Addendum and corrections to the printed version of the 2000 Trappers Newsletter:

The table on pages 13and 14 of this newsletter was reproduced from information produced and provided by the Trap Research and Development Committee (TRDC) of the Fur Institute of Canada (FIC). The TRDC of the FIC continues to make significant progress in testing both commonly used and newly developed and modified traps against the Agreement on International Humane Trapping Standards (AIHTS). The measure of this progress is clearly evidenced in the numbers of traps which have been rated and added to the list of those found to meet the thresholds set out in the AIHTS.

Collections required this year: Fisher, otter and incidental catches of marten and lynx. Submission of accidental catches of flying squirrels is voluntary. Also a voluntary collection of wild mink from the Southwestern part of the province, is needed as part of continued research on mercury contamination of top line predators. This information will be collected in conjunction with three other states along the northeastern coast.

Table of Contents

• Coyote Trap Testing Results
• Mandatory Fur Harvester Courses
• Furbearer Report
• Bobcat Reproduction, Age Structure and Bag Limit
• Species Abundance as Recorded by Fur Harvesters
• Dog Proofing Raccoon Sets
• International Humane Trapping Standards
• 1999 Black Bear Harvest Survey
• Trap Standards - Update on the EU Agreement and Canadian Trap Standards
• Fisher Study Continues

Note:

Due to government cut backs the Trappers Newsletter will only be mailed out to trappers who held a license during the 1999/2000, season. A limited number of copies will be made available for pick-up at local district offices. Alternatively the NS Trappers Newsletter will be available on the Internet, @ www.gov.ns.ca/natr/wildlife/furbers/newslet.htm

Anyone seeking further information on furbearer management or wishing to provide input to the Department of Natural Resources should contact their local office, a Regional Wildlife Biologist, or the Furbearer & Upland Game Section of DNR, Attn: Mike O'Brien, 136 Exhibition Street, Kentville, NS B4N 4E5

By email: obrienms@gov.ns.ca Phone: (902)679-6091 Fax: (902) 679-6176. The Furbearer Section, including Trappers Newsletter, is on the Internet: https://novascotia.ca/NATR/WILDLIFE/furbers/furbs.htm

Accidental catches or sightings of rare species may also be reported by calling 1-800-565-2224.

In the October 1999 edition of the Trapper Newsletter, there was an article outlining coyote trap testing which took place during the early fall of the same year. This project was part of the trap testing program of the Trap Research and Development Committee of the Fur Institute of Canada. Trappers were chosen from within the provincial trappers associations of the 4 provinces involved. These trappers were chosen on their ability to successfully catch coyotes using foot hold traps. This trapping session took place concurrently in British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario, and Nova Scotia. Each team consisted of a trapper and a technician who was present to ensure the adherence to trapping protocol. Mike Boudreau and trapper Lloyd Duncanson were the technician/trapper team for the Nova Scotia component of the project.

The purpose of the test was to evaluate a number of commonly used traps to catch coyotes. Up to the time of the testing, the Belisle foot snare was the only trap which met thresholds in the Agreement on International Humane Trapping Standards for coyotes. The results of the testing have been analyzed, and the Bridger #3, equipped with 4 coils and a 5/16" offset, a double jaw lamination (3/16" on top and 1/4" on the bottom), center swivelled on base plate of the trap, has passed the AIHTS. The performance of this Bridger #3 in the latest round of testing, will now give trappers another tool to use when trapping coyotes.

Courses take place each year in late September. Since 1986, 64 Fur Harvester courses have been held and there have been a total of 1,311 students. Application forms are available at all DNR offices, and may be submitted throughout the year. Registration and payment must be received by TANS secretary not later than August 15 in order to guarantee a place in courses for that fall. Students registered by August 15 will receive notification of their course date and location in early September; participants are required to confirm their attendance by September 15. Anyone unable to attend must also notify DNR, Wildlife Division in Kentville, by the date specified (prior to the course date), otherwise their name will be removed from the course waiting list, and their registration fee forfeited.

The number of fur harvester licenses sold in the 1999-00 season decreased by 10.9% to 1468. The level of effort, as indicated by licensed furharvesters who caught fur, has dropped from 62% to about 57% in the 1999-2000 season.

Fur prices increased in almost every species with the exception of raccoon, skunk and fisher. Raccoons still seem to be a hard sell and may continue to have poor clearance at the auction houses until the Russian market comes back on line. Many trappers did not trap early in the season, mainly because of poor forecast for early, unprimed fur and waited to go after fur when it was prime. This may have had an influence on the rising prices.

Snowshoe hares, or rabbits as we Nova Scotians call them, are an important prey species for several furbearers. Abundance rankings made by furharvesters show an overall decline in snowshoe hare across the province. Upland game harvest survey results showed an decrease in both the number of respondents and the number of snowshoe hares harvested, with an estimated harvest of 152,994 overall. The annual pellet plot surveys showed a decreasing trend for snowshoe hare as well.

The bobcat harvest was up by 21.4% from the last year, with a total of 1403 animals taken. This increase probably at least partly reflects an increase in bag limits to five in all counties. Average prices have been falling in recent years, however last year prices improved moderately throughout the season and may have contributed to increased effort late in the season. Abundance rankings for the province continued to increase with only a slight drop in Queens, Shelburne and Yarmouth counties. The proportion of kittens in the harvest was down slightly as well as the percent pregnant yearling females, as reported elsewhere in this issue in the article Bobcat Reproduction, Age Structure and Bag Limits.

The provincial beaver harvest declined by 28.9% to 4126 animals, but still remains relatively high. Pelt prices increased this year but are not quite up to 1996-97 season averages.

