Adapted from an interview by Lindsey Botts

January 1, 2023

A few years after moving to a remote area of southern New Mexico, I saw a Sierra Club ad in the local paper. I was a longtime member and thought, “That’s amazing that a Sierra Club group is forming in this rural area!” I joined it and made new friends, but it wasn’t until 2003 that I really became active as a leader.

That year, I was hiking on a winter morning on public land near my home with my two dogs. Suddenly, one of the dogs started pulling on his leash. At the spot he wanted to investigate, there was a hidden steel-jaw trap. It leapt out of the sand when I inadvertently triggered it and slammed shut on air. The dogs and I weren’t hurt, but that moment cleaved my life in two: before trapping and after trapping.

The injustice—that a trapper could legally put me in this dangerous situation and harm my dog—was unconscionable. I shared my story with a Sierra Club friend and mentor when I got home. She said that she had also recently run into a trap on an outing she was leading: A participant’s dog had gotten caught, and it ruined the entire excursion. We were furious. Placing people in harm’s way was wrong, to say nothing of subjecting wildlife to this cruelty. That’s when I began to actively advocate for a trapping ban on public lands.

We started with the New Mexico Game Commission. After several years of us trying—organizing and generating more opposition to traps—they remained unmoved. We felt ridiculed and belittled. It didn’t matter that every year more people submitted comments opposing traps on public land—100, 1,000, then 12,000 written comments didn’t make a difference. While leading an outing myself in 2011, our group came upon a coyote struggling and badly injured in a trap. I vowed to use her picture to publicize the brutality of trapping. She is memorialized as the logo of TrapFreeNM.org, the coalition of conservation and animal protection groups I helped bring together. I never could have done this work alone.

By 2013, our coalition realized that the game commission would not help us, and we needed the legislature to change the law. The resulting bill’s first sponsor was a legislator representing a tourist destination where people enjoy recreating on public lands and where a constituent not only had two dogs that got caught in traps but was also injured herself.

The bill didn’t pass when it was first introduced, but we kept at it. Our state legislature meets only every other year to consider nonbudgetary bills. With every iteration, more people, including legislators, became aware of the injustice of trapping.

Each session brought more public support, more media coverage, and more yes votes. In 2021, the bill passed the state senate floor. We knew it would be close in the house of representatives. After several hours of debate on the house floor, the tally was tied. A bill does not pass on a tie vote. The next two years and all the work ahead flashed before my eyes. But at the last moment, another yes vote was cast by a legislator. One of their constituents had a dog who was killed by a snare in 2018. The bill became known as Roxy’s Law in the dog’s memory. The law went to the governor’s desk. With her signature, 17 years after I started my advocacy, traps and poisons were finally outlawed on New Mexico public lands.

It’s unbelievable that in the 21st century, the archaic and cruel practice of trapping is still allowed. Our opponents ignored us, then laughed at us, then fought us. But finally we, the public, and wildlife won.

Read this article at Sierra

The post Bye-Bye, Trapping on Public Land in New Mexico appeared first on TrapFree New Mexico.

It was the passionate work of the TrapFree New Mexico coalition, the genuine leadership of state legislators, the courageous testimony of trap victims from around the state and, ultimately, the governor’s signature that turned this tragedy – and countless others like it – into a positive outcome for New Mexico. Roxy’s Law will make public lands safer for everyone.

It is likely that millions of animals in New Mexico have been tortured, maimed and killed by cruel, limb-crushing traps and strangulation snares. This indiscriminate slaughter continued for so long because one state agency – the Department of Game and Fish – kept it going despite massive, clearly stated opposition. This self-serving department operates with state authority, but without any real accountability to the constituents it is supposed to serve, the people of New Mexico. The behavior of the Game Department illustrates a basic failure of governance in our state.

With its relentless “hunting is conservation” propaganda, the Game Department essentially operates New Mexico as a pay-to-kill game farm, selling the state’s wildlife as “products” on its website. Let’s be clear: killing wildlife is not conserving wildlife. This is the same state agency that did nothing to stop the obscene coyote-killing contests. The state Legislature had to step in and stop that slaughter.

The Game Commission that ostensibly oversees the Game Department has positions for seven commissioners, only one of whom represents conservation interests. Commissioners are appointed by the governor, but are not required to have any training or expertise in wildlife, biological sciences or public trust duties, and can be removed at any time without cause. This is a purely political exercise that is subject to abuse. Wildlife management should never be politicized.

Wildlife is a public trust in which all New Mexicans have a legitimate interest, not just those who hunt and fish. But the 95% of New Mexicans who do not hunt or fish are systematically excluded from state wildlife policy. This arrangement is profoundly anti-democratic and lacks basic legitimacy.

Basic components of good governance include accountability, inclusivity, responsiveness and transparency. New Mexico state wildlife management lacks all four. The Game Department’s backward policies are badly out of step with mainstream society and show little sign of improving. There is no reason we should allow any state agency to pursue an agenda that is clearly at odds with what most New Mexicans want for the state’s wildlife: respectful coexistence. Without deep reform and repurposing of state wildlife management, we can and should expect the abuse to continue.

