it always comes back to coyotes...................

[trappnman]

I for one, for multiple reasons, will be trapping this fall. esp coyotes. Two main reasons for it- 1) it took me a long time to build up permissions. if I trapped all or mostly public land, I'd not worry about it, but I know how permissions go- you don't show up for a year or two, and they tend to fade away. 2) I just enjoy the hell out of coyote trapping. I guess there is a 3rd reason as well- unless the market totally collapses (and despite the hand wringing fur) good fur still has value.

so trapping smarter becomes even more paramount.

and that leads me back to my quest to find the perfect set. I'm convinced that it IS a dirthole (to catch the most in the shortest time), but what makes that dirthole the best it can be?

I'm also convinced that a couple of things can be taken as a given- big patterns, deep holes, good backings.

and I am also convinced for personal use that multiple scents and liberal use of urine is key as well.

I know a lot of people don't want to post pics of sets- as they either fear copycats, or derision- but perhaps we can get a discussion going on what nuances we do to our dirtholes that set them apart, and provide maximum success.

If some others chime in, i'll share my "secret set"/....................

time to start shaking the cobwebs off, and think about fall

[blackhammer]

Can't help but admire your passion T-Man.

[Deleted]

Weeellllll, as you would expect, this is going to be a little long-winded, maybe as usual!   Back in 1971 to be exact I developed a dirt hole set for fox that took the "lookers" as well as the "set workers" but usually I couldn't tell which they were, I only knew from experience that at that time I had "lookers" that I didn't catch and for all practical purposes, made fox trapping almost too easy.  So easy that I actually got tired of killing'em and quit in 1985 only to resume in 2004 by the request of MSU and a canine study they wanted me to do.  During the period that I didn't trap fox the internet with all it's info that I didn't have back in 1971(only had FF&G for info) appeared along with coyote in my territory.  As being human, I found new, shiny, canine sets that seemed as though all the "who said it to the greatest magnitude" were heralding as being better then sliced bread.  So, being under the gun so to speak to perform because it was a job rather then fur trapping, folks were paying me to catch both types of fox and coyote and I had zero experience with coyote.  I will say though, I used Russ Carmen's trench set and my 1st coyote catch was a double.  In fact, I only had 8 sets out that night and I caught 1 grey, a double on reds and the double on coyotes with his set.

Once the canine study was completed I found I no longer had the aversion to killing fox so, back to canine trapping with coyote thrown into the mix.  Since that time I've flopped around searching for a set that "felt right" and caught coyote.  Over those years there was one thing I kept observing but only reacted to rather then make a switch from the universally recognized dirt hole sets.  As most reading this know, I test scents and I saw the same thing occurring at literally every test hole that coyote showed interest in for years but it wasn't until this spring that I finally said enough was enough, I needed to return to my roots, back to the old style, 1971 dirt hole set.

So with this past spring's testing I actually used the old hole size and angle that I used for fox and watched the approach.  Sure as the world, every set showed the same thing just as the fox did back in 1971.  So this year rather then keeping on-keeping on AND instead of reacting to a "looker", I won't need the canine to attempt to work the set.  Over the years whether I was using a deep, step-down, dirt hole or my walk-thru there would be a percentage of coyotes that were "scratchers" at the walk-thru's or only check-out the deep, step-down set and leave.  The "scratchers" at the walk-thru exposed the set's weakness of having two holes and one trap, the down-wind scent placement is almost always accessible and workable without crossing over the trap.  The weakness of the deep, step-down set is the coyote has to want to work the set, just it checking it out won't put him in the trap.  Now I can't tell you that when this would happen and I'd make my adjustment.  I can't tell you if it was the same animal that returned or a different coyote but the adjustment NEVER failed to connect on whoever showed up next!!

[Aaron.F]

I will be trapping coyotes no matter what. I am a hobby trapper and coyotes are the most fun.

My favorite dirt hole set.  I left the trap pan uncovered to show the location.

Attachments:

[blackhammer]

Jun 3, 2016 8:36:29 GMT -6 @never said:

Weeellllll, as you would expect, this is going to be a little long-winded, maybe as usual!   Back in 1971 to be exact I developed a dirt hole set for fox that took the "lookers" as well as the "set workers" but usually I couldn't tell which they were, I only knew from experience that at that time I had "lookers" that I didn't catch and for all practical purposes, made fox trapping almost too easy.  So easy that I actually got tired of killing'em and quit in 1985 only to resume in 2004 by the request of MSU and a canine study they wanted me to do.  During the period that I didn't trap fox the internet with all it's info that I didn't have back in 1971(only had FF&G for info) appeared along with coyote in my territory.  As being human, I found new, shiny, canine sets that seemed as though all the "who said it to the greatest magnitude" were heralding as being better then sliced bread.  So, being under the gun so to speak to perform because it was a job rather then fur trapping, folks were paying me to catch both types of fox and coyote and I had zero experience with coyote.  I will say though, I used Russ Carmen's trench set and my 1st coyote catch was a double.  In fact, I only had 8 sets out that night and I caught 1 grey, a double on reds and the double on coyotes with his set.