Provincial abundance rankings showed slight increases province wide. After discussions with Department field staff and trappers, the bag limits have been set at the same levels as last year in all four zones. We recognize the fact that trappers often trap other aquatic furbearers (such as muskrat, otters, and mink) over a geographic area that extends beyond the boundaries of the beaver zone in which they permanently reside. As a result, regulations now allow trappers to retain beaver taken in any zone. This is provided that they do not exceed in total the bag limit for the zone in which they permanently reside, and do not take in any one zone more than the bag limit for that zone. It appears that after two years this change has not resulted in any major harvest management problems, and is providing us with an improved picture of the geographic distribution of our beaver harvest.

Otter harvests have declined again this year, dropping by 7.9% to a level of 440 animals. This is still in the middle of the range for harvest in recent years. Like most species the average price rose as the season progressed. Abundance rankings increased overall, however remain in the low to medium range. We are again collecting otter carcasses this year to continue to improve our understanding of what is happening with the otter population. Preliminary results suggest that otter, like other fish-eating species, are being affected in some parts of Nova Scotia by environmental mercury contamination. The status of this species will be closely monitored to ensure the maintenance of a sustainable population.

Muskrat catches continue to drop again this year, dropping by 40.4% to 15,859. This is the lowest level since the 1993/94 season. The average price increased slightly to $3.26 which is consistent with 1994/95 levels. The provincial abundance rankings are down slightly.

Fisher abundance rankings, provided by licensed furharvesters took a slight drop this year, keeping fisher in the low range. Regulations remain the same this season allowing retention of one accidentally caught fisher in Cumberland, Colchester and Pictou counties, and the remainder of the province is closed. A 12.2% drop in the harvest brought the total catch to 115 animals. While the harvest of the past four seasons continues to be encouraging, we will need to continue close monitoring of this species to ensure continued population recovery and expansion. An updated report on the fisher live capture and translocation and habitat research project can be found elsewhere in this issue. Following an offer of financial support from the Trappers Association of Nova Scotia (TANS), we plan to continue the project again this year, with additional animals being live-trapped and moved from Colchester and Pictou counties to the south central part of the province. This will hopefully bolster fisher numbers there, and eventually connect the eastern and western fisher populations. To increase the impact of this program and to protect relocated animals, regulations will remain the same as last year: trappers resident in Cumberland, Colchester or Pictou counties will be able to retain one accidentally caught fisher if caught in Cumberland, Colchester or Pictou counties only. Fisher that are accidentally caught in all other areas of the province must be turned into DNR, at least for the duration of this project. As with all seasons and bag limits, this regulation will be reviewed annually.

Raccoon harvests have dropped again by 63.8% to a level of 2018 animals. Abundance rankings have remained about the same. Average price for raccoons continue to be low and decreased substantially from last year, with many pelts unsold by the auction houses. Outbreaks of distemper will likely continue to result in lower populations in affected areas.

Fox harvest decreased by 21.3% to a level of 662 animals. Abundance rankings increased somewhat on the provincial scale. Prices did rise by 11.9% from the previous year.

Coyote harvest increased by 9.7% to 1388 animals. This harvest was second only to the harvest during the 1994-95 season, which at that time was 1887 animals. Overall abundance rankings were up and continue to be on an upward climb.

Squirrel harvest dropped significantly by 77.3% to a level of 1486. Weasels on the other hand increased by 60% to 1156 animals. Skunk harvest increased by 38.9% to reach a level of 247. Lynx and marten continue to be taken accidentally each year. Trappers should make every effort to avoid accidental capture of these species.

Furharvesters who accidentally catch protected species or animals in excess of their bag limits should try to release them alive if practical. If not practical, you must report your catch to an office of the Department of Natural Resources before it is removed from the trap site: this may be done by calling any DNR office, or calling 1-800-565-2224, 24 hours a day. The office will advise you on how to handle the situation. Anyone found in the possession of an animal to which they are not entitled, without first notifying the Department, may be charged. Most animals turned in DNR are used for demonstration and training at the annual workshop. Proceeds from the sale of pelts are used to support trapper education.

Note: See "Species Abundance as Recorded By Fur Harvesters" for criteria.

The state of Nova Scotia's bobcat population has been of concern since a decline occurred in the early 1980s. In order to monitor this situation, the Department has collected bobcat carcasses from fur harvesters during most trapping seasons since that time (including a mandatory collection for the past thirteen years). These collections have provided information on location, date of capture, and harvest methods, and allowed DNR to determine sex and age ratios, as well as reproductive success of the population.

Figure 1 shows that the percentage of kittens in the harvest has been fluctuating in recent years. In the 1990-00 harvest, it decreased slightly from the previous year. This decrease is indicative of the number of new animals entering the population. It may reflect some unfavorable environmental factor(s) in 1998-99, resulting in poorer survival of young. It may also be showing that increases in bobcat numbers had caught up with expansions in snowshoe hare populations at that time, so that competition for prey had become more of a factor for younger, less experienced animals. Other factors such as trapper interest and effort, and effects of weather on trapping conditions, are difficult to measure directly. However, they may influence representation of age classes in the kill.

In bobcat populations, the percentage of pregnant adult females is generally quite high, around 90 per cent in most seasons. The percentage of pregnant yearlings shown in Figure 2 has been much more variable, probably reflecting environmental factors and overall population conditions. These "yearlings" (actually only around 10 months old when they are bred) are much more likely to become pregnant when they are in good body condition. The relatively easy winter of 1994 - 95 appears to be strongly reflected in the 1995 - 96 results, with 59 per cent of the yearling females pregnant. In both 1996 - 97 and 1997 - 98, the proportion of yearling females showing evidence of pregnancy the previous spring declined to 37 and 31 per cent respectively. After an increase in the 1998 - 99 season, the percentage of pregnant yearlings decreased to around 30 per cent in 1999 - 00. This decrease may reflect decreasing trends in snowshoe hare abundance in mainland counties. These fluctuations are perhaps a bit more difficult to attribute to winter conditions, since the winters of 1995 to 1999 - 00 have all been relatively easy.

