Monday, April 25, 2016

Proposed Law Would Allow Trapping Of Adirondack Coyotes With Cable Snares

A Cable Restraint Caught Coyote in MissouriLegislation is now pending in the New York State Legislature to allow the use of cable snares, also known as cable restraint devices, to trap coyotes in the northern hunting zone, which includes the Adirondacks. The New York State Conservation Council has been actively lobbying for the bill’s passage.

The Senate Environmental Conservation Committee has reported bill S2953-C, sponsored by Senator Robert Ortt (R,C,I – North Tonawanda), and it is on the floor calendar. Assembly companion bill A9462-A, sponsored by Assemblyman William Magee (D-Nelson), is currently pending in the Assembly Environmental Conservation Committee.

“Coyote populations are growing across the state causing increased predator damage to bird and animal populations,” a press announcement issued by the Conservation Council, a sportsmens group which advocates on behalf of trappers, hunters, and anglers.  The Council said coyotes are “a nuisance species in both rural and populated areas where they are an increasing threat to small livestock and domestic pets.”

Cable snares are currently permitted in 36 states and on some federal lands.  The bills do not cover Long Island, New York City, or Westchester County.

Photo: A Cable Restraint Caught Coyote in Missouri

Related Stories


Stories written under the Almanack's Editorial Staff byline are drawn from press releases and other notices.

To have your news noticed here at the Almanack contact our Editor John Warren at adkalmanack@gmail.com.




138 Responses

  1. W. Davis says:

    Sickening and cruel, can also snare lost pets, same goes for leg hold. Imagine your beloved German Shepherd in one of these. Better to have special hunts if it’s that big a problem. DEC: “Most problems can be avoided with proper husbandry techniques.”

  2. Boreas says:

    Another good reason for large apex predators like wolves and cougars. But if humans feel they must kill them, at least attempt to do it humanely. While they may be effective, snares and leg traps are probably the most inhumane trapping methods out there.

  3. dave says:

    Barbaric and indiscriminate.

    This is being pushed by an organization that cares about “conservation” in so much as it benefits the user groups they represent… hunters, trappers, etc… and that subscribes to a dated approach to “wildlife management” that manipulates ecosystems for those uses.

    If you are appalled by the cruelty of such a proposal, or simply feel that wild lands should be managed differently – more naturally, utilizing science to promote and protect biodiversity – then make sure you reach out to representatives and let them know you oppose this legislation.

    • Brian Truax says:

      Well said dave. I will be contacting my legislators to let them know that I oppose this barbaric attempt to “manage” the coyote population.

    • AG says:

      But I don’t even see how it benefits them.. Trapping kills any animal indiscriminately. It just makes zero sense. Aside from the fact that it is a cruel death for any animal.

  4. Charlie S says:

    ‘Most inhumane’ you say. But of course. This is a good indicator of the psychology of the DEC…the same lot who are supposed to be protecting black bears but instead thanks to their ok a near record number of black bears were killed in the 2015 hunting season. I called the DEC up once to see what could be done to save a few families of groundhogs from being buried alive due to new development. I forget his name (I have it in my notes) but he basically laughed me off. There’s no laws to protect groundhogs but there’s laws to protect developers. What’s a bunch of dead groundhogs anyway?

    To do it humanely would probably cost more and would take too much time Boreas. My brother lost his beautiful dog Shep to a snare some idiot hunter left behind…on private property I might add.

    • Anthony says:

      DEC main concern is towards their “stakeholders” and maintaining the game population for them as well as their habit. Rarely do you see any money or effort going into protecting the environment unless it was to benefit the hunting community and make money by selling killing licenses.
      How they can view the 2015 Bear as a success is beyond me.. You basically wipe out a 1/3 of the bears in NY. So what do you get? Orphaned bears that will be without there mother teaching them how to survive in the wild which may end up becoming a “nuisance” bear and have to be “dispatched” (i.e. Killed)
      Next time you have an issue with Groundhogs or Wildlife. You are better off calling a Volunteer Wildlife Rehabber. DEC’s answer 99% of the time is lets kill it. 🙁

      • Dan'L says:

        Anyone who says that Sportsmen only contribute to the interests of their quarry might want to Google the Pittman-Robertson and Dingell-Johnson Acts.

        • PR and JD (later amended by Wallup-Breaux) applies excise taxes on hunting gear, firearms, ammunition, bows, arrows, etc. (PR) and ditto goes to fishing equipment (WB), which is funneled into the Federal Conservation Fund, dispersed to the States based on a formula of acreage and coastline, which figures the dollar amount per sporting license sold, with definition of a sold license being a sporting license that cost the buyer of said privilege at least $5.00. The license has to be purchased for more than it cost to produce and administer.

          If you do not buy a sporting license (Fishing, Hunting or Trapping), you are not part of the contributing folk to the State Conservation Programs. You may buy a fishing pole, or some arrows as gifts for relatives every now and then, and, indeed the excise tax $ are paid and go to the Federal Fund, but if you do not buy a sporting license, you have not brought that bacon home.

  5. Toni Poormon says:

    Seems like some intelligent, more humane methods could be utilized ……….I am sure the almighty dollar has a hand in this . Poor creatures suffering at the hands of humans again .

  6. Debra says:

    This is very disturbing. I can not believe that this would even be considered.

  7. Pete Klein says:

    No! And no again.
    But if this stupid idea becomes law, I do hope some of those who are in favor of it get caught in the snares and then are put out of their agony by the person who set the snare.

  8. Ethan says:

    Be alert for the arguments you’ll be hearing from trappers in attempts to convince the public these cable restraint snares are “more humane” and less likely to catch and kill pet dogs and cats than the leg hold types. They’d like to falsely assuage the fears of pet owners so there will be less opposition to trapping in general. Don’t fall for it and do not wait to let your legislators know you oppose these bills. I believe this is a test for the Adirondack area for foxes and coyotes, but at the discretion of the DEC the activity could leach into any part of the state and carry over to any other species such as bear.
    No species of our NY State wildlife deserves to die in such a horrible way and the foxes and coyotes won’t suffer any less than pet cats and dogs. Adding another torture device to trappers’ arsenal is wrong in every respect and should not be tolerated.

  9. Christine Denno says:

    It’s clear that none of you keeps any small farm animals. I like my sheep and chickens to enjoy fresh air, and I should not have to build them a fortress to keep them safe.
    The way I look at it, I love my creatures and they make money to pay their keep (And if I’m lucky, a bit more.), therefore they have more right to life than wild animals.
    I have been a “mini farmer” for 34 years and we have lost maybe 10 chickens and two whole flocks of guinea fowl (We gave up keeping them because we cannot keep them safe.) I should have the right to eliminate what wild animals threaten me and mine.

