|
Post by trappnman on Mar 2, 2012 11:02:53 GMT -6
TC- look up "continuity". I started the thread with one purpose in mind, to discuss PURE urine use- all based on the link I inquired about, which you then provided. A singular purpose. so no, that's not the conclusion I came up with- its pretty obvious in my posts- but I'll bring it up again- the PERCENTAGE OF COYOTES THAT INVESTIGATE AND REMARK URINE LOCATIONS IS DISMALLY SMALL OVERALL. NO MORE, NO LESS and that FOR ME, I'll not waste my time setting up pure urine sets as a go to coyote set. its counter productive IMO now you can either agree with that, or disagree with that. the general point (again, thought it was obvious through continuity of posts), is that to catch the most coyotes, one needs to work WITH their nature, rather than opposed to it. but lets move on................. ---------------------------------------- 1080- I was able to open that link, and mentioned that directly, plus commented on the study several times. I have much higher faith in studies done with collared coyotes vs those in a 1ha pen, that are used to human stimuli daily. So many times, the info gathered there, is opposite that gathered on unrestrained coyotes. and I have a hard time with conclusions that "are statistically insignificant.....but.......... so this study concerned visuals and scent- and the conclusions are simple. I think. A larger visual is noticed at a further distance than a smaller one, and thus, is open to more distrust than smaller ones, seen only close up. Makes sense. I wonder about conclusions drawn insofar as familiar and unfamiliar territory goes, since in reality, its ALL familiar territory in similar pens, would it not be? the conclusion that SCENT, brought on no signs of neophobic reactions, was interesting as well. but whats missing from this study, is this, in my mind- all tests were made once- that is, one test for each coyote. no retests. So for a practical matter in trapping- do the results stay the same on additional encounters? lets say I have a set with a big visual. So on the initial encounter, they do show more neophilia, but what about on the second, their, fourth encounter? does after 2-3 encounters, the neophobic reactions disappear? and since its now familiar, does that give them a greater response without caution? does 2 similar sets, or stimuli, within a short distance of each other- make the response reaction completely different? I've felt for years, that often times a coyote is aware of your set for many encounters, but eventually it BECOMES familiar- esp if its constant, not here, there and gone. How often does a coyote see a set, before he works it enough to be caught? If he blows by it once- that doesn't mean his actions with be the same, and indeed, one can conclude his actions WON'T be- isn't that the purpose of "stalling them out"? ------------------------------- something of interest? what possible study could I show you, that you haven't read before? and if you meant something else- hey buddy- my EYES are up here...............
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Mar 2, 2012 12:28:12 GMT -6
heres another thought to consider-
larger visuals, cause a larger degree of neophobic reactions, correct? or at least thats he conclusion the study came up with.
so reading that- and yes, including other factors such as scent, but overall- one could come to the logical conclusion, that put away the imact hammer, put away the big tools- and go back to a teaspoon for digging patterns.
that the larger the pattern, the larger the holes- the more neophobic reactions occur.
That a set with NO visuals, will outproduce a set with a visual- and the more of a visual, the more reluctance to work it.
thats based on ONE trial per animal- what makes my above post, seem more accurate
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Mar 2, 2012 16:16:53 GMT -6
I have always found I get quicker responses setting on a travel route with natural well blended sets and I get good responses with loud sets at places where things are loud.
|
|
|
Post by Brunner on Mar 2, 2012 19:04:12 GMT -6
Something that I noticed that I didn't see mentioned in the study that TC first posted was the maps where they plotted the markings. Seems that a large number of the alpha markings and the double markings were located on the southeast edge of their territory. Had me wondering if that might be where the den is located??
|
|
|
Post by jsevering on Mar 3, 2012 6:57:57 GMT -6
in the last study it appears that they liquified the dung... to eliminate the visual effect.... is that a common in the studies in regard to scent marking and visual stimuli studies...
seems the reaction to dung without the visual effect and its olfactory stimulation in nature may have been perverted some... i understand why they did it... just had me head scratching some, but think i understand due to the nature of the study..
