present our positions to government officials’ departments and legislators.

• Educate all trappers (young/old) and the general public on the values of the sport of trapping.

• Promote good sportsmanship, good trapping ethics and safe trapping practices.

• Promote and maintain high-quality fur-bearer programs.

• Provide opportunities for trappers to meet, share experiences and develop a fraternal spirit.

• Support enforcement of regulations, which curtail the illegal taking of fur-bearers.

• Support efforts to increase opportunities for furbearers on public and private lands..


• Support wildlife research, provide pertinent information and maintain a working relationship with wildlife officials..

• Establish a realistic and workable position on predator control..

Good questions
?

Osky

Hope you guys find a solution but with multiple organizations with different goals it will be a struggle. I was surprised at the trappers and dealers that opposed it here, life long guys that promoted the sport until then. Many have passed now so maybe it’s a old guy thing somewhat?

Plenty of guys who state hop fought against it

I have very little knowledge of the current MNFZA . Certainly not supporters of NR trapping. I have no doubt they are a minority in comparison to the MTA. Like by a really , really, long ways !

I only know the much larger Association MTA , voted to support NR trapping ( excluding tagged species) quite some time ago.

I think having past conversation and context in a thread like this is invaluable, don’t know why some are perturbed by that. And it’s not a dead horse, just a horse locked in a barn. Happy trapping! ScottW

Come to think of it in my area I’ve never heard of or seen a NR trapper but I’m sure that’s not true across the whole state. I’m sure the golden triangle and the Black Hills get some just not here yet.

Non residents can trap In SD but I don't think they can start till Jan. Not sure If's that starting date.

Does WI still have a delay for NR trappers?

Looks like they start Dec 1st

Yes and no. Non-resident trappers have the same start days as resident trappers for all species except raccoon; where non-residents have a 14 day delay. It's an old statute which given the current prices of raccoon doesn't make much sense but isn't going to change.

Start dates vary by location (zones) in the state and by species. Start dates open as early as mid October.

Bobcat by draw only in the whole state? Resident only or can NR draw a tag?

I'm not Against it at all. but others Stance will hurt me anyway

The point I try to make often is every state has its own rules and restrictions be it equipment, late starts, draws that exclude NR or greatly reduce the NR chance of drawing, no harvest of certain species or limited harvest of certain species. People often forget their states restriction but not other states restrictions.

Just saying each state has its own unique rules, advantages and disadvantages find the one that works for you is all you can really do no different then planning any other trip.

Dec 1st and beyond in WI vs SD is often way different we get bad weather but it comes and goes. Yesterday I could not leave the house tomorrow I’ll be cat trapping. That’s a common occurrence lots of trapping opportunities further into winter often allowing more days/months in the field. I’ve trapped a lot of states and that’s often not doable. Some states if you’re not local you’re not trapping.

Not all states restrict NRs. Mine doesn't.

Not being a wise butt but what’s it got offer with being that far south I really have no clue what MS has to offer furbearer wise.

Unlimited otter and cat. Lots of NRs come here in winter.

Cool I never hear much about it, big fur price difference? Them snakes sleep all winter? Trapped LA years ago that was a different experience lots of otter there also.

no nr restrictions in ks or quite a few other states other than license fee's

Not every state but many have restrictions or little to offer. Not a great yote there from what I hear I can’t say from experience just what I heard in the past true or not?

Well there is between southern cats and western cats of course. Otter are the same price as any other otter though. A decade or so ago when pale otter were on fire everyone wanted to trap down south as a lot of otter down here are pale.

We also have live market coyote trapping and a guy can make money on that as well. I know of several people on this forum that come down here every February to live market coyote trap.

And then there are beaver absolutely everywhere, and southern beaver sell for the same price as northern beaver. Plus you can trap them in open water year around.

i have 40 year old friendships from my times in mississippi. id travel south before ever thinking about going east or west to trap. great people and alot of opportunity for a trapper.

The SD change In non resident trapping happened back when rats were worth something. I know lots of guys went to SD and trapped rats. Then the SD TA went and voted to change the non resident opening date. So basically It was all froze up when the non resident could trap.

Myself and some others fought the set back for nonresident coon trappers. It all steamed form greed. Coon back then were worth big bucks. Coon hunters also had a say In the set back.

