|
Post by PAskinner on Aug 6, 2007 20:16:02 GMT -6
Ok, just as an example, I'd like to see the Iowa pocket set minker do what he does there, here. It's pretty hard to dig pockets in rock, so you use sets that fit the situation. BE sets are great, but not in every spot. Being a one trick pony won't get it in every part of the country.
After awhile last year, it seemed pretty silly to keep digging holes last year, when the ground was saturated with water, so a guy goes to flat sets instead of banging his head against the wall, especially, if he doesn't care to remake sets every day. Just common sense.
|
|
|
Post by 17HMR on Aug 7, 2007 2:52:55 GMT -6
I think a lot of flat sets I have seen of others include a hole, somtimes two, to get the K9 in position, so is it a flat set?
|
|
|
Post by mac on Aug 7, 2007 4:51:15 GMT -6
Mr. Wendt writes: "I disagree tman, without the flashy big dirt pattern and the hole itself you lose a LOT of eye appeal and advantage of a canines natural interest in holes, any kind of holes. and a reason for him to stay longer and foot around more with a smell down te hole he can`t get at easily."
I hesitate to join in because I am not long lining pro like most here but do have to ask a question. (Bob has been very good in answering my dumb questions the last few years.)
If one traps in an area in which there are a number of trappers (also limited amount of farm type ground etc.) and they all hit the coyote line hard the first two weeks of the season (because the third week brings out an incredibly large horde of folks dressed in blazed fluorescent orange) and they all use dirt hole sets.
OK, dirt hole sets are every where. Not all coyotes get caught at every set they encounter (remember not all pros using super good techniques or lure etc.) so it would seem plausible that any given coyote could see a good many dirt holes in their travels during the two week period.
Dirt holes every where with basically unnatural odors coming out of them (I know trappers think all their lures and baits are natural smelling etc. but lets face facts). And Lord forbid any one use a mink smell as we all know the fear that will put in a coyote.
It would seem logical that the dirt hole set would lose some of its glamor and effectiveness during and following such a time frame.
It would seem logical to say that any given coyote can be caught at some type of dirt hole set, no matter how smart they become through their life experiences. It also seems logical to say that perhaps other less blatant sets just might produce better than a dirt hole.
I respectfully ask about this topic and offer the above scenario, a scenario that for example, Maine trappers see every year. I even forgot to add the fox trapper using 1.5 coils popping old bristle backs adding to their education.
You mention or elude to the fact that many would question any method, for example a video or book, that does not include any more than a dirt hole set. I would hazard a guess that when folks buy a video or book from a famous coyote man such as yourself they expect that perhaps you will share more than the basics. Perhaps they feel that would benefit knowing more than how you or any other famous expert makes other effective sets. But alas, you suggest that none are needed. There in lies the rub, as other folks think they need more. Perhaps folks have been conditioned to feel as though they need "filler" in materials they buy or perhaps they have experienced in the field experiences that suggest they really need to know how to make well blended flat sets on their line. (While fulling understanding that it may not be necessary in some areas, i.e. ares of high population and limited competition)
I respectfully wait your response.
Scott
|
|
|
Post by bobwendt on Aug 7, 2007 5:27:35 GMT -6
yep that is the rub. anyone that thinks the trick is in the set has totally missed the forest for the trees. those folks would be better served to buy a 20 sets in the back yard or variations of the dirthole video and variations of the flat set video and get a measuring tape to make sure their distances are correct and such, and continue catching mediocrity, as that is exactly where they will be stuck for life while seeking the perfection in sets and setting techniques and knowing multiple sets. luckily every video ( of which there will never be anymore made by me for sure) I ever sold came with a 100% moneyback guarantee so those looking for 2-4 hrs of how to make multiple sets in someones back yard rather than trapping knowledge could get their money back for any reason at all. plus, seriously mac. how long do you think a video or dvd would have to be to please everyone and have in everything from rank amatuer this is how to wax a trap yada yada to these are the 14 basic sets, to this is the 4,000 location types east to west to this is how I skin, collect pee, how I bone my ife too, yada yada and how many sales are there at 39 to 59 bucks to even pay for the dang thing? I`ll tell you, not enough unless it`s a b.s. in the back yard deal. if there is no "line", the reason is the dude has no line. I saw in another forun a post on "what pro you would like to spend a day on the line with. " some names were of a 400 lb man, another a known drunk and alcoholic,and a guy so old he can hardly walk ,etc. I think ,are these all just kids or idiots to not realize a man sooo fat he can hardly walk or bend over or another that stinks like a brewery or another that is so old he is physically impared , that these guys HAVE NO LINE, so you can`t go with them either in person or on a video either one. they don`t do it! you can`t go with them, they are just peddlars of magic in a bottle and how to make multiple perfect sets videos. anyone can make one of those. I don`t know how else to say it mac. this trapping biz is over run with b.s. ers and fakes and con men. for the life of me I don`t know why. surely a good con man could make more doing about anything else. if you have any videos bought directly from me you don`t think were worth what you paid for them, for any reason, you send them right back and I`ll get you an instant refund. I`d rather die in the pooor house than toi have even one man think I cheated or conned him. if you bought them off anyone else, then you are on your own as I don`t cover bootleg stuff. fwiw, I`ve received 2 back in my life and their complaiunt was they needed to see more trpes of sets. hey they got to see the other 4 hrs for free, but you know I think they were blind as there must have been SOMETHING in that other 4 hours and it sure as hell wasn`t 4 hrs of making dirthles over and over .