also was wondering is .50 ml or .50cc the threshold of the amount where the synthetic attractants worked best or just a common with the time period utilized in the study... seen where they discussed it in regard to an old Harris study regarding neophobia also seen in your prior post where you said you cut the monkey pheromone to 10 percent.... interesting reads... jim
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Mar 3, 2012 9:12:35 GMT -6
while coyotes in small pens certainly must exhibit some of the same behavior as in the wild-
I personally don't feel that it mirrors unrestrained coyotes behavior. Behaviors in small pens certainly must bring out adaptative behaviors that exist less in the wild, or not at all. How can you correlate terirtorial responses, when the territory doesn't exist per se?
many of the studies mentioned, directly- that THEIR results, with a few anmals, differed greatly from collared coyote studies. so MY pont was if you have a group of studies that point one direction with penned coyotes, and another that goes the other with collared coyotes- which ones take precidence in actual actions?
for example- putting a coyote in a kennel for 12-18 hours, THEN releasing them into a pen to observe actions- is far from the "mood" of an unrestrained coyote that had free range for months, then encounters something.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Mar 3, 2012 9:25:23 GMT -6
However,much Information that does agree is often times "Critical" and quite useful for trapping. Find it !
oh, ok- got it perhaps "agree" is the key word? but what when they "disagree"? --------------------------------------- remember the saying about not assuming............? Because I don't mention something, doesn't mean I've not taken note. ------------------------------------------ neophobic Neophilia: and damn it I knew that! but spell check corrected me, so I left it. -------------------------------------------- knowing where to set,and then knowing where to place those sets so coyotes will accept your offering is Critically important.
you know that you know I accept this as one of the givens. but you are you, and I is I........ and on my sets........ you are right, snow doesn't lie but I cannot agree more- one of the most valuable things you have gotten me thinking about, is working with the coyotes nature, rather than against it. and I think about that it seems, every freaking day!
|
|
|
Post by freepop on Mar 4, 2012 17:48:04 GMT -6
There was quite a bit of activity there for a while, now that it's calmed down.
Steve, I mentioned the lack of scent there from an animal that left the urine/scat. Yes, they blew off the human scent factor and that's all you commented on. Being a hound guy, you know how long an animal's scent can stay on the ground. So, am I all wet in thinking that there is something missing when there is scent/scat there and no scent trail where an animal came through to deposit said items? In my mind, even the dumbest coyote would soon discount the scent/scat in short order, because it probably fell out of the spacelab. Much of this is along the line of your statement "what territory?"
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Mar 5, 2012 7:49:55 GMT -6
freepop- everyone that traps canines and wants to understand scent, needs to follow hounds for a few seasons. Continuity of scent trails, weather conditions, becomes quite apparent.
One part of the studies listed, showed that with a Q-tip of scent, coyotes would not "notice" the sets w/o visuals, until quite close, 2m if memory serves me correctly.
and that makes sense- a small amount of lure, down at ground level or below, had little long range capabilities.
getting scent out there per se, really means nothing on its own- the scent not only has to "get out there", its got to provide continuity IN that scent trial, or its just a whiff on the wind.
to get that continuity in various weather conditions, my conclusion is you need a lot of lure- and its got to be placed so that it IS able to to not only provide scent at distances, but provide a "way back" to the location.
I used to be a firm believer in "scents down the hole", and still want something good down it- but at the same time, call scents like O'G advocates, seem to make logical sense.
Since we got bogged down in micro debating on the issue of urine/marking, let me state that even though I was fixated on that pint, I wasn't ignoring the overall macro point- and that point was, is and will be that to catch the most coyotes one can in one location, that location, sets, etc MUST be in tune with the innate (as 1080 says) nature of coyotes.
With my concept of innate being things coyotes MUST do, based on their nature.
As I said on the misting thread- I'm halfway there insofar as half of my locations are what I consider good locations- but alas the others are NOT.
to expand my goal of taking the most possible in the shortest time, while I think mechanics ARE important, I am a believer in THE SPOT.
That's why the studies are important to me, and that's why I tend to fixate on aspects of the research- trying figure out how to make EVERY spot, THE spot.............. or rather being able to find and recognize, THE spot..............
