Michigan regulation changes

[clevelandk1]

The Michigan DNR will be recommending a number of regulation changes for falconry for information at the 8 December meeting of the Natural Resources Commission. The NRC will vote on these recommendations at their January 2012 meeting. These recommendations were developed in consultation with the Michigan Hawking Club and Michigan Audubon Society. Please watch the DNR web site (http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,4570,7...888---,00.html) for the agenda for the December meeting; the text of the regulation changes will be included in this agenda. The agenda will also contain information about how to provide public comment; the Michigan Hawking Club has already indicated that they will provide comment at the meeting. Agendas are generally posted 1-2 weeks prior to the meeting.

Significant changes include:

1. Addition of rough-legged hawk to the list of species that can be taken under a General Raptor Capture Permit. Take will be capped at 10 birds annually (similar to current regulations for American kestrels).
2. Addition of a single Limited Raptor Capture Permit for snowy owls. Take will be limited to Michigan residents only, and birds may only be taken in the UP.
3. Application deadline for Limited Raptor Capture Permit drawings (northern goshawk, great-horned owl, snowy owl) changed from 31 March to 15 January.
4. The spring eyas season will become a generic spring season, and it will be legal to take either eyasses or passage birds during this season.
5. The spring season will open on 1 February and run through 19 July.
6. Maximum overall take will increase from 86 birds annually to 87 (with the addition of the snowy owl permit).
7. We will also be adding language such that falconry take can be used to address depredating raptors when this will not result in a violation of federal regulations.

Items #1-6 are primarily the result of requests by individual falconers, requests by the Michigan Hawking Club, and analysis of the 2010 survey of Michigan falconers.
Item #7 was generated by the DNR to provide the Department with an additional management tool to deal with incidents where raptors are causing significant negative impacts and where the only other viable tool would be lethal take. A specific example would be issuing a permit to a falconer to take a great horned owl that was eating chicks in a common tern colony (common terns are a state listed threatened species). With a similar justification, we amended the regulations in 2009 to allow take of endangered species by falconers under an endangered species permit to allow the Department to work with the Michigan Hawking Club to take merlins (a state listed threatened species) that were nesting or hunting near piping plover (a federally listed endangered species) nests; prior to this partnership, the management tool available to remove these merlins was lethal take. This take is expected to be relatively uncommon (probably no more than 1-2 permits annually).

If these regulations are approved by the NRC at their January meeting, the application deadline for northern goshawk, great horned owl, and snowy owl permits for the 2012 seasons will be 15 JANUARY 2012 (not 31 March). You are encouraged to apply early if you want to take these species in 2012; late applications will not be considered.

[FredFogg]

WOW! Add Michigan to where I never want to move due to their regulations! Really, you all have a number limit on how many birds can be taken in your state, really? I just don't get that states don't recognize what the feds have said about zero impact to wild populations by falconers, it just puzzles me!

And I just have to ask, sorry! What happens if, say 50 apprentices apply to become falconers in Michigan and there are already 50 general and master falconers (just guessing numbers here) and the regulations say 87 birds can be trapped and all the falconers want to trap a bird that year. How long does it take to change the regulations to accomodate the number of falconers? I know our regulations have to go through a comment period, etc and it can take up to a year to get them changed. If that is the case there, then some folks are going to be .... well, you know! LOL

[KidK]

Fred,

We all have worked hard to build good relationships with the DNR and the powerful birding group in the state. Without the cooporation from both these groups, we would still not have the wild take that we have enjoyed for the last 10 years.

Karen Cleveland, among others, has been a staunch supporter of falconry in Michigan. We are greatful for the 86 birds we have access to. As falconers, we typically take around 20 birds each year. We have gained so much in the past few years, passage and eyas goshawks, horned owls, access to Merlins thru the plover project, passage Peregrine permits, to name a few.

What you read above, and may not understand, is Karen's post is about the expansion of our access and continued support of our sport. Perhaps if you understood the number of positive changes that we have seen in the last dozen, it would make more sense.
For the most part, we are very pleased with our falconry and take regulations. What is really nice is the direct and open lines of communication we have with all the stake holders in the state.

Things just keep getting better here.