Banning traps, snares and poisons on public lands is a victory for basic decency in our relationship with each other and what remains of our wildlife. There is no reason we should tolerate the cruel, indiscriminate killing of our companion animals or wildlife. There is no excuse for repeating the mistakes and abuses of the past, no matter how longstanding.

Read this piece in the Albuquerque Journal »

The post Roxy’s Law a win, but wildlife governance needs reform appeared first on TrapFree New Mexico.

As a scientist advocating for evidence-based decision-making, I’m doing everything I can to promote Roxy’s Law, Senate Bill 32, to ban public lands trapping, snaring and poisoning in New Mexico.

In my testimony and prior opinion pieces, I address the science and value-based systems that inform debate on these lethal tools. While those points seem to resonate with some, recent debate from legislators centers not on science but on the traditions of farming and ranching.

So never mind science for a moment. I’d like to talk about traps, snares and poisons wearing my farmer hat. I am the daughter of three generations of farmers. I think three generations is enough time to inform useful thoughts on land stewardship.

My great-grandfather, grandfather, father, their wives, children and hired help never had to employ a trap, snare or poison in their livelihood of raising livestock and crops. We had more issues with deer in fields or rodents in grain bins than coyotes even looking at our cows or horses. Coyotes were welcomed because they checked rodent populations and were fun to watch.

During state Senate floor debate, Sen. Cliff Pirtle portrayed vulnerable images of cute baby cows. I agree, they sure are cute, as are baby pigs, chickens, horses and all the young ‘uns of the pastoral lot. Those same baby cows Pirtle so vividly depicted are some of my fondest childhood memories. But Pirtle also vividly described gory scenes of predation by wild canids. Well, nothing like that happened on my family’s farm (farming can be gory thanks to humans).

We weren’t spared those gory scenes of nature red in tooth and claw because we were lucky in some way. We didn’t experience conflict with nature because we understood nature and practiced commonsense husbandry. In nature, babies are vulnerable. So calves (and colts, fillies, piglets) were welcomed into the world close to human presence and shelters. We lost fewer mothers to birthing complications that way.

We also avoided conflict with nature by not asking for conflict in the form of lethal control. This is where I must put my science hat back on and point out that studies increasingly support my family’s experience. Lethal control begets chaos in the social dynamics of coyotes and other predators. It can also increase the chances that breeding adults get killed before they teach their young to properly hunt. If you’re not taught how to get healthy food, you end up at the easiest fast-food joint. Similarly, juveniles that aren’t taught to hunt native prey might turn to an atypical food source like an easier (future) burger, however cute it may be.

The post Farming is possible without killing coyotes appeared first on TrapFree New Mexico.

Santa Fe, NM 

We share this video from New York because animals in New Mexico experience the exact same torture when caught in the same cruel traps that are legal in both states and many others. The good samaritan encountered the coyote while hiking on public lands and discovered the unfortunate animal had both front legs caught in a trap. Fortunately, the hiker was able to free the animal from the leghold trap. During New Mexico’s current trapping season, this same traumatic experience has occurred at least seven times to animals and people hiking on public lands. In six cases, the hikers’ own dogs were cruelly trapped. In another incident, hikers encountered a lone dog struggling in a leghold trap.

“No one—neither residents nor visitors to the Land of Enchantment—should have to encounter the excruciating experience of a wild or companion animal maimed or killed by traps, snares or poisons,” said Michelle Lute, National Carnivore Conservation Manager for Project Coyote. “It’s 2021 and well past time to finally end the egregious and cruel practice of trapping.”

“There’s disconnect, for many people, about what large-scale private trapping means,” said Chris Smith, Southern Rockies Wildlife Advocate for WildEarth Guardians. “For every one of the 150,000 animals killed since 2008, there is a story like this one. A story of a desperate or maimed living being on its way to a cruel death.”

The good samaritan remains anonymous because, despite the clearly heroic act, rescuing a trapped animal and tampering with a trap is technically against the law in many states. Other laws governing trapping regulations, such as trap check durations and distance from roads and trails, are rarely if ever enforced.

ASK YOUR NEW MEXICO LEGISLATORS TO SUPPORT SB 32 “ROXY’S LAW”

Roxy’s Law has been introduced as Senate Bill 32. If the proposed legislation does not become law, the video will continue to be illustrative of how to save your dog or a wild animal from archaic and cruel traps. If successful, this important legislation will prevent future residents and visitors from the traumatic experience of encountering traps on New Mexico’s public lands and save countless animal lives. To read more about SB 32, click here.

The post Video Released Showing the Excruciating Experience of Rescuing a Coyote Caught in a Trap appeared first on TrapFree New Mexico.

