Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
MIDWEST FURBEARER GROUP ANNUAL REPORT JUNE 2016 MEETING TIME AND PLACE The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MNDNR) hosted the Midwest Furbearer Workshop on May 23 – 26, 2016. The meeting was held at the Grand Ely Lodge in Ely, MN. A field trip was held at the Soudan Underground Mine State Park. ATTENDANCE Forty-five (45) participants attended the workshop in 2016, including state furbearer biologists from 7 Midwest member states (North Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Minnesota, Michigan, Iowa, and Wisconsin) and the province of Manitoba. Additional attendees included representatives from: University of Minnesota, Southern Illinois University, Kansas State University, Iowa State University, Grand Valley State University, Central Michigan University, U.S. Forest Service, Voyageur’s National Park, Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission, Little River Band of Ottawa Indians, Minnesota Trappers Assn., Minnesota Forest Zone Trappers Assn., and Fur Takers of America. A complete list of attendees and contact information for state furbearer biologists is available in Appendices 1 and 2. The Furbearer Committee wishes to acknowledge the soon-to-be-retired John Olson for his many dedicated years of important contributions to furbearer management in Wisconsin, the Midwest, and nationally/internationally. John’s tireless work ethic has been an inspiration to many and the ‘furbearer community’ will benefit for years to come from his efforts. This year’s meeting was not the same without him. Enjoy the woods and wetlands Mr. Olson, you deserve it! EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Forums such as the Midwest Furbearer Workshop provide valuable opportunities for state furbearer biologists to become acquainted with emerging issues and exchange information and ideas related to furbearer research and management. As such, the need for state fish and wildlife agencies to establish/maintain furbearer biologist positions and support travel of furbearer biologists to the annual Midwest Furbearer Workshop is imperative to promote quality furbearer management and research in each state. It is more important than ever that state agencies are in the forefront of issues related to furbearer management and regulated trapping in order to ensure abundant populations, address important conflicts, and provide sustainable recreational opportunity. 1 At the 2016 meeting, numerous speakers presented information on topics related to furbearer ecology, monitoring, damage management, and regulated trapping. Professional presentations were given on the following topics: Using aerial LIDAR data to map and monitor forest furbearer habitat structure Fisher reproductive ecology Fisher denning habitat Improving population reconstruction with telemetry data Martens on the Apostle Islands National Lakeshore Population cycles in Manitoba carnivores/prey River otter spatial ecology, survival, and capture efficiency in Illinois Beaver dispersal and effects of tail transmitters on beaver fitness Factors influencing muskrat harvests in the Midwest Muskrat status and habitat restoration in Iowa Beaver hunting strategies by wolves Wolf depredation management in MN Lynx snow-track and DNA surveys Using GPS collars to locate wolf dens and monitor pups Using non-invasive DNA surveys to monitor fisher population dynamics North Dakota mountain lion update Nebraska mountain lion update Using stable isotopes for diet analysis Wolf predation on moose Live-capture of wolves with cable restraints North Dakota cable breakaway device research and testing protocol Beaver damage and eradication in Chile Best Management Practices for trapping update The beautiful boreal setting overlooking a lake in the heart of ‘canoe country’ offered participants a chance to relax and explore Minnesota’s Northwood’s during their down time. As usual, the breaks, evening hours, and business meeting also allowed much exchange of information on current results from population and harvest surveys, current challenges and issues in furbearer management within each state, and an opportunity to discuss new or proposed research projects. The workshop provided a good venue for discussing new ideas or issues that affect multiple state agencies. Summaries of these topics are presented below as Director Action or Information Items. DIRECTOR ACTION ITEMS 1. Background: At the 2015 MAFWA meeting in Duluth, MN, a motion was passed asking the Furbearer Committee to discuss/establish a “Large Carnivore Sub-Committee” under the Furbearer Committee. Initial discussion