|
Post by BrandonH on Mar 6, 2006 18:45:01 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Mar 7, 2006 9:46:06 GMT -6
just had time to look at the coon one. not much info in the published report. I suppose they tried to minimize the fallout. One surprize that I didn't know, was that bodygrips would be so much a part of it. If a killing tool like the bodygrip could be tested, why don't another killing tool, the drowning rig? AT LEAST have a paragraph saying ALL traps are recommended for drowning purposes.
Also- it would have been nice to see an admittance, that techniques can and will change the results of the recommendations.
all in all, blah stuff.
|
|
|
Post by jeffc on Mar 7, 2006 12:52:46 GMT -6
So a no#1 coilspring passes and not a 1 1/2?
Jeff
|
|
|
Post by DaveLyons on Mar 7, 2006 15:02:19 GMT -6
That is what it appears to say. But after going over all of it. It looks like the big thing was the distacne between Bottom of the jaw to the pan distance. But this is what I am getting out of it. Not saying this is gospel.
Since I have never used the Sleepy Creeks is this how there double Jaw comes or was this some sort of add on???
What I don't like about the Coon BMP is the cage trap in the standard. The rest I would live with although it would mean retooling a bit.
Dave
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Mar 7, 2006 15:13:38 GMT -6
Jeff C read it well, the 1 coilspring "only" passed in the SE US, as I'm sure there front feet are smaller and couldn't get to them to chew as easy as bigger midwestern and western coons could depending on depth of foot in trap.
There are 1.5's that passed all having a jaw guard or double jaw configuration to keep the coons mouth away from the toes.
|
|
|
Post by SgtWal on Mar 7, 2006 21:04:09 GMT -6
I'm glad to see these. This place has been too dam quiet. If you get a chance read the survey on trapping they did back in 92. It's at the bottom of the same page as the BMPs. Some interesting findings in there.
wayne
|
|
|
Post by SgtWal on Mar 8, 2006 17:29:51 GMT -6
It looks like they used a survey, now 10 years old, to see what trappers were using. Lots of interesting stuff in there. Interesting that with all the comments about using drowning sets, less than 20% of the trappers asked said they used them for raccoon. Interesting that the top 3 traps for Coyote were a #3 coil, a #2 coil, and a #3 double long. Also interesting that less than 10 % of the trappers used the dog proof traps available then.
wayne
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Mar 8, 2006 20:34:57 GMT -6
Sgt wal they used the last "national" trappers survey available to them as would any other research, they are in the process of doing a new study sometime in the near future and I bet that will change alot now that laminations and base plating and animal comfort is at the forefront, I doubt we will see the #3 dbl as staying high on the list for coyotes.
As far as coons and drowning I beleive it, who would want to go through the troubel needed or in alot of areas have the water needed to drown coons, so 20% does not surprise me at all. Doesn't make a fast/ efficant coon line over a large area.
I'm also sure the 10% is correct as trappers are a tough bunch to add to change, look at guys like Slim P and OG they were preaching base plating and lamination better than 15+ years ago and look how long it took to catch on, also alot of those early coon specifics were pretty exspensive comapired to other traps types some just poor design and now we have better priced and better specific coon traps like the grizz which guys have caught 1,000 coons in a season with. I guess we can't say they are a hinderance and cost you coons now can we?
|
|
|
Post by dj88ryr on Mar 8, 2006 21:44:35 GMT -6
look at guys like Slim P and OG they were preaching base plating and lamination better than 15+ years ago and look how long it took to catch on, Still more without than with out there, and maybe their traps were crap and they HAD to do this to make them hold up, with todays traps, not so much of a nessesity.
|
|
|
Post by Zagman on Mar 9, 2006 7:38:45 GMT -6
look at guys like Slim P and OG they were preaching base plating and lamination better than 15+ years ago and look how long it took to catch on,
Still more without than with out there, and maybe their traps were crap and they HAD to do this to make them hold up, with todays traps, not so much of a nessesity.
DJ: Do you know of what you are speaking? They were advocating modifying YOUR beloved Monties......the old catalogs first had the Sterling-modified #3 dogless Montgomery (Montana!)....
Then, Montgomery went out of business.....
