Colorado Fur Trapper Assoc... Sucks...

huntwithBT17,

I can answer your question, but will asked one before. Did you sign the petition to support the e-callers? Did you put the boots on the ground to help support this petition?

If the answer is yes, then I commend you. If the answer is no, then your statement against the Colorado Trappers Assoc. is irrelevant.

One may assume that the duties of President is to voice his own personal comments, that is further from the truth. I asked the membership if they wanted to take a stand, they had mixed emotions. I stated that in the meeting, that the ability to create opportunitys were there. But on the other hand, there was possibilitys that precedents would be set. If my membership was solely set on one side or the other I would have spoke that.

Do you think for a moment that the CTA has so much political stroke in this state that it changed the thought process of the voting?

I have taken much of my adult life fighting for the rights of furharvesters in this state in one capacity or the other. Not to benefit me, but others. Putting my tail end on the line for years. Putting my name infront of millions of people. Having death threats, allegations filed against me,because of my sole passion for protecting what we have. I leave my personal business behind and use alot of my own hard earned dollars, and time that I dont have much of to go fight for things that I believe in.

I have and always will have a problem with people who sit on the sidelines, and make accusations of things they have absolutely no idea what they are talking about. One thing I will say for any of the "nay sayers", for myself and other leaders of sportsmans orginazations, until you have spent they time,money,effort, or walked in there shoes, then you dont really have a dog in the hunt. Everybody always wants someone else to do things for them, but by gawd wont return the favor when someone else needs the same help.

The finger wants to be pointed at the CTA, which is fine. It wouldnt be the first time nor the last for us to be someones scape goat. But the fact of the matter is, within your own group you let your petitioner down. There were 3 predator hunters at the first meeting, and 2 predator hunters at the second meeting. For the mathmatical challenged thats 5 total people attended a meeting that would decide the outcome of what you dearly believed in. So before you all start pointing fingers at other orginazations I would surely look in the mirror. I may step on some toes here, but hopefully will open some eyes as well.
 
So how would you have worded it differently CoCat? I am not trying to stir the pot, maybe if they petition can get reworded you would be more supporting maybe?

CoCat, do you hunt Mt lions? If so, how do you do it? I myself called one in with an ecaller and it was an adrenaline rush. But as has already been stated, the lions comes into the call expecting a meal...without someone having your backside covered it can get a little hairy.
 
Elks, thanks for pointing out the whole lion at 8 yds deal. Looking at it from that view I can totally understand the desire to use an e caller. Never thought about that.

Littledawg, just keep in mind that attacking someone else's way of hunting isn't going to help anyone. All I'm gonna say.
 
I have just caught up on this topic and I have to say that the division that I am seeing between us ( Trappers and predator callers ) is alarming to say the least! We have people that know nothing about Colorado and what the CTA has done for predator harvesters in the state voicing their opinions with only half truths and one side of an argument. The CTA has stood up for the predator community for years even though the sport that they love was virtually taken away from them. They have overcame adversity and have worked very hard to get multiple species back on our huntable list. As a predator caller and cage trapper I commend their efforts and know that they do not make a decision unless it is well thought out. Elks you talk about calling in a lion and not being able to shoot it, well I remember calling in multiple grey fox a night and not being able to shoot them. Thanks to the CTA I no longer have to endure that hardship. ELKS if this is that dear to your heart follow the lead of the CTA and work hard for your sport !
 
Quote: Elks you talk about calling in a lion and not being able to shoot it, well I remember calling in multiple grey fox a night and not being able to shoot them.when you called those fox in, did you have in the back of your mind that they could kill you. After all, you've become the hunted when a lion comes. Once that lion is at 8 yards and stalking the thing that's been screeming distress, do you think you really have a choice to shoot or not to shoot?
 
