Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Wright County trustees debate beaver-tail bounty and dam-removal rules; staff to draft clearer process
Summary
Trustees discussed whether to pay beaver-tail bounties and remove beaver dams outside drainage districts when outlets could be affected. Staff reported practices from neighboring counties (GPS requirements, trapper licenses, seasonal payouts) and trustees asked staff to draft unambiguous forms and rules for beaver-trapping payments and dam-removal work orders.
Wright County trustees held an extended discussion about beaver management after staff reported examples from Hamilton, Franklin and Hancock counties. Staff said Hamilton generally pays for dam removal only when a dam impedes a district outlet and requires GPS and paperwork; Franklin uses a $35-per-tail bounty with seasonal limits and requires evidence that the animal was trapped in the county and a valid trapper's license.
Trustees debated paying bounties for tails taken outside of drainage districts ("no-man’s land") when an upstream dam could affect a district outlet, concerns about fraud in bounty programs, whether to require trappers to provide GPS/location photos and trapper-license numbers, and whether to have work orders filed before removing dams. Some trustees favored paying to remove dams that impede district outlets regardless of ownership; others opposed funding bounties outside district boundaries and emphasized the need for clear, unambiguous rules and documentation.
Trustees asked staff to draft options and updated forms for consideration at a future meeting (two weeks), including a possible work-order form for beaver trapping and dam removal, GPS/photo requirements, and potential prorating rules if multiple districts are affected.
