So I’m over at Leadore’s community library day before yesterday when a neighbor I’ll call Jim (okay, in Leadore a neighbor is anyone who lives within 10 miles of you) beckons me out into the hallway. It seems he is missing one of his muskrat traps, set near the Smokey’s Cubs BLM campground, several miles east of Leadore on the state highway that takes you into Montana. He noticed boot tracks in the snow that appeared to be made by a woman, and dog tracks. He wonders if I might have left them, and if I might know the whereabouts of his trap. I assure him that I don’t walk my dog out there, that I last drove by there months ago, and that I don’t have his trap. I ask him if it looks as if the dog had gotten caught in the trap, and he says no, the area “didn’t look torn up.” He assures me that he knows he isn’t allowed to set traps in the campground itself, so he has been setting them along the creek upstream from the campground. This strikes me as not real smart, in an area where travelers and hunters frequently stop to use the restrooms and let their dogs run around, but I don’t say so.
“I don’t know whether she followed my tracks, or whether she was just walking up there,” he says. We look at each other. Although Jim and his wife have a child of voting age, I still think of him as the young man – the kid, really –he was when we first moved to Leadore twenty-four years ago. Then, just married and with a seasonal job, he trapped muskrats and foxes in the winter. He continues to do so, mainly along the Lemhi River north of Leadore, though he now has a good permanent job. Often, when I drive into Salmon, I see his pickup parked along the highway, and know that he’s pursuing his avocation of killing small animals.
In the long winters when the earth around Leadore is bleached of all color, a man might well want to get out of the house and away from his wife and kids. He might want to walk out in the sharp clear air just to be alone and watch the geese flying over and listen to the silence in their wake. But if a man’s culture tends to regard expeditions without an object as suspect, perhaps even as a mark of sloth, he might need to bring back some sort of harvest as justification. Perhaps that’s why he traps, without even really knowing it himself, even in those times when muskrat pelts bring only $1 apiece. On the other hand, now that they’re worth about $10, maybe it’s just about the money, after all.
In the 1990s, when Bob and I were busy losing money on our sheep flock, our Great Pyrenees guard dog patrolled the leased pasture behind our home place. She often extended her patrols into the adjoining fields, where Jim had set traps for foxes. Once, she got caught in one of his traps overnight. Another time, she found a fox in one of them, and promptly tore the hapless beast to pieces, ruining the hide. The next day, Jim and Bob yelled at each other in our driveway as Jim demanded that we pay him for the lost pelt. Not long after, we bought twenty tons of hay from a rancher neighbor, and as he and his sons unloaded it near the sheep pens, we talked about sheep and guard dogs, and we told him about Jim’s traps. The rancher shook his head. “I’m going to have to have a talk with that boy,” he said. It probably helped that the rancher was also the Mormon bishop, but in any case the fox traps vanished and did not return.
“Well,” Jim says, back in the present, “if you hear of anything, can you let me know? My traps all have my name on them.”
Sometimes I am a poor judge of facial cues, but it seems to me that Jim thinks I took his trap. As I return to my laptop, I don’t know whether to be insulted at the accusation, or flattered that he thinks I’m capable of it. Do I really have so fearsome a reputation?
Only later do I think, well, well, someone took that trap. A woman, a boy, a man with small feet? Someone, perhaps, whose dog once got caught in a trap. Someone who recognizes cruelty when they see it. These are dark times for the creatures of the wild. But it’s good to know that there is at least one lone ranger out there, doing the right thing. But next time, whoever you are, brush out your tracks.
louise wagenknecht
Louise Wagenknecht worked for the Forest Service for 31 years and has written two books about her life in the Klamath Mountains of northern California. She writes from the wilds of eastern Idaho.
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
DDD-D. Disarm, Destroy, Dispose – play DUMB.
Thanks Louise.
And this sums it up nicely:
Only later do I think, well, well, someone took that trap. A woman, a boy, a man with small feet? Someone, perhaps, whose dog once got caught in a trap.
****Someone who recognizes cruelty when they see it****
These are dark times for the creatures of the wild. But it’s good to know that there is at least one lone ranger out there, doing the right thing. But next time, whoever you are, brush out your tracks”
I don’t have a problem someone being against trapping, but I do have a problem with intensional vandalism or encouraging one to destroy others property.
This is about the third reference (make that the 4th if comments are included) to springing traps I’ve read about today. Must be becoming a popular pastime.
Robert, I agree with you. Not that I disapprove of civil disobedience where and when required but part of the ethics of civil disobedience is that you dont hide. You commit the act, you accept (indeed welcome) the societal reaction/punishment, and make your voice heard. Sneaking around destroying traps, or covertly poaching wolves for that matter, makes you a lesser cowardly person…
Currently trapping is a legal activity, so I would not say this is civil disobedience, but criminal activity and it makes the one tripping or stealing the traps, look just as bad as those that poach.