[harrishawk_79]

hey fred as kory said in the last ten plus yrs we as a group of falconers have never taking any where close to the 80 allowed.it dont quite work as u said anyone who puts in for a trapping permit is given a permit plus band but its a first come first server thing u have 24 hours to report your trapped bird and then i would asume our dnr agent would contact everyone that has not trapped thier bird and inform them that the allowed number has been hit. but coming from the fact that when i started as a falconer in michigan we had to leave state to get a bird im proud to say our hawking group and clubs and suporters do a great job

[FredFogg]

Kory, I am not questioning your relationship with the wildlife folks up there and am glad you all have that relationship because I know very well how nothing would ever get done without it. I hope every state falconry club works on having a great relationship with the wildlife folks in their state. But that doesn't make the fact that you have regulations that are, well, just plain crazy. If they were bad for years and are getting better, that is fantastic. But that doesn't hide the fact that you all are over regulated and there is no sound biology to support that over regulation. Period!

[KidK]

Kory, I am not questioning your relationship with the wildlife folks up there and am glad you all have that relationship because I know very well how nothing would ever get done without it. I hope every state falconry club works on having a great relationship with the wildlife folks in their state. But that doesn't make the fact that you have regulations that are, well, just plain crazy. If they were bad for years and are getting better, that is fantastic. But that doesn't hide the fact that you all are over regulated and there is no sound biology to support that over regulation. Period!

Fred,

I am trying to be patient. You really need to just trust me on this one.

The regulations we have here do have little to do with biology. It is all about the opinions of the parties involved. We have worked hard to build relationships that allow for our needs to be met and we are very pleased with the support we have.

[FredFogg]

Fred,

I am trying to be patient. You really need to just trust me on this one.

The regulations we have here do have little to do with biology. It is all about the opinions of the parties involved. We have worked hard to build relationships that allow for our needs to be met and we are very pleased with the support we have.

Happy for you Kory! I am glad you all are happy with your regulations! Again, just another state I wouldn't move to because of their falconry regulations! Just my humble opinion!

[KidK]

Well Fred, if the high unemployment and piles of snow don't keep you away, the falconry regulations will!

I am glad you are glad that I am happy with our falconry regulations.

[DirtHawker]

Karen,
Thank you for the update and your help on the regulations.
Sue

[FredFogg]

Well Fred, if the high unemployment and piles of snow don't keep you away, the falconry regulations will!

I am glad you are glad that I am happy with our falconry regulations.

Mostly the amount of snow and cold is what would keep me away, the other stuff would just be nails in the coffin! LOL

[Joby]

but coming from the fact that when i started as a falconer in michigan we had to leave state to get a bird im proud to say our hawking group and clubs and suporters do a great job

Being from a state that lot's of Michiganders used to, and still do, come to to take birds from, we'd LOVE to have some reciprocity provisions in your state regs that would allow us to come into YOUR state from time to time to try and take some birds!! LOL

Actually, a couple of years ago, some of us here in Ohio talked about only allowing falconers to take birds from our state that were from states with reciprocity regs. That is, you can have a shot at our birds, and we can have a shot at yours. Seems only fair that when MI falconers come into Ohio to get early birds (our season starts on August 1st) that we should be able to come up to MI to try for goshawks, sharpies, etc.

Just saying....

BTW, we're blessed to have a great working partnership with our DNR folks. Glad to hear that MI is enjoying the same.

[harrishawk_79]

hey joe i agree 100% and im certain other michigan falconers would feel the same and im not 100% certain you cant i would have to read or look into it but i do know its a lottery for the gos permits maybe kory would no weather u can or not.

[SadieHawk]

Being from a state that lot's of Michiganders used to, and still do, come to to take birds from, we'd LOVE to have some reciprocity provisions in your state regs that would allow us to come into YOUR state from time to time to try and take some birds!! LOL

Michigan does have a nonresident take. Even allows a nonresident take on 1 peregrine.

http://michigan.gov/documents/ChapterX_128648_7.pdf
(b) The total number of all raptors taken by nonresident falconers in any one calendar year shall not exceed 10, which may include no more than 1 goshawk and 1 great horned owl.

