|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Jan 24, 2005 21:05:52 GMT -6
I got an email from my source the NTA designed a test for modified and reg jaw 1.5, and the trappers were trained by Robert Colona and they still failed. I don't have the exact answer for coon duke as of yet, but my source will be attending a BMP meeting tomorrow and I'll get the info you wanted coonduke as soon as he gets back in a few days. In reguards to your cynical question DJ, the traps tested this Fall on Coyotes/fox is an adendium to the first test and the scores are the same thresholds as always. Just new traps that have yet to be tested is all. Thats why it is called a living document, for new trap testing with the same standards in place.
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Jan 24, 2005 21:15:37 GMT -6
I found out in case you haven't heard of him Robert Colona is a furbearer specialist for the Maryland DNR, as well as a wildlife biologist and has been invloved with many trapping projects in the past. Thats my info/bio on him.
|
|
|
Post by dj88ryr on Jan 24, 2005 21:34:58 GMT -6
I hope my thoughts do turn out to be cynacism TC, but something smells, and it ain't on my shoes.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Jan 24, 2005 21:49:54 GMT -6
whos going to pay for all that?
I know who Robert Colona is.
Whats your point?
How many coon he sell in a year? No disrespect- just curious. Must be a lot if his methods are the preffered methods.
so he taught novice trappers how to trap coon- and they failed?
maybe if they had listened to seasoned trappers----the teachers could be taught.
This is like Alice in Wonderland.
Robert Waddell proved he could reduce chewing in 1.5s. I proved I can reduce chewing in 1.5s. I've done it for years and teach it in my coon demos.
If either of us would have taught these trappers- the traps wouldn't have failed.
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Jan 25, 2005 8:20:19 GMT -6
My point being tman, there was measures taken to try to get passing results for these traps, if you think you can do it, call up IAFWA and tell them you want to be involved and do the teaching and get these traps retested/passed then simple? Do you really think those invovled in BMP's are novice trappers? What you would have to do is to teach these guys you can only set coon traps in certain areas?Enlighten me. When most coon trappers set where they know coon are and on sign, not caring awhole lot about having cover or whatever to ensure the better success rate of this trap. I found out that this wasn't just a ship shod deal, the NTA and others where involved trying to get these traps passed, the problem being they didn't. Explain in detail your method for no foot chewing on coon in 1.5's. Let your people you know on the inside of the BMP and get those methods tested Tman.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Jan 25, 2005 9:04:00 GMT -6
I have explained my methods many, many times on this forum, in articles, in demos.
Search for yourself.
regarding quality of trappers in test- who knows their skills? - I don't... but once again- you missed the point-
THE TRAPS WERE DOOMED TO FAILURE IF SET RANDOMLY
Testing traps not technique- remember.
The bmp committee was NOT INTERESTED IN TECHNIQUES
Go figure. Better to fail traps, right?
When most coon trappers set where they know coon are and on sign, not caring awhole lot about having cover or whatever to ensure the better success rate of this trap.
Really? That goes contrary to what the coon trappers I know do. Perhaps you could tell me some names of coon trappers that subscribe to that thinking? I doubt you can provide any that would lay claim to your statement.
Pointing fingers at nobody- but any trapper that DOESN"T take the time to ensure a better success rate, a better comfort level with their traps- is a piss poor trapper or a novice.
I always set so I get a better success rate- and that includes not chewing as much- something easily accomplished- but hey- thats just me.
Next you will tell me that you cannot set in entanglement situations because "coon pull out of traps".
Did the bmps set in such conditions?
Consult your source- were the sets made in NO entanglement situations- I'm betting so. Most studies, and I am asssuming te bmps were no different- forbid setting up in entanglement situations- thinking that to do so would skewer the results. And they'd be right....
Heres a tip for you-
Entanglement cuts down chewing.
A lot.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Jan 25, 2005 9:35:16 GMT -6
look at it this way-
I can stake a duke 1.5 out in the open on a short chain.