Yes i can be very frustrated with the CTA. When the 90s ban came in, I was still in high school. I remember sitting in a local CTA organization and hearing members talk about how the threat was not that important, they do not have the votes etc. They were counting on the fact that everyone would simply vote it down. At that point I started going door to door. The overwhelming response from most people was "I do not trap therefor it does not effect me." When I presented this to others in teh community who did trap (including a local CTA regional leader... there seem to be nothing done. There was no attempt to get the public out voting. Instead we relied on the hope that everyone would magically ban together. It was a failure on the CTA and several other organizations. Now I nor my kids will get to know how to trap in the state. And now due impart to lack of support from the CTA we will not be able to use an ecaller for lions.
At the time there was no real effort to address the public in the state beyond the hunter and ranchers about the ban. I remeber being 15 years old sitting in a "public" forum meeting in Snowmass where people gathered to get information about the ban. Again this was a public meeting. I showed up with one other older gentleman. We sat there and wondered where the CTA, Ranchers, other trappers and land owners were. In the end we were the only ones in the crowd that stood up and asked for honest truthful answer to the situation. On the flip side there were multiple people there from both PETA, Humane Society Etc. When I was given the opportunity to speak I shared my experiences and take on the situation. It was amazing that people actually listened to some punk kid with a view opposite of all the other presenters. Unfortunately, we lost the battle in Pitkin County, but I still never have forgotten the feeling. Where were the other groups? It was the sme feeling I had here... It felt like those who it did not effect did not really give a crap. It had no benefit to the CTA therefore we will not take a stance. Which basically is the same, if not worse than not supporting it.
Simple put, in this case if the other hunters/trappers would not support it, it makes a very easy argument for the antis. while i may not agree with a variety of forms of hunting, I will never allow myself to not take a stance. If the anti go after hunting with dogs I would fight to keep it. If CTA came up with a proposal to allow leg hold traps again, I would support it. I would not however turn my back and leave them out to dry.

Dun Urich... You actually called me out on this? You have no idea what I have and have not done. You do not know who I am etc. If I follow the lead of the CTA I become only interested in advancing my sport and when there is opportunity to support others expand theirs I will shy away. And then if I was asked hard questions as to why I would hide behind the blanket statement "not support it in its current form..." then I could just ignore questions as to why I would not support it and better yet provide no solutions as to how to make the proposal better.

As far as what I do... I do all I can given my situation. You do not know me nor my circumstances etc. You do not know what sort of hardship a week day trip across the state will place on me and my family. I is simply to far for me to drive. I how ever did write letters, did talk to local reps. etc. everything I could do minus walking in the meetings.

I am bitter right now and have been packing it around a bit. I simply can not understand how the CTA and other organizations would not support this measure. As for me I always have a lion. And in the rare case one is called I might just kill it...

Simply put it was great opportunity for us to take one step forward, but instead we gained nothing and actually got slapped in the face by fellow sportsmen in the process.
 
Last edited:



#29Coloradocat



Junior Member

Members
7 posts
Location:Colorado


Posted Today, 05:02 PM

First off, being the man I am I would personally like to apologize to "Youngdon" for any shots I may have taken at ya. Caught up in the moment, one tends to let his emotions outrun his brain, so my apologies to him.

I wont clutter up predator talk with a ton of posts, but feel that a little history will help alot of you understand some things. Reverse time back to prior to Amendment 14 passing as a ballot initiative. Which became part of our State constitution in 1996. Which banned the use of foothold traps, snares, conibears statewide. There is some exemptions but no need to go into that. I will try and keep this short, but the CTA,NTA,Woolgrowers,Cattlemans Assoc, many,many others that worked together and tried, with scientific and biological reasoning to convince the people of the State of Colorado not to let this pass. Well, it did, and within a narrow margin I should add. When the smoke had cleared, and we were doctoring our tail ends, not at one single time, did you hear the CTA say,"well if the predator hunters would have been involved, or if someone else would have helped us, we would have been better off". We pointed the finger at no one except ourselves and the CDOW at the time for selling us out. We went into battle, knowing rightly so, that no one else was going to defend what our passion was. It was the help of a select group of people and there money, that made the fight worthwhile.

A short few years after, the CDOW wanted to look into changing the regulation on night hunting in Colorado. Once again, who was the fighting force behind that, and maintained status quo on how the regulation is today. Kinda funny, wasnt even a trapping issue, but who stepped up to the plate. Several years after, the CTA toyed the idea of trying to get back 9 furbearers they we lost prior to Amend. 14 as a possibility of heading off a ballot initiative. It in turn came back to bite us, but being the kind not to just sit back and let things be, we pursued a citizens petition to see if we could attempt to re-classify those species. Our first attempt failed, our second attempt got us/you mink and pine marten, and the third attempt we recieved the remainder. We are under a stakeholders process right now, for monitoring furbearers in the state. Which is a good thing, because we are able to collect data on populations and make sure that we are never a detriment to the resource. After heading off a citizens petition for a limit/quota on bobcats, which was not to exceed 2 bobcats per hunter/trapper, and the elimination of the swift fox season. So it was part of the CTA, asking for a policy in which we can look at populations to appease the enviromental groups. Otherwise, the limit/quota would have probably had a chance of being implemented, or the chance of another ballot initiative.