2 years ago, I had some locations that should have paid off based on sign, but did not. last year we changed the micro locations on the farms, and saw, in some not all, dramatic differences- the most noticeable was one where zero 2 years ago, 7 and some left behind this past year.
My mechcanicals are "good enough" meaning that if I'm THERE, the coyotes are there in the morning as well- if I'm not THERE, its hit and miss.
so my goal is a march to eliminating all the "bad" locations, and concentrating on the GOOD ones.
|
|
|
Post by freepop on Mar 5, 2012 8:09:37 GMT -6
My goals too.
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Mar 5, 2012 20:12:20 GMT -6
Tman how much scent does a coyote catch of a human at 300 yards? One part of the studies listed, showed that with a Q-tip of scent, coyotes would not "notice" the sets w/o visuals, until quite close, 2m if memory serves me correctlyYou don't need an alot "IF" your setting on exact location of a coyotes travleway and use the wind. The lure brings them in and the bait keeps them working alot of the times. Also I don't want them to "notice" alot of my sets ona travelway, it seems to work for me that way. Do I think for a second using the wind that a coyote can't smell an odor from 12 feet away? Heck NO! I have seen the brick wall response from much further when it comes to human scent!!!! All about the scent cone. Sure nothing can smell what doesn't hit the scent cone unless clkose and high octane, but ALL lures do not need to be high octane and get a response when using the wind. I made the referance to what Russ Carmen made a guy that has forgot more on lure compounding and testing than most of us would ever know. Coyotes need to get their noses close to pick out the ingrediants of a compunded lure, you poo pooed that idea with an anology of your own correct?
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Mar 6, 2012 8:27:46 GMT -6
Coyotes need to get their noses close to pick out the ingrediants of a compunded lure, you poo pooed that idea with an anology of your own correct?
I can't remember the analogy, but do I think a coyote has to get his nose in something, to determine the individual components in a lure, the answer is no, I don't think that.
A think any canine, has a far better nose than that would allow-
So IF they do break down a combination of odors to their individual components, I think they are able to do so getting ANY whiff of a lure.
TC- do you disagree wih using a call lure high and away from a set? if so why, if not why not?
you say work the wind- but why if you are exactly on location? you cannot micro manage wind- that is, you can use the general direction (usually NW, or W to SE or E for me) but at the actual location, the wind is always moving everywhich way.
so sets made to take into acount any wind direction elinimates that concern
But when we are talking wind as such, aren't we talking about approaches, downwind, etc?
so why would we want to use tiny amounts of lure IF our concern is throwing out a wider, longer, more lasting scent cone?
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Mar 6, 2012 21:50:19 GMT -6
You can manage the wind by set placement 100% of the time? Probably not but 2 -3 sets on a travelway hitting both wind directions the others are taken care of with the scent cone. I will take a trapper that uses the wind versus one who doesn't every time and leads into far more doubles and triples.
The wider and longer isn't needed when setting within feet of where they will be anyhow. A coyote hunts you don't need alot of visual when your setting right on top of them, they will find it specially when using the wind. Hot air rises, cold air sinks.
I have used call lure more in extreme cold, never worried about it alot othertimes of the year. Warm air creates better than does cold air. Cold air is more dense, warm air not so much. More thermals in warm air than cold.
Define tiny amounts? I have never saw the need to use 1/2oz of lure when on location, meaning within feet of where they will be. Bait is better and more cost effective for milling. I also never saw the need to use ounces of urine when those coyotes are presented an offering so close to their line of travel and using the wind.
If you smell soup in a pot when you come in, what is the normal reaction? To lift the lid and get a good nose full much closer to break down the actuals of the soup correct?
Coyotes dig and hunt for food mice, insects, etc. What odors to beetles put out? I have found summertime coyote bellies full of black beetles how did they find them? Zero visual really. Knee deep grass and bellies full of grasshoppers a visual? Potant grasshopper odor?
