Response to Wiley

[trappnman]

Wiley- its obvious you have spent little time coon trapping. You read what others have posted or written, but you don't have the practical knowledge to know if its credible or not. So allow me to enlighten you a little.

T'man: "When you have those responsible for determining the regulations, conducting studies that impact those regulations- isn't the vested interest pretty obvious?"

When you have private trappers conducting studies that "MIGHT INFLUENCE" future regulations FOR THEIR BENEFIT, yes, the vested interest is pretty obvious. How do you like that spin?

What studies are yo talking about? I would like copies.

Beats the hell out of the sideline grenade lobbers who bitch about an INEVITABLE PROCESS "after the fact". Know anyone like that? Two can play the "categorization games" Gappa.

As if the US would have never faced another trapping regulation without BMPS. LOL! As if nobody would have ever conducted trap testing research that would have been used by someone to "INFLUENCE" regulations. LOL! Once again, bitching about the smoke of a train that has long since past. Really accomplishes alot doesn't it Steve??

Bitching after the fact? You know something I don't? Are you pulling info out of the air or what? Pretty bold of you to assume it was after the fact.

Do you know the dates of my first conversations with Dave Hamilton?

No? Didn't think so. So since the above ramble was based on inaccurate assumptions, I';ll dismiss it

A more logical approach would be to try to ban any future trap testing and try to pass the "red faced test" explaining the reason for such a ban to the wildlife management agencies ("we might not like some of the results"). [Sarcasm]

don't have a clue what this pertains to or why you brought it up.

My participation in the bmp study was no more responsible for determining any trapping regulations than any private trappers participation in the bmp study.

Why ? Did someone say it did? I suggest you read more carefully- you are making a lot of assumptions based on words not posted.

Regarding a "PERCEIVED BIAS", ironically, I have fought our own "wildlife management agency personnel" on trapping related regulations ON BEHALF OF THE PRIVATE TRAPPERS numerous times so get off your "quest for motive" that is contradictory to the private trapper. I told you, that dog won't hunt and it won't. Actions speak louder than "CHEAP TALK".

once again- READ. "quest for motive" contradictory to private trappers? where did that for example come from? thin air- cause certainly not even implied in any of my posts..

Want to walk on my fighting side, just accuse me of not defending the private trappers rights particularly when we (ADC trappers in SD) have been criticized by our own agency for not considering the agencies stance on certain issues (72 hour trap check and breakaway locks). Nothing pisses me off more than these "CHICKENSH*T" allegations of my having any vested interest other than what is best for the private trapper considering my history. I went through that same bullsh*t with certain disgruntled SDTA members who tried to create AN ILLUSION OF WILDLIFE AGENCY BIAS (imagined) when I was an NTA director.

You know what pisses ME off? Those that don't read and interject their own thoughts into others posts. I DEFY you to show me ANY of what you speak. Whats chickenshit is your reaction to an imaginary insult.

Who do you think led the battle in getting a 72 hour trap check in western SD??? Does that particular piece of "REGULATION" sound more conducive to private trappers or to wildlife management personnel including conservation officers??

Who do you think led the battle in getting breakaway locks to replace deer stops??? Does that particular piece of "REGULATION" sound more conducive to private trappers or to wildlife management personnel including conservation officers who have to enforce those "MORE COMPLICATED" regulations??

Silence.................?? you are arguing yourself. what do you want me to say except better reread the posts and keep things in context

I'm absolutely amazed that you would even throw that empty allegation (having a bias other than what would be in the best interests of the private trapper) out there considering all I have done for private trappers. I also hate the idea of having to sell myself regarding what I have done for private trappers but you put me in the defense mode.

Time to get off that hobby horse. See above, and above ,and above.

Get off this lame attempt to discredit anyone who looks objectively at bmps as having some inherent bias or MOTIVE other than what is in the best interests of private trappers. It only detracts from your arguments and screams of desperation on your part. Use some logic on this issue and deal in facts rather than speculation. Dont' be one of those who "discredit" because their arguments are empty.

see above

I participated in the COYOTE studies to prove what we have been stating all along is true and that is that properly modified traps are every bit as "ANIMANE" as the padded public pacifiers. We proved it. Is that a good thing or a bad thing? Well, so why the hell disregard that good data with your coon bmp blaming???

see above

note: i have said in dozs of posts you apparently haven't read coyote =good in bmps


Tell me, have we seen more states use bmps to defend modified traps and use the snare data to get snaring back in their state, or to regulate 1 1/2 coils out of existence FOR ALL FORMS OF COON TRAPPING??