Robert Harrison, Ph.D, University of New Mexico^[1]

December, 2020

Summary:  Wildlife enthusiasts are well aware of the potential of leghold traps to severely injure wild animals.  Less appreciated is how many wild animals suffer such injuries in the course of an average trapping season.  I used leghold trap injury rates reported in published studies combined with the numbers of animals reported caught by the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish to estimate the number of wild animals injured annually in New Mexico. Based upon an average reported catch (harvest) and an average estimated catch (based upon harvest reporting rates) of 10,846 and 12,893 animals, respectively, from 2010 through 2020, I estimate that 5,315 to 6,318 animals in New Mexico annually suffer serious or severe injuries such as broken bones, severed tendons, deep cuts, dislocated joints, and broken teeth.

The use of leghold traps (a.k.a. foothold or steel traps) has drawn controversy for decades^1,2,3.  Efforts to find more humane alternatives for animal capture began at least as early as the 1940’s⁴.  Studies have compared injury rates of traditional leghold traps with modified leghold traps and other types of traps (Notes 5-19).  Studies used in this report were published in peer-reviewed scientific journals, primarily the Journal of Wildlife Management and the Wildlife Society Bulletin, which are the two premier journals of the wildlife management profession.  To simplify this brief report, I do not include scientific names for animals and use common terms for injuries rather than medical jargon.

The New Mexico Department of Game and Fish (NMDGF) allows the use of traditional leghold traps of jaw spread less than seven inches²⁰.  The only required modifications are a 3/16″ offset (gap) between the jaws when the trap is closed if the jaw spread is less than or equal to 5-1/2,” and lamination if trap jaw spread is between 6-1/2 and 7″.  It is unknown how many New Mexico trappers use offset traps, other types of traps, or traps with additional modifications.  For these reasons, I assume for this report that all New Mexico trappers use traditional leghold traps with a 3/16″ offset.

Many different species have been included in injury studies, with coyotes being the most common.  Other species included in the studies reviewed here were red, gray, and arctic foxes, bobcats, raccoons, wolves, opossums, skunks, dogs, cats, porcupines, groundhogs, weasels, sheep, squirrels, and snowshoe hares.

Several systems to rate the severity of injuries have been used.  The two most common are a simple four-level system and a point system.  In the four-level system, Level One includes no or slight injuries, Level Two includes moderate swelling, chipped teeth, and small cuts, Level Three includes medium cuts with damage to underlying tissues, minor joint dislocations, broken teeth, hairline fractures, and one or less toe bone broken.  Level Four includes deep cuts, swelling that prevents an animal from using the injured limb, severed tendons, major joint dislocations, frozen feet, and broken bones.  Level Three is considered serious injury, and Level Four is considered severe injury.

In the point system, points are given for each injury⁸.  For example, 5 points for minor swelling and bleeding, 20 points for tendon and ligament cuts, 50 points for major joint dislocation, 75 points for compound fractures near the wrist or ankle, 200 points for compound fractures away from the wrist or ankle, and 400 points for amputated limbs.  Points are added for each injury to yield a total score for each animal.  Total scores of 50-100 are considered to be serious, and total scores over 100 are considered to be severe.

Most studies employed veterinary pathologists to perform thorough necropsies, including the use of x-rays.  A few, mainly older, studies used external evaluations by non-veterinarians.  The latter studies most likely underestimated the extent of injuries.

The average percentage of caught animals receiving serious and severe injuries reported by those studies using the four-level system or an equivalent was 49% (range 24-86%, 11 studies).  The average injury score from studies using the point system was 94 (range 44-150, 7 studies).  A score of 94 is very serious and nearly severe.

Figures presented in the previous paragraph were from studies of traps with no offset.  The number of studies including offset traps is very limited.  One other study that included traps with an offset of 1/5″ reported an average injury score of 80¹⁶.  A second study reported a serious or severe injury percentage of 41% for unmodified traps and a serious or severe injury rate of 38% for traps offset by 1/12″¹⁸.  To my knowledge, no significant advantage from offsetting has been reported.  I found no studies of lamination.

For comparison, guidelines issued by the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (AFWA) include criteria for approval for the use of specific traps for specific species²¹.  AFWA conducted injury studies on various species using a variety of traps.  One set of criteria required that average total injury scores must be 55 or less.  The other set allowed 30% of animals to suffer serious or severe injuries.  The former criterium does not indicate what percentage of animals suffer scores of more than 55.  These criteria are stricter than the average injury rates found for traditional leghold traps in the studies reviewed here.  However, there is no requirement by NMDGF that trappers adhere to the guidelines or use recommended traps.

AFWA guidelines approved specific traps for specific target species.  There was no consideration of injuries to captured non-target animals.  Although there are modifications available to traps that prevent animals below a certain weight from being captured, such modifications are not required by NMDGF, and trappers are unlikely to use them.  Smaller animals caught may suffer far more severe injuries than larger animals in the same trap.  One study which focused on coyotes reported that snowshoe hares had an average total injury score of 209, and smaller animals such as squirrels were usually found dead¹⁰.

There are two methods available to estimate the numbers of furbearering animals caught in New Mexico each year.  Trappers are required to report their catches, leading to a reported total catch (harvest).  However, not all trappers report.  Accounting for the percentage of trappers not reporting leads to an estimated total catch (= reported catch/reporting fraction).  The actual numbers of animals caught lies in between the two estimates.