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Aug 7, 2007 5:54:25 GMT -6
I deleted some posts because they have nothing to do with the subject at hand.
the question was simple- and nothing to indicate it needed to be a pissing match.
If you are unable to make flat sets, or don't like flat sets- fine- but don't even begin to tell me dirthole sets outproduce flat sets.
After all, coyotes are dumb, stupid, even an idiot can take 75-100 a day. But now they are too smart for flat sets (or whatever reason was pulled out of the air)?
If your flat sets aren't visible...hmmn- could there possibly be a solution for that- good location or/and visuals?
I KNOW flat sets produce the same- I make a lot of each- and I NEVER have seen where one outproduces the other.
This thread has nothing to do with speed, or bragging or anything but does 1 type of set, outproduce another successful type of set.
I listed several examples-- coon with 220s vs footholds, mink the same, etc.
If you make a set on location, does it matter what it is?
I say no.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Aug 7, 2007 5:55:38 GMT -6
anyone that thinks the trick is in the set has totally missed the forest for the trees
yet in the next breath, you make mention how no one could begin to match your success using flat sets..sigh....
|
|
|
Post by mac on Aug 7, 2007 6:11:48 GMT -6
I thank you for taking time to respond.
Mac
|
|
|
Post by jsevering on Aug 7, 2007 6:18:00 GMT -6
dont think 'not seeing the forest for the trees' was really a set related comment by bob.... methods and success are more than set types, think thats what he might of been getting at... but been known to be wrong, usually more than Ive been right.... jim
|
|
|
Post by frenchman on Aug 7, 2007 6:36:42 GMT -6
To move away from canids, I would say that with fisher, the type of set is probably the least important variable.
1- Abundant fisher 2- good location 3- good weather (the nastier the better!) 4- good bait
the set, well, as long as it keeps the trap in operation during the nasty stuff. I have my own favorites, but they are my favorites simply because they are the fastest and easiest (but not necessarily the prettiest)
|
|
|
Post by PAskinner on Aug 7, 2007 6:50:44 GMT -6
"If you make a set on location, does it matter what it is?"
Yes, no, and it depends.
If you are dead on location, all you need to do is put a trap under his foot. But, since location isn't always quite that exact for land animals, especially, then, yeah, it matters that the set catches his attention and makes him step in the right place. If it does that, it really doesn't matter what fancy name the set has, or whether you dig a hole or not.
|
|
|
Post by mostinterestingmanintheworld on Aug 7, 2007 7:02:54 GMT -6
I'd say probably not.
My thinking runs more towards making the location rather than searching for one.
If I was gonna trap coyotes seriously again I'd probably spend the summer filling 5 gallon buckets full of carp and putting them out where I wanted the coyotes to go.
I had some down in the wash at my other house and the coyote tracks around them were never ending, went on for years.
Joel
|
|
|
Post by bobwendt on Aug 7, 2007 7:05:43 GMT -6
severing had it right. tman, if you refuse to accept anyone elses answer or opinion to your question, then why the heck ask? mac , let sum it up. a guy can learn to trap, or he can learn to set traps. learning to set traps makes a big splash at demos and conventions. learning to trap catches lots of animals. probably neither can be done watching any videos, but they might point a guy in the right direction if he will just look in that direction. paskinne, I`d argue your pointyto some extent. I believe location can be made exact, easily, almost every time, if a guy knows his animals and his business. show me the track or turd and I`ll show you the animal 98% ( lol, 98%!) unless he is dead already.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Aug 7, 2007 7:09:23 GMT -6
I agree 100% frenchman.
I don't think any set is better, in the hands of one who is versed in its use.
Bogmaster for example, uses nothing but 330s for his castor mound sets- and Rally uses almost exclusively snares- yet both, I feel, would take the same beaver if given access to the area first.
And me? I prefer footholds by far- more time consuming perhaps, more work to set up- but success is A= B =C.
whatever "tool" you decide on, years and decades will make you an expert with that tool.
and what decides favorites, can also vary. Some like the fastest, some like the "trickiest", some don't care and match the set to the conditions.
a slippery slope tangent, but one I often think about, is the emphasis placed on speed. And that goes to your circumstances and goals. I'll wager that there aren't more than a handful of trappers that ever have 100 or more traps out at one time on this forum. And for those that do, does speed matter? Sure- if trapping for limited periods or trying to beat weather, etc.
But does speed always need to be a factor?
Or indeed does "bigness" always matter? For example, if numbers are the #1 thing- then by doubling the mileage and doubling the number of traps, one would accomplish that. But what if money, or time was more important overall? The numbers needed to be qualified by those moderators?
