The Cape Leopard Trust does not support the use of any kind of trap by a landowner to manage predators; instead we advocate for holistic and sustainable livestock management practices (read more HERE). The only trapping we support is for peer-reviewed, scientifically justifiable and ethically sound and approved research under valid permits.
Who decides whether it is acceptable to capture a wild predator for scientific research purposes?
Trapping wild animals is an invasive process which carries with it the risk of discomfort, injury and in rare cases, even death, to the target animal. Consequently, all research that requires the live trapping of predators is subject to the approval of a SANS (South African National Standards) accredited independent ethics committee. The role of the ethics committee is to assess the potential benefits of trapping (the scientific value of the data obtained from the trapping process) relative to the welfare concerns to the target animal. In addition, permits must be obtained from provincial and national authorities who regulate the management and conservation of wildlife within and outside of protected areas. Both ethics committees and governmental authorities’ make use of national and international ‘best practice’, in addition to local and international experts (with relevant experience of particular species and trapping methods), to improve their assessment of applications.
Any other trapping of predators is governed by the provincial statutory nature conservation body – CapeNature in the case of the Western Cape. CapeNature is the permitting authority and no trapping may be undertaken without the appropriate authorisations in place. In terms of leopards, no permits are issued to private landowners to capture leopards that are perceived as being damage-causing animals (DCA’s). CapeNature officials are the only people authorised to capture leopards for predation management, and this is only done in exceptional circumstances and with the utmost consideration for animal well-being.
To provide some context, what follows is a short overview of three trapping methods that are considered examples of ‘best practice’ by both local and international leaders in carnivore research.
Cage or Box Traps
Cage or box traps is a very commonly used method to catch large carnivores. Cage traps have the advantage that non-target species or individuals can be released without needing a veterinarian to first anesthetise the individual. This reduces the total time spent in the cage for non-target species. A disadvantage is that both leopards and caracals may throw themselves violently against the walls of the cage in an attempt to escape. These actions may lead to deep tissue lacerations and abrasions as well as broken teeth and claws. These injuries affect hunting success and may even prove fatal. It is possible to modify cages to reduce the probability of animals damaging themselves on the internal surfaces, in addition to ensuring that the response time to any animal being captured is minimised (e.g. through telemetry that signals when the door closes) and that researchers and veterinarians are trained in how to approach animals in the cage (if approached head-on the animal may attempt to charge and severely injure itself in the confined space).
When set properly (with modifications to make the cage more target specific), monitored frequently (using radio transmitters to signal when a trap has been triggered), and ensuring close supervision, purpose-built cage traps still have a place as a trapping method, especially when the situation, terrain or habitat precludes the use of any other method.
Foot loop traps
Firstly, the foot loop traps we refer to here should not be confused with illegal snares used by poachers to catch bushmeat. A foot loop trap in this context is a highly specialised type of trap which uses stainless steel rope to capture an animal by the paw. Foot loop traps are globally regarded as the safest, most humane, and most effective capture technique for large felids (Frank et al. 2003, Gannon et al. 2007, Balme et al. 2007). Foot loop traps have been used for several decades around the world to safely capture and handle large carnivores for research purposes. In Africa, the past decades has seen a significant move away from using cage traps by large carnivore researchers to the use of foot loop traps. This trapping method is promoted by the wildlife capture guidelines of the American Society of Mammalogists, an organisation regarded as a world leader in promoting ethical research standards. All over the world, snow leopards, jaguars, cougars, tigers, lions, cheetahs, bears and wolves are routinely and safely caught by researchers using this method.
The proper use of foot loop traps minimises the risk of serious injuries typically associated with cages. Foot loop-related injuries are usually only slight soft tissue swelling to the capture paw (which subsides while the cat is being measured and weighed under sedation). Foot loop traps are also highly selective when set properly – up to 100% target specific with no non-target species captured.
Soft-catch leg-hold traps or soft traps
In some cases, neither cage nor foot loop traps may be suitable to trap a target species for research purposes. In such cases, soft-catch leg-hold or foot-hold traps could potentially be used.
Soft-catch leg-hold traps are used safely by researchers around the world (Earle et al 2003; Saffy and de Waal 2010; Boitani and Powell 2012) – and once again the safety lies in the way this tool is used. Current scientific literature shows that appropriate soft traps, if correctly set and monitored, cause comparatively little or no damage to trapped animals – provided that they are regularly checked. Regular trap checks are vital, and as with any trapping method, the risk of injury increases with time spent in the trap. Therefore, response time needs to be minimised in order to reduce the risk of injury.
An important distinction should be made between the traditional gin trap and modern soft-catch leg-hold traps. These differ in that gin traps (called slagysters in Afrikaans) have sharp (sometimes serrated) metal jaws causing severe soft-tissue, ligament and bone damage to any captured animal. The Cape Leopard Trust condemns the use of gin traps in the strongest possible terms. On the other hand, true soft traps (such as the Oneida Victor Soft Catch Coil Trap) have offset jaws, thick rubberised pads, weaker springs, double swivels and springs on the chain to avoid muscle, ligament or bone damage. Unlike a gin trap, a human can trigger this specific soft trap with his/her fingers and experience no damage. Thus, although soft traps are not necessarily entirely target-specific, non-target species caught in soft traps can generally be released unharmed.
NOTE: The Cape Leopard Trust does NOT consider the Schneekluth ‘Terminator’ leghold trap as a 'soft' trap. These Schneekluth ‘Terminator’ leghold traps are still able to maim and severely injure the trapped animal as it does not have rubberised padding, the jaw offset is too little and the jaws snap shut with too much force (i.e. spring tension is too high). The Cape Leopard Trust does not support or condone the use of the Schneekluth ‘Terminator’ leghold traps for any purpose whatsoever.
While it is not currently illegal for private persons to buy or own a gin trap, the use of gin traps and any kind of foot-hold or leg-hold traps are indeed illegal in the Western Cape without a special permit from CapeNature, and none has been issued to the public for many years.