was related to wolves, but the motion also included bears and 2 mountain lions as focal species for the sub-committee to consider. John Erb (furbearer biologist MN DNR) had follow-up conversations with Ed Boggess, Kurt Thiede, and Tom Hauge to get additional clarification on goals. For reference, a list of which biologist(s) in each state have responsibility for these 3 large carnivore species was then compiled. Acknowledging that some states have different personnel for research and management, and many states do not have 1 or more of these species, it was apparent that a furbearer specialist already has at least partial responsibility for all 3 of these “large carnivore” species in 8 of the 13 Midwest states (Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and Wisconsin). In a 9th state (MN), the furbearer biologist also has at least partial responsibility for 2 of these 3 species (wolves and mountain lions). In 2 states (Indiana, Kentucky) there was insufficient clarification on who would have responsibility for some of these species at this time. Only in Michigan and Illinois are furbearer responsibilities completely non-overlapping with bears, wolves, and cougars. The topic of establishing a sub-committee was then discussed by state biologists at the business meeting of the 2016 Midwest Furbearer Workshop. It was also discussed at a special ‘business meeting’ attended only by agency wolf biologists at the beginning of the 2016 Midwest Wolf Stewards meeting. At both business meetings, the consensus among state biologists in attendance was that the business or other informal meetings offer ample opportunity for agency biologists to discuss management issues amongst themselves. In addition, agendas at these 2 meetings are largely in the control of the state biologists, though the Wolf Stewards meeting is often, but not always, a collaboration between a state and a non-profit wolf organization in that state. In the latter case, it was felt that the meeting agenda can still be developed in a manner that ensures talks have scientific relevance to management and that with proper talk moderation, unprofessional or irrelevant discussion can be avoided without stifling open discussion of the controversial social issues surrounding management. Furthermore, with respect to bears and mountain lions, regional meetings (e.g., Eastern black bear workshop, Mountain Lion Workshops) are held regularly, thus providing agency biologists additional opportunity to network with other agency staff. In addition, informal biologist-only meetings are periodically held by a subset of states when sufficient items for in-person discussion are identified (e.g., the “Tri-State (MN/WI/MI) Furbearer/Bear/Wolf meeting” often organized in Wisconsin). Hence, to the extent that forming a “Large Carnivore Sub-Committee” under the Furbearer Committee would involve any additional meetings, the group feels this would be redundant with existing meetings and potentially cause less participation at existing meetings given normal travel budget constraints. Given that for ~ 9 of the 13 states, at least 1 person with responsibility for these species is already in attendance at the Midwest Furbearer Workshop, the Furbearer Committee feels that this meeting, along with other relevant meetings (Eastern black bear 3 Workshop, Mountain Lion Workshop, Midwest Wolf Stewards), already provides agency biologists with sufficient opportunity to discuss management issues amongst themselves and that with proper agenda development and talk moderation, these meetings can provide the desired outcome. ACTION ITEM: If the Director’s disagree with the above assessment from the Midwest furbearer/carnivore biologists that have met and discussed the idea, the Furbearer Committee can certainly assemble a “Large Carnivore Sub-Committee” but asks for additional clarification from the Directors: 1. Is there an expectation that the sub-Committee would meet in-person annually and submit an annual report? 2. If YES, and acknowledging normal budget uncertainties, would there be a commitment to approve travel to an additional meeting for sub-committee members, or is it expected that the sub-committee would meet at the Midwest Furbearer Workshop and be largely or wholly composed of furbearer biologists that also have responsibility for 1 or more of these large carnivores? 