If the CTA should have been such a strong voice, and we should be the black sheep because we didnt take a stand. Then so many other groups would fall into that category. Mule Deer Assoc, Elk Foundation.NWTF,DU, the list is long. I want you to ponder something for what it is worth. The E-caller issue had a total of 3 people my friends who supported it. The CTA and other Assoc. memberships total in the thousands if not hundreds of thousands. A issue has to have solid scientific/biological backing in order for things like those to half way have a chance. Not just because someone wants it, And especially when only 3 individuals show interest in it. We are all for opportunitys, dont get me wrong. But there is a limit on how you can sell opportunitys. To the point that aircraft or hand grenades for that matter would create opportunitys.

You also need to understand, that in the State of Colorado, trappers/predator hunters are a very small percentage compared to big game,fisherman,small game hunters. Big game is and will always be top priority in this state regardless. It generates almost 90% of the moneys for CDPW. So other groups and sportmen are always going to protect the resource of big game first and for most. You can all get mad, piss and moan that you didnt have the backing. But it was a bombed idea from the origin. And the thing that actually hurt the worst, was there was no support from individuals like yourselfs. Not saying that you actually had to be there, but letters cold have been written to Commissioners, others could have searched for research info. on other states policys on e-callers and big game. Or just spending a little time lobbying with the right individuals. We would have not been your saving grace, regardless, that I can tell you. There is just somethings, and this was one of them, that no matter how you toss it around to make it fit into something that can be justified, and especially in Colorado, was not going to happen. Now maybe re-classifying lions outside of big game, might have been a start. But even that would have failed because of the respect to the Outfitters Assoc. and the Houndsmen.

What you all need to do is be a part of a Association that has the membership to back it, the money to back it, to get anything accomplished. SFW sailed through this because they are one of the most respected groups in the west, and they have the membership to go after things. You dont always have to be the guy/gals that are gone from home doing the leg work on things. Theres always other things behind the scenes that you can do, and help benefit you cause. Or you can take the opposite side of things and say,hopefully someone else will do it. The fortunate part for most, is regardless if your a member or not, of any association, and speaking of the CTA as well. We will fight for things regardless, with or without you, we will fight. It would be easier with you, but we CAN do it without you, and that is proven day in and day out in our world today.

Your right , we did not take a stand. And the reasons have already been addressed. There are much bigger and more important things going on about our resources today. You didnt lose anything, you just didnt gain. That doesnt make it the end of the world, It is still staus quo, but frustrating on the same token, I understand that. But drawing a line in the sand,and saying it was because of me personally or the CTA doesnt help your causes or our causes down the road. I know I cant appease everyone, and I cant get changes that everyone wants. But I can pick and chose battles that I feel will benefit the most people. My boots will be available this year for re-election, if any single one of you thinks you can do a much better job, I would gladly buy new liners for them

Otis Latham



Like This

.
Quote
MultiQuote
Report
..
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



#30hassell



Die Hard Member

PredatorTalk Pro-staff

2,754 posts
Location:creston,b.c.


Posted Today, 05:46 PM






















.
.





































 
Last edited:
COCat,
In your 3 posts here on Predator Masters im pretty sure you have said more than I have in all of mine combined. It cracks me up, you sound like a politician.
lol.gif
 
Originally Posted By: elksDun Urich... You actually called me out on this? You have no idea what I have and have not done. You do not know who I am etc. If I follow the lead of the CTA I become only interested in advancing my sport and when there is opportunity to support others expand theirs I will shy away. And then if I was asked hard questions as to why I would hide behind the blanket statement "not support it in its current form..." then I could just ignore questions as to why I would not support it and better yet provide no solutions as to how to make the proposal better.

Actually, I think he was calling me out. I thought this was a public forum, I didnt know that I could not state my opinions
confused.gif
.
 
CoCat, what I think you have failed to realize that back in 1996, there were some predator hunters around. I would venture to say that the number of predator hunters has increased tenfold....I don't think you could say the same for trappers. Trapping is an art and a hard way to make a living, guys that predator hunt mostly do it on the weekends.

I agree, he sounds completely like a politician.....

CoCat, good luck on your reelection.
 
I asked a question in my first post on here too, and he gave me a four paragraph answer that was kinda some bullsh@t. I have yet to still read every word of it. I would like a one or two sentence answer that is straight to the point, not avoiding our questions.
 
Maybe he should take some of that wind that he's so full of and get on the end of a hand call and call in a mt lion up close and personal, maybe then he would understand the need of an e caller for calling in dangerous animals instead of the other little critters. Calling in something that can eat you or definitely hurt you will definitely change ones perspective.

How bout it elks? Are you willing to take CoCat out and call in a lion for him? Couldn't hurt your case, maybe just maybe it will help....lol.

I'm not trying to stir the pot too much, I just wanna see what kind of "hunter" is representing you gentlemen in CO, on the board of the CTA.
 