Various indices of snowshoe hare populations suggest the numbers of this important bobcat prey species are past their peak in the current cycle in Cape Breton, as well as on the mainland. Bobcat populations still appear to be healthy and supporting increasing harvests. Abundance rankings are also continuing to increase. Considering this information, as well as other indices discussed above, the bag limit for the 2000 - 01 season has not been changed. Consequently, the bag limit will remain five animals across the province.

Notes for Table - Fur Bearing Animals Taken by Fur Harvesters 1990 - 2000

• Bag Limit Increased to Two Province-Wide in 1990-91
• Bag Limit Reduced to One Province-Wide in 1991-92
• Bag Limit Increased to Two Province-Wide in 1993-94
• Bag Limit Reduced to One in Cumberland and Colchester Counties in 1994-95
• Bag Limit Increased to Three Province-Wide (except Cumb/Col) in 1995-96
• Bag Limit Increased to Four Province-Wide (except Cumb/Col) in 1996-97
• Bag Limit Increased from One to Four in Colchester County in 1997-98
• Bag Limit Increased from Four to Five Province-Wide except for Cumberland County in 1998-99
• Bag Limit Increased to Five Province-Wide in 1999-00

• Season Closed in 1988/89 to 1994-95
• One Mistake Fisher Allowed in 1995-96, 1996/97, 1997-98
• One Mistake Fisher Allowed in Cumberland, Colchester and Pictou Counties in 1998-99, 1999-00

• Season Closed

• Season Closed

Fur harvesters were asked again last year to record their perception of population levels for 16 animal species. Population levels for five of those species have been reported for eleven years, while reports on population levels for the other eleven species have been added more recently.

This has been a very successful program as it gives us the ability to draw on hundreds of skilled observers, who tell us how abundant each species is in their area. We encourage all fur harvesters to fill in this section of their report form, as higher numbers of participants increases the accuracy of the data.

Rankings for individual counties may not provide a reliable picture of annual trends because of low response numbers from some areas. The summaries for each of the three regions, as well as the provincial totals, are considered very viable. The table shows results for the 1999-00 season. The numbers are averages calculated by assigning values to the ranks selected by each fur harvester. The values given to the ranks are shown under the table.

The lowest possible value for a County is "0", which means that all respondents in that County felt that none of that particular species was present in their area. The highest possible value is "4," which means that all respondents from that County felt that numbers for that species were "very high".

This type of information is most valuable when looking at changes from year to year, and graphs are presented to show the rankings for five species over a nine year period for all of Nova Scotia.

The modern and responsible trapper must know where, when and how to set a trap in close proximity to areas which may cause conflict with pets and people. As a trapper you should be familiar with the furharvesting regulations which deal with legal trap types, special trap setting requirements, tending requirements, legal distances for setting traps from dwellings and public buildings, etc. (Please consult the Hunting and Furharvesting License and Summary of Regulations booklet or contact an office of Department of Natural Resources for details). Regulations may also be accessed via the internet or the Department of Natural Resources website. (www.gov.ns.ca/natr/wildlife).

Understanding and following these regulations will help to ensure that your trapping activity is effective and humane and minimize potential conflict with landowners/occupiers and other users of wildlife habitat. However, trapping those species which occur frequently in or actually prefer habitats found in close association with human development and activities, presents additional challenges to the modern trapper. An otherwise perfectly legal, humane, effective and appropriate set when employed in these situations, may result in a conflict with local residents/land users, which could be damaging to the reputation of yourself and trappers in general. It is important when operating in these situations that the furharvester always maintain an awareness for potential conflicts, and set his/her traps accordingly. In Nova Scotia the species that results in more conflict than almost any other is the Raccoon, mainly due to their nature and occurrence in close proximity to humans.

This is not a new problem. Some 20 years ago Natural Resources published a pamphlet for trappers, to help illustrate the use of alternative trap sets specifically for catching raccoons. At that time an increasing number of dogs were being caught and killed in conibear style traps, in particular the larger 220 and 330 size. Because of this problem the setting of the larger body gripping traps, (ie 220, 330 conibear type traps) was regulated in land setting situations, and could only be set with specific limitations. These different avenues were made available for this size of trap. a.) In a dog proof box with an opening the top of which may not be more than 5" above the ground, b) Five feet off the ground, or c) in or over water. The regulations remain in effect today with little if any problems, since inception. When applied, these techniques are very effective at keeping dogs out. However, the efficiency and versatility of these traps may have been somewhat comprised.

