We had the trail to ourselves. But you wouldn’t know it.
My dog — a 4-year-old golden retriever — and I were on the Paul Bunyan Trail near Nisswa on one of those recent 50-plus degree days. It was a weekday, so there was absolutely no traffic on the paved trail as we walked south from Nisswa toward Merrifield. A perfect day — and a rare opportunity — for him to enjoy time off the leash to stray just a bit off the beaten path. Not too far, mind you, but far enough to enjoy some freedom.
As early as a week before that, I wouldn’t have thought twice about it.
But not on this day. And probably not anytime soon. It’s just not worth it.
A week earlier I did a story involving two dogs killed by Conibear 220 traps in the greater Brainerd lakes area. Up until then, I didn’t know these traps were out there. And while there may not have been any such traps anywhere near the Paul Bunyan Trail between Nisswa and Merrifield, I wasn’t about to take any chances.
That I felt threatened (at least for my dog), and at the same time powerless to do anything about it, frustrated me.
I’m not a trapper, but I have nothing against trapping. I know it helps control certain species, and monies from licenses help fund DNR projects and efforts, which is good. And if someone wants to make a few extra bucks trapping — even a living, in some instances — that’s OK.
But these traps are not.
Conibear 220 traps are commonly baited and set — on the ground — inside a 5-gallon bucket or small crate. A lightweight, powerful and compact body-gripping trap with a jaw spread of seven inches, it’s effective for trapping and killing bobcat, fishers and otters in this area. The animal sticks its head in the bucket or crate — and the jaws of the trap — in search of the bait, trips the trap, has its neck snapped and is dead within minutes.
While it’s rare that these traps do catch dogs, the two dogs in the story were killed in a 10-day span. And it only takes one such incident to make people think twice about enjoying time afield with their dogs. One of the dogs killed, an English setter, was a prized hunting dog and was doing what its owner had spent countless hours teaching it to do — find grouse; the other dog was on a routine outing with its owner when it strayed away for just a moment.
The story prompted 60-plus comments from readers on both sides — trappers who insist they have as much right to the woods as anyone else and those who say they feel, well, trapped, by the fact that trappers can pretty much put these traps anywhere they like.
Most of the latter also said they didn’t have a problem with trapping — including the two men who lost their dogs; both said they had trapped at one time or another. Instead, it’s the type of traps being used — and the fact that they’re allowed to be placed on the ground — that is a problem, they say.
Yes, Conibear 220s are extremely effective, but there are other options, such as footholds, which could still injure a dog, but wouldn’t be a death sentence. And if 220s absolutely, positively have to be used, place them off the ground four or five feet. Fishers and bobcats will still get into them; dogs will not.
In the most recent DNR Conservation Officers’ Report, there were 18 reports of trapping violations or complaints across the state. Many were fairly minor — incidentally trapped fishers and the like. But in the Cass Lake area, the CO “received a trapping complaint that led to violations for not tending traps, untagged traps and illegal body-grip sets.” And in the Princeton area, the CO reported that “several dogs were caught in traps, and several illegal traps were found.”
Yes, the trapping season ended Jan. 8, but I’m not relieved. All it takes is one forgotten trap.
A reader from the Palisade area emailed me after the story, saying “Less than two weeks ago, while on our daily walk, my daughter-in-law’s boxer was nearly killed by a trap, which was placed 10 feet off our road. If the neighbor (who knew how to release the trap) had not miraculously come along, she would have died, and we would have had to watch her die a horrible death. We called DNR Enforcement and discovered this is completely legal. Since then, we have discovered there are two trappers who are maintaining traps along every road we walk on. We’re afraid to go on walks in our own neighborhood, and are concerned that even after the season ends, we could still run across forgotten traps. From reading the DNR trapping regulations, it seems trappers have all the rights, and we have none. As long as they set a trap on a road right-of-way, they can set one right at my driveway if they choose.”
The writer and at least one of those who commented on my story said they will campaign to change the state’s trapping regulations.