3. If a sub-committee is to be established, we propose 6 members, 2 specializing in each of the 3 species, with membership dependent on the answer to question 2. Does this seem reasonable? DIRECTOR INFORMATION ITEMS 1. Over the past year, and largely coordinated by AFWAs Fur Resources Technical Working Group (FRTWG), furbearer/bear biologists have been engaging the USFWS to 1) improve the CITES permit process for sending biological samples from bears to Canada (e.g., for DNA analysis) and 2) consider establishing a CITES tagging process for bear pelts that is similar to wolves, bobcats and otters. Primary concerns among the states have been a slow and cumbersome process for sending biological samples outof-country and potential waste of a fur resource due to the high cost of a CITES export permit for an individual bear hunter (permit cost often exceeds pelt value). To date the FRTWG has conducted a survey of bear biologists to assess interest/concerns, though the survey may need to be re-done due to concerns over the level of CITES understanding by respondents. In addition, the FRTWG helped coordinate a webinar between USFWS staff and bear biologists. As a result of the various discussions, some changes have been made to the permit process for scientific specimens, but the new ‘pre-approval’ process still takes up to 2 months to complete, is only valid for 6 months, and final issuance of any specific permit will still take a minimum of 1–2 weeks, so not a real 4 solution for many urgent situations (e.g., rapid DNA confirmations in cases involving human attacks). Furthermore, USFWS remains reluctant to start the process necessary (i.e., Federal Register) to move toward a bear pelt tagging system similar to wolf, otter and bobcat that allows states to apply for CITES authority and then issue tags directly to bear hunters/trappers. Their primary concern appears to be their sense of a lack of demand, but this fails to consider that low demand may be a result of lack of knowledge among hunters that such opportunity even exists in addition to the high cost of an individual permit (~ $100); if bobcat/otter trappers had to purchase individual permits, in most years we predict there would be little demand to export pelts of these species as well. As such, the FRTWG and Midwest Furbearer Committee are encouraging more local discussion between Regional AFWA associations and their respective Regional FWS Offices to try and encourage further simplification of the process for biological specimens as well as a Federal register proposal to create a CITES pelt tagging process for bears similar to otter, bobcat, and wolves. A substantial portion of the national bear harvest comes from 3 Midwest states (MN/WI/MI) so the issue is relevant to MAFWA. 2. In 2012, the USFWS published a 90-day finding that listing of the “Plains spotted skunk” and “Prairie gray fox” was warranted and they initiated a status review for these species/sub-species. Because of concerns over the taxonomy of these entities, various efforts to collect DNA samples have been undertaken, including a collaboration between Midwest fur biologists and Dawn Reding from Luther College. To date, our sample collections have focused on Gray fox. Vince Evelsizer (IA DNR) is going to check with Dawn for an update on additional Gray fox samples she thinks are still needed. In addition, various projects are beginning to examine taxonomic identity of spotted skunks in various areas of the country, including the Great Plains and SE US. Although spotted skunks appear extremely rare in many Midwestern states, reports of decent numbers in some areas suggest sufficient sample collections may be possible. Vince was going to check with Dawn regarding her interest in either conducting DNA analysis on any spotted skunk samples we could obtain or possibly collaborating with other projects that are proposed in other parts of the country. If either were confirmed as ‘real’ taxonomic entities and federally listed, it could have notable impacts on regulated trapping in some areas. Hence, sound science is vital as this status review proceeds. 3. As options for improving selectivity of snares or cable restraints have increased (e.g., various breakaway mechanisms), many states have encouraged their use through education or regulation. Numerous states in the Midwest now require breakaway mechanisms on cable devices, though the purpose or poundage ratings vary by state. Until recently, states that require breakaway devices have not specified in law/rule how 5 breakaway poundage is to be measured. North Dakota recently became the first state to specify a testing protocol in law/rule. While additional research on efficiency, selectivity, and precision of various breakaway designs is still needed, a standardized testing protocol is desirable or necessary for researchers, breakaway manufacturers, trappers, and in many enforcement situations. The explicitly-defined ND testing protocol is consistent with the more general guidelines advocated in AFWAs white paper “Modern Snares for Capturing Mammals: Definitions, Mechanical Attributes, and Use Considerations”. As such, the Midwest Furbearer Committee encourages States that choose to promote breakaway devices, via rule/law or education, to recommend/adopt similar testing protocol in order to standardize across states. Lack of, or variability between, testing protocols has inhibited advancement of our knowledge of these selectivity devices. 