With these regulations in place trappers shifted their focus to the smaller 160 body gripping trap, which could be set on the ground, without restrictions. This trap, used in baited cubby sets, turned out to be very popular as well as very efficient at catching raccoons. Unfortunately during the last couple of years there have been reported incidences of dogs getting caught in these smaller 160 body gripping traps. As an alternative to further restrictions on the 160, which would be similar to the restrictions on the larger body gripping traps, NSDNR in cooperation with TANS has agreed to try a pro-active approach, and re-educating trappers on current methods of dog proofing raccoon sets, regardless of the size of the trap. Recent changes to the definition of dog proof were implemented during the 1999 - 2000 trapping season to allow the 220 size body gripping trap to be set on the ground, in a wider variety of dog proof enclosures. The conditions which allow for the setting of these traps are described in the Hunting and Furharvesting Summary and are illustrated in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Dog proof enclosure, means a special trap holding enclosure designed to keep a dog away from a trap by creating a barrier to the trap allowing entry only through designated openings and:

a) for unbaited or unscented trap sets, an enclosure that provides openings no greater than 25.4 cm (10") height and 25.4 cm (10") width with the trap trigger set back at least 38.1 cm (15") from any enclosure opening.

b) for baited/scented traps sets, an enclosure that provides openings no greater than 322.6 cm²

(50 in²) with the trap trigger set back at least 17.78 cm (7") from any enclosure opening or an enclosure with openings no greater than a 20.32 cm (8") height by 25.4 cm (10") width, the trap trigger set back at least 25.4 cm (10") from any enclosure opening.

These changes exclude dogs from the trap by crating a physical barrier to the trap. It is important to note that even though the enclosures in the above diagrams are made of wire and plastic, the dog proof enclosure can be made of anything including such things as stone, brush, wood or steel. It can be totally collapsible, as long as the structure creates a barrier to the trap, within the specifications given.

The diagrams above are meant as examples only, and can be improved upon by using brush, moss, stone or other materials to cover and blend them into the surrounding areas. The purpose of the illustrations is to show examples of the set back of the trigger position and the size of the openings that are required in order to legally set the trap and ultimately exclude dogs. The dimension of these set backs are a result of research carried out in Wisconsin, USA and are proven to work both at catching raccoons and excluding dogs. As mentioned earlier, even these legal sets will not keep out all accidental catches 100% of the time. Using alternative baits and a little common sense will always be important when setting traps, regardless of the kind of trap or set location.

Bait selection, with or without lure, is a very important part of any trap set. Some baits will be attractive to raccoons as well as other non target animals including dogs. Baits such as red meat, poultry and fish, should be avoided in areas that you suspect dogs to frequent. Alternative baits such as peanut butter, beaver castor, marshmallows, honey, and fruit to name a few, should be considered. Selection of specialized lures may also reduce problems with non target catches. However careful consideration should be given to lure selection as some lures may be more attractive to dogs, especially hounds, than the actual bait itself.

A point to consider when making cubbies for the smaller body gripping traps, is the cut-out which allows the spring of the trap to expand when fired. If the cut-out is too shallow then the trap will be forced forward and out of the cubby. This additional thrust can be enough to throw the trap out of the cubby and over a dogs head. By making the slots in the sides of the cubby longer, and keeping the trap away from the back of the cut-out, there is little or no forward momentum when the trap is fired. By using the minimum set-backs for trigger placements, on all body gripping traps, and enlarging the cut-outs for the springs, traps will stay within the cubby when fired. This will reduce the chance of catching dogs.

Another suggestion is to use a piece of small wire to bridge between the two wires of the trigger, of the body gripping trap. This increases the surface area of the trigger, which should prevent dogs from putting their head as far into a trap before setting it off. The result of this is to reduce the likelihood of a "killing strike" in a dog size animal.

These are only a few suggestions which will help keep unwanted animals out of your traps. The point to remember is consider the location, potential risk of the bait and lure you are going to use, and then set the trap accordingly. Failure by furharvesters to consider potential conflicts with landowners, local residents and other land users, to use some "common sense" and take the appropriate precautions will likely result in escalating conflicts, and potentially more regulatory restrictions, over time. Very few trappers think of the trappers who came before them, however every trapper should consider the trappers who will follow. The future of trapping rests in the hands of todays' trappers.

The Canada Lynx was once very common on Cape Breton Island. Competition with bobcat and coyote, along with other factors, has contributed to a significant population decline in recent years. DNR staff are trying to determine the present range and numbers of lynx on the island.

• Carefully release any live lynx accidentally captured in a trap.



• Report any lynx accidentally killed in a trap to your local DNR office.



• Keep a written record of where and when you see lynx or lynx sign during the trapping season. Return it along with your Fur Harvester Report at the end of the trapping season.



Traps Meeting Requirements of Agreement on International Humane Trapping Standards

Updated November 27, 2000
The following table was reproduced from the TRDC file, of the Fur Institute of Canada website - http://www.fur.ca/humane_trap/results.html, and will be updated from time to time.
Killing Traps


Beaver	Belisle Super X 330 LDL C330 BMI 330 Rudy 330 Bridger 330 Sauvageau 2001-11 Species-Specific 330 Dislocator Half-Magnum Species-Specific 440 Dislocator Half-Magnum Woodstream Oneida Victor Conibear 330 Woodstream Oneida Victor Conibear 330 modified
Weasel	Victor Rat Trap
Fisher	Sauvageau 2001-8
Marten	Belisle Super X 120 Sauvageau C 120 Magnum LDL B 120 Magnum Sauvageau 2001-5 Rudy 120 Magnum BMI 126 Magnum
Muskrat	Jaw-type leghold trap with submersion system Woodstream Oneida Victor Conibear 110 underwater Woodstream Oneida Victor Conibear 120 on land
Lynx	Woodstream Oneida Victor Conibear 330 Woodstream Oneida Victor Conibear 330 modified
Raccoon	Belisle Super X 160 Belisle Super X 220 Rudy 220 Sauvageau 160 Sauvageau 220 Sauvageau 2001-8 BMI 160 BMI 220 Bridger 220 Species-Specific 220 Half-Magnum LDL 160 LDL 220 Woodstream Oneida Victor Conibear 160 Woodstream Oneida Victor Conibear 220




These traps meet the time to loss of consciousness and sensibility thresholds as set out in the Agreement.