[harrishawk_79]

thank you aimee for the responce as like i said i was not certain im glad someone was tho lol

[SadieHawk]

Your welcome, Harold. I remembered it did due to the new peregrine trapping regs.

Now Joe, how about we get free trapping permits and not have to pay the $15 fee since Michigan does not charge nonresidents, to be fare to each other

[harrishawk_79]

hey hey hey now aimee its 15 per type of bird of prey so if u want to try to trap a coop its 15 plus another 15 for a redtail lol

[SadieHawk]

LOL.....yes, you are right and then Ohio needs to add that we can have an eyass take since Ohio does not have an eyass take and their falconers come here for them, among other surrounding states.

[harrishawk_79]

oh and dont forget the out of state small game license we have to buy to trap as well lol

[clevelandk1]

Being from a state that lot's of Michiganders used to, and still do, come to to take birds from, we'd LOVE to have some reciprocity provisions in your state regs that would allow us to come into YOUR state from time to time to try and take some birds!! LOL

Actually, a couple of years ago, some of us here in Ohio talked about only allowing falconers to take birds from our state that were from states with reciprocity regs. That is, you can have a shot at our birds, and we can have a shot at yours. Seems only fair that when MI falconers come into Ohio to get early birds (our season starts on August 1st) that we should be able to come up to MI to try for goshawks, sharpies, etc.

Just saying....

BTW, we're blessed to have a great working partnership with our DNR folks. Glad to hear that MI is enjoying the same.

Joby:

I'd sent a notification to the Ohio Falconry Association (and the Indiana Falconers Association) this summer that we would be allowing nonresident passage peregrine take. Did the word get out to Ohio's falconers? If not, is there a better email address to use to contact the Association than info@ohiofalconry.org? As always, we do allow nonresident applications for goshawk and great horned owl permits and will issue General Raptor Capture Permits to nonresidents until the quota is reached (I don't think we've ever come anywhere near reaching the quota on nonresident take).

We consider reciprocity every time we consider the regulations on take. We've also had some long discussions during our Mississippi Flyway meetings about how to get passage peregrine take opportunities to falconers throughout our flyway, and allowing nonresident take in Michigan was seen as a way that we could provide some opportunity to residents of neighboring states who would not otherwise have it.

Karen

[SadieHawk]

And another I can think of. Ohio needs to allow us to trap the same species that we allow. Not just cooper's, red-taileds, and ketrels.

But I think Howard and I made our point. Our reulations are great and it is wonderful that we may have more options.

So Joe, before asking to change our regs, when you don't live here, you should first read ours and make sure what you are asking is not already there and that you should look at your request from the other way around.

[Tom Scheib]

Kory,

I find interesting a number of allowed take. Do you know if that number is based soley on MI permanent resident species?

The reason I ask........when trapping during the fall migration in MN [Duluth] & WI [Superior], one could expect to catch a bird that was passing thru, as opposed to a resident. In essence, trapping a Canadian resident bird.

[SadieHawk]

Karen,

I know the Indiana Falconry Association got it to their members because I belong to that club also and recieved the notice via e-mail.

[clevelandk1]

WOW! Add Michigan to where I never want to move due to their regulations! Really, you all have a number limit on how many birds can be taken in your state, really? I just don't get that states don't recognize what the feds have said about zero impact to wild populations by falconers, it just puzzles me!

And I just have to ask, sorry! What happens if, say 50 apprentices apply to become falconers in Michigan and there are already 50 general and master falconers (just guessing numbers here) and the regulations say 87 birds can be trapped and all the falconers want to trap a bird that year. How long does it take to change the regulations to accomodate the number of falconers? I know our regulations have to go through a comment period, etc and it can take up to a year to get them changed. If that is the case there, then some folks are going to be .... well, you know! LOL

Fred:

Our old regulations (up through 2009 - technically, these weren't DNR regulations, it was state law written by our legislature; when that law hit its sunset date, we worked with the MHC and the Michigan Audubon Society to get a new law written that would authorize the DNR to regulate take), capped take at 27 birds. We worked with the MHC during the update of the regulations to identify how we wanted to modify the regulations to allow Michigan's falconers a level of access to the resource that would meet their needs, be biologically defensible, and be acceptable to the 9.5+ million Michigan citizens who are not falconers.

