LICENSED FUR TRAPPERS' AND DEALERS' REPORT Prepared by. Matthew Meshriy

Similar documents
2nd Year. Addt'l Wage or Pension. Total Package 50% 1 Alameda $37.12 $24.13 $2.25 $4.50 $0.00 $6.24 $46.40 $30.16 $2.25 $4.50 $0.50 $8.

IFP HIPAA Guaranteed Issue plans monthly rates

DEDUCTIONS EFFECTIVE DECEMBER 1, NOVEMBER 30, MONTHLY PREMIUM

Handgun purchasers must be legal residents of California and be age 21 or older. They must also pass a background check and a safety course.

TRAPPING HARVEST STATISTICS. Division of Fish and Wildlife 500 Lafayette Road, Box 20 Saint Paul, MN (651)

TRAPPING HARVEST STATISTICS. Division of Fish and Wildlife 500 Lafayette Road, Box 20 Saint Paul, MN (651)

TRAPPING HARVEST STATISTICS. Division of Fish and Wildlife 500 Lafayette Road, Box 20 Saint Paul, MN (651)

TRAPPING HARVEST STATISTICS. Division of Fish and Wildlife 500 Lafayette Road, Box 20 Saint Paul, MN (651)

Job Title: Game Management, Subsection B Game Management Predator and Furbearer Management. SPECIES: Predatory and Furbearing Mammals

NEW BRUNSWICK FURBEARER HARVEST REPORT

Name: License #: Year: FUR BUYER RECORD

Furbearer Management Newsletter

New Jersey Trapper Harvest, Recreational and Economic Survey

RESULTS OF THE TRAPPING SEASON

RESULTS OF THE TRAPPING SEASON

California Community Colleges ISP Usage for June 2004

New Jersey Trapper Harvest, Recreational and Economic Survey

NEW BRUNSWICK FURBEARER HARVEST REPORT FISH AND WILDLIFE BRANCH ENERGY AND RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT

Fresno, Kern, Kings, Madera, Mariposa, and Tulare Counties

and Furbearer Trapping & Hunting Regulations

Furbearer Management Newsletter

FUR DEALER LICENSE Valid: Oct 1 Sept 31 Resident - Nonresident

Dear Volunteer: Sincerely, Anne Coles. President, Alberta Trappers Association. RFMA Log Book- Trapping Season 2017/18 Page 1

Saskatchewan Wild Fur Harvest And Cash Values

Saskatchewan Wild Fur Harvest And Cash Values

The first of its kind in Québec!

STATUS OF WILDLIFE POPULATIONS, FALL 2008

Wild Mammals: A or B or C or D (circle) Inventory Checklist

PLEASE NOTE. For more information concerning the history of these regulations, please see the Table of Regulations.

FUR CATCHER LICENSE Valid: Oct 1 Sept 30 Resident

PUBLIC NOTICE (11-137)

STATE OF NEVADA BOARD OF WILDLIFE COMMISSIONERS CR 18-12

Clostridium difficile Infection (CDI) Standardized Infection Ratios (SIRs) California Department of Public Health 2015 Data

Clostridium difficile Infection (CDI) Standardized Infectio California Department of Public Health 2015 Data

California Department of Public Health 2015 Data

THE NEW TRAPPER S NOTEBOOK Notebook completion guide

FUR CATCHER LICENSE Valid: Oct 1 Sept 30 Non-Resident

New Permit Requirements for Fisher, Marten and Bobcat

Blue Diamond Growers Quality Management ASFMRA in California Almonds Outlook 2018 Conference

New Jersey Furbearer Management Newsletter

ALABAMA HUNTING SURVEY

Trickle Across Theory: Student Flow

ORDINANCE NO. WHEREAS, the feeding of wildlife can lead to negative impacts on animals, people and the environment; and

FUR HARVESTING REGULATIONS

ELECTRIC PRELIMINARY STATEMENT PART A Sheet 1 DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE AREA & GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

Agency Determination [150B- 21.3A(c)(1)a] Implements or Conforms to Federal Regulation [150B-21.3A(e)] Necessary with substantive public interest

Section 31 of the Act has the same general intent as Section 2 of the repealed Game and

$60.01 to $ $65.01 to $ Allan Hancock $ Antelope $45.

Hunting Seasons and Bag Limits

ORIGIN AND DESTINATION STUDY Mendocino, Lake, Napa and Sonoma Counties

Hunter and Angler Expenditures, Characteristics, and Economic Effects, North Dakota,

2016 ANNUAL REPORT A CONSTITUTIONAL AGENCY FUNDED BY SPORTSMEN AND WOMEN THROUGH THEIR PURCHASE OF HUNTING AND FISHING LICENSES.