Jason Abraham, season setting/fur bearer specialist for the DNR in St. Paul, said that in 2010, the DNR enacted rules restricting the placement of 220 body-gripping traps near houses and buildings occupied by livestock and said the DNR will continue to discuss regulations aimed at limiting accidental catches of pets when it meets in the coming months.
Such regulations could even impact hunting and, ultimately, hunting licenses and monies raised from those licenses. In recent years, the DNR has worked hard to get more people involved in outdoor activities, including hunting. But knowing what I know now, if I were just considering getting into bird hunting or was on the fence in regard to training a dog, spending the money involved to hunt and, finally, buying a license, I don’t know if I would do it.
Said another reader: “It feels like some guy who lives down the road who decides he wants to make some extra money can place a hidden booby trap that I have to somehow stay clear of without knowing where to look. Not fair, in my opinion.
“I have also read in several places that some trappers use the remains of game birds as bait ... and you are saying it’s my fault if my dog gets caught in a trap by doing what I have spent hundreds and hundreds of hours training him to do, track and flush those same birds. It sounds like the old Halloween horror stories I heard as a kid of some freak putting razor blades in candy bars.”
Here’s hoping that Abraham and the DNR have the courage to do the right thing and change the regulations as they pertain to Conibear 220 traps. Until then, my dog’s days afield are over.
Not fair, in my opinion.
BRIAN S. PETERSON, outdoors editor, may be reached at brian.peterson@brainerddispatch.com or 855-5864. To follow him on Twitter, go to www.twitter.com/brian_speterson. For his blogs, go to www.brainerddispatch.com.
Comments (60)
Add commenttrapping
years ago trappers were pushed to use body gripping traps because they were considered more humane so many trappers changed from leg holds to body gripping traps. but like everything times have changed places you could place a trap in 20 yrs. ago are now unsafe because there are more people, no trapper i know wants to hurt someones pet, and owners have to take some responsibility in not letting there pet just roam. but trappers also need to realize that if there in an area where people are it may not be safe to set body traps legal or not i have thought the d.n.r. should make trappers post signs that warn there are body gripping traps in the area, but trappers also have to deal with people that will steal there property. trapping is a sport few trappers make enough to even break even, and there are plenty of people that dont like trapping mostly because they dont understand it. like most things the answer will be in both groups compromising. Dont bash on the trapper they are not a ruthless killer and trappers protect our sport by being smart.
Trapping
So, admittedly you were breaking the law by traveling the trail with an unleashed dog. There are other tragedies that could befall your pet from being unleashed in that situation besides being caught in a bodygripper such as it being struck by a car at any one of many intersections there or being attacked by another unleashed pet or maybe even biting someone else who is out for a walk. The leash rules were put into effect so everyone could enjoy the trail without having to worry about hitting a dog while bike riding or getting bitten.
Trappers should share in the responsibility by not placing the 220 on the ground in areas that may be frequented by unleashed dogs.
trapping and dogs
I am trying to reign in my emotions on this. I am not a trapper. I don't understand trapping or the reason for trapping if a person can't 'break even', then what exactly is the point? However, just because I don't understand it doesn't mean I am an authority on why 'not' to trap and each person needs to make their own choice. There is a group of ladies that get together frequently to hike the area trails and we nearly always bring our dogs. It is quite the sight! A large group of women and all of dogs traipsing through the woods. Generally we have at least 5 dogs with us at a time. And they 'run'! That is why we bring them. So they can run and frolic and play and smell...and quite frankly wear themselves right out. We love it and they love it. They are part of our families, our 'kids'. I can't even imagine, nor would I want to, what it would be like to find my dog caught in a trap much less to find her decapitated! One group of people are out there to kill, one group is out there to enjoy the tranquility of nature. That is quite to gap to bridge. We have discussed this issue in the past days. When a permit is issued is it issued for a certain area? If so, can it be posted at the beginning of public trails that traps exist? Can certain trails be exempt from trapping? Can traps be marked within a certain area in a way that doesn't give away the exact location to help with theft, but in a way that would warn hikers with their dogs and children for that matter to stay clear? I believe there are compromises available, but being a responsible dog owner is letting them run on trails that should be safe. We just have to get to that point with each other.
