wolfer
Active Trap Talker
Posts: 60
|
Post by wolfer on Jan 29, 2010 16:47:29 GMT -6
Copy of letter I send to Tymeson.
Dear Representative Tymeson,
Allow me to introduce myself. My name is Matt Pittman, I am 37 years old, married, and the father of five daughters. We live on an acreage 2 miles west of Jefferson, a wonderful place to raise a family. Although I currently work with my father in our family business (POWERLIFT where we manufacture heavy duty strength training equipment for pro athletes) my roots are that of a farm kid and outdoorsman. As a kid growing up, working on the farm in Iowa allowed me many wonderful experiences and memories. Among some of the most cherished memories I have are those times I spent trapping. I began trapping 25 years ago at the age of 12. Over the years, this sport and wonderful heritage on how this country was settled, has been an important part of my life allowing me to experience just one of the many freedoms that we have in this great country of ours.
My passion for trapping is why I write today. I would like to ask you to reconsider your sponsorship of Bill HF 2139. Please allow me to explain my position as well as a vast majority of the trappers in Iowa. I would first assume this law is being presented due to trapper-landowner conflicts and being presented to protect landowners. There is already a law that prohibits the use of snares and conibears within 200 yds of a residence driveway to curtail conflict. By passing HF 2139, I do not feel this would help resolve any issues that arise between landowners and trappers. As with anything there are a small percentage of people out there setting traps that have no regard for others property or pets. These people are simply giving trappers a bad image and can be handled adequately by the local conservation officers without another law on the books. The 200 yd. law requires some mutual understanding and respect by both the trapper to keep his conibears and snares 200 yds. away from the residence and the landowners to understand this law and keep a close eye on pets when 200 yds. away from home during the regular trapping season. I do believe that this mutual respect and understanding of the current law is much more prevalent than one might think. You see we seldom hear about the good things that happen in life, so much of it is just the negative. Most trappers have a deep respect and understanding for the animals they seek as well as respect for others property and pets. The truth of the matter is that there will always be law breakers around, not just in trapping but everything. I don't feel this law will help protect landowners any more than they are protected currently; it is simply unnecessary. The people that break the 200 yd. law will have no problem breaking Bill HF 2139. As a farm girl growing up in Iowa, a school teacher, a mother and someone who has served their country to preserve the freedoms we have in this great country I salute you and thank you!! Please help preserve those freedoms by not sponsoring this bill.
Thank You for your time
Matt Pittman
Life Member #260 Iowa Trappers Assoc.
Member National Trappers Assoc.
|
|
|
Post by 4fur on Jan 29, 2010 20:09:16 GMT -6
Great job wolfer! And you too Ken! I was very impressed last year with your efforts to retain our prestaking privileges, HB. You are good at this so thanks for helping us out! I especially liked your leash law reference and the liability issue with permission. I have land I am welcome to trap, but every year the landowners will state, "If you ever have an injury or accident on my property, for insurance purposes, I will have to call you a trespasser." I sent an e-mail to my rep who owns a gun shop in my home town. Unfortunately, he is on commerce, veteran and several other committees that won't directly address this issue. I expressed my displeasure with the bill and asked him to find out specifically why it was introduced by Mrs. Tymeson. I touched on fur being a renewable resource and how trapping is a valuable and necessary wildlife management tool. I included a picture of my two young daughters and I sitting on a tail gate with a modest amount of nice fur. I stated that I would always be animately opposed to any anti-trapping legislation which might effect my daughters' future enjoyment of the sport. I sent the e-mail late this afternoon and have not heard back from him, yet. But I will update you when I do. My rep is Matt Windchitl of District 56. I doubt that he has ever set a trap but believe he is one of us. His e-mail addy is matt.windschitl@legis.state.ia.us
|
|
|
Post by gopherkiller on Jan 29, 2010 20:58:44 GMT -6
here is my email...
