Minnesota and reciprocity?

I am not posting this to cause an uproar.

I just have a couple questions.

I have a couple friends on here from Minnesota who haven't been able to go out of state to trap furbearers due to the restrictions on non resident trappers and theyre kinda upset.

According to them the majority of trappers from the northern part of
Minnesota are the trappers not wanting non reaident trappers.

Is this true?

I was also wondering if any of the rest of yall from MN feel that the restrictive laws on non resident trappers have impacted your ability to travel out of state to trap?

Do yall ever think the DNR eill ever say..enoughs enough and override the restriction of non resident trappers?

I have no desire to come to MN to trap I just told one of the guys I'd make the post he was wanting to but didn't want the repercussions

Maybe I am missing something but how does Minnesota not allowing non residents to trap affect their residents from going out of state? Are there laws in other states that don't allow Minnesota residents to trap their state?

I'm in NW MN and some time in my life would love to head to NW North Dakota and trap some highline coyotes . Not everyone in N MN is against it . 49er would be a good resource of the trial's of this issue - Hopefully he'll chime in

Many states are reciprocal. If non residents can't trap in MN, then MN residents can't trap there.

Lol to the first sentence

No to the second.

We will eventually follow Colorado and California banning effective trapping eventually, I doubt trapping restrictions ease in this state.

Northern MN is. Beaver mecca. The guys up there can make serious money if beaver prices rise and imo that is the main driver of not allowing non residents

Idaho is one of them.

It's a Sad old fight

Many states ..like Wyoming are reciprocal which means mn residents cannot trap fur bearers in Wyoming solely because MN does not allow non resident trappers

It's like if you won't let us trap in your state you're not trapping in ours

The way it was explained to me is that when miners would get laid off from work, many would trap to make ends meet. For many it was a matter of survival and became quite cut throat even between close friends. Good money could be made and competition was heavy and one way to eliminate some of the competition was to no longer allow non-residents to trap. As a result, now many states won't allow us to trap in their state. I have had several offers to trap out of state for bounty but can not due to this law. Would love to get it changed but from what I have heard there is little chance of that happening. With fur prices being in the tank and fuel prices being as high as they are I doubt there would be many non-resident trapping licenses sold any time soon.

Serious money? Beaver? I guess one would have to define what serious money is.

I live 3 miles from Wisconsin. Over the years I have gotten dozens of calls to trap problem animals there. But because of our restrictions,I cannot trap in Wisconsin.
Though as a Wi. trappers ed instructor, I have been able to help my Wisconsin brothers--learn to trap.
Was hoping to see non resident trapping allowed in Mn. before I die, but doubt if that will happen.
Tom

My guess is MN residents could buy a license to trap in as many or more states as not.

Don't know for sure, just a hunch.

Last I checked Minnesota and Hawaii were the only states I can’t trap.

Not true.

Talking historically not currently. Yes, perhaps "serious" was a bit of an overstatement.

Donner, not even historically, when I was a child we had a limit on beaver. Tom is as old as the wind, he'd remember. I believe it was 10.

Not only was there a limit,seasons were short with almost no open water trapping.
Tom

Tom, when do you think we got a spring season? 80s?

My uncle used to tell us about the time there was a beaver pair that moved into this water hole. He said people would come and watch them in the moonlight as they were rare. He just amazed how we'd catch them by the hundreds now in the same area.

Steven, I am thinking it was 1981. I was 30 that year and trapped bever close to home. It wasn't just a spring season--beaver opened in the fall along with the rat and mink openers.
Tom

Wow

And you had to tag each pelt!

Do you think that eventually ..with residents alot not wanting to trap beaver because of the current market..that they'll open it to non residents due to over population..or will the state just lean more heavily on the USDA for beaver control?

Heck,the way things are going---once us old farts are gone--people will have to pay for all animal trapping.
There are very few young people to take our places. Fur trapping is heade in the same direction as the DO DO bird.
Tom

That's still 40 for a family of four...

