|
Post by coyote on Mar 13, 2005 11:55:15 GMT -6
Steve,
don't get discouraged here...this is good discussion!
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Mar 13, 2005 12:14:09 GMT -6
nah...not me!
|
|
|
Post by Dhat on Mar 13, 2005 12:15:59 GMT -6
yeah i can see your viewpoints and i respect that everyone does things differently and even people doing things differently can have similar success i understand that and dont condone anyones methods. I just dont understand how people can base so much on reasearch when in the real world unless you are trapping collared coyotes or working dens there is no way of knowing his core area. that is why i dont get wrapped up in it and go to pains to wonder if hes in a so called core area or not. Thats why i say set on sign you know that coyote or coyotes is using that particular spot. who cares if he spends 60 percent of his time there or 10 if there is sign a coyote has been there and most likely will be back kinda like railroad tracks , tracks are there trains gonna come. sure i worked an area for three years almost devoid of coyoes that alot of times you would find sign and the coyote never wuold come back no competition an they could go wherever they wanted but i havent seen that case much just in very very thin coyote populations. but all in all i believe your last statement is what caught my attention the most the trapping smarter not harder thing. I think maybe thats where we see differently sure i agree trap smarter but i think trap smarter and harder will get more accomplished. you see men that are good that trap smart and you see men that trap good that trap hard but the best ive seen combine both worlds to make one.
|
|
|
Post by bobwendt on Mar 13, 2005 12:39:50 GMT -6
well, it boils down to this for me. trapping is not brain surgery, similar to cutting wood, you have wood, a good splitting mall , and all the smarts in the world won`t split that wood. Put a college professor with nice smooth silky hands next to me -and me with my strong back and arms and tough stubborn won`t quit attitude. I`ll have ten ricks stacked before he can get a half a rick. The only smarts involved is split across knots and not sideways, split with the wood upside down rather than up. The prof. can know that and he still loses. It`s all about heart, desire, work ethic, good equiptment and attractants, having the ground, having the coyotes- and the most basic knowledge of trapping coyotes. All else is fluff. The only thing that counts is the number of dead coyotes at the end of the day, and everyday. A man does it every day and he knows coyotes better than they know themselves- work first, knowledge second. Won`t work the other way around (no pun intended)
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Mar 13, 2005 12:46:35 GMT -6
First and foremost- by the fact you are here and debating this, you are a thinking trapper.
Don't misunderstand me- when I got my best season- I was running 175 miles a day. I still run hard- but I want to run 100 mile days- with less traps- for the same yotes.
And I agree- that without collared studies- it would take a lot of constant observation as to what is core areas or not.
Although ask around here- where the farmer tells you he sees the same coyotes consistently in 1 area, thats probably the core. And the core area isn't stagnant- it changes with seasons and conditions.
Hers what I am trying to say. I see by the collaring 2 patterns 1) a location where I took 1 or 2 coyotes and 2) a location where I took more.
We found that coyotes taken in 1) locations- were just about always to be found in that specific location. My recaught collared coyotes were actually mostly 1) type locations.
and 2) coyotes caught in this type location- scattered to specific areas AWAY from the capture site...and then could usually be located in the new area.
So now... 1) I have this knowledge and 2) I read a study based on many previous studies...that gives a true cause and effect for what was happening.
This makes me think... what do these "core" areas have in common? What makes them "social areas"?
A reevaluation of my line...in both collared and non collared areas...shows me that...yes, indeed...these "core" areas or common areas or perhaps simply the areas in which coyotes come then disperse.....do have severla things in common.
so- could I pick out new areas to trap based on these common occurances? Areas picked for just how they are situated between certain features, for how they are part of the pattern, etc.
Areas that give me multiple coyotes over the season- not just 1 or 2?
Yes- I found that to be indeed true.
Because once armed with the knowledge of what was happening..I could reason out the "why".
Does that mean I don't set up other areas- not at all.
