|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Feb 22, 2012 8:35:38 GMT -6
Tman look at a dog and where it's nose is when it comes to really smelling something on a fire hydrant ,tele pole, rock or other objects. Look at a coyotes tracks in the snow or mud. I'm not making the point they can't smell A odor from further they can, but to really understand what that smell is all about is from a closer distance. This was a point Russ Carmen made many years ago.
The idea they either like it or not can be changed by close proximity to where they are. If you put the smells right under them your going to get more investigation than sets further off in many cases. Doesn't matter what the odor. Tman I had major travel ways I could keep traps on year round on some sheep producers that put the lure within 4 ft or less of those coyotes traveling through, mass volume to me was not needed a coyotes nose is great and volume had little to do with it. location and odors used with a natural placed set caught many of those coyotes year round. Did I measure out exactly 3-4 drops per sey? No but I didn't load them up either. It is the breaking down of the odor cues not the overall volume at these locations they worked.
Many coyotes have fell victim to a "turd" with a smaller amount of urine and or gland lure on it, close to the travel lane of those coyotes. The reason as to why is easy,it is a natural situation for thsoe coyotes to check it out, it is what they do. In the proper location many times a slam dunk.
Adult urine versus other I have never really bought into that concept, small dogs will check out large dogs. Natural phermones are hard to keep intact and outside of certain times of the year collecting, such would make little differeance I have seen.
If we take into account more marking on the edge and also they are more apt to investigate things on the edge and that is where you will have more coyotes it adds up to more passer by's.
This information and others can apply differently at different times of the year.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Feb 22, 2012 8:52:13 GMT -6
I mostly agree with what you say in the above post-
Tman look at a dog and where it's nose is when it comes to really smelling something on a fire hydrant ,tele pole, rock or other objects. Look at a coyotes tracks in the snow or mud. I'm not making the point they can't smell A odor from further they can, but to really understand what that smell is all about is from a closer distance. This was a point Russ Carmen made many years ago.
The nose is going to be at the point of odor or rather the point of strongest odor. but that has, imp, nothing to do with figuring out the odor, its more putting the nose as close to a favorable odor as one can.
For example, we have a few roses. you can smell the general odor of the roses by standing by them- but I often put my nose down tight to one, and inhale the odor, simply because its pleasant and enjoyable to me, do intensfy that odor. but its stil lthe same odor.
Let me put it another way- you gal has on some nice perfume, and you can smell it sitting next to her- but the real enjoyment comes when you nuzzle her neck and get the full effect of the odor.
Dogs, esp non hunting dogs, don't have even close to the noses that coyotes do, nor do fox imo. Just look at the average size of the nose, and the amount of olafactory glands present in each.
I believe that coyotes, and other canines to a lesser extent, can analyize odors from the first good whiff, and that the particular odors are there at 6 inches, or 100 yards.
but that doesn't preclude them from wanting to get their nose as close as possible to those odors, if its something they want. If its not, bye bye.
on a side note, I don't believe amount of odor from a set, matters if its on location, or not. I'm a firm believer that the benefits of more lure/odors, far supercedes that of noticing the set.
This information and others can apply differently at different times of the year.
very good point
|
|
|
Post by jsevering on Feb 22, 2012 14:25:21 GMT -6
would be kinda interesting to see an actual chemical breakdown of whats in coyote urine... which chemicals are more attractive when...
didn't they do a study with fatty acid scent and the scent post... heard about it in reading other things, but never actually read it, to see the results personally.. call me thick headed but sure seems like there's a lot more to it, heck... maybe only at different times even.... situations presented?
some of the synthetics they tested on m44's were tma, perverted with acids at least in part.. one of the same acids found or produced in urine along with tma?
no chemist here and way beyond my comprehension the amounts even required, or how it would truly relate overall, to argue about it one way or another.... but sure leaves a lot of questions, for me at least... jim
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Feb 22, 2012 15:24:48 GMT -6
but sure leaves a lot of questions, for me at least... jim
me too jim, me too.
