No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
A Comparison of Injuries to Leg-Hold Trapped and Foot-Snared Red Foxes
... Even though rabies is an important disease, there is no proof that trapping has any effect on the natural reservoir in a particular region 10 . The Council on Environmental Quality has found: "The contention that rabies increases dramatically when steel leghold traps are banned seems entirely without merit" 11 . ...
... In replying to the sentiment that these courses are beneficial, one licensed trapper in Connecticut wrote: "[the person] is either describing his hallucinations, or he is...pulling the wool over the reader's eyes" 20 . This same trapper explained how such courses taught trappers how to manipulate habitats in order to increase 10 In testimony to the inherent cruelty of steel jaw leghold traps, over 64 countries already have banned their use, and several of the US states have either banned or substantially restricted their use. 21 The American Animal Hospital Association, which represents a substantial number of veterinarians, is on record as opposing these traps 22 . ...
This paper discusses the issues surrounding the trapping or raising of wild animals for their fur. It points out the pain and suffering inflicted upon these animals and the extreme inhumanity of many of the traps used in capturing them.
Keywords: animal welfare, furs, injury, ranch-raised, trapping, traps, wildlife
... Trapping animals is a geographically widespread activity practiced by humans for centuries (Atkeson, 1956;Lishak, 1976;Englund, 1982;Elbroch et al., 2013;de Araujo et al., 2021;Montgomery et al., 2022). People trap animals for several reasons including harvest for food, trophies, or medicament (Proulx et al., 2012;Montgomery, 2020), as a means of population control (Quiatt et al., 2002;Mijele et al., 2013), or for research and management purposes (McCarthy et al., 2013;de Araujo et al., 2021). ...
... A variety of studies describing foot injuries in both wildlife (Englund 1982;Warburton 1992;Logan et al. 1999;Powell 2005;Munoz-Igualada et al. 2008;Elbroch et al. 2013), particularly coyotes (Olsen et al. 1986;Onderka et al. 1990;Phillips et al. 1996;Shivik et al. 2000Shivik et al. , 2005Darrow et al. 2009), anddomestic dogs (e.g., Basher 1994;Libardoni et al. 2016;Isaksen et al. 2020) exist. Relatively few studies have described injuries in wolves, and these have compared injuries incurred using different types of traps in known-trapped animals, rather than epidemiologically surveying a broader population (Van Ballenberghe 1984; Kuehn et al. 1986;Sahr and Knowlton 2000;Frame and Meier 2007). ...
The range of gray wolves (Canis lupus) in the contiguous United States is expanding. Research and monitoring to support population recovery and management often involves capture via foothold traps. A population-level epidemiologic assessment of the effect of trap injuries on wolf survival remains needed to inform management. We describe the baseline rate, type, and severity of foot injuries of wolves born 1992-2013 in Michigan's Upper Peninsula, evaluate the reliability of field-scoring trap-related injuries, and the effect of injuries on wolf survival. We assessed foot injuries by physical and radiographic exam at postmortem and/or time of capture for 351 wolves using the International Organization for Standardization 10990-5 standard and the effects of injuries, sex, age, previous capture and body condition on survival using proportional hazards regression. We used ordinal regression to evaluate epidemiologic associations between sex, age, previous capture, body condition, cause of death and injury severity. Most wolves (53%) experienced no physically or radiographically discernable foot injuries over their lifetimes. Among those wolves that did experience injuries, 33% scored as mild. Foot injuries had little epidemiologically discernable effect on survival rates. Wolves with higher foot trauma scores did experience an increased risk of dying, but the magnitude of the increase was modest. Most limb injuries occurred below the carpus or tarsus, and scoring upper-limb injuries added little predictive information to population-level epidemiologic measures of survival and injury severity. There was little association between injury severity and cause of death. Based on necropsy exams, previous trap injuries likely contributed to death in only four wolves (1.1%). Our results suggest that injuries resulting from foothold traps are unlikely to be a limiting factor in recovery and ongoing survival of the Michigan gray wolf population.
