Understanding the new trapper's license law SB 1645

            (Section 4005, CA Fish and Game Code of Regulations)
 

                                               February 2003

 Here we go again - another ambiguous wildlife law written by people who do not understand the wildlife control industry. As a result of enacting legislative change without input from the people impacted by it, it is left to the Department of Fish and Game to explain what this new law will mean to NWCOs, PCOs, ACOs, Landscape Gardeners and others who trap nongame mammals and furbearers "for profit" (wages, salary or others forms of compensation?).

There are a lot of nongame mammals not specifically named in this new law but included nonetheless by being members of the group of animals known as nongame mammals, i.e., those that have no commercial value or that are not taken for food. Those unnamed mammals include bats, rats, mice, gophers, moles, voles, ground squirrels, tree squirrels, feral cats, feral dogs, and probably others. You will note that each these animal species can be controlled by trapping although none are specifically excluded in this law.

The law, as it is written, applies to "persons" and not to businesses, companies, corporations or other organizations. Therefore, unlike other regulatory agencies who allow employees to work under the business license of the owner or operator, Fish and Game may interpret the law to mean every single person who is paid to trap these mammals will need to obtain a Trappers License. How many California pest control technicians, wildlife control technicians, gardeners, animal control officers, etc. would be that be? Probably thousands!

And of course there is the license exam itself. Getting a Trapping License won't be like applying for a fishing license where you just plop down your money and walk away with your permit to fish. Oh no! The theory underlying this new law is that both wild animals and pets will be the direct beneficiaries of the Department's required training program for trapping license applicants. Fewer non-target catches, fewer animals injured by traps, fewer animals neglected in traps, etc. Those who can demonstrate proficiency in trapping will be eligible for licensure. Those who can't cut the mustard won't. Its as simple as that.

So what will it take to become a competent and proficient trapper? Can you acquire the requisite skills, knowledge and abilities to prevent animal suffering by reading a study guide? I don't think so!

In my opinion, the Department of Fish and Game can only comply with the terms and the spirit of this new law by instituting radical changes in their licensing procedures. Section 4005 (b) requires the Department to set the standards and then to determine a license candidate's skill and knowledge in trapping before awarding a license. The sponsors of SB1645 will certainly lobby for the highest possible standards of proficiency, perhaps at the eighty percent level.

Objective tests in the form of True/False or Multiple Choice paper and pencil tests cannot demonstrate one's skill in setting traps or creating trap sets. Ideally, the applicant would need to demonstrate his or her ability to capture an animal without hurting it. The minimal standard would be whether the captured animal cries out or not. A direct inverse relationship between trappers' skill and vocalization level of the trapped animals. But we're not going to subject a lot of animals to pain and suffering just so that prospective licensees can show off their trapping skills. So we'll have to settle for a less direct measure perhaps?

#1  Here is a Macabee gopher trap. Show me you know how to set it. You have 15  

      seconds.

#2  Here is a Conebear trap set it up to catch an adult male beaver. You have 5 minutes.

#3. Here is a length of aircraft cable and all the other parts you will need to make a   

      coyote leg snare. You have 10 minutes.

      Complete 8 of the 10 assigned challenges within the allotted time and you will pass   

      the trappers' proficiency test.

Some years back I attended a rendezvous of California Fur Trappers. These guys were proficient trappers and loved to compete against each other or against a stop watch in setting a variety of animal traps. To demonstrate their facility in handling leg hold traps they played "egg toss" with set traps. After each successful catch the partners would take

one step backward until only one pair of trappers remained to be named the winners.

In another event, twelve different unset leg hold or foot hold traps were be laid out on the ground  forming a large circle. At the timer's command each contestant knelt down and set one trap after another until all were set and ready to catch an animal. The judge recorded the elapsed time taken to set the twelve traps and then deducted points for every trap improperly set.

Of course these fur trappers didn't call these contests "proficiency tests", but the games these fur trappers played really demonstrated their individual skills and abilities in handling the tools of their trade. Maybe a NWCO should be asked to remove a skunk from a debris box without getting sprayed.

Realistically though, at a very minimum, a competent trapper should know the trapping laws, understand the biology and natural history of the target animal and know enough about traps to prevent injury to himself and to animals. But why should the State require a gardener who traps only gophers and moles have to demonstrate proficiency in trapping coyotes when he will never ever try to catch one.

In order to assure relevance between a trapper's authority and his chosen scope of work, he should seek licensure only in those areas of work in which he wishes to perform. For example, certain mammals burrow into the ground where they create damage. Catching these animals and stopping their damage requires only a subset of the total knowledge, skills and abilities. This trapper should only be required to know about the laws, regulations and state policies relating to gophers, moles, voles, ground squirrels, Norway rats and any other burrowing nongame mammals. If he or she later wants to start trapping coyotes, let him take the "predator exams" in order to earn the additional license.

This same model is now employed by the other regulatory agencies of the state.

A Structural Pest Control Operator can opt for Branch 1, Branch 2 or Branch 3.

The Department of Pesticide Regulation issues Qualified Applicators Licenses in many license categories in which the candidate elects to be tested. The Contractor State License Board has over 40 specialty license categories and a multitude of limited specialty license categories. A plumber does not have to demonstrate skills and knowledge in electricity. Every licensed contractor, or pest control operator is issued a little plastic card bearing his name and the license category in which he showed proficiency.

If the Department of Fish and Game is to comply with the terms and spirit of SB1645 and to begin regulating people working in the wildlife control industry (in addition to regulating the natural resources of the state) it must develop and institute a licensing program with at least this level of sophistication. Anything less will be a sham and will afford little protection for the pets and wild animals for which this law was enacted. It will be of little help to the California consumer seeking to hire a competent trapper to end the gopher damage. The California NWCO Association has offered its assistance and hopes the Department of Fish and Game will allow us to help them meet the challenges presented by the new trapping license law. There is no reason why California can't set the licensing standards for the other states to adopt.