Based upon NMDGF published Furbearer Harvest Reports²² from the 2010/2011 through the 2019/2020 seasons, the average number of furbearers reported caught was 10,846 per year.  The estimated average number of furbearers caught based upon reporting rates was 12,893 per year²³.  These figures include red, gray, kit, and swift foxes, badgers, beavers, coyotes, bobcats, ermines, weasels, muskrats, nutrias, raccoons, and ringtails (See Note 24 for treatment of coyotes and skunks).  At an average serious or severe injury rate of 49%, between 5,315 and 6,318 wild animals received serious or severe injuries as a result of being caught in a leghold trap.  At an average injury score of 94, most animals received serious or severe injuries.  These high rates of injury are what prompted the many studies of alternatives to traditional leghold traps.

It is impossible for most people to fully understand the experience of a trapped animal, injured and vulnerable to attack by larger predators.  We do know that trapped animals experience significant levels of stress, as shown by increased levels of hormones, serum chemicals, and immune system activity^{25, 26}.  Given that all mammals, including ourselves, have similar nervous and endocrine systems and brain structure, it is fair to say that the reactions that trapped animals have to being in pain and in fear for their lives would be quite similar to the agony and horror we ourselves would feel in a similar situation.  Certainly, soldiers in combat, severely wounded and exposed to enemy fire, would understand.  In New Mexico, the extent of these grisly misfortunes can only be described as horrendous.

Notes:

1. Muth, R. M., R. R. Zwick, M. E. Mather, J. F. Organ, J. J. Daigle, and S. A. Jonker.  2006.  Unnecessary source of pain and suffering or necessary management tool: Attitudes of conservation professionals toward outlawing leghold traps.  Wildlife Society Bulletin 34(3):706-715.
2. Andelt, W. F., R. L. Phillips, R. H. Schmidt, and R. Bruce Gill. 1999.  Trapping furbearers: an overview of the biological and social issues surrounding a public policy controversy.  Wildlife Society Bulletin 27(1):53-64.
3. Proulx, G., M. Cattet, T. L. Serfass, and S. E. Baker. 2020.  Updating the AIHTS trapping standards to improve animal welfare and capture efficiency and selectivity.  Animals 10:1262; doi:10.3390/ani10081262.
4. Robinson, W. B. 1943.  The “Humane Coyote-Getter” vs. the Steel Trap in Control of Predatory Animals.  Journal of Wildlife Management 7(2):179-189.
5. Linhart, S. B., G. J. Dasch and F. J. Turkowski. 1981. The steel leg-hold trap: Techniques for reducing foot injury and increasing selectivity.  Pp. 1560-1578 in J. A. Chapman and D. Pursley, eds. Worldwide Furbearer Conference Proceedings.  R. R. Connelley & Sons, Co., Falls Church, VA.
6. Novak, M. 1981. The foot-snare and the leg-hold traps: A comparison.  Pp. 1671-1685 in J. A. Chapman and D. Pursley, eds. Worldwide Furbearer Conference Proceedings.  R. R. Connelley & Sons, Co., Falls Church, VA.
7. Englund, J. 1982. A comparison of injuries to leg-hold trapped and foot-snared red foxes.  Journal of Wildlife Management 46(4):1113-1117.
8. Olsen, G. H., S. B. Linhart, R. A. Holmes, G. J. Dasch, and C. B. Male. 1986.  Injuries to coyotes caught in padded and unpadded steel foothold traps.  Wildlife Society Bulletin 14(3):219-223.
9. Olsen, G. H., R. G. Linscombe, V. L. Wright, and R. A. Holmes. 1988. Reducing injuries to terrestrial furbearers by using padded foothold traps.  Wildlife Society Bulletin 16(3):303-307.
10. Onderka, D. K., D. L. Skinner and A. W. Todd. 1990.  Injuries to coyotes and other species caused by four models of footholding devices.  Wildlife Society Bulletin 18(2):175-182.
11. Phillips, R. L., F. S. Blom, G. J. Dasch, and J. W. Guthrie. 1992.  Field evaluation of three types of coyote traps.  Pages 393-395 in J. E. Borrecco and R. E. Marsh, eds.  Proceedings of the Fifteenth Vertebrate Pest Conference.  Newport Beach, California, USA.
12. Warburton, B. 1992. Victor foot-hold traps for catching Australian brushtail possums in New Zealand: capture efficiency and injuries. Wildlife Society Bulletin 20(1):67-73.
13. Proulx, G., I. M. Pawlina, D. K. Onderka, M. J. Badry and K. Seidel. 1994.  Field evaluation of the number 1 1/2 steel-jawed leghold and the Sauvageau 2001-8 traps to humanely capture arctic fox.  Wildlife Society Bulletin 22(2):179-183.
14. Phillips, R. L. 1996. Evaluation of three types of snares for capturing coyotes.  Wildlife Society Bulletin 24(1):107-110.
15. Hubert, G. F. Jr., L. L. Hungerford, G. Proulx, R. D. Bluett, and L. Bowman. 1996.  Evaluation of two restraining traps to capture raccoons.  Wildlife Society Bulletin 24(4):699-708.
16. Hubert, G. F., Jr., L. L. Hungerford, and R. D. Bluett. 1997.  Injuries to coyotes captured in modified foothold traps.  Wildlife Society Bulletin 25(4):858-863.
17. Earle, R. D., D. M. Lunning, V. R. Tuovila, and J. A. Shivik. 2003.  Evaluating injury mitigation and performance of #3 Victor Soft Catch® traps to restrain bobcats.  Wildlife Society Bulletin 31(3):617:629.
18. Frame, P. F., and T. J. Meier. 2007.  Field-assessed injury to wolves captured in rubber-padded traps.  Journal of Wildlife Management 71(6):2074-2076.
19. Turnbull, T. T., J. W. Cain, III, and G. W. Roemer. 2011.  Evaluating trapping techniques to reduce potential for injury to Mexican wolves.  Unpublished report to NMDGF.  Open file report 2011-1190.  USGS.
20. NMDGF 2020-2021 New Mexico Furbearers Rules and Information. General Rules. Page 12.  Restrictions applying to all traps that could reasonably be expected to catch a furbearer.  Size Restrictions.  www.wildlife.state.nm.us/hunting/information-by-animal/furbearers.  Accessed 22 December, 2020.
21. Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. 2006.  Best Management Practices for trapping in the United States.  Page 5.  www.fishwildlife.org/application/files/3515/1862/6191/Introduction_BMPs.pdf.  Accessed 22 December, 2020.
22. NMDGF Harvest Reports. www.wildlife.state.nm.us/hunting/information-by-animal/furbearers.  Accessed 22 December, 2020.
23. The average reporting rate from 2010/2011 through 2019/2020 was 82.3%.
24. Coyotes and skunks caught by trappers have not been recorded by NMDGF since 2014. To estimate their numbers, I applied the average catch from 2010/2011 through 2013/2014 to 2014/2015 through 2019/2020.  Average reported catches applied were 5006 for coyotes and 443 for skunks.  Average estimated catches applied were 6177 for coyotes and 553 for skunks.
25. Kreeger, T. J., P. J. White, U. S. Seal, and J. R. Tester. 1990. Pathological responses of red foxes to foothold traps.  Journal of Wildlife Management 54(1):147-160.
26. White, P. J., T. J. Kreeger, U. S. Seal, and J. R. Tester. 1991. Pathological responses of red foxes to capture in box traps.  Journal of Wildlife Management 55(1):75-80.

