Wolverine Conservation Part 2

Trapping & Wolverine

The area of the study included three licensed traplines, none of which were active until well into the camera study.  A portion of the Alberta study was trapped for two winter seasons.  This situation lead to observations and data which, coupled with interviews with the trapper (who incidentally pre-empted our camera stations for his traps without taking advantage of the contact info we had posted at the stations), gave us insights into how trapping compares with, and acts cumulatively with, other activities to impact wildlife.

He never caught our territory holding wolverine, although he did, within a matter of days of his setting his traps, kill a number of the other documented individual furbearers in our study.  In his second year, he did catch two wolverine, however, from elsewhere on his three traplines.  One got away leaving a toe in a foothold trap (a device illegal in Alberta for taking wolverine), one didn’t get away.  It was also caught in an illegal foot-hold.

This particular trapper, it turns out, had caught quite a few wolverine.  The interesting thing is that, as I ascertained in our interview, not a single one of the wolverines he ever caught was taken legally. All were caught in foothold traps set for either lynx or wolf. 

As an ex-fur trapper myself, intimate with the life, I believe that fur-trapping represents a huge potential, if not already real, obstacle to wolverine conservation.  Fur-trapping by its very nature is like scattering “set-guns” around the land, that is, it is virtually impossible in reality, despite the intentions of the regulations and humane-trapping initiatives, to decide what kinds of animals you are and aren’t going to trap.  The situation with foot-hold traps and wolverines is illustrative.  It is a political gesture and gesture only to say one can’t trap a wolverine in a foothold trap, or that one may only trap one wolverine per season, when one permits these traps to be set in wolverine territory for wolves and lynx.   

Political acceptance of programs is vital in a democracy.  But if none of us are advocating, at every applicable juncture, presently unpopular holistic approaches, will they ever become palatable?  We need a thorough program of reminders to reach a “tipping point” (to use an overworked term) on the other side of which lies acceptance.  Witness the change in how we view global climate change compared to a decade or less ago, from broad skepticism to near-total acceptance. 

In the case of fur-trapping, there are measures that I believe could work for wolverine conservation, none of which are likely to be popular with many trappers.  We are lucky, from a wolverine conservation perspective anyway, that trapping appears to be a dying tradition today.  Many traplines are inactive or being exploited simply as cheap resorts by wilderness playboys who dabble in trapping in attempt to legitimize their claim.  Should we hit a recession or depression accompanied by high fur prices at any time in the future, this situation could change and we could overnight have the makings of a conservation disaster on our hands.  The system is working today by default.  It is inadequate, and needs to be revised as it could cause irreparable damage in a cumulative scenario or not.

In the case of fur-trapping, here’s what I believe could work for wolverine conservation:

-         all trappers must divulge the manner in which wolverines were caught when pelts are brought in to be stamped;

-         the pelt must be examined in an attempt to ascertain the validity of the claim; if the wolverine was caught in any other than a legal device, it may not be sold;

-         if a trapper fills his quota for wolverine (one wolverine in Alberta), he must at that point disable any and all trapping devices employed on his line that may catch additional wolverines, including those traps set for other species that could catch wolverine e.g.: foothold traps and or snares set for wolves, lynx and coyotes and any conibear type trap larger than a 120 (even though I know of trappers who have caught wolverines – dead, or nearly so – in conibear type traps of the size set for marten);

-         there should be large “trapping prohibited” buffer zones established around  traplines – the present system of traplines blanketing the land like a quilt is not an acceptable one where the conservation of such wide-ranging carnivores as wolverines is an objective; an alternative would be to legislate that certain traplines must be remain inactive during certain years.

 Not Me – I’m a Scientist!

This may be a tough row to hoe.  Aside from the protests of interest groups, there will be perhaps even greater internal hurdles.  My own experience with researchers, some my own past colleagues, is that they are often more than happy to do the fun stuff, the neutral stuff, the ‘unbiased’ stuff, the academic stuff.  When the hard political stuff is called for, they can be prone to crying something to the tune of, “Not me pal – I’m a Scientist!”  I have witnessed this, in public no less!  Are such people not impediment to conservation?  Do we have the luxury at this time to specialize to the point where we feel justified in saying, “No thanks – I’ll leave the controversial stuff for someone else”? Do we have the luxury to employ biologists who have no qualms about capitalizing on the plight of their subject by accepting money to invasively and impactingly examine symptoms but who refuse to speak out about root-causes?  There are plenty out there who are willing to take a stand, and we need to make room for them.  That, to me, is a reality of the times.  All hands on deck!  Continued Here.