|
Post by Scott W. on Sept 10, 2012 6:49:17 GMT -6
I sat in and eaves dropped during a portion of the ITA Director's meeting and learned a few interesting things. The discussion was about the possibility of changing the code to include using a trapper's DNR number instead of (either/or) name and address on a trap tag. Jason Sandholdt informed us that opening the code isn't always as scary as we may believe it to be. If the code is opened, only the section that is opened can be changed. It was hoped that the section concerning trap tags only concerned trap tags, but when Jason got his Code book we learned that the section concerning trap tags also included a bunch of other areas that no one was willing to allow unintended tinkering with to happen. So it was decided to leave the trap tag requirement as it is. Scott Webb
|
|
|
Post by skunkboy on Sept 10, 2012 8:32:41 GMT -6
Well, that's news I guess. Is there a link to the actual Code that anyone of us could review? I would be interested in reading it, just for my own interest.
Scott, you may not have the answer, but maybe someone else here does and could weigh in. Much appreciated.
L8R...Ken
|
|
|
Post by Scott W. on Sept 10, 2012 9:33:04 GMT -6
With a bit of looking (maybe a fair bit) you can find what you need, but I don't have a link at my finger tips. Sorry. Scott
|
|
|
Post by catting on Sept 10, 2012 16:24:14 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by catting on Sept 10, 2012 16:26:25 GMT -6
sorry link works but it brings you to the general site, code section is 481A.92, you should be able to search for it by typing code section into search menu.
|
|
|
Post by k9 on Sept 10, 2012 20:00:25 GMT -6
481A.92 TRAPS -- DISTURBING DENS -- TAGS FOR TRAPS.
1. A person shall not use or attempt to use colony traps in taking, capturing, trapping, or killing any game or fur-bearing animals except muskrats as determined by rule of the commission. Box traps capable of capturing more than one game or fur-bearing animal at each setting are prohibited. A valid hunting license is required for box trapping cottontail rabbits and squirrels. All traps and snares used for the taking of fur-bearing animals shall have a metal tag attached plainly labeled with the user's name and address. All traps and snares, except those which are placed entirely under water, shall be checked at least once every twenty-four hours. Officers appointed by the department may confiscate such traps and snares found in use that are not properly labeled or checked. 2. Except as otherwise provided, a person shall not use chemicals, explosives, smoking devices, mechanical ferrets, wire, tool, instrument, or water to remove fur-bearing animals from their dens. Humane traps, or traps designed to kill instantly, with a jaw spread, as originally manufactured, exceeding eight inches are unlawful to use except when placed entirely under water. 3. Conibear type traps and snares shall not be set on the right-of-way of a public road within two hundred yards of the entry to a private drive serving a residence without the permission of the occupant. 4. A snare when set shall not have a loop larger than eight inches in horizontal measurement except for a snare set with at least one-half of the loop under water. A snare set on private land other than roadsides within thirty yards of a pond, lake, creek, drainage ditch, stream, or river shall not have a loop larger than eleven inches in horizontal measurement. 5. All snares shall have a functional deer lock which will not allow the snare loop to close smaller than two and one-half inches in diameter.
|
|
|
Post by k9 on Sept 10, 2012 20:01:38 GMT -6
Opening up the code for tags opens up all the above for good and bad changes
|
|
|
Post by ~ADC~ on Sept 10, 2012 20:26:14 GMT -6
Dang, that code covers almost every rule I'd like to see changed. Trap tags, 330's 1/2 submerged, bigger snare loops, and BAD option. I'm not scared. I'd like to see it opened and see our guys fight to get us all these much needed changes. ~ADC~
|
|
|
Post by x-demoman on Sept 10, 2012 21:12:59 GMT -6
For all road trapper #3 would be of concern. The wording "could " be changed to stop after "Conibear type traps and snares shall not be set on the right-of-way of a public road". If I was a road trapper I would certainly oppose opening that section.
