The marten and fisher are “both easily trapped, have high pelt values, show relatively low recuritment rates, and are vulnerable to overharvesting. Neither is endangered or threatened throughout North America, although both are classed as such in some parts of their peripheral range. Because fisher and American martens have always been highly valued in the fur trade, and because trapping was virtually unregulated before the 1920’s, populations of both were severly reduced by the early 1900’s. Local extirpation occured...as a result of the excessive harvesting and extensive habitat loss following human settlement.” p. 149

“Populations of fishers and American martens that have been reduced to low levels by excessive harvest may take years to recover, and long-term loss of genetic variation may result. Fecundity may be altered...Low-density populations are the least resilient and the most difficult to assess, and only well-established populations should be harvested.” P. 151

“Trapping may be additive to natural mortality...trapping mortality of American martens in Ontario was additive when food was scarce, reproduction was low, and adult animals had been forced to disperse in search of food. Population growth in the Yukon was highest among unharvested populations...” p.151

“One aim of sustained yield management is to reduce variablilty in population size so that harvests are predictable and consistent. Although this may be best for the trapper and the manager, it may have ecological consequences.” p.151

“Often management plans have not been developed, and harvest targets are based on data from past harvests and perhaps on carcass collections, track counts, or questionnaires...The decision to initiate a harvest in a formerly closed area is often based on “suggestive” data such as increases in sightings, accidental catches, and road kills, and on the opinions of trappers and managers.” P. 152

“Controls must be implemented to prevent harvest targets from being exceeded. To be effective, controls require the cooperation of the trappers and strict enforcement. Most jurisdiction license trappers as a means to control trapper numbers and to communicate with trappers.” p. 159

“If populations are harvested excessively, closure for a year or more may be necessary to allow recovery...Early in this century most jurisdictions had long-term closures to allow populations of fishers and American martens to recover...Open and closed seasons can be alternated, but if seasons are not combined with other controls, this approach can reduce populations below viable levels. Even when seasons are closed, fishers and American martens often are captured accidentally.” P.600

“Area-specific quotas, combined with registered traplines such as those used in Canadian provinces...best control the harvest. Registered traplines, which allocate exclusive trapping rights for a defined area to one trapper, will help distribute the harvest geographically, minimize competitive trapping, encourage stewardship of trapline resources, and reduce poaching. Most U.S. jurisdictions do not use this type of management; instead, many trappers in a single area may compete for the same animals. This pattern, which is aggravated by easy access, forces a more conservative harvest target.” p.161

“Several relict populations of fishers and American martens across North America owe their existence to refuges where all land furbearers are protected. “Natural” refuges also exist where access for humans is difficult. Refuges provide population reservoirs for disperal to surrounding areas in many parts of North America.” p. 161

“Management of furbearer harvests may be of only academic interest in the future. Decline in fur prices since the late 1980’s may mean the death of the trapping industry as we know it. Increased production of ranched furs and pressure from antitrapping movements may reduce demand for wild fur products, and without a market there can be no industry.” p.165