|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Oct 18, 2016 18:05:03 GMT -6
The protocol is set up to do exactly what you think is crap. Test the trap on various measures, animal selectivity, damage to said animal, catch rate, animal welfare etc.
It is all,on the BMP area of AFWA website.
So why did you not partake in the coon or coyote BMP's?
Again 20 years and going and all trappers benefit from such.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Oct 18, 2016 18:12:26 GMT -6
are you mentally unable to answer any question put to you?
TELL ME WHAT YOUR DEFINITION OF A PROTOCOL IS AND WHAT IT IS SUPPOSE TO DO.
if your next post doesn't do this, this thread will be locked.
enough is enough
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Oct 20, 2016 18:53:53 GMT -6
: a system of rules that explain the correct conduct and procedures to be followed in formal situations : a plan for a scientific experiment or for medical treatment
I agree enough is enough.
The protocol is as defined and they change with the groups setting them up. The definitions are as used in any trapping BMP.
The groups did not want to narrow the testing of any device down to a singular method, that is not what normal trappers do in any situation even coon trapping. That is a fact.
Those traps that passed the COON BMP will work across a variety of terrain, upland or water and reduce chewing that is fact , they also surpassed the efficiency standards set fourth As well or would have not passed either.
Good day.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Oct 21, 2016 5:50:57 GMT -6
The groups did not want to narrow the testing of any device down to a singular method, that is not what normal trappers do in any situation even coon trapping. That is a fact.
are you nuts? I mean literally unable to reason?
what you just posted, is 100% opposite of what that protocol did no wonder you think its so good, when you 100% don't understand what it did
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Oct 21, 2016 20:50:57 GMT -6
Tman those traps that passed for a reason, sorry those are the facts and it has nothing to do where they where set, those and other thst have been tested since the first go around.
Coon chew we agree on that , you either do one of two,things use methods so they cannot chew or drastically lessen that or you use traps that do not allow it to happen in the first place. One is testing the trap,the other is testing the method and methods only that keep them from chewing.
This has been like which came first the chicken or the egg with you.
These test and the focal point are on the traps "tools" used that is the way they are setup. No different than the skunk testing except for the traps that passed that testing . You should look it up.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Oct 24, 2016 18:50:34 GMT -6
you are totally missing the point-
if you want to TEST THE TRAP- you do not design specific protocol on how that trap can be set
you would, like the coyote bmp, allow multiple methods and set presentation- to get an average, using multiple methods in multiple ways
so that the method- ie how the trap is set, does not dictate the results? can you not see, that the protocol dictated the results?
if you cannot so be it. I'm done here. you want to argue just for the sake of it with a minimum knowledge base- and I tried to be logical, I tried to be reasonable- and lesson learned.
good day sir
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Oct 29, 2016 17:59:52 GMT -6
thread closed
|
|