Attachment 4 DIVISION 050 FURBEARING AND UNPROTECTED MAMMAL REGULATIONS

State Fish and Wildlife Agency SURVEY. & Best Management Practices

FINAL REGULATIONS - CHAPTER W-3 - FURBEARERS and SMALL GAME, EXCEPT MIGRATORY BIRDS

Media Kit. Our average reader. INSIDE How we can expand your business!}

301 KAR 2:251. Hunting and trapping seasons and limits for furbearers.

FOX AND COYOTE TRAPPING SURVEY

Colorado Parks and Wildlife. Furbearer Management Report Harvest Year

June 2017 NBWC Page 1 of 2 #19

This page intentionally blank

Mammal Management and Diseases In Delaware

Economic Outlook. Peter Rupert Professor and Chair Department of Economics, UCSB Director, UCSB Economic Forecast Project

FINAL REPORT. for. Vertebrate Pest Control Research Advisory Committee

Crossing Corridors. Objective. Materials. Background Information

Cascadia Wild Wolverine Tracking Project Season Report

New Jersey Furbearer Management Newsletter

Local Programs Procedures

2009 SMALL GAME HUNTER MAIL SURVEY

P.O. Box 24 Joshua Tree, California July 16, 2015

Angling in Manitoba (2000)

SPOTLIGHT DEER SURVEY YO RANCHLANDS LANDOWNERS ASSOCIATION ±10,400 ACRES KERR COUNTY

TRAP USE, FURBEARERS TRAPPED, AND TRAPPER CHARACTERISTICS IN THE UNITED STATES IN 2015

10-DAY EMERGENCY BEAVER OR MUSKRAT PERMIT Appendix 8

TRAPPING REGULATIONS MAJOR REGULATION CHANGES FOR TRAPPING RESTRICTIONS.

2016 Summary of Furbearer Trapping Regulations in the United States

REBOUND. on the. It was the winter of 2000/2001, and it seemed like the snow

CHANGING STATUS OF MOUNTAIN LION IN CALIFORNIA AND LIVESTOCK DEPREDATION PROBLEMS

GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 2011 SESSION LAW HOUSE BILL 432

Wildlife. Contest Details: The contest shall be divided into team and individual activities. The following is a breakdown of the scoring to be used.

RE: Support for Option 2: Complete statewide ban on commercial trapping of bobcats to implement The Bobcat Protection Act AB 1213.

FURBEARERS Fall Hunting and Trapping Forecast

TRAPPERS Newsletter. ISSN Number

Hunting Digest NEW! 2011 big game. California AUTOMATED LICENSE DATA SYSTEM IS HERE! Fund-raising Random Drawing Tags

Sources of Lead Exposing California Condors

Department of Legislative Services Maryland General Assembly 2012 Session

DISABLED MILITARY VETERAN S APPRECIATION 3-DAY EVENT HUNTING LICENSE Valid: Sept 1 Aug 31 Resident Non-Resident

Appendix H Recreation and Tourism (Chapter 8) Contents. List of Tables

Furbearer Management Newsletter

Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Document ARLIS Uniform Cover Page

Bowhunter Observation Survey

Trapping on Public Lands: National Wildlife Refuges

2008 Real Estate Market Forecast. October 10, 2007 Leslie Appleton-Young C.A.R. Vice President and Chief Economist

2112 Behan Road Crystal Lake, IL 60014

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 06/21/17 Page 1 of 15

Revised Statute 56 Sections that Pertain to Alligators

Kansas Deer Report Seasons

2017 TRAPPING REPORT

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA

2009 California & Bay Area Real Estate Market Outlook

Transcription:

State of California Natural Resources Agency Department of Fish and Wildlife Wildlife and Fisheries Division Wildlife Branch LICENSED FUR TRAPPERS' AND DEALERS' REPORT 16-17 Prepared by Matthew Meshriy September 17

