THE STATEMENT :
“ TRAPPING IS INDISCRIMINATE AND CRUEL !”
WHAT IT MINIMIZES :
SCIENCE , ENDANGERED SPECIES RECOVERY , GAME AND HABITAT KNOWLEDGE , FINANCIAL INVESTMENT OF TRAPPERS
THE RESPONSE : Did you know that scientists around the world have used trapping to protect and expand endangered species ? [ 1 ] It ’ s precisely because trapping is not cruel and indiscriminate that they can use foot-hold traps to specifically target , capture and relocate [ 2 ] many animals — including the wolves that were relocated to Yellowstone ! Conibear and similar traps kill immediately , which is as ethical as it gets when there ’ s need to kill an animal . [ 3 ] If you ’ re against killing an animal period , well , that ’ s a different discussion [ 4 ] that includes more than just trapping .
Successful trapping is anything but indiscriminate ; it requires exact placement of the trap where the intended animal will precisely step , which requires incredible knowledge of the animal and its habitat . [ 5 ] Traps come in various sizes to reduce unintended catches ; [ 6 ] trust me , trappers don ’ t want to waste their time and resources catching non-target species . [ 7 ] The rare times it does happen , foot-hold traps allow the unharmed release [ 8 ] of the animals . Even wolves can be released ! [ 9 ]
Since the inception of Best Management Practices 25 years ago , more than $ 40 million has been spent studying 600 trap types for 23 species of furbearers . [ 10 ] These studies have greatly reduced unintended catches ; in fact , of the hundreds of thousands of times traps were deployed , more than 99.5 percent of the time no unintended catches took place . [ 11 ] The few times there was bycatch , the animals were released unharmed .
You don ’ t have to like trapping , [ 12 ] and if you know nothing about it , that ’ s understandable , [ 13 ] but according to science and logic [ 14 ] it ’ s most definitely not indiscriminate and cruel . [ 15 ]
1
This statement legitimizes the use of trapping by invoking science and endangered species , two things anti-trappers try to use as reasoning to end it . 2 Differentiates traps and underscores that they ’ re not indiscriminate , and that animals can be released unharmed . 3 Paints trappers as ethical and caring about how their prey dies . 4 Shifts the discussion off trapping and to differences of ideological beliefs .
5
Implies trappers know more about these animals than you do . 6 Provides education . 7 It costs time and money to run a trap line — even more if you ’ re catching the wrong species . 8 Debunks the idea that traps are devices that maim .
9
Search YouTube and offer a video for visual evidence .
10
Says “ we ’ re invested and ethical about trapping .” 11 Google : “ Science Brief Animal Selectivity ” study from the Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies for links to fact sheets , studies and more .
12
Gives people an out to say they just don ’ t like trapping . 13 Gives them another out to admit they don ’ t know , while also pointing out their ignorance in a “ bless your heart ” kind of way . 14 Says this isn ’ t opinion . If they disagree , then they ’ re denying science , which makes them look unreasonable . 15 Underscores your argument and finishes with the most important point .
MAKE YOUR POINT
Having trouble framing an argument related to animal rights , wildlife management or aspects of hunting , fishing and trapping ? Email us ( info @ sportsmensalliance . org ) and we ’ ll help you break it down here !
FALL 2022 15