... We tested numerous models of foothold traps with different types of jaws (Fig. 3). Footsnares (Poelker and Hartwell 1973, Englund 1982, Shivik et al. 2000 are spring-activated cables used to capture and hold medium-and large-sized mammals by a foot (Fig. 2C). Cage traps are manufactured in an array of sizes suitable for many mammalian species (Fig. 2D), and are constructed of wire or nylon mesh, wood, plastic, or metal, with a treadle or other triggering device that activates ≥1 gravity-or spring-operated door. ...
Humans have used wild furbearers for various purposes for thousands of years. Today, furbearers are sustainably used by the public for their pelts, leather, bones, glands, meat, or other purposes. In North America, contemporary harvest of furbearers has evolved along with trap technologies and societal concerns, and is now highly regulated and more closely coupled with harvest analysis and population monitoring. Traps and regulated trapping programs provide personal or cultural rewards that can also support conservation, and can assist with advancing ecological knowledge through research, protecting endangered species, restoring populations or habitats, protecting personal property, and enhancing public health and safety. However, animal welfare and trap selectivity remain important topics for furbearer management in North America, as they have for more than a century. A related international challenge to modern furbearer management came with the Wild Fur Regulation by the European Union, which passed in 1991. This regulation prohibited use of foothold traps in many European countries and the importation of furs and manufactured fur products to Europe from countries that allowed use of foothold traps or trapping methods that did not meet internationally agreed-upon humane trapping standards. To address existing national concerns and requirements of the Wild Fur Regulation, the United States and European Union signed a non-binding bilateral understanding that included a commitment by the United States to evaluate trap performance and advance the use of improved traps through development of best management practices (BMPs) for trapping. Our testing followed internationally accepted restraining-trap standards for quantifying injuries and capture efficiency, and we established BMP pass-fail thresholds for these metrics. We also quantified furbearer selectivity, and qualitatively assessed practicality and user safety for each trap, yielding overall species-specific performance profiles for individual trap models. We present performance data for 84 models of restraining traps (6 cage traps, 68 foothold traps, 9 foot-encapsulating traps, and 1 power-activated footsnare) on 19 furbearing species, or 231 trap-species combinations. We conducted post-mortem examinations on 8,566 furbearers captured by trappers. Of the 231 trap model-species combinations tested, we had sufficient data to evaluate 173 combinations, of which about 59% met all BMP criteria. Pooling species, cage traps produced the lowest average injury score (common injuries included tooth breakage), with minimal differences across other trap types; species-specific patterns
... Trapping kills millions of targeted as well as non targeted species throughout the world): by using different types of the traps. Snare traps are wire trap used by some scientists to capture wild animals (Berchielli and Tullar, 1981;Englund, 1982;Skinner and Todd, 1990). These snare traps are used as neck, body gripper traps to capture canids also (Noonan, 2002;Goodrich et al., 2001;Logan et al., 1999;Onderka et al., 1990;McKinstry and Anderson, 1998) . ...
Twelve adult female leopards trapped in snare traps were rescued from Shivalik Hills areas of Himachal Pradesh. Of the 12 female leopards, 33.33% (4) leopards were found pregnant while others 66.67% (8) female leopards were non pregnant. Of the eight dead female leopards, 62.5% of trapped female leopards died because of body gripper trap injuries while in 37.5% of female leopards the cause of mortality was feet trap injuries. The maximum of the trapping that is 50% (6) were in the winter season followed by rainy (33.33%) (4) and summer (25%) (3) Seasons. Out of 12 female adult rescued leopards, four female leopards could survived and others eight succumbed to trapping injuries. There was 100% mortality of all the fetuses in rescued free range female leopards. The fetuses were 1-3 in numbers in their uterus. Three leopards were in mid stage of the gestation while one leopard was in its early stage gestation.
... There are various types of traps used legally as well illegally by the scientist and farmers across the world. Snare traps are wire nooses used mainly to capture small mammals like rabbits and squirrels are used in different trapping designs to tightened the animal's body mainly, leg or foot snare used by various workers to capture wild animals (Novak, 1979(Novak, , 1981Berchielli and Tullar, 1980;Englund, 1982;Skinner and Todd, 1990) neck (neck snare traps) and around the body (body gripper snare traps). ...