One of these days a tripper as they are sometimes called is going to end up getting shot.
Civil disobedience means someone deliberately and openly breaks a law to protest the law and accepts the consequences.
People who secretly kill protected animals, or alternatively, spring traps, are not engaging in civil disobedience. They are breaking the law and trying to avoid the consequences. This can defeat the law if done enough, but it is law breaking, not civil disobedience.
Because trapping — deliberate animal cruelty — may be legal (even enshrined in Idiot-ho’s constitution in last November’s election!), doesn’t make it humane, moral or ethical.
So who has the high ground : the person committing a legal, but inhumane act, or the person committing an unlawful act in attempting to stop the cruelty ?
Although lots say trapping is animal cruelty, it is still legal and I know who would get the ticket and fine or worse shot, if they are caught messing with the trap.
Although I usually agree with your opinions SB, I have to disagree in this instance regarding the “potential” use of deadly physical force (shooting) against someone who is “messing” with a trap. In Idaho, and also Montana, an individual is not justified in using deadly physical force against a person when it is solely in defense of property damage or theft (and springing does not cause damage, only a potential loss of money which is a civil tort). see MCA 45-3-104. Use of force in defense of other property. A person is justified in the use of force or threat to use force against another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to prevent or terminate such other’s trespass on or other tortious or criminal interference with either real property (other than an occupied structure) or personal property lawfully in his possession or in the possession of another who is a member of his immediate family or household or of a person whose property he has a legal duty to protect. However, he is justified in the use of force likely to cause death or serious bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.. Springing or stealing a trap is not a forcible felony and therefore it is an illegal use of force.
I only point this out because you seem hung up on what’s legal, as opposed to what may be unethical or immoral, but not illegal.
Alf, the danger is that by allowing anyone to decide which law is moral and which is not, you also empower idiots like child pornographers and poachers. The law defines societal norms, not always well or current, but if you venture outside it then you tacitly permit others of differing opinions to do the same.
Shielding/justifying secret action by claiming the moral high ground is how suspects get tortured. It is a slippery slope to claim that you personally have such a grasp on morality that you can pick and choose which laws to obey and which to defy. Work to change the law or engage in open civil disobedience as has been defined in earlier comments. Anything else is callous self-indulgent hubris and empowers those whom you oppose.
Well said, Mike.
I don’t buy this argument at all. It is an excuse to justify our less than moral behaviour by the majority who can’t or don’t want to live up to it for whatever reason, greed, personal gain. There is a moral high ground that most everyone would agree is right, and that we have been taught from many sources the world over. In other words, there is a moral high ground that isn’t just observed or made up by a few social misfits and weirdos. Courage would be to have the guts to stand up for what you believe despite ovewhelming pressure to conform by an immoral majority. People like Ghandi, Rachel Carson, Martin Luther King, Daniel Ellsburg, the list goes on and on.
So Ida,
You are advocating for illegal action to gain the high ground? If you are, then you are no better than those on the hunting side that ignore poaching.
Illegal actions by either side, have no place in the same conversation as Ghandi or Martin Luther King, neither of those great leaders advocated for illegal behavior.
actually, no. Gandhi was a staunch advocate of non-violent civil disobedience, such as the Salt March of 1930 where he broke the law and was imprisoned. He even notified the British that he was going to break the law.
“If my letter makes no appeal to your heart, on the eleventh day of this month I shall proceed with such co-workers of the Ashram as I can take, to disregard the provisions of the Salt Laws. I regard this tax to be the most iniquitous of all from the poor man’s standpoint. As the Independence movement is essentially for the poorest in the land, the beginning will be made with this evil.”
Civil disobedience is completely different than what has been discussed in this thread.
No, never said anything of the kind. I did speak about those who go against the grain and get labelled for it, and that was all. Please don’t assume that I am a lawbreaker.
Mikepost: This is a classic relativist argument. As such, it is not worthy of any consideration whatsoever.
Sam Parks,
I thought it was very worthy of consideration. We are a country of laws. Those who choose to operate out side it should be punished until the law is changed. Those who wish change, in the form of civil disobedience should break the law, call attention to the fact they did it, accept the accompanying punishment, and make their social stand. Anything less is simply illegal, and advocacy of subverting the law, if severe enough, leads to anarchy.
I’ll take relativism over absolutism any day. Anyone who thinks s/he ‘knows’ what is right or wrong–absolutely–is a danger to him/herself and others.
So ‘you’ say. Which is a form of absolutism in itself. Are you saying that what is right and wrong is ambiguous? Or situational?
There is an enormous amount of middle ground between those two ideas.