    • Boreas says:

      Christine,

      I am sorry for your losses, but if you are going to leave your livestock out essentially as bait for predators, then you will need someone or something to look over them 24/7 to keep predators away. This has been true since man domesticated animals. You are most likely entitled to kill any predator that is on your property, but your property is where it ends. The discussion here is about the statewide use of snares to kill anything that walks into one – whether a predator or not.

    • Anthony says:

      Sorry but this type of thinking needs to go. There are non-lethal methods to protect your farm animals. But sadly there are some that are too lazy, or to ignorant to try them. 🙁

      • Christine Denno says:

        Thank you for your kind comment, Anthony. I didn’t know that YOU are in charge of appropriate “thinking”.

        I hope you like your food from factory farms…full of antibiotics perhaps, since they don’t get any sunshine and fresh air. If I built a fortress and charged $6 a dozen…..I would be out of business real soon. I am aware of guardian animals, and don’t care to own them. We have a flashing light.

        I’m just playing the devil’s advocate here. Our losses are minimal and we have not needed to shoot or trap any wild animals. So far our facilities have been secure enough. I should be able to if need be, however. That’s all I’m saying.

        Sorry if I ruffled your feathers, King Anthony.

        • Anthony says:

          I don’t eat meat…

        • Boreas says:

          Christine,

          One thing you could cheaply employ would be several game or security cameras. This would let you know possibly in advance if a predator is checking out your stock – and possibly give you a chance to discourage them before an attack. I believe coyotes may be discouraged by wolf urine and possibly canine urine. But you are also likely to see fox, fishers, and weasels as well. A weasel will wipe out a henhouse in a night – especially if they are caged. The cameras may at least let you know what your most current threat is. Just a thought.

      • Bruce says:

        Anthony,

        These non-lethal methods you talk about? What do we do with the animals after they are live trapped, can we bring them over to your house and let them go? Do you have a high fenced yard so they won’t come back?

        As to the issue of valuable pets, what are they doing running free in places where other people hunt or trap?

        The point is, if your pets are valuable enough to mean something to you, it’s your responsibility to keep them out of harm’s way, not the hunters or trappers who may be on a nearby property.

    • AG says:

      Sorry – but that is just plain selfish. If we all thought that way there would be no nature.
      In any event – it is your responsibility to protect your animals. Nature belongs to everyone – but your animals belong to you. If predators are a problem – get protective dogs – as has been done for thousands of years. That would keep the predators away from your animals and doing something which helps you as a farmer – which is to keep rodent populations down.

      • Bruce says:

        AG,

        If one’s responsibility includes protecting one’s own livestock, and it certainly does, then that individual can take whatever means is legally provided for to kill or catch certain nuisance or predatory animals on their property. If that turns out to be some form of trapping, then so be it. There’s nothing selfish about it.

        I don’t know about the folks on this forum, but I suspect many who have the “easy” and pat answers never owned livestock which was subject to the ravages or terror of predatory animals. Let’s just say I have been there, done that, and have the tee shirt.

        • AG says:

          Except this is not about private property… Try again. This is about wanton destruction. And if animals in the area are endangered then it is the responsibility of the property owner to make sure they are not killed. People seem to have an incredibly selfish outlook. So it is ok to lay poison all over your property if it poisons the nearby water supply too??? NO. That’s how ecosystems have been destroyed.

          • Bruce says:

            AG,

            True, it wasn’t about private property, but since you were talking about what property and livestock owners should do, I just thought I would add to it. By the way, I haven’t heard anyone speaking of “wanton destruction” except you. They’re buzz words intended to have an effect which is not relevant to the conversation.

            Some folks are making it sound as if not only will the coyote population be decimated, so will the population of pets and other wild animals. It ain’t going to happen.

            • AG says:

              That’s just plain sad if you think only coyotes will be caught in there… That’s like saying only tuna are still caught in tuna fishing nets. It’s just not reality.
              Also – the numbers won’t really be reduced. The only places in this country with low coyote numbers are in areas with wolves and cougars. That’s it. None of the other measures really work.
              All it will do is catch animals wantonly and cause suffering just to satisfy the blood lust of some humans. To me – killing animals needlessly is “wanton destruction”. This has absolutely nothing to do with preventing conflicts. I’m not talking about buzzwords – I’m talking about real life. No SERIOUS science can claim these devices can reduce the coyote population.

              • Bruce says:

                AG

                Read what I said. I never said only coyotes will be caught, what I did say is they won’t be decimated, and neither will people’s pets or other wild animals. Decimated means a very high proportion. It ain’t going to happen.

                • AG says:

                  I read it again and it wasn’t clear. But you are right – and we agree that coyote numbers won’t be decimated. All it will do is cause needless harm and suffering indiscriminately to animals. This will do NOTHING to prevent conflicts with coyotes – or any other animal. So what is the point? Allowing another way for people to kill animals. It’s just that simple. I would respect them more if they just came out and said that (though I still wouldn’t agree) rather than trying to rationalize it as a “good” they are trying to do.

    • Amen. Very well said. I would rather see the coyote listed as an unprotected wildlife species for this very reason. But in absence of this, allowing cable restraint traps would increase the coyote take during the season (Oct 1-Mar 26) and should alleviate some of the issues you have mentioned above. Unfortunately, it does nothing for you when the coyote start harassing your livestock in May when they are starting to feed their litters.

      We (Sportsmen and women in NYS) have also proposed extending the season to end of May to account for this rise in coyote activity during this period of time. This doesn’t take a law, rather adjustment to regulation. I have no idea where that stands at this point in time, unfortunately.

      • AG says:

        If you have livestock – invest in guardian dogs. People have done it for thousands of years – and they work.

        • With the emphasis on DOGS. Even that does’t beat a bullet. Or a trap

          • AG says:

            Unless you are dealing with wolf packs – you don’t need many dogs. In fact – there is probably nowhere in NY would you really need more than 2 guardian dogs. They keep away bobcats, coyotes, and bears (and even cougars if they come back). And again – shooting coyotes does not reduce their numbers… Nor will traps. Guardian dogs keep coyotes at bay – allowing them to stay eating rodents and such. The only unfortunate part is even these “coywolves” aren’t able to really reduce deer numbers like full blooded wolves… Nor can they stop feral pigs from growing in population. Both of which (too many deer and growing feral pig populations) are problems that aren’t simply solved by bullets or traps either.

            • You need at least two, better to have three.

              Eastern Coyote appear to hunt in family units (not packs, like many people erroneously believe), and they will separate the dogs and tear them apart. Ask any coyote hunter that uses dogs, and you’ll get a better handle on this.

              Deer herds in the ADK, many areas do not have DMP issuances. The way to reduce deer numbers is to reduce the reproductive component, or the does.

              Both coyote and black bear – especially black bear, do tremendous damage to deer numbers – by killing and preying upon he fawns during the birthing period. Coyote also are taking a big toll on Turkey, pheasant, red fox, cottontail and snowshoe (varying hare) rabbits, and coupled with growing raptor numbers, additional predators like fishers and growing numbers of bobcats, and we have a scenario that requires addressing.

