More trapping of dogs...

[TylerS]

B-man715 is right on. I agree 100 percent.

[nolte]

In WI it is illegal to dry land set 220s unless elevated. Guys still do ok catching fur. I only trap a little bit, but Dad still likes enjoys it in the fall. We never set any dry land conibear type traps. They do work quite well for water sets though.

I see more guys shifting to relaxing snares. They are cheaper, lighter and not as costly if someone takes them.

[HunterLee]

If they let us run snares right away and on extended checks it wouldn't be a huge issue. But that is the allure of 220's. Once every 3 days for checking. Also it if a dog has any type of leash training no snare would kill it.

[BLACKJACK]

In WI it is illegal to dry land set 220s unless elevated. Guys still do ok catching fur.

Right there is the key, trappers can still have success, all they have to do is elevate their traps. Or use leg hold traps.

By not doing anything it just creates bad publicity everytime a dog is killed by a 220. Is that good for trapping??

As hunters and fisherman, we put up with all kinds of rules and regulations - 4 PM closing for ducks, one line in the summer and two in the winter, Antler Point Restrictions, steel shot, can't shine deer at certain times, removing drain plugs in your boat, the list goes on and on, some rules are biological, some are for social concerns.

Putting a few restrictions on 220's won't be the end of trapping. Its pretty obvious that trappers won't and can't control themselves, experienced trappers will but rookie trappers will look at 220's as an easy way of catching a few critters, so then its time to step in and pass some laws that help society as a whole.

[Random guy]

Well this should come full circle nicely. Take away the 220 on land, a poor plan. A 220 ground set is a very common set for fisher, coon, badger, bobcat, skunk, otter, muskrat and other furbearers that travel across land. Just so we are clear badger, skunk, otter and muskrat don’t climb trees on a regular basis so it is going to be pretty tough to figure out how to get these target species 4 feet off the ground. A guy could use long spring and coils but loss is going to go way up. What will happen is the species the 220 ground set targets with efficiency will once again increase in population due to trapping failures or trappers that just got tired of overregulation and stopped trapping.

How will it come full circle? What do these species the 220 target love to eat? Grouse, pheasant, rabbits, baby ducks and all the same stuff dogs and dog owners chase. So take away the best means of predator control from the land and see what happens to the bird populations…again.

Now as for elevated sets I have one for you. We have trapped since the 1920s in this area and yes we had one dog in a trap. It was an elevated /leaning tree martin set. A bird dog wandered over ¾ mile from his home onto private property and walked his way up a 6” wide log to try and get a piece of meat scrap 5 feet up. From the tracks the dog just walked right up the tree leaning at a 45 and stuck his head in the trap. The owner acknowledged the dog was a problem as it wandered all the time and would go missing for entire days.

Another thing to think about is if you take away the ground set 220 what do you think will happen? Trappers will just use more snares and if the trapper is worth his salt the snare will have knocked the target specious unconscious quickly. No sound, little thrashing and most likely very well hidden. I have had snare sets that incapacitated target species before they could drop the bait out of their mouth. Honesty very little will be gained by eliminating the ground set 220.

Dogs that run and have no control are going to have problems with traps, cars, predators, porcipines and even livestock. Been that way for many years but the news doesnt cover dogs hit by cars or ones that choked on porcipine quills.

[Todd Caswell]

First off I haven't trapped in years but, loved it but the fall season is short and there just isn't time for every thing.

I have retrievers , but I do upland hunt them, they stay close. I have seen bucket sets while hunting and was able to get the dog away from them befor there was a problem, but what if the set had been on the back side of the pine tree, where I could not see it??? MY male would have a tough time getting his head in a 220 but Iv'e got a little female that I know could get her head in there. And what about the guys that run setters or shorthairs? Most of the time there a little out of site, thats how they hunt.

Quote:

Dogs that run and have no control are going to have problems with traps, cars, predators, porcipines and even livestock. Been that way for many years but the news doesnt cover dogs hit by cars or ones that choked on porcipine quills.

Johnny I really don't think these are the dogs that we as bird hunters are talking about or concerned with for that matter. I'm talking about the dogs that are doing nothing wrong, just following there nose. Not only could a person loose a part of the family, but in many cases there is ALOT of money lost as well, some of us that run FT in the off season may have 10's of thousands of dollars tied up in our dogs. Yep accidents happen, they could get hit by a car, choke on a quill, but when they die by something that the owner has absolutly no control over it's a shame. By simply modifying the set it could be avoided. Most dogs aren't going to climb a tree to get into a bucket set but alot of them will honor there nose when it's on the ground.

