|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Apr 2, 2005 17:22:15 GMT -6
Tman I know 5 guys that dry land trap alot of coon, because of the lack of water, yet a high abundance of corn and beans and some big, big Iowa coons living in old abandon barns, gravel pits, etc. They foot trap in order to be able to catch the fox and coyotes as well. East/West don't matter as long as the trap/techniques make the grade right?
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Apr 2, 2005 17:43:17 GMT -6
So you are saying no need for western or eastern or northern bmps- one size fits all?
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Apr 3, 2005 8:04:08 GMT -6
NO, I'm saying whatever it takes to get the 1.5 passed.
|
|
|
Post by trapperjoemo on Apr 4, 2005 9:42:35 GMT -6
Larry Kline said: "Sorry Joe, but your attitude saying who cares what the trap does to an animal, since we are going to knock them in the head in the morning (or within 72 hours in some States) isn't going to fly with the general public. I guess you are never intending on releasing a non- target either. Is that right? If that's what you think, you ought to just keep it to yourself." Larry, Thank you very much for your apolgy. (that is what that "sorry" means.... correct?) Perhaps you feel some kind of guilt?
I did not say I don`t care what the trap does.
I have little intention of releasing "non-targets", as I don`t have enough to warrant a conversation about them, but... When my trapping season opens, all furbearers are legal. So, no non-targets in that group. Pets, well, we all know they never leave the owners yard or house. Isn`t that what we always hear? and as for other wildlife non-targets... I hit more non-targets on the highway in a years time than the number of non-targets I catch! I try to see what I do in the BIG PICTURE. I don`t see the bmp`s helping trappers catch and hold more critters... that is what we do you know. I`m starting to get an image of the "people" defending bmp`s as (the) way to save trapping. Some of us trappers have a feeling that many bmp`s will be adopted by state agencies, which is one more form of restriction or hardship on us. I know, someone will say that what the states do is up to them, but if you put the bmp`s out there, and the general public "tells" us those bmp`s "sound" good, what will the state need to do to keep us trappers working for free? The state will go with bmp`s, the trappers will re-tool or quit. Some trappers have the view that ANY trapping is better than NO trapping at all. I don`t think so. Have I misunderstood the reason we "need" the bmp`s? Let`s see... we show the middle class voteing public the bmp`s and tell them,"look how careing and responsible we are", can we still trap.... pleeeease? The soccer moms vote, and trapping is approved. BUT, you know those soccer moms are going to expect us to be using those same bmp`s! So don`t try and sell us on the idea that it`s JUST up to each state. And Larry`s last statement, " If that's what you think, you ought to just keep it to yourself." I probably will (keep it to myself) from now on.
I will watch, and I continue to wonder about the real motives of some people here, and on other trapping forums. Maybe us trappers are being misdirected, after all, we are just (simple) trappers, not polititions. Or, am I wrong, and we are very clever!? And the bmp`s are just a scheme designed to FOOL the public into letting us trap just like we have been? After all, the public will never read the bmp`s, and very few of the public will ever see our traplines. So they will just assume we are all following the bmp`s! Wow, we are a clever group, aren`t we!
Joe
|
|
|
Post by thebeav2 on Aug 15, 2005 7:30:49 GMT -6
I have been a little bored so i read all this. It seems one side is trying to push BMP results and the other side Is trying to push trapping methods. No matter what you feel works for you In your situation It's not going to work In all situations. I'm not picking on you steve when i say this But. Lets say we test standard 1 1/2 coil springs and we have a chain 4 feet long on this chain we place a section of PVC and we attach a 6' long sapling to the chain as a drag. We test this system for one whole season In MN . It works we have very little self chewing with this system. So now It becomes a law that we all have to use this system If we want to use a 1 1/2 coil spring for coon trapping. What has that gained us? Pushing trapping methods down some trappers throat Is just as bad as telling him he has to use this type of trap or he won't be trapping. The way to solve this whole problem Is to stop trapping coon with foot holds.
Are we testing traps or trappers or methods?
Gary
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Aug 16, 2005 16:39:51 GMT -6
how can you separate the two? Aren't recommended checks methods?
Tell me this - what would you do- to get a coon to chew the maximum amount and the maximum number of times.