              Everything in balance. If only we could apply this to habitat variety as well in NYS. Tell ya what, folks in the ADK in another 50-75 years will wish some land/ timber management was ongoing. The forests are approaching the final stage of forest succession, as most of the trees were planted about the same time, and will die off about the same time, according to NY Forestry.

              Thank God I won’t be around to see this screaming

              • AG says:

                Hunters who use dogs and livestock guardian dogs don’t behave the same way at all – nor do they have the same capability. I think you are the one that needs to get a handle. Aside from being stronger – livestock guardian dogs are smarter as well.

                The idea that coyotes are decimating all those animals is pretty ridiculous. Predator and prey have had that dance going on for thousands of years. When wolves lived in NYS they would have been eating even more of these animals than coyotes do. The ecosystem didn’t collapse. Why? If predators eat all their prey – they themselves will starve and die off… Then guess what..? The prey rebounds. It’s been that way for thousands of years. It was human activity that caused all those animals to become strained – not the wolves (and cougars) that were here before. Nature abhors a vacuum. It was again human activity which made the ecosystem ripe for coyote expansion. Animal numbers balance themselves out. I used this example before and I will use it again. The Chernobyl area is a perfect example right before our modern eyes. No humans involved and all animals – predator and prey – have flourishing numbers. NYS is not the same I admit – but don’t pretend you are really worrying about the lives of turkeys or nature itself. This is about feeling urge to kill animals.

      • Ethan says:

        Wait a minute! Are you suggesting that coyote season be extended to include pupping season? Please confirm. This is beginning to sound extremely callous. Please don’t refer to yourself as a “sportsman” if that is what you mean. Apologies if I misinterpreted your comment.

        • I know it sounds a little harsh, but this is being done (hunting, not trapping) through end of May in many States. Georgia began doing this a few years back and their turkey numbers after a few years rebounded.

          I think something like 30 states list coyote as unprotected, or varmint, and allow year-round taking of them. Predominantly in place for property owners/ farmers whose livestock get harassed by them, and this gives the ability to lawfully dispatch the problem animal or animals.

          The numbers of coyote taken by hunters is small in comparison to trapping. However, if coyote are encountered during turkey season, and that happens a lot, this would reduce the pressure on the turkeys and allow the hens a better chance to have a successful nesting – wet weather not withstanding.

  10. Darlene Abbott says:

    No trapping does not discriminate

  11. Anthony says:

    There is nothing humane about snares even with the supposed “relaxing device”. When does a trapped animal relax? When it is exhausted from pulling too much or when the snare has basically cut into its skin and cut off circulation to the brain. What happens next you say? Well due to the rush of blood to the trapped animals head and can not circulate you have what is known to be “Jelly head” its basically when the animals brain will burst. So many non-targeted animals will also be killed or injured. Many birds of prey will be caught.. Falcons, Hawks, Owls, Eagles.. Will all be caught!
    Call your Senator and tell them NO, Marchione, Farley, Amedore (Voted Yes)… There is a very good chance they already voted yes to it before…Since it has passed 3x in the Senate and call your Assembly Member and tell them NO..
    And remember trappers already have traps they can set so not using a snare does not set them back financially…

  12. Anthony says:

    A coyotes main diet consists of Rodents. Rodents are the prime carrier of Ticks and Lyme disease. Something this article fails to mention.

    • Ethan says:

      Too many articles fail to mention that fact and too few people are aware of it. Same with opossums.
      Folks don’t worry about those things until they get the “bull’s eye” somewhere on their body, or begin to develop symptoms. The defenders would prefer to keep trapping and killing, keeping everyone else in the dark.

    • Actually, a coyote is an omnivore, and its primary diet will depend greatly on where they are residing. SUNY ESF study included Scat sampling, and in more wooded areas, main diet appears to be deer (some actively preyed upon during the right time of year, balance of year typically scavenged). In areas where more grasslands are present, more rodents make up the diet.

      What this truly speaks to is the incredible adaptability the coyote shows. They will eat anything they can get their mouths on, including vegetable crops to boot!

      • Bruce says:

        Rich Davenport,

        People with a mission are bad for not doing research, and will make the same unfounded or iffy claims over and over again, hoping repetition will turn those claims into truth.

        Guardian dogs are not a magic bullet. They are expensive, require extensive training at the place where they will be used, and have proven to be aggressive towards innocent strangers or pets who inadvertently encounter them.

        I often wonder how much reading PETA’s BS has figured into unrealistic ideas about trapping and killing wild animals.

        • AG says:

          Bruce – there is no such thing as a magic bullet. There never was and never will be. Real bullets never work magic either.
          What is even more disconcerting is persons who make ridiculous comments. Livestock guardian dogs are WAY more effective at controlling predators (in terms of taking livestock) than culling. It’s not even close. Unless you replace the word culling with eradication. If the claim is livestock predation – then indeed guardian dogs are the better solution. I agree that everything you said about potential difficulty is true. Guess what? That’s the cost of doing business. The lazy and easy way out always has unintended consequences.
          You also might not realize but even German Sheperds (while not technically guardian dogs) were originally bred for such a role. You might want to look up history. In fact – to give an anecdotal example – I’ve stayed at cabins in West Virgina deep in the woods. The property owner has 2 large German Sheperds. These dogs are not pets. They are working dogs. They protect against thieves on the one hand – but they also keep coyotes and bears off the property. We went out late at night to get wood for a fire. The dogs were “dancing in the darkness” with those wild animals. When we get up in the morning – they were sitting on the deck as calm as a lap dog. Point is – these things are nothing new. The owners of that property don’t feel the need to go and kill every large animal around their acreage. That is indeed anecdotal – but it’s backed up by sound science not tainted by political campaigns.
          Fact is there are some people who think killing is the best and only resort. It shows up in nature as well as geopolitics. Indiscriminate killing has never actually solved problems…. Not in nature – nor human politics.

  13. owen says:

    Yes , Cable restraints are an effective device , this is long overdue….

  14. Charlie S says:

    I just sent a brief note to the NY State Conservation Council who support this bill. Are their e-mail addresses for the people who lead the districts where this will be allowed? Or e-mail addresses for those who have sway on this matter?

    • Anthony says:

      Contact your Senator and Assembly Member. The Conservation Council is just a front for the Hunting Organizations. Just google NYSENATE to go to the page.

      • Ethan says:

        You’ve done your homework, Anthony. The NYCC sounds very official, but just another pro-hunt organization. Nothing special about them.

  15. Sc B McKinney says:

    Cable snares are cruel and are responsible for immense suffering of many other species besides the targeted one. There is always a better way than cruelty and a plain disregard of suffering of any living creature. Please do not do this horrid cruel thing.