So how much human scent does a coyote need to think, WOW I need to get out of here from 100's of yards away downwind? I have called enough coyotes to know them winding you is tough with the wind in your face. Not a 360 effect or anything close. I have had coyotes within feet of me with proper winds. I have also have hd them hit that "brick wall" from a few 100 yards and back out as quick as they came in. They rely on the wind use it your advantage.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Mar 7, 2012 8:39:28 GMT -6
You can manage the wind by set placement 100% of the time? Probably not but 2 -3 sets on a travelway hitting both wind directions the others are taken care of with the scent cone. I will take a trapper that uses the wind versus one who doesn't every time and leads into far more doubles and triples.well I agree with you and I don't. I agree with the first part where 2-3 sets will take care of micro wind direction patterns. but I have to ask? WHAT scent cone? Qtips down a hole, had coyotes not responding to the smell unless within 2m of it. Aren't your visuals (hole, bone, whatever) attracting them from further than that. The study concludes it does. So a logical conclusion to the study, would be that small amounts of lure, really don't have much of a scent cone emulating from them. so again, logically it must mean that LARGE amounts of scent, put out more of an odor, and by extension of givens, a scent high up, will have a longer scent cone. sure, you set exactly on location, and much of this becomes moot-but lets be real- how many times, in a fur line, are you setting exactly on top of them? Circumstances make being where you want, not always possible. So alone with visuals such as holes, dug up patterns, etc- why NOT use large amounts of lure? So many positives and really not much negativity except cost of lure. As far as doubles, I thought the main thing was to catch that FIRST coyote.... the doubles take care of themselves. I haven't a doubt in the world, that my doubles would double and triple on 2-3 day checks simply becasue te ultimate coyote attraction, is a coyote. The wider and longer isn't needed when setting within feet of where they will be anyhow. A coyote hunts you don't need a lot of visual when your setting right on top of them, they will find it specially when using the wind. Hot air rises, cold air sinks.
I have used call lure more in extreme cold, never worried about it a lot other times of the year. Warm air creates better than does cold air. Cold air is more dense, warm air not so much. More thermals in warm air than cold.using the wind how? when they get within 2m? its a done deal by then wind is such a small fraction of the physics of scent trials. Humidity, vegitation, temp all play as much or more of a role IMO. Define tiny amounts? I have never saw the need to use 1/2oz of lure when on location, meaning within feet of where they will be. Bait is better and more cost effective for milling. I also never saw the need to use ounces of urine when those coyotes are presented an offering so close to their line of travel and using the wind.ounces of lure? me either. but at the same time, no 3-4 drops for me either- in my opinion, there is no value in skimping on lure. and again, I'd like to know, using your style of setting- HOW you are using that wind, because I can't see it, with the exception of general working direction of coyotes If you smell soup in a pot when you come in, what is the normal reaction? To lift the lid and get a good nose full much closer to break down the actuals of the soup correct?no, any good cook knows you don't take the lid off of simmering soups until needed...... but lets look at your food analogy in another way. you walk into the house, and your wife is cooking hamburgers. if she was cooking 1 small burger- you most likely would notice little until on location (the kitchen) now lets as she had a big skillet full of them- why, you would smell burgers as you were walking into the house. Now- lets say you had a big cookout in back yard, bunch of cookers going- the whole neighborhood would smell like burgers.......... does the smell of 50 burgers spook you- while the one in the pan makes you salivate? burgers are burgers, scent is scent- the more you use, the more it GETS OUT into the wind and air. one reason skunk is so popular in call lures and fixatives, is because in MY opinion, its a "heavy" odor and doesn't dissipate as well as other odors do. heck- if you are exactly on location- why use any bait or lure just set trail sets. Coyotes dig and hunt for food mice, insects, etc. What odors to beetles put out? I have found summertime coyote bellies full of black beetles how did they find them? Zero visual really. Knee deep grass and bellies full of grasshoppers a visual? Potant grasshopper odor?You really don't think that beetles and grasshoppers have a distinctive odor to them? I don't think that for a second. I think locust are hunted both by smell land sight- and how many of those beetles are carrion beetles- I'm guessing most if as in my area- my personal thought is much of that type of stuff- beetles, maggots, etc are eaten along with carrion. but that's really besides the point. not sure the point, any more than me saying studies show more action at large baits (20-30) cows vs <3 or under- So how much human scent does a coyote need to think, WOW I need to get out of here from 100's of yards away downwind? I have called enough coyotes to know them winding you is tough with the wind in your face. Not a 360 effect or anything close. I have had coyotes within feet of me with proper winds. I have also have had them hit that "brick wall" from a few 100 yards and back out as quick as they came in. They rely on the wind use it your advantage.How did we get on human scent? its not how much scent- its how fresh the scent is now again, you bring up working the wind- and again, I ask you HOW are you doing so? because with tiny amounts- Q tip amounts, 1-10 drop amounts, call it as you will- your NOT getting much of a wind effect. You keep saying you set exactly on location every time, so how is the wind doing anything (except general approach directions)?