I can stake a Duke 1.5 out in the open on a long chain.
I can drag a Duke 1.5 in the open.
I can drag a Duke 1.5 in cover.
I can set a Duke 1.5 in tight cover using freedom of movement.
I can set a Duke 1.5 in open cover using freedom of movement.
I can set a Duke 1.5 staked on short chain in water.
I can set a Duke 1.5 on drags in water.
I can set Duke 1.5 up on drowning slides.
IN ALL THE ABOVE SITUATIONS- I GET A DIFFERENT RATE OF CHEWING.
And so will anybody.
No brag- just experienced fact.
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Jan 25, 2005 14:45:16 GMT -6
THE TRAPS WERE DOOMED TO FAILURE IF SET RANDOMLY. Different strokes for different folks and geographic terrain Tman. Doesn't matter coon,fox, coyotes, we all deal with different areas and different places we set up. You set where the animals/terrain tells you to, too acheive a high success rate. It all isn't the same local, for all areas or species. The bmp committee was NOT INTERESTED IN TECHNIQUES. If it where and used techniques to pass equipment, what kind of wordage nightmare would that be? and think about enforcement since so many are bent on the fact that these studies will become law would that be! Trappers due to terrain and what works for them, should have the freedom of technique/style they choose to use. Pointing fingers at nobody- but any trapper that DOESN"T take the time to ensure a better success rate, a better comfort level with their traps- is a piss poor trapper or a novice. Success rate and chewing has nothing to do with one another. The whole idea of the BMP is to ensure both, high success of equipment with good animal comfort.The very thing you link together. I can tell you "most" fur trappers care about success over chew rates, because success leads to dollars in there pocket. That is the simple truth. Heres a tip for you-
Entanglement cuts down chewing. Entanglement can also lead to swivel failure, thats with any animal, which leads too more foot damage as well. Thats why they don't like entanglement in these studys. Take swiveling away from a coyote trap/coon trap and a hard fighting coyote/coon, and through my experiance, things can get ugly in a hurry in terms of foot damage, as well as any other species. look at it this way-
I can stake a duke 1.5 out in the open on a short chain.
I can stake a Duke 1.5 out in the open on a long chain. ETC ETC. I bet you can, and I bet you have different chew rates as well, but how do you incorporate that into a BMP Document? In situation A you must use trap C? Situation B use must use 1.5 type A? etc etc. Again back to a wordage night mare. Look at the BMP for coyotes in the East it states the traps that passed, but no where does it tell you, where you must set each type, just list trap specs, and leaves it up to the trapper on where to set them.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Jan 25, 2005 16:29:45 GMT -6
so what? so what how the coyotes stuidied were done.
It sure seems like you have vested interest in pushing the bmps.
Different strokes? You mean some coon trappers are smart enough to set to reduce chewing and others aren't?
Have you trapped coon? I mean really- with footholds in woods? I cannot possibly see how you can- you seem not very knowledgable on the techniques involved. Setting snares in ditches isn't exactly "coon trapping"
Fouling swivels is NOT and never has been a problem in woods trapping. A trapped coon and a trapped cooyte have completely different responses.
How do you incorporate techniques into a bmp?
....aren't they already? there? Aren't certain procedures layed out?
I know they are and I would hope you would also.
Technique is the KEY to the coon BMPS-
They could be as incorporated as easily as suggesting double staking for cooytes- after all- stakes are traps...so stakes would be ...technique.
it all goes back A COON IS NOT A COYOTE.
if technique suggestions would have been listened to- it would be a whole new coon bmp.
But they were not- why? who freaking knows- but in any case their omission makes, as I said and will say over and over- the bmp on coon a pretty bogus study.
I hope it is as widely ignored as it deserves to be.