What I'm trying to accomplish, is to maximize coyotes. and to do that- I HAVE to work with their nature, not against it.
and these studies- yes, lots of variables in time, place, populations- understand urine usuage (vis avis coyotes themselves) goes a long way into understanding other things better- territory, action within/without- even the reactions of transients vs breeders
|
|
|
Post by seldom on Feb 22, 2012 15:48:10 GMT -6
but sure leaves a lot of questions, for me at least... jim me too jim, me too. What I'm trying to accomplish, is to maximize coyotes. and to do that- I HAVE to work with their nature, not against it.and these studies- yes, lots of variables in time, place, populations- understand urine usuage (vis avis coyotes themselves) goes a long way into understanding other things better- territory, action within/without- even the reactions of transients vs breeders I agree and it brings up what has always appeared to me that there seems to be a common trapper/human ailment and thought process that I see on trapping forums. Folks seem to try to make the animals do what they, the trapper thinks they should do and where they should do it according to the trappers nature!!! Rather than the trapper using the nature of the animal and putting himself instep with what the animal tells/shows him to do by it's nature! A little wordy and maybe a little convoluted but it's the best I could do.
|
|
|
Post by freepop on Feb 23, 2012 16:20:31 GMT -6
I understood and agree Seldom. About like trying to catch animals where there are none.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Feb 28, 2012 12:56:38 GMT -6
We done with this already? feel free to expound on any of the studies here, or add your own.... Come on you scent post guys.......I know you are out there And no, I'm not trying to bust anyone's balls- but I would like to know if anything you read in those studies or the discussion, caused you to reevaluate your usage. what types of success rates do you have? I had miserable luck with them, the type I read about in FFG- I figured just me- and maybe still is but reading the study just shows me, how misunderstood the use of remarking a scent post was to me. I thought that like a dog, they are going to remark urine about every time they came across it. if you take your dog for a walk if 100 dogs peed, he will pee, even if only a drop, on every one of them. but reading, in a couple of studies, that most coyotes don't remark urine spots, and those that did did so in a variety of ways, and where it was in regard to territory- I thought good grief, I'm making a set for 2% of the coyotes that walk by. so- does this change your thoughts on scent post sets- and if not-whats your secret to consistent working of the sets. Are you making them as an "extra" set, or a serious go to type set? perhaps this is the famed alpha male taking set?
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Feb 29, 2012 10:28:04 GMT -6
all those responding to the coyote posts, and no takers here?
interesting.
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Feb 29, 2012 15:40:25 GMT -6
Tman visit with Scott H about this subject and where he used "rocks" in relation to getter locations and see if he would agree with the study of coyotes not remarking the same areas. It is about where and what you use as a scent marker!!!!!
You could see it visually that they did indeed remark those areas as they came through. It was about the area and the use of a natural marker not a post sticking out of the ground that made it all come together.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Feb 29, 2012 17:23:42 GMT -6
not my point at all TC. I have no doubt that coyotes remark locations.
but I also find that the studies, seem clear on a few things. and the study was long enough, and contain a fair amount of animals observed, suggesting that the findings were fairly accurate as to coyote behavior vis a vis scent markings.
The more I know about coyotes, the.......well, more I know about coyotes, and these studies, to me, mesh pretty well into showing behavior influenced by nature.
Hard to bet against nature.
so its not that scent posts can't catch coyotes, its that based on the NATURE of coyote behavior, contrary to what I thought- the % of coyotes that WILL remark a location, is small.
Transients for instance, remark scent locations at a far lower pace than do residents- which again, makes perfect sense- they have no territory to defend- why scent mark?
and pups and betas, also have a significantly lower rate of responding to scent posts that alphas- and even alphas didn't do so all the time
I'm waiting for someone to tell me I'm looking at this wrong, but to me as a GENERAL set, it fails to have the required response one would think it would. And for the record- if a guy is adding lure- it no longer is a urine remark set- its a lured curiosity set.
and on another point- WHERE would you put the trap, to consistently catch a coyote "urinating"?
that half leg, squat, full leg lift- really matters would it not?
I've read many times in articles, how urine post sets are the missing ingredient to take more canines. Yet, the science suggests otherwise.
I'd love to hear from Wiley-
but how about you TC- do you consider a pure urine remark set, a good all around coyote set- and if so, how do you "get around" the science vis a vis more universal attraction and trap placement?
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Feb 29, 2012 17:38:36 GMT -6
Tman not talking a lured set, talking long after the setting devices pulled coyotes still marking and the way one can tell, super tall green grass from the N count and other ingrediants in urine. The rest of the area shorter grass and brown grass the marking location green and lush as can be. Not all uine and defication is to mark a territory, look at areas where you find lage amounts of scat there is also alot of peeing going on as well. These are areas coyotes of all ages spend more than just a few moments in time.
At a marking location I would set them the same as some other sets according to the backing, not talking a post stuck in the ground at a 90 or 45, are they as high % a set as some others? Maybe not but all depends on the backing or marking object if one thinks about it. If it is a natural marking location why would one want to set solid and catch a coyote or two and destroy the attraction in many cases anyhow?
The area is one of interest more often than not so I would rather set within short distance and keep the marking location around in it's natural state, when talking traps.
To answer the question I would set the trap at the 7-8" range from dead center of the pan, as they are going to check things out with their nose, not just come up lift a leg or squat and go the majoity of the time anyhow.