Well said! The problem is
Well said!
The problem is that there are very very few places on public land that don't get visited by hunters or hikers with dogs. The woods has changed and trappers need to change along with it.
We need responsible trappers to join the effort to protect trapping and our dogs by asking the DNR to change the regs so that body grips must be set 5' off the ground or underwater. At least 18 states require this and the trappers do just fine in those states.
Trappers do NOT have to kill our dogs to continue to trap.
Jason@Abraham@state.mn.us needs to hear from responsible trappers who want to protect their sport by preventing dog deaths. Please copy your legislators AND Governor Dayton.
There were 4 recorded dog deaths by body grips last year and that is only the ones that were recorded somewhere. Not one of those dogs would have died if the trapper had used a foothold trap or set the body grip off the ground.
Trapping season is NOT over.
Trapping season is NOT over. Raccoon season runs from Oct 23 to March 15th. With the mild winter you run the risk of losing your dog all winter this year.
Bucket sets using 220 killer traps are a favorite set of some trappers.
What to do
Great article! I am hoping that others will do as I have done and contact the DNR with a request to have them change the Body Grip Trap regulation in Minnesota and require that Body Grip Traps be set up and off the ground by 5 feet. The DNR has the ability to make this change without legislative action, but they need to hear from enough concerned citizens who would like to see this change as soon as possible. This is not about dogs running loose. It is about responsible dog owners who are out hunting, excersing and training their dogs while they are near them. I too, am now fearful, because these traps can kill so fast. I am heading to an upland training session with my dog now, but luckily I know the land owners and they would not set one of these traps on their land. Not sure though if they have any neighboring adjacent public land or someone else's private land with poor signage that I may have to worry about....
You unleashed your don on the bike trail???
That is illegal!
According to the Minnesota DNR website, "State trail rules require all pets to be attended and restrained by a leash of not more than six feet in length."
There are many signs posted on the trail stating this rule.
I appreciate your articles, but please abide by the laws and rules and encourage others to do so.
Did you read the article? He
Did you read the article? He didn't say he let his dog of the leash.
A dog was killed next to the Paul Bunyan Trail near Nisswa in a legally body grip trap.
Did YOU read it, Fish?
He does say his dog was off the leash. An unleashed dog is exposed to a lot more hazards than just traps and it can cause a lot of problems for other people on the trail and adjacent property owners as well.
220 traps
Good Article . The only thing you can say about these traps is that they are used by trappers who have absolutely no regard
for other people or their pets who enjoy the outdoors.
Actually hans MN changed the
Actually hans MN changed the law that prohibited trappers from being accompanied by a dog back in the mid-90's if I remember right. Has that been changed back? If so let us know and show us your source.
That was the first year I ran across dog killers in buckets right next to a heavily hunted grouse trail named Cranberry Bog trail on the Old Grade. The whole area was covered with fresh dog tracks but it was still legal to set those traps.
Fortunately I was able to call my dog back that time because the buckets were baited with grouse.
Hunting on a leash
How is a person suppose to hunt grouse with their dog on a leash?
I have never seen that done before. Gerry was hunting grouse with his setter when she was killed in a trap. This does not have to be us vs. them. Both trappers and hunters buy license so both should be able to do hunting and trapping. But when a trap kills your dog you can no longer hunt with that dog. While trappers can still trap, they are just being asked to one thing differently so hunters can still hunt with their live dog.
If you use the national
If you use the national average of 40% dog ownership that means that MN has over 2,000,000 dog lovers. That's a pretty potent group of people when it comes to asking for one very reasonable change to trapping regulations.
By the time you find the
By the time you find the killer trap your dog has already found it and is dead or dying. Also I doubt there are too many hunters or dog walkers willing to check boths sides to the scent line (the distance a dog can be attracted to bait or lure) for several miles of trail before they go hunting or go for a relaxing afternoon fall walk.