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Jan 25, 2005 17:43:15 GMT -6
Different strokes? You mean some coon trappers are smart enough to set to reduce chewing and others aren't? Yes! Not all trappers care about foot damage, if you sell 100 coon with great feet and some other traps 100 coon in #3's cause it is what granpa had lying around when he died, there the same coons who makes more at the fur buyer? While the animal comfort thing has come to light in the last 10-15 years, not all care about chewed feet if they can hold the target animal with a great deal of success. No different than the live market, Bob W spends many more hours and uses soft catch to insure great feet for a reason more$$$ I can deal with marked feet because I'm a dead coyote trapper. Different strokes for different folks, the end result is the same: coyotes caught. If you where first and foremost concerned with the coons foot and what it looked like then the enclosed traps would be your choice hands down, they can't chew a foot they can;t get to. It doesn't make anyone a bad trapper, just different ideals. I trapped the hill country of NE,Iowa for 9 years, trapping greys, reds, coons and coyotes. I used alot of 1 3/4 NW and they worked well for me, did I have chewed feet yes, was I that concerned NO, the coons where there at checking time. I set cedar stands, pine forest, and crop change ups'. Dirt holes and flat sets, stock traps and chain. 18"-24" rebar I set where the critters told me too. I caught alot of big upland coons in these areas. If you like I'll switch to coon snaremen, because I found that to suit me better, more access to coons, in a quicker amount of time, and yes I am good at a high% of neck snared coons, because I learned of the deductions from hip snared ones, so I thought it through and with some help I got down the art of neck snaring alot of coons, with no deductions. If technique suggestions would have been listened to- it would be a whole new coon bmp. Yes a whole new coon BMP that would concern those that would say, I can only use a 1.5 reg jaw with 12" of chain in this certain area and cover? The point being, the BMP"s won't ever please everyone, there will be give and take from both sides it is learning the art of give and take that is the key. Look I understand your pissed, the trap you use isn't one that passed, and you use it as a combo trap, mink, coon, and rats. I can even see your point, "IF" your state decides to mandate these BMP"s into law, it means retooling cost to you, and yes some freedom as well, but trappers in ALL states have dealt with it at some level at some point, some alot more severe than others. Some states have snaring, others don't, some states restrict jaw spreads others don't, some states restrict baiting methods, others don't, some states have 24 hr check laws other don't. Some states may mandate BMP's while other won't. The list goes on and on. I will get all the info I can from my source and post only factual information on this matter and soon the BMP will be printed and then all can look at it and decide for themselves. You can bash it all you want, and I say the BMP's as a hole will help us out, so I"m done posting this pissing match, and will post only the facts and leave my thoughts out of it from here on out. Good Day Tman.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Jan 25, 2005 18:43:18 GMT -6
TC35- we ae so close- look at what you just said- and I concur...
some coon trappers can, by their methods- reduce chewing by a large %.
A misnomer to call the "smart" trappers- how about experienced trappers. Trappers that don't set with such goals in mind can be as smart as Einstein- they just are inexperienced or unawares.
Now- both of us agreeing on that- you see NO place for teaching proper techniques with certain traps to reduce injury and imporve success?
I would think to include it would be a #1 priority.
also- just so you know- if MN passed a lwa saying 1.5 are not allowed for coon- I'd be setting 1.5 100% for fox and 100% for rats and mink.
Without a qualm or heisitation..
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Jan 25, 2005 19:49:18 GMT -6
you see NO place for teaching proper techniques with certain traps to reduce injury and imporve success?
I would think to include it would be a #1 priority. Yes but that is taught/learned through communication with veteran trappers, Trapper ED course like the one I teach, demos and good videos, being around good trappers, again I don't feel it is up to the BMP to teach Trappers ED, as that runs state to state with varying laws, just as Hunters ED, when I became an instructor, we not only used a manual I mentored a class with a vertran ED Instructer. Again because each state has varying laws that are to be dealt with. Animal comfort is here to stay, be it trapping, hunting, livestock production/slaughter where all being looked upon by Joe Public and those against us.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Jan 25, 2005 19:59:34 GMT -6
220s on land are a hot topic now in many states. WI had a big scandel a few years back- wrong persons dog killed in a legally set trap. Big political push to ban 220s on land. The WTA worked hard- and set the standard- for seeking out, publishing and teaching dog proof methods for 220s. Their efforts were a success- 220s can still be used- WITH these special techniques only. The WTA has worked on this, the dnr has worked on this- the end result is a trap that was going to be banned for land use- was continued for use on land BY using special techniques. All land set 220s MUST adhere to these special techniques. I suggest the same applies to 1.5s.