Huh T'man?

Answer the question...........

Sure- but first.....what states do you think got ...snaring?

.....what states got modified traps approved using the bmps?



T'man: "I just find it interesting, and let this statement stand on its own- that the only two men here really promoting the bmps, with all the faults and all- are two gov't trappers both who participated in the bmps."

"RED HERRING"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

DIVERSION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hahaha! WOW, some revelation that is?

How the hell do you get "PROMOTING BMPS" from "DEFENDING CERTAIN ASPECTS OF BMPS"?? That's quite a leap there Skippy!

You have quite an imagination or an ability to spin, I'll hand that to you. Right back to the old two camps again huh? You're either blaming bmps for any future trapping regulations or your "PROMOTING THEM". LOL!

I just find it interesting, and let this statement stand on it's own - that the few men here really "BLAMING" the bmps, with all their positive results disregarded, are coon trappers who didn't see their pet traps fair well regardless of the protocol tested.

And that folks- is vested interest.

How do you like them apples? Ready to ban me yet?

As if the number of "DEFENDERS OF CERTAIN ASPECTS OF BMPS" vs. the number of "BMP BLAMERS" on this forum is indicative of a cross section of views on bmps. LOL! Yet another "ILLUSION"!

A safer bet is that only a few of us are stupid enough to argue about it.

and thats your opinion


Gappa: "I was told entanglement, holding coon in water, etc- was inhumane so not on the table."

You can argue the issue of what is and what is not "ANIMANE" forever and never reach consensus and that is where the process turned to the science of stress regarding body temperatures, etc.

lets take it one thing at a time. ENTANGLEMENT was not allowed by protocol. Nothing to do with body temps. FACT

The facts of the matter is that when restraining raccoon in COLD WATER, I repeat COLD WATER, you are dealing with hypothermia which elevates stress.

If you have a dead raccoon due to hypothermia, you have the lowest score possible for a "RESTRAINING" trap set. Pretty hard to make the argument that you "RESTRAINED" an animal properly when it's flatlined due to hypothermia.

"HE'S DEAD BUT HE AIN'T CHEWIN' BY GAWD!"
Depends on your area, now doesn't it? Hypothermia is NOT a problem with coon in the northern belt. I've taken 1000s of coon in Dec and Jan in ice water and can count the number dead o none hand.

and besides, If hypothermia is a problem in restraining traps on coon , isn't 72 hours holding yotes in heat the same?

To be quite honest, I think the argument of holding a raccoon in water to keep him from chewing is stupid "IF" you have the water depth to drown him. No need to argue that point with me because I see nothing wrong with drowning a coon and will fight to the bitter end for the PRIVATE TRAPPERS ability to drown a raccoon WHICH DOESN'T HAVE A DAMN THING TO DO WITH "RESTRAING TRAP" BMPs.

No it doesn't buddy- but the fact that the CONCEPT of drowning coon WILL NEVER BE ON THE TABLE whether in a killing set or not. And thats the important issue here. Keep up.

T'man: "So no grenades Wiley- genuine apallment at bogus tests and protocol- and I offered my thoughts LONG BEFORE THIS WAS ALL A DONE DEAL."

Once again, you paint with your broad brush as if ALL bmp protocols were BOGUS. Be specific to coon because there is very little that is bogus about the coyote protocols.

Once again read the past 2 years history to find out what I really said.

Is the raccoon protocol bogus? Not in my opinion. If I am going to restrain coon, I want them on land not in the water and there is many traps to do just that.

Even the latest Fur Taker magazine showed some new innovations to prevent coons from chewing.

you of course have your opinion as a coon trapper.

T'man: "Since I haven't yet bestowed the status of Gods onto the BMP committee, I find it within my rights to tell them that their version of "humane" is based on the Bambieesque version offered and rammed through by the Vets Council."

You have every right and I totally support your right to voice your concerns about any particular aspect of bmps but I will criticize you the minute you try to lump that criticism into ALL BMPS IN GENERAL.

see above

T'man: "As far as the NTA experts doing this or that- thats neither here nor there.

Obviously they aren't that expert if they didn't find that holding coon in water on short chains eliminated chewing."

They were expert enough to realize that a death by hypothermia gave the "RESTRAINING TRAP" the lowest score.

depends on the weather and season- any expert knows that.
but not enough of experts to know that their protocol gave the next highest scores

T'man: "Any dollar amount. Hold a coon in six inches of water on 2 inches of chain. No chewing. Fact. And this is both PRACTICAL and easy to do, if your aim is to eliminate coon chewing. and there are similar ways that work as well."