4. The Midwest Furbearer Working Group thanks state Directors for their continued support of state biologist participation in efforts to develop and implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) for Trapping. Of the 23 species for which the U.S. agreed to develop BMPs, an initial BMP has now been completed for 22; only a trapping BMP for wolverines remains to be developed. A significant amount of attention is now being turned toward BMP outreach efforts. Recent national trap use surveys show strong support for BMPs among trappers who are aware of them, but much work to be done on BMP awareness among trappers. The Midwest Furbearer Committee agrees with and strongly supports all efforts to improve BMP outreach, and encourages support by our Director’s to facilitate more outreach to trappers, the public, all agency staff (especially those associated with I&E), and elected officials. AFWAs FRTWG continues to provide or develop outreach materials for States, but ultimately each State needs to closely examine all opportunities to further BMP outreach (e.g., agency websites, educational programs, informational packets to elected officials, more meetings and user-friendly BMP ‘tools’ for trappers, etc). The Group also discussed the importance of ensuring any state-sponsored trapping programs (e.g., predator control) use BMP traps in these efforts and the need to expand BMP awareness to our conservation ‘partners’ that may utilize trapping in one form or another, including the USFWS/National Wildlife Refuges, Universities, USDA-APHIS-WS, etc. The ultimate goal of BMPs is application, not simply development. 5. Because legislative challenges to regulated trapping or other aspects of furbearer management are likely to continue, and in some cases state biologists are not free to speak out against unreasonable proposals, the idea of trying to establish a “Furbearer or Trapping Issues” committee within State TWS Chapters was mentioned. The Wisconsin chapter has amended their bylaws and created such a committee earlier this year. 6 While the feasibility or support for this will undoubtedly vary by state, the Group agreed it is an idea worth considering. An independent scientific entity armed with sound scientific data on trapping (e.g., BMP research) may be useful in countering miss-information and advocating for sound science-based decisions on trapping policy. 6. The Midwest Furbearer Working Group thanks state Directors for their continued support of travel of state furbearer biologists to the annual Midwest Furbearer Resources Workshop. With tight budgets and restricted travel this annual workshop continues to be a critical component of sound resource management in the Midwest. Annual meetings allow for an open, thorough exchange of information and knowledge resulting in efficient, effective, and sound management of these unique species. TIME AND PLACE OF NEXT MEETING The Iowa Department of Natural Resources will host the 2017 Midwest Furbearer Workshop. An exact time and location is yet to be determined. A complete list of previous host states is available in Appendix 4. APPENDICES Appendix 1. Appendix 2. Appendix 3. Appendix 4. 2016 Midwest Furbearer Workshop Attendees…………………… 8 Midwest Furbearer Biologists – Contact Information…………….. 10 2016 Midwest Furbearer Workshop - Agenda……………………. 12 Host States of Midwest Furbearer Workshops…………………….15 7 Appendix 1. 2016 Midwest Furbearer Workshop Attendees. Name Agency/Affiliation Jason Abraham Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Adam Ahlers Kansas State University Max Allen WI DNR / UW-Madison Rob Baden Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Dean Berezanski Manitoba Wildlife Branch Sergey Berg University of Minnesota Adam Bump Michigan Department of Natural Resources Kevin Carlisle Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Pam Coy Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Al Dietz MN Forest Zone Trappers Assn John Erb Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Rick Erpelding Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Vince Evelsizer Iowa Department