in regard to:
HOUSE FILE BY TYMESON
A BILL FOR
1 An Act prohibiting setting or maintaining traps within a public 2 road right=of=way without prior permission of the adjacent 3 landowner or tenant and providing a penalty. 4 BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF IOWA:
PAG LIN
1 1 Section 1. Section 481A.92, subsection 3, Code 2009, is 1 2 amended by striking the subsection and inserting in lieu 1 3 thereof the following: 1 4 3. A person shall not set or maintain any type of snare 1 5 or trap within any public road right=of=way unless the owner 1 6 or tenant of the land adjacent to the public right=of=way has 1 7 given permission. 1 8 EXPLANATION 1 9 This bill prohibits the use of any type of snare or trap 1 10 within any public road right=of=way unless the owner or tenant 1 11 of the land adjacent to the public road right=of=way has 1 12 given permission. Currently, a person must obtain the prior 1 13 permission of the occupant of a residence whose private drive 1 14 entry is within 200 yards of where a conibear=type trap or 1 15 snare will be set. 1 16 "Public road right=of=way" means an area of land, the right 1 17 to possession of which is secured or reserved by the state 1 18 or a governmental subdivision for roadway purposes. The 1 19 right=of=way for all secondary roads is 66 feet in width, 1 20 unless otherwise specified by the county board of supervisors 1 21 of the respective counties. 1 22 A violation of the new provision is punishable by a scheduled 1 23 fine of $25. LSB 6001HH (3) 83 av/nh
I am Tim Love, owner of Love's Wildlife Control out of Knoxville,IA. I would like to inform you of the mistake it would be to ban trapping of the ROW. I feel that high numbers of predators such as the raccoon, opossum, and skunk to be the leading cause of the low numbers of pheasant and quail in our state. Pheasant hunting was (and could be again) very lucrative to Iowa. In the early 80's when fur prices were high, record numbers of these animals were harvested and our bird population was excellent.Now 30 years later Peta and other similiar organizations have tried to discredit wearing fur. Demand has dropped and so have the fur prices. The number of trappers has also dropped and in turn the predator numbers are over carrying capacity. This not only leads to unhealthy animals but also to conflicts between humans and wildlife. Trappers have answered the challenges we have faced by changing and adapting to new methods. The laws we have in place make it fair for both the homeowners and the trapper, snares and body-gripping traps must be 200 yards away from a residence. We have DP (dog proof) traps and cage traps that protect domestic animals. Furharvestors do not want to catch domestic animals and go to great lengths not to. I understand you are not against trapping in general but I feel compelled to inform you that the ROW accounts for a large percentage of the animals harvested each year. Taking away the ROW will cause more harm than good. I want you to know that fur trappers of today are a declining breed and how important they are in damage control/furbearer management. In my line of work I deal with many people that are invaded by raccoons. Raccoons in an attic, soil insulation, shread heat ducts, chew on wiring, chew holes in roofs, and create a unhealthy environment. Raccooons account for literally millions of dollars of property damage every year. Many customers want to know why there are so many of these animals and the short answer is "because few people are harvesting fur". Think for just one minute of the number of raccoons that a furharvester caught near someones home before it had a chance to damage that home. Imagine the number of skunks that have been caught before it had a chance to bite/spray someones dog. Skunks are the leading carrier of rabies in Iowa. It seems insane to me to resrtict a beneficial entity (furharvestors) even further than has been done already. Please see fur trappers as valuable and stop the bill to ban trapping the ROW.
|
|
|
Post by hillbillyken on Jan 30, 2010 7:50:25 GMT -6
Thanx Guys....just tryin to do my part
|
|
|
Post by Eric Rector on Jan 30, 2010 8:48:44 GMT -6
Two excellant examples of using logic over emotions. Now there are examples for others to follow, fill in the blanks so to speak to fit your own situation and email off or personal contact. Now we need everyone to contact her and the members of the natural resources committee to do the same
|
|
|
Post by Griz on Jan 31, 2010 14:55:46 GMT -6
If you are not sure of your representative or how to contact them, you should be able to find out by going tho the following website: www.legis.state.ia.us/FindLeg/
|
|
|
Post by 4fur on Feb 1, 2010 12:12:33 GMT -6
Took a little time this morning to e-mail politicians concerning the anti-trapping legislation including this to Mrs. Tymeson: Dear Representative Tymeson: I am very angry to learn of your bill to restrict legal fur harvesting in Iowa. Such bills rarely originate from sound wildlife management principles. Harvesting a renewable resource, fur, provides thousands of Iowans enjoyment and even income, insures a healthy animal population, as well as reduces human-animal conflicts. Such legislation nearly always originates from anti-consumptive animal use philosophies. Are you an Anti, Mrs. Tymeson? I will always be animatedly opposed to any legislation which restricts my daughters' future enjoyment of Iowa's outdoor activities. There are already laws in place which help to insure pet safety including the leash law. Because we realize pets can not read and there are non-responsible pet owners who allow their pets to free roam off of their property, many of us trappers explain our activities to residents when setting within the 200 yard buffer zone of an inhabited dwelling. Attached are several