At that time, we doubled the number of goshawk permits and added great horned owls to the list of species that could be taken. We also looked at the number of falconers in Michigan (~100, this number has been relatively stable for quite a while) and the number of permits that have historically been requested annually (~40-50, more permits can be issued than there are birds taken - we have a system where our Permit Specialist calls everyone who still has a permit when the quota is hit and lets them know that the season has closed). And then we considered what we felt we could get our Commission to approve (these are political appointees, and there are no falconers on the NRC). While it was a gamble to more than triple the quota, we felt that we could make a compelling argument for doing so that they would accept. Keep in mind that when we bring regulation changes in front of our Commission, they generally vote the whole thing up or the whole thing down - so if there's one point they don't like, we can lose the entire set of changes.

We also decided at this time to go to a 3 year regulations cycle for falconry (prior to this, our falconry regs had gone pretty much untouched since the late 1990s) so we could assess how the changes were working and if additional changes were needed. We started identifying issues in 2010 that needed to be addressed in the 2012 cycle (or just that we wanted to address - things that provided additional opportunity with little or no social or biological argument against them), and have been talking with representatives of the MHC about changes since late 2010. The actual regulation change process (the paperwork part) takes 3-4 months, though it would take something fairly major (ex. thousands of raptors dropping dead from the sky from some mystery disease) for us to consider random changes to the falconry regulations in an off-cycle year. We aren't recommending increasing the cap significantly this year because the demand for permits (with the exception of our goshawk and great horned owl permits that are issued by a drawing) is much lower than the number of birds that we allow to be taken. We will continue to monitor this demand, however, so that we will be able to modify regulations as needed.

It can seem like a Byzantine mess at times, but it's been a joy working with the MHC to move things forward in a considered, responsible, and professional manner. And that makes it more fun for me to argue for Michigan's falconers with MAS, our Commission, other states, and our federal partners.

Karen

[clevelandk1]

Kory,

I find interesting a number of allowed take. Do you know if that number is based soley on MI permanent resident species?

The reason I ask........when trapping during the fall migration in MN [Duluth] & WI [Superior], one could expect to catch a bird that was passing thru, as opposed to a resident. In essence, trapping a Canadian resident bird.

Tom:

The breakdown of species in the quota is as follows-
4 northern goshawks
2 great horned owls
80 birds which can be a mix of red-tailed hawks, Cooper's hawks, sharp-shinned hawks, and American kestrels (no more than 10 kestrels can be taken)

Biologically, there isn't a significant concern about take on red-tailed hawks, Cooper's hawks, and sharp-shinned hawks. There have been regional declines in kestrels that have a number of biologists concerned about long term trends (we've never had falconers take more than 3-5 kestrels annually so the 10 bird cap is mostly a cap in name only). We're also not worried about biological impacts of take on great horned owls, but we limited permits based on feedback from the MHC and their concerns about the care, feeding, training, and hunting of great horned owls. Northern goshawks are a Special Concern species in Michigan; we increased the number of permits available a couple of years ago, but we're still concerned about population trends.

We sent a survey to all of Michigan's falconers in 2010 asking about additional species they'd like the opportunity to take in Michigan. There was very little interest in several species, but the top three species selected from the list provided were passage peregrine (70%), snowy owl (39%), and rough-legged hawk (26%). We were able to provide passage peregrine take this year, and we're recommending to add snowy owl and rough-legged hawk for 2012. The cap on snowy owl take was, again, the result of discussions with the MHC and their concerns about the welfare of owls taken for falconry. While we did have either one or two snowy owls summer in Michigan a few years back, we strongly suspect this is not a Michigan breeding species. Similarly, rough-legged hawks aren't a Michigan breeding species.

Karen

[sharptail]

Hi Karen,
Thanks for joining nafex, explaining where DNR is coming from and being on our side! Although, being from a state that recognises the individuals right to hunt and trap and is pro most types of hunting, I can appreciate the improvements in falconry regulations in your state and the hard work that it has taken so far.