Two inches of chain??? LOL! Hell the swivel and two rivets are damned near that long. Who the hell uses a 2" chain???

I explained this method to you before- I use it on several streams
Is it an everyday method? of course not- thats not the point. the point is- its inhumane.

Any dollar amount. Hold a coon in 6" of COLD WATER on a short chain. HYPOTHERMIA and possible death. NO CHEWING BUT THE LOWEST SCORE POSSIBLE IN A "RESTRAINING" SITUATION.

bring your checkbook my friend- any time in Jan feb- I prove it to you. Its what other coon men i the north also say. 25 coon -at least 95% alive next day- name the bet. Serious as a hammer.

The goal of a "RESTRAINING TRAP" is not just to eliminate chewing but also to "RESTRAIN" as opposed to killing from hypothermia. If you take "RESTRAINING" out of the equation, just send them down the slide wire and drown them.

Sorry- not an approved method.

T'man: "The argument was never that THIS DIDN'T ELIMINATE chewing, the argument was that IT WASN'T HUMANE."

The argument was that death to hypothermia had the lowest score in a "RESTRAINING" situation. The argument was if you want them in the water, drown them but that has nothing to do with a "RESTRAINING" bmp.

see above

T'man: "When you DEFINE protocol, when you make MANDATORY certain setting conditions, when you FORBID common practices...my friends, you are testing methods."

When all of the traps tested have to use the same protocol, the same setting conditions and the same testing methods, you are testing traps.

Agreed. But then why limit it to a FEW protocols to test- when others are better?

T'man: "In the case of the coon bmps- the protocol could not have been designed, could not have been more defined to one end- as to have coon chew the maximum amount of time."

If that was true, no traps would have passed. Some did and others failed miserably.

LOL the ones that passed did so by a hair, and that was 2- a #11 worthless here, and a double jaw 1.5-


They would all pass a "DROWNING" bmp but there was no such thing.

and there never, ever, ever, ever, will be

T'man: "Now- you can accept those type of protocols and that kind of results, or you can say wait a minute...

me- I'll say wait a minute."

Me, I will accept them because "DROWNING" and "DEATH TO HYPOTHERMIA" has nothing to do with "RESTRAINING".hypothermia is just such a small part of it, yet you base 99.99% of your argument on it. Note that I also am as concerned with the LAND bmps on coon.

T'man: "The bmp committee DID have plenty of input- they choose to ignore it."

That is absolutely untrue. They didn't ignore it, they simpy reached a different conclusion than you did. That doesn't mean they ignored it.

They heard it, it didn't fit their mold, it was ignored. Case closed.

I have yet to hear any of the wildlife biologists say they wanted to prohibit drowning raccoons. They were simply testing "RESTRAINING" traps to see which would result in the least amount of damage.

Doesn't matter WHAT the wildlife biologists want on the drowning issue. THATS the point. Its not on the table and will NEVER be on the table.

Don't you see- that that is the "line in the sand" on the coon bmps? DROWNING will NEVER be recommended..NEVER

Would not have an easy solution to have stated- similar to the Canadian bmps on rats- "ANY trap is suitable for a drowning set"

But no- that will NEVER come to pass. Hamilton told me it was a VERY tough sell for the Vets Council to approve drowning for rats and mink..but a coon..NO WAY

Still buddies? LOL!

Of course! Just cause you are lost on the coon bmps doesn't mean you aren't a good coyote man and can't dance....

[Wiley]

T'man: "Wiley- its obvious you have spent little time coon trapping. You read what others have posted or written, but you don't have the practical knowledge to know if its credible or not. So allow me to enlighten you a little."

Absolutely untrue!

I have caught more than enough raccoon in restraining traps in my life time to be well versed on the subject. It just doesn't happen to be my main meal ticket.

Back to your feeble discrediting tactics again I see........ZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzz!


T'man: "What studies are yo talking about? I would like copies."

Bmp trap studies.


T'man: "Do you know the dates of my first conversations with Dave Hamilton?"

Yes, I know exactly when you started cussing and discussing bmp protocals. If you fail to remember, I was also a part of those discussions.

Were you at the table when bmp protocols were originally being discussed? NO!


T'man: "I suggest you read more carefully- you are making a lot of assumptions based on words not posted."

T'man: "You know what pisses ME off? Those that don't read and interject their own thoughts into others posts. I DEFY you to show me ANY of what you speak. Whats chickenshit is your reaction to an imaginary insult."

