|
otter
Sept 27, 2007 18:18:25 GMT -6
Post by ColdSteel on Sept 27, 2007 18:18:25 GMT -6
Otter are very easy to force on land.Another tip they are easy to force in the water also.I am shocked by the otter some catch in castor mound sets.I even talked to a buddy of mine today who is a castor mound fool.He catches over 200 beaver in a months time and most are in castor mounds he only cathes 2 to 3 otter a year in these sets
|
|
|
otter
Sept 28, 2007 6:27:03 GMT -6
Post by Vanmeer on Sept 28, 2007 6:27:03 GMT -6
All of you catching otter in castor mound sets, are you setting for front or hind foot catches? I catch more in hind foot sets than in front foot sets.
|
|
|
otter
Sept 28, 2007 6:31:43 GMT -6
Post by trappnman on Sept 28, 2007 6:31:43 GMT -6
I'm not sure if people are delibrately setting for otter with castor mounds- simply becasue beaver would be there more often than otter.
I've caught them by both back and front- not sure if one more tna the other.
|
|
|
otter
Sept 28, 2007 9:20:34 GMT -6
Post by Bigfoot on Sept 28, 2007 9:20:34 GMT -6
If you set footholds for a back foot you will still catch big otter just like offsetting the trigger and twisting the wire together on a 330 . that means you are catching mostly big male otters a few old females . leaveing most of the young females either way. One advantage the foothold has over the 330 is when you set 330s this way you don't get them nice head catches any more you just get body catches leading to some fur damage . In todays beaver market I don't see that it makes much difference on my beaver weather they have a conni rub or not . They are just buying square inches (this opinion was formed from reading my grade sheet on 97 beaver sent to nafa this season . )probably 80 of my beaver were caught in 330 casor mounds with no otter caught . the other beaver were caught in easy channel sets near beaver lodges . these sets produced 6 otter . I use fresh castor that I collect durring the season .
|
|
|
otter
Sept 28, 2007 18:55:49 GMT -6
Post by thorsmightyhammer on Sept 28, 2007 18:55:49 GMT -6
I catch them in castor sets.
I'll catch a couple in pocket sets for coon and mink if I have any number of traps out that year(I think I'd catch more if using bigger traps and more drowners)
I've caught them with a plain aspen stick driven into the bank as a feed set for beaver.
You'll snare a couple a year if putting out alot of baited snare poles for beaver through the ice.
Otter are the bane of a beaver trapper if the prices are low or if you have a restrictive limit.
There nothing but a nuisance as far as I'm concerned and I'm not leaving the 330's at home.
|
|
|
otter
Sept 29, 2007 6:33:56 GMT -6
Post by ColdSteel on Sept 29, 2007 6:33:56 GMT -6
I am not leaving the 330's at home smart man they are truely a beaver killing machine.If I had to go to 100% legholds I would probably stop beaver trapping.
|
|
|
otter
Sept 29, 2007 7:37:04 GMT -6
Post by trappnman on Sept 29, 2007 7:37:04 GMT -6
why Coldsteel? footholds do the job in my mind just as well, and many times better.
And if the rigs are put together in the shed- it takes no more time.
Its all in what the individual prefers- even on my ADC work- I use 100% footholds on beaver. Why? I just like them better.
|
|
|
otter
Sept 29, 2007 8:39:10 GMT -6
Post by thorsmightyhammer on Sept 29, 2007 8:39:10 GMT -6
why Coldsteel? footholds do the job in my mind just as well, and many times better.
All right steve i'll tell you why. Because they are more effiecient.
You go out and ask any trapper who takes 4-500 beaver in 30 days and i'd wager 9 out of ten use the bg as their primary tool.
I suppose they do it because the foothold is many times better.
Sure adc work I'd go footholds, snares and bg's if I was interested in wiping the colony out or catching one animal.
But I'm not, I'm interested in catching as many as I can in as little time as possible.
|
|
|
otter
Sept 29, 2007 10:18:49 GMT -6
Post by trappnman on Sept 29, 2007 10:18:49 GMT -6
no steven - they do it because its easier- not better.
a 330 on a stabiliser is easy and quick- no set to construct, no weights to make/carry, etc.
If I had 500 beaver to trap and wanted to trap them, I'd dig out the 330s also.
heck- for many years 330s were all I used. Didn't set a foothold for years. But with the few beaver I got now- I would rather use footholds- and they are, in my opinion, just as efficient as a foothold as far as beaver per trap. etc.
Can you get more sets out in a day with 330s? without a doubt, without a doubt...BUT... that still makes them only faster, not better.
|
|
|
otter
Sept 29, 2007 11:30:26 GMT -6
Post by thorsmightyhammer on Sept 29, 2007 11:30:26 GMT -6
Can you get more sets out in a day with 330s? without a doubt, without a doubt...BUT... that still makes them only faster, not better.
Well I guess that all in how you look at things.
My idea is to get out more sets in a day allowing me to catch more fur.
Maximizing my harvest potential with minimizing input.
Is that not better.
|
|
|
otter
Sept 29, 2007 11:38:40 GMT -6
Post by ColdSteel on Sept 29, 2007 11:38:40 GMT -6
I have tried several different drowning methods and in my opinion nothing beats a 330 with 10 feet of 1/8 SS cable and a lap link very quick and effective plus I dang sure know I will catch more otter in conibears(not that it matters now).To me 330's are lots faster and more sets equals more fur.I use foothold some they have there place but no way will they compare in numbers to a 330 day in and day out
|
|
|
otter
Sept 29, 2007 13:02:14 GMT -6
Post by trappnman on Sept 29, 2007 13:02:14 GMT -6
once again, if you find 330s to be a more efficent beaver thrap than a foothold- then you do. and its better for you- not everyone.
the piojnt being discussed- is "are 330s BETTER- that is more efficient"
I say no, simply because for me, its no harder nor easier to catch a beaver in either. Whats so hard about catching a beavr ina foothold? Are you trying odd sets? make a bowl depression to set the trap in, with the front ridge 3-4 inches high and firm, set your trap, put out the lure and a beaver in the morning. Its not hard or a mystery-= footholds are very effcient if you want to use them- and just like 220s vs 1.5s on coon, 110s vs traps for mink- if footholds for beaver cause you to miss too many beaver, then seriously- check your methods or traps.