Unfortunate but I almost completly avoid public land because of this, I shouldn't have to but untill something changes Iv'e got too much invested in my dogs to risk it during trapping season.

[Random guy]

Fully understood you have an expensive dog but also understand this; I do not trap for a hobby or freeze my but off 16 hours a day for something to do. I trap full time for income, trapping money pays my bills. You want talk about investment, I have my life invested. I need to be on the trap line or in the river boat daily running sets to make it pay. Those of us that have limited opportunities and truly make our living from the land see this a bit different. Taking away ground set 220s (not lazy man bucket sets) will cost me a lot of money. I won’t lose my purebred whatever dog; I will lose my truck, heat, power and most of my fall income. The alternative leg hold set has a higher loss, miss rates and do not perform as efficiently. Another thing many do not consider is what do you do when the water has frozen? Where do you think you are going to trap otter, rats, and other water based furbearers? You are going to set on runs, slides and other travel corridors above the water line. I will also tell you I use both elevated and ground sets for fisher, coons and other furbearers and the ground set will bring you the larger higher priced furs most of the time. Majority of my 300-500 sets are the 220 and this would be a devastating blow to my income. Hunting dogs are great but they do little to keep food on my table and plus I don’t have the cash for one of these dogs apparently. If you think the trapping community is going to just roll over and give up a time proven method, I think you are going to be surprised.

Not for a little taste of woods reality.

What I really find is interesting is nobody is looking at the alternative that will happen. Take away the 220 land set you are going to see snare sets and slider sets triple in numbers. To be honest with you I carry a small bolt cutter in my trap pack, there is no way I can undo a synched snares with my bare hands. I have tried and have to unwire the snare to take it with until I find a really good set of wire cutters or a small bolt cutter. You will not cut a decent snare with pliers, cutting dykes or a Leatherman. So now instead of dealing with a trap you can release with a belt, leash or boot lace and I as any working man can release with bare hands, you have a device that you have to possess a tool to release. To add to this a wary wild critter normally eases into a snare set but a bird dog is going to hit it full force and tighten up in less than a second, and if the snare is set correctly no amount of leash training is going to stop this. So truly this plea to ban the 220 is just going create a larger problem that will be impossible to stop and harder to respond to.

What I want to know is how can the conibear trap that came be in the mid 1950s and has been in use extensively for over half a century now suddenly become a prominent problem?

[Dave S]

What I want to know is how can the conibear trap that came be in the mid 1950s and has been in use extensively for over half a century now suddenly become a prominent problem?

More hunters, more dogs and the fact that dogs are now part of the family and not just a 4 legged critter that runs around the farm yard. Only my but IMO, people view their dogs differently now than they did 50 years ago. So of course emotions will run high when someone's pooch sticks their nose where it don't belong.

[Eric Wettschreck]

Let's look at things from the other side of the fence for just a sec..........

As a trapper, I'd appreciate others keeping their dogs out of my traps. Dogs set the trap off and now I don't have the opportunity to trap the furbearer I was going after. I have a lot of money invested in my traps and they're more than just toys, they're tools. Would anyone out there like it if my dog went sniffing around and dropping deuces in your tool box?

Or, people can quit being selfish and realize that public land is for everyone to use. If you are going to hunt it with a dog, be mindful that 220's exsist and are out there.

[Random guy]

Well its simple, all hunting dogs small enough to get into a 22O need to be kept on a 4 foot leash. We are not asking you to get rid of the dog just change how you us them.

[BLACKJACK]

Ironically when I scroll to the bottom of this thread I see an ad for Duke Dog proof traps...

What about the bad publicity trappers get everytime that a dog gets killed in a conibear trap?

On this forum, you're preaching to the choir, to guys that hunt and fish, they can understand your passion for trapping, but when Suzy Homemaker from the Cities is out walking her dog while up at the cabin, shes not going to understand your 'her dog shouldn't have stuck its nose in my trap' argument, shes going to go tell her book club, the ladies at church, etc., the majority of them are non-hunters. One Suzy H. is going to raise more heck than ten bird hunters that get their dogs caught. All preventable because their are alternative methods of trapping.

[BLACKJACK]

A couple more arguments I want to refute:

1) Snares - I did a search on how to set a snare, doesn’t look that easy, maybe a professional trapper will get it done, but the majority of the amateur trappers won't, and they're the ones causing the problems with bucket sets, its an easy method for the rookie.

2) Public land - Its not just a public land problem, here in pheasant range, its anywhere thats close to a road because its easy to for a trapper to stop by a road, find some coon runs, and set 220's.

