|
Post by redknot on Feb 25, 2015 9:54:47 GMT -5
Jim, I know where you are coming from with the whole "fool me once" scenario...I do understand that and have mentioned that to DEC...Having to approach a plan with a healthy dose of cautious skepticism usually is not the best way to get started. I also agree with “grey areas”. I have already asked for some clarification as to why a certain approach. In some of what I read I see the cause and effect, but I also see a secondary effect, that I have had to ask if it was created by design. I may not have a problem with the secondary effect (others might) but I see no reason not to be overt about it (providing the secondary effect was intentional)...Even if some are unhappy about it, we’d at least know the full intent...So I agree with what you are saying there too....
|
|
|
Post by redknot on Feb 25, 2015 9:59:49 GMT -5
Did they explain WHY the fisher pop. is exploding in other areas? I did see where they said they were coming from PA. But what about the rest of the areas? Granted, again the red in my eyes may have caused me to miss it...
You did not miss anything 82 and that is going to be part of my comments for sure...
|
|
|
Post by jsevering on Feb 25, 2015 10:03:46 GMT -5
the way its written and as recent management "enhancement" on the ground history provides... there is no way it could end even half way favorably for us jerry... jim
.............................................................................
jim... they don't consider us partners in this deal or any other... were the justification... the need... and they have been presenting us that way for a long time... just look at all the regulations... we have accepted, like the 220 regs,for all the free roaming illegal pets, 50 foot trail offsets, no exposed bait compromise for one eagle incident, no baited mink boxes with 110's after the close of fisher and marten season, when baited mink boxes shine.... sure there is more on that list, i missed.... we are not a partner in their eyes... were the justification of their being... or that is how we always get presented.... jim
|
|
traps82
#3 Newhouse
Hope is always alive
Posts: 3,208
|
Post by traps82 on Feb 25, 2015 10:29:40 GMT -5
Glad I didn't- Hate to go off on something and then see I missed it
I think part of the problem is the "public". Meaning.. John/Jane Q Public cannot fathom that there are actually healthy and expanding populations of animals if they are not "seen" on a regular basis. I cannot tell you how many people have said to me "I saw this animal.. Long and skinny with a long tail.Looked like a huge mink or weasel. What was it?" Tell them it's a fisher and show them a picture of one and that is what they saw. You will get: 1) What is a fisher? 2) We have those? 3) Aren't they endangered? etc I had a lady at work tell me she was going to turn me in to the DEC because I caught a bobcat.. I handed her my phone and said "Go ahead. My local officer's number is in my cell"
This is what we face- ignorance on a grand scale
I may take some heat for this but so be it: When dealing with the DEC and their requests for "input" on "studies".. It should be the same as when stopped for a license check in the field: Name, rank and serial number. Nothing more- How many times do we need to see their promises hold as much water as a bucket with no bottom?
|
|
|
Post by E.Reynolds on Feb 25, 2015 11:14:16 GMT -5
Just out of curiosity, are there any parts of the Draft Fisher Plan people like? I have some issues with portions of the Plan, but there are other portions I am in agreement with...Anyone else? as jimbison brought up, each zone has something the people in that area will like. will we take the bait or will we stand together. I know this did not answer your question, I just wanted to point that out again.
|
|
|
Post by whartonrattrapper on Feb 25, 2015 11:45:56 GMT -5
Living in the "Otsego/Delaware Hills" area of NY I have a substantially different view of this plan than has been presented here, with the exception of a few comments by Traps82.
IMO this plan does nothing to address or control the extreme unchecked proliferation of the Fisher in this area of the state. It does nothing to protect the rest of our wildlife population, which has been, and will continue to be severely damaged by the Fisher.
Do they not take into consideration the Fox, or a Turkey or any of the other protected species of animals the Fisher have, and will continue to decimate due to their unchecked populations?
Having witnessed first hand the decimation a Fisher can do in a Turkey roosting area and the destruction of several fox dens, along with their killing of the pups in the spring. These voracious predators are fast becoming more of a nuisance than a trophy in this area of the state!
Are these species of animals any less of a "trophy" than the Fisher? Do they think by creating an over abundance in one area it will eventually repopulate areas where Fisher were once abundant? Are they so ignorant to the fact an October caught Fisher is anything but a trophy and is also worthless?