photos of special equipment we often utilize: Dog-proof traps and cage traps. I imagine you are familiar with cage traps but the Dog-proofs are a fairly new device. Coon are caught and comfortably restrained when they reach into a Dog-proof to pull out the large marshmallow it is baited with. An animal must have dexterous feet to be captured in this pet friendly device. Bait selection is also important when avoiding non-targeted animals. I often use strawberry jelly, molasses, maple syrup and such. Many tappers, including myself, own pets and have small children. Believe me, we take great measures to insure no harm will come to either when we set traps! I assume you are not from a farm background so let me identify another problem with your bill, Mrs. Tymeson. Each year I trap a lot of private property with the landowners' blessing but they always remind me that if I get injured or have an accident, I will be deemed a trespasser in the eyes of the law and their insurance companies. Why? If they give written or explicit permission, it can be used against them in court. Also there are a lot of absentee, corporate and trust land ownerships in our state. This makes it very difficult to identify and contact who to to acquire permission from. There are also issues involving in who actually has authorization to grant permission, the farmer or the landowner? For the above mentioned reasons, Representative Tymeson, will you please pull Bill HF 2139? If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Most Sincerely, Name Address Phone numbers Businesses owned Affiliations Photos I attached:
|
|
|
Post by centraliowa (ryan) on Feb 1, 2010 12:30:20 GMT -6
a couple additional items i touched on in the letters i sent out where this. - i know she is targeting trapping but is next if this is successfully? no hunting, pheasants, mushrooms, asparagus
- giving landowner final say on land they don't own - who do we seak permission from, landowner, renter, leaser?
- why take away public ground, we have very little of it in Iowa and now you want to take away some because of irresponsible land owners that let their pets roam
|
|
|
Post by paulb on Feb 1, 2010 12:37:22 GMT -6
That sounds very convincing Wayne,and i thank you for your efforts,,,,,but i wonder how far she read before she deleted it,,,
|
|
|
Post by 4fur on Feb 1, 2010 12:58:45 GMT -6
That sounds very convincing Wayne,and i thank you for your efforts,,,,,but i wonder how far she read before she deleted it,,, Good point Paul! I think it's important to be brief and concise but I took a little extra time for her and my district guy. I imagine an e-mail only titled Against Bill HF 2139 and signed is just as effective as a long winded one. Politicians are in business because they please the majority. So many letters, e-mails and phone contacts are viewed in a score board context rather than for their content. But we can play that game too!
|
|
|
Post by riverbandit on Feb 1, 2010 13:34:17 GMT -6
Well done Wayne, but I'm not sure its wise to mention alternative devices that are pet resistant. We need all the tools currently at our disposal to trap the ROW. She may amend her bill to allow ROW trapping but limit us to cages and dog proof traps.
|
|
|
Post by paulb on Feb 1, 2010 14:08:10 GMT -6
i imagine we will be hearing about the ITA winter meeting soon,,,i am sure this topic came up there,,,
|
|
moleman
Active Trap Talker
Posts: 54
|
Post by moleman on Feb 1, 2010 18:15:39 GMT -6
My letter to Tymeson. Dick Reiser here from Gilbertville IA. I am sure you are aware of the current laws regarding trapping along road side ditches & how close they can be to building. I am not sure of the reason that you would like to see your proposed change. My guess would be a canine or cat was involved in a mishap. My view of course is different from yours & we probably could not convince each other other wise when it comes to arguments about road side trapping so I will not go in to detail here. The Iowa DNR sets rules & regulations for trapping with some strong guidance from the Iowa Trapper's Association & the Natural Resources Commissions. Legislators I believe pass laws based on there input. Do you have any from them? Their the experts,let them decide. Thanks for your time. Dick Reiser Gilbertville IA
|
|
|
Post by coonhunter679 on Feb 1, 2010 19:39:01 GMT -6
Has anyone heard back yet. I called Dave Deyoe last night and talk to him. He informed me: He just heard of the bill from an email someone sent him on friday night. He was going to look at the bill this week and to call him back later this week. Then he told me about some of the details of the current shall carry bill.
|
|
|
Post by 4fur on Feb 1, 2010 19:50:16 GMT -6
Well done Wayne, but I'm not sure its wise to mention alternative devices that are pet resistant. We need all the tools currently at our disposal to trap the ROW. She may amend her bill to allow ROW trapping but limit us to cages and dog proof traps. Good point Dave, thanks for pointing that out.
|
|
|
Post by justwannano on Feb 1, 2010 21:06:05 GMT -6
I contacted my rep, Dave Heaton, a personal friend. I just kept it short and simple stating I am opposed to the bill and there already were dnr rules concerning distances from homes and buildings. 2 minutes later there was a email stating he would look into the bill. Probably a canned email response but I'm sure he will look into it. Have a good 1 just
|
|
|
Post by longpond on Feb 1, 2010 21:36:03 GMT -6
Everybody please go to the ROW CONTACT INFORMATION thread and E-mail those six Representatives listed. They are the people that will be seeing HF2139 before or even if your Rep. does. Hopefully yours will never see it !!!!!!!!!! Please everybody do so........Thanks
|
|
|
Post by grinnergetter on Feb 2, 2010 8:46:14 GMT -6
This is what I received back.
