Patterns at dirt holes

[oso lento]

Well, It's that time of year. Boredom is starting to set in and it's tougher to find something to talk about. I've been wanting to do this for a while. I'm posting 3 pic of dirt holes with patterns. I used some darker dirt for this as an example. What do u use? Or does it make a difference?
1. little or no pattern(blended)

2.round pattern

3. long pattern

[vttrapper]

all three

frank

[trappnman]

At a set where I leave a "visible" pattern, i like to make it farily long and wide. Just never had much luck with cooytes at small pattersns...

but do like blended sets- and prefer blended flat sets...although I'm definitely rethinking my style there.

While I am satisfied (well, never totally, but you get my drift...) with my sets, something Wiley told me a few months ago has nagged at me...

he said that he feels that on a flat set- a completely hidden lure hole or no visible hole- causes a coyote to dig at a set more-

NOTE I originally said "work a set with more caution" but after being questioned about this by Zags, realized that I really meant nothing of the sort and was wrong to say caution. Scott didn't say caution he said digging. My only defense is my subconcious mind equated "digging" with "caution"...
THanks for catching that Mark.


most times, I cover the lure hole with grass or a small dirt clod.

whereas if the hole is visible- the coyotes attention is more on the hole than the surroundings.

I have to believe that is true..... I'm a firm believer in visuals demanding attention. For sure, I'm going to leave some of my flat set lure holes visible this fall.

[bobwendt]

frank took the words out of my mouth. generally the more dirt kicked around the better is my thought, but depth of hole and size of pattern is directly related to the hardness or frozen-ness of the dirt I am dealing with. I think all 3 are near identical results if set on direct sign. Most of the time here in the east the term dirt is a misnoamer. we have mud all but maybe the first week or two of season, last 3 years not even that , with several inch rains starting daily the day before season- of course following a 6 month drought where all our crops die.

[Traveler]

I often times dig the hole deeper than I really need it.Then I use a good part of this dirt and mound it up on one side or the other of my dirt pattern.Gives a little better eye appeal from a few feet father away.

[17kiss]

Man I feel sloppy cause here is my mainstay

[Zagman]

"he said that he feels that on a flat set- a completely hidden lure hole or no visible hole- causes a coyote to work a set with more caution- "

Did he say WHY he felt this was true?

Knowing how most make their punch hole lure holders, the holes are barely visible anyhow, aren't they?

In sod ground, they are, unless you make the holes in your dug up pattern......

I assume lure/bait type must come into the equation as well and throw in some more "un-naturalness".

Not every enticing smell a coyote comes across comes out of a hole, does it? Especially gland/urine/natural smells.....

So when/how does a flat set with exposed holes remain a flat set vs. a twin punch dirthole set? Semantics, I reckon.

To the question, I make sets like Oso and Kiss......must admit, I like the long, narrow pattern in Oso's pics.....and problably emulate that more than #1 or #2.

Zagman

[trappnman]

no- its not quite that complicated Zags- its simply this.

If a coyote comes to an area and smells something- but cannot see any possible "point" from which it is coming from- what does he do? He starts looking- both visually and with his nose. This puts his attention all over the place- on the pattern, on the bed, in the backing, etc.

On the otherhand, if he SEES where the smell is coming from- his attention is drawn to that point- not to the other areas of the set.

I don't make flat sets in high grass, sod, etc- I make them i ndust circles and bare spots. Making a wobble hole on bare ground is VERY visible- which is why I started covering them a little bit.

Of course a cooyte doesn't SEE a scent source every time he smells one- but am guessing that just about 100% of the time he smells something and doesn't see the scource- he looks for it.

[Zagman]

Understand that....

Just don't understand why looking for it causes "caution", that's all......

Interested in what prompted Scott to surmise this, as I am sure it is valid and supported with facts.

Some writers suggest that multiple applications of lures causes just the opposite reaction.....intrigue, interest, foot shuffling, and "you can't help but catch them".

If the goal is to keep him focused on one spot and not cause him to be cautious, then it seems logical that a twin-hole set (covered or not) adds to the problem vs. just having a single source of smell......in this scenario.