INTRODUCTION The Department of Fish and Wildlife has been gathering information on the number of furbearing mammals harvested, their value, and the number of licenses sold in California since 1919. Early reports of take were gathered by compiling data from a sample of licensed trappers. Since the 195-53 season, each licensed trapper has been required to report his/her annual take of furbearing or non-game mammals for profit in order to purchase a trapping license for the following season. As of January 1, 1983, anyone applying for a new trapping license must first pass a test of trapping competence and proficiency before they may purchase the license. For 16-17 that license fee was: Resident: $113.75 Junior: $38.5 Nonresident: $57. Over the years, the take and monetary return to trappers for their furs has varied greatly. The number of licenses sold increased during the 19 s to 5,43 in the 197 8 season. Fur revenues were relatively high at that time as well. With the Depression and World War II, fur revenues and trapping license sales decreased dramatically. This decline continued until about 197, when the fur value and take began to increase. The increase was rather dramatic over the next decade; the number of licensed trappers increased from less than 5 to more than 3,9, and the fur value increased from about $5, to almost $,4,. During the 198s, the number of trapping licenses sold decreased from 3,1 to 834, and the take decreased from 131,491 to 1,46. License sales decreased by 4 percent in the 1998-99 season and 46 percent in the 1999- season after the passage of Proposition 4 on November 3, 1998. Passage of Proposition 4 eliminated the use of body-gripping traps for commercial purposes. After legislation was passed in, beginning in 3, persons who provided trapping services for profit (nuisance/pest control trappers) were also required to obtain a trapping license as has historically been required of commercial fur/recreational trappers. Therefore, the number sold in 3-4 could be a combination of both groups. Beginning with the 4-5 license year, this report only provides trapping data generated by commercial fur/recreational trappers. METHODS Section 467, Title 14, California Code of Regulations, requires that all licensed commercial fur/recreational trappers report their season s harvest by the end of the trapping year (July 1). Since 14, trappers have had the option to report their take electronically, utilizing CDFW s Automated License Data System (AlDS) accessible online at: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/licensing/harvestreporting/. If the trapper s annual report is not received by July 1, the trapper s license will be suspended. On these reports, trappers note the number of each species of furbearing or non-game mammal taken for commercial or recreational purposes, the number of each species sold, the county of take for each species, and the dealers to 16-17 Licensed Fur Trappers And Dealers Report -1-

whom the furs were sold. Trappers also have the option to report their catch-per-unit-effort, for taking individual furbearing and non-game species. The catch per unit effort (CPUE) for a target species, is equal to the number of individuals captured, divided by the total number of trap-nights (trap-nights = number of traps set * number of nights traps were set). This index of trapping effort is commonly standardized to reflect the catch per 1 trap-nights. Likewise, licensed fur dealers and their agents annually report their purchases of furs. The dealers are required (Section 44, Fish and Game Code) to report the number of furs of each species taken in California that they bought and the average price paid per fur for each species. After the trappers and fur dealers reports are received by the Department, the data from these are compiled to determine the take for each species, the distribution of that take, and the variations in that take from previous years. These compilations of data are presented herein. RESULTS A total of 1 trapping licenses were sold during the 16-17 trapping season, a decrease of thirty eight percent from the 193 licenses sold in the 15-16 season (Table 1). TABLE 1 Numbers of Fur Trappers Buying Licenses and Reporting Their Harvest 13-14 14-15 15-16 16-17 Licensees who reported successful trapping effort 149 15 51 5 Licensees who reported, but did not trap or were unsuccessful 113 1 13 66 Licensees not reporting 5 8 1 Commercial Fur/Recreational Trapping Licenses sold 67 53 193 1 Licensed trappers who do not send in their annual reports by July 1 (Table 1) will have their licenses suspended pursuant to Section 467, Title 14, California Code of Regulations. This year, licensed trappers failed to send in their annual report by the required due date. Estimated revenue received by trappers from the sale of furs during the 16-17 season, based on average prices paid by fur buyers was $54 (Table ). This is $4,96 less than the estimated revenue of $5,5 received during the 15-16 season. The average income per successful trapper decreased from $18 in 15-16 to $1 in 16-16-17 Licensed Fur Trappers And Dealers Report --