of Natural Resources Doug Franke Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Tom Gable Central Michigan University / VNP Jonathon Gilbert Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission Alex Hanrahan SIU Cooperative Wildlife Research Lab John Hart USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services Dave Hastings Fur Takers of America Bert Highland Minnesota Trappers Association Carolin Humpal Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Fabiola Ianarilli U. of MN Sean Johnson-Bice University of Minnesota-Duluth; VNP Michael Joyce University of Minnesota-Duluth Paul Keenlance Grand Valley State Univ. Bob Klaver Iowa Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit Jenna Kosnicki Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Sarah Malick-Wahls Superior National Forest 8 Sarah Mayhew Michigan Department of Natural Resources Nick McCann Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission Cory Netland Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Bridget Nixon Iowa State University John Paulson USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services Matt Peek Kansas Department of Wildlife, Parks & Tourism Shawn Rossler Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Andrew Rutter SIU Cooperative Wildlife Research Lab Dan Ryan Superior National Forest Barry Sampson Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Bob Sanders Little River Band of Ottawa Indians Joe Stangel Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Stephanie Tucker North Dakota Game and Fish Department Rusty Wetzel Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Sam Wilson Nebraska Game and Parks 9 APPENDIX 2. MAFWA Furbearer Biologists – Contact Information. Illinois Bob Bluett, Illinois Dept. of Natural Resources 1 Natural Resources Way, Springfield, IL 62702 217-782-7580; [email protected] Indiana Vacant Iowa Vince Evelsizer, Iowa Dept. of Natural Resources Fish & Wildlife Research Station, 1203 North Shore Dr., Clear Lake, IA 50428 Office: 641-357-3517; [email protected] Kansas Matt Peek, Kansas Department of Wildlife, Parks and Tourism PO Box 1525, Emporia, KS 66801 620-342-0658 & 620-340-3017; [email protected] Kentucky Laura Palmer, KY Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Resources 1 Sportsmen’s Lane, Frankfort, KY 40601 800-858-1549 ext. 4528; [email protected] Michigan Adam Bump, Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources Constitution Hall, P.O. Box 30444, Lansing, MI 48909-7944 517-284-6157; [email protected] Dwayne Etter, Michigan Dept. Of Natural Resources 8562 E. Stoll Road, East Lansing, MI 48823 517-373-9358 ext. 256; [email protected] Minnesota John Erb, Minnesota Dept. of Natural Resources 1201 East Hwy 2, Grand Rapids, MN 55744 218-328-8875; [email protected] Missouri Jeff Beringer, Missouri Dept. Of Conservation 1110 South College Avenue, Columbia, MO 65201 573-882-9909; [email protected] 10 Nebraska Sam Wilson, Nebraska Game and Parks Commission 2200 North 33rd Street, Lincoln, NE 68503 402-471-5174; [email protected] North Dakota Stephanie Tucker, North Dakota Game and Fish 100 N. Bismarck Expressway, Bismarck, ND 58501 701-328-6302; [email protected] Ohio Suzanne Prange, Ohio Dept. of Natural Resources 360 East State Street, Athens, OH 45701 740-589-9924; [email protected] South Dakota Keith Fisk, South Dakota Dept. of Game, Fish and Parks 523 East Capitol, Pierre, SD 57501 605-773-7595; [email protected] Wisconsin Shawn Rossler, Wisconsin Dept. of Natural Resources 608-267-9428; [email protected] Nathan Roberts, Wisconsin Dept. of Natural Resources 107 Sutliff Avenue, Rhinelander, WI 54501 715-365-8917; [email protected] Manitoba Dean Berezanski, Manitoba Dept. of Sustainable Development Wildlife and Fisheries Branch Box 24, 200 Saulteaux Cresc., Winnipeg MB R3J 3W3 204-945-7469; [email protected] Ontario Stephen Mills, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Wildlife Section 5th Flr N 300 Water St Peterborough ON K9J8M5 705-755-1207; [email protected] Jeff Bowman, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Wildlife Research and Monitoring Section DNA Bldg, 2nd Flr Blk B 2140 East Bank Dr 11 Peterborough ON K9J7B8 705-755-1555; [email protected] Saskatchewan Mike Gollop, Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment Fish and Wildlife Branch 112 Research Drive, Saskatoon SK S7N 3R3 (306) 933-5767; [email protected] 12 Appendix 3. 