Download fur_rpt16

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