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Jan 26, 2005 8:04:11 GMT -6
Yes I'm aware of that and the dog in NE,Iowa just this past Fall, and the dog in a snare in South Dakota, I applaud both states by sticking to there guns and showing not the trapper at fault but the pet owner. Now South Dakota has a law that any dog, that can not be presumed as a hunting dog, working legal game must be on a leash on all state wildlife production areas, or face a fine! Snares stand under the sames laws as always. Iowa the dog was tresspassing onto private property, when it hit the 220, the write up in the paper, was the owners wanted all ajoining land owners to be notified of trapping actvity, Iowa DNR stated trapper was doing things within the law, I wrote a letter to the editor of this paper, published, and explained pet owners have as much responsability as trappers. The thing with all this it was handled at the state level and not the federal level. Where it should be. I don't want the feds dictating to us in each state how each trap must be used or set. Perhaps your hitting on something that the state trapper groups could do, get ahold of the game depts, and show them eventhough, the BMP test couldn't get this trap passed, we can show you techniques that will meet there standards. Again I like state control versus Federal control on wildlife laws, beleive me the last place we want dictating our game laws is the USFWS. They can do the waterfowl, leave the rest up to the states, we will be much better off for sure.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Jan 26, 2005 9:22:19 GMT -6
I don't want the feds dictating to us in each state how each trap must be used or set.
Yet you blindly endorse all BMPS?
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Jan 26, 2005 13:55:53 GMT -6
Tman the BMP's are run by IAFWA, which is made up of every states Game Dept, also it is not a regulatory body, it has no power to enact anything! I'm not blindly endorsing the BMP's, I endorse them because of all the positives, that in MY mind outweight the few negatives. If the BMP passed with hard stipulations that had to be adheared too, either every state would have to add this to there game policy/procedures manual for trapping or have USFWS take over that aspect. If they decided to use the coon BMP and make it law. Again you can use your 1.5 in any manner you choose, until that dreaded day, your state of Minniesota tells you it is against the law, and everyone else can do the same, do you or I know what day that may be? I have not a clue in the world, and I'm sure no one from the highest power in any state agency, down to the lowest trapper knows the answer. Heck it may never come to be and all this sweating and writing for not. Look this is the most extensive trap research ever done in our history, and being new, things aren't going to be 100% rosey, and in time things with continued funding can/will get better, but I still stand behind the fact that the BMP's are better for the trapper as a whole and the credo it adds to our defense than not having it at all.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Jan 27, 2005 7:51:57 GMT -6
restrictive laws that erode trappers righhts will never be endorsed by me.
For example- you can take every 220 out there and toss them in the creek. I could live and trap perfectly fine without them. Set 1 this year, 0 last year. Its not a tool I like or need.
Yet I support there use 100% and will fight to lkeep states that can use them, using them.
please answer the snaring question.
IAFWA? Gods not men?
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Jan 27, 2005 7:59:22 GMT -6
so first 220s and now snaring bmps are being made into law.
it would take a real.....optimist...to believe the same will not happen with foothold bmps.
sure- I have no doubt the tests will be outgoing- and with each test, the antis will smile because trappers took one more step to extinction.
I'll be kicking and screaming when loaded on that train- not smiling looking forward to "my ride in the country"
and Im not worried about MN- we wil lbe last to go because our game department actually is made up of sportsmen and realists.
