Wednesday, November 23, 2011

Ethical trapping? No such thing

---

I was disturbed to read that Idaho is opening its gates to trapping as a more effective way of reducing the wolf population. Why don't we just go back to public hanging, or putting thieves in stocks in the public square? Just as there is no such thing as an honorable poacher, I do not believe there is an ethical trapper (72 hours before they check on their line—are you kidding me?).

The article indicates that snares are "recommended" but not required. I submit that there are so-called hunters willing to use leg traps who are salivating at the prospect of trapping their prey in this fashion. The image of a thrashing, horrific death speaks more of a barbaric inbred than a sincere hunter. The snares, while limiting the death to a mere six or seven minutes, is probably not what will be the preferred method, and I see no effort on the part of Fish & Game (big surprise) to monitor the use of leg traps.

And before there is a spat of hunters sending a rebuttal to this, I hike these canyons on a daily basis and come across poached animals year-round. That would certainly impact the elk numbers being taken—where is your outrage over that? And most hunters know who is doing the poaching, so don't get me started on your being offended that I consider hunters who turn a blind eye no less offensive than the poachers themselves.

If the state of Idaho is so proud of this fashion of "hunting," why don't we add the image of it on our license plates? Or perhaps we could hang a poster of it at the Boise airport, with a photo of a leg-trapped animal and the caption "Welcome to Idaho, We (Heart) Traps."

Judy McLean

Bellevue

buy cialis
comprar cialis
acheter cialis