Fifteen to Twenty years ago when I saw my first fisher in Otsego County I dreamed about the possibility of some day having a trapping season for them. That dream has turned into a nightmare!
|
|
|
Post by redknot on Feb 25, 2015 12:26:20 GMT -5
Wharton, why do you feel the predator prey relationships are not covered in this plan? To be fair there has been a lot of study already on that subject with attention specific to turkeys. Will fisher kill and eat turkeys? sure, they will, but Powell's work in NH does not suggest fisher will decimate a turkey population.
You can probably find that paper online...I am more familiar with Coulter's work in Maine, but it was long ago....
|
|
|
Post by redknot on Feb 25, 2015 12:27:24 GMT -5
Bullchipmunk, I was just wondering if there was a starting point where we could begin....
|
|
|
Post by whartonrattrapper on Feb 25, 2015 13:00:15 GMT -5
Worton, why do you feel the predator prey relationships are not covered in this plan? To be fair there has been a lot of study already on that subject with attention specific to turkeys. Will fisher kill and eat turkeys? sure, they will, but Powell's work in NH does not suggest fisher will decimate a turkey population. To be honest I'm not familiar with his work and can only go by what I have witnessed. One question is they terrain and weather the same in NH? I'm have honestly no idea why but the fisher population in and around Otsego county in is totally out of control.And quite honestly New York is not New Hampshire or Pa. or any other of the state which the DEC has seemingly taken Guidance from.
|
|
|
Post by graydog on Feb 25, 2015 13:14:42 GMT -5
A few people on here have asked how many traps they should set to catch one fisher. Set as many as your conscience will allow realizing that you can only keep one and the rest will need to be turned in to the DEC. They want data on population density. Give them the data they need.
The risk is the opportunity to keep one fisher.
As a non-resident if you believe my post is out of line let me know and I'll delete it or one of the moderators can.
|
|
|
Post by whartonrattrapper on Feb 25, 2015 13:27:31 GMT -5
Worton, why do you feel the predator prey relationships are not covered in this plan? To be fair there has been a lot of study already on that subject with attention specific to turkeys. Will fisher kill and eat turkeys? sure, they will, but Powell's work in NH does not suggest fisher will decimate a turkey population. To be honest I'm not familiar with his work and can only go by what I have witnessed. One question is they terrain and weather the same in NH? I'm have honestly no idea why but the fisher population in and around Otsego county in is totally out of control.And quite honestly New York is not New Hampshire or Pa. or any other of the state which the DEC has seemingly taken Guidance from. oopps.. I wasn't done yet. I also feel it is unwise for the DEC to paint this subject with such a broad brush. There are obviously two different dynamics to this subject. One is the decreasing population in northern NY and an exploding population in some pockets in southern NY.
|
|
|
Post by whartonrattrapper on Feb 25, 2015 13:29:27 GMT -5
rednot, thank you for the info I will be sure to check it out!
|
|
traps82
#3 Newhouse
Hope is always alive
Posts: 3,208
|
Post by traps82 on Feb 25, 2015 13:57:51 GMT -5
I think we know why it has declined in the north: no food/suitable habitat Explosion: Food and suitable habitat
And your comments on them killing "everything". Yes sir. Friend of mine was saying how he noticed a decline of birds and limb rats around his house... But lots of fisher sign
|
|
|
Post by redknot on Feb 25, 2015 14:36:15 GMT -5
No problem Wharton...Still a lot to read...
|
|
|
Post by squash on Feb 25, 2015 17:01:40 GMT -5
A few people on here have asked how many traps they should set to catch one fisher. Set as many as your conscience will allow realizing that you can only keep one and the rest will need to be turned in to the DEC. They want data on population density. Give them the data they need. The risk is the opportunity to keep one fisher. As a non-resident if you believe my post is out of line let me know and I'll delete it or one of the moderators can. This past season ,I set 2 running pole sets with 220 coni's, and caught 2 Fisher. There's plenty of good habitat for fisher in the NZ, I don't agree that the population is in any severe state of decline, like everything else the cycle ebs and flows up and down.