But many states aren't.
so you are saying that these "wildlife" vets have denounced the non trapping policy of the American Vet Council?
Perhaps with a public statement somewhere I can read?
That would be big news indeed- a divide of vets on the "humaneness of trapping" issue.
btw- are you saying ALL postings were down by these two sympathtic vets? All?
Cause I highly doubt that. It would be stupid waste of that precious $$$ to send animals 3000 miles away to be posted.
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Jan 27, 2005 13:45:20 GMT -6
Look just because someone is a animal vet, you can't paint them with a broad brush of being anti trapping, I have trapped critters for vets that where causing damage to there very own livestock, you see vet's exspecially those that deal with farmers and ranchers, are more pro trapping than anti, a big majority of your vets that have a problem with trapping are city/town vets, they went to school to make a decent living and fix fido,and fee fee the cat, not working on a daily basis with farmers and ranchers, those type of vets are becomming more in shorter supply, but yet are more prone to be pro trapping, because they see the very problems a coyote can cause to lamb,ewes and calves.
|
|
|
Post by Toptrapper1 on Jan 27, 2005 20:35:54 GMT -6
I will try to help out a little hear or just fuel the fire. I was a test trapper and do not consider myself a novice. I make my living trapping both fur and ADC and that is it, no second job or rich wife ( she works for me). All test regardless of the X factors of eack trap type was always anchored solid. The first 2 times we tested the 1.5's we were told to try to set where entanglement was not a problem but it was not a hard rule. I set as I normally would for my usual trapline with little thought to entanglement. I still had chewing I am not sure to what degree but it was still present but no more than I normally get out of my own traps. The third year when the NTA decided they knew how to control chewing we were made to clear all entanglement and I do feel the chewing was worse than in years past. To give you an idea of how anal the NTA was on the test we had to use the exact same pocket set, lure and bait on every set. The guy with the NTA was not going to let us use bait at all but that was when I said wait a minute most coon trappers that use pocket sets use bait so they gave in. They sent me a 4 oz. bottle of lure for 72 sets and to last 10 days. They said we could not set anywhere that outside influences could happen. Examples of this would be cows in a pasture, cars over a bridge ect. The sets could not be set so the caught coons could see each other. There were more but I have forgot. As you can see they beat their heads against a wall trying to get these traps to pass to the point of stupidity. The test was set up without real world setting in mind. Who has ever heard of a coon trapper who does not set up bridges? The first 2 times testing we tried long chains, short chains, pan stops multipule swivels, reg. jaws and double jaws. The last time the NTA insisted that all traps be tuned by JC Connors and have 30 in. chains. This is were it gets good they said that the springs were to strong and did not allow the coon to seesaw down to the lever thus causeing more chewing. So half the traps had weak springs withe reg jaws and the other half had double jaws and standard stock springs. As I stated before the regular jaws failed. As for brands we only tested Victors and Sleepy Creeks I kept saying they should round up enough Montgomery 1.5's for the test because they would test better but they said we could only test traps currently available. I said if you test the Mont. 1.5 and they pass it would not be long before one or all of the companies would take the passing specs and put them in their own 1.5's but they did not want to hear that.The thing that is lost to most is that even a coon that did not chew could fail the test. Remember the whole animal was necropsied not just the feet so a coon that got caught in an entanglement situation may not have chewed but may have torn muscles in the trapped leg thus failing it. I volunteered for the BMP because I have read some of the lab test done by the USDA and knew I could do a fairer job on a real trapline than some geek in a labcoat. Go back through Wildlife Society Bulletins and see how they test traps and you will see we as trappers are better for the job of testing the tools we use. I realize this is falling on deaf ears as far as Trappnman is concerned because he see this test as the states trying to take away a tool and I hope and pray this is not the case but we as trappers have to change with the times or we risk losing all our tools. If any of you think they have the foolproof answer get ahold of your states furbearer biologist and let them know. It is better than sitting on the sidelines complaing about the results.
|
|