Killing traps similar to those listed above could meet these standards, provided that their mechanical values are shown, through testing, to be adequate.


Restraining Traps


Lynx	Belisle Foot Snare Victor #3 Soft Catch equipped with 4 coil springs Victor #3 equipped with 3/16-inch jaw laminations and 4 coil spring and a swivel centre mounted on base plate
Bobcat	Belisle Foot Snare
Coyote	Belisle Foot Snare Bridger #3 equipped with 5/16-inch offset, double rounded jaw laminations using 3/16-inch on topside of jaws and 1/4-inch on underside of jaws, with 4 coil springs and a swivel centre mounted to base plate (Please note slight changes in description of measurements for this trap from May 23, 2000 list.)


These traps meet the injury thresholds as set out in the Agreement.


The above lists apply to traps meeting specific performance requirements as set out in the Agreement on International Humane Trapping Standards. They are subject to certification by the provincial and territorial governments and those Aboriginal agencies sanctioned to regulate trapping methods.




---


Watch the Furbearers Website:
www.gov.ns.ca/NATR/WILDLIFE/furbers/furbs.htm
for the new Internet-based Furharvesters Report Form


---






2001 Trappers Workshop and Annual Meeting Kentville, March 1 - 3, 2001 Sleeping space available - bring your own bedroll. Contact Paul Tufts President of the Trapper Association of Nova Scotia for details. Phone: 742-2771 Fax: 742-1277 The 2000 Trappers Workshop was held in Kentville. To-date we have held 48 workshops with over 1,375 students.



1999 Black Bear Harvest Summary
by Vince Power



Bear hunting license sales increased last year by 5.0% over 1998 while hunter success dropped by 7.4%. Success rates for resident versus non-resident bear hunters were 29.3% and 44.4% respectively.




Hunters expended a total of 2775 days afield in pursuit of bears last year compared to 3406 in 1998. The average number of days required for a hunter to take a bear in the province dropped from 18.2 in 1998 to 16.9 in 1999. The diversity of hard and soft mast (oak acorns, beaked hazel nuts, mountain ash berries, etc.) in the western region continues to produce more bears than the rest of Nova Scotia. On average, only 14.9 days of hunting were required to harvest one of the 123 bears taken in that area of the province. An average of 18.9 days of hunting effort produced a bear in the eastern counties where a total of 74 bears were bagged, while the 11 bears harvested on Cape Breton Island required an average of 25.6 days of hunting each.




The practice of snaring bears continues to be most popular with trappers in the eastern half of the mainland. Trappers tallied a total of 389 snare nights in the eastern region compared to 147 in the western region and 70 on Cape Breton Island. The total effort by trappers trying to snare a bear dropped by 63% last year. Trappers accounted for only 606 snare nights in 1999 compared to 1621 in 1998. The decline in interest last year led to 49% fewer bears being snared.




The total harvest of 241 bears in 1999 consisted of 168 (69.7%) males and 73 (30.3%) females, or 2.3 males for every female taken compared to 1.7 males per female in 1998. The five year average is 2.1 males per female and appears to be sustainable.




Premolar teeth from bears harvested in 1999 have been forwarded to a lab in Montana for age analysis. Results are not expected until October of this year. The Wildlife Division in Kentville will notify all hunters and trappers, for whom we have proper mailing addresses, of the age of their bear.



Table 1. Bear Harvest Data



	Hunting Licenses		Calculated Hunter Harvest	Mean Hunter Success	Snaring Permits	Calculated Snaring Harvest
	Resident	Non-Resident
1990	245	13	99	35.2%	111	57
1991	364	10	178	47.6%	102	53
1992	239	30	76	29.7%	104	43
1993	286	44	111	44.2%	129	60
1994	481	37	248	47.9%	181	110
1995	708	81	286	36.2%	227	91
1996	656	102	247	32.6%	184	67
1997	540	116	191	29.2%	162	65
1998	505	109	243	39.6%	142	65
1999	522	123	208	32.2%	101	33




Trap Standards - Update on the EU Agreement and Canadian Trap Standards
By Mike O'Brien



In late 1997, the European Union (EU), Canada, and Russia signed the Agreement on International Humane Trapping Standards (AIHTS). This Agreement averted the implementation of European legislation that would have prohibited the importing of 13 species of wild furs into Europe from Canada. The effects of such a ban would have been very serious, directly affecting all our major furbearing species except mink and fox. Likely even the market for these would have been indirectly affected. The industry has been seeking and developing alternate markets (for example Asian countries), but the European market currently accounts for approximately 70 per cent on the market for Canadian wild fur. Recent gains in Asian markets have been significantly affected by the economic uncertainty in that region. The industry has been dealt a further serious blow by market losses as a result of the severe downturn in the Russian economy.




The United States had previously withdrawn from the official Canada-EU-Russia negotiations. In late 1997, the Americans concluded a separate understanding with the EU which is similar to the one agreed to by Canada, though a bit more lenient. As a result, complications and negative effects of having US fur blocked out of EU markets were also averted.




A major event in the implementation of the AIHTS occurred on June 1, 1999, with the ratification of the Agreement by Canada on a bilateral basis with the EU. The bilateral option had been included to allow for the Agreement to move forward in the event that Russia was unable to ratify within a reasonable time period. After careful consideration of the options available, including the risks and uncertainties of leaving the Agreement unratified in the face of changes in the EU administration, the various Canadian stakeholders asked the federal government to proceed with the bilateral ratification. Prior to ratification, consultations had taken place with our US agreement with the EU only went into effect in the event of ratification by Canada, Russia, and the EU. However, after Canada's ratification in June, the US decided in August 1999 to also bring their agreement in to force as of June 1, 1999. Canada continues to make every effort to encourage and support Russian ratification at the earliest possible opportunity, but this has still not occurred.