I would say that the taking of a life is considered wrong universally except in the most limited of circustances. There’s not a lot of middle ground. Therefore, lifesaving is morally superior to life destroying.
Ida, I completely agree with you (you are describing the “harm principle” of ethics). I was referring to JB’s implication that if you aren’t a relativist, you are an absolutist. I was saying there is an enormous amount of middle ground between those two things. Sorry, I know this comment system can be confusing.
Sorry, Sam.
Well Sam, rather than summarily dismissing Mike’s argument as moral relativism (and therefore, ostensibly unworthy of consideration), you might try making a counter argument.
Personally, I’m very skeptical of people who claim the moral high ground. Especially when they don’t show their work.
A LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Dog caught in wolf trap leads to awful situation
Published: Fri, 01/04/2013 – 3:00pm | Section: •Letters
Editor:
The day was like many in Montana — a cold winter blue sky day. We were walking our dog last week in an area where we have walked for the past 17 years. Our dog was glad to be out in this familiar setting and was out to our side about 30 feet sniffing and looking for rodents, when all of a sudden she was bolting in the air frantically screeching, yelping and biting uncontrollably. We ran to help. It took a second to realize what it was: “My god, it’s two traps that were clamped down on her front leg above the paw and her back leg at her paw.” She was fiercely trying to bite them off. Blood was flowing.
We were freaked, and tried to calm her. We tried to restrain her from hurting herself more. She finally went into shock and became docile. We were afraid to try and release the traps for fear of hurting her more. My friend started having severe chest pain and I had to take over restraining Solano. We both had our cell phones, so we called 911, our vet, and the land owner. We then tried to pull the traps from the ground where they were staked. No luck. Such a mixture of archaic tortures and telephones!
Our vet arrived and the sheriff was not far behind. Our vet was able to release the traps. Solano was taken to our vet’s office, X-rayed, and found to have no broken bones, though she has several broken teeth from trying to bite off the steel traps. My friend continued to have chest pain.
Both were lucky. Other pets or people might not be so lucky. A wild animal would definitely not be so lucky. The thought of how my dog reacted and was injured in this very short amount of time reminds us of the unthinkable process a wild animal might go through in the 24 to 48 hours before her killer arrives.
Montana regulations are very much all about the trapper and not about the public or the animals that are being trapped. A trap can be set only 150 feet from a road, and the trap does not need to be marked in any way for a person to see it. In fact, most of the regs are all about the hunt. This treatment of animals is not a hunt at all — it is malicious torture of our wildlife and can lead to injury of people and their pets.
I suggest that anyone thinking of joining the trapper group please take two traps into a field, stake them down, and when they are nicely frozen in, walk out and place both hands into the traps so they will snap into place. I’m sure no trapper would do this, but I hope you get the point. We must stop this trapping now, please write, call your legislators.
So the second part to this horrific day: When Solano was caught in a wolf trap and DD and I were struggling for Solano’s life, a rush of adrenaline and calcium was heading for DD’s heart. What that means in the medical world is that she was having a heart attack caused by the anxiety of our dog’s life being threatened in an instant. We took her to the ER in Livingston, where her enzyme levels indicated that her heart was sustaining damage. She was taken then to Bozeman by ambulance, and into the cath lab. They determined that she had a Stress Cardiomiopathy a “mild heart attack” that is solely produced in a fight or flight situation. She is going to be fine. She does not have a diseased heart — her attacker was the wolf trap.
Ursula Neese
South of Livingston
Which paper was this post in alf, also one other thing I will bring up, which Ralph has brought up in the past, posting full articles and such from Newspapers opens up this blog to copyright violation problems. it is always best just to post a teaser and then a link to the article.
Savebears if you wish to check the state news out this is a good resource.
http://mt.gov/residents/state_newspapers.mcpx
Thanks Robert, I was not aware of that site.
“I suggest that anyone thinking of joining the trapper group please take two traps into a field, stake them down, and when they are nicely frozen in, walk out and place both hands into the traps so they will snap into place.”
Over the years I’ve seen multiple people do exactly this (well, not in the freezing cold) with a #4 trap–the kind used for a coyote or lynx.
Alf
I have read that letter several times and something is not right.
++We both had our cell phones, so we called 911, our vet, and the land owner.++
++Our vet arrived and the sheriff was not far behind. Our vet was able to release the traps. ++
The conclusion was that the dog and her friend were all right, what about the trapper and trap. The trapper was trapping private land was it his/her own land or was he/she trapping with permission of the landowner. In Montana a trapper must have written permission of the landowner to trap private that is not his own.
If the trapper had broken the law the writer would have mention any infraction or citation and the penalties incurred. None was mention. Were those two women trespassing on private land or did there dog leave the trail and crossed into private land. I think that the trapper was operating on private land legally with the permission of the landowner and maybe the women and the dog were …………..