I have caught plenty of coyotes in a remake on nothing more than urine and gland lure or urine and a turd. Coyotes and fox.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Feb 29, 2012 20:42:23 GMT -6
I have caught plenty of coyotes in a remake on nothing more than urine and gland lure or urine and a turd. Coyotes and fox.
without a doubt- but thats not what we are talking about.
To answer the question I would set the trap at the 7-8" range from dead center of the pan, as they are going to check things out with their nose, not just come up lift a leg or squat and go the majoity of the time anyhow.
again- are the majority of those aware of it, going to remark it or attempt to remark it?
I'm not saying coyotes can't be taken at such- my question is, based on the science, its it an overall, productive set?
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Mar 1, 2012 4:43:16 GMT -6
Define productive...................................
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Mar 1, 2012 8:01:21 GMT -6
can't get the link to work 1080- comes up Utah site, but as "corrupted file"
productive? sure- you are coyote trapping, you come to a good location, decide to put in 2 "go to" sets to catch the first coyotes that come along.
Works fine,try it again ....
|
|
|
Post by jsevering on Mar 1, 2012 8:19:37 GMT -6
size and the social structure is different along with the smaller area of a presumed implied neophobia of any territorial boundary, scavenging as an underlying influence was also introduced, to an area that wasn't previously marked. it seems that the subordinates in this study would of been considered alphas or alpha females in the other... the classification... bonded pairs vrs. food dominate... isn't there a study out there that showed females urinate more in relation to food and denning areas, anyhow seem to remember reading that somewhere... need to learn how to bookmark things more i booked marked this one, found it interesting... i know apples and oranges... but it is olfactory stimulation... thoughts of situations where it may come into play maybe even within the social structure as defined by the studies, using urine... just something else to think on steve... productive maybe...even... jim www.wildlifeprofessional.org/western/transactions/2009_3_Randel.pdf
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Mar 1, 2012 8:54:12 GMT -6
thanks Jim-
one thing stood out for me-
The most commonly reported reason for scent marking behavior is territoriality with no overlapping scent marking occurring between packs (Allen et al. 1999).
with the relative low reaction responses, the main question I'd ask- what would the respones be with an oz of lure, or lure/bait vs the use of a Q-tip?
|
|
|
Post by jsevering on Mar 1, 2012 9:54:35 GMT -6
... figured you would get that part.... i might be a bad person to ask that second part... kinda think along the line that russ carmen presented with animals evaluating semiochemicals up close and such and adapting lure volumes to weather, evaporation rates of chemicals that might be irritants in different lures and such....but all theory on my part... urine usage if that's what your referring to with lure... who knows for sure but its possible curiosity with the advent of sign posting may come into play i find the thread pretty interesting.. doing some thinking... and thats a good thing with a bone head like me.. thanks... jim
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Mar 1, 2012 10:15:07 GMT -6
I've read studies on attractions to certain odors, but have never read one that has to do wth reactions to amounts of lure used.
would sure like to!
hint hint 1080!
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Mar 1, 2012 10:28:26 GMT -6
some theory on my part.........
I'm convinced, that the amount of lure, has nothing to do being repelled by too much, but instead has much to do with raising interest, if too small amounts are used. I'll never be convniced, that for general fur trapping at the very least (meaning on kill areas, etc- changeups can be te solution) with transients, pups, etc that overuse of lure, matters.
that I don't want a few soft notes of a tune, but instead want a siren song coming from the hole.
the coyote I'm trying to trap, is going about his business- and i'm trying to change that pattern, and have him be interested in "my" business, meaning what I've put out there for him, to change "his business" needs to be something that DOES interrupt the pattern.
does a litlte hole with little scents coming from that, do it more often than a bigger hole, with lots of scents coming out of it?
In my opinion, no.
that to get the majority of coyotes that are there to work the set, you need plenty of stuff there for him- to both get him there, and more importantly, to keep him there. and this goes back to the 4-5 drops, never mix lures, a few drops of urine mindset vs the 2-3 lures, bait, lots of urine, lots of bells and whistles mindset. this is with good proven lures- scents I know, have a high rate of response in the general population. I am not saying all lures are created equal.
|
|
|
Post by freepop on Mar 1, 2012 10:35:46 GMT -6
IMO: The study talks about who marks and when. It says nothing about who investigates the posts. If they all investigate good, I want to catch them as soon as they walk up to the post, not as they're attempting to mark it. So in that frame of mind, who cares how it is marked. I have good luck with the trap around 4-6 inches from the post, dead down wind.
If you add gland lure along with urine to the post is it now a "lured" set or is it still a scent post? I still consider it a post.
|
|