More raptor available is a good thing but I have to question why any true falconer would, would even want a roughlegged hawk or any owl. My prospective is that these are pet keepers types of birds as they have very marginal value in actually hunting, the point of falconry. I am sure that there are a few that would consider catching mice and voles as legimate 'falconry' but I have a hard time viewing this as such. In adding the two types, it seems as if Mi. is encouraging pet keeping. Any chance that the take of these types could be exchanged for added numbers of raptor better suited to sport in the future?

[SadieHawk]

More raptor available is a good thing but I have to question why any true falconer would, would even want a roughlegged hawk or any owl. My prospective is that these are pet keepers types of birds as they have very marginal value in actually hunting, the point of falconry. I am sure that there are a few that would consider catching mice and voles as legimate 'falconry' but I have a hard time viewing this as such. In adding the two types, it seems as if Mi. is encouraging pet keeping. Any chance that the take of these types could be exchanged for added numbers of raptor better suited to sport in the future?

There are falconers that are very successful in hunting rabbits with Great Horned owls. Snowy owls are just as big and can easily handle a rabbit and since they are more of a diurnal hunter, they are more suited for falconry that the more nocturnal great-horned. Also the rough-legged may have smaller feet but so does a male harris' which is still able to catch rabbit easily but the rough will handle our colder weather easliy. So I do not see as to why these species are not fit for falconry. Also what game do you consider "true" falconry? What about the small falcons that people use for sparrows and starling? Why is that any different than say using a broad-winged hawk to catch mice and voles?

Falconry is the sport of catching prey with a bird of prey. The prey sought after is the preference to the falconer due to what is most available to them and the species of raptor for that prey.

[Tanner]

Hi Karen,

I wonder what biological evidence supports the prohibition of merlin take in MI, specifically passage merlins?

Thanks,
Tanner Schaub in NM

[sharptail]

Hi Aimee,
The whole Owls in falconry thing has been well hashed on nafex and I have wieghed in on it on those threads. We will have to agree to disagree on there reasonable use in falconry.

Believe it or not, I have a pretty good idea what falconry is all about!

Have a great season!

[goshawks00]

Joe- I am surprised by your comments about Mich and our regs. In the truest sense of reciprocity we should be able to take the same birds in your state as you have been allowed in ours. BTW how is your goshawk season in Oh. or any of your eyas taking going? How much did your non resident permit cost you to have an opportunity to come to Mich. and take or atempt to? Mich from the very outset of our first ever take in Mich, what 12 years ago has always allowed non-residents to come here, so I am not sure what you are on about. I am all for reciprosity and it should involve any one coming to Mich having to pay what their state charges non-residents, take only what there state allows nonresidents to take. Isn't that what truly reciprosity is?

Fred-As Kory stated our regs are for the most part political in nature, and not based on statistics. It is what it is, could they be better, absolutely, and they better than we've had... for sure

Now then a question for Karen... I do understand the taking of depredating species and how it has worked, but am curious why any opportunities that become available has to be channeled through MHC? Is there in place, a contact list for ALL falconers (including possible non residents) to partake of this availability of otherwise non trappable birds. I am sure this is not a one time situation (as in the taking of merlins), and would like to know what provisions are in place for all falconers in Mich. rather than a select few.

Thanks for all your work for all of us,
Barry

[clevelandk1]

Hi Karen,
Thanks for joining nafex, explaining where DNR is coming from and being on our side! Although, being from a state that recognises the individuals right to hunt and trap and is pro most types of hunting, I can appreciate the improvements in falconry regulations in your state and the hard work that it has taken so far.

More raptor available is a good thing but I have to question why any true falconer would, would even want a roughlegged hawk or any owl. My prospective is that these are pet keepers types of birds as they have very marginal value in actually hunting, the point of falconry. I am sure that there are a few that would consider catching mice and voles as legimate 'falconry' but I have a hard time viewing this as such. In adding the two types, it seems as if Mi. is encouraging pet keeping. Any chance that the take of these types could be exchanged for added numbers of raptor better suited to sport in the future?

It's not really an either/or equation. For the permits issued by drawings, we consider each species separately. For the general permits, we pretty much make quota recommendations based on demand (since the species covered under these permits are relatively common).