  16. Avon says:

    I can’t imagine a non-cruel way to reduce or eliminate any population. The smarter an animal is, the more difficult it is to design an effective yet humane method – and, coyotes are smart! Even the most efficient genocides in history, and the most effective reduction/elimination of species such as bison or passenger pigeon, are now seen as moral horrors nevertheless.

    We have an increasing number of coyotes here in New York City; coyotes roam between Central Park and the Bronx, though we aren’t sure what they’re eating. (Rats not cats – I hope.) I can bet you’d get more support for this bill inside the City Line than inside the Blue Line … it’s a bit ironic that the bill specifically excludes the City from its coverage!

    • AG says:

      They do know what they eat. In The Bronx (where there are at least 20 living year round) they have them on camera in different parks. They eat squirrels, raccoons, rats, turkeys. That said – there are too many roaming cats in the environment. They haven’t noted to eat the cats – but the cats apparently avoid where the coyotes are. No one in The Bronx wants any coyotes killed – because they don’t bother anyone in the over 20 years they have been documented. People in Manhattan would be a different story though – they even complain about skunks and raccoons to try to get them removed.

  17. Andrew says:

    We need action to reduce the deer population. They are destroying the forest.

    • Boreas says:

      I agree. Hopefully, someday humans will recognize that Nature doesn’t need our help in trying to manage it. If we hadn’t removed the apex predators, we would have fewer problems and less of a need to ‘manage’ species populations now.

  18. John Gregoire (ornithologist) says:

    This displays a total ignorance on the part of those proposing such barbaric and thoughtless legislation. We need top level predators other than man! john

  19. Brandon says:

    Are you suggesting we introduce wolves and mountain lions to the Adirondacks?

    • Ethan says:

      I wouldn’t suggest we introduce ANYTHING to the Adirondacks or anywhere else. The results are not good, primarily because there are, let’s just say, certain people who will use “reintroduced” species as an excuse to kill, kill, kill. In effect, the reintroduced species are sitting ducks. Look at the Red Wolf in North Carolina as a perfect example. Wolves or other species will somehow find their own niche anywhere it’s appropriate for them to be. Nature us smart that way.

    • AG says:

      Actually – you don’t have to reintroduce anything. Animals return on their own when man doesn’t get in the way. Unfortunately they are killed anytime they try to.

  20. Charlie S says:

    I sent a note to the The New York State Conservation Council yesterday relative to this report and the below is the edited response I received in kind. It appears this technique is not the monster it was made out to be in this thread.

    Dear Mr. Stehlin,
    It is clear from your email that you are unfamiliar with the design and functioning of cable restraint devices. I have attached a copy of the Missouri State F&W Training Manual which goes into considerable detail on the whys and wherefores of equipment as well as the development and testing of the system.

    The primary reason for allowing the use of cable restraints is to deal with coyotes in areas that are not amenable to conventional trapping techniques or to firearms hunting and, in particular, night hunting, which is the most effective time for hunting coyotes. The cable restraint is designed to avoid trapping non target species and, since it has an extremely low injury rate for captured animals, allows the release of any by catch that is captured without injury.

    Note: I personally like coyotes. To me they are are kind of the everyman of the world, loping along and giving you a look that says “hey, what do you want from me? I am just trying to make a living.” Unfortunately, a living for a growing coyote population in a state with almost 20 million people often includes small pets and protected wildlife species.

    Bill Gibson NYSCC

    The below is a snippet I pasted from the link he sent. This is better news than we all thought it might be evidently.

    “When used properly, cable restraints have a great track record of holding captured animals without mortalities and with few significant injuries. Because of this distinction, cable restraints can be safely used in many places where other traps pose problems pets and other animals.”

    Carry on!

    • Boreas says:

      They might not be strangling, but any wild animal that is being held by a snare or trap goes through an enormous amount of stress and fear. That’s why they chew their own legs off in ankle traps. Having a steel cable around my neck for 12-24 hours alone would be pretty stressful. At least until a human comes along, scares me even more, then either shoots or bludgeons me to death – possibly with my family watching.

      A family pet or non-target species will go through this same traumatic stress until it is released – hopefully without ‘mortality and few significant injuries’. But don’t expect that animal to be normal afterward. Barbaric.

  21. Charlie S says:

    You’re absolutely correct Boreas but I am relieved at least at the more humane way this trap is employed. Evidently there’s a problem with coyotes and what can we do about it? There’s too many people and we’re taking away more and more land and if it were up to me things would be different. I cannot kill any thing,not even bugs,and it pains me to think of all the suffering there is of the wild animals because of our over-population and arrogance and whatnot. It pains me thinking about the animal waiting to be ex-communicated when the human arrives like you say. Many things pain me! It’s either I deal with it or go bonkers. I’m trying my darndest to stick with the former but it is not always easy!

    • Bruce says:

      Charlie S,

      “I cannot kill any thing,not even bugs,” I wonder if you’ve ever dug a tick out of your skin? If you have, you killed it.

      In the case of coyotes, it’s not that humans are taking away more and more land (which of course they are), coyotes in the East have found it can be advantageous to live near people. People have small pets and livestock which present fairly easy pickings compared to wild rabbits and other natural foods.

      When wild animals discover a niche which may give them a particular advantage, like white tailed deer which love farms and orchards, they flourish and can become a nuisance, and deer carry deer ticks which carry lyme disease. Coyotes can become rabid.

      It’s doubtful hunters and trappers will make a serious dent in coyote populations, they’ve been trying since well before the 60’s when I remember as a teenager reading in the newspaper about state sponsored coyote and coy/dog hunting, I believe with bounties offered.

      http://www.orkin.com/other/ticks/deer-ticks/

      http://wtkr.com/2015/04/23/coyote-tests-positive-for-rabies-in-york-county/

      • AG says:

        You are right… Deer and coyotes “overpopulate” int the east because we erased their two best deterrents – wolves and cougars But human hunting can’t control the deer population. Coyotes are able to be shot on sight but they keep spreading. Seems what we do isn’t working… Snares won’t help. They will cause needless and indiscriminate suffering though.

        We as people need to learn to co-exist with wildlife – not try to eradicate it. Nature can balance itself. Look at what is going on in Chernobyl. Granted – this was not planned “experiment” – but it is eye opening. All animals are apparently flourishing. The deer – the beavers – the bison – the wolves – the lynx – the eagles – the wild boar. Protecting our lives and property is fine – but negatively altering wildlife isn’t a good thing.

        • No, actually whitetail deer by the turn of the 20th Century were nearly extirpated from the NYS landscape. It was hunters that brought them back, with protections, limits, elimination of market hunting, and let’s not forget about the habitat loss for the Nation’s expansion west.

          We co-exist with wildlife in the natural way, as prescribed by nature. We have set protections to assure the greed and gluttony of mankind doesn’t walk us down the road we were on throughout the 1800’s.