And as long as it's legal you will run into trappers with attitudes like the bucket trapper who emailed me.
"The MTA trains trappers to avoid incidental catches by staying clear of homes on ROW and other sets. ROW sets are extremely common. Bait sets on public land will attract K9s. That is what they are designed to do."
He of course blames dog owners like many who have posted here and puts impossible conditions on them.
The only reasonable solution that stops the slaughter of our dogs is to prohibit placing them on the ground like 18 other states have done. That's not an unreasonable change in the regulations.
There really aren't any solutions that allow trappers to continue using the traps (placed off the ground or underwater) and protects our dogs. The only other solution is to ban body grips completely like some other states. I don't support that solution.
I was wondering is French Rapids open to trapping? I understand a lot of people walk their dogs on those trails for excercise. If it is not specificallly closed to trapping it's completely legal to set killer traps beside those trails.
Show me proof. Just show me the facts, fishhead.
I don't believe you. Show me the bodies of the nontarget animals caught in the traps. I want proof of how these animals perished. I also want to see the set site and to be able to investigate whether or not the person trapping was doing so legally. On top of that I would like to argue that a trap set in a pail is in fact off the ground being supported of course by the pail.
Guts, fish oil, smelly turned meat and other baits are allowed for use to attract fur bearing animals to the trap location under the right circumstances. A professionally trained dog if handled correctly from a pup to an adult will avoid these legal temptations. A run of the mill non-trained dog, even an untrained purebred, on a leash will go straight for these baits if they get close enough. They are pets they don't know any better.
I've had the pleasure of seeing 2 very well trained canines in my lifetime. I hunted with one of them. They belonged to a former renter of mine and a friend who bought his dog properly trained by a professional hunting dog trainer. First hand experience with professional dogs showed me what a poorly trained run of the mill junk canine most people hunt with: these mutts make great pets though. They just shouldn't be allowed out into the wild country unescourted or even on a leash. Pets are like urbanites they should just enjoy nature from the car window as they pass by, because everyone knows if they go out into the country a search party of locals will have to be formed to bring them back.
The real problem here isn't what's right and what's wrong. It's a case of urbanites infringing on what has always been a form income for the lesser paid local people. The urbanites are figuring out that living away from the city is the only way to live. They are finding themselves unprepared to live in this "wild" country when the move here and can't adapt to the freedom of their new surroundings so they freak out and think their only course of action is to overregulate their new way of life to make it more like that of a metropolis. They want to make this, our home, more like the cities they are from. How dare they. They wrecked their way of life and moved into ours and are trying to do the same.
Now having said that, fishhead, I'm sure will want to get in on the comments. He called me an ugly name the last time we met here to discuss opinions and I flagged him as an offensive comment for it but amazingly my postings were the ones the admin folks desided to delete and not his. Try to get it right this time will you admin, I'm "trooper" and fishhead started his post as "Trooper" do you see the difference a capital letter. That's all. I wasn't flagging myself. I do not like to be called "_oy", replace the_ with a "B" and you will get to see how low some people will stoop to try to make sure they get the last word.
Fishhead stop trying to scare the public. You've got to be kidding me French Rapids, who would be dumb enough to put a trap, let alone a 15 to 20 dollar trap, in a heavily used area as that? The trapper would only have more luck getting their trap stolen if they put a nail in a tree and hung the trap from it and placed a flashing neon sign above it saying here it is come take it. I can't believe you think your scare tactics are going to work. Save the dirty politics for the professionals.
I'll say it again, "No trapper is actively targeting dogs."
punke 1995
Licenses are issued for the entire state so any trapper can trap anywhere another trapper can set traps with some minor exceptions. That means that a trapper can be working in an area over a hundred miles from home where he has no idea of where people and their dogs visit. That's a very common way of trapping for 'long liners' who catch lots of animals.
Also, killer traps don't decapitate. They kill by breaking the neck or crushing the windpipe causing suffocation.
So trooper
Would a professionally trained dog that is trained to seek out grouse avoid a bucket trap baited with grouse parts?