17. The average income per successful trapper (beginning in 9-1) is based on numbers of trappers who indicated trapping success during the current season. Average income in prior years was based upon total trapping licenses sold. Each year a portion of the fur harvest is reported as unsold. During the 16-17 season, 7 percent was unsold, compared to 3 percent unsold during the 15-16 season. Unsold pelts still have value and, for the purpose of this report, are considered to have the same monetary value as marketed pelts. In comparison to the 15-16 trapping season, the harvest of fur-bearing and nongame mammals decreased 73 percent in the 16-17 season. More gray foxes were taken during the 16-17 season than any other species (Table 3). The 133 gray foxes taken represented 7 percent of the total take. TABLE Number of Animals Taken, Average Price Paid, & Revenue Received by 15-16 Badger Beaver Coyote Gray Fox Mink Muskrat Opossum Raccoon Spotted Skunk Striped Skunk Weasel 6 114 84 1,18 44 1 19 1,89 Harvest Unsold 9 61 194 8 44 118 19 587 4 6 111 133 91 48 66 39 498 Harvest Unsold 4 8 13 48 6 39 358 Sold 17 53 9 1,8 1,4 Average Pelt $ $33. $13. $.39 Estimated Revenue (sold) $1,749. $1,17. $,581. $5,5. Estimated Fur Value (taken) $3,76. $3,69. $,648.1 $1,1.1 Estimated Revenue (sold) $54. $54 Estimated Fur Value (taken) $54. $54 16-17 Badger Beaver Coyote Gray Fox Mink Muskrat Opossum Raccoon Spotted Skunk Striped Skunk Weasel Sold 6 9 1 91 4 14 Average Pelt $ $9. = No Report 16-17 Licensed Fur Trappers And Dealers Report -3-

TABLE 3 Trapping Take by County 16-17 County BA BE CO GF MI MU OP RA SP ST WE Butte 3 8 11 Colusa Fresno Glenn 1 1 Humboldt 11 7 18 Inyo Kern 11 11 1 36 Lake 6 6 Lassen Los Angeles 6 4 68 Madera Marin Mendocino 1 3 5 56 Modoc 1 6 11 Mono Monterey Nevada 1 1 Orange Placer 5 4 18 6 71 Plumas 1 4 Riverside Sacramento San Benito 1 1 San Bernardino San Luis Obispo 11 11 Shasta Sierra Siskiyou 37 1 91 19 Solano Sutter Trinity 11 4 15 Tulare 1 1 Tuolumne 3 3 Yolo Yuba 4 4 Unknown 4 6 111 133 91 48 66 39 498 Percent 1% 1% % 7% % 18% 1% 13% % 8% % 1% BA = Badger; BE = Beaver; CO = Coyote; GF = Gray Fox; MI = Mink; MU = Muskrat; OT = Other; OP = Opossum; RA = Raccoon; SP = Spotted Skunk; ST = Striped Skunk; WE = Weasel reported for county trapping take means that the county was actively trapped with no take for the season. 16-17 Licensed Fur Trappers And Dealers Report -4-

While the reporting of CPUE to take individual species is not required by law, 93% of all licensed commercial fur/recreational trappers reported this information for the 16-17 season. Catch per unit effort can be considered an indirect measure of the relative abundance for a given target species. However, CPUE is influenced not only by the intrinsic density of a target species local population, but also by extrinsic factors, including local variation in landscape characteristics, changes in trapping regulations, and the experience/skill level of individual trappers. Therefore, CPUE should only be considered a coarse measure of differences in relative abundance of a given species and location from one year to the next, or between locations within the same year. Reported capture rates during the 16-17 season were highest for American badger (.1818) and lowest for the coyote (.3, Table 4). TABLE 4 Reported Trap Capture Rate (CPUE) By 16-17 Average CPUE Trappers Reporting Reporting Trapper Take Trap- Nights Capture Rate (CPUE) 4-Year Average: CPUE 4-Year Average: Catch Per 1 Trap-Nights Badger, American 4.1818.9.93 Beaver, American 4 4.1.37 3.71 Coyote 1 65,795.3.11 1.116 Fox, Gray 13 17 5,.43.17 1.698 Mink, American.18.185 Muskrat, Common 1 3 8.88.1453 14.53 Opossum, Virginia 4 6 76.789.88.879 Raccoon 7 5 76.658.18 1.78 Skunk, Striped 6 6 635.49.164 1.639 Skunk, Western Spotted.71.76 Weasel, Long-tailed.58.577 16-17 Licensed Fur Trappers And Dealers Report -5-

Licensed fur dealers reported that no pelts were purchased in California (Table 5). The average prices paid by the reporting California dealers, in addition to sales reported by trappers (which may be out of state), are used to calculate the estimated fur revenue and value (Table ) for each species. TABLE 5 Furs Purchased by Dealers 16-17 Number of Average Fur Price Furs Purchased Spent Badger $. Beaver $9. $. Coyote $. Gray Fox $. Mink $. Muskrat $. Opossum $. Raccoon $. Spotted Skunk $. Striped Skunk $. Weasel $. $. = No Report The 16-17 season saw a decrease in the number of commercial fur/recreational trapping licenses sold and a decrease in the number of animals taken from 15-16. 16-17 Licensed Fur Trappers And Dealers Report -6-