          Simple. And over 100 years of success cannot be wrong, nor argued against, unless you’re cracked or something…

          • AG says:

            Human guns and traps are not “nature”. Therein lies the difference in thought.

            • Yes, they are, each species on this planet has strengths and weaknesses that assure survival – ours in intelligence and making/ using tools.

              Or did you skip that lesson in junior high biology class?

    • Boreas says:

      Charlie,

      There are relatively ‘humane’ traps – I believe they are called conibear body traps. Basically it is a type of steel trap that is designed to break an animals neck from the back and/or suffocate them fairly quickly. As brutal as they are, they are designed to work like a mousetrap and are sized appropriately for the target animal. But in the case of this type of trap, there is no second chance for any non-target species that trip the jaws. I don’t even know if they are still legal, but I would rather see these used than the snares.

      • Bruce says:

        Boreas,

        Yes, they are legal, with restrictions on how they may be set, depending on size. I just read the NYS regs.

  22. Shari Johnson says:

    I Live up here in the Adirondacks….I am against snares and traps! NO to your proposal as a tax payer….NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  23. Ok, this article is bunk. If one doesn’t know the difference between cable restraints and snare traps, one should get educated, as this is nothing but pure emotional propaganda. Cable restraints are just that – it restrains the animal much like handcuffs attached to a tether. If the animal caught in this form of trap is not a targeted species, the trapper can easily release the animal by releasing tension on the cable. A snare trap does not.

    According to the Coyote study done by SUNY ESF, concluded in 2011, coyote populations have boomed since the first estimate was completed in the early 1990’s. It was estimated at that time @ 20,000 coyote inhabited NYS. Today that number has grown significantly, but what is more troubling is the way coyote have adapted to our presence, finding it most advantageous to reside closer to people, as we offer great food choices, very low threats, great cover from inclement weather and places to den and raise their young. As numbers increase, and habitat changes due to natural succession, coyote do greater damage to game birds and other creatures as the cover used by prey diminishes as the forest canopy gets higher, and chokes sunlight from the under story.

    The cable restraint is necessary. We have all seen way too many stories of brazen coyote coming into back yards and attacking kids playing on swingsets, and here in R9 we had coyote attack and kill two dogs being walked by their owner. Coyote also present dangers as numbers swell to people and their pets, not just from their aggressiveness when hungry, but also with disease, including parasitic mange and rabies. All it takes is one or two incidents with tragic results and the people at large will begin demanding drastic measures.

    Support the cable restraint – these are not snares – and through this support you are assuring coexistence with the coyote for many years to come.

    • John Warren says:

      Rich Davenport is a Director of the New York State Conservation Council.

      http://www.nyscc.com/aboutthenyscc/nysccofficers.html

    • dave says:

      “We have all seen way too many stories of brazen coyote coming into back yards and attacking kids playing on swingsets”

      We have? Please provide sources for these way too many incidents. I’m especially looking forward to seeing what evidence you can produce regarding kids in the Adirondacks being attacked in backyards while on swingsets

        • John Warren says:

          None of those are in the Adirondacks, or even in the Northern Zone, where this proposed law would be in effect. This proposed law would have no impact on canine attacks in the suburban neighborhoods you are concerned with.

          Also, I realize that you’re from the City of Tonawanda in Erie County and that may be why you’re not up to date in understanding coy-dog/coy-wolf taxonomy and hybrid origins in the Adirondacks, but that research is easily available online.

          • Believe me John, I am more than up to speed on the coydog/ coywolf debate/ issue.

            Congrats, you figured out where Region 9 is. I applaud you. Despite that, I work with ALL regions in NYS on Big Game initiatives, working directly with DEC Albany.

            Do you want me to collect more articles? Are you saying you’re incapable of doing this research for yourself? Somehow I doubt that, or you are just trying to play ignorant to continue to be misleading?

            • John Warren says:

              Rich,

              You don’t seem to understand that you live six hours from us in a city. The Adirondacks does not have these problems with coyotes, in fact we rely on nature tourism for our livings.

              And you can lay off the bully attitude. If I’ve said something false, point it out. Otherwise, act like an adult and discuss the issue with civility.

              • And you don’t seem to understand that I have friends with property in the ADK, on Piseco Lake, and I visit frequently. I have hunted all over the State. Do you really think WNY is very urban? We ain’t NYC.

                You have said something false, that conflicts aren’t happening in the ADK. In areas of population density, conflicts are happening. The DEC has been pretty proactive in getting information out to residents of the ADK on how to reduce potential conflicts. They wouldn’t do this unless problems were on the rise.

                Yes, you rely on nature tourism. That all goes down the toilet when a kid gets attacked by a rabid coyote. Just like on Chautauqua Lake, the big tourism draw for Chautauqua County, where the past few years of blue-green algae blooms have put a damper on the tourism (at least they have Lake Erie as well, and I have been pretty instrumental in moving that county forward in a Great Lakes Fisheries Tourism initiative, partnering with Erie and Niagara Counties.)

                Now you can go ahead and conduct your own research. I already have done that, although I admit I have not posted every single article I have recorded over the past 7 years concerning coyote conflicts in NYS, all across the State, N, S, E and W. I really think it rude to post over 100+ links to stories because someone doesn’t want to do their own homework 😉

                And the “mean card” doesn’t work on me, either. Be honest, or get blasted. Pretty simple.

                • John Warren says:

                  You’ve made a vague claim to work for DEC, even though you really work for a lobbying group, and you claim we are having problems with coyotes in the Adirondacks, but you haven’t provided any evidence to that effect. You also claim to be a wildlife expert, though I’m guessing you have no training in that discipline at all, since you reject the science out of hand when it doesn’t fit your opinions.

                  If you want to be taken seriously, I suggest you be more honest and pay more attention to science. You could start with articles on this topic in the journals Genome Research and Biology Letters.

                  Also helpful, would be to get a better understanding of the difference between where you live in Erie County (with a population of about 1 million over 1,227 square miles) and the Adirondack Park (with a population of about 130,000 over 9,375 square miles). More than 300 miles separate these places, and we have different ecological conditions.

                  • I have made no such claim that I work FOR the DEC. What I have clearly said is that I work WITH the DEC. The biologists, the wildlife managers, the regulators, across a wide range of things. Including meeting with the Regional DEC officials, biologists and managers, monthly, quarterly, and at least once annually with the Albany officials, typically in Herkimer, and if I have the chance, at the Council Convention in September.

                    And are you familiar with the SUNY ESF Coyote study? You may want to consider some science found right here in NYS….

                    http://www.esf.edu/coyote/

                    Yes, I attended the public hearing on this one when it started a few years back. Were you?

                    And we’re not talking about counties, we’re talking about coyotes and implementing a device (cable restraint, not snare, misleading and deceptive, and shameful to have this article state this as such) that will aide in reducing conflicts.

                    Thanks for allowing me to clarify. Tell me, are you the author of this?