This going to be an educated guess on my part but I believe it was an April 15 close at first. Essentially not a spring season for most of us. Couldn't trap within x feet of a house and
within x feet of a dam.

Just as a general intrest point-Ontario does not allow non resident trapping.I would be open to non residents(even yankees) being able to get a licence to trap as an 02 on a registered trapline here.
I was speaking with a trapping instructor in Hearst yesterday,he was saying he has never seen so many young people taking the trapping course.
And a lot are young women.
Trapping is alive and well here.

I have a couple hundred of those tags......they were a pain cutting them off before grading.

There is another 4 letter swear word that cant be said with the non-resident issue. It begins with L and ends in K and unfortunately everyone uses the plural when saying it. for non target capture

Here in WV we still have state all beaver caught in the state..

Difficult to say. It's been law for so long and there are people in office that don't want to change it for whatever reasons. I personally see no real good reason not to allow non-resident trapping. Hard to make any $ with today's fur and gas prices prices as a resident. Figure what it would cost for someone from out of state to want to trap Herr in MN is enough to deture that idea.

Cathryn, sorry to hijack your thread taking a trip down memory lane. I'll try to answer some of your questions from my perspective.



I have been to district trapper meetings all over this state. One will find anti nonresident in every latitude. I'll speak in generalities here. I would surmise that the majority of trappers who are against changing the status quo are from north of US HWY 10. That is not the south of the north-south division of MN but seeing as every numbskull from the MSP area thinks that is "up north" I will go with it. There are quite a few people opposed who live in the central part of the state. I would say a better metric is forested areas vs agricultural areas.



Of course it's impacted my ability to go out of state, I've said it more than once, the furthest I have trapped in state from my home is 350 miles or so. If I could trap a 350 mile radius from my home I would be able to trap ND, SD, MT, WI, MN, and a couple of Canadian provinces. What is worse is my daughter, son-inlaw and grandchildren who live out of state aren't able to come home and have the ability to meaningful trap with me other than riding around in the pickup. Technically they are not allowed to carry a trap to the site or a muskrat back to the truck. It's a dang travesty!!!! I'd have used a couple of cuss words if Paul permitted it.



The nonresident trapping ban is codified into law, it will take an act of the legislator and the signature of the governor to change the status quo. The DNR has little to do with it, they could come out and say for whatever reason they aren't in favor of a law change but at the end of the day it's a legislative decision. A couple of well placed legislators can have done more damage to trying to get a law change. Take it as a coincidence or not those two are from the northeast. Looking at it from solely the perspective of nonresident trapping initiatives, the two biggest obstacles are retiring this fall. Still won't be easy.

It will be interesting to see how long this thread lasts. Historically it isn't very long lol.

John, if you have some MN tags from different years, I'd be interested in some for my collection. Even more so if they somehow haven't been damaged.

I am from NW ND and can't trap my farm because of this odd rule. ND residents of which I am formally, can't stand a lot of MN plates. The average rank and file hunter in ND is not a fan of more MN running around hunting and fishing. Trapping is an oversight but it gets caught up in that mindset too. MN non-resident trapping rule should be tweaked and allow a minimal amount of NR trappers in via a lottery. Allow them to trap coyotes, fox, muskrats, skunk, possum, mink and coon and then make cats, fisher, marten and beaver off limits to NR.

I have only one more year in MN and then I am off. The state is run by liberal idiots and making friends here is hard because everyone hangs out with their buddies from 7th grade. I will go to the MN Trappers Convention this year and renew my membership. It would be nice to sit in on a discussion from the MTA on the NR Trapping issue and see if there is any middle ground here.

Every state has odd rules that don't please everyone. In Iowa, NR landowners can't get a guaranteed bow tag every year and in Utah NR can put in for all the trophy one in a lifetime tags but residents can only put in for one.

