Examining the effects of bodygrip 330 traps on domestic cat (Felis catus) cadavers

Bodygrip traps (also called Conibear traps) are nontoothed kill traps used for furbearers and nuisance wildlife. These traps pose a danger to nontarget animals, such as protected wildlife, domestic animals, and people, more so when used on dry land. Because of the potential for intentional or accidental misuse, diagnosis of bodygrip trap injuries may be of consideration in forensic casework. To determine whether trap-related injuries can be identified to narrow down or confirm the cause of death, standard 330 and Magnum 330 bodygrip traps were used on cadavers of 9 domestic cats (F. catus). Trap jaws were engaged in various locations on the bodies to simulate potential live entrapment situations. The cadavers were then imaged and necropsied. Trap-related damage was present only in one (1/9) cat and consisted of liver fractures, likely augmented by the presence of a full stomach. The remaining cats (8/9) had no grossly or radiographically visible injuries. Findings are consistent with past live animal studies in which trap-related injury was only rarely observed or documented. Because no specific injuries can be attributed to bodygrip traps, the diagnosis must rely on the circumstance and rule out other likely causes of death.

Conservation Officer Perceptions of Academy Training: Resource Specific and General Policing Tasks

This research is among the first to examine the degree to which law enforcement officers tasked with protection of natural resources feel prepared for specialized and general tasks by their academy training. Drawing upon a survey of over 900 conservation officers across 13 states, the current inquiry examines whether officers who attended a conservation-specific academy feel better prepared for their work than those who attended a conventional police academy. Findings suggest conservation officers feel well prepared for their general policing duties by their academy experience, but fewer than half of the officers surveyed felt that their academy experience prepared them to handle nuisance wildlife calls or consult with landowners on habitat needs. Officers who attended a conservation academy held greater perceptions that their academy prepared them for specialized duties. These findings help inform state conservation agencies about the topics which are well covered or need additional attention in their pre-employment training curricula, as well as recruitment strategies for varying academy types.

Wildlife Translocation

Many people enjoy wildlife. Nationwide, Americans spend over $144 billion annually on fishing, hunting, and wildlife-watching activities. However, wildlife is not always welcome in or near homes, buildings, or other property and can cause significant damage or health and safety issues. Many people who experience a wildlife conflict prefer to resolve the issue without harming the offending animal. Of the many options available (i.e., habitat modification, exclusion, repellents) for addressing nuisance wildlife problems, translocation—capturing and moving—of the offending animal is often perceived to be effective. However, trapping and translocating wild animals is rarely legal nor is it considered a viable solution by wildlife professionals for resolving most nuisance wildlife problems. Reasons to avoid translocating nuisance wildlife include legal restrictions, disease concerns, liability issues associated with injuries or damage caused by a translocated animal, stress to the animal, homing behavior, and risk of death to the animal. Translocation is appropriate in some situations such as re-establishing endangered species, enhancing genetic diversity, and stocking species in formerly occupied habitats. The main focus of this publication, however, is to address nuisance wildlife issues that may be commonly encountered by homeowners and nuisance wildlife control professionals.