Then, they were selling/touting the #3 NW coil, a GREAT production trap that continues to be my favorite factory dog-on trap....
Then, NW went out of business.....
So, then they started pushing the modified/Canadian jaw #3 Bridger......
None of these traps were "junk or bad traps"......
And, in the mix, in the shadows, lurking, was the Sterling.....the trap that embodies all of the very best qualities of modifications in a custom-made trap.
So, to your comment, these guys were not pushing mods on junk #4 jumps, Herters coils, or #3 longsprings.....
They took good traps and made them better......
Impossible in some minds, but true in my opinion.
Zagman
|
|
|
Post by Steve Gappa on Mar 9, 2006 7:56:45 GMT -6
As far as coons and drowning I beleive it, who would want to go through the troubel needed or in alot of areas have the water needed to drown coons, so 20% does not surprise me at all. Doesn't make a fast/ efficant coon line over a large area.
no- that is not true in any way. Drowning is the only option for any state having a 3 day check on drowning sets. Its the ONLY way to run a longline efficiently and over a large area. I would be willing to bet that the 20% using drowning 10 years ago- contained 19% of the top numbers coon men.
Drowning coon is simple, easy and quick if you set up right for it.
|
|
|
Post by SgtWal on Mar 9, 2006 8:13:28 GMT -6
I pointed out the age of the survey, not to put it down, but to point out how long ago it was taken. Alot has changed over the last 10 years. Fur prices weakened, Eastern Coyotes increased, Muskrats declined, gas prices doubled, new traps came out,and several other factors that would impact trapper activity. I saw Bodicker was running a simple survey last year, and his work was quoted in the survey used by the working group. I wonder what the newer information will bring to the table. If you haven't read that report of the findings I pointed out I highly reccommend it as it is an eye opener as far as how the regions compare. www.furbearermgmt.org/documentcenter/1992_ownership-use_of_traps.pdfwayne
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Mar 9, 2006 15:51:18 GMT -6
Sgt wal, OK I see your point and is well takin, yes alot has changed in the last 10-15 years some good and some not so good.
Steve OK, but I know for me and having limited water sheds that snares were my ticket to catching a pile of coons, not 500+ but a good share of them each fall, quick,easy and way less exspensive than running 200 traps and having to deal with drowning and the such. For me it was corn fields, bean fields and bridges.
In my younger years it was water sheds and weighted drags, but then in hill country you had to deal with ever changing water levels and the such, after fine tuning snaring it made coon trapping much quicker and more enjoyable for me. Coons some years were the easy money and others paid for the gas and equipment to trap my high priority specie "the coyote".
|
|
|
Post by dj88ryr on Mar 10, 2006 21:38:38 GMT -6
Zag, I have stated before that my devotion to Montgomery was the DOGLESS design. You kind of made my point though, with the advent of the Montana, which is a recreation of the Montgomery, only they did it better, and therefore there is less need for anything to be done, out of the box and prepped and set, You CAN succesfully catch coyotes with an unmodified Montana, I have, although not as many as you. A new trapper today, could purchase a few Montanas and start out catching coyotes without the " Bother " ( my opinion ) to DICK with traps.
What??....Did you get tired of arguing with Gappa...... ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Mar 12, 2006 9:21:24 GMT -6
I'll have to say- snaring coon seems as easy a way to take coon as I ever saw. No wonder those big 1000+ coon catches are coming from Iowa and roadside snaring laws. When we tried to snare yotes- you couldn't keep coon OUT of the snares. I can only imagine the success rate when actually trying for them.
My reason for drowning is simple- 3 day check. Snares and drags are 24 hours here.
My hope is that we will eventually get a longer snare check- perhaps 3 days so similar to conibear check laws.
|
|
|
Post by ccarlier on Mar 22, 2006 19:46:43 GMT -6
Sorry guys but we are governed too much by appointments now. BMP had a good idea in 1902 but times has changed. The FTA wasn't invited on BS reasons. Time we get together before we really have problems with the anti's. Just my opinion
|
|
|
Post by ccarlier on Mar 26, 2006 19:41:38 GMT -6
Correction to last post: IAFWA in place of BMP in 1902.
|
|