But if I had 35 farms set up- would rather have those 35 farms that were social areas, common areas, etc....more bang for my buck....trappnman
another practical aspect of research was learned with added visuals. I was exeprimenting somewhat with imported visuals- but until I read the study- and taking that data and combine it with my observations on te line- and Euerka!
I just jumped up 3-4 steps on that ki-yo-tee ladder....
added many more yotes to the bag with the same effort
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Mar 13, 2005 12:53:35 GMT -6
so a guy could go out and set 200 coyote traps with no knowledge- just sets them on the ground with bait on the pan...great work ethic..
Contrast that with a trapper making 20 correct sets-
who wins at the end of the day?
you comparison is about as applish apples compared to orangy oranges as i've seen in quite a spell.
As it anything- work plus knowledge equals success.
|
|
|
Post by bobwendt on Mar 13, 2005 12:53:39 GMT -6
farmer tells me where he sees coyotes regularly, hears them regularly, I`m going directly there and load it up. If on the way there I see tracks turds in other places, I load them up. Bottom line , core area scmore area, either way their tail is mine. and probably their cousins and aunts and neighbors too. And it make no difference to me which traps they get in as I am going to set all those spots and swoop and scoop.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Mar 13, 2005 13:03:48 GMT -6
see Bob- heres the thing- i'm trying to MAKE money on coyotes... my farm line isn't my hobby line- I trap the same areas year after year. anything I can do to cut down miles and take more coyotes- i'll do. And i am finding, for me of course, that the research available, since I choose to use it- is making me a better all around coyote trapper. I don't have 25,000 coyote to my credit. I doubt if anyone here but you has Bob. so- since my numbers are much lower that that- I'll take any advantage I can get to augment the information from the coyotes I have trapped- and if that means doing some "book learin'...by gad I'll do it!
|
|
|
Post by bobwendt on Mar 13, 2005 13:46:56 GMT -6
25,000! holy mackeral jethro! I think I`ll need to live a couple hundred years till I get that far, and I think the second 100 years I`ll be too pooped ,plus likely bored with it by then. But thanks for that inflated figure. No doubt will be re-told over and over and end up being 125,000 by this time next year. Man, am I good or what? 25,000 is like martin luther kings speech "I have a dream", except the 25,000 coyotes is like "in my dreams". but I`m trying, I did catch one more this morning to put on the count. I just can`t fathom intentionally setting outside the core area only ,since research shows coyotes work sets better there, uh, if they ever come by.....! that is the type thing where I see the breakdown in extrapolating scientific fact to field use. Everything you (they-logan) say in regard to core areas etc etc may be true, but it will lower the end catch in field use (i.e. setting on the fringes only to take advantage of more aggressive set working) My brain can`t compute that.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Mar 13, 2005 14:16:44 GMT -6
Very Good Bob (oh by the way- I thought that was how many you had taken- so any inflation was unintentional)
you have it .... more action core areas- even though sets might be worked "less" ie walked by 10 times a night then popped the 11th.
but where you are misisng the point...is not the fringe area itself---but instead a instead...te best of both worlds.
For lack of anything better, I call them social areas. Areas that seem, at least to the ones I am realitively sure ARE social areas... to be on the fringe of many coyotes territory.
imagine a series of rings...laying so they all intersect with the smallest possible area overlapping..... then you would have both a "finge" area and an area containing lots of coyotes.....
I have 6-7 such areas that I believe are indeed non territorial social areas- and all are consistent producers and all have similar features/factors in common.
So- if when getting permission on new farms- I seek out these types of areas...since the overall landscpe in the broads sense is similar... and I should be getting onto the best location. I picked 2 areas this past fall that I felt met this criteria- and both were two of my better producers.
Its just another tool....
|
|
|
Post by redfoxtrapper2000 on Mar 13, 2005 15:02:29 GMT -6
Very goog arguement from both sides ,my humble opinion is that Bobs style is gettem and go, set plenty of traps where they are and be done with it and it appears that Steve would set less traps in a social area then wait them out . Both ways work we just have to use the one best suited to us and our area.As far as the research goes I see no way that this knowledge could hurt as long as it doesent change our work ethics.
|
|
|
Post by coyote on Mar 13, 2005 15:14:57 GMT -6
[quote author=trappnman
imagine a series of rings...laying so they all intersect with the smallest possible area overlapping..... then you would have both a "finge" area and an area containing lots of coyotes.....