The signing of this Agreement with the EU has kept the critical European marketplace open to Canadian furs. However, it was reached only at considerable cost to the wild fur producing nations. With the initialing of the original Agreement in 1997, we became obligated to ban the use of conventional steel-jawed leghold restraining traps not later than the end of the 2000 - 01 trapping season - regardless of whether or not the traps would otherwise pass thresholds set for restraining trap standards, ( which is very likely for some species). Over the next few months the Canadian provinces and territories will be taking the necessary steps to ensure that we are in compliance with our commitments in relation to this particular issue.




The bilateral ratification of the Agreement on June 1, 1999 started the clock ticking on the schedule for testing of various other restraining and killing trap systems against the standards in the AIHTS. Considerable work had already been done prior to that time and significant progress has been made in the past year (see the List of Traps which have been found to meet the AIHTS, page 13 of this issue of Nova Scotia Trappers Newsletter or for the most up to date information, check out the Fur Institue of Canada Trap Research and Development Committee. Significant effort and expense over a relatively short time frame will continue to be required to test and improve current systems, as well as to develop new traps and trapping systems. Without such an effort, trappers will not be able to continue efficiently harvesting wild furbearers. After testing and development are completed, the cost to trappers of re-tooling with traps which meet the standards mandated by this Agreement may be considerable.




On the positive side the markets are still open, and we can certainly be proud of the many capable representatives from the various players in the fur industry (such as governments, the Fur Institute of Canada, aboriginal organizations, trapper organizations, fur auctions, fur farmers, etc.) who have made, and continue to make, important contributions toward dealing with this situation. Unfortunately, this is not simply an issue of science, factual information, and technological improvement, but also of animal rights, public relations campaigns, strong emotions, and politics. And though the threat to the EU markets may have been successfully resolved, the lobby groups will undoubtedly continue their attacks on the industry in other arenas. Canada's leadership in humane trap standards, trapping system development, fur harvester training, furbearer conservation and management, and in implementing this Agreement are strong demonstrations of our commitment to humane, sustainable furbearer resource utilization. Our efforts will also be invaluable assets in combating propaganda campaigns against management and use of wild furbearer populations.




In late September 1997, a meeting was held in Quebec City between representatives of federal, provincial, and territorial government agencies, aboriginal peoples, and trappers to discuss the implications and requirements of the Agreement. Discussion centered around timetables and options available for complying with the Agreement, along with such issues as direction and funding for required trap testing, research, and certification, and coordination between different jurisdictions. While the federal government coordinated negotiations and signed the Agreement on behalf of Canada, the actual mandate for managing furbearing species rests with the provincial, territorial, and aboriginal land claim governments. Consequently, only they can implement the requirements of the Agreement, and approaches for doing this may vary between jurisdictions.




Following the meeting in Quebec, discussions between the various jurisdictions and interest groups on implementation and coordination have continued both nationally and internationally. The Trap Research and Development Committee of the Fur Institute of Canada is leading the trap testing and development work for our country. Its primary goal is to ensure that effective, economical, safe and humane traps are available for Canadian trappers. The FIC also plays a key role in facilitating many other processes and activities necessary for the implementation of the Agreement. The Canadian Furbearer Management Committee (CFMC - a national committee comprised of representatives from each of the provincial and territorial government wildlife agencies, that reports to the Provincial/Territorial Wildlife Directors) has been working on various issues to ensure harmonization and coordination of interpretation and implementation of the Agreement in the various Canadian jurisdictions. The process for certification of traps as required in the Agreement is in the final development stages. Once agreed to by all competent authorities, this process will provide the framework for certification of traps by the competent authorities as complying with the requirements of the AIHTS. The requirement for traps used to capture furbearers to be certified as meeting the AIHTS does not go into effect until 2007. However certification of traps will begin as soon as the certification process is in place so that both manufacturers and trappers will know as soon as possible which devices meet the AIHTS, well in advance of that deadline. The CFMC also advises the Wildlife Directors on furbearer management related issues, and provides representation for the provincial and territorial jurisdictions at various international meetings pertaining to the implementation of the Agreement.




The Canadian Wildlife Directors have moved ahead with the formation and mandating of the Canadian Management Committee for the implementation of the AIHTS. From that group will come direction on the composition of the Canadian delegation to the AIHTS Joint Management Committee, as well as on the actual work eventually undertaken by that delegation. Canada hosted a provisional meeting of the Joint Management Committee in June of this year in Edmonton. Attendance at the meeting consisted of representatives of Canada and EU (currently the only signatories who have ratified the Agreement), along with invited representatives of Russia and the USA. Reports tabled at the meeting detailed the status of trap testing and research in the respective jurisdictions.




It is interesting to note that far more progress appears to have been made in the major wild fur producing countries (Canada, Russia and the US) than in the EU, even though traps continue to be used there for a variety of purposes.




Trappers and trapper organizations continue (along with other stakeholders when appropriate) to play key roles in various aspects of the efforts surrounding this Agreement: participation in FIC activities and committees, cooperation in trap testing, research and development, delivery and development of furharvester education, representation on international delegations, and direct input to provincial and territorial governments. This work is being done in close cooperation with US and Russian counterparts to ensure coordination of efforts and sharing of information. Anyone wanting more details on the EU Agreement and how it will affect trappers here and in other parts of Canada, as well as information on trap research and development or related topics, should contact the Furbearers and Upland Game Section of the Wildlife Division, Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources (contact information inside the front cover of Nova Scotia Trappers Newsletter).