[1] Dr. Robert Harrison is an Adjunct Assistant Professor at the Biology Department of the University of New Mexico and a native of New Mexico.  His Ph.D research was a study of the effects of residential development on gray foxes in New Mexico.  He has published over 40 peer-reviewed articles on bobcats, swift, kit, red, and gray foxes, badgers, ringtails, and rabbits, and has followed furbearer trapping issues in New Mexico for 28 years. 

The post Injuries to New Mexico Wildlife Caught in Leghold Traps appeared first on TrapFree New Mexico.

On a warm November morning, a man taking a stroll through the amazing trails south of Santa Teresa discovered a pile of some forty dumped animals. What he first thought were dead greyhounds turned out to be coyotes. They had been killed and skinned, and left with only a little fur on their legs. The carcasses were left to unceremoniously decay in the desert. Wounds on their paws indicated that this was the heinous work of trappers.

This gruesome scene is the common outcome of trapping, but is rarely witnessed by the public. Trapping is legal in New Mexico, and is widespread on public lands. A license only costs $20 through the Department of Game and Fish, but the real cost is paid by the public and by our ecosystems. Over the years, dozens of companion animals have been victims of traps on public lands. Coyotes are a common target, but a range of species, including bobcats, beavers, badgers and foxes are killed by the thousands every year so that a tiny group of New Mexicans can profit from taking away something we all love.

As a native New Mexican, I know that our state’s public lands have some of the most beautiful scenery and landscapes. They are also home to an incredibly diverse array of wildlife, and these species are all important parts of interconnected ecosystems. Healthy ecosystems clean our air, maintain our soil, regulate climate, and recycle nutrients that provide us with food. Animals such as coyotes and foxes keep rodent populations in check, protecting us all from disease and safeguarding crops. Beavers help to store precious water in the dry desert. Elusive bobcats are a treat for anyone to see while out on a hike.

The pile of coyotes found near Santa Teresa is a grim reminder that a handful of New Mexicans think that wildlife is there for them to slaughter for fur or for a sport. But maybe, this horror will prompt some of our state legislators to act in 2021. A small fraction of our state’s population holds our public lands hostage for nearly a third of the year with dangerous and deadly traps. Banning traps on public lands must be a priority this coming year.