I have 6-7 such areas that I believe are indeed non territorial social areas- and all are consistent producers and all have similar features/factors in common.
[/quote]
please describe what habitat/landscape situations constitute such areas.
Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by bobwendt on Mar 13, 2005 16:15:40 GMT -6
I have this large confinment hog operation in the middle of mostly open farm country, very little brush and second growth woodlots, 90% grain fields in a 10 mile radius. I have been blabbing about this place since last fall when I took like 19 coyotes out of 4 traps in a 50 foot radius of the dead hog pile, only 20 feet from the last back building, 200 yards from the house and paved road. Took 3 more couyotes there so far this week after not being there since last november, so up to 21 coyotes in 50 square feet and havn`t taken 21 more in the tem mile radius around the dead hogs. And I can drive on gravewl right up to my sets come flood ot blizzard. Now to me this is what I am looking for as a trapper, what puts coyotes in the cages, or on the board as the case may be. It is obvious from the color and facial features I am dealing with about 4 different family groups plus strays and migraters. A constant year ` round food source, apparently known by all coyotes in that 20 mile across area. So what would logan refer this as, not a core area or fringe area either one, just a good spot for a trapper to be. In this case core or non core is meaningless, there is a unique super TRAPPER feature that supercedes all research on core or non core. In other words instead of trying to decide which is the right tree, I found the whole forest. Sometimes a guy can not "see the forest for the trees" type deal. education is a great till it becomes over education, then it starts working in reverse. find track, set trap, always good advice
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Mar 13, 2005 16:47:41 GMT -6
Logan doesn't say one thing or another- Logan simple states...once again- that coyote work stimulus more cautiously in core areas. but to your example- are you saying- 22 cooytes or whatever are all there territorially? While protesting my point- you are doing a suburb job of reinforcing it...
|
|
|
Post by bobwendt on Mar 13, 2005 17:13:54 GMT -6
they are there eating the dead pigs. I have no idea where their home territories are, or their cores or fringes. Apparently in a situation like this they leave their home territory to share in the spoils ,or eat in a pecking order depending on who is the baddest dog in town, or all their territorys overlap. I dunno, moot point to me. I have several feedlots in the west that are good for 20-25 in a week in a similar deal, 4-6 traps in only 50 feet around the dead pile. whoever is calving and afterbirth all over is the same deal, the coyotes will be there and then move en masse whanever the next rancher calves, be it a mile away or ten miles away. setting other than in or near the calving pastures is a 2 coyotes a week deal in the core or fringe areas if 5 miles away are 300 cows calving in a 3 week period. word must travel fast when calving starts and ends. As long as they get caught it matters not to me if they mince around a half hour before getting brave enough to step on the pan or if they charge in like a bull. foot in the trap, all that counts to me. see track, set trap, see lots of tracks, set more traps. even a single dead cow on the prairie will give similar although lesser results. these are the factors that pile up big catches for me and not territories fringe or core. late spring denning and summer trapping I go right in on top of the core, the epicenter. they only go to the fringes once every 10 days or so then and I can`t wait that long as not economical or rancher pleasing. I need first night results, be it aggressive set working or passive set working, just so they are set working enough to get caught, and they always are. say I get a bashful one, track at back of patern, he generally gets with the program the next nigfht if I leave the set alone. I love seeing a track on the pattern, then I know which sets to run with anticipation the next day!
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Mar 13, 2005 19:46:32 GMT -6
coyote- I found that my fringe areas here that had a lot of social interaction, there were several things i ncommon.
1) high ground
2) open area- little brush or trees
4) good access from at least 3-4 directions
5) in the geographical middle of things- that is- like the hub in a wheel
6) dry pond
These areas SEEM to have no attraction. Yet have constant action. ---------------------------------------------------------------
|
|