Then it becomes a cost factor- whether time or money. Running 100 miles for example, might take you 6 hours and X amount of animals. Would running 200 miles- be cost effective? Would it double your take? Would the $ value of each animal be worth the extra cost?
I mentioned before about giving up my single coyote spots as not being cost effective. The year I did that, I eliminated locations that gave me a total of 22 coyotes the year before. My numbers went down that year- but my profit went up.
I've got all the time in the world. Our life's are set up, so that Oct-Mar we trap fur. Our goal of course is numbers, but more importantly, it is to enjoy each day on the line. There are days where speed is needed, but the day I can't afford 5 extra minutes to make the setting enjoyable (for us now- I'm fully aware that running flat out as hard as you can 24/7 IS the enjoyment for some) is the day I quit trapping.
|
|
|
Post by robertw on Aug 7, 2007 7:17:01 GMT -6
In my opinion, with coyotes dirt holes out perform flat sets about 3 or 4 to1.
I commonly make both types of sets at a location but the dirthole is (almost) always the primary set and always see the most repeat catches. When rain and continued flooding (standing water) force me away from using hole type sets I then go to only flat set sets.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Aug 7, 2007 7:23:34 GMT -6
methods and success are more than set types
sure they are- but the question remains- does the set type then matter?
Bob says yes, that the dirthole catches more coyotes, given as am in reason visibility.
I say no- that when you put in a flat set, you account for location and visibility.
When I come to a location- if a perfect flat set is there- and in hay, beans, lanes they often are- I'll make one without hesitating. And really is anything faster than a flat set if thats a concern?
I have equal confidence in taking that coyote whether with a flat set or a dirthole.
If someone always uses flat sets 100%, I think they will outproduce themeselves than if they tried to use nothing but dirtholes for a few days.
And I also think the converse is true.
But if one makes sets 50/50- then I think either will produce the same.
A= B =C
|
|
|
Post by bobwendt on Aug 7, 2007 7:29:07 GMT -6
tman, no one has all the time in the world unless time is free, and it never is. time is the only thing more valuable than any commodity on earth as you can`t buy more of it. the time I am here now is lost time, forever , that isn`t spent doing something else, like sleeping, loving on my lady, working on the farm , or trapping. and each conversly also, in spite of the computer in the toilet, lol. and numbers, profit, miles , time etc all go hand in hand in the eqation. and setting a trap is not in the equation. anyone can set a trap. not everyone has a clue as to how to figure the equation for numbers, profit, miles hours, labor and time to where all are going your way only. that is the deal.
|
|
|
Post by lynxcat on Aug 7, 2007 7:29:17 GMT -6
HORNET nest.. not EVEN gettin in.. ;D
|
|
|
Post by bobwendt on Aug 7, 2007 7:40:40 GMT -6
everyone quick, lets beat up on lynx. lord knows he desereves a good whooping.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Gappa on Aug 7, 2007 7:49:15 GMT -6
Bob- We all place priorities on time. And you just made my point- I'd rather spend some time loving the old lady, or playing here, or reading or just looking at the stars- then trap 24/7 365.
and profit vs time isn't that hard to figure out- end dollars subtract expense divide by hours spent. If I got 1 gopher at the end of a quarter mile field- I don't trap him- it would cost me more in both time and $ than its worth. Same with a coyote. If I checked a trap for 10 days and got 1 coyote- I lost money.
I've often thought, I'd be $$ ahead at the end of the season on water, to just walk a line around town and have zero transportation expenses
I'm not quite sure if your statement "to where all are going your way only" means I think people need to do it my way- which I certainly do not- different strokes for different folks-
or that its tough to have everything go your way..which it is...but you plan the best you can, have an alternate plan, and do the best you can do.
Because at the end of the day- I'm the only one that has to be content with my day.
I have this quote on my wall, and I try to live by it:
"Finish each day and be done with it... You have done what you could; some blunders and absurdities no doubt crept in; forget them as soon as you can. Tomorrow is a new day; you shall begin it well and serenely" Ralph Waldo Emerson
Robert- a lot is explained in that dirtholes are your PRIMARY set. You use the same lures at both sets?
I catch 7-8 mink in footholds to each 1 in a 110- because my PRIMARY sets are footholds.
BK takes the reverse in 110s, because his PRIMARY set is a 110.
When your PRIMARY set is random- so will the results be- given the same expertise with both.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Gappa on Aug 7, 2007 7:57:21 GMT -6
17- I like flat sets with visible holes. I had a period where I used to cover my lure holes with a cow chip, or grass, etc. I did get more digging at the sets it seemed like. Talking to Wiley, he made the comment that he thought that coyotes dug more, when they couldn't see the source of an odor. and that made perfect sense to me. I stopped doing so, and did see a reduction in digging.
I make 99.9% of my flat sets, 2 hole walkthrough type sets. And I find that the hole positions, based on the trap pattern, is an integral part of the guiding. I don't understand why so many don't like the thought of using guides- they take so little time, and increase the effectiveness of any set- that its just second nature to use both directional guides and set guides.
|
|