It looks like this issue might hit the TV soon. It's important that MN dog owners find out what is legal in this state and where it's legal. Most people are amazed that trappers can hide traps capable of killing the largest lab, baited with meat or duck/grouse/pheasant feathers on the ground on public land.
That's why it's important that people email the DNR http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/input/rules/change_rule.html
and ask that the DNR change the regulations so that all body grip traps be kept 5' off the ground or underwater. Unless that happens before next trapping season more people are going to lose dogs and that's bad for everyone involved. At least one legislator has joined the effort and that's our own John Ward. Senator Gazelka has yet to even reply to my emails.
We also need to ask Governor Dayton to join the discussion.
Right on Brian
Thanks for doing this article. Great job tellling it like it is, no reason they cant put the traps off the ground 4-5' like in many other states. I hope everyone contacts there representative or DNR to get this law changed.
Quote:
""It's a case of urbanites infringing on what has always been a form income for the lesser paid local people.""
Did you mean for all those words to come out together?? I will trust nobody actually believes this to be true.
trooper
Well said.
rejo
How many states would that be?
realy
fishead saying you have john ward on your side big deal. this whole forum is one sided anyway. when i post on here it gets removed why is that i guess that some people cant handle the truth or answer questions they have been asked numerous times. what a joke.
trapping
i can understand both sides of this issue. and i am not sure there is an easy fix. i have caught many coon fisher otter and mink in 220s. alot of the places i used to set these traps i wouldnt now there are just to many people, the fur is still there but so are the people and there pets. dog owners at least try to understand the trappers point of view, putting these traps 5 feet in the air will make them very ineffective for most fur.i would hope the trappers are staying away from the walking trails people use.the bird hunters that hunt on state land i see as the real problem if i have a 220 out there baited with fish and your bird dog comes by it there is a good chance he will be curious about it, and the last thing i want to do is kill your hunting partner. i dont know of a good solution to this but bashing on each other claiming the trappers have all the rights etc. wont solve anything try to understand the others point of view and work towards a solution
Do not change the law... change the pet owner
Many tragedies occur under the protection of the law. Our awareness of our surroundings is our responsibility and cannot be governed.
That dog did not deserve to die, the dog deserved an owner who cared enough to watch over it.
Dog owners beware
Tragically, on average 18 people are killed by dogs each year.
By using the philosophy enacted in this article and by fishhead there is no way that anyone should be allowed to own a dog. Why does our government allow someone to own an animal that will kill a person. Dogs do kill people.
MN bag limit on fisher and
The MN bag limit on fisher and marten is 2 fisher and 5 marten with fisher displacing marten in the bag limit.
The Maine bag limit is 10 fisher and 25 marten. Maine requires trappers to set body grips off the ground.
Don't tell me that trappers cannot learn how to place body grips off the ground and stop killing our dogs.
trapping
there is a reason the limit on fisher and marten is so much higher in maine, there are more of them. in this area 220s are used for furbearers other then fisher or martin much more then for them. fisher and marten can be trapped off the ground not all furbearers can.
The point was that ME
The point was that ME trappers do just fine trapping fisher and marten with body traps off the ground and using footholds for other animals like bobcats. Even some MN trappers admit that footholds work much better on bobcats than body grips. We also have dog proof coon traps that are faster and easier to set than body grips for coon.
Danberg
fishhead does not want a compromise, I offered one and he shot it down. He is mad at the world because he failed as a pet owner. He took his dog on his trap line, the dog wandered off while he was tending to his trap(s). The dog did not deserve to die, it deserved a better owner.
Here is a person that knows that these types of traps are out there and in all likelihood where he is trapping as well. So this person takes his dog with, lets the dog wander on its own while he tends to his own trap. He let his dog go off by its self, alone in the woods where he knew there was a likelihood of one of these trap sets. That is insane and just a poor excuse of a pet owner. He put his dog at risk and lost and the dog paid the price.
45vs9mm
makes sense thanks
The compromise is that
The compromise is that trappers get to continue using body grip traps off the ground or underwater and our dogs get to live.