|
|
|
Post by jimbison on Feb 25, 2015 19:21:01 GMT -5
I think we know why it has declined in the north: no food/suitable habitat Explosion: Food and suitable habitat And your comments on them killing "everything". Yes sir. Friend of mine was saying how he noticed a decline of birds and limb rats around his house... But lots of fisher sign some has to do with habitat ,where there is good habitat fisher are there, but for the most a lot of the area where the season is being shortened is hard to access fewer roads more walking ,to access a lot of fisher you have to cover huge amounts of ground and if roads are closed to traffic it becomes hard to do therefore lower catches does not mean lower populations just inability to access the population that is there if looking at the #s given by DEC do they not correspond with the state buying and limiting access to thousands of acres of land in these areas. mature forest are not the best habitat but the forest are not managed for wildlife as much as for timber & to please the eyes of john q public . the very northern part not being changed is mostly old farms going back to forest and a lot of heavy logging on private land by landowners within a decade of heavy cuts being done on this land there is a huge prey base for all predators fisher ,fox ,cats ,and coyote all hunt these areas with ajoining areas of uncut for the denning you have the best of both for fisher with roads going everywhere if the DEC did the same studies in the Adirondack areas of concern they would find just as many fisher just not as accessable hence the lower catches before changing anything they should do the same test here as was done in the southern part of the state Jim
|
|
|
Post by chappy on Feb 25, 2015 19:34:38 GMT -5
A few people on here have asked how many traps they should set to catch one fisher. Set as many as your conscience will allow realizing that you can only keep one and the rest will need to be turned in to the DEC. They want data on population density. Give them the data they need. The risk is the opportunity to keep one fisher. As a non-resident if you believe my post is out of line let me know and I'll delete it or one of the moderators can. Your post brings up a good point.....so if I run a longline in Allegany this year instead of the Catskills they will be able to collect lots of data off the carcasses. I'm sure the local ECO will get tired quickly of picking up all the fishers I can't keep. Or does that mean after one fisher all I can use is DP's!?? These proposed regs are pandoras box!!
|
|
traps82
#3 Newhouse
Hope is always alive
Posts: 3,208
|
Post by traps82 on Feb 25, 2015 20:43:46 GMT -5
I think we know why it has declined in the north: no food/suitable habitat Explosion: Food and suitable habitat And your comments on them killing "everything". Yes sir. Friend of mine was saying how he noticed a decline of birds and limb rats around his house... But lots of fisher sign some has to do with habitat ,where there is good habitat fisher are there, but for the most a lot of the area where the season is being shortened is hard to access fewer roads more walking ,to access a lot of fisher you have to cover huge amounts of ground and if roads are closed to traffic it becomes hard to do therefore lower catches does not mean lower populations just inability to access the population that is there if looking at the #s given by DEC do they not correspond with the state buying and limiting access to thousands of acres of land in these areas. mature forest are not the best habitat but the forest are not managed for wildlife as much as for timber & to please the eyes of john q public . the very northern part not being changed is mostly old farms going back to forest and a lot of heavy logging on private land by landowners within a decade of heavy cuts being done on this land there is a huge prey base for all predators fisher ,fox ,cats ,and coyote all hunt these areas with ajoining areas of uncut for the denning you have the best of both for fisher with roads going everywhere if the DEC did the same studies in the Adirondack areas of concern they would find just as many fisher just not as accessable hence the lower catches before changing anything they should do the same test here as was done in the southern part of the state Jim Amen- You are correct
|
|
paintedpaw
Retired NYSDEC Lake George Ranger
Posts: 691
|
Post by paintedpaw on Feb 25, 2015 21:49:15 GMT -5
From my perspective I particularly do not like or trust the trend of DEC towards "trophies" and away from sound support of fur trapping. Past performance on their part makes it difficult to trust. Let see now, just how long has it been since the otter closure in the Catskills and Mohawk Valley? Approaching twenty years! Shameful.One excuse after the other.Now we are told the Pine Marten plan is next, not the otter plan. Look at the Bobcat Plan and a season that produces junk pelts.Look at the delays with this Fisher plan, look at the posting on the DEC website with a 30 day comment period instead of the traditional posting on the New York State Register with a 45 day comment period. Why did the plan take so long to be presented to the public? You can't convince me that DEC does not change the rules at the drop of a hat. I feel that the explosion of fisher into new areas has been a natural happening and not as the result of DEC management. Just a question if I may, after Fisher were reintroduced into the Catskills when a season was opened there was there a quota required???