330s faster, easier, less work- sure......better- not in my book.
|
|
|
otter
Sept 29, 2007 13:13:12 GMT -6
Post by ColdSteel on Sept 29, 2007 13:13:12 GMT -6
I would say my biggest problem with legholds is not having enough water to drown them and I hate having one splashing around for everyone to see.I also have tried several different drowning methods and some always seem to cause me problems plus I have a 72 hour trap law on submerged conibears so with 3.00 dollar a gallon gas I will take advantage of it.That law was a huge benefit to a beaver and otter trapper in my area
|
|
|
otter
Sept 29, 2007 14:59:24 GMT -6
Post by trappnman on Sept 29, 2007 14:59:24 GMT -6
without a doubt Coldsteel- I see both of your points. Here the beaver I trap are stream beaver- and getting water to drown is never a problem. We can also go 3 days on drowning sets in addition to 3 days on 330s. Unlimited under ice checks.
|
|
|
otter
Sept 29, 2007 18:07:40 GMT -6
Post by thorsmightyhammer on Sept 29, 2007 18:07:40 GMT -6
You ever try dig a bowl when the river bank is froze solid. Near impossible to dig a ridge.
Dont kid yourself and think I dont or havent caught alot of beaver in footholds.
Sure if you give me on 330 and one #5 to use for a season I will catch about equal in each.
But thats not the point.
The point is 330's are more effiecient making them a better trap.
I can set a 330 in any area I can set a foothold but I cant set a foothold in any area I can set a 330.
The only reason I find myself using footholds is I will average more per beaver on the one I have caught in footholds vs ones in 330s.
Lets compare it to work.
I can do a job with track hoe x or track hoe y.
Both will get the job done but x is more efficient for various reasons.
Which one is better.
|
|
|
otter
Sept 29, 2007 18:16:09 GMT -6
Post by livefreeordie on Sept 29, 2007 18:16:09 GMT -6
Steve, I think if you were in real Beaver country, you would find it a little different. Up north the 330 shines in that type of habitat. Like you say, it all depends on where you live. But, someday, we will have to go to NH, you with a dozen footholds, me with a dozen 330s, one week, and I will catch 3 times the number of beaver as you will, as I am sure out there, you could do the same to me.
|
|
|
otter
Sept 29, 2007 18:31:52 GMT -6
Post by trappnman on Sept 29, 2007 18:31:52 GMT -6
no, i ould not think it differently- the statement was made that the 330 is a BETTER beaver trap- and my only difintion of better- is that it outpreforms something else.
I think this statment says it best- Sure if you give me on 330 and one #5 to use for a season I will catch about equal in each.
and thats my point.
on beaver- a 330 is better than a 110- you will catch far more baeaver in a 330- although I have caught 2 beaver in 110s.
A #5 is better than a #1- although I have taken a fair amount of beaver in #1 over the years....
how efficient a trap is is based on performance (catches) in that trap rather than personal preference (ie setting it faster, less work)
same as settign pockets vs blind sets on mink- neither is better- because both produce as well depending on the trappers methods.
and you do not have to cut a pocket, to make a castor set- you can easily make them on vertical walls, to make a point.
and lastly- this statement says it all....
Sure if you give me on 330 and one #5 to use for a season I will catch about equal in each.
|
|
|
otter
Sept 29, 2007 18:40:32 GMT -6
Post by livefreeordie on Sept 29, 2007 18:40:32 GMT -6
A lot of it is the habitat you trap in. Bogs, marshes, ponds, or streams, they all have their place, but where you live and the type of habitat that dictates the type of set, plays a major role in what is more efficient. There are just more natural sets up there for the 330 vs the foothold, where I trapped, it was far more efficient to use a 330. Under ice, it might be a 50/50 proposition on baited poles, but open water, you could set more traps and catch more beaver quicker with a 330.
|
|
|
otter
Sept 29, 2007 19:00:19 GMT -6
Post by trappnman on Sept 29, 2007 19:00:19 GMT -6
sure, the type of trapping matters as far as drowning, bank type, marsh, stream, etc in what trap goes in faster, or indeed can even be used-
but if conditions are equal- which is the only way things CAN be compared, if I had to catch a beaver- I'd choose the trap based on conditions- not because one trap is going to catch more beaver because of the design of the trap.
for example- you have a creek damned up. Now- I could take a 330 and put it in channels, put it on the spillway, make a castor set- or make a foothold castor set, a blind set at a dam break, a pullout set, etc.
the chances would be, I'd get the beaver wherever he went first- no matter if foothold or 330 was there-
|
|
|
otter
Sept 29, 2007 19:18:23 GMT -6
Post by thorsmightyhammer on Sept 29, 2007 19:18:23 GMT -6
and lastly- this statement says it all....
Sure if you give me on 330 and one #5 to use for a season I will catch about equal in each. You think this say it all.
Can you get more sets out in a day with 330s? without a doubt, without a doubt...BUT... that still makes them only faster, not better
I say this says it all.
Tit for tat and ying and yang bud and all that other hokey pokey.
Now limit me to one or the other and we will see which one out performs.
Now in the words of the famous forrest gump
"thats all I have to say about that"
|
|