$447 per pelt, and 60? Not a bad chunk of change.

Trapper faces poaching charges



(NORTH OGDEN, Utah (AP) -- A trapper accused of illegally killing bobcats was so successful that other hunters probably didn't find many, a Utah investigator says.

Jared Beal, 40, of North Ogden has been charged with 12 counts of wanton destruction of protected wildlife.

Bobcat pelts can be worth hundreds of dollars and, in some cases, more than $1,000, but trappers typically are limited to six per season.

Investigators were tipped when Beal was selling 60 or more bobcat pelts a year in Wyoming, which has fewer restrictions. The Wyoming pelts are not included in the charges.

"It's been a horrible year for bobcat trappers this season, except for Jared," said Kip King, investigator in the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources.

"A lot of very good trappers didn't even get six this season. ... I think he's impacted the bobcat population in northern Utah, absolutely," King said.

Beal declined to comment Thursday. He is scheduled for arraignment June 26.

Beal is believed to have trapped more than 24 bobcats, but authorities declined to reveal a specific number. He used additional permits in the names of family and friends.

The allegations involve bobcats trapped in Weber, Box Elder and Tooele counties, said Gary Heward, a Weber County prosecutor.

The charges include third-degree felonies, which carry prison terms of up to 15 years, and Class A misdemeanors, which can result in a year in jail.

Many trappers sell their pelts at an annual auction held by the Utah Trappers Association.

According to the group's Web site, www.utahtrappers.org, 1,004 bobcats pelts were sold in February at an average price of $447.88.

I'd like to turn him loose on our growing wolf problem!

Not a bad idea! I could over look the bobcats for that!

He's a POACHER, whether by trapping or hunting.
It always cheeses me off when they refer to some spotlighting, out of season SOB as a hunter, and being a trapper, this cheeses me off as well.

Aand here I was happy with what grey fox were bringing back here!

quote:

spotlighting

That's a legal method of take for predators/furbearers in many states, so don't include us legally sanctioned nocturnalists into the SOB/poacher category.

UT has it's quota of 6 cats per trapper which is based on a biological assessment of what they believe a sustainable harvest is.

If he's guilty of exceeding that or worse yet laundering cats through WY then fine him and suspend his license.

Bobcats taken commercially are required to have a CITES tag from the state of capture. If he tagged his excess limit of UT cats with WY tags he's up for a Lacey Act violation as well.

quote:

Beal is believed to have trapped more than 24 bobcats, but authorities declined to reveal a specific number. He used additional permits in the names of family and friends.

If the state issued a certain amount of permits then how did he create such an impact on the population.
I mean regardless of if he used other peoples permits the state issued those permits and should have expected them to be filled, right?
If the state issues 100,000 deer tags they dont expect 100,000 tags to be filled. If everyone fills there tags by some quirk of fate then the state has issue with it?
In fact what he did, using other peoples tags/ permits is considered group hunting and is legal in many places accross the US.
Why dont they elaborate on his method?

I agree with kstevens that while a loop-hole, filling someone else's tag is within the agency's rules. That is to say obeying the quota. I understand it is NOT legal or ethical and do not in any way condone it but the insinuation here is that HE is responsible for impacting the region's population. The fact those permits were available tells me the agency screwed up issuing them!

The whole episode sent a chill up my spine as it sounds all too much like the Claude Dallas story from back in 81. If you're not familiar, Dallas murdered two game wardens searching his camp for illegal cats.

Niether Utah or Wyoming allow party huting or trapping. You can not fill others tags or quotas.

Just to clearify... I did not intend to imply that this was OK. What I meant by saying the department was at fault is simply that if filling someone else's tags endangered the population it wouldn't have mattered WHO filled them, the population would still be endangered if they were filled by the rightful holder of the permit(s). Hence, the agency over-allotted harvest permits.

The wildlife departments issue permits based on a statistical percentage of filled permits, among other things.

Let's say that a state wants 100 bobcats taken. Records for the state show that bobcat permit holders are 10% successful. They would expect to issue 1000 permits. Based on a predicted take of 10% that would result in a take of 100.

Yes, they run the risk of 1000 bobcats being taken. This is extremely unlikely. If conditions were excellent then maybe 15% are successful, resulting in 150 bobcats taken. If the conditions were bad, then maybe only 5% success. Adjustsments can be made to the permits issued in following years to make up for it.

The success ratio used by the agencies go right out the window when you get a guy like this. We don't condone anything he did, but it certainly appears that he's either a pretty good bobcat trapper or possibly used snares and other illegal methods to get them. No one can deny that the guy can find a bobcat. That being said, he has likely taken most of the bobcats from a fairly concentrated area (cost a lot for fuel, takes time to check a long trapline, knowledge of area, etc.). So by taking a lot of bobcats from a small area he very well may have impacted the bobcat population in those areas, though I'm sure they'll recover.

One can only guess why he did it - greed, or is is how he feeds his family? I can only hope that the judge has the opportunity to do the right thing in this case.

I may be wrong, but I doubt that any state allows "group" trapping when permits are involved. I know of a few states that allow sharing of tags for such things as deer hunting, but it's usually just for does.

quote:

Originally posted by erict:
The wildlife departments issue permits based on a statistical percentage of filled permits, among other things...

Yes, I fully understand that. All I'm saying is that claiming this guy - wrong as he is - is responsible for destroying the population is a misnomer.

It's a roll of the dice when trying to set such regulations. I personally dropped out of a waterfowl club when I learned it was accepted that some members justified shooting over the (daily) limit because they only hunted a couple days a year. Likewise the guides who allow clients to shoot their (the guide's) limit in addition to their own. We all know people who have shot their wife, or kid's limit. My pet peeve is guys who take some kid on "youth day" and shoot his deer, turkey, goose, duck,... for him. This is contriving the law and WRONG!

This guy was surely motivated by greed, which is an embaressment to the sport. Just the same, when the game taken - rightfully or not - still falls within the prescribed overall limit, the limit needs to be reconsidered. Was he wrong? YES! Was he responsible for taking more cats than the department intended to be taken? Probably. Should he be held responsible for degrading the population? Sure. Should he be held solely responsible? No. Is he unique in this practice? Absolutely not!!! And the practice in all its variations is reprehensible.

quote:

Niether Utah or Wyoming allow party huting or trapping. You can not fill others tags or quotas.

In this case charge the people who the permits were issued to as well. Even if they get off care to guess if they will help him again?