With newly elected representation in southern New Mexico, there will be an opportunity to make all of our public lands safer for people and pets and more hospitable to wildlife. Banning traps on public lands is a common-sense solution that our neighbors in Arizona and Colorado made decades ago. It’s time for New Mexico to catch up. In 2019, New Mexico passed Senate Bill 76 banning coyote killing contests. The obvious next step to bring our wildlife and public lands policies into the 21st century is right in front of us. Our elected lawmakers should have an easy decision in the upcoming 60-day legislative session.

As a rural resident myself, I see that these public lands are home to the most beautiful sceneries that southern New Mexico has to offer. These lands must not be home to dump sites and animals suffering and left to rot in the desert. Our elected lawmakers must recognize the change we need in order to ensure that this remains the Land of Enchantment.

To learn more about the effort to get cruel, indiscriminate traps off of public lands, please visit trapfreenm.org.

Read the Opinion in the Las Cruces Sun News »

The post Las Cruces Sun-News: It is time for New Mexico trapping laws to catch up appeared first on TrapFree New Mexico.

New Mexicans have worked hard over the years to do right by the animals in our state. We have banned cockfighting, horse tripping and coyote-killing contests. We have made dog fighting a fourth-degree felony. We have created a dedicated funding stream for low-cost spay and neuter services.

And now it is time we finally stop allowing the brutal, indiscriminate use of traps on our public lands.

For a paltry $20 permit, members of a small and vocal minority are allowed to litter our amazing public lands with as many leg-hold, body-gripping and cage traps, snares and poisons as they want. There is no limit to the number of animals they can maim and kill. No requirement they take only a certain species or gender or quickly put a suffering animal out of its misery. They can leave their traps unchecked for up to two days as anything suffers in them.

And since Nov. 1, three pet dogs have been caught in these traps (including Jesse, a 2-year-old Dutch shepherd who suffered minimal injuries from a trap in the Jemez National Recreation Area on Thanksgiving, and Mahlia, a black lab who lost many of her toes in a trap in northern Santa Fe County). Meanwhile, a hiker in Doña Ana County found a gruesome pile of more than a dozen skinned coyote carcasses, many with obvious trapping wounds on their legs. A map from TrapFree New Mexico shows incidents of traps catching people, pets and the wrong kind of animal stretch across our national forest, BLM and state trust lands.

Put that on a tourism ad.

The window dressing of “updates” the feckless state Game and Fish Department adopted last year to make trapping more palatable was just that, and real reforms are past due.

Jessica Johnson of Animal Protection Voters New Mexico says that once again, her group and others will advocate for Roxy’s Law, aka the Wildlife Protection and Public Safety Act. (It is named for family dog Roxy, an 8-year-old blue heeler-mix that strangled to death in a neck snare at Santa Cruz Lake in 2018. Her owner desperately, unsuccessfully, tried to save her.)

Versions of this reasonable legislation died in the 2017 and 2019 legislative sessions, so it is important to emphasize again to lawmakers and the public alike that it:

• Pertains only to public land, not private property.
• Does not affect hunting with firearms, archery, fishing or falconry equipment.
• Still allows trapping of mice, rats, pack rats, gophers, prairie dogs, moles, voles, rock squirrels, birds or fish.
• Provides exceptions for bona fide scientific research as well as government agencies to prevent/mitigate threats to human health and safety and address livestock depredation.
• Allows cage traps to capture wildlife and feral and domesticated animals that cause damage to property, crops or livestock, as well as to recover a domesticated animal or trap-neuter-release a feral animal.
• Exempts members of federally recognized Indian nations, tribes and pueblos for religious or ceremonial purposes.

New Mexico has long been an outlier on trapping. Colorado and California have banned it statewide, and Arizona and Washington have banned it on public land. That’s because they recognize trapping is indiscriminate, cruel, threatens recreationists and tourists, kills our threatened and endangered species (at least eight Mexican gray wolves in New Mexico) and, because there are no bag limits, presents a real threat to our already threatened ecosystem.

Trapping is in no way “New Mexico True.” New Mexico needs to make 2021 the year it adds a ban on trapping on public lands to its important list of successful animal and wildlife legislation.

This editorial first appeared in the Albuquerque Journal. It was written by members of the editorial board and is unsigned as it represents the opinion of the newspaper rather than the writers.

Read this Editorial in the Albuquerque Journal »

The post Albuquerque Journal Editorial: Nothing about traps is New Mexico True appeared first on TrapFree New Mexico.

Kevin Bixby, executive director of the Southwest Environmental Center in Las Cruces, went to the site to check out the scene on Sunday.

“It was pretty gruesome,” Bixby said. “They were probably trapped in the area out in the desert.”

More than 30 coyotes had been dumped in four piles in the desert, their bodies all skinned and at varying levels of decomposition. Several had typical leg-hold trap wounds on their paws, indicating that this was the work of trappers who had dumped the bodies after removing the coyote’s fur.

“I can trap coyotes all year round,” Bixby said. “But this time of year when it gets a little colder, the pelts are worth more money.”

According to state law, there isn’t a limit on trapping coyotes and New Mexico residents don’t need a hunting license to trap coyotes.

