Casada: Conversation about forgotten hunting practice turns to pet control

Published: Sunday, January 6, 2008 at 3:15 a.m.
Last Modified: Sunday, January 6, 2008 at 8:20 a.m.


From December through the end of February, I would rise well before dawn for a breakfast with my Dad, who always arose at 5:15 a.m. Then I'd bundle up in long johns, two or three layers of clothing, and set out, flashlight and tow sack in hand, to handle a daily chore - running a trap line.

It was hard, even bitter work, especially when pre-dawn temperatures were in the teens and most of my traps were water sets for muskrats and mink.


Afternoons would be devoted to skinning my catch, scraping the hides, and then stretching them on home-made boards to dry and cure.


Moreover, the fur market at the time was one which paid well. A prime muskrat pelt might bring three dollars or a bit more, while mink hides fetched five times that amount.

As my Grandpa Joe would have said, for the time that was "significant cash money," and it provided the wherewithal for things like ammunition, more traps or outdoor gear such as a cherished knife.



Trapping, along with the wearing of fur garments, can be a controversial matter. However, lollipop sentimentalists who make up the ranks of groups like People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, along with urbanites who have little if any connection or closeness to the land, get no sympathy from this writer.

Trapping is legal, properly done it makes a significant contribution to sound wildlife management, and the use of furs traces back to the roots of man's existence. It is also about as fine a way as I know to learn the skills of woodsmanship and understand the cycle of life.

That being said, I don't intend to devote this column to an extended defense of trapping. I support it, I would remind skeptics of the role the mountain men (who were first and foremost trappers) played in this country's westward expansion, and as has already been noted, it is a lawful, long-established vocation.

Pets in danger

My purpose at present is to share a thought, or call it a warning if you wish, which Mitchell offered in the course of our phone conversation.




Indeed, to take matters a few steps further, free-ranging dogs and cats, whether feral or roaming pets, are a major problem. A couple of years back an animal control officer from York County told me, after I had significant trouble with cats and dogs and had called for help, that almost no one realized just how bad the situation was.

This came after he had come to pick up either a dog or cat caught in traps he had set for three consecutive days. Dogs run deer and can wreak havoc with game populations in general, especially in the nesting and mating seasons of spring and summer.


The situation of pets on the loose is a shameful one, and any pet owner who fails to control their animals does the pets, wildlife and their neighbors a disservice.

As I am writing this, a neighbor's cat is lurking at our bird feeder, and I can almost guarantee that if I was able to identify the owner and complain to them, they would be irritated with me rather than willing to acknowledge their failure to do the right thing.

Yet letting the animal roam loose violates the law, and should it wander far enough and get caught in a trapper's set, it would be tragic.

The solution is a simple one - dog and cat owners need to look after their pets properly, and such care includes keeping them under control on their property.

Letting them venture where they wish is, simply put, irresponsible. There are just too many things which can go wrong - for the pet, for wildlife, and even on occasion for humans.

Jim Casada can be reached at


Comments are currently unavailable on this article

▲ Return to Top