Zagman

[trappnman]

Why would a twin hole set- 2 holes, 10 inches apart- cause more caution? With a coyotes wideset eyes, I have no doubt he sees both holes at once, the same as you or I do.

I've been an advocate of multiple scents for years- but not because I think a coyote is going to be there LOOKING for the lures longer- thus shuffling their feet, etc.

But he will STAY at the set longer because...

... multiple smells create multiple triggers- in my opinion of course- and the more triggers that are present- the longer a coyote will stay at the set. Shuffling his feet, etc...going back and forth between the TWO points of interest.

Whereas with a one hole setup- a coyote can stand in one place to satisfy himself- and it might be the right place, it might not be.

I always used to leave the holes visible, then the last few years, started making them invisible. Not sure why I started doing that. When talking to Scott and telling him this- he made the comment I quoted. And thinking about it, it made sense.

I did say caution- but that perhaps wasn't the correct word- should have defined it more as "diverted attention". Hard to say exactly what you mean via the internet.

that is, attention perhaps in places where you don't want it- ie. over the trap.

Scotts complete words were "causes more digging". Extend that to: causes more digging "looking" for the scent source...

regarding natural vs unatural scents. I think this "natural" scent in dirtholes to be a bogus threoy.

That is- thoughts like don't add urine to a dirthole cause its not "natural" behavior. Unless you are using a piece of rodent, a cowpie, whatever you pick up off the ground at that location in your hole- its not "natural".

Hole sets aren't, to me at least, an attempt to fool a canine into thinking they are stealing another canines stash- a hole set with lure coming from it is simply a curiosity set.

[Maineman]

Good topic...I prefer the smaller patterns but I agree with the above statement that all three will catch k9's. My thought is that the smaller the pattern, the smaller the loose dirt leading up to my pan...

IMHO, From one mans perspective, I think we give animals too much credit when it comes to "thinking"...They are animals that do not possess the ability to reason like a human. If they could we would never catch them...They would look at a dirt-hole set, smell human scent and "reason" that this was trouble...

An animal can not figure out that when his buddy (or 2 or 3) is bouncing from a #3 Bridger just 5 feet away that it would be a pretty good idea to stay clear and head for the hills. and that's just talking k9's...You know how coon can be...Catch the same coon 3 nights in a row. lol

All of us has our unique methods of making sets and luring but I am a believer that if you make a mechanically sound set (ON LOCATION), and don't give the animal a reason to NOT get caught, that your odds are pretty good that you'll catch him...

Dave Z

[Steve Gappa]

and don't give the animal a reason to NOT get caught,

ah...but thats the rub....

its always a different reason.... so the secret is to eliminate as many reasons as possible..if that makes sense...

[trappnman]

Been thinking about what you said- I didn't say what I meant very well at all. Not a question of semantics- simply used the wrong words....

I see why you were "confused".... in my responses to you, I was thinking "digging".

and Im sure that makes more sense to you- that a coyote that can SEE the hole, won't spend time scratching and digging looking for the source.

I had never made that specific a connection with this before....one of those Duh! of course it would! things when I heard...

[Yotes]

EXCELLENT POST...............I would love to see more pics

[thebeav2]

Most If not all of my FLAT sets have some type of focus points. 80% of my flat sets have a small patch of beaver fur spiked down and the trap bed perfectly blended. My normal guides are replanted grass clumps.
The fur Is visable. In most cases the lure Is applied close to the fur but not on It.

Beav

[musher]

With regards to wobble holes I think a double hole gives the trapper an edge with regards to lynx. Cats crouch over things they are smelling. The extra hole makes them step from one to the other before crouching again. The foot shuffling gives the pan a greater chance of being stepped on.

I figure its the same for 'yotes and fox minus the crouch and with less time at the set.

With regards to patterns, I think a loud one has a greater chance of drawing the furbearer over if your lure is washed out or the wind is blowing the wrong way. Conversely, if you have thieves around discretion is better. My blended sets are more difficult to see than oso's. If it's a wobble hole, and I cover the hole with a piece of wood, rock or duff, it's pretty well invisible.