BMP descrepancies

[CoonDuke]

Did anyone but me notice these documents are loaded with descrepancies??

For example, on the Bridger #2 modified trap, the western coyote BMP says it is laminated with 3/16" and the eastern coyote and red fox BMP says it is laminated with 1/4". In the western coyote BMP, it says the trap is approved for e. coyote and red fox so it is not a different trap.

I found some other numbers and specs that looked like they were off.

[robertw]

Wait until you read the Trapper Ed manual!

[trappincoyotes39]

Actually coon duke both east and west in my sheets state 3/16ths lamination on the bottom side of the jaws? I don't have printed off the red fox study yet so you maybe right on that, also they state: That traps and modifications can very by 1/8th of an inch and still be in the same ballpark on useage guidlines due to different manufactures of materials.

[CoonDuke]

On the sheets I saw, east says 1/4" and west says 3/16".

The 1/8" of leeway is a good thing to help keep traps already modified BMP approved.

[trappnman]

leeways, fudge factors, suite data, small samples- gee...money well spent.....

at least they are testing trappers and not traps.....

[trappincoyotes39]

Tman, glad to see you looking at that glass as always being half empty versus half full sometimes LOL!

[trappnman]

Actaully, I'm not as anti bmp as you might think. I haven't read the western coyote one yet, but imagine I'll find it pretty much on the money, as was the eastern coyote one.

By problem with the bmps lies with two things- the strict adherence to the Olson Scale- and the refusal to test trappers methods as well as traps.

The coyote bmps are, in my definition of methods- loaded with methodology.

My main beef specifically- is that i nthe coon bmps- yo ucould not have sat down and written a ptotocal meant ot encitem aximum chewing than if that would have been the motive.


Staking without concealment, staking on long chains with land access in combination with above- will give you the most coons doing the maximum damge.

My worst case coons are ALWAYS in staked out coyote sets.

My problem isn't with BMPs per se- its with BAD bmps.

[trappincoyotes39]

By problem with the bmps lies with two things- the strict adherence to the Olson Scale- and the refusal to test trappers methods as well as traps.

The coyote bmps are, in my definition of methods- loaded with methodology

Tman we have been over this before if not the olsen scale what scale of measuring "trap inflicted damage" would you want to see? The Olsen scale has a history in past trap studies nothing else that I'm aware of has ever been used in this type of trap study. Again to get a new scale to pass all involved and measure with what you deem "science" would be years if ever developed.

It is a good scale in terms of being straight foward and labeling the different damage that can be trap inflicted. The history in measuring damage of trapped animals in the past few studies done on this subject. Also to weight the scale for each species would make the outcomes weighted or handicapped and put one species on a higher plain than the next. Something I don't feel would be in trappers "best interest".

Please explain the coyote studies East/West being loaded with methodology?

As far as the coon study and the protocol could things be different? Yes, but I also noted traps with jaw guards and double jawed traps passed under the "strict protocol used" so is that saying these traps have oustanding value as coons traps for most water sets? I would say yes they do if they passed the muster ("under the toughest protocol for maximum chewing" )Tmans words. In water sets how would these trap types hinder any mink or muskrat trapping activitys? Outside of retooling?

Maybe they need to take it one further and do a dryland coon BMP as well?

My worst case coons are ALWAYS in staked out coyote sets.

Yes I 100% agree, as zags and others have pointed out coyote traps don't make ideal coon traps by anymeans due to the room under the jaws for a coon to chew. That would be expected with these trap types and sizes.

[trappincoyotes39]

Also as a side note I have noticed the majority of coons I catch by the hind foot have very little if any damage to the foot, a far sry from front footed coons in #3 and sterlings so maybe the answer would be to target the hind foot with those coyote traps

[trappnman]

Please explain the coyote studies East/West being loaded with methodology?


we been down this road before- ANY hints, instructions, etc on HOW to set and use the trap- are methods.

The Olsen scale has a history in past trap studies nothing else that I'm aware of has ever been used in this type

WHAT exactly is the history as to where and when the Olson Scale was used for similar trap studies. It was not, as far as I know, devloped FOR trapping injuries or indeed ever used much in that purpose, before the bmps process.

It can be concise, and clear and short- but if wrong for the application- which the TRAPPERS argued, then its wrong....

Target certain feet on coon is a hobbiests game.

[trappincoyotes39]

Tman, NWRC has used the olsen scale in the past on the few studies they did in reguards to what damage a trap does on a coyote.

Your ideal of methods is alot of what is common practice and knowledge found in the BMP"s, staking a coyote trap is something the large majority do. Running swivels is again something "good trappers do". I don't see any "methods" found in the coyote East/West that is something the majority don't already do. The traps were staked solid and the testing was done on the trap under the hardest circumstances yet we had many pass, we may have had a few more models pass if coyote traps were dragged as well? but many good coyote traps passed.

Now before you get to far into the methods and coons, remember that by adding the jaw guard under the Basic circumstances (staked solid) the 1.5 did pass, they didn't test different techniques but had the traps modified to keep the coons from chewing and testing the trap in that reguards like any other animal study done to this point.

Why did someone come up with stoploss traps? They seen the problem with muskrats and designed a better trap to elimanate wring outs. It wasn't the technique so much as how the trap performed with and without the additions to the longspring. It is the muskrat and it's rolling coupled with small front fragile feet that lead to an improved design change on the trap.