Gene
|
|
|
Post by ~ADC~ on Sept 10, 2012 22:02:54 GMT -6
Nothing ventured, nothing gained Gene. (or lost too, I suppose.) ~ADC~
|
|
|
Post by skunkboy on Sept 11, 2012 6:45:13 GMT -6
So, just for the sake of argument, let's say the code was opened to change something to our benefit...like half submerged 330's. Would there be an agenda for the action...I mean, would WE know if there will be other amendments being discussed in advance? Or could anyone just show up and move to strike this and add that...on the spot?
Seems to me that if there were an agenda published...and the Board (or who ever) stuck to that agenda, we could gather our own info and argue the points that are proposed to be changed (that we oppose changing) against any harmful changes. A couple of good speakers with the proper info could nullify any argument against.
Of course, that means work and there are a lot of people that talk the talk but don't want to walk the walk. Not calling ANYONE out because I don't know anyone that well yet. I cannot say that I have met one of the nonwalkers here yet.
I'm with ADC on this. If you really want change, you have to work for it and there are risks involved.
What's to stop some anti from proposing changes on it's own to get the Code open? Who controls the Code so it doesn't get reviewed and amended every year? Just curious about that point.
I believe that when a change is proposed by amendment, you cannot change the 'intent' or the idea of the rule...only clarify it. So in your example Gene, the change you suggest significantly changes the 'intent' of the statement. The 'intent' of the statement, I believe, is to protect the land owner within the 200 yard zone, to make the landowner aware that the trap is there...not to blindly stop trapping within the 200 yards.
All food for thought...L8R...Ken
|
|
|
Post by billallenisu on Sept 11, 2012 16:56:52 GMT -6
"What's to stop some anti from proposing changes on it's own to get the Code open? Who controls the Code so it doesn't get reviewed and amended every year? Just curious about that point."
I have wondered the same thing. Why don't the antis try to open the code? Would they be nervous for the same reasons we are?
Bill
|
|
|
Post by x-demoman on Sept 11, 2012 19:37:56 GMT -6
For the shakers and movers all you need to do is find a legislator who is willing to move foreward with your proposals.
Changing the intent. Well guys you just do not get it. Everything is on the table, no holds barred and no a couple of good speakers who have done their homework "can sway the argument" I agree there are many who talk and think they have good ideas. Do you think you represent the nearly 17000 licensed Fur Harvesters in the state of Iowa? 2011 numbers from the DNR
How many have attended a public hearing? Spoke at a public hearing? Participated in public debate? Presented your views to a group of animal rights activists? Spoken before a legislative committee? Talked one on one with your senator and rep? Sorry guys it is not as simple as telling the legislature, DNR and the animal rights folks what you want.
I will not comment on this thread again. Do your homework.
Good luck Gene
|
|
|
Post by ~ADC~ on Sept 11, 2012 19:49:32 GMT -6
I've never done any of that stuff Gene. I was under the impression that the ITA or DNR or someone had guys trained to do just that. Someone always says if they open the code we have stuff ready to get the changes we want. That leads me to believe that there are people out there who know how to do whatever it takes to get the changes made we want made. Maybe you're suggesting the majority of the 17k trappers don't want the chance to better utilize the 280's and 330's for beaver and otters, or want a chance at snaring coyotes with a coyote sized loop, or have the opportunity to eliminate their personal info from trap tags... Too bad ITT wasn't around to make suggestions just a few years ago when this code was apparently opened to change the muskrat colony trap rule. ~ADC~
|
|
|
Post by k9 on Sept 11, 2012 20:10:25 GMT -6
So ADC, if we have guys who are experts to do that Legislative work, and thier advice to us is to not open the code because of risks, would you take that advice?
|
|
|
Post by neotoxo on Sept 11, 2012 20:11:47 GMT -6
That code is messed up. That huge paragraph covers several different items and needs to have each separate subject given it's own paragraph...the single sentence should be it's own paragraph then you could change it without "Opening" pandora's box...