COCat,

As an out sider, looking in, you must realize the gravity of words given by a person of influence.

Remember back in the "mad cow scare" days, Oprah made a comment about (loosely quoted) 'thinking twice about eating a hamburger'? That comment set into action protest, boycotts and a huge law suit from the Cattlemen’s Assn. Simple words can be twisted and misconstrued to mean, or seemingly mean a lot of different things.

When a board member of a huge and influential organization like the CTA speaks up, he is still wearing the "VP" label. Whether it is intentional or not.

If Pres Obama was to say, "He" does not support Israel, it would instantly be seen as the US as a whole does not support Israel. Truth or not, perception, in most cases, is more constant and powerful then the reality. And often times the perceptions are simply regarded as the truth.

I, for one, do not have the means to use "thousands in personal monies" to go to and contribute in organizations meetings or State level issues. That is what the Assn, Federation, and club dues are intended for. I do, however, contribute to Duck Unlimited, RMEF, NWTF regularly with what I can spare. For the president of a state wide voice on trapping to say "I” have no opinion because I did not attend this meeting or that is insane! That is why you are elected. You volunteered for the position, right? That is why you were entrusted. YOU are the voice of many. Please discontinue your stand of telling other what voice or opinion they have. That, Sir, is not your place. I stand ready to deploy and defend the right of EVERYONE to have their opinion and have it heard. So when one red blooded American tells another they’re opinion does not count, I take personal offence.
 
Elks knew getting the DOW to make E-callers legel was going to be like pulling teeth from a chicken. They just don't don't E-callers used on big game. As far as the CTA goes I have been a member for over twenty years, and they have done far more good than harm for predator hunters.
 
To answer a couple of questions. I have hunted lions over dogs many times, as I was a guide in my younger years. And in my lifetime have called 4 lions in with hand calls, and 1 while cow calling elk. 2 of those being at night. And no, I wasnt scared outta my pants and not afraid of the dark either.
 
Song Dog , I have called in a couple of Cats with my calls and I never really felt that afraid of them with my shotgun in my hands. It is a public forum and that is the reason that I take offence with the title of ELKS topic. My point to all of you is that if Elks has a problem with the CTA why not come to a CTA meeting and air his grievences with us face to face instead of bad mouthing a good organization on a public forum. If Elks wants to call in a cat with an e-call then why not continue the fight and try to get more support from other groups and then take it back to the wildlife comission.
 
Wow! Seriously. Blaming the failures of this petition on the CTA is pathetic.

From what I can see a handful (being generous) of individuals decided to attempt this petition. One of the major three involved couldn't even show enough support for his own petition to make the meeting and it's the CTA's fault it was voted down unanimously. Curious, how many sportsmen even signed the petition? How many sportsmen's groups backed your petition? How did they show support?

I just read the actual petition and can't blame the commission for not even seriously considering it. The first argument presented is that of the danger of calling with a mouth call because of possible attack. What data do you have to support this? How many people have been attacked?

Your other argument is that there would be a longer opportunity to determine the sex and age of the mountain lion before deciding to take or not take. A very valid argument. However, how did you relate this to goals of the division? Would a more selective harvest make the population healthier?

You mention the quota system to limit lion harvest briefly in the alternatives section. Would not this have been good to put in the arguments for e-callers? The use of e-callers would have no additive effect on the overall harvest.

You mention Arizona and Washington as two states that allow e-callers. Do you have any data from those states to support your petition?

Link to mountain lion petition: http://wildlife.state.co.us/SiteCollecti...llsforlions.pdf

Link to CTA Petition: http://wildlife.state.co.us/SiteCollecti...ciesMar2009.pdf

So what you were asking for was blind support for changing the state's regulations concerning big game species with a few unsupported arguments. I now applaud the CTA for deciding to take a non-stance on this well meaning and well conceived, yet poorly executed petition. From the words some have said, just because I am a sportsman means I should support sportsmen just because. I ask, what methods do you think should be allowed or disallowed? We could propose allowing vehicles, shooting birds on the ground, shooting over bait for any species, penned animals. Am I to support these merely because I am a sportsman? Should the CTA support these merely because they are a fellow sportsman's organization?

I personally have no problems with the idea of using e-callers for mountain lions. I am however hesitant to support changing the big game regulations. If the petition comes up again and in some way minimizes the chance that it opens a can of worms regarding take methods for big game species, I would support. Maybe the opening here would be that the Mountain Lion is predator vs. the others being herbivores.

Okay, bash away. Oh, and I have never called in a mountain lion, have never tried to call in a mountain lion, have never hunted a mountain lion, and in fact have never seen a live mountain lion.
 


Write your reply...
Back
Top