                    • John Warren says:

                      The study you linked to has nothing to do with what we’re talking about, in fact, it’s not even a study. You should read what you link to. What you have linked to, links to another ESF page that confirms what has been said here about the size of coyotes, the difference between suburban areas and the Adirondacks, the lack of deer predation, and attacks on humans, and more. You’ve link to a webpage that argues I’m right, congrats.

                      You’re obviously not intellectually honest, as is clear by your claim that a cable restraint is not a snare and your claim that children are attacked by coyotes in the Adirondacks.

                      So that ends my interactions with you.

                  • Guess you missed this part of the summary.

                    Are Coyotes Dangerous to Humans and Pets?

                    Although coyote attacks on people have been historically rare, this concern is not unwarranted in the light of more recent events. Such attacks have become more frequent as both coyote and human numbers have increased and merged in space and have been reported in several states (including New York), but most notably in California. Attacks have primarily occurred in suburban areas where coyotes have lost much of their fear of humans due to lack of pursuit and where associated with an easy food source such as garbage and pet food. In some cases, coyotes had been deliberately fed. The best insurance against coyote attacks is to 1) keep all garbage or other foods safely secured, 2) keep pets and their food indoors or safely secured if out doors and 3) harass any coyotes which come into your neighborhood by making loud noises – shouting, starter pistol, alarm devices, etc. If coyotes become persistent or unfazed, lethal removal may be necessary.

                    Attacks on dogs in rural areas most often occur during the coyote mating and pup birthing period – January through June – as a territorial defense behavior. Coyotes have frequently closely followed and sometimes attacked dogs when being walked by their owners – and sometimes the owners. Coyotes relish cats as food items.

                    You asked me a direct question. I answered directly, and you run away.

                    Projecting is not something you should engage in, John.

          • Also, concerning the “coywolf”, must be related to the Chupacabra? According to SUNY ESF, the eastern coyote seems to have more wolf DNA than the western coyote. But it is still a coyote.

        • AG says:

          Pet dogs bite WAY more children in a year than all predators combined. What is your solution for that?

          • We already have remedies for that on the books. Apples and oranges…

            • AG says:

              No – my point is that if you really wanted to prevent children from being attacked – you would be campaigning to prevent pet dogs from biting them. It’s not apples and oranges if children are your real reason for wanting to trap coyotes. But its not really. Where my mother lives – there are known coyote dens within a mile. Have been for years. Never once has anyone ever thought to not let their children play outside. They also are sensible enough not to let their small children be out alone for any reason. This is an area where a woman’s pit bull was attacked. Why? She was foolish enough to walk her dog in the woods right near the coyote den while its pups where there. Needless to say – no one did that again. There have been no incidents since (that was 7 years ago). You know they are there because they are sometimes seen late at night – or when the German Sheperds and Rottweilers in the area starting barking furiously. No one gives it a second thought – and no one thinks they need to be trapped or shot. Again – that’s one incident in 25 years that coyotes have been living there. The cats and squirrels haven’t all disappeared either. There was a woodchuck under my mothers shed that isn’t there anymore… Not sure if the coyotes got it. Maybe a bobcat. Maybe it died of old age. Who knows. Point is – your ideas of threats are vastly overblown.

              • Really? So you don’t believe we have remedies on the books, responsibilities that pet owners must adhere to? Leash laws, mandatory rabies vaccines, dog licenses?

                Apples and oranges.

                We have a growing population of coyote in NYS. The numbers are greater than wildlife folks thought. Conflicts are on the rise (which do include, but not limited to kids being attacked), and these negative interactions don’t go over too well with segments of the population that could care less about coyote. DEC exists to manage wildlife and assure healthy and diverse wildlife on behalf of the people of NYS. If communities see problems, action is expected. Its pretty simple.

                Best way to do this, while assuring adequate protections for coyote, is assuring the most effective tools be available. This means Cable Restraints. This is the best way to go.

                • AG says:

                  You don’t get it. We have all those laws and again – more pet dogs will bite and kill people this year than all wild large predators combined. That’s just a fact. If it was really about protecting.

                  So the segments of the population who don’t care about coyote should override the others..?? Yeah – got ya. We haven’t done a good job of keeping animal numbers in balance. Culling populations rarely meets the mark.
                  Well there are plenty of people in plenty of communities who live with them everyday and get by just fine. Some people just like to kill. If an animal attacks – then that specific animal should be targeted and killed. Works fine in may places throughout the world..

    • AG says:

      Coyotes do nothing to reduce the ungulate population – so the forests of the east – including NY – have trouble with new growth. In any event – “restraints” won’t stop coyotes from wanting to eat a little pug dog. “Restraints” won’t help if a parent is foolish enough to let their small child run free. But you really think “handcuffed” animals can’t/won’t needlessly die???

  24. Charlie s says:

    “I wonder if you’ve ever dug a tick out of your skin? If you have, you killed it.”

    You get my drift Boreas. I’ll put it this way…I kill far less than your average human I assure you.

    • Christine Denno says:

      “You get my drift Boreas. I’ll put it this way…I kill far less than your average human…………. “- So what??? You want points for that???

  25. Charlie s says:

    dave says: “These are all very official sounding positions, but he is referring to internal titles within his own lobbying organization.”

    I was sent a link relative to this device dave. It seems to me it is not what it’s made out to be in most of the comments above. There are much more inhumane ways to trap a coyote according to what I read. I don’t like the idea of any kind of trapping for the record.

    • dave says:

      That there are more inhumane ways to trap and kill something does not mean that this way is acceptable.

      Your instinct to not like any kind of trapping is the right one… because restraint traps are still extremely cruel. In fact, if you peruse any hunter/trapper forum you will see that some trappers feel restraint traps are actually more cruel, since they can prolong suffering and fear. This is necessary, however, because of the indiscriminate nature of trapping (they need a way to release non-target animals).

      • Actually, working to get the cable restraint traps legal for coyote is at the suggestion of Gordon Batcheller, now retired Wildlife Manager for NYSDEC.

        My personal choice would be to list coyote like darned near every other state does, as an unprotected wildlife species. But the most effective means to reduce coyote numbers, or at least have a chance at stabilizing their numbers, is through trapping.

        What is more inhumane? Managing a potentially dangerous wildlife species through subtraction? Or allowing populations to continue to come into closer proximity to people and then having to place bounties on them and engage in an extirpation exercise?

        The responsible thing to do is manage through subtraction – it is natural, and it works. You, however, put your own sensitivities ahead of the animals, which is bad.

        • AG says:

          No – what is “natural” is allowed the strongest males to keep coyote numbers in check by removing weaker males. Indiscriminate killing of coyotes only causes more “problem” animals.

          • Or reduce the reproductive component. Or take the whole unit.

            • Ethan says:

              Why didn’t you write that in the very beginning of this discourse? You could have saved yourself a lot of typing. It really seems to be your ultimate goal anyway and negates everything else you wrote.