Why then did you ask whether or not I got paid to participate in the bmp study? What was your point?

You were clearly trying to "IMPLY" that we have some sort of inherant bias.

Same reason why you keep referring to some imagined "VESTED INTEREST" of the wildlife agencies participating which might be contrary to the private trappers best interest.

If not, why mention it?

Come clean T'man, WHY DID YOU ASK ABOUT WHETHER WE GOT PAID AND WHY DID YOU MENTION STATE WILDLIFE AGENCIES LIKE OURS HAVING A "VESTED INTEREST" IF YOU WERE NOT TRYING TO IMPLY THAT WE HAD SOME HIDDEN AGENDA.

Talk straight and I won't have to second guess your motives.


T'man: "Sure- but first.....what states do you think got ...snaring?

.....what states got modified traps approved using the bmps?"

Snaring has been answered on the other thread.

My point wasn't that states would use bmps to get modified traps, my point was that states would refer to bmps to prevent states from mandating padded public pacifiers.

You are not going to spin this on me. It is you that is under the assumption that bmps will be used to restrict certain trapping methods. You can bring the examples to back your assumptions.


T'man: "lets take it one thing at a time. ENTANGLEMENT was not allowed by protocol. Nothing to do with body temps. FACT"

Finally, we are getting passed the "ad nauseum" to the meat and potatoes. Entanglement was not allowed because.....

1. entanglement was ORIGINALLY feared by many coon trappers to create more bone damage than would be offset by any redution in chewing.

2. you cannot objectively compare two traps for damage if you inject the variable of entanglement.

3. Entanglement is not a common practice used by most coon trappers.

The objective was to compare commonly used trap types using trap set methods used by most coon trappers.

The initial concern was that any reduction in chewing would have to offset any increase in bone damage due to restricted swiveling from entanglement. It's easy now, with the bmp results in hand, to look back and say, I doubt whether entanglement would have created enough more bone damage to offset the reduction in chewing.

Most coon trappers do not allow the coons to entangle due to reduction in swiveling.

"Entanglement" is very subjective and one form of entanglement in one area is hardly going to be comparable to entanglement in another area. Talk about injecting bias into a study on traps. Talk about testing trappers.

I can hear it already, "NOT FAIR, NOT FAIR, HE WAS USING TREE ROOTS FOR ENTANGLEMENT RATHER THAN WILLOWS". "HIS TREE ROOTS ARE SMALLER THAN MINE, NO WONDER HIS TRAPS SCORED SO GOOD".

How can you fairly evaluate an individual trap when you inject the huge variable of defining "entanglement". How would you measure the results? Measure the elasticity, size and diameter of all the entanglements to make sure they were consistant so you were comparing apples to apples? Talk about a nightmare.

THINK!


T'man: "Depends on your area, now doesn't it? Hypothermia is NOT a problem with coon in the northern belt. I've taken 1000s of coon in Dec and Jan in ice water and can count the number dead o none hand."

Interesting!

Most of our water is froze in December and January and we are as far N. of the equator as you are.

Do you trap coon in hard running streams that don't freeze?

Do you get monsoon winds in your area?

Don't your coons semi-hibernate when it gets cold?

I'm truly impressed that you can catch thousands of coon in December and January when most coon are semi-hibernating at a time when most water in the northern states is frozen.

That's quite an accomplishment!

Further explanation is definitely needed here. Keep in mind, I don't know a lot about coon trapping according to you, remember? LOL!


T'man: "and besides, If hypothermia is a problem in restraining traps on coon , isn't 72 hours holding yotes in heat the same?"

Nobody tested 72 hour trap checks in summer heat. Why would they? You can't objectively compare a trap that held an animal for 24 hours to a trap that held an animal for 72 hours. Once again, talk about injecting bias into a study.

I never said that hypothermia was an issue to me, it's only an issue to a raccoon "RESTRAINING" trap test where you are trying to make objective comparisons between traps. You can't measure the damage created by a trap if the animal dies of hypothermia can you?

Tell me Steve, do you think it would be a fair measure of a trap if one trap had a higher score because a higher percentage of coon that were caught in that trap died of hypothermia?

Answer that question please or I'll just ask it again.....


T'man: "No it doesn't buddy- but the fact that the CONCEPT of drowning coon WILL NEVER BE ON THE TABLE whether in a killing set or not. And thats the important issue here."

I disagree! Drowning is drowning and restraining is restraining. One kills the other restrains. There is no way you can compare trap damage objectively if you allow death due to hypothermia into the mix. You immediately bias the study.

