Muskrat Trapping on Sand Lake National Wildlife Refuge, South Dakota

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
The study shows that effective fall trapping is limited to a short period before the freeze-up. Trapper efficiency is much lower than winter trapping in houses or spring trapping. Fall skins are smaller and less prime, thus reducing their market value. Winter house trapping is an efficient method of harvesting where trapper technics can be controlled. It permits a long period over which trapping can be continued, and the skins obtained are largely prime, of good size and demand good prices. House trapping, when properly done in this climatic zone, is not harmful to the muskrat population. Freezing out of houses is caused more by their location in shallow water and areas of poor food than by disturbance when house trapping. Healthy muskrats with a good food supply and access to it will not permit their houses to freeze up. Spring trapping is very productive, and the skins are both large and prime. However, a large proportion of the skins are damaged by fighting animals, and proper spring trapping is limited to less than a month''s duration. The muskrat population was in direct proportion to the abundance and distribution of good food plants. The winter house count is an excellent indicator of the muskrat population. The number of muskrats caught during both yrs. under heavy trapping pressure was directly proportional to the number of houses present. Male musk-rats were more numerous than [female][female] both in summer and in winter. Wt. and measurement of the 2 sexes showed no significant differences. Tagging studies indicated that muskrat movements were quite restricted between early fall and late winter.

This publication has 1 reference indexed in Scilit: