|
Rust
May 8, 2004 21:31:57 GMT -6
Post by jsevering on May 8, 2004 21:31:57 GMT -6
Im no chemist either, but one of the reasons I use calcium, is in wet weather to dry up the set alitte, so Im not playing in the muck as long.
Dont have any problems until the trap goes dorment for awhile. (thats why I really dont think its heat, if its not a gas, it has to be one heck of a bad smell if there is such a thing for a canine)
there is somthing there that is rust related because time and again they dont want to put their nose across the trap bed,start working the side or the back of the set or plane just sit down wind of it.
Change the trap out, before any problems and no problem.
think theres a difference between crossing fences, walking through, living near and laying down around scatered junk.
just because you walk by a out house everyday dosnt mean you would want to poke your head in, over the hole to get a magazine or whatever...jim
|
|
|
Rust
May 8, 2004 22:00:49 GMT -6
Post by buckeyehunter on May 8, 2004 22:00:49 GMT -6
T-Man and Wacky...You guys need to stop spending so much time at the Holiday Inn Express...
I thought that waxing traps stopped or greatly reduced the rusting of traps...
|
|
|
Rust
May 9, 2004 5:56:00 GMT -6
Post by trappnman on May 9, 2004 5:56:00 GMT -6
It is interesting that many people consider 2-3 days to be the critical time. Even though rust probably is starting almost immediately on a used trap (we have all see how new traps start rusting within a few hours after cleaned) cleaned like a coon, etc cleans a trap. Since all agree that there are several stages of rust- this makes sense. Yes, waxed traps do indeed slow or eliminate rusting- we are talking about a trap that has caught an anmal and gets the wax, dip worn off it.
|
|
|
Rust
May 9, 2004 7:00:16 GMT -6
Post by jsevering on May 9, 2004 7:00:16 GMT -6
Figured Id clarify, my dont really think its heat statement on my last post, before someone takes it off on a tangent (heat in general)
to old wiley's credit and as steve illistrated in an other thread , think the smoke stack effect may have something to do with it, but only after its at the problem stage.
another good example would be the old time winter flat set were the trappers use to burry a working concoction below the frost level with a weed comming up through to let the odor excape. in that principle\theory, I think heat is envolved...jim
|
|
|
Rust
May 9, 2004 8:08:09 GMT -6
Post by Wackyquacker on May 9, 2004 8:08:09 GMT -6
I'll try to reply here and get all:
DJ, if there is still a horseshoe that you can hold after you scrape there is still steel and it is still going to be rusting in appropriate situations.
But yet, if I understand what you posted-you say that the process of rusting and iron flakes should be undetectable by coyotes? I meant this as your conclusion.
Once again, I take no stand on wether a coyote smells / tastes rust or not. Since I can smell / taste it and others say they do, I see no reason to preclude it. On the other hand correlations are circumstantial at the very best. I've not seen results of controlled studies. Against this backdrop it is prudent to consider likely alternative explinations.
There are many reactions in chemistry that have intermediates. The reason they are intermediates and not end products is discribed by entropy. As long as reaction conditions are favorable the reaction proceeds to the end product (lowest energy level, state of most randomness).
If there is a net release of any gas a fellow can collect it.
Heat, if there is a net release can be measured, maybe even felt. How many have felt the heat of the rusting process? Forget that snow accumulates on a trap bed with the same kinetics as the surrounding ground (the beds are not much of a heat source). When you put a trap into the earth the world becomes a heat sink for any released energy. The net flow of heat would be toward cooler areas...energy moves nicely in liquids and solids and will be disipated (consumed). You will need a bit of heat to warm the surrounding ground which should be readily meassured (can you detect any increase in temp for even the extreme of lets say 100 lbs of iron filings rusting in a container?)
You're getting hung up on differences in process and product. Can you sense a process or, in the case of smell / taste, do you detect matter (end products)?
I suppose one could pressume that a coyote senses very very very very small quantities of heat ("the process") through their pads or nose or gums, whatever, but we have no anatomical or phsyiological evidence to support this notion in canids.
Fresh rust smells How about old rust? Does it smell differently? Remember now that according to entropy the reactions will proceed to the final end products and not accumulate in significant amounts of intermediates provided reaction conditions are favorable ("rusting").
When a waxed trap is set some metal is exposed and rusting begins. This level of rust doesn't cause refusal. Therefore we have a threshold respond...a dose response...is consistent with the laws of mass action.
If there is a net procudtion of gas it can be measured, or at least calculated, same with release of energy. If such a production is factual a sufficiently sensitive detection system, in this case in canids, needs to be present...no evidence for such.
Working within the limits of knowledge is there an alternative explination?.
I offer that if a coyote, in fact, can smell / taste rust the rust must get to the coyotes sensors. The third law of thermodynamics (entropy) predicts that matter will seek its lowest enegy state...concentrated sources will seek the most dilute state. A corollary to this notion is that a the process is concentration dependant. Also, the process occurs faster in a liquid than a solid.
In wet conditions traps rust. The rust is most concentrated at the trap. The rust moves to seek the most dilute state. This movement is always toward the the lowest concentration of rust...the source of the wetness...the surface...the coyotes sensors.
Conversely, in dry conditions, the process of dilution is slowed, well it just doesn't happen. Rusted trap or not the rust isn't moving.
I contend that every condition mentioned here and other places fits this model. There is no reason to be concerned with intermediates, heat, gas, old, new or the "process". The fact that coyotes detect a trap bed more readily in wet conditions is easily explained on the basis of mass action and dilution...thermodynamics...matter moves upward (to lower dilutions) toward the nose or what ever. It just so happens that these same conditions are favorable for rusting, which in itself effectively increases the concentration of avaialable matter and increases the rate and final concentrations at equilibrium.
If you want to talk microbial chemestry that is another post and I'll be happy to address any issues you have.
Jim, do you ever use trail sets? During wet conditions have you noticed an increase in digging these trap beds over dry conditions? If not why?
This is not a matter of smelling rust with me rather its one of exchanging beliefs for knowledge.
|
|
|
Rust
May 9, 2004 9:13:11 GMT -6
Post by jsevering on May 9, 2004 9:13:11 GMT -6
good post, good question. I dont use calcium with blind sets, will leave a wet spot with the frost, opposite effect of what I use it for during a wet spell.
I also dont direct the animals nose to or over the set.
blind sets are the one set, I like to change the trap out with each catch, unless the trap is set under water. such as a stream hopping set (not for rusting purposes)
mabye one out of twenty- thirty sets or so are a true blind set on my line, I dont notice the same effects, but I see your point...jim
|
|
|
Rust
May 9, 2004 9:25:17 GMT -6
Post by Wackyquacker on May 9, 2004 9:25:17 GMT -6
So when the coyotes attention is not drawn to the area of the trap bed it does not locate the bed is that what you 're saying?
Why so? If he can smell rust he can smell rust. Maybe the "rust" smell is only important relative to a lure(s), hole etc...a constellation of sensory input that triggers suspicion...and if it where to turn out that old yotes don't "smell rust" but detect a disturbace in the force (or ground for that matter) its still only important when associated with the constellation.
|
|
|
Rust
May 9, 2004 9:28:55 GMT -6
Post by trappnman on May 9, 2004 9:28:55 GMT -6
I still think you are going around in circles WQ-
How much more of an experiment do you want?
Are you saying I am unable to conduct a scientific experiment unless I have a lab and 20 people around me in white coats?
Here is the experiment-
The scenerio:
1) in dry weather- refusals of coyotes are not noted in excessive amounts.
2) in rainy weather- a pattern is noted.
3) traps that have caught animals- seem to have a lot of avoidance at the set.
4) NEW traps or TRAPS THAT HAVE NOT TAKEN A CATCH do not have this excessive avoidance problem.
5) the traps dug up at the set- are rusting WITH NEW FLAKING RUST.
So- the premise is
1) Traps that have taken animals are causing avoidance in rainy conditions
2) These traps are rusty
3) Therefore, rusty traps spook coyotes.
________________________________________
These steps were taken:
1) patterns were extended outward many feet from trap (no change in avoidance)
2) new traps were tried (change in avoidance)
3) Traps that caught animals daily were unaffected (traps were shiny, no rust)
4) taking a rusty trap, spraying the trap and entire pattern with urine (avoidances reduced considerablly)
5) different lures, sets, etc were tried (no change if with the rusty traps)
6) the urine spraying was stopped and started multiple times- in EACH CASE- the results were consistent and immediate.
THEREFORE- my conclusion is- SOMETHING IN THE RUSTING PROCESS WAS SPOOKING COYOTES
Now- you seem to be hung up on heat, on gas, on smell , etc- I don't know and I really don't care WHAT the cause is of the rusting process- all I know is the END RESULT.
My conclusions on rust are based on reading the research papers published by others.
I do find it hard to believe that you don't conceed that there are several stages of rusting- all involving different reactions- all sources do.
Heres an experiment for you- go out with a metal detector- dig up several pieces of iron left in the ground for years or decades. Compare that to a trap rusting underground for 3 days. Are the the same?
The answer is no- but try it for yourself-
Heres another experiment- dipped traps.
I became convinced that dipped traps were causing diggings.
So-
I waited until bitter cold- 20-30 below zero.
then- 1) I took 6 traps that were dipped in Sept- and hanging up airing out ever since (it was not January)
2) I went to 3 good locations and set 2 traps each.
3) At each location- I used tested lures at 1 set, fresh, untested lures at the other.
4) I used dried dirt stored since August.
5) I waited until a fresh snow- I set on bare ground- had 4 inches of snow that night. I made EACH set with a 2-3 inch deep dry dirt pattern in circles 10-15 around the set.
Now-
1) we have a soft fresh dirt pattern 10-15 feet out- so the coyote has to walk over it- no avoidance on the soft dirt
2) we have 4 inches of fresh snow- so NO visuals are showing.
3) the temp is bitter cold- humidity, etc is a non factor.
Next morning- 4 of the 6 sets were dug from the back or sides. The tracks came right to the sets-no hesitation right up to the trap- dug right at the trap- then worked the set.
I ran these 6 sets for 2 weeks. I had diggings every night- no matter how I tried to cure the problem.
I did take 4 "dumb" coyotes- after a catch- a fresh Sept dipped trap was used.
_________________________________________
So -preliminary conclusion was the dipped traps were causing digups. So....
Later that spring, I needed to collar a few yotes (8 I think).
I went to the SAME areas- in many cases the SAME sets-used the SAME dirt, the SAME lures (temps were different- no rain rather than snow).... the ONLY differance was dyed/waxed traps.
I HAD NO DIGGING IN 2 WEEKS catching my 8 coyotes.- plus a ton of possums, skunks, coon.
So- labratory or not- I KNOW based on about as controlled an experiment as you can do in trapping- that dipped traps IN MY AREA- CAUSE DIGUPS.
And I feel the same about rust.
A belief is something ya "know"- my conclusions are based on a little more than "beliefs".....
Bottom line- I hope everyone in my area dips their traps, uses urea and thinks rust is unimportant.
|
|
|
Rust
May 9, 2004 10:15:39 GMT -6
Post by lynxcat on May 9, 2004 10:15:39 GMT -6
How about we add iron oxide to magnesium.....the almighty thermite...now that is some HOT STUFF!!!! later lynx
|
|
|
Rust
May 9, 2004 11:16:23 GMT -6
Post by Wackyquacker on May 9, 2004 11:16:23 GMT -6
I fear all I can do is repeat what I've said repeatedly above I don't know if coyotes can or cannot smell or taste rust. There is no net production of gas nor detectable heat (both issues you introduced to the discussion and I was simply trying to set things straight) during rusting. Stages of rusting is just another way of saying intermediates. Intermediates are that because they are not the endproducts...endproducts accumulate. Correlations do not represent scientific proofs, even though they may be correct. For science you need to be testing one variable and evaluating it against a control. Furthermore, this needs to be done in a demonstrabily unbiased manner...hard too impossible to do short of "blinding" the experimenter. I can't keep up with all the changing variables in this thread , especially when you post related issues on other threads and I'm not saying coyotes can't detect rust! I'm not saying coyotes can't detect rust! I'm not saying coyotes can't detect rust! Forget the microbes, forget the dips, forget low temps (you still have humidity at low temps by the way not that is important for this discussion), forget the dirt patterns, forget the urine; some coyotes that have expereinces with traps and trappers become conditioned to be suspicious. The exact reasons why / how they do are as of yet unknown but there isn't any reason to believe they can detect any chemical process. Kick this one around in your head for awhile: take a clean trap and make it so it won't rust no matter what. Place it in a bed, at a set near where a yote has been locating your traps (we're trying to control for the coyote varibale here). Now sprinkle some appropriate amount of rust (competely rusted iron) over the trap and cover the entire thing. See if the trap is exposed...mind you same wet weather conditions etc etc. This protocol is an attempt to eliminate the variable of the "process". You should have a bunch of these situations to get a statistical handle on things and you should make a similar number of sets with traps treated and untreated, with and without added rust and with rust only no trap and with out and disturbance of a trap bed. To make this really good you need to have the guys making the sets not know which traps etc arre being places where (blind them) and the fellow collecting data and analyzing it not know which sets are which (double blind). Now there's a protocol right off the top of my head. There are probably a number of changes that will need to be made to tweek the protocol but its a starting point. The only question is how do you pull this off and still make a living?
|
|
|
Rust
May 10, 2004 5:50:43 GMT -6
Post by trappnman on May 10, 2004 5:50:43 GMT -6
I believe I stated nothing but facts- A chemical process does occur- heat and H2 are produced in some stages.In minute amounts- but produced.
If you don't believe that- well, thats your choice.
However- please note that I said several times- many times- I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS ABOUT THE RUSTING PROCESS that spooks coyotes.
I also said- that it is the CONJUNCTION of this fresh rusting metal w/a coyote set that does the spooking.
The "hiding" of the trap- trying to be tricky- hell, I don't know.
BUT- I DO KNOW RUSTING TRAPS in my area, my country (and, although you again seem to want to ignore this basic fact- acids and minerals in the soil- and the alloys in the steel (which vary) combine differently with different humiditys and temps)
And here is something I found in several papers- "the rusting process is still not completely understood"
Now- you say the thread has gotten convoluted and off topic- not really.
Its still simple. Rusty traps can be detected by coyotes> That's my premise. Do you agree or disagree? Plain and simple.
The tangents were offering possibilitys and options- A mental exerrcise.
Now- you are starting to sound like the BMP antis- "too many variables" to test traps.
Where is there more than 1 REAL variable here-
1) traps several days after a catch were causing aviodance in rainy weather, evidenced by fresh tracks around the pattern.
2) these traps, dug up, were rusting with fresh rust.
2) remaking set had same results- fresh tracks around pattern.
3) urine sprayed in heavy spray over entire, extended pattern.
4) avoidance stopped- evidenced by coyotes in set.
5) a fresh trap had same results as #4.
6) A trap that ism aking a catch every day or 2 was not affected by the pattern avoidances.
Now- temps were the same- a constant rain/drizzle were the same, the winds were the same, time of year was the same- consecutive nights, the sets were the same and for all practical purposes- in more instances than not- it was the same coyotes.
Now- you could argue that a butterfly sneezed 10 miles away or that the coyote picked up a burr- but for ALL PRACTICAL applications- conditions were identical
And remember also- it was happening over a whole line of 100 or so traps- not every set, no- but a pattern- and the proof of the pattern was the reduction in daily coyotes.
Use a fresh trap or spray- % about the same.
Use dirty trap-without spraying- % dropped- overnight.
Cause and effect- Scientific enough for me.
BTW- I consider myself an excellent motorcycle (hey, I ride old Harleys!) trouble shooter and was employed as a small press troubleshooter for a couple of years- I know how to troubleshoot keeping constants and changing 1 variable at a time. I convey that same mindset to trapping problems-
Interesting to note- that a few years after I had figured this out- I read Hoofbeats- and O'Gorman came to the exact same conclusions based on the exact same reasons- he said he will use a gallon of urine on 60 sets or so- its the only way, without changing traps, to keep production up with rusting traps in rainy weather.-
Read one og the Leggetts books- and their conclusions were the same- if a used trap hasn't made a catch in 3 days- change it. __________________________________
I'm not being delibrately obtuse here WQ- but the best I can figure out- you are saying-
....that coyotes might be able to smell or detect a rusty trap- but there is absolutely no way rust can be detected- that no chemical processes occur that can be detected through aeriated dirt by a coyote?
|
|
|
Rust
May 10, 2004 11:01:40 GMT -6
Post by Wackyquacker on May 10, 2004 11:01:40 GMT -6
Please note, in the above paragraphs I never said nor did I infere that a coyote can or cannot detect a concentrated accumulation of hydrated iron oxide. In fact, on the basis of reports by others, I suspect that such a repository in juxtaposition with olfactory and visual stimuli may very well be detected, identified and associated with danger based on prior "bad" experiences of the indiviual in question. Also, I would predict that moiisture, temperature and soil conditions will affect this outcome.
What, in this the last paragraph of my first post is confusing? Particularly the last sentence?
I'll try it this way: Animals can sense energy, in the form of heat, light or sound, and matter. They lack the capacity to sense chemical events in time...only endproducts.
I am a bit confused! You could help me if you would, as breifly as possible and in words not formulas, explain what you are thinking of when you address / refer to the process of rusting. To a chemist this means the complete oxidation of iron. I am getting the feeling that you are viewing this as more global event...maybe considering iron as a catalyst for additional reactions that maybe occuring in moist environments.
I really would like to be able to get you to realize that the process of iron oxidation in no way involves an obligatory / stoichiometric production / release of molecular hydrogen. Water exists as an equilibrium state of hydrogen cations (H+) , hydroxyl anions (OH-) and complete H 2O. In other words there is virtually always a mixture of these three forms. Another way of saying the same thing is that water exists in varying states of dissociation. Hydrogen gas is not released simply because hydrogen ions are present. The vast majority of atmospheric molecular hydrogen comes from rather complex biochemical processes releasing hydrogen from organic molecules.
I'll try it this way also; acids and bases: What are they and how are they expressed? In one definition acids are compounds that when in aqueous solution (in water) dissociate such that the hydrogen ion concentration is higher than the hydroxyl ion...the pH is less than 7. pH is the negative logrithm of the hydrogen ion concentration ...a mathematical expression of the number of H+s present. Dilute solutions of many acids have a pH of 1 (complete dissociation, the highest concentrations of H+) and hydrogen gas is not released. There is an equilibrium among the ions.
Now, I don't know what you refer to when you typed "hiding" of a trap.
Fresh steel / stale steel, old or new they all rust the same way with the same end product. Reduced iron in a moist environment oxidizes.
I can't address the multiple "variable" issue since there is no experimental protocol provided, no controls are indicated and no standard for assesment and evaluation are given.
I do not view or approach this discussion as an adversarial situation rather I'm trying to convey some knowledge. Remember when you know something you stop learning.
A few years back, in the time of Pasteur, people still believed that wine spoiled because of spontaneous generation. In spite of all the blessings from the Priests the wine kept spoiling. Pasteur and others, using scientific methods revealed that in fact the "Little Animacules" first observed by van Leeuwenhoek nearly 100 years earlier were getting to the wine from the air. Subsequent to these findings / revelations processes, including pasteurization, enable man to safely store wine and many other food stuffs. Further studies lead to the understanding of sepsis and the control of infectious disease. Is / are casual cause and effect relationships good enough?
|
|
|
Rust
May 10, 2004 12:45:52 GMT -6
Post by trappnman on May 10, 2004 12:45:52 GMT -6
I do not view or approach this discussion as an adversarial situation rather I'm trying to convey some knowledge. Remember when you know something you stop learning.I concur Rusting: the oxidation of iron or iron compounds. BTW- "In addition, many bacteria secrete acids as they grow (lactic acid, and others, e.g.). In the sense that acids accelerate the process of corrosion, microbes present on iron-containing surfaces would enhance the ability of material to rust." Complete is a descripatory word (if descripatory is a word LOL) concerning rust. Rusting has various stages- all rust, and all stages of rust- ARE NOT THE SAME. Here is a good look at what I am saying- pages 1 and 2 www.methyl.demon.co.uk/dl/sgrade/12-13.pdf Formulas are the essense- the key- when you say: I really would like to be able to get you to realize that the process of iron oxidation in no way involves an obligatory / stoichiometric production / release of molecular hydrogen. Water exists as an equilibrium state of hydrogen cations (H+) , hydroxyl anions (OH-) and complete H 2O. In other words there is virtually always a mixture of these three forms. Another way of saying the same thing is that water exists in varying states of dissociation. Hydrogen gas is not released simply because hydrogen ions are present. The vast majority of atmospheric molecular hydrogen comes from rather complex biochemical processes releasing hydrogen from organic molecules.All I can say is that researchers show various STAGES of rusting . One aspect of it produces H2. Is H2 hydrogen gas? If yes- then one stage of rusting produces gas- if it isn't true- then it does not. Forget the gas- to me H2 represents hydrogen gas- if it does not- I don't care. The gas was just a possible option. Not really improtant to the debate. I can't address the multiple "variable" issue since there is no experimental protocol provided, no controls are indicated and no standard for assesment and evaluation are given.Well- as good of controls as many of the Logan studies, among others. Yes, I understand your analogy of mistaken cause and effect- similar cases have been night air causing maleria and rainwater starting spontaneous life in rain barrels. Yet at some point- facts can't be ignored. Heres an example. I own a cow. I feed her daily for 3 months- she prospers and is doing fine. I quit feeding here. After so many days , she dies (kids- always feed your cows!). Can I conclude that the stoppage of hay caused the death? Even though the temp was different every day- even though I moved her from stall to stall- while there were some variables- elimination of the minor ones is just common sense- or, as scientific types like to say- a given. So- the fact is this- USED TRAPS, in rainy weather- spook coyotes. (for me, here) Why or how I don't know. I have tried every variable practical on the line to try to isolate the cause- it all comes down to RSTING traps- change traps, spray urine- both solutions to combat the rust "awareness". since a coverup scent cures the problem-one could- logically- conclude that it is an odor on the trap- and the only odor that is present that is different- is rust. In fact, on the basis of reports by others, I suspect that such a repository in juxtaposition with olfactory and visual stimuli may very well be detected, identified and associated with danger based on prior "bad" experiences of the indiviual in question. Also, I would predict that moiisture, temperature and soil conditions will affect this outcome.