It has been hoped that the Canadian General Standards Board Humane Trap Standards process would be completed by now. Representatives of trapper organizations, native peoples, governments, the Fur Institute of Canada, trap manufacturers, humane trap researchers, animal welfare groups, and other interested parties have been meeting regularly since the summer of 1995. After considerable effort, a standard for killing traps on land was agreed to, and received final committee ratification in 1997. Work continued on Canadian standards for restraining and submersion devices. Drafts of both standards had been approved in principle at committee meetings held in Halifax in April 1997. A follow-up meeting in Calgary in fall 1997 failed to complete this work. Revised drafts were completed following that meeting, but have been put on hold pending certain decisions about the implementation of the AIHTS and the results of some of the testing efforts related to that initiative. We should soon be in a position to re-visit and compete these standards. In the intervening time, we continue to ensure that data is collected from all trap testing/research activities to comply with both processes. Canada is world leader in humane trap research and development, and is the first country to develop and implement trap standards process. Even with the implementation of the EU Agreement it is still important that our Canadian Standards process be completed and in place. These are the only standards developed by Canadians for Canadians, and will stay in place regardless of whether the EU Agreement remains in force or is terminated by any party at some future date. Trappers have played an important role in these efforts, a fact of which we can be justifiably proud. Current Nova Scotia representatives on the Canadian General Standards Board Trap Standards Committee are Paul Tufts from the Trappers Association of Nova Scotia and Mike O'Brien from the Department of Natural Resources. Anyone with questions about the Canadian standards process should contact either of the above.




Undoubtedly the fur industry faces difficulties now and in the future. However, continued hard work and cooperation between government, fur harvesters, and other players in the industry should ensure the wise use of this natural resources, as well as the survival of a distinctly Canadian industry and way of life.

---




Trappers Association of Nova Scotia
Application for Membership



I hereby apply for membership in the Trappers Association of Nova Scotia and I agree to abide by its bylaws.


(Please Print)

Date: _______________________

Surname: __________________ Given Name: ___________________




Full Address: _____________________________________________




Town, City, etc. ___________________________________________




County: _______________ Province _________ Postal Code _______

(Your Complete Address is Important)



Occupation: ______________________________________________




Age: __________ Approximate number of years trapping __________




Please check one: Renewal ______ New Member _______




Membership Dues @ $15.00 per year - Renewable September 1^st of each year.

Life Membership @$150.00

Free badges for 5, 10, 15, & 20 years on bona fide membership.

Please Send me the following:


Membership years	$ 15.00 per year	$
Embroidered crests	$ 5.00 each	$
Trappers' hats	$ 6.00 each	$
Camouflage hats	$ 7.00 each	$
Rendezvous hats	$ 6.00 each	$
Winter hats	$ 8.00 each	$
Fur Harvester Education Manual	$ 30.00 each	$
Fur Preparation Videos	$ 25.00 each or $ 45.00 for set of 2
Tape 1: Semi-aquatic furbearers (covers muskrat, mink & beaver)	(specify which tape)	$
Tape 2: Upland furbearers (covers raccoon, bobcat & coyote)		$
Lapel Pins	$ 4.00 each	$
T-shirts	$ 15.00 each	$
plus postage & handling cover (per order)		$ 3.00
TOTAL		$




Hats (adjustable size) come in orange and other colors. Indicate color preferred.


Please send payment with application to: Trappers Association of Nova Scotia R.R. #2 New Ross, NS B0J 2M0 Phone: 902-689-2951



---




Nuisance Wildlife Operators Association
By Mike Larade, President, NWOANS


Trapping nuisance wildlife has historically been under government jurisdiction. In 1993, it was opened up to private business. The Nuisance Wildlife Operators Association of Nova Scotia (NWOANS) was formed about four years ago with the goal of establishing a code of ethics wand working guidelines for this area of work. The Association also looks after the interests of the nuisance wildlife operators across the province in dealing with government regulations, and in determining what steps should be taken to ensure the best interests of the animals and the public are served.





The NWOANS is open to anyone who is licensed nuisance wildlife operator in Nova Scotia. We meet annually (on the last weekend in April), and have demonstrations at the meetings, as well as a representative from the Department of Natural Resources present. One of our latest initiatives is working to set up a training course specifically geared toward nuisance animals.





Many challenges lie ahead for the nuisance wildlife industry, including inevitable scrutiny from the media and the public and promoting the fur industry as a viable wildlife management tool. Our focus must remain on education, both for our clients and the general public.





Membership in the Association costs $20 a year, and applications can be sent to:



Nuisance Wildlife Operators
Association of Nova Scotia
P.O. Box 25023
Halifax, NS
B3M 4H4



Fur Marketing Information North American Fur Producers Marketing Inc. (Formerly Hudsons Bay Fur Sales) 65 Skyway Ave., Rexdale, Ontario M9W 6C7 Phone: 416-675-9320 Nova Scotia Representative, Furafee Trading Inc. 115 Brunswick St., Truro, NS B2N 4P6 Phone: 902-895-2511 Sale Date: January 11, 2001 Last Receiving Date: December 2, 2000 Sale Date: February 11, 2001 Last Receiving Date: January 6, 2001 Sale Date: April 23, 2001 Last Receiving Date: April 7, 2001





Fur Harvester Auction Inc. Fur Harvesters Auction Sales Inc. 1971 Bond St., North Bay, Ont. P1B 4V7 Phone: 705-495-4688 Maritime Representative, Mark Marshall R.R. #1 Barton Digby County, NS Phone: 902-837-4300 Fur Harvesters Auction Inc. Annual Convention - March 30 - 31, 2001 2000 - 2001 Auction Dates: Sale Date: December 14, 2001 Last Receiving Date: December 2, 2000 Sale Date: February 11, 2001 Last Receiving Date: January 6, 2001 Sale Date: April 23, 2001 Last Receiving Date: April 7, 2001



Update on the Nova Scotia Fisher Project
By Derek Potter, Mike O'Brien, and Dr. Phil Taylor



Historically, fisher (Martes pennanti) were frequently trapped in Nova Scotia, and their fur was often exported out of the province. However, by the early 1900s their numbers had drastically declined and it's generally accepted that fisher were extirpated from Nova Scotia by the mid 1930s. Across various areas of their North American range, over-trapping and habitat alteration have been suggested to be the major causes for their decline.