The reason I'm passionate about this is because my dog almost got caught in a set like that about 20 years ago, was hunting along a road, letting my young lab dart in and out of the 20 yard strip of cattails and then 'yip' and she came out with a bloody nose. Went and checked it out, a conibear trap. Luckily it only caught her nose, since then I don't hunt close to roads because I realize that trappers want to cover some ground, thats an easy way to do it. I got lucky but how many other hunters need to lose their dogs to learn the lesson?

3) Without conibear traps, skunks and coon populations will rise. They're high now, I caught 14 coons on my deck last summer - and conibear traps are legal. Trapping pressure is dictated by fur prices, if fur prices are high, more trappers will be out.

[lakevet]

Education of the general public is the key. Out state Minnesota basically functions more each year like one big suburb of the Twin Cities. Articles should be done about the joys and risks of walking/running your dog in the country/woods. So many people think erroneously that life in the country/woods is a garden of eden where nothing bad happens. Wolves and trapping are but two of many risks, especially for dogs not "street smart". My dog, like me, knows its way around the woods. Never had trap, porcupine, skunk, or other problems. However if my dog went to NE minneapolis, it would become someone"s lunch real quick! I likely would not fair well either.

I wonder how many dogs end up road hamburger down in the Twin Cities every day? That stat along with a few pictures would help put the real risks into perspective for the general public.

lakevet

[Random guy]

Ironically when I scroll to the bottom of this thread I see an ad for Duke Dog proof traps...

Coon Cuffs, you need to catch about ten coons in each one to make them pay for themselves. Plus look out if a frost rolls through. Better bring two trapping axes, one for limbs and one for chipping the coon cuffs out of the of the ground

Now as far as the suburban family pet goes. Well If that is the case look at the just how many dogs are caught in traps verses how many are hit by cars, attacked by other dogs, abused, neglected, mistreated and other various real word situations, trapping is a very small problem. It just involves a trap and those that live where the asphalt goes right to the garage door do not like it and never will. It’s an easy device to hate.

What has really happened is two things. Bird hunters want free range for their dogs so they can run care free. They want to be the most important guy on public land. Heck as stated by bird hunters on many occasions during this debate already, they have $5,000 shotguns and a $10,000 dogs. Why shouldn’t they be the most important guy to walk a track of state land? Plus now they can get this done as they have pulled in the antis and the suburban homemakers to make the noise for them. Basically a few uplanders that do not want to take responsibility for their working dog in an environment that has not changed since the 50’s have teamed up with the anti hunting and trapping campaign. Whether they realize it or not they are now shoveling the coal to that fire. Bad press; when upland hunters have joined the ranks with the antis to get their agenda accomplished.

Pretty sad day if you ask me.

[Random guy]

Quote:

1) Snares - I did a search on how to set a snare, doesn’t look that easy, maybe a professional trapper will get it done, but the majority of the amateur trappers won't, and they're the ones causing the problems with bucket sets, its an easy method for the rookie.

2) Public land - Its not just a public land problem, here in pheasant range, its anywhere thats close to a road because its easy to for a trapper to stop by a road, find some coon runs, and set 220's.

Snares are very easy and fast. I can pack about 200 in a pack sack and set a multi mile snare line in a morning. And the easiest thing in the world to snare is fox and coyote, or should I say the dog family. The body shape and gate/nose down travel makes for easy sets. Keep bugging for the 220 to be gone and you are gonna see snares gone wild. Plus I can buy 50 premade snares for the price of a 220 conibear. Often you do not just put one snare in place of a trap, you cluster snares since they are cheap and easy.

Another thing is everybody talks about coons and buckets. Well to be honest I maybe trap 15 racoons a year if that, its not coon country. So you are telling me so your dog can run wild and free in SW minnesota I need teach River Otter to climb trees or stairs in the northern Minnesota bogs? 10 miles from any road and 400 miles away from a pheasant?

Once again a metro based attacked on those making a living in rural Minnesota.

[Recon]

So I need to keep my 28lb springer on a leash when I'm hunting. So your rights as a trapper out weigh my rights to hunt upland birds. Over the past 5 years i've had 4 encounters with these sets and only one could I actually see from a distance of 10 feet. Three were baited with either grouse or pheasant parts, wings, remains etc and were completely hidden in grassy, brushy, pine bough type spots. Spots you would walk expecting to jump a grouse. The 4th was set along the creek in front of our house, baited with meat, by a trapper who didn't have permission to be trapping that property. I'm really sick of hearing that its the hunter or hunting dogs fault for getting in one of these sets. Hunting dogs are being lured to these sets by scent. There is a solution to this problem that still allows trappers to trap and us bird hunters to hunt. In my opinion its time for the state of Minnesota to get these sets and traps off the ground.

