Oppose fur trapping at Lake Umbagog NWRefuge

Dear Ms. Nancy McGarigal, Mr. Casey, and other planners,

We, the signers of this petition, want you to drop all consideration of recreational fur trapping & targeted fur trapping from your management planning for Lake Umbagog National Wildlife Refuge.

The top 8 reasons why allowing trapping on the refuge is a wrong decision:

1.         As you say in your Compatibility Determination, %u201Cindirect impacts may include displacing migratory birds during the pair bonding/nesting season or the destruction of nests by trampling. Direct impacts may include the catch of target and non-target species that are predators on migratory birds or nests, or the removal of species that induce that induce habitat change (e.g., beavers).%u201D And you add, %u201CNon-target species could be taken through this trapping program.%u201D Reason #1 to not allow trapping is, Why would you allow trapping knowing ahead of time that such negative impacts as trampling and catch of non-targets would take place?

1. Reason #2 to not allow trapping is that the NH trapping season does indeed continue into Spring when all of wildlife comes alive ready for reproducing, and not as you stated in the Compatibility Determination, through only mid-March. Many NH seasons run through March 31st and several through April 10, such as beaver and otter.

1. Reason #3 to not allow trapping is that recreational fur trapping is motivated by the sale of pelts, which is a commercial use of the refuge for personal gain.

1. Reason #4 to not allow trapping is that fur trapping is %u201Crecreational%u201D to trappers like hunting is to hunters, then why is it snuck in under Goal #1 and isn%u2019t dealt with more appropriately under Goal #4, and the reason must be because, as stated in the Compatibility Determination, trapping %u201Cis not a priority public use%u201D of the refuge system. I repeat, trapping is not a priority public use.

1. Reason #5 to not allow trapping is that the Service is failing to recognize that furbearer species manage their own populations in natural predator-prey relationships with each other, such as fishers preying on porcupines, or coyotes preying on beavers and small rodents. The refuge belongs to all native furbearer species. Loons and other threatened and endangered species ought to be protected without destroying furbearers.

1. Reason #6 to not allow trapping is that NH%u2019s Wildlife Action Plan lists the bobcat and the pine marten as two species of conservation concern, and yet these species would be trapped on the Maine side of the refuge, which doesn%u2019t seem very helpful to NH that is trying to recover the strength of these species. Pine marten are routinely trapped in fisher sets and the Service ought to have Zero Tolerance for that.

1. Reason #7 to not allow trapping is that the refuge and its wildlife, such as loons, are already suffering the effects of various user groups, why would you propose adding fur trappers tromping through the woods and onto sensitive wetlands?

8.         A final reason (#8) to not allow trapping is that trapping was identified dead last in public responses about the importance of activities when respondents visit Lake Umbagog (Question 7, Table 4.). Whereas %u201Cbeing in natural, undeveloped lands%u201D got a whopping 91% importance rating, %u201Ctrapping%u201D got a miniscule 19%, obviously indicating that trappers and their families are the only ones desiring the commercial and recreational benefits of trapping.

Finally, when all the critique of trapping is examined, it leaves the Service with No Good Reason to allow trapping in our refuge. Remember to put wildlife first %u2013 this is not a %u201Cpeople refuge,%u201D it is a %u201Cwildlife refuge.%u201D

Sincerely,
Signers of the Petition to Dis-allow trapping at Lake Umbagog NWRefuge