Hand that code book to an English Major and let them tear it apart and reassemble it as it should be.
Our AGFC here in Arkansas revamped our code book last year and sectioned off allot of stuff including creating an addendum for the items that change on a seasonal basis.
The best thing any sportsman can do is STUDY the code book...it will keep you from trouble when you can effectively argue your point in the field before the ticket is written.
|
|
|
Post by dahlyjr28 on Sept 11, 2012 20:19:28 GMT -6
Of the 17k licensens that were sold how many of them are trapers. A guy has to take into account that the licensens covers those that run dogs only or chase the reds and never touch a trap. Just my thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by hvtrapper on Sept 12, 2012 5:12:47 GMT -6
I've never done any of that stuff Gene. I was under the impression that the ITA or DNR or someone had guys trained to do just that. Someone always says if they open the code we have stuff ready to get the changes we want. That leads me to believe that there are people out there who know how to do whatever it takes to get the changes made we want made. Maybe you're suggesting the majority of the 17k trappers don't want the chance to better utilize the 280's and 330's for beaver and otters, or want a chance at snaring coyotes with a coyote sized loop, or have the opportunity to eliminate their personal info from trap tags... Too bad ITT wasn't around to make suggestions just a few years ago when this code was apparently opened to change the muskrat colony trap rule. ~ADC~ It comes down to picking your battles. Gene was there and fought the battles that allow us to use 220's and snares on dry land and in the ROW. I was there for the colony trap revision. Different time/legislature. Colony trap revision was just adding the words "except for muskrats" to the existing code. Lots of agonizing went into just doing that. Before anything else, examine the trapping laws/regulations of our surrounding states. W/O picking and choosing the things YOU like, decide if Iowans have better over-all rules to operate under. I did and IMO we do. Would I like to have the things mentioned? Yep, but politics has a way of biting you in the ass just when you least expect it. So in the mean time I'll work with what we have and be prepared to strike should someone else decide to open the (can of worms) code. Tom
|
|
|
Post by k9 on Sept 12, 2012 5:28:31 GMT -6
I have testified before the legislature and stood up to speak in forums. I am not saying we should never go for what we want if the situation arises but if the most experienced people you have working on your behalf on Legislative issues are saying opening the code is a bad idea do you continue to proactively work against thier advice?
|
|
|
Post by LLLTrapper on Sept 12, 2012 5:50:57 GMT -6
I hate the tag we use today but have NO interest in going against those who know more about the legal issues that face us than the average trapper. We have it pretty good here in IA. Is it perfect? NO but it could be worse. LLL
|
|
|
Post by ~ADC~ on Sept 12, 2012 14:45:06 GMT -6
Well, Who are the "experts" as Bruce said? Why are they in charge of deciding if the code should be opened? Are they like lawyers on retainer that only want to go to bat for us if they have to? I assumed these "experts" basically had to do what the ITA, or the DNR, or whoever they answer to, tell them to do based upon what the majority of the trappers want. ... now don't take that all wrong, I'm not trying to be confrontational, simply trying to "do my homework" and figure out just how and why these things work. Like I said I have no experience with this type of stuff, and I was thinking instead of burying my head in the sand and letting those in the know take care of it, like I prefer to do with most political BS, I thought maybe I'd try and figure it out. ~ADC~
|
|
code
Hyper-Active Trap Talker
Posts: 175
|
Post by code on Sept 12, 2012 16:23:39 GMT -6
You, or an anti would first take your suggestions to a DNR commissioners meeting. Get put on the agenda, pitch your case and see if they react positively or send it to committee. Most anti's will get shot down, as the DNR generally makes laws based on facts and science, not emotion, that is why it does not get opened often, and without alot of convincing. If it goes to legislative committee every anti-lobbiest will be all over it with their associations trying to ban something else in that code. My guess would be snares and conibears. If another group does go for something in that code, we would be one of the other groups trying to get what we want, just as they will be.