[Random guy]

So I need to keep my 28lb springer on a leash when I'm hunting. So your rights as a trapper out weigh my rights to hunt upland birds.

Well this entire deal has been dog owners saying us as trappers have less right and need to change our ways.

So what you are saying is I as a trapper need bend and lose income but its not ok when I ask dog owners to change how they do things? Thats wrong? Just figure if I have to give up some rights dog owners should too. I mean we are waving the rightous flag are we not?

[blindluck]

I don't see anyone waving a flag. It's not an I'm better than you thread. I haven't read an "all trappers are dirtbags" post. This is a safety issue. People are discussing on how to ensure that their dog, hunting companion, family member, or whatever can come home safely after a hunting trip.

[Trashguy]

Rights, rights, rights.... What gives you the right to kill my dog?!

[lichen fox]

No ones out to trap and kill anyone's dog...if that were the case there would be alot more missing! The trapper has the same rights to use public or private land as the hunter who uses dogs...Trappers usually try to avoid areas where dogs are known to run free, (not under the supervision of thier owner), but the trapper has no way of knowing if someone will be hunting with dogs in a given area when he makes the set...The hunter also, has no way of knowing for sure if there are traps placed in a area he is hunting with his dog...both know from reading the trapping and hunting regulations that the risk exists during the time that the trapping and hunting seasons coincide...a hunters dog could step in a trap just an hour or less after it is placed...the hunter removes the dog but the trapper loses the opportunity to harvest any fur from that set until he returns to re-set it...if the hunter is not close enough to the dog when it is captured by the trap, the risk exists that the dog may be injured or worse...in most situations these traps won't kill the captured animal immediatly or even ever in some instances...if the hunter is nearby and knows how to open the trap the dog will be fine...it's not about who's right or wrong...it's about knowing the risks and what to do if it happens...that's the responsibilty of the dog's handler to protect it...

[BLACKJACK]

Its a no-win situation.

If 220's are banned on ground sets, trappers, especially pro trappers like Jonny P. that make their living trapping, will get hurt.

If nothing is done, dogs will keep getting killed by 220's.

Everytime a dog gets killed by a 220, another nail is driven into the coffin of 220's because another trapper hater, along with their friends, is made, which garners that much more support for a ban.

Ironically, the recreational trappers, the ones that just do it for fun, and are the ones that are probably responsible for the majority of the killer sets, they'll just move onto leg hold traps and still enjoy their fun.

I don't know what the answer is but if nothing is done, if more dogs keep getting killed, more bad publicity is generated, a ban will eventually follow.

[jparrucci]

And there in lies the problem. I know how to release a trap, even though it might not matter knowing the force of a 220. The problem is too many wrappers are placing their traps in places that are not ethical. Near wma parking lots, baiting with pheasants, etc. Last year when this same thread popped up, we had a good discussion. But it seems to me the problem here is too many trappers are setting traps in areas that are likely to have high dog numbers. What is the solution? We bird hunters should expect some risk of lots of things, including traps. But when there are too many bonehead trappers out there, we hunters have to start thinking about no longer asking trappers to use some common sense, but push for legislation that removes the ability of somebody to do something stupid and put my dog at risk.

[Todd Caswell]

What is the main reason these regulations are in place now? Why can't we set say Bear size footholds or 330's on land?

any foot or leghold trap with a jaw opening greater than 8¾ inches;

• any body-gripping or conibear-type trap with a jaw opening greater

than 7½ inches, except as a waterset*

[Todd Caswell]

The two people that I know that are REALLY pushing this will not quit untill something is done,period. And your right JP whether they planned it or not they have gotten the attention of the anti's and that doesn't help any of us.

The way I see it is the trapping community has two choises either make a compromise or be faced with an all out ban on the 220 as a land set. And it's not going to be the bird hunter that looses a dog that accomplishes this it's going to be the lady up at the cabin taking fluffy for a evening stroll, who ISN't a hunter and has more money than she knows what to do with. You think she's going to care that Jonny P can't make a living with out the 220, I don't think so.

[jparrucci]

Could pushing trapping season back be an option? I would like to hear some ideas or compromises from trappers. I want you guys to trap! But you aren't helping your cause by telling hunters to stick your head in the sand. What other options are there? Can we push for a change to daily trapline monitoring? Later season starts? Is there another trap type that is safer for dogs? I haven't heard a single solution from a trappers except we will continue our ways, deal with it.