The aim of the present study was to find the incidences of the trapping mortality in free range rhesus macaques in Shivalik hills of western Himalayas of Northern India. During this investigation a total of 2642 rhesus monkeys were captured by trapping cages, out of which 12 rhesus monkeys were found trapped in different traps. Of the twelve rhesus monkeys 4 monkeys were rescued from the trapped site while others 8 monkeys were found with lacerated injuries with wire traps. Out of twelve monkeys 7 (58.33 %) were males while 5 (41.66 %) were females. 4 (33.33%) monkeys were trapped in body gripper traps while 6 (50 % ) in hand snare traps while 2 (16.66 %) were trapped in feet traps. There were mortality of 4 ( 33.33%) monkeys while 8 (66.66 %) were recovered well and set free at their respective site of rescue or capture. Out of 12 rhesus monkeys 3 (25 %) were commensal while 5 (41.66 % ) were semicommensal while 4 (33.33%) others were noncommensal. The maximum of the trapping 50% (6) were in the winter season followed by rainy (33.33%) (4) and summer (3) (25 %) seasons.
... Many foothold traps with padded jaws meet Criterion II to capture other foxes (Vulpes spp.), coyotes (Canis latrans; Onderka et al. 1990;), bobcats (Olsen et al. 1988), and otters (Serfass et al. 1996). The Åberg (Nordic Sport AB, Skellefteå, Sweden) and Fremont (Fremont Humane Traps, Beaumont, Alberta) snares can capture canids without causing serious injuries (Englund 1982; Onderka et al. 1990), and the Fremont (Mowat et al. 1994) and Schimetz-Aldrich (D. Schimetz, Sekiu, Washington) (Logan et al. 1999) snares also meet Criterion II for felids. The Belisle and the Wildlife Service snare systems used to capture coyotes appear not to meet Criterion II (Shivik et al. 2000). ...
We propose that researchers integrate ethics, performance criteria, techniques, and common sense when developing research trapping programs and in which members of institutional animal care and use committees address these topics when evaluating research protocols. To ask questions about ethics is in the best tradition of science, and researchers must be familiar with codes of ethics and guidelines for research published by professional societies. Researchers should always work to improve research methods and to decrease the effects on research animals, if for no other reason than to minimize the chances that the methods influence the animals' behavior in ways that affect research results. Traps used in research should meet performance criteria that address state-of-the-art trapping technology and that optimize animal welfare conditions within the context of the research. The proposal includes the following criteria for traps used in research: As Criterion I, killing-traps should render >/= 70% of animals caught irreversibly unconscious in </= 3 min (calculated with 95% confidence). As Criterion II, live-traps should trap >/= 70% of animals with </= 50 points scored for physical injury (calculated with 95% confidence). The types of traps described include killing-traps (snap traps, rotating jaw traps, snares, pitfalls, and drowning sets), common sets, and the common types of live-traps (box and cage traps, pitfalls, foothold traps. snares, corrals and nets, and dart collars). Also described are trapping methods for specific mammals, according to which traps fulfill Criteria I and II for which species, and techniques for short-term, long-term, and permanent marking of mammals.
... ns in the trap, due to the interruption of blood circulation. Balser (1965) mentioned that the major injuries are caused when the animal tries to escape; some even chew part of their own limb (automutilation). This author also noted the importance of time spent in the trap combined with pressure of the trap, to produce serious damage to the animal. Englund (1982) mentioned that the severity and frequency of injuries in foxes, caused by leg-holds, could be considerably reduced by covering parts of the trap with plastic. The use of rubber padding on the jaws of the trap and coils on the chains of legholds also significantly reduced injuries to trapped animals (Linhart et al. 1986, Onderka et al. 1 ...
Capturing small carnivores is often necessary for obtaining key ecological data. We compared the efficiency of box and leg-hold traps, using live and dead bait, to capture six carnivore species (Herpailurus yagouaroundi (E. Geoffroyi, 1803), Leopardus tigrinus (Schreber, 1775), Nasua nasua (Linnaeus, 1766), Cerdocyon thous (Linnaeus, 1766), Eira barbara (Linnaeus, 1758), and Galictis cuja (Molina, 1782)). The use of leg-hold traps significantly increased the capture rate of carnivores (5.77%) and non-target species (non-carnivores, 11.54%). Dead bait significantly attracted more non-carnivores than carnivores and live bait was more efficient for capturing carnivores (2.56%) than non-carnivores (0.77%). Both box and leg-hold traps caused some minor injuries (swelling and claw loss). We provide recommendations for the ethical use of these trap and bait types.
