Maine Lynx Lawsuit Settlement Said To Have Minimal Effect On Trappers
October 5, 2007
In a press release issued yesterday by the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, a lawsuit that had been filed by the Animal Protection Institute against the MDIFW, was settled at the last minute before a judge’s ruling. The lawsuit charged that MDIFW was responsible for any Canada lynx inadvertently caught in traps by Maine’s trappers.
The ruling, it appears, places restrictions on the size of traps that can be used. Any trap with an inner jaw spread of 5 3/8 inches cannot be used in lynx designated habitat - WMDs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10 and 11. There are other restrictions on types of traps and how they can be set, along with the maximum sizes of cage traps.
API is claiming a victory in this settlement along with those representing the MDIFW. So where does this leave the trapper? The API is saying that they got what they wanted in that the settlement provides for more restrictions that should result in fewer injuries or death to lynx. The MDIFW is claiming victory because they have not been found guilty of anything and they say this settlement will have little effect on trappers. They also claim that this settlement will be null and void once Maine is issued its Incidental Taking Permit from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. What they are not eager to say is that conditions of that permit will never be less restrictive than the agreed upon settlement and could be more restrictive.
Let’s also not forget the concessions trappers have made in the past, the biggest one being the loss of the use of snare traps for coyote. Since the snare has been outlawed, coyote populations in the northern part of the state have blossomed out of control while at the same time having a disturbing negative effect on the whitetail deer herds.
It seems that the most positive thing that has come out of this settlement is that the lawsuit is over. We still have to ask ourselves the question as to whether the lawsuit was necessary to begin with? Simply put, this can be addressed from both sides. From the MDIFW side, would the lawsuit have happened if MDIFW had gotten its act together and had an Incidental Taking Permit in hand long ago? We’ll never know. From the API perspective, what was there really to spend all this time and money on to begin with? Two lynx?
Most reports I hear say that MDIFW dragged its feet in denial about applying for an ITP from the USFWS because they didn’t believe it was necessary. I think this alone left an opening for organizations such as the API to file a suit. We know that these groups’ long range intentions are to rid the U.S. of hunting, fishing and trapping. Any weakness in the armor of state’s fish and game provides opportunity for lawsuits. MDIFW should have been more vigilant to protect the interests of the trappers in this case. They should never have taken the risk and assumed anything. Let’s hope they take a lesson from this act.
The API, while from their over the top perspective on things, can’t be totally blamed from bringing the lawsuit. As extreme as there ideals are, it is insane to think that an organization will spend the money to bring a lawsuit against MDIFW because they were responsible for the incidental killing of 2 lynx in eight years. While not one media source ever reported the fact that during this same time frame, 11 lynx were found killed from automobile accidents, there was never any attempt by API or any other group to stop that incidental killing. Why not? Does the USFWS require the state to obtain and incidental taking permit for this action? Why not?
When the dust settles, it will become clear who the real losers are in this settlement. You can always count on the fact there are no real winners when a settlement is reached. My prediction is that the biggest losers will be the trappers - as usual.
Tom Remington
If you enjoyed this article check these out:
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
We feature the latest news, events and politics effecting the sports of hunting, fishing, and all outdoor activities in North America.
Tom,
I agree that the biggest losers will certainly be trappers. Aside from the conibear restrictions that will affect marten trappers, the jaw spread size on foothold traps eliminates some of the most effective coyote traps on the market. Limiting trappers to fewer devices to capture coyotes will likely result in fewer coyotes taken, leaving more ‘yotes around to compete with lynx! But what do the API folks know or care? In addition to the obvious fact that the lawsuit will not result in fewer lynx being killed (only two were killed out of the thousands of sets that had the potential to take lynx) and the fact that more lynx being caught in traps is likely a result of a growing lynx population, which needs less protection and is food source limited, people failed to recognize that lynx are commonly captured by Alaskan trappers in some of the smallest foothold traps on the market! More laws, more restrictions, more limitations and more difficulties for the Maine trapper. I guess even if they can’t ban trapping outright, they can complicate trapping regulations to such an extent that most people are too overwhelmed to even try their hand at the sport!
Fish Geek! - That is the ultimate objective of the animal rights groups - to put an ending to hunting, fishing and trapping by any means available to them.
I am disappointed that MDIFW didn’t obtain the Incidental Taking Permit and that they haven’t taken a stronger stance on trapping issues fighting against this infringement. The snaring issue being one of them.
The biggest argument against this kind of animal protection is one that you bring up very well and that is that attempting to create ignorance bases restrictions will have no affect on the species they claim to be helping and in many cases they create a bigger threat to that same animal. That’s the epitome of ignorance in my book.
[...] about at Maine Lynx Lawsuit Settlement Said To Have Minimal Effect On Trappers - black bear blog, - Last Updated - 11 minutes ago Follow This Story Change [...]
[...] Maine Lynx Lawsuit Settlement Said To Have Minimal Effect On Trappers [...]
[...] Last week the state of Maine, namely the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife along with support from the United States Sportsman’s Alliance and others, agreed to settle a lawsuit filed against the state by the Animal Protection Institute for breaking the Endangered Species Act. Specifically, the lawsuit said MDIFW was responsible for the incidental taking of Canada lynx by licensed trappers in Maine. Maine does not have an Incidental Take Permit from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Many have wondered why and some believe the feds told them they didn’t need one. [...]
[...] are questioning the timing of this incident in reference to a recent compromise reached between the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife and the Animal Protection [...]
[...] Rob wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptIt seems that the most positive thing that has come out of this settlement is that the lawsuit is over. We still have to ask ourselves the question as to whether the lawsuit was necessary to begin with? Simply put, this can be addressed … [...]
[...] This new ruling comes at the heels of two recent federal lawsuits regarding the taking of lynx: one in Minnesota and one in Maine. Both lawsuits were filed by animal rights groups, and both were settled with the agreement that the respective states file for ITP’s with the feds. Minnesota reached their agreement with very little compromise in trapping regulations, while the Maine settlement resulted in some very significant changes in the way trappers were able to operate. [...]