Advisory council backs restriction on lethal cougar snares on public land after heated debate

The Central Region Advisory Council recommended restricting the use of lethal trap sets for taking cougars on public lands, voting 7–3 to adopt the Division of Wildlife Resources proposal after several hours of public testimony and member debate.

The proposal, presented by Chad Wilson of the Division, would bar methods the division defines as “lethal traps” — sets that are designed or likely to cause an immediate or rapid kill upon activation — when used for sport harvest of cougars on public lands. The Division said the recommendation follows a three‑year review after House Bill 469 (2023) expanded legal take of cougars statewide and in part reflects low recorded take by snares and strong public concern about pets and non‑target injuries.

“We looked at the data and the public input,” Wilson told the council. “There weren’t a lot of cougars being harvested with lethal snares, and the public had safety concerns.”

Conservation advocates and members of the public urged the council to limit lethal snares on public land. Denise Peterson of Utah Mountain Lion Conservation said removing lethal traps “is a reasonable and practical step” given their small contribution to total harvest and the methods’ non‑selective nature. “Snares are inherently non‑selective and can capture females with dependent kittens,” she said.

Trappers and houndsmen countered that snares and cable restraints are effective, humane tools for targeted predator control. Tyler Keat of the Utah Trappers Association said trappers felt excluded from discussions and warned the rule could be the start of broader limits on trapping. “Properly used traps are an effective management tool,” he told the council.

Council members split the difference. After failing to adopt an amendment to reject the Division’s recommendation, the council voted to approve the restriction. Members said they were weighing competing public‑safety concerns, limited evidence of current snare use to harvest cougars, and the need to retain management tools. The council also unanimously directed the Division to study and report back on the possible legalization and standards for relaxing‑lock (non‑locking) cable restraints and other alternative methods that might reduce non‑target harm while remaining usable for management.

The action only applies to public lands; the Division noted any producer or authorized agent may still use lethal methods on private land to protect livestock under existing authorities. The council and Division emphasized this is a regulatory change for sport harvest methods and not a change to the underlying legislative framework established by HB469.

The Division said it will engage stakeholders—trappers, houndsmen, conservation groups and the public—on any technical standards for non‑lethal cable restraints and provide more detailed guidance on where and how any methods may be used in the future.

What happens next: The advisory council’s recommendation will be forwarded to the wildlife board for consideration. The Division will prepare additional analysis of relaxing‑lock cable restraints and hold stakeholder meetings as requested by the council.