The coon backfoot thing was in jest. I do understand some of your frustration with the Coon BMP, but I also know that to change the injury scale or mandate certain protocol would not be in the trappers best interest to get passing grades on certain trap types. I will ask again would not the 1.5 dbl jaw or coon guard model pass all test as a coon BMP trap?

The drowning issue is not dead and it may be comming, who knows as I think you would see the most exspensive testing to date. Would not a 1.5 dbl jaw/coon guard trap hold the majority of all coons,mink and rats that land in them? Serious question.

[love2trap]

trappincoyotes35 said:

It is a good scale in terms of being straight foward and labeling the different damage that can be trap inflicted.

One of the main problems I see isn't with the Olsen scale itself so much as it is with the techniques that trappers use. We are harvesters of fur. So, limiting yourself to testing just animals that are alive as far as trap damage goes is not realistic...especially with species like coon and rats that are most commonly drowned at the trap site.

Why can't you necropsy a drowned coon in a 1.5 coil and see what damage was inflicted by the trap? Why does a dead animal automatically result in an Olsen scale failure? The trap didn't cause the death...humane techniques did!

TC37, you said it yourself in an earlier post (quoted above) the Olsen scale tests TRAP damage. As long as the trap didn't kill the animal, then what is the difference between testing a live coona and a humanely drowned one?

Mark

[trappincoyotes39]

Mark the olsen scale test trap injury the issue of drowning comes into a humane aspect. How quick does the coon or rat drown? Does it drown from water in the lungs or in colder areas hypothermia? Does it take 2mins or 40 mins for each species to sucumb to drowning?

I state that I have No problem with drowning, but I'm not the head of any power belt that makes the decisions. I know there has been more talk on the issue and maybe we will see the drowning issue be brought to light, I would think many traps would do well on a drowning BMP, problem is there would be much greater exspense involved in this testing.

I think it would be a great study,as Canada found out testing traps for time of death can get exspensive and they switched to a computer generated test for conibears I believe due to cost on an actual trapline.

[trappnman]

Hamilton told me directly that there never will be a drowning bmp approval on coon. Just won't happen and the reason is simply the Vets council will not- in any form approve it.

They will go along with drowning "aquatic" animals like rats and beaver. I don't know about mink-0 that would be borderline I guess.

The reasoning is that rats and beaver take naturally to the water and once underwater, then drown.
This is what Dave told me on the phone.

But lets look at coon. Can we consider restraining itself inanimane (I refuse to use the term inhumane on animals)? THe answer would be no.

So- I've watched coon go down a drowning wire. I've had a few years ago that didn't go down the wire, so an easy way of dispatch was to toss the into the water and let them go down the wire and drown.

Not so easy. A coon goes down the slide reluctantly. So time here.....5-10minutes. But isn't that restraining... so that time should count no more than time spent in a trap on land (Now I just shoot them rather than wait.)

But once underwater- they dispatch quicker than a rat or mink does or certainly a beaver.

So- as far as DROWNING time- a coon goes quicker.

Yet it is judged more inhumane? THATS the type of reasoning we are dealing with concerning the Vets council.

And thats my major beef with the bmp arrangement. Trappers have little real input- never had, and it seems that the Wildlife guys have little inpact also- that is, in every "either or" ith the vets council- they win.

something not quite right about that.

[SgtWal]

If memory serves, the Canadians did a study called the"Fatal Dive" in which monitored animals were placed in tanks with footholds set on artifical banks.
Many animals did not jump for the water when the trap fired as some believe. They went about their feeding and dived when done. They showed no sign of discomfort.
Most "drownings" were actually death by narcosis. The throat closed off and the animal died from CO2 build up in the body. The rest from water in the lungs as expected.
I have serious doubts that many methods used for putting down animals will survive review by the AVMA.
Their standards, for example, suggest gunshots as suitable only for free roaming animals.
And when our ADC regs were re-written drowning was specificaly addressed and voted down as acceptable.
As long as there is any input from the AVMA and the AR groups trapping will suffer.



wayne

[trappincoyotes39]

Sgt wal the BMP criteria is for a 22 caliber head shot so I don't get the free roaming animal scenario?

See the states get to mandate their regs as your state did with ADC policy, not the feds or anyone else. Our state has no such regulations and I know others that do not either when it comes to drowning.

Restraining and death are 2 different aspects of it all, people want repsect of the whole process you can't lump the 2 into 1. For most general public to accept trapping they want the animal to be restrained in the best way we can and they want quick/ relatively painless death to come to them. The reason many slaughter houses have switched the way they kill our beef,poultry etc.

[trappnman]

not true TC- death via bodygrippers are not only included, but get prominant billing.

[trappincoyotes39]

What is not true? I'm talking the US BMP.

[trappnman]

The coon bmps devote as much time to conibears as they do to footholds.

Fine with me- but dead is dead.

[sinrud]

Discrepancies!!! Lets talk about the libelous language, improper restrictions, highly selective studies, non scientific scientific testing, manipulated results, lack of communication excluding manufacture and trapper input. Or simply the fact that the BMP was developed to promote fur trade with the EU while the EU has no such "BMP" process and they don't attempt to screw up the trapping methods available.
Contact the FTA - they know what' going on.
Thompson Snares (Me) is sending a letter of intent to the IAFWA/BMP on 3/20/06. If you want information on this - send me an e-mail.

Dick Sinrud