The basic design of the modern foothold type trap is over 175 years old; however, there have been many modifications to make it more efficient and effective and such research continues.

There have been allegations that despite modifications, the foothold trap is still an inhumane device. It should be noted that the term "humane" is a subjective one. The only place where it is defined in federal law as to taking animals in the wild is in the Marine Mammal Protection Act, which states:

The operative word is, of course, "practicable". For example, the most humane method of trapping wild furbearers might be in a live cage trap where the animal could be dispatched instantly after capture. However, the use of such traps on an extended trap line is totally impractical. Thus, the alternative devices must be judged in practical terms of humane trapping under given conditions. In sum, what is "humanely practical", given the availability of alternative trapping devices (i.e. methodology), are the appropriate guidelines to determine humaneness. Given the practical flexibility, substantive progress can be made to establish humane trapping of any species as technology changes over time. This recognition then, is an educated process:

Those states that have banned the "leghold" trap by way of legislation or by ballot initiatives have created a host of problems.

For example, in California the "leghold" trap was banned by a ballot initiative in 1998. The NTA successfully intervened in a case in federal court brought by the National Audubon Society, the California Waterfowl Association and others, challenging the ban as it related to the control of non-native fox that predated upon seven (7) endangered birds and the foothold trap was the only effective means of controlling the problem. The court granted a permanent injunction against the ban on federal lands or use by federal employees. Are those birds only found on federal lands? Of course not and these birds are still at risk.

In Massachusetts traps were banned by a ballot initiative and the beaver population increased by 200% and continues to grow. Beaver, doing what beavers do, have caused millions of dollars in water damage to roads, crops and other real property. Coyote populations have also dangerously expanded to where there have actually been attacks on humans. To help remedy the situation, the legislature did pass a bill allowing body gripping traps and are considering permissible use of foothold traps.