Cody
|
|
|
Post by trapperchris on Sept 12, 2012 16:28:23 GMT -6
I'm not trying to be confrontational when I say this, but the answers have been given already by k9, LLL and Gene. When you "open the code" it is open to both sides, against and for, trapping, in this case. EVERYTHING that is in that section of the code is then open for "discussion", if you will. And also any amendments. It may seem simple to say, "we JUST want to have our DNR number on a tag rather than our name, address,etc." However, it's not that easy to get done. There is a whole host of other regulations in that same section of the code that "we" don't want to have challenged. An example is trapping the ROW w/o adjacent landowner permission. We can do that right now as long as we're 200 yds away from a private drive of a residence, etc. Some states you can't set anywhere in the ROW w/o permission or in the ROW period. Opening the code also opens the door to allowing this to become a reality for us in Iowa. Your correct when you say that the ITA is hear to speak for the trappers and the disctrict that the director represents. So.....using that, lets go to the numbers for "furharvester license's" and last years number ~17,000. Of that ~17,000 lets say, to make this easy, half of those numbers are actually trappers, so ~8500. The other half are just folks that walk up to the counter and say, "Give me everything on my license", hound hunters and predator callers that want to shoot fox, coon and 'cats. Just because they have the fur harvester license does not make them pro trapping! Then to get more dramatic, of the estimated ~8500 trappers, only about ~1800 are ITA members, ~485 NTA members and I can't speak for the FTA as I'm not that familiar with their membership. I'd guess about the same as the NTA. There may be a couple thousand trappers that are aware of the ITA, NTA or FTA but are not members and the rest don't know or just don't care to know. Now take into account the trappers that don't agree with your point of view and what you want changed and don't forget, it's not just trappers that are voting for these changes! How much are you prepared to potentially lose, that you already have, if it doesn't go as planned? As you can see, your already less than 25% sure this will work out in your best interest. To make it more interesting, it's the legilatures that have the final say and the DNR. Do you really think that everyone in the DNR is pro trapping? These experts are the DNR and the ITA BOD members, lobbyist's and attoryney's that have worked with and for the trappers in Iowa for several years. When you look around at bordering states to Iowa, we really have it pretty good compared to most, in my opinion, and it's because of the hard work and dedication by a handfull of people that will VOLUNTEER their time in the interest for all those involved who can't or won't volunteer for the good of others. Those people are supported by a small segment of the trappers and fur harvesters in the state by being members of one or all of the organizations that protect what we already have. Don't fool yourself into thinking that if we would like to "change" something we'd all band together as sportsman to make sure it gets done. That couldn't be further from the truth! The next ITA meeting will be the end of January or first part of February. Anyone interested in learning more about how it all works is more than welcome to attend as a guest. If you wish to speak at the meeting, you will have to contact someone on the ITA BOD to be put on the agenda.
|
|
|
Post by billallenisu on Sept 12, 2012 17:35:38 GMT -6
Thanks everyone for contributing to this thread. I learned a lot. This thread is the perfect example as to why I enjoy being a member here Bill
|
|
|
Post by ~ADC~ on Sept 12, 2012 17:41:02 GMT -6
Thanks for the input chris. I understand, and have understood for years what bad can happen when the code is opened. That wasn't my questions. I wanted to know WHO decides if its worth opening the code, and risking what we have, to attempt to improve the rules in the favor of all trappers. I also am wondering how to let them know one way or the other what each individual trapper would like them to do? Sounds like all I could do is tell my district director what I'd like to see done and trust he'll pass it along to whomever he needs to. Guess I have already done that now. lol
Here is the code edited as I'd like to see it...
481A.92 TRAPS -- DISTURBING DENS -- TAGS FOR TRAPS.
