The trapping of furbearers has been an enduring element of human culture ever since our prehistoric hunter-gatherer ancestors devised the first deadfalls, pit traps, snares and capture nets. People were dependent upon furbearers to provide the basic necessities for survival - meat for sustenance, and fur for clothing, bedding and shelter - throughout most of human history.

Defining and defending territory where furbearers could be trapped to acquire these critical resources united families, clans and tribes long before the invention of agriculture and animal husbandry gave rise to ancient civilizations. While modern technology and agriculture have significantly reduced human dependence on furbearers for survival, people in both rural and developed areas ontinue to harvest furbearers for livelihood and personal fulfillment. The taking and trading of furbearer resources remain on the economic and environmental agendas of governments throughout the world.

Trapping furbearers for their fur, meat and other natural products has a long tradition in the Northeast, dating back to the time the first aboriginal people moved into the area behind receding glaciers. Several thousand years later, fur was the chief article of commerce that spurred and funded European colonization of the continent during the 17th and 18th centuries. Many cities and towns founded as fur trading centers during that period still bear witness to the fact that furbearer trapping had a major influence on our history.

The utilization of furbearer resources was unchallenged throughout that history until early in the 20th century, when the first organized opposition to furbearer trapping emerged. The focus of that opposition was primarily on development of more humane traps and curtailment of trapping abuses, rather than against trapping itself or continued use of furbearer resources.

During the 1920s, however, opposition magnified to challenge all use of animals, and sought to ban the harvest of furbearers. In response to this development, proponents of trapping and the fur industries began organizing to defend themselves. By the 1930s, furbearer trapping had become a recurrent public issue. Since then, the pro- and anti-trapping factions have disseminated enormous amounts of generally contradictory information. During this same period, new technologies and advances in ecology, wildlife biology, statistics and population biology allowed wildlife management to develop into a scientific profession. State, provincial and federal agencies were created to apply this science to protect, maintain and restore wildlife populations. The harvest of furbearers became a highly regulated, scientifically monitored activity. Trapping and furbearer management - one steeped in ancient tradition, the other rooted firmly in the principles of science - allowed furbearer populations to expand and flourish.

Today, as controversy over the use and harvest of furbearers continues, professional wildlife managers find themselves spending considerable time trying to clarify public misconceptions about trapping and furbearer management. The complex issues involved in that management - habitat loss, animal damage control, public health and safety, the responsible treatment of animals - cannot be adequately addressed in short news articles or 30-second radio and television announcements.