How would you make your set?
|
|
|
Post by thebeav2 on Aug 16, 2005 17:28:44 GMT -6
I still maintain that we have to test the trap It's self. Example: we know If you put the trap in the water and keep the coons foot under water you will reduce chewing and or elimanate It. Right? But some poor slob that uses 1 1/2 coils In Texas and dosen't have any water around Is then going to be SOL. Right Same with using drags, we know that with the use of drags we can reduce the foot chewing, by keeping the animal working on something other then It's foot. But what about the poor slob from Timbucktoo Iowa that's got hundereds of coon 100s of miles of ditches with not a three In sight. Does he carry green saplings around with him so that he can use the 1 1/2 coil for coon trapping. I think not. As we can see there Is no hard and fast remedy. All tests are done with the trap being modified In different ways,not the methods. That Is the only way you can come up with a standard that will fit all trappers all over the country.
Yep I can hind foot a coon and reduce foot chewing I can catch him on a front foot and let him get into a culvert and that will help. But again we are talking about methods and not the trap It's self. Untill they come up with some kind of foot hold that meets the BMP standards I think we are SOL. Maybe FWS should just scrap the coon BMPS and admit defeat on on them.
I'm sorry but coon foot chewing Is just the nature of the beast.
Gary
|
|
|
Post by Steve Gappa on Aug 16, 2005 19:11:25 GMT -6
Gary- I agree with much of what you said- BUT..please answer my question. I asked it to make a very specific point.
plus- coyote traps WERE tested by methods- chain length, drags, staking, etc
|
|
|
Post by bblwi on Aug 16, 2005 21:36:50 GMT -6
Steve and others, I have not participated in the above discussion. I am a fence rider on the BMPs. Maybe more of a BMP person then not. I feel that the NTA would have been better served by continuing inside the process longer and been part of the debate and questioning as an organization. Once reports and recommendations were being published the NTA could have made the decision as to how they would choose to respond. I feel that being part of the research would have been good for all of us. As regulations and trap sizes start infiltrating the states and the countries what is the science that is being used to establish the regs? Or is it more politically correct then science? The whole statement above may very well been a discussion and decision tht the NTA came to much earlier and that is why we are not an active player in the continued study. With that out of the Steve you asked about maximum mutilatition with highest consistancy. From my experience with WI coon in WI only now. I would say that if I set 1.75, 2 coils or 3 coils and or similar size dble longsprings( all square jaw) with no lamination in an open field with 8-12 inches of chain with a heavy enough pan tension to have a very high catch on the coon's front foot I would maximize the chewing and replicate that event the most often. As you can see there are many variables that can be changed. Methods, locations, trap type and size. Which of these are BMPS? My idea is everything, we then need to decide how to separate so that we can quantify and or qualify the specific area we want to researh, study or test.
Bryce
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Aug 17, 2005 6:17:15 GMT -6
much of what you stated- were the exact protocals used. The tests could NOT have been conducted to cause these traps to fail more.
And Gary is 100% right- an issue that should have been addressed EARLY BEFORE tests were copnducted. Coon chew.
A coon is NOT a coyote.
methods, locations, etc as bryce says- could ALL have been mandated and tested for.
To say the trap was tested and not the methods- is to ignore genrations of things coon trappers know and developed for themselves.
|
|
|
Post by thebeav2 on Aug 17, 2005 6:45:16 GMT -6
On maximising chewing what Bryce said. As to NTA being Involved In BMPs no way at least not In the credits. If you have a study done by a trapping org or a non trapping org,what would the general public find more credibiltiy In ?. As to trap mods and trapping methods a big difference between the two. You can add 8 feet of chain and attach a steel grapnel and use It all over the country. Although I would hate to do that to my coon traps, I've climbd to many trees trying to get my traps back. You can add ten swivels and attach a shock spring and change lengths of your chain and then add lamination but that Is a trap mod that improves the trap It's self, but It's not a trapping method. I would hate to see state goverments getting Into legislating trapping methods. No matter what you feel works there Is still no clear cut solution as to saving the 1 1/2 coil spring for coon trapping.
Gary
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Aug 17, 2005 7:19:48 GMT -6
you are wrong gary- in my humble opinion, of course. I have layed out several methods of reducing/eliminating chewing- but have been met with a "traps not methods" stonewall.
For example- drags- a multi branched drag- on small water or land- is a method I use a lot. Never a problem with finding the drags or coon- and chewing is almost nonexistent.
water alone? Even easier. THe dumbest thing I ever heard- all water traps 1) have no cover around them 2) are staked so coon has free access to land.
Do...lets see what the tests showed....