|
|
|
Post by jsevering on Mar 7, 2012 14:28:44 GMT -6
i cant help think on strike dogs... then personally kinda being on the up wind side of a dead deer carcase.... then on the down wind side...
then add in the studies on stimuli and im having a real hard time figuring what 3 more or less 30 cows coming out of a dirt hole, would be like to a coyotes senses... in any sort of olfactory vision.... small hole or big hole
i even tried to imagine it.... if they smoked refer.. sorry cant help it, bored here at home today..
i gotta ask out of curiosity how much lure do you use at your flat sets, more or less your dirt holes... do you ever use a subtle ingredient or mix... and are you defining the spot in a macro or micro type deal of the concept... jim
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Mar 7, 2012 15:16:41 GMT -6
the reference on the cows Jim, was from a study showing movement of coyotes to dead piles and one of the conclusions was that large area of carcasses- 20-30 cows far outdrew coyotes from multiple areas, in repeated trips, than an area with similar criteria but only 2-3 cow carcass as a draw.
I was lucky enough to have a dead pig pile many years ago- and the stink and stench was terrible- but it was a coyote magnet, and you could see daily, pigs moved all over by coyotes the previous night. alas, that pile is long gone- but as it melted down to just bones, then scattered bones then grass, it still was an attraction point.
but the point being, if coyotes were going to get overwhelmed by "good" smells, these would surely be the spots.
I truly believe, that with the amazing noses canines of all type have (Molly the bloodhounds, dogs trailing individuals in moon suits, drug dogs finding 1 millionth of a drop of chemical on a stick buried 10 feet underground) that they can through the use of THREE scent organs (also mentioned in one of the studies) filter and in effect moderate odors so they DON'T get overwhelmed.
again back to the hounds- ever see a rabbit cold trail a bunny through a herd of deer? I have, several times. And nothing stinks worse than a deer, or has more scent- yet, the fresh deer sign ,droppings, urine etc is ignored, even though that smell, overwhelms the rabbit smell.
I would guess, I get 20 or so sets from 2 4 oz bottles of lure. I use the same amounts at both flat sets- 2 lures- but at flat sets I separate the lure into 2 focal points, to get the walk through effect, and at flat sets I might or might not add some commercial bait, but since I use wobble holes at flat sets, the amount of bait would be small.
I don't use subtle smells. I use a skunky lure at every set- varying the 2nd lure as to gland, sweet, food based etc
As far as macro and micro, I'm trying to do both. The macro location being the obvious (or sometimes not so obvious) general locations where concentration should occur, and the micro location being setting on THE SPOT.
its been drummed into my head enough, and practical work o the ground confirms this, while there might be many locations one can take a coyote, there are going to other locations that are going to have every coyote around come through, and be in a mood to work the set.
the above, is the crux of the whole discussion.
That's the value of these studies to anyone that wants to improve at coyote trapping.