However, these piles of coyotes were found on private land according to Bixby. The private land owner could pursue trespassing charges.

Bixby said he doubted they were killed in a contest because that would likely mean the animals would be shot, which often spoils the furs. They also didn’t have wires around their jaws, which are typical of animals that have been killed in killing contests. Coyote-killing contests are banned in the state.

Bixby warned of the dangers that trapping poses.

“Every year, people out walking with their dogs, their dogs get caught,” Bixby said. “The act of trapping itself is horrible. It’s indiscriminate. They’re like landmines in the desert. They’re just waiting to catch anything that steps on them.”

Jessica Johnson, chief legislative officer for Animal Protection Voters, said this method of trapping, skinning and dumping seems quite common in the community.

“Having engaged in conversations with trappers … several of them have told me that what they do is they dump the bodies into ditches or hidden areas out on the land,” Johnson said. “They say that you should only dump maybe two or three at a time in one space to not create a big smell or visual appearance that would make it noticeable to someone.”

She said the most responsible way to dispose of these carcasses would be through a landfill or incineration, both of which cost money. Johnson explained that most trappers trap to make money, so these options take away from that profit.

When Bixby arrived at the scene, he ran into some men leaving the area who claimed they were hired to distribute the bodies. He suspected these men were not law enforcement or wildlife officials as one man was drinking a beer. He said it was  suspicious.

Bixby said he believes these men could potentially be connected to the dumping crime as the story was reported by KFOX14 two days prior, and they could have been tampering with the scene.

Read the article in the Las Cruces Sun-News

The post Las Cruces Sun-News: ‘Pretty gruesome:’ Skinned coyote carcasses piled in desert likely the work of trappers appeared first on TrapFree New Mexico.

NASHVILLE — Last week, Walden’s Puddle, a nonprofit wildlife rescue organization in a rural area of Nashville, posted a set of photos of a barred owl caught in the jaws of a leg-hold trap. The first photo, which featured the owl on the ground, its wings spread wide and its eyes cast down, was emblazoned with the words “Graphic images ahead.” I didn’t click through to see the rest of the pictures. The sight of that magnificent creature of the air tethered to the ground was graphic enough to break my heart. I didn’t need to see what the rest of the images would inevitably reveal: sinews torn, bones splintered, flesh bloody and swollen, great yellow claws mangled beyond repair.

Walden’s Puddle rehabilitates and releases orphaned and injured animals, and its Instagram account is normally a feel-good feed of squirrels, songbirds, turtles, deer, raccoons, opossums, snakes, rabbits, foxes, skunks, groundhogs, bobcats — pretty much everything that flies or crawls or walks or swims — and all of them on the mend. The caption to the post about the barred owl, which had to be euthanized, was uncharacteristically fierce:

Read the full article in the New York Times »

The post How Not to Kill an Animal appeared first on TrapFree New Mexico.

Nogal resident Kathleen McDonald had climbed about 100 yards into the Lincoln National Forest when Jasper, her Golden retriever Jasper suddenly began yelping and crying.

“I went running down and he was about 200 feet away,” McDonald said. “I was shocked to see him stuck in a trap. He was trying to get out of it and chewing on his leg.

“I finally got it open, it took me about 10 minutes. His paw immediately swelled. He limped on it and hopped down. It was so upsetting. He was whimpering and scared.”

The 2013 incident is one of many highlighted by a recently released interactive map released by TrapFree New Mexico, a coalition of 14 advocacy groups that oppose trapping on public lands, which pinpoints animal trap encounters by domestic pets and other non-target creatures in 22 counties across New Mexico.

The map shows seven incidents in the Alamogordo-Mescalero-Lincoln County area, three near Farmington, one near Carlsbad and eight in the Las Cruces area.

McDonald said a game official who checked the trap that injured Jasper six years ago told her the trapper later was fined $40, because he had not checked the trap within the 24-hour period required. But the officer also warned that she could have been fined, if she had removed the trap, and that she should have kept Jasper on a leash, she said.

“The laws all are on the trappers’ side,” she said. “It’s absurd.”

A dog must be on a leash in developed campgrounds or recreation sites, said Lincoln National Forest public information officer Laura Rabon Monday.

“But outside of those areas, we revert to county ordinance. If it says dogs must be leashed off private property, then dogs must be leashed on the Lincoln National Forest. The national forest covers five different counties, so the answer isn’t simple.”

Lincoln County Sheriff Robert Shepperd said the county has an ordinance governing dogs running at large.

“They must be under the control of the owner with commands,” he said. “If they don’t obey commands and run at large, they must be leashed.”

Trapping for fur bearing animals is allowed throughout the national forest, except for beavers, said Public Information Officer James Pittman with New Mexico Game and Fish.

A ban of traps on public land in New Mexico is long overdue, McDonald said.

The strangulation death of a dog named Roxy at Santa Cruz Lake in November 2018 renewed efforts to ban traps on public lands and brought together the TrapFree New Mexico coalition.