Don,
Thanks for your e-mail and comments.
This is in the House and it doesn’t appear to have much support.
I will watch to see if it moves forward and let you know.
Thanks, again
Senator Rich Olive Representing Story, Hamilton, Wright and Webster Counties
|
|
|
Post by dspree on Feb 2, 2010 12:41:13 GMT -6
I sent my emails today.
|
|
|
Post by grinnergetter on Feb 2, 2010 15:15:46 GMT -6
Don,
I have received several comments from constituents on this bill—all opposed. I told Rep. Tymeson yesterday that I would not be supporting her bill.
It appears that this bill may not be going anywhere. Thank you for your input on this issue.
Sincerely, Rep. Dave Deyoe House District 10 "Proudly Serving Story and Hamilton Counties"
Representative Deyoe as a trapper and hunter in your district I am asking that you do not support the bill/house file listed below. I have lived in the area all my life and have trapped, snared and hunted for years. There is already a law in place to keep trappers and hunters from using the road right of way within 200 yards of inhabited buildings whether it be people or livestock. This would not allow us to trap or hunt in road ditches and under bridges without permission from the land owners. I own property (farm ground) and raise a few cattle and do not feel this bill/file would be a benefit to me from a land owners prospective. I do live on the fore mentioned land. Please tell me that you will help out trappers and hunters by not supporting this. I believe there are many other issues that deserve your and others attention more than this one. Thanks in advance Don Hoffmann 13273, 530th Ave. Story City 515-733-4437
|
|
|
Post by hvtrapper on Feb 2, 2010 17:33:25 GMT -6
I have also heard form Rep. Deyoe and Rep. John Beard that they would [glow=red,2,300]NOT[/glow] supporting this bill.
|
|
|
Post by walleyehunter123 on Feb 2, 2010 18:21:16 GMT -6
way to go guys keep up the good work for all the trappers !
|
|
|
Post by hardwired on Feb 2, 2010 22:03:24 GMT -6
Sat in Natural Resources meeting on the House side in Des Moines today. After the meeting a person with the DNR told me at the present time this bill wasn't going anywhere. I would need to here back from a ranking member on the house side to be confident that it has been killed for this session but all your efforts have made an impact down there. After I'm confident its dead I'll let you know. Don't stop contacting your legislators. You guys have done a good job.
|
|
|
Post by trapperknox on Feb 3, 2010 9:53:13 GMT -6
Hey yall What's the House bill number of this? I'm writing an artcile for the Van Buren register and I need the house bill number so we can call our rep and senator to let them know which one it is and all Thanks yall
|
|
|
Post by grinnergetter on Feb 3, 2010 10:15:18 GMT -6
House File 2139
|
|
|
Post by trapperknox on Feb 3, 2010 10:28:32 GMT -6
Thank ya, sir
P.S. Sorry for the wrong emote
|
|
|
Post by jdrogge on Feb 3, 2010 11:27:20 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by centraliowa (ryan) on Feb 3, 2010 13:33:59 GMT -6
that is the benefit of communication! same way we handled the threat we had up in the lakes area earlier. organization, communication and a willingness to get it done. thank you to everyone that sent letters and made phone calls. this isn't over but we are heading in the right direction.
|
|
|
Post by grinnergetter on Feb 3, 2010 15:46:28 GMT -6
Dear Don, Thanks for the letter. I will try to kill the bill. Thanks again. Rep. Dan Huseman Aurelia
|
|
|
Post by Bristleback on Feb 3, 2010 18:51:53 GMT -6
Guess I postted this on the wrong thread.
Early this am, I sent 7 emails, 6 to the committee members and 1 to Ms Tymeson.
This afternoon, I received this reply: "Thanks for the letter. I agree with you and am trying to kill the bill. Rep. Dan Huseman"
Fellow trappers, it only takes a few minutes and I encourage you all to do the same to help protect what's right.
|
|