We were caught off-guard by the level of interest from Michigan falconers to get the opportunity to take snowy owls. It led to a number of conversations with a number of falconers who I know and trust will give me an honest and unvarnished opinion when it comes to falconry. Those folks were also surprised at the level of interest in taking snowy owls. There are a ton of social issues attached to snowy owl take that could result in this blowing up in our faces, but there's also a strong desire to have this happen. The way we tried to balance this out was to allow very limited take (1 bird annually - so this doesn't turn into an Easter bunny/Halloween black cat/Harry Potter owl type situation) that could only be taken in the northern 1/3 of the state (where it's much less likely that we'll get a conflict between birders and a falconer attempting to take a bird).

Regarding take of rough-legged hawks, the decision there was based solely on interest in the falconry community and potential biological impact. It is not my intent to have Michigan regulate the ethos of falconry at the level you describe. This is a debate I'd rather leave to you guys. This take falls into our general permit take which is based on demand, and basically just gives folks one more option as to which birds they can take.

I'm expecting us (DNR & MHC with input from MAS) to spend some time in 2014/2015 looking over our permit numbers (how many issued and how many filled) to decide whether we want to increase quotas again (to put all these quotas into perspective, fewer than 40 raptors were taken in MI in 2010 of the total 86 allowed; we had 60 applications for general capture permits - a few folks got more than one permit - under which the quota is 80 birds). We tried to position ourselves in our 2009 regs change with enough permits to meet demand, but also close enough to triple-digits that an increase to triple digits wouldn't give our Commission sticker shock if we brought that recommendation before them.

The day may come when quotas will come off some/most/all species, but we will need to provide a lot of education and strong biological and social justification before that will come to pass. There is still an attitude in many quarters of "why do they need that?" rather than "is there any harm if they're allowed to do that?" - it came up when we increased our Master falconer possession limit from 3 birds to 10 birds - and if we can't convince a panel of nonfalconers (i.e. our Commission) of the reasonableness and validity of our recommendation, we can't get any changes made. On the positive side, at least we don't need to introduce a bill to the state legislature now if we want to liberalize take - that was the only pre-2009 option. I could regale you with stories of the frustrating political monkeyshines that went on in 2008/2009 in the legislature that shut down our wild take in 2009 for about 7 months, but we're in a much better place now, and I try not to think about those days.

Karen

[clevelandk1]

Joe I am surprised by your comments about Mich and our regs. In the truest sense of reciprocity we should be able to take the same birds in your state as you have been allowed in ours. BTW how is your goshawk season in Oh. or any of your eyas taking going? How much did your non resident permit cost you to have an opportunity to come to Mich. and take or atempt to? Mich from the very outset of our first ever take in Mich, what 12 years ago has always allowed non-residents to come here, so I am not sure what you are on about.

As Kory stated our regs are for the most part political in nature, and not based on statistics. It is what it is, could they be better, absolutely, and they better than we've had... for sure

Now then a question for Karen... I do understand the taking of depredating species and how it has worked, but am curious why any opportunities that become available has to be channeled through MHC? Is there in place, a contact list for ALL falconers (including possible non residents) to partake of this availability of otherwise non trappable birds. I am sure this is not a one time situation (as in the taking of merlins), and would like to know what provisions are in place for all falconers in Mich. rather than a select few.

Thanks for all your work for all of us,
Barry

Barry:

The merlin situation is sort of an oddball thing. A few of the biologists here in the DNR just got peeved enough at the fact that a state listed species was being shot to protect another state listed species that we decided to get creative about ways to reduce the shooting of state listed species period. We figured that take into falconry possession beat the heck out of a dead merlin. That's why we'd slid in a change to the regulations back in 2009 during the whole wild take law sunset/renewal chaos to allow falconers to acquire birds under an endangered species permit (this is the same authorization we're using for our passage peregrine take). Given the stakes in this particular management issue, we would need to have a falconer or falconers we could call and mobilize at a moment's notice to head to wherever we told them to go and stay and trap until the offending bird was caught - oh, and the folks doing the trapping don't get reimbursed for any expenses. We don't have the time and resources to chase after lots of people, and if we couldn't get a falconer on the ground in a timely manner, one of our federal partners would pretty much come in and employ lethal take. What we decided to do was have the MHC identify a short list of individuals who could fill this "johnny on the spot" role who would do the trapping; trapped birds could be transferred to other falconers after they were trapped. It turns out that there are many more levels of paperwork at the federal level to do pretty much anything than we would ever consider requiring at the state level, and the only way we managed to roll out this program was to name these individuals as agents of the DNR - not an agreement we enter into lightly. Given the high level of membership of falconers in MHC and the lack of raptor housing facilities owned by the DNR, the simplest way to allocate birds was to let the club coordinate with the falconry community. If there is some level of general unhappiness with how the club is doing this, we can revisit it.