I guess what is confusing- is that is exactly what I am saying. my question then is WHY? .....what is your thoughts for coyotes having that capability? That, after all, is the crux of this thread. (Hiding a trap- trying to fool a coyote...putting dirt over the trap....)
|
|
|
Rust
May 10, 2004 15:07:56 GMT -6
Post by Wackyquacker on May 10, 2004 15:07:56 GMT -6
I can't go to that site this damn acrobate reader won't open the pdf files so I can't figure out what is going on. I'll guess that when the oxidation process is halted prior to completion they see release of hydrogen. The thing is in nature it doesn't halt. Like some famous fellow said " show me the bubbles" ;D
You don't need the microbes...don't confuse things here...trust me...if you want to talk microbiology start a new thread I know this guy who understands that stuff real well ;D
"AS GOOD AS THEY USED" don't cut it in science...they weren't asking the same question.
Conditions that are suitable for iron oxidation (moist vs dry) are the same conditions that will facilliate dilution / diffusion of and thereby movement of "particles" away from a concentrated sorcuce. The movement will be toward the lowest concentration. If the water is coming down the "smells / tastes" are going up. This movement is more in the relm of physics than chemistry...entropy.
I'm wanting you to see that it is more likely the "condition" that permits detection not the process of oxidation.
I'm guessing they are smelling / tasting something, maybe iron oxide. Also, I 'd guess that they have to be searching for it in order to detect it is as out of the ordinary, i.e., trap sets alert them and they go hunting based on prior conditioning or curiosity.
|
|
|
Rust
May 10, 2004 16:19:37 GMT -6
Post by trappnman on May 10, 2004 16:19:37 GMT -6
I see the distinction between the process and the condition- but isn't the end result the same? A smell of rust, from the rust- no matter how it is transferred? 2 things can halt or slow down the rusting process- a lack of O or a lack of H2O- or other medium. Thus- pieces of metal in compacted ground-old buried metal- might well have so little oxygen that the rusitng process stops- I'm guessing they are smelling / tasting something, maybe iron oxideNow darn it Quacky- thats rust!
|
|
|
Rust
May 10, 2004 16:55:51 GMT -6
Post by musher on May 10, 2004 16:55:51 GMT -6
I'm not a baker but I can tell the difference between the smell of baking bread and cooked bread! I figure canids have a better nose than I.
|
|
|
Rust
May 10, 2004 17:35:45 GMT -6
Post by Wackyquacker on May 10, 2004 17:35:45 GMT -6
Now darn it Quacky- thats rust! By Joe I think he's got it! The end product RUST maybe I don't know, but for certian not the process of oxidation. Hell that was a lot easier than I thought for. Say while you're here how much of the digging that you observe at a set do you suppose is do to something other than a smell(s) from the trap bed (lets not bother with wiggly traps cause you and me never do that no more If you feel that some digging is do to something other those smells what causes it? and precisely how can you distinguish between the two causes (smell vs what ever)?
|
|
|
Rust
May 10, 2004 17:49:13 GMT -6
Post by trappnman on May 10, 2004 17:49:13 GMT -6
I'm wasn't getting any digging (that was the dipped traps) - it was total avoidance of walking on the dirt over the buried trap.
Tracks all over- EXCEPT over the trap-
The first time I really started noticing the avoidance- I spent many, many an hour trying to use the same trap by rebedding different, moving it slightly, different guides- about everything possible. Spraying with urine was a LAST resort- not a first one.
Lets define this a little further- dry, older rust does not seem to affect coyotes the same way- it is the bright, organish, wet rust that seems to be the culprit
With the dip- coyotes walked up to the trap and dug at the corner of it- exposing al ittle bit- then working the set fr mthe sides.
|
|
|
Rust
May 10, 2004 17:58:49 GMT -6
Post by Wackyquacker on May 10, 2004 17:58:49 GMT -6
Ok fine. Now how about answering my questions ;D
|
|
|
Rust
May 10, 2004 18:05:14 GMT -6
Post by trappnman on May 10, 2004 18:05:14 GMT -6
If you feel that some digging is do to something other those smells, what causes it?
I got no digging with rusty traps.
and precisely how can you distinguish between the two causes (smell vs what ever)?
N/A
|
|