As far as testing drowning, there's nothing to test. Chewed toes is a non issue if the animal is dead under the water.

I see no reason to test drowning as the bmp process was supposed to objectively compare trap types and you cannot do that if you are drowning or losing coon to hypothermia. FACT!


T'man: "DROWNING will NEVER be recommended..NEVER"

By who? The "vets council" _____ THEM! They aren't GOD!

Drowning will be recommended by those that matter most, TRAPPERS and those wildlife management professionals that understand trapping. To hell with the rest of them.

I've wasted enough time on this today!


~SH~

[trappnman]

Why then did you ask whether or not I got paid to participate in the bmp study? What was your point?

A simple question- did you?


Yes, I know exactly when you started cussing and discussing bmp protocals. If you fail to remember, I was also a part of those discussions.

yes, as a matter of fact- I don't remember. I DO emember, one one one conversations with Dave Hamilton


Were you at the table when bmp protocols were originally being discussed? NO!

You got me there! so what?

. entanglement was ORIGINALLY feared by many coon trappers to create more bone damage than would be offset by any redution in chewing.

2. you cannot objectively compare two traps for damage if you inject the variable of entanglement.

3. Entanglement is not a common practice used by most coon trappers.

I guess you must know lots more coon trappers that I do.

Variable of entanglement? LOL

T'man: "Sure- but first.....what states do you think got ...snaring?

.....what states got modified traps approved using the bmps?"

Since NO states got snaring, and NO states have used the bmps to GET traps- your point wasn't really a point then, was it?

It WAS speculation..and MY best speculation guess is the opposite.

Interesting!

Most of our water is froze in December and January and we are as far N. of the equator as you are.

Now we can agree! Yes, you are. So is Oregon.
And thats pertinent...how?

Do you trap coon in hard running streams that don't freeze?

Yes..300+ in late DEc and Jan this past year.

Do you get monsoon winds in your area?

No

Don't your coons semi-hibernate when it gets cold?

of course

I'm truly impressed that you can catch thousands of coon in December and January when most coon are semi-hibernating at a time when most water in the northern states is frozen.

You understand of course, I'm talking over the years. But thanks- its not really that much of an accomplishment. Its simply learning all I can about winter coon and putting that knowledge to work for me. Being, so to speak, an experienced coon man.

Further explanation is definitely needed here. Keep in mind, I don't know a lot about coon trapping according to you, remember? LOL!

What don't you understand? Seems self expalnitory is you have read any of my coon articles or them any coon posts here on winter trapping. If you have an specific questions, I'll be glad to answer them. You are also welcome to come here and see.

Nobody tested 72 hour trap checks in summer heat. Why would they? You can't objectively compare a trap that held an animal for 24 hours to a trap that held an animal for 72 hours. Once again, talk about injecting bias into a study.

Biased? Of course I am. As are you. As yo my point- the bmps (and you) are very concerned over hypotermia- yet the bmps didn't address legal trap times on western coyotes...perferring to "recommend" a 24 hour check. If this is a moot point to you, it is not to others including myself.

Tell me Steve, do you think it would be a fair measure of a trap if one trap had a higher score because a higher percentage of coon that were caught in that trap died of hypothermia?

I'd sure be glad to answer this question, If I knew what you wanted to ask.

Do I think that 1 trap has a higher % of hypothermia? Can't answer that, its not a problem here. (I'm as serious as a hammer about that bet- don't take my word for it- find out.)

If are you asking do I thijnk hypothermia should be counted agaisnt a trap- I definitely do not!

T'man: "No it doesn't buddy- but the fact that the CONCEPT of drowning coon WILL NEVER BE ON THE TABLE whether in a killing set or not. And thats the important issue here."

I disagree! Drowning is drowning and restraining is restraining. One kills the other restrains. There is no way you can compare trap damage objectively if you allow death due to hypothermia into the mix. You immediately bias the study.

As far as testing drowning, there's nothing to test. Chewed toes is a non issue if the animal is dead under the water.

I see no reason to test drowning as the bmp process was supposed to objectively compare trap types and you cannot do that if you are drowning or losing coon to hypothermia. FACT!

LOL- Scott- you are missing the point 100%. Can't explain it better than I have, so its just going to lie there.

T'man: "DROWNING will NEVER be recommended..NEVER"

By who? The "vets council" _____ THEM! They aren't GOD!

You wouldn't think so, would you. Yet on the bmp committee protocals, they HAD the power of God.