Bobcat and fisher are by draw only across the entire state. Depending on either northern zone or southern zone and time period (early or late) draw point accumulation may be anywhere from an estimated 2 years to more than 6 years for a Bobcat tag. Only one bobcat permit per hunter or trapper per year. I believe bobcat and fisher draws are open to all applicants, I didn't see any restrictions placed on non-residents. Also carcass collection rotates between time periods, this year it is the early period. Selection is random for harvested cats, so providing a carcass when notified may be viewed by non-residents as a further inconvenience, but it is a requirement for residents also.



I'm not sure where the suggestion of a Dec1 opening date of non-residents trapping might come from, the only species/zone that opens near then is the small and narrow, lower Mississippi River zone for beaver on December 4th, this year, which is the same for both residents and non-residents.

I will agree with Law Dog, weather is often very different between South Dakota and Wisconsin. That said Wisconsin's weather often comes from South Dakota depending on prevailing air currents. Weather is variable across our state due to topography as it is everywhere. I would guess that trapping after December 1 in South Dakota would be more intimidating to non-residents but South Dakota offers more generous species take limits than other states.

Also to be noted, Wisconsin requires completion of the state's Trapper Education course for both residents (with limited exception) and non-residents which is offered by 3 methods to best meet the circumstances of the student. Additional information is available on the Wisconsin DNR website.

Dec 1st is our NR opener here in SD usually a 2 week delay or it was that way in the past Beav thought it was in Jan but it’s Dec 1st that was my reply to him about that. We get several different weather patterns across the state most years we get snow and it’s gone a short time later but there are some extreme exceptions to that rule. LOL Often I go for 7 months straight hoping for a bad weather rest late in the winter. Always badger mounds to set on or the wind will blow off large areas down to bare ground it’s a learning experience. If the wind blows a metal detector can be handy or snares come into play also lots of options.

MO doesn't discriminate towards NR trappers, either. Lots of good saleable fur in MO. And SD didn't change things until the rat boom.

Our brother trappers shut that down for other brother trappers. The road crews, businesses and about everybody that owned wetland was against the change In SD. Squeaky wheel gets the grease. It's the same reason why we don't have NR trapping here in MN.

People who do, do. People who are lazy sit around and complain and shut things down for the people who do. This is exactly what happened in SD and is still prevailing in MN. I've met them face to face in both states. We trappers are our own worst enemy.

Excellent post. That about says all that needs to be said. The sad fact is I doubt we have trapping as we know it allowed in Minnesota in a few years.

So it’s SD fault MN does not have a season? That’s ridiculous laughable you can’t come here because you don’t have a season get a season then come on down. The way I read it if you do get a season someday cities animals won’t be included for NR so how it that any different really? Many states have rules that suck get a season then complain.

My bad I read this wrong I should have read it a couple more times as Calvin and I are often on the same page on many things. My apologies.

Your reading comprehension on this thread sucks Jerry. He said a few selfish trappers from SD got the rat season changed and he said a few selfish trappers are why MN has no NR trapping. Not the same trappers FCOL.

Your right my mistake just a little gun shy from past years I got to expect the BS. Yes I see no point in any delay myself never did funny the fight for fur that might not be the best anyways early/late. The guys here that caused that are mostly gone now maybe things will change.

Not to worry.

Some trappers will still be around to help carry the torch.

w

No our coyotes are not great. Western skins are decent. No where near as many grade heavy as yours will. I wont skin them now. When prices are good its not hard to pile them up though. People who have not seen it don't get the numbers we have. We have good cat and coon populations. Again not high quality but numbers. Beaver and otter not scarce in eastern KS. Get lots of NR trappers when the demand is there.

Does anyone remember the guys name that went there and caught a thousand or so rats and took us along via a thread here he updated regular? I believe he was banned from here a little later for something he said.

Banned for something he said ? You’re going to have to narrow that down a bit ! LOL

I think he was from Wi. and trapped out of an enclosed trailer. He really stacked them up and was Purported to be one of the reason the butthurt had nr trapping closed in S.D.

O.B. ?

That rings a bell Walleyed!!! I think you got it.

I couldn't remember his name.

He was a go getter!

That fits into what I’m saying Danny as to the give and take I see guys heading to KS to get some numbers because it works for their goals. But the quality is not there for trappers with other goals. I was seeing a lot of yotes out on the WY border years ago so I asked a state trapper is anyone trapping them ? I just keep running into them. He said they are not good yotes in that area so ya never know until your into it.

OB was laying on a beach in Florida 2 days ago celebrating Christmas with his family. Probably still has some of that Cash stashed !