Once the canine study was completed I found I no longer had the aversion to killing fox so, back to canine trapping with coyote thrown into the mix.  Since that time I've flopped around searching for a set that "felt right" and caught coyote.  Over those years there was one thing I kept observing but only reacted to rather then make a switch from the universally recognized dirt hole sets.  As most reading this know, I test scents and I saw the same thing occurring at literally every test hole that coyote showed interest in for years but it wasn't until this spring that I finally said enough was enough, I needed to return to my roots, back to the old style, 1971 dirt hole set.

So with this past spring's testing I actually used the old hole size and angle that I used for fox and watched the approach.  Sure as the world, every set showed the same thing just as the fox did back in 1971.  So this year rather then keeping on-keeping on AND instead of reacting to a "looker", I won't need the canine to attempt to work the set.  Over the years whether I was using a deep, step-down, dirt hole or my walk-thru there would be a percentage of coyotes that were "scratchers" at the walk-thru's or only check-out the deep, step-down set and leave.  The "scratchers" at the walk-thru exposed the set's weakness of having two holes and one trap, the down-wind scent placement is almost always accessible and workable without crossing over the trap.  The weakness of the deep, step-down set is the coyote has to want to work the set, just it checking it out won't put him in the trap.  Now I can't tell you that when this would happen and I'd make my adjustment.  I can't tell you if it was the same animal that returned or a different coyote but the adjustment NEVER failed to connect on whoever showed up next!!

So what were the specifics of your 1971 dirtholes?

[Deleted]

Here's a series of old photos of a mock-up of the 1971 set.  This and a variation of it will go back into use this year.  in all actuality, it's not very far removed from my walk-thru if a person can envision using only the up-wind half and added a larger hole with or without the pile of dirt.  During the past half dozen years I've seen this set or a very close variation of it in videos of two highly renown trappers.

I made these photos for a trapper up north in exchange for a particular mink set he used.  His coyote catch jumped-up and so did my mink catch!

[Aaron.F]

Seldom, I believe that is very similar to a set I saw in James Lucero's book. The trap is set on flat ground with the large pile of dirt to guide him, correct?

[Deleted]

Jun 4, 2016 4:25:44 GMT -6 Aaron.F said:

Seldom, I believe that is very similar to a set I saw in James Lucero's book. The trap is set on flat ground with the large pile of dirt to guide him, correct?

YUP!  It's just a dug-out hole with the trap placed on what I have observed for many years, as their natural approach angle and foot placement location.  Also, even without the pile of dirt the same approach angle is evident AND when they initially check-out the hole/scent or work/dig into the hole, they will inherently position their body and feet on the same angle and most importantly, at the same spot.

I haven't seen the Lucero's book and when I developed the set, I'd seen nothing except FF&G and the fox to guide me so if I could figure it out, I'm sure a lot of others did too! LOL  If you were to go back and look at a few, especially my most recent testing videos and look close you can see exactly what I'm describing.  JC Conner shows it very well in his dirt hole video.

**NOTE**
More importantly then what the mock-up looks like are the principles it's based upon.

[toddh]

OUTSTANDING!

[trappnman]

I'm trying to find pictures, I have way too many, and absolutely no organization.

here is one from 2007- I like a similar set, but have larger patterns now. its a horizontal hole, dug under the sod



here is same set, circa 2015



here is a very typical set location given similar circumstances. bare fields all around except for this tree belt and this larger patch of scrub woods/weeds

[blackhammer]

Thanks, great information guys!

[cameron1976]

I have gone to almost all dirtholes in my canine trapping. I just don't find myself making many flat sets or scent posts anymore. Most of the dirthole sets I make are pretty standard text books type sets...trowel sized dirtholes, trap bedded slightly offset to the right, small dirt clods to guide the foot, etc.

It seems like I am the only trapper in the country that doesn't have much luck with step-down dirtholes. I will admit I have caught coyotes with the set, but they don't seem to work as well for me as a standard dirthole.

One variation I do like is a set shown by Tom Miranda in his coyote book that he calls his walk-through set/method. The set uses two small rebar sized dirtholes with a centered trap out front. Its worked pretty well for me. BTW I have to say I still think Tom's coyote book is a pretty darn good read, especially considering the thing costs all of $12 or so from most trapping supply dealers.

[Aaron.F]

Jun 6, 2016 7:36:36 GMT -6 cameron1976 said:

It seems like I am the only trapper in the country that doesn't have much luck with step-down dirtholes. I will admit I have caught coyotes with the set, but they don't seem to work as well for me as a standard dirthole.

I agree with this, I like the idea behind a step down dirt hole, but some just do not want to commit. Maybe it has more to do with my choice of attractors than anything, but not sure. I do and will continue to use a step down dh because I like the appeal of it and do catch some in them.