|
|
|
Post by jsevering on Feb 25, 2015 22:14:24 GMT -5
no al there wasn't any bag limit and the season lenghth if i remember right was the same as up north when it opened here .... but that was over thirty years ago, so you might want to check my memory on the season length... even though im 99.9 percent that it also was the same as up north.... jim
|
|
|
Post by johnrockwood on Feb 25, 2015 23:03:06 GMT -5
New York is not New Hampshire or Pa. or any other of the state which the DEC has seemingly taken Guidance from. oopps.. I wasn't done yet. I also feel it is unwise for the DEC to paint this subject with such a broad brush. There are obviously two different dynamics to this subject. One is the decreasing population in northern NY and an exploding population in some pockets in southern NY. Think about this for just a minute: Who said the fisher population is decreasing in northern NY ? There are NO science based studies to prove that the population of fisher in the Adirondacks is declining. The only argument presented is that less fisher have been harvested from the Adirondack WMUs for a few consecutive seasons. Does that harvest data automatically prove, beyond doubt, that there is a significant decrease in the Adirondack fisher population? I think not. As correctly stated above, NY is not PA, NH, MN, WI, ME or anywhere else. Are some of these studies in other states relevant? Yes. Are they all relevant? No. Of the ones relevant, are they 100% relevant? Not necessarily. This is NY. There have been studies done in NY that are not cited in this plan. Why? Because the findings of those studies do not support some of the "facts" used to justify some parts of this plan.
|
|
austinp
#3 Newhouse
the next fur season is never far from our minds :)
Posts: 3,008
|
Post by austinp on Feb 26, 2015 6:01:31 GMT -5
the ironic and also sad part of all this is, trappers are the only people who care about fisher at all. DEC needs to smell the coffee and face true facts: most people in NY and quite frankly across the country don't even know what a fisher is, don't know they exist and couldn't identify one if they saw it live. Bowhunters don't care if they ever see a live fisher or not. Most people in NY will never see a live fisher in their entire lifetimes.
So who are we supposedly "managing" this species for? Nobody cares about fisher, period except for trappers. We are the ONLY ones who have best interest of the species in mind. Yet our represented voices appear to go completely unheeded thru DEC channels.
|
|
|
Post by whartonrattrapper on Feb 26, 2015 8:08:27 GMT -5
John, as far as the population in the northern zone I made a mistake in referring to what I have read here about the perceived decline in populations. My mistake as I'm not normally travelling north the thruway to trap.
Photographers is the answer to your question Austin from what I read in the plan. LOL
One more thing, Their estimation of Between 4 and 6 Fisher per 10 square miles in my area is totally laughable, and more than likely, probably ten times their estimate! Every ridge in Otsego and Chenango county has it's own population of Fisher, you just may need to get off the road to find it.
I also believe the southern fisher have adapted to a totally different environment here than in the Adirondacks and they have no need to travel great distances for food. Which make most of the studies cited in this plan irrelevant and outdated due the Fishers RECENT (20 years) expansion into this area, an area unlike any in the prior research cited in this plan.
|
|
|
Post by redknot on Feb 26, 2015 8:18:55 GMT -5
the ironic and also sad part of all this is, trappers are the only people who care about fisher at all. DEC needs to smell the coffee and face true facts: most people in NY and quite frankly across the country don't even know what a fisher is, don't know they exist and couldn't identify one if they saw it live. Bowhunters don't care if they ever see a live fisher or not. Most people in NY will never see a live fisher in their entire lifetimes. So who are we supposedly "managing" this species for? Nobody cares about fisher, period except for trappers. We are the ONLY ones who have best interest of the species in mind. Yet our represented voices appear to go completely unheeded thru DEC channels. Austin, this is the easiest question I'll answer all day...The NYS DEC is managing fisher in the State of New York for the People of the State of New York. If you are reading this Draft Fisher Plan with some other perspective, the Plan may indeed be a frustrating read for you.... I'm not disagreeing with your statement about which of those People of NY will likely be the ones seeing fisher, but believing DEC will author a Plan for just trappers is not reality...
|
|
|
Post by k9goodtimes on Feb 26, 2015 9:28:13 GMT -5
As the only legal means of taking Fisher, the plan should be specifically geared around trapping. There in lies the problem.
|
|