This commentary is by Susan Burns, a resident of Middlebury.
Trapping supporters, including our own Fish & Wildlife Department, often claim the word “science” to advance a political agenda.
Bill S.201, a ban on leghold traps, was discussed on Feb. 2 by the Senate Natural Resources Committee that is chaired by my senator, Christopher Bray. To those who are unfamiliar, steel-jawed leghold traps are baited and set in the woods, including our shared public lands, and slam shut with tremendous force on any unsuspecting animal unlucky enough to trigger them.
Trapping regulations are underenforced and place not only wildlife, but also our domestic animals, in tremendous danger.
Trapped animals — including bobcats, gray fox and other animals labeled “furbearers” — suffer from visible injuries, including bloodied paws and mouths from biting at the trap, to unseen injuries including severed tendons, dislocated joints, broken bones and other injuries.
A conservative estimate reveals that only one out of three animals trapped is the target animal. Nontarget animals trapped in Vermont include barred owls, ravens, turtles, dogs, cats and a host of other species. Surprisingly, trappers are not even required to report when they trap nontargeted wildlife, including some imperiled species such as birds of prey.
Trappers continue to trap based on tradition and “recreation,” and will readily admit that there’s no longer monetary value in trapping. In fact, trappers are likely losing money trapping, since furs are no longer selling thanks to the fashion industry evolving to meet 21st-century standards around animal suffering.
Trappers often target animals like bobcats and coyotes that they dislike simply due to the fact that they’re classified as predator species. Predator hatred is alive and well, not just out West with wolves, but right here in Vermont as well.
But let’s loop back to the oft-used excuse as “science” supports trapping. Even if science did support the use of leghold traps, the ends do not justify these cruel means. But science does not support it.
It is important to remember that science does not say that we must trap and kill bobcats, for example, to manage their populations. Where’s the peer-reviewed science that tells us that bobcats and other animals should be trapped in leghold traps? There is none, because that is a value-based argument peddled to the public as science.
Science “might” inform Vermont Fish & Wildlife about bobcat reproduction and other factors and how their populations might respond to a trapping season. But it is Vermont Fish & Wildlife’s values of being pro-trapping that informs its policy that allows these animals to be trapped in the first place. That is a value-based wildlife policy, not one that is rooted in science.
It would be very helpful if Fish & Wildlife biologists were to state their political biases when providing testimony to the Legislature. Sadly, they are acting more like lobbyists for trappers than biologists.