Why, the coon chewed in that situation..
Duh.
|
|
|
Post by thebeav2 on Aug 17, 2005 15:05:38 GMT -6
Guys I have a system, well it wasn't my idea. You can take just about any stock trap out of the box add 2' of chain to the stock chain and set it just about any place and catch coon and In most cases you won't have any chewing. Hear's how It works. You set a 160 In a box and stake down the box within 12" to 18" from your set. when the coon gets caught it will run In the box to hide bang dead coon no foot chewing.It really makes the old 1 1/2 coil preform with no foot damage to the coon.
Gary
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Aug 17, 2005 16:04:44 GMT -6
I see the whole coon BMP debate alive and kicking
|
|
|
Post by bblwi on Aug 17, 2005 21:35:39 GMT -6
Beav, I will need to visit with about the credibility issue of who should do the testing and how valid that may be. I am probably wrong in my assumptions of the NTAs role early on with the BMP process. That does not mean they were wrong just that I am not familiar with the early work and what lead to what.
HOW about a way too late to matter What If? What if a biology or ecology graduate student lets say about 12 were assigned to each travel with a specific trapper on his or her line and have them use the methods they always did. Some water, some dryland, some Little Grizz, North, south Mid Atlantic. There could have been a standardized recording form and then all could have been compared. The idea here is the tabulation of methods and traps could have served as the basis to now develop a more formal statistical study that could have developed into the BMPs? The cost of that initial data collection would have not been unduly high from my perspective. There were and maybe are grants for this process. The types of trappers that could have been used could have been the same as used in the BMP process so then one the data could have demonstrated if any improvement or less trauma or chewing was evident by employing perceived to be better traps or methods.
Bryce
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Aug 18, 2005 9:38:55 GMT -6
That would be as accurate reporting as any. Thats basically how the research on the otter line was conducted. They choose the traps, I choose my methods. The results of my methods with their traps, was recorded as data.
About the same on the coyotes except I choose the traps.
By #1 complaint about the coon bmp is very simple- coons are not coyotes and the Olsen scale- once the mystique and mystery is removed- is as arbitrary a system as is out there- yet it now is considered dogma.
As beav and many others say- coons chew.
Make that viewpoint the basis for ALL tests conducted- and its soon obvious, methods become the determining factor.
Its obvious ot all coon trappers that take more than 20 coon a year- certain methods REDUCE/ELIMINATE chewing.
No brag, just a fact.
A shame this wasn't incorporated into the protocal.
|
|
|
Post by MRussell on Aug 18, 2005 19:35:03 GMT -6
It is a shame that these BMP's carry so much weight. To me the shameful part of it is the notion that they will circumvent education and experience of tried and true trappers. I agree that these studies have their merits but also could be used to tie the whole trapping community to the whipping post. So in essence it is a big deal when coons and coyotes are judged by the same standard. even though the most effective methods to catch either species vary more than the test parameters allow for. The anti's are no different than terrorist groups in my opinion.focused and well funded. among others attributes.
my 2cents
MR
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Aug 19, 2005 9:24:47 GMT -6
Broken record but, you have got to keep the same thresholds NO Matter the species being tested or you will be showing a bias and that would take away all credability on the part of any such BMP test done!!!!!
You can not "float" the thresholds for each species, because then your handicapping the tools that are used period!!! If you do that and get your wish then the testing is all a mute point because you could get any and ALL traps to pass!!!! The general public would then never put trust into what we had to say again.
The big deal isn't that all species are judged under the same set of standards, the bigger deal would be to manipulate the testing, we would loose all credability in this whole process.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Gappa on Aug 19, 2005 9:31:41 GMT -6
If what you said is true- then it would also be logical to use the SAME trap in testing all species. If fact, it would be extremely hard to justify using different traps for different animals- If one is logical than so is the other.
If one is illogical, then so is the other.
|
|
|
Post by MRussell on Aug 19, 2005 9:40:40 GMT -6
How can the playing field really be level with an across the board standard for all animals.I wonder how mink would fair?How much injury would they incure? For anyone that has ever caught them ,that would be an easy one. Parts of this deal make me feel like I did when mom took me in for immunization shots. Remember it like it was yesterday. I had to be held down cause I was kicking and screaming as the guy was preparing to stick me in the A$$ with that huge needle. All the while I was being told that this was good for me. Maybe so but I still did not like it at the time. ;D
MR
|
|