2016 Midwest Furbearer Workshop – Agenda. Midwest Furbearer Workshop May 24-26, 2016 Grand Ely Lodge Ely, Minnesota AGENDA Monday May 23rd (Travel Day) 4:00-8:00 PM Registration 8:00 PM Informal Social Tuesday May 24th 6:45-8:00 Breakfast (Included) 8:00-8:30 Registration 8:40 – 9:00 Welcome, Logistics, etc. 9:00-9:30 Applications of LIDAR Data to Furbearer Research and Management Michael Joyce, U. of Minnesota-Duluth 9:30-9:50 Comparing the Utility of Varying Amounts of Radio-Telemetry Data for Improving Statistical Population Reconstruction of American Marten in Northern Minnesota Sergey Berg, U. of Minnesota 9:50-10:10 American Martens on the Apostle Islands National Lakeshore Jonathon Gilbert, Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission 10:10-10:30 Reproductive Ecology of Fishers in Minnesota Pamela Coy, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 10:30-10:50 Break 10:50-11:10 The Role of Nearby Large-Diameter Cavity Trees in the Selection of Den Sites by Female Fishers in Northern Minnesota Sergey Berg, U. of Minnesota 11:10-11:40 Wisconsin Furbearer Research Overview/Update Shawn Rossler, WI Department of Natural Resources 11:40 – 12:00 Predator-Prey Population Synchronicities in Manitoba: the role of biology and life histories. Dean Berezanski, Manitoba Wildlife Branch 12:00 – 1:15 Lunch (Included) 13 1:20 - 1:40 Spatial Ecology of River Otters in Southern Illinois Alex Hanrahan, Southern Illinois University 1:40 – 2:00 Survival and Capture Efficiency of River Otters in Southern Illinois Andrew Rutter, Southern Illinois University 2:00 – 2:20 Do Transmitters Affect Fitness Indices of American Beavers? Steve Windels, Voyageur’s National Park 2:20 – 2:40 Why Walk When You Can Swim? Long Distance Dispersal in American Beavers Steve Windels, Voyageur’s National Park 2:40 - 3:00 Break 3:00 – 3:20 Economic Influences on Trapper Participation and Per Capita Harvest of Muskrats Adam Ahlers, Kansas State University 3:20 – 3:40 Status of Muskrats in Iowa and Regional Questions/Discussion Vince Evelsizer, Iowa Dept. of Natural Resources 3:40 – 4:00 Wolves Hunting Beavers: Description of Kill Sites Thomas Gable, Northern Michigan University / Voyageur’s National Park 4:00 – 4:20 Overview of Wolf Depredation Management in Minnesota John Hart, USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services Dinner (On Your Own) / Social Wednesday May 25th 6:45 – 8:00 Breakfast (Included) 8:30 – 8:50 Use of Snow-track Surveys and DNA for Monitoring Lynx on the SNF Dan Ryan, Superior National Forest 8:50 - 9:10 Using Satellite Collar Data to Determine Wolf Den Location in Northern MN Carolin Humpal, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 9:10 – 9:30 Using Non-Invasive DNA Techniques to Document Dynamics of a Fisher Population Roger Powell, North Carolina State University 9:30 – 9:50 Status of Mountain Lions in Nebraska Sam Wilson, Nebraska Game and Parks Commission 9:50 - 10:10 Status of Mountain Lions in North Dakota Stephanie Tucker, North Dakota Game and Fish Department 10:10 - 10:30 BREAK 14 10:30 – 10:50 Use of Stable Isotopes in Diet Analysis – issues to consider John Erb, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 10:50 - 11:10 Wolf Predation on Moose in Minnesota Michelle Carstensen, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 11:10-11:30 Evaluation of Cable Restraints for the Live Capture of wolves in Minnesota Barry Sampson, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 11:30 – 11:50 North Dakota Snare Breakaway Device Research and Standards Stephanie Tucker, North Dakota Game and Fish Department 11:50 - 1:00 LUNCH (Included) 1:00 – 1:20 Beaver Damage and Eradication on Tierra Del Fuego, Chile John Paulson, USDA-APHIS-WS 1:20 – 1:50 Best Management Practices for Trapping in the U.S. – an update and review of the how and why. John Erb, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 1:50 – 2:10 Auction Results / Closing Announcement 3:00 Depart for Field Trip 3:30 – ~ 4:30 Soudan Underground Mine State Park Tour 4:30 – 5:00 Back To Grand Ely Lodge Dinner (On Your Own) / Social Thursday May 26th 9:00 AM - Business Meeting (State Furbearer Biologists and Invited Guests Only) State Reports Location for 2017 Midwest Furbearer Workshop Other 11:30 AM Adjourn – Safe Travels Home! (Lunch on your own) 15 Appendix 4. Host States of Midwest Furbearer Workshops. Year State Year State 1979 Kansas 2016 Minnesota 1983 Wisconsin 1984 Illinois 1985 Iowa 1987 Minnesota 1988 Indiana 1989 Missouri 1990 Nebraska 1991 South Dakota 1992 Ohio 1993 Oklahoma 1994 North Dakota 1995 West Virginia 1996 Michigan 1997 Illinois 1998 Kansas 1999 Wisconsin 2000 Missouri 2001 Ohio 2002 Iowa 2003 Minnesota 2004 Illinois 2005 North Dakota 2006 Michigan 2007 Nebraska 2008 Kansas 2009 Kentucky 2010 South Dakota 2011 Wisconsin 2012 Missouri 2013 Illinois 2014 Ohio 2015 Indiana 16