              • Sorry, but you apparently just do not get it. We take the numbers down, that is the best we can do. We can let things go the way they are, and then we will see bounties, no protections, perhaps permits for poisoning, etc.

                I don’t want that. I want trappers to be able to do a more effective job. This alleviates the jeopardy to the coyote as a whole.

                You, on the other hand, want to feel better about yourself. You have no interest in coyote. Just your own feelings.

              • AG says:

                Yeah I said the same thing… But once you get people talking – after awhile they reveal their true intentions.

  26. Charlie S says:

    Christine Denno says: ““- So what??? You want points for that???

    Points? Explain!

  27. marcia ricker says:

    There needs to be a more humane answer to this. Live traps and then shoot them. But torture before death is not the way. I’ve seen my livestock taken away in the mouth of these creatures and I still would not want to torture them. Everyone needs to eat. It is a natural act for the species to hunt to eat. It is not natural for man to want to torture. Find a more humane way.

  28. adkrob says:

    I live in the Adirondacks and I love to see the wildlife on my property even the coyotes. But when there are packs of them standing in site of our houses it is time to harvest them as they get weak, sick, mangy, and desperate. Coyotes try to kill everyday to survive and it is heart wrenching to hear a pack of them tearing a live deer apart bite by bite, or a fawn trying to outpace them in snow. That’s just me.
    the animals can have the whole Adirondack Park, and most of my large property, but when they are so many that they are pushed onto my and destroying my property, such as woodchucks and beavers, or scaring/threatening people just out for a walk like our coyotes – time to harvest. That’s just me.
    Although I don’t like hurting any living thing and still a bit squeamish about shooting something, nature/life itself is a cycle of life/death and unending killing. If you are living, you are killing or responsible for killing (vegetarians kill plants). That’s the way it is.
    Injecting compassion into nature is interesting when as a people we kill unborn, defenseless, babies that have a spirit and a soul, sometime tearing them apart piece by piece while they are alive. For this we will be accountable, not for the killing of an animal.

    • AG says:

      I’m confused. Why do you think something is wrong with beaver, woodchuck, deer being preyed upon is “wrong”? Predators can’t farm like us. They need to kill to eat. If they kill too much then they themselves starve. Nature balances itself out. If one is that is sick or weak is threatening you – I don’t think anyone would begrudge you defending yourself.

  29. Taras says:

    I found a video demonstrating how to make a cable snare. As one would expect, the more the animal pulls, the more the loop shrinks, and a locking mechanism prevents the loop from loosening. It’s an asphyxiation/garotting device. The author explains it ought to be used exclusively for catching game in survival situations because it’s an inhumane killing technique and outlawed in many states.

    For more insight, I proceeded to read Missouri’s Cable Restraint Training Manual (36-page PDF download).
    http://mdc.mo.gov/hunting-trapping/trapping/use-cable-restraints-missouri/resource/cable-restraint-instruction-manual

    The cable “restraint” they describe is considerably different from the video’s simpler survival version.
    It is designed to break free if more than 350 pounds of force is applied.
    It has a stop that prevents the loop from becoming smaller than 2.5″ in diameter.
    It has an articulated link that allows the loop to relax slightly after tightening.

    The manual demonstrates proper placement, to minimize the trapping of other animals (i.e. other than coyotes), and explains the trapper’s responsibilities to ensure humane capture. It also cites a necropsy study showing the coyotes suffered mostly minimal, and some moderate, physical injury when restrained. In fairness, they didn’t explain what’s “minimal” and “moderate” but they did say there was no damage to the pelt. It suggests the cable never cut flesh.

    A cable restraint doesn’t seem as cruel as a cable snare. Granted it’s hardly a non-traumatizing experience but far less brutal than other methods (powered cable snare, leg-hold trap). I imagine the final blow is delivered by a rifle shot. If the goal is to reduce (kill) the coyote population, capturing them with cable restraints seems like an effective and humane technique.

    What remains is to determine if there’s any real need to kill coyotes in the Adirondack Park. I’m unconvinced by the anecdotal evidence presented.

    • Thank you Taras. Lots of disinformation right in this article concerning the cable restraint trap.

      Coyotes are already being killed in the ADK. Both by trappers using leg hold traps and hunters with rifles and shotguns. This is an additional tool that is more effective for coyote trapping, but it sure isn’t a magical device that will suddenly see the eradication of the species.

      Also, as an FYI, the bills have been amended to authorize the use of cable restraints statewide. Original bill was targeting the northern zone only, but it has been amended. Across NYS coyote conflicts are on the rise. This is a larger issue with more populated areas, for certain, but their numbers and seemingly increasing boldness not just in NY but elsewhere as well, is enough reason to add this tool to the trapper’s toolbox.

      • Taras says:

        Naturally the article’s title caught my eye. I’m not a hunter or trapper but I do have a little ‘book-knowledge’ about woodcraft so a “cable snare” is a familiar term. I found it surprising anyone would lobby for the use of this lethal tool to trap coyotes

        I didn’t know anything about a “cable restraint” so I looked it up and discovered it’s a term often used interchangeably with “cable snare”. That’s too bad because, based on what I read, there’s a substantial difference in lethality.

        I can’t say this article contains disinformation but rather it uses the two terms in a loose way that caused people to, I believe rightfully, protest the use of an inhumane trapping method. Except, the proposition is about using a humane technique, namely the cable restraint.

        This plain spoken fellow explains cable restraints. Apparently they are illegal in Georgia and he’d like to see that changed.
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26AOAQrm1K4

        Youtube also has videos of coyotes caught in cable restraint snares. I can’t say the animals look happy but they are conscious, alert, and seemingly uninjured.

        • Boreas says:

          Oh, but if they could talk about their last day with their head in a noose, they would probably have quite a story to tell. People with PTSD look normal as well.

          • Taras says:

            We can only speculate about a restrained coyote’s thoughts. However, we can be certain about its fate.

  30. Paul says:

    This looks better for the animal than a leg hold trap which is already legal. There are so few trappers these days this is like a non-issue. Sure has gotten folks here in a tizzy.

    • Thank you Paul. It is a non-issue, but the way this article described the device itself was IMHO purposely misleading to evoke the emotional outrage we see here. Pretty shameful that a writer would not take the time to at least be accurate.

      Again, thank you…

      • Paul says:

        Rich, some of these are folks here are pre-programmed to just throw out the usual knee jerk anti-trapping response. It probably doesn’t even matter what is in the story. The response here would probably be the same even if the story took out the word snare. Technically it is a snare by the dictionary definition. I look at that picture and I see a coyote (a decent size one) that is spooked but not because it is in the trap but because there is a person there taking its picture. Coyotes are rightly afraid of people. They are very hard to see in many cases and as I understand it difficult to trap. If they smell a persons sent on the set they won’t go near it. If this was your dog caught in there it looks like you would just walk over and let it go. No harm no foul.