With the decline in their numbers, concern grew for the welfare of this species. As a consequence, trans-locations and re-introductions, which are commonly employed strategies for species conservation and population management elsewhere (Millsap et al., 1998; Parsons, 1998), have been used in the past and are currently planned in Nova Scotia.




Re-introductions were first attempted in 1947 - 48 and then again in 1963 and 1966. The first re-introduction occurred when 12 ranch raised animals were released in the general area of the Tobeatic Wildlife Management Area in southwestern Nova Scotia. The second introduction involved 92 wild animals from Maine that were released in the northeastern part of the province. As a result 2 separate populations now exist in the province; Colchester, Cumberland and Pictou counties host a strong population while a sparser population persists in Annapolis, Digby, Queens, Shelburne and Yarmouth counties. It is thought that the smaller western population may be of low genetic viability because it originated from ranch stock. Because of the situation of this population (limited in both distribution and overall population size), fisher are considered a 'yellow' species under the General Status of NS Wildlife ranking system (where 'green' is of least concern and 'red' of highest concern).




In 1989, the fisher season was officially closed due to concern that the population was declining. During this time it was mandatory for trappers to turn in any accidentally caught fisher to the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) so that fisher numbers could be more closely monitored.




In the early 1990's, it was thought that the fisher populations were on the rise as there was substantial increase in the number of fisher turned in through accidental trapping. Thus, DNR and the Trappers Association of Nova Scotia (TANS) devised a fisher relocation plan in an attempt to link the two isolated populations and increase the genetic diversity of the western population. To this end, 13 animals were caught in northeastern Nova Scotia in 1994, marked, and released in Lunenburg County. Limited (1 'mistake' fisher bag limit) harvest is now allowed in Pictou, Cumberland and Colchester Counties, with the remaining counties closed for fisher harvest to enhance the effect of translocation efforts.




In 1998, with support from the Trappers Association of Nova Scotia, a combined relocation plan and habitat research project was proposed. By the winter of 1999 fieldwork had begun. The objectives of this new project were to gain an understanding of fisher habitat preferences in their natural landscapes, model fisher habitat preferences with the aid of GIS technology, and to relocate animals into preferred habitat to try and link the two Nova Scotia populations. This project is an important effort by DNR to try to increase the viability of the Nova Scotia fisher population and to help fisher re-establish their original range across the province. An important longer term product will be improved knowledge of fisher habitat requirements. DNR is working cooperatively with the Trappers Association of Nova Scotia, and with Acadia University on this project.




In winter 1999, 12 animals were captured and held at the Wildlife Park at Shubenacadie until they were released in the spring of that year. These individuals were released back into the same areas in Cumberland County where they had been captured, each affixed with a radio collar so that their normal movements and habitat use in their home territories could be monitored.




From the radio telemetry data and winter harvest location data collected from Colchester, Cumberland, and Pictou Counties, superimposed over fisher habitat mapping developed from existing GIS forestry mapping, a preliminary fisher habitat model was created. Relevant attributes for the model were determined by consulting the literature for reports of habitat preference in other areas.




Approximately 10% of the harvest data was retained for cross-validation. The resulting model was used to predict habitat suitability for fisher in areas of Halifax and Hants Counties, and is being further tested by monitoring fisher movements after re-location. In spring 2000 fisher were moved to various areas within Halifax and Hants counties - several animals to areas of habitat identified by the model as most suitable for fisher, and several more to areas that are less suitable. Four individuals were ones which had been followed in natal areas in 1999 and then re-captured allowing us to account for some of the differences among individual animals in their response to the translocation. Following their release, animals have been monitored via radio-tracking.

Through work which is still on-going we will measure how well the model can predict fisher habitat by examining:




(a) the initial movement patterns of animals post-release (b) the proximity of individuals to their release site 9c) the time spent by individuals in the vicinity of the release site and (d) the movement patterns of individuals within the new area. In addition, we will assess the suitability of the individuals' new home range according to the model, to determine whether the animals select preferred or non-preferred habitat. The results will be useful in future re-introductions and management programs because we are explicitly testing the utility of the models and their predictions.




In order to extract maximum value from the radio-collared animals, we plan to continue to monitor movement and habitat use of these and additional animals which will be acquired during the winter 2000-2001 live-capture/relocation project. In order to increase the power and applicability of the habitat model generated in the above-described work, we will combine these additional data from relocated animals with an analysis of the full provincial data set from harvest location records of fisher taken by furharvesters in Nova Scotia during the past 20 years. This effort should produce a model for fisher habitat in Nova Scotia which can be used to improve our ability to ensure that IRM planning for our forests incorporates necessary components for the maintenance and enhancement of fisher populations.




The primary partners in this project are Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources - Wildlife Division, Acadia University - Center for Conservation and Wildlife Biology, and Trappers Association of Nova Scotia. Financial support was also received in year one of the project from Nova Forest Alliance. Bowater Mersey paper Company has also been very supportive of this work, providing cooperation and assistance to project activities on their lands.