There is ranch south of Livingston that has a score of wolf traps out now, knowing the owners if a person/persons and their dog trespassed on that private property getting caught in a wolf would be the least of their worries.
Our society is going nuts,example congress and their staff can do insider trading,some have made millions on both sides dems and republicans. Three more dead today in gun violence. Why do I bring this up,because our society is up side down. Only children and animals can’t protect themselves against society. If a child gets caught in a trap and injured or killed I would like to see how much ink will be in the news. When does it stop.Now a person a being treated by a doctor for a gunshot wound, the doctor can’t record that he person had a gun.This was written into law with the health care bill,put in the last minute by Harry Reid,done for the NRA,as I said where does stop. Only the innocent get hurt wild animals, children, the public, when does it turn around.Now hunting with dogs is allowed in Wisconsin!Again when does the cruelty stop. What was that article by Ken Dark Times,for sure.
P.S. Thanks J.B. I could have not said it better.
The other days I was driving home on the NJ turnpike,when this tractor-trailer in the back has two mountain goats, a baby and it’s elder,on the bottom it said Visit Montana.com.So I drove past it,and on the side,it has a big sign, Montana,Gateway to Yellowstone,it was beautiful. To bad it did not have hunters trapping wild animals.
Louise, I agree with this post greatly. It is good to know there is a lone ranger out there. Not a “lesser cowardly person” as a previous commenter offered, but somebody who recognizes cruelty when they see it. I, too, hope they brush out their tracks next time. Yes trapping is legal, but the right side of the law is frequently the wrong side of justice. Personally, I go by a higher law than what a small group of old rich white men (our legislature) decrees. God speed to you, Wilderness Guy.
Sam,
I have no problem with people having their ideals, and encourage it. But only up to the point that someone could get killed. In the west, you will not become a martyr, you will only become dead.
It is easy to say you will die for your cause, but to experience it is another story.
These situations are analogous to those faced by the people who helped fugitive slaves escape to Canada via the “Underground Railroad” in the 1850s. They were breaking an unjust law, and they knew it, and they tried not to get caught, because then they could not continue to help those who needed help. So it wasn’t what we usually think of as “civil disobedience.” The latter was practiced by Henry Thoreau, who refused to pay his taxes in protest (if I remember correctly) against the Fugitive Slave Law, and went to jail. When one of his friends came to visit him and said, “What are you doing in here?” he answered, “What are you doing out there?”
Very true. And the French Resistance!
Thanks for this observation Louise. There is certainly a difference between civil disobedience and the situation you describe – people helping slaves escape via the underground railroad. You might label this “subversive civil disobedience” and liken it to that which occurs in countries where individuals risk their lives to prevent torture or genocide. It has to be done undercover, and most would call the people who did this as heros. I admit, on seeing traps, I’d remove them or dismantle. The thought of seeing an animal in one of those devices would not allow me to pass by knowing the fate of the soon to be trapped, snared, or choked animal. I know this might be an unpopular statement to some here, but I would be compelled. I love animals and do not believe our laws respect wildlife or me. I hope they change so people will not be forced into difficult decisions to break the law.
Some interesting facts about our own species “muddled” history when it comes to respect, treatment, compassion etc.
http://facts.randomhistory.com/facts-about-race.html
I too hope they brush their tracks out next time
I would (if I came across a trap) would disable. As you probably know – I would not be afraid to do so. I think it would be a great to get a bunch of folks together & dismantle a whole bunch of them. I know that some of you think that would be wrong, but I feel it’s wrong to kill wildlife. Mother Nature has always taken care of itself. Now man has screwed it up, in a matter of a couple of hundred years.
Wrong to kill wildlife, wildlife has sustained me and my family for many years now.
If you eat rames09, then you are responsible for the death of animals, it does not even matter if your a vegan or vegetarian, animals die so you can eat, there are hundreds of thousands of ground dwelling rodents that die every year, so you can have a loaf of bread!
Throughout history, there have been many activities or practices that were “legal” at the time, but today are considered atrocities. What is legal is determined by a small group of people with powerful interests behind them, usually ones with the most money or an intolerant ideology, not necessarily the best morality or wisdom. Most people are prisoners of their time, and cannot think beyond it.
Throughout history, people who resisted these “legal” practices were judged to be acting illegally and often paid dearly for their disobedience.
Now, however, the resisters are considered heroes, and those who did nothing as cowards. Sometimes, you must follow your conscience and be counted…to draw a line in the sand, so to speak.
Morality is not a matter of opinion. We all know the difference between right and wrong. Cruelty to animals is not excusable by saying it is “legal,” although it is disheartening how many hide behind this.