        Hunters (I am one) and I would assume trappers (I am not one) understand that they are part of the ecosystem that they are hunting or trapping in. They are the predators (and good one that is why we need rules like these) not spectators which is what many of the commenters here consider themselves. So they would never understand why folks hunt and trap. I suggest that folks read a book called the “Hunter’s Heart; Essays on Blood Sport”. One of my favorite essays is one where President Jimmy Carter explains his reasoning for being a sportsman.

        • Oh, I am sure, and you are correct by dictionary definition, but in trapping terms, a snare and a restraint are two entirely different things. Accuracy in writing, and I am a freelance Outdoors writer, should be of paramount concern of the writer. Goes to public trust and ethics with the written word.

          Yes, coyote are difficult to trap, even more difficult to hunt (with or without the aide of dogs). Very keen sense of smell, keen ears, pretty sharp eyes, and when they travel together the learn quick from what may befall another. Nevertheless, the cable restraint is the most effective means to trap coyote, and it is a tool long overdue.

          I had a dog when I was a kid, a big Alaskan Malamute male, that my grandparents took when he got too big for the house in the ‘burbs. He got loose and wound up getting caught in leg hold traps. My grandfather found him after a couple days, each paw caught in a leg hold. He released him unharmed. Dog was fine. Sucks that it happened, but no harm, no foul.

          We are all part of the ecosystems. The big thing is that we have natural succession naturally altering the ecosystems. As the once dominant grassland fall to mature forests, habitat starts favoring coyote and other predators (black bears, fishers), and becomes less favorable for prey, due to cover loss, food loss, etc. No one’s fault, this is just how nature works, and eventually if a fire doesn’t renew the lands, natural succession sort of will (not the soil pH, but tall trees will fall, letting the sunshine back in). The dynamics at play are natural, and we address the numbers naturally too.

          Thanks for showing lots of sense and reason! I salute you!

        • AG says:

          And some people appear to be predisposed to just want to kill things and have a knee jerk reaction against those who don’t.
          Well if you feel man is “just an animal” – well that’s up to you. I don’t believe I evolved from other primates. I believe I was created by God with superior intelligence and moral imperative to other “animals”. That includes not wanting to inflict cruelty on other living beings – human or not. I have no problem with people hunting for food. I eat meat. Nor am I against persons killing an animal which specifically poses a danger. Show me a coyote who attacked a person – give me the weapon and I will go kill it myself. Setting traps for random animals fits into neither category. Killing just for the sake of killing according to our whims – I don’t support. Trapping random animals who will indeed suffer is not something I support. That’s not “knee-jerk”.

  31. Boreas says:

    As I see it, using squirrels as an illustration, you can shoot, trap, frighten, and swear at them all you want, if the right habitat and food source exists, losses of individuals simply make room for others to move in. If the use of any device would eliminate all future negative interactions with humans and their property, then it might be worthwhile. But since it won’t guarantee further interactions, all you are really doing is just killing more coyotes, not solving the problem. Their numbers expanded dramatically because they have evolved and adapted to humans and have a rapid reproductive cycle. They are quite intelligent – snares aren’t going to make them avoid humans, just fear snares.

  32. Charlie S says:

    Tara says: “A cable restraint doesn’t seem as cruel as a cable snare. Granted it’s hardly a non-traumatizing experience but far less brutal than other methods (powered cable snare, leg-hold trap).”

    This is what I got out of the same report when I stated above “There are much more inhumane ways to trap a coyote according to what I read.”

    Not that I’m for trapping or killing animals needlessly which we do all all too often.

  33. rlstolz says:

    Culling top-level predators from an ecosystem has repeatedly proven to be short-sighted. Referring to any species as a “nuisance”, as if that label is objectively accurate, fails to acknowledge the contextual nature of that nuisance. In New York, culling coyotes increases deer populations, and that means the nuisance simply shifts from small livestock and pets to agriculture and gardens – it does not go away. It’s one or the other, take your pick.

    From an economic perspective, deer do far more damage than coyotes and in most places deer are already overpopulated. Hunters can’t keep up with deer populations, despite increasingly liberal bag limits. Milder winters exacerbate the problem. Increasing the number of deer when there are already too many only makes sense from a very narrow perspective that fails to consider the big picture. Culling coyote populations will reduce a small, but real, problem while increasing a much bigger one. Is this really a good idea?

    • Boreas says:

      I agree. The presence of coyotes also keeps populations of fox and weasels in check which are also major nuisances around chickens. I would welcome something to reduce the deer and rodent population around my house. I am within village limits where hunting is not allowed, so that’s where the deer are. They have already mowed down my spring flowers that didn’t even have a chance to bloom. And don’t even get me started on the ticks all around me. To me, deer are the problem, not coyotes.

      As I mentioned before, the unique niche for a predator near human settlement is there. Coyotes have evolved into filling that niche faster than wolves. You can kill as many as you want, the niche is not going away. Just like my squirrel analogy above, more coyotes will just move in.

      On the positive side, perhaps reducing coyote numbers will speed up wolf or big cat re-population. Then there will be even bigger animals to trap and kill.

    • AG says:

      Yeah – I just watched a documentary about the expansion of Asiatic lions from the only place they still exist – which is in western India. The reason the population is growing is because the supposedly un-sophisticated villagers realized that the lions help reduce/prevent the ungulates from destroying their crops. Those performers are truly poor… To them it is more cost effective to lose an ox once in a while to the lions rather than lose all of their crops to ungulates. There were only 20 Asiatic lions left… Now the number is up to 600… Not only are the farmers doing better (even though they sometimes lose cattle) – the forests are doing better as well. Personally, I wouldn’t want to live next to lions, but I admire that seemingly unsophisticated people can learn from their past mistakes. With all of our riches and tools – we don’t seem to.

  34. Snares kill indiscriminately and cause great pain and prolonged suffering to any animal caught in them. They are extreme methods of animal control and not necessary.

    Please say no to them.

    Thank you,
    Claire Perry

  35. Drew Westfield says:

    Red Wolf Coalition, hoodwinks donors, by “Paying” Trappers!!

    Click on the below link for supporting documents!! This must STOP!! No Not for Profit should be able to collect donations under the disguise of being an Animal Protection Group!

    https://www.facebook.com/redwolfcoalitionwatch/posts/1613319738985876

  36. Lauren says:

    It’s cruel, inhumane, lazy, and not necessary.

  37. LaVerne Dudik says:

    This bill should not be passed. It is the most inhuman way to kill anything. It seems that lately all some people want to do is get rid of all the animals.

  38. William Slawson says:

    Was this bill rejected?

  39. Jimbo says:

    A lot of people here care less about their own species than nuisance animals. Makes me wonder how they treat their kids.

    If you had packs of coyotes in the neighborhood, would you send your kids outside?