Parochialism here in northern MN is something else. I once put a tree stand up in a tree in St Louis County on PUBLIC land. A few days later someone put a note on that tree upset with me for taking "his" tree. He left his number so I called it and had an interesting chat. Keep in mind, there was no tree stand in that tree but he felt it was his "Spot" and wanted me to move the stand. I told him I didn't care if he was conceived in that tree, I was not moving that stand. This was 18 years ago and my first year living here.

So NR trapping is just an extension of "this is my tree". Its makes me laugh its so (This word is unacceptable on Trapperman) dumb.

Ok shall bring them down sometime.
Some are the cabin and you know where the keys are if your fishing Lake Winnipeg this winter. We are now going to change it to Ocean Winnipeg with all the water in it.

The chances of me entering Canada anytime soon is less than slim to none

I hope the thread doesn't get axed because someone gets stupid.

It's an interesting topic and there are others besides me who think that way.


It's crazy to me I could come hunt in MN if I wanted but can't set s trap.

OK I wont bring it up at the AGM then.Forgot about that sentiment down there.
Thought there might be some interest.

What two are retiring?

Cathyrn. I grew up in MN. Served on the MTA board from 1989 to 1994. Wore a few hats. Non Resident trapping has been a sore topic. In 1992 it was brought to a vote then. Was shot down. When I moved to Ohio. In 2002. Now it is 2022. I have pretty much given up the fact that I will be able to trap in MN. I will never understand how on earth you would want to keep non resident trappers out. But when it comes time for a legislative law. This group is more then happy to except money from out of state trappers. I understand it is not all that want this law. But it has remained intact. So be it. I give to all trapping organization except MN. I won’t support anything that doesn’t support all trappers in the USA.

I would think the only residents upset would be those doing ADC work. Someone coming in and gaining possible work from a resident might cause some discontent.

Robert, my comment was to N50. As I am not vaccinated Canada won't let me in and I don't plan on it at 5he moment. I would love to come up and trap if it were available.

Dusty, Bakk and Tomasonni are retiring. Both are vehemently opposed and both wielded a bit of influence.. You know what I forgot Ruud is out this year as well, her area was redistricted and didn't win the endorsement. frankly she wasn't really in favor. As she was the chairperson of the Senate environment and natural resource committee it was tough.

Tom, we would be happy to have ya here, iffen we could get politician out of the way! And thank you for your years of teaching.

Seek, I've run into that mentality too. National forest, but this is my ridge, I always hunt here. And you wonder what you're going to find when you walk out to your truck after the hunt. I only ever have that issue up north, where there is so much more public land.

We have laws that allow NR to hunt coyotes here free and we pay to hunt there

1.00 per inch …lol

I would love to trap MN with my grandson and teach him.

You want to trap Mn., you better move.

Not really have plenty to trap at home but grandson lives in the western swamp.

Seems like there would be a way to teach him without a license.

Perhaps a "Baby Step" forward would be defining "Assisting" a trapper at the State level. Clarify what assisting consists of in the context above. Is a NR trapper verbally explaining on site what needs to be done considered "assisting" the trapper? If so, maybe look at changing that to "Physically setting or placing" the trap is prohibited???? Just a though.

anyone can trap in Michigan even Canadian

If we are going to change it let's make it a meaningful change not a participation trophy.

Actually nonresidents ADC businesses can operate here. No trapping license required for that.

Guys from Wisconsin travel to the MSP area every day

Work on registering your lines in the north part.Get the councils involved and have all the trappers bring in maps where they traditionally trapped for years.Where they overlap the council mediates and draws the final lines between drainages to de lineate trappers exclusive areas.Some gain a little bit,some lose a little bit but everyone is better off after.
Thats how it was done here in the 40's,started in central Ont,which would be similar demographic as N Minnesota.

Absolutely not.

Not only the best for trappers but best for the resource also.
Line registration was driven by trappers across the country.