Description
STP 974 is the latest offering in the continuing series on the subject of test methods development for materials used in controlling of managing vertebrate pests. Information on birds, rodents and predators/deer is presented in 18 papers. A majority of the papers in this volume are directed toward efficacy evaluation based on new or existing field test methods.
Collaborative efforts can help in developing protocols for treatment and isolation of the wild canid patient for the safety of domestic animals in the clinic. As they are the most commonly presented species, this chapter focuses on the natural history and appropriate techniques and management of red and gray foxes and coyotes. The most common reasons for presentation of a fox or coyote to a rehabilitation facility or clinic include vehicular trauma, steel leg‐hold trap injury, wild, or domestic animal attack, direct or indirect consumption of toxins, gunshot wounds, emaciation, disease, and found orphaned or abandoned. An immediate physical assessment determines appropriate protocols and procedures. The initial exam will determine if the patient's condition indicates euthanasia. The actual release occurs rapidly; soft release methods are not applicable. When returned to the wild, the rehabilitated coyote or fox will usually bolt immediately from the transport carrier although some may linger briefly.
(1) Predators were removed in an experiment to study the impact of mammal predation on woodland tetraonid populations during vole cycles. Foxes and martens were killed from 1976 to 1980 on one of two similar islands in the northern Baltic. The treatment was then reversed until 1984. (2) When predators were killed, tetraonid brood sizes averaged 5.52 in August, and 77% of hens had chicks. When predator were not killed, broods averaged 3.29 chicks and 59% of hens had chicks. (3) Counts of adult capercaillie and black grouse during July and August increased by 56-80% after 2 years of predator removal. Counts at leks increased by 166-174%. (4) Removing foxes and martens had no significant effect on vole abundance during two 4-year cycles. (5) When predators were not removed, tetraonid brood sizes and the proportion of females that bred successfully were each positively correlated with vole abundance in summer. There were most chicks per adult hen when vole numbers were high and increasing slowly from summer to autumn. When foxes and martens were killed, neither brood size nor subsequent adult numbers were significantly correlated with vole abundance in summer, although losses of whole broods increased slightly when vole numbers grew most rapidly from summer to autumn. We conclude that large vole populations resulted in large autumn grouse populations mainly because they reduced predation on breeding grouse. (6) The vole numbers and increase rates that were asociated with high grouse breeding success in one summer were also associated with low counts of adult grouse the next year, and thus with an increase in grouse losses from one summer to the next.
Measuring and mitigating trap-related injuries while maintaining an acceptable level of trap performance is a priority for species reintroductions and studies dependent on capture, release, and eventual recapture of marked animals. We trapped bobcats (Lynx rufus) in the northern Lower Peninsula of Michigan from midsummer to early fall from 1991-1996. Trap-related injuries and performance of new, stock #3 Victor Soft Catch® (Woodstream Corporation, Lititz, Pa.; current manufacturer: Oneida Victor, Inc., Euclid, Oh.) traps (SSC-n) were compared in 1991 to that of a previously used, unpadded analog, the #3 Victor double coil spring (DCS-u). The SSC-n trap significantly reduced trap-related injuries to bobcats while maintaining performance at or above the level of the DCS-u trap in 1991 and was used exclusively in 1992. Trap-related injuries to bobcats caught in previously used stock #3 Victor Soft Catch traps (SSC-u) in 1992 increased compared to SSC-n traps used in 1991 , and trap performance appeared to decline. Traps were modified to address these problems prior to use in 1993 by replacing the pair of stock #1.75 springs with #3 Victor springs, and cutting the pan width from 66.5 to 53.0 mm. Modified #3 Victor Soft Catch traps (MSC-n) used in 1993 reduced trap-related injuries from the SSC-u traps used in 1992 . Trap-related injury scores of bobcats held in MSC-n traps in 1993 and MSC-u traps used from 1994-1996 did not differ among years (KW=2.746, P=0.432) and reduced trap-related injuries from SSC-u traps used in 1992 . Trap performance of MSC-n and MSC-u traps met or exceeded the levels of performance measured for the DCS-u and SSC-n traps used in 1991. We measured mechanical properties of the 4 models of #3 Victor Soft Catch traps used in this study. We compared jaw closure velocity, clamping force, and impact force between samples of each model. We found differences in trap mechanical properties among models consistent with observations of trap field performance and trap-related injury assessment. SSC-u traps declined in impact force compared to SSC-n traps. MSC-n traps did not differ from MSC-u traps in any criterion measured and were combined for analysis. MSC traps showed greater jaw closure velocity, clamping force, and impact force than SSC-u traps. The #3 Victor Soft Catch trap can be used to trap bobcats with minimal trap-related injury and a high level of performance. However, it may be necessary to modify the traps as received from the manufacturer for optimal use with bobcats.