1. A person shall not use or attempt to use colony traps in taking, capturing, trapping, or killing any game or fur-bearing animals except muskrats as determined by rule of the commission. Box traps capable of capturing more than one game or fur-bearing animal at each setting are prohibited. A valid hunting license is required for box trapping cottontail rabbits and squirrels. All traps and snares used for the taking of fur-bearing animals shall have a metal tag attached plainly labeled with the user's name and address or DNR ID number. All traps and snares, except those which are placed entirely under in water, shall be checked at least once every twenty-four hours. Officers appointed by the department may confiscate such traps and snares found in use that are not properly labeled or checked. 2. Except as otherwise provided, a person shall not use chemicals, explosives, smoking devices, mechanical ferrets, wire, tool, instrument, or water to remove fur-bearing animals from their dens. Humane traps, or traps designed to kill instantly, with a jaw spread, as originally manufactured, exceeding eight inches are unlawful to use except when placed entirely at least 1/2 submerged under water. 3. Conibear type traps and snares shall not be set on the right-of-way of a public road within two hundred yards of the entry to a private drive serving a residence without the permission of the occupant. 4. A snare when set shall not have a loop larger than eight twelve inches in horizontal measurement. except for a snare set with at least one-half of the loop under water. A snare set on private land other than roadsides within thirty yards of a pond, lake, creek, drainage ditch, stream, or river shall not have a loop larger than eleven inches in horizontal measurement. 5. All snares shall have a functional deer lock which will not allow the snare loop to close smaller than two and one-half inches in diameter or a 275lb. B.A.D. (break away device).
I'm certain the vast majority of members on this form would support such changes, but then it comes down to risk vs. reward again. I'm still in favor of giving it a shot but I can see why others are scared.
~ADC~
|
|
|
Post by paulb on Sept 12, 2012 18:17:01 GMT -6
i am still waiting for some one to tell me what good the trap tags are,,,is the violator going to tag an illegal set with his name and address??,,,does the warden really need to know who's trap it is if it set leagally?,,,help me out here what am i missing??
|
|
|
Post by trapperchris on Sept 12, 2012 18:37:14 GMT -6
Jayme, Thanks for posting what you would like to see changed in the code if the oppurtunity arises. What I would do with this, is send it to your ITA district director and then plan on being at the next meeting and help present your case to the BOD as well as the DNR representatives that attend the meeting. One point of clarification though; I think your right in saying most people on this forum would support your view points but the thing that keeps getting missed is it's not up to you, I or anyone on this forum to do the voting. It's the legislatures who will vote and that's where "we" come in and also how well "our" lobbyst's present the case to the legislature. Most of the time, the ITA can do a super job in helping to direct issues in the interest of trappers but they need help and support in getting it done as there is no lack of opposition! Not "if" but "when" the anti crowd decides to come knocking again, especially if a code is opened, support will be crucial for the ITA, NTA and FTA. In a sense, that is when we'll be at our vulnerable point. The anti's know this and would love the oppurtunity to take a run at "our" code. They've got lots of time and money and paid employees to stay at it. You have to decide if having four more inches of snare loop, 4-5 more inches of trap above the water or DNR number vs name and address is worth it to you and everyone else it could effect. The ITA BOD has had to mull this over numerous times over the years. I....and I mean just me, not speaking for the NTA or the ITA...... wonder why this was brought up in the first place at the BOD meeting? It wasn't brought up by anyone in the ITA, I can assure you of that.
|
|
|
Post by trapperchris on Sept 12, 2012 18:48:30 GMT -6
Paul,
What's the difference between having a tagged trap or a licensed vehicle? If your doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to worry about. Burden of proof is on the state, remember?
|
|
|
Post by paulb on Sept 12, 2012 20:14:26 GMT -6
i think the key word here is revenue,,,i buy a trapping license to trap with,,i buy a vehicle license to drive on the highway,,when i buy trap tags the only person to make any money is the guy who sells the tags,,,
i am still waiting for some one to tell me what good they do,,,except a citation from an officer for not using them and then i guess there is a revenue raised there,,
the trap tag was originally used to regulate the amount of traps set by a trapper,,,originally 15 tags for a buck,,,and 15 cents for each additional tag
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2012 20:19:50 GMT -6
|
|