State Reps. Matthew McQueen (D-Galisteo) and Bobby Gonzales (D-Taos) sponsored a bill to outlaw commercial trapping on public land called “Roxy’s Law” in honor of the 8-year-old heeler mix that died on a recreation area of the Bureau of Land Management.

In 2019, “Roxy’s Law” passed through two House committees, but did not receive a vote on the House floor. The bill won’t be introduced during the 2020 short session, but will likely be reintroduced in 2021, according to Chris Smith with WildEarth Guardians, a member of the coalition.

Trap incident map

Earlier this month, conservation and animal protection groups as part of the TrapFree New Mexico coalition released a map detailing trapping incidents around the state.

“The map shows trapping’s toll all across New Mexico, demonstrating that trapping is an ongoing problem for companion animals, endangered species, and law enforcement alike, according to information from the coalition,” a statement from the coalition noted.

The trapping incident map includes descriptions, locations, dates and photos of events involving family dogs, Mexican gray wolves, and illegally set traps based on data from New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, TrapFree New Mexico incident reports and media coverage.

The map shows:

• Trapping incidents have occurred in 22 counties in New Mexico
• More than 75 incidents involved domestic animals, some with no source cited
• In the 2015-2018 trapping seasons, 23 documented illegal trapping incidents
• Other incidents include outdoor recreationists finding dead, dying, or injured animals suffering in traps.

The New Mexico Department of Game and Fish is considering rule changes, according to information from the department. The proposal includes closing less than 1 percent of public lands to most traps on land, some technical requirements on how to set traps, mandatory trapper education and increased setbacks from trailheads, but not from trails or roads, according to TrapFree New Mexico and the Game and Fish department.

The proposal also calls for expanding year-round trapping seasons for raccoons and nutria, and increasing the time frame for a trapper to check on underwater traps.

The coalition characterized the suggested changes as “trivial,” contending they would do nothing to address the majority of the incidents documented on the map.

“This map highlights the reality of trapping: It is indiscriminate, cruel, and has a major, negative impact on people and animals throughout New Mexico,” said Mikaila Wireman, who created the map for WildEarth Guardians.

“The negligible changes proposed by the Department of Game and Fish do nothing to address the real problems that trapping imposes. Until traps and snares are banned on all public lands, devastating confrontations with traps will carry on and this map will only continue to grow.”

Blue jay caught in trap

Another view of traps

Ranchers in Lincoln County annually pay toward a predator control fund that is included in the county’s budget under external agency requests. In 2019-2020 the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s predator control program budget request was $34,660, which is supplemented by a per head of cattle tax paid by ranchers of 75 cents.

“Predator management is key to the success of any livestock operation and most agricultural operations,” said Caren Cowan, director of the New Mexico Cattle Growers Association. “It’s a good method, because it targets the offending predators. It is safe to be done, contrary to what others might say.

“Trappers have to be licensed and many of the incidents we hear about are from nonlicensed trappers. Trappers get a black eye from those kind of people and 99 percent of the trappers obey the laws. They do trapper education. It is  just a part of the hunting, fishing, ranching and agricultural culture of New Mexico.”

Banning traps on public land would remove a key element of predator control, Cowan said.

“Land in New Mexico is comingled and checker-boarded. Sometimes pastures may contain at least two statuses of land, federal and private or private and state. But most ranches are made up of all three classes of lands,” she said. “So when you stop it on one class of land, you are causing serious damage to the landowner, who can no longer protect his livestock.”

Chance Thedford, president of the New Mexico Trappers Association, contended what is described on the map is an inaccurate account of incidents throughout the state.

“It’s statistically proven that the chance of a hiker or their pet being injured is more likely to come by a snake bite rather than a legally placed trap,” Thedford said.

“Ranchers in New Mexico have never been able to trap wolves on private or public land,” he said. “A continued false attack on trapping has resulted in inaccurate/false reporting by local news outlets due to lack of knowledge and education on the subject.”

The New Mexico Trappers Association strongly advocates for and promotes wise use of trapping and trapping education, Thedford said, adding that the group’s motto is “Promoting Wise Use.”

Members were angered about the death of Roxy and outraged at the decision not to pursue charges against the individual identified as the illegal trapper, he said, adding that the incident left a black eye on the trapping community.

“We continue to see the blatant disregard for a long existing law that requires pets to be restrained on public land,” he said. Instead, those lawfully trapping have been attacked, he contended.

TrapFree officials disagree, stating that trapping conflicts with the state’s valuable outdoor recreation industry and that scientific studies show that trapping and lethally removing carnivore species, like coyotes often exacerbate conflicts such as those with livestock.

They referenced “Using Coyotes to Protect Livestock. Wait What?” from the Oregon Small Farm News.

“The true toll that trapping takes on native wildlife is difficult to know. Reporting requirements exist for some species, but not for often-trapped so-called ‘unprotected furbearers’ like coyotes and skunks,” according to the information supplied by TrapFree New Mexico. 

Read this article in the Ruidoso News »

The post Cruel or essential? Map details trapping incidents across New Mexico appeared first on TrapFree New Mexico.