[trappnman]

I concur on Miranda's book and the effectiveness of his walkthrough, which he learned from Odon Corr. Had an interesting talk one year with Odon- he knows coyotes.

I do think that the effectiveness and success rate of a deep,in my case triangular shaped stepdown, is related to 4 things:

1) to be absolutely isolated- I use it primarily on bare ground, no cover, no backing no nothing but a hole in the ground that is the stepdown

2) the lure hole needs to be deep, and horizontal- just under the sod- in remakes I need to cut a piece of sod to recover the lure hole

3) multiple scents- I believe in this for all sets, but if at any time a set demands such, its here.

4) spray area with urine

1st set I taught Lori, and it took real convincing to get her to try other sets, because she had so much success with it.

I tell new coyote trappers that the stepdown is perfect as they learn, because it eliminates the 2 most common concerns in coyote trapping- blending & guiding

both are automatic in a deep stepdown.

[trappnman]

seldom- just really noticed your placement of your stake-

why so?

[Deleted]

Jun 6, 2016 18:58:39 GMT -6 trappnman said:

seldom- just really noticed your placement of your stake-

why so?

. Means nothing, I just stretched it out of the way to take the photo is all. The photos don't show the offsetting angle well either. This was only a mock set for photos.

Only of recent have I got more comfortable with the deep, step-down and only of recent has it's catch rate started tocome close to my walk-thrus. No deep, step-downs this year though?

[braveheart]

The step down set around here is what I call a fair weather set. One little snow and it is always filled in with snow .When I give lessons I show the student the set but I tell them soon as it snows it it is done.

[Aaron.F]

Jun 6, 2016 18:57:30 GMT -6 trappnman said:

I do think that the effectiveness and success rate of a deep,in my case triangular shaped stepdown,

I am not sure I understand in what you are referring to when you state a triangular shaped step down?

[trappnman]

many years ago, I bought Ron's book on fox trapping- and a set they used was a very similar triangular shaped stepdown. In areas that I thought looked "real foxy" I'd put in a deep stepdown. And I caught fox. But I also caught coyotes- and a fair amount of coyotes vis a vis the number of sets put out. To where the light went on, and I realized that it was a pretty decent set, and I should be making more of them. And I did- lots and lots of them. And at conventions, talking to new coyote trappers, I'd draw out the set-

and the next year, or by phone, they would tell me that they caught their first coyotes, or that they went from 2-3 to 10-15.

Marty is right about snow- but at the same time, my extended 2 months of a snow line of 2 years ago, taught me a lot about snow, and one thing it taught me is if you have snow and wind, there is pretty much nothing you can do. Any backing, any depression, and hole is going to be covered with blowing snow....I'm convinced if I used a match stick as a backing and a pin sized hole, I'd have a foot of packed snow over it in the morning.

So I don't find the stepdown to be too much more of a problem in snow than any hole set.

I think the set works for multiple reasons- while it is certainly not natural in design, I'm not sure if a coyote sees any difference than any hole in the ground- but if he does, the fact that it is by itself, with absolutely nothing else around eases his neophobic reactions. and lots of good smells coming from it?

I do it like this:

I cut the sod out of a triangle in the ground with a shape of roughly 12" side x 12" side x 10" base, with the lure hole going in at the point, just under the sod and at least 8-10" deep.

I toss sod (I sometimes place a bit over the hole as a focal point)to side, and dig out dirt to 5-6". Trap gets bedded tight into corner (I do right side for no reason) so it is below and level with the depth of cut out. Entire pattern is sifted level, a small clod/rock/corn cob, etc is placed next to the outer jaw by dog (I put dog out to left). 2 lures and bait go into hole, urine sprayed over entire set, and out of patter some as well.

I still make them in bare ground areas, such as near compost areas where there is often just short grass ground, or hardpacked

Why don't I make more? A couple of reasons- they are a little more effort to make, I like sets into backing now (as previous post)and I do think that stepdowns can take (since there is no long range visual) a bit longer to connect if not set on "the spot".

but really, I don't know why- I guess it is just the progression of a trapper, I made 2 I thinkflat sets last year- both connected- u sed to make 90% of more- ebb and flows I guess.

[cameron1976]

It certainly seems like the stepdown dirthole works for many people. Look at the number of canines Pete and Ron Leggett caught with it. If I am not mistaken I believe Phil Brown uses the set almost exclusively. It sounds like T-man and his wife do very well with the set, as do trappers all over the country.

Probably one of my issues with the stepdown is confidence. I will admit I don't use it as often as a standard dirthole, because I have found something that works (for me) and therefore have confidence in it. Kind of like a guy that goes fishing and finds a lure or fly that works well. He is likely going to be to use that particular fishing lure to start with, and when the going gets tough he likely reverts back to old faithful. When trying other fishing lures he may not really leave them on his line long, because his favorite lure will likely catch him fish...or so he thinks anyway. I think you can say the same with trapping sets. When a person finds a set that works for him it sometimes becomes hard to try other things.

A year like this, with low fur prices, is just the time to experiment with something new.