Since we'd need the same sort of "johnny on the spot" reaction for depredation take of non-listed raptors, I expect we'll use a similar mechanism for take (again, birds can get transferred to other falconers after they're taken). In the case of take of the great horned owl from the example, we'd likely look at contacting folks with a great horned owl permit that wasn't filled or folks who'd applied for a permit and were unsuccessful as an option.

Karen

[clevelandk1]

Hi Karen,

I wonder what biological evidence supports the prohibition of merlin take in MI, specifically passage merlins?

Thanks,
Tanner Schaub in NM

Tanner:

Merlin are a state listed threatened species in Michigan, and there would be significant public resistance to including take outside the depredation program we've got going on. (We've encountered resistance to our passage peregrine take, but that is much easier to defend since we band many/most of the peregrines produced in Michigan, and we're providing feather samples from our chicks to help define the Eastern Population baseline for the stable isotope analysis of passage peregrine take - all of which should help minimize the chances of taking Michigan produced peregrines.)

The better question is: how far away is Michigan from delisting merlins? I suspect there will be a fairly interesting discussion of their status the next time the list comes up for review since we've been getting reports of successful breeding in places we never would have expected to see them historically. If/when it gets delisted, we would probably consider a level of take similar to what we have for goshawks, at least initially.

Karen

[goshawks00]

Barry:


. What we decided to do was have the MHC identify a short list of individuals who could fill this "johnny on the spot" role who would do the trapping;

Given the high level of membership of falconers in MHC and the lack of raptor housing facilities owned by the DNR, the simplest way to allocate birds was to let the club coordinate with the falconry community. If there is some level of general unhappiness with how the club is doing this, we can revisit it.

Thank you Karen.. I understand the position you are in , that being said I pay the same fees as every other falconer within the state. I should have the same opportunity as every other falconer. So yes there is some , as you call it, unhappiness.
If the state needs MHC to do their job, then I suppose you could also let them do the testing/inspections/ drawing etc that pertain to the taking and practicing falconry within the state.

Thanks again for your input on a national falconry list.

[clevelandk1]

Thank you Karen.. I understand the position you are in , that being said I pay the same fees as every other falconer within the state. I should have the same opportunity as every other falconer. So yes there is some , as you call it, unhappiness.
If the state needs MHC to do their job, then I suppose you could also let them do the testing/inspections/ drawing etc that pertain to the taking and practicing falconry within the state.

Thanks again for your input on a national falconry list.

Barry:

Thanks for the input. MHC, and other falconers in Michigan, are not needed for the DNR to do its job in managing piping plovers (this is, at its heart, a plover management issue). We did, however, see this as an opportunity to partner with the falconry community in a way that would benefit the resource and Michigan's sportsmen. We will not be expanding the list of individuals who are authorized to trap merlins in this program to all falconers statewide (it took 2 years to clear the paperwork hurdles with our federal partners on this program to allow the current take - much of which is dependent on having a predefined list of agents who will trap). The DNR does not take lightly the naming of agents since we take on a level of responsibility and liability for their actions; MHC's involvement in naming these agents was to provide the DNR with recommendations of falconers who would be capable of performing the tasks necessary, available and willing to perform the tasks necessary, and would hold themselves to a high standard of professional conduct while acting on behalf of the DNR. That being said, I can certainly discuss with the MHC how decisions are made as to who will receive the trapped birds; we do have the ability to determine what our agents can do under our authority, including transferring caught birds. If you have specific suggestions on an allocation process, please email them to me at clevelandk1@michigan.gov so that I can share them with our Endangered Species Coordinator and other staff working on this project.

Karen

[REYNALDO]

they put names in a hat........pulled names.