Innate behavior- what they do, and where they do it.
|
|
|
Post by jsevering on Mar 7, 2012 15:41:56 GMT -6
thanks for the low down on the three to thirty study... was having a hard time relating to it .... jim ......
sorry kid got me going, cut my reply short ... i use to run walker fox hounds... what stuck with me was hot trail 15- 20 feet down wind easy... young dogs often over ran when the fox turned... they had to work some when they over ran and you could tell it in their voice...
right on top of it, cold tracking... guess it boils down to how you look at it some... not saying your right or im wrong.... just kinda sorta relating it in my own mind to the spot... location micro and macro... foot placement and such... lots to think about is all... jim
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Mar 7, 2012 17:19:33 GMT -6
your hounds overrunning was just young hounds having more foot then sense Got to love their enthusiasm Cold trailing can be either a fault or a positive- I had one hound that absolutely would not give up a cold trial, and he would work it relentlessly, methodically making progress- til all at once his tail would start moving, he's let out that first long "about damn time here he is" bawl- and the chase was on. Once he opened, he didn't lose many. but you also get those pottering types- one that gets a whiff of something, opens up, but then doesn't know what to do with it and worries it and potters about, til finally giving up and moving on. what causes each behavior? The true cold nosed hound, has the nose process ability (for lack of any other descriptive term) to know the scent he is faintly smelling, is still active- and he doesn;t work nonsense like a potterer does. the potterer smells something- and you often see this after freezing nights, then a warm day on light snow- but his nose is such that he can't differentiate between an "active" scent, and some snippet of scent left here and there by the wind or on a whim. You mentioned strike dogs- and I don't mean strike dogs where you see tracks from a truck, and then let the "strike" dog go... but a real rare creature that of a hound that can be cut loose- and if something is there- he will be on it. In literally hundreds and hundreds of hounds, I think I've had less that a half a doz what I considered top notch strikers think of ail the factors that go into the makeup in the nose of such an individual -he not only has to process trail scent, but form scent- and must be to a degree a cold nosed dog- yet being able to handle hot scent as well and be methodically, working every area in a systematic fashion just rambling on a few things about categories of hound noses- not sure where we are disagreeing? large scents vs small?
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Mar 7, 2012 17:28:40 GMT -6
I forgot- the purpose of the above ramblings, was to pose the question- in working hounds, the nose ability, is individual. Each dog, has strengths and weakness in their abilites based on their nose.
Breeders breeding for specific traits, on often base that on scenting abilities (nose)
Are wild canines noses all alike- can every coyote, process scents the same- or are their poor nose coyotes as well as superior coyotes viv a vis scenting abilites.
Ah 1080- if there ever was a study I'd like to see for S & G if no other reason- one pertaining to this subject would be most welcome.
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Mar 7, 2012 19:51:01 GMT -6
Sorry Tman you are lossing me fast with things. YOu are all over the map my friend...... You Feel the need to use a skunky odor at every set, yet you also feel that a grasshopper and beetles have some wonderous odor factor to them. Why not grind up some hoppers and forget the skunk essenace? They are opportunist and very good oportunist, they will eat what is easy to obtain. Even hoppers with those legs that makes them go down dry and scratchy on the throat. They will eat maggot filled dead stuff as well. WE got on human scent as you FEEL the need to add alot of volume or it doesn't work as well or the fact that a visual adds more to it. So humans scent is nothing different than a lure odor correct? So the question is still unanswered how much human smell do we put off and why can a coyote smell that so much better than lure in your mind? A visual can be of benefit but can also be a hinderance as well. A coyote isn't the only thing attracted to a visual of some size, specially new in the area types. I prefer to use many natural visuals not at a trap set per say but one I know they often investigate. I had plenty of large bone piles to work out in SD most ranchers had dead piles, but the last place I would set was right on the bone pile. Other natural visuals are rocky buttes, a large knob of rocks but again the sets many where well blended on the paths to and from these types. A few examples: This set was dug in at the base of a yucaa very hard to see before this coyote tore up the yucca, I didn't need a visual I used the wind and a good backing with some lure/bait I was less than 10 ft off the travel way, why would I need a visual other than the yucca??? This set in this area was as natural as it gets and demands a response. Said coyote trail: Another such natural visual bone and rock pile on a hill top over looking a sheep pasture again why would I need to use skunky lure/ or add more visual? Use the wind and a well blended set milling effect more important to ME that is what bait and lure is about. The only thing to ME that skunky lures and 6oz of urine would have added would be a higher probabilty of NON Targets and a waste of urine and skunky lure.
|
|