Anti-Trapping Legislation Advances in Maryland

Feb. 2, 2010 - In early December, State Delegates from Montgomery County, backed by several animal activist organizations, announced plans

to introduce legislation in the 2010 Maryland General Assembly to ban the so-called “leghold” and body-gripping traps in Montgomery County. The Delegation will soon vote to advance its bill, MC 16-10 to the full General Assembly.

The Maryland Fur Trappers, Inc. (MFTI), the umbrella organization for the state’s practitioners of fur trapping and animal control, is seeking support in opposing the legislative threat to their livelihoods and to public safety. MFTI’s message is that if the legislation is passed in one jurisdiction, others could follow the precedent. If trapping were to be restricted, it could pave the way to increased animal/human conflicts, danger to livestock and affect the cultural diversity that is the cornerstone of Maryland’s foundation. MFTI wants the public to know that the positive role of trapping is beneficial to the environment and to the sustainability of many species of wildlife.

MFTI President, Ron Leggett, said, “It’s easy for opponents of fur trapping to advance an emotional plea against the practice. The benefits of fur trapping are misunderstood by many in the modern age. Most Marylanders are unaware of the protections afforded to them by trappers and wildlife control agents.” Leggett also stated, “Detractors refuse to consider the facts about trapping and its methods and wage unrelenting campaigns using “compassionate” messages, with no real proof to back up their claims, to garner support from the uninformed majority of urbanized citizens.”

ü QUICK FACT: Nearly 8000 Individual Furbearer Permits and 300 Wildlife Damage Control Operator Permits are issued in Maryland annually.

The So-Called “Leghold” Trap - Whenever and wherever anti-trapping legislation is introduced on a municipal or larger statewide scale, the goal is always to ban the primary tool of the trade, the so-called “leghold” trap. This misnomer refers to the “live-hold foot trap” used predominately to hold land-based furbearers without injury in case the captured animal need to be released.

For years, animal activists have portrayed the tradition and heritage of fur trapping as a cruel, primitive craft that indiscriminately targets any unwitting creature, including domestic pets that happen to step into the waiting jaws of a bone-crushing “leghold trap” only to suffer anguishing torment until killed by the brutish trapper. Nothing could be further from the truth.

In fact, the use of the humane “live-hold foot trap” is the preferred tool of trappers for the very reason activists decry its use. Any non-targeted animals can be and are routinely released unharmed. In addition, the live-hold foot trap is used in the propagation of threatened species including the Canada lynx and the red and grey wolf. In Maryland, this method has been used in the reintroduction of the river otter with much success. On a larger scale, the live-hold foot trap is used to protect nesting waterfowl and endangered sea turtle eggs from ravaging predators.

Time and time again during legislative hearings, the typical live-hold foot trap used for most furbearers has been sprung on the hand or finger of a trapper to demonstrate the strength of the device. No pro-trappers were ever injured during the demonstration.

ü QUICK FACT: The Maryland Veterinary Medical Association has NO data to support claims that stray pets are injured or killed by live-hold foot traps.

Rabies - Trapping is the first line of defense in the prevention of several wildlife diseases carried by furbearers including rabies, which can threaten human life as well as domestic pets and livestock.

Rabies is always fatal if left untreated. Humans exposed to rabies must undergo a series of expensive injections to prevent the disease. Nearly 40,000 people are treated for rabies exposure in the US annually. Feral cats are the most prolific hosts. Furbearers such as raccoons, foxes and skunks are frequent carriers.

ü QUICK FACT: Montgomery County, Maryland with 54 cases in 2007 (latest data), led all counties in Maryland with laboratory confirmed incidents of rabies. Montgomery also had more cases in 2005 and 2006 than any other jurisdiction.

Cultural Diversity and the Real Cost of Anti-Trapping Legislation – Like Maryland’s Chesapeake watermen and Maryland’s 13,000 family farmers, trappers have felt the pressures of an increasingly urbanized society. Though now fewer in number, they still cherish their independence and feel the closeness to nature that their forbearers did when this nation was in its infancy.

While wildlife flourishes and the conflicts between humans and animals continue, it is the trapper who stands in the gap to protect not only the wildlife, but the family’s pet and the farmer’s livestock.

Anti-trapping legislation, if enacted, will not only do harm to Maryland’s ability to protect its thriving wildlife heritage, it will also prove costly to Maryland. Taxpayers will be expected to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to offset the increased need for nuisance wildlife control, and we will lose one of the state’s most colorful and historical rural cultures.

Maryland was founded to give men and women of divergent beliefs a place to live in harmony. The proposed Bill in Montgomery County will not benefit wildlife; it will erode the freedom of choice and cultural diversity now enjoyed by Maryland’s citizens.