A main concern of farmers worldwide is how to reduce crop losses to wildlife. Some potentially lethal crop protection methods are non-selective. It is important to understand the impact of such methods on species of conservation concern. Uganda has important populations of Endangered eastern chimpanzees Pan troglodytes schweinfurthii. Farmers sometimes use large metal man-traps to guard their fields against crop-raiding wildlife, particularly baboons Papio anubis and wild pigs Potamochoerus sp.. Chimpanzees that range onto farmland also step in these illegal devices and without rapid veterinary invention face severe injury or eventual death. Unlike inadvertent snaring of great apes in African forests, the problem of mantraps in forest–farm ecotones has received little attention. We report 10 cases of entrapped chimpan-zees in the cultivated landscape surrounding Uganda's Budongo Forest during 2007–2011, undoubtedly only a portion of the actual number of cases. Mantraps currently present a substantial threat to ape populations in this important conservation landscape. Our data underscore the need for conservation programmes to consider the tech-niques used by rural farmers to protect their livelihoods from wild animals.
This paper sought to determine whether common haematology and blood biochemistry values might assist in determining the relative welfare outcomes arising from the capture of red foxes (Vulpes vulpes) by treadle-snares, Victor Soft Catch® (VSC) #3 traps, cage traps, netting and sampling by shooting. Compared to all other capture methods and shooting, treadle-snared foxes had significantly higher mean albumin (ALB), creatine kinase (CK), red cell count (RCC), neutrophil to lymphocyte (N:L) ratio, sodium (Na), total protein (TP), white cell counts (WCC) and lower glucose (Gl). Treadle-snares were also associated with higher chloride (Cl), haemoglobin (Hb) and packed cell volume (PCV) than cage trapping and netting. Treadle-snares produced indicators of possible muscle damage, exertion and dehydration compared to cage and VSC traps. Cage trapping and netting produced lower indications of exertion, possible muscle damage and dehydration compared to both treadle-snares and VSC traps. These data do not support previous conclusions that due to similar injury scores, treadle-snares and VSC traps produced equivalent welfare outcomes. In restraining traps, injury and death sustained during capture are end-points of poor trapping welfare. Monitoring stress using physiological indicators allows the comparison of the relative potential for different capture techniques to cause pathological and pre-pathological states. As the response of physiological indicators to stress is not independent of time, accurate data on the duration of captivity and the relative intensity of struggling behaviour should be routinely collected when assessing the comparative humaneness of different trap devices.
Millions of wild mammals are trapped annually for fur, pest control and wildlife management. Ensuring the welfare of trapped indi-viduals can only be achieved by trapping methods that meet accepted standards of animal welfare. At the international level, the assessment of mechanical properties of killing and restraining traps is set out in two documents published by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). Few traps currently in use have been tested according to the ISO standards and, in addition, new traps have been designed and old traps modified since the publication of the standards. In this paper we review trapping methods used in Europe and North America to see whether they meet the ISO standards and examine ways to improve the welfare perform-ance of traps. In addition, international legislation is assessed to determine whether this ensures a sufficient level of welfare for trapped animals. Finally, trapping practices used in academic research are reviewed. We conclude that many of the practices commonly used to trap mammals cannot be considered humane. Current legislation fails to ensure an acceptable level of welfare for a large number of captured animals. New welfare standards for trapping wild mammals need to be established so that in future a minimum level of welfare is guaranteed for all trapped individuals.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.