Southern RAC rejects DWR proposal to bar lethal snare sets on public land after hours of testimony

The Southern Region Regional Advisory Council (RAC) voted on a motion June 4 to reject a Division of Wildlife Resources proposal that would have prohibited lethal snare sets targeting cougars on public land and asked DWR to return with a rewritten recommendation developed with trappers, houndsmen and other stakeholders.

DWR animals coordinator Chad Wilson said the recommendation followed a three‑year review after the legislature authorized year‑round cougar harvest; the division recorded an average of about seven cougars taken in lethal sets annually over the period and cited risk to hounds and pets as a rationale. "We made that recommendation because the method isn't being utilized much and there's a risk to dogs on public land," Wilson said.

The agenda item drew the meeting's longest public comment period. Houndsmen and others urged preservation of trapping and urged technical fixes rather than a ban, proposing mandatory trapper education, use of modern relaxing‑lock snares and larger‑gauge cable that they say reduces lethality to hounds. "We don't want trapping to go away — we want education and better tools," said Brett Gin of the Utah Houndsman Association. Trappers and allied sportsmen said removing snares on public land risks setting a precedent that could erode other trapping privileges.

Trappers also pressed enforceability and definition questions. Several RAC members and commenters noted that some documented cougar captures in recent years were incidental to bobcat or coyote sets, and asked how to distinguish a ‘‘lethal set’’ in the field. Kelly Lair, a long‑time houndsman, argued that modern cable‑restraint designs with a relaxing lock can be identified and are less likely to kill a dog: "A relaxing lock and heavier cable aren't going to kill your dog," Lair said.

Conservation and sportsmen voices were split. Some RAC members and other speakers expressed concern about dog safety on multi‑use public lands and supported additional limits; others warned that a ban would be premature and urged more collaborative rulemaking. After deliberation the RAC passed a motion to reject the division's proposed ban and requested that DWR "come back with something better," including technical standards, education, and negotiated language drafted with both trappers and houndsmen. The motion passed 6–2.

The RAC asked DWR to convene stakeholders and return with a revised proposal that clarifies definitions (what constitutes a lethal set), addresses enforceability, and explores non‑ban alternatives such as mandatory trapper training, zone‑specific restrictions, or prescribed snare designs. "We need a solution that reduces risk to dogs but doesn't unreasonably remove tools from trappers," a RAC member said.

Next steps: DWR will work with stakeholders to rework the draft recommendation before re‑presenting it to the RAC; the RAC did not direct immediate statewide regulatory change.