Trap in open Field - Was this Right?

[tealitup]

On Saturday, my lil puppy and I enjoyed a walk in a local WMA (outside the city of Crown). The snow coming down (her first snow) along an open field was great.

I noticed a small orange flag in the field. We so did my puppy. As she started running over to it I had her stop and sit. As she turned she must have thrown up some dirt because a trap went off (a leg hold trap).

This was in an open field - and I looked at the trap but there was no information on it; no name or phone number. Just by itself; no tracks to or from it. The flag was not weather worn so it had to be placed within the past 2 weeks.

What kind of bothered me - this is an area which many people hunt pheasants with their dogs. The trap was large enough to hold my dogs leg and many others. Was this right or a trapper?

[fishermann222]

no trap tag on the trap then the trapper was illegal.

If there was a trap tag on it, then the trapper would be in the right, unless there are restrictions in WMA's in Minnesota. Did you leave the trap? Did you contact a CO because there was no trap tag?

Lastly, leg hold traps are not designed to harm the animal, and I am sure your puppy was not injured at all correct? If pheasant hunters are with their dogs and they get in a set they will not be harmed, the owner will just have to go over and release them. Remember that foothold traps are not designed to injure or maim the animal that steps in it, just designed to hold the animal. In the case of a domestic animal, as long as the owner is with, the dog will just be "held" until they go over and release it.

Anyway sorry for the rant, Contact the CO if the trap did not have a trap tag on it.

[tealitup]

I understand that a leg hold trap does not hurt the animal. I did call the TIP line to let them know.

Also, the trap was hand cut to have "V" shapes in the trap part. Kind of hard to explain. Like both sides were cut to have wedges that came together. I thought a leg trap was just flat on the trap part.

Nope, my dog was not injured - just was wondering if this trap was in the right to be in a WMA. I am not mad at all - I want there to be more trappers out there to get the coyotes and fox (more ducks). And I, infact, would someday like to try trapping.

[fishermann222]

Quote:

---

Also, the trap was hand cut to have "V" shapes in the trap part. Kind of hard to explain. Like both sides were cut to have wedges that came together. I thought a leg trap was just flat on the trap part.

---

I am a bit confused on yoru description here. There are many parts to the trap, levers, pan, dog, jaws, springs, base. Think you can be a little more specific?

If the V shape was cut into the pan then it was a Victor brand of trap. Any chance that i named the parts now that you can explain it a little further?

Glad you called tip if there were no trap tags present.

[wh1stler]

Quote:

---

Also, the trap was hand cut to have "V" shapes in the trap part. Kind of hard to explain. Like both sides were cut to have wedges that came together. I thought a leg trap was just flat on the trap.

---

Are you thinking of the jaws? The actual pieces of metal that would hold an animals foot? Unless I am mistaken, traps with teeth on the jaws are not legal.

If this is the case, my guess is that somebody found an old trap and decided to set it and see what would happen. I can't imagine it was a serious trapper.

Wh1stler

[Hammer Handle]

Actually, if the trap is on your own land...you don't have to have a tag on the trap...isn't that right?

The "V" cutting you talk about, was the trap made to have teeth? That is not legal.

[xHCxOutdoorsman]

he has every right to trap in an open feild whether or not people pheasant hunt it with dogs or not but, the trap no tagged is unlawful and the DNR should be contacted and shown where the trap is, DO NOT PULL THE TRAP LET THE DNR DO THAT PART!!!!!

[Hammer Handle]

But, the DNR laws state "A person many not set or place a trap, other than on property owned or occupied by ther person, unless the following information is affixed to the trap..."

From that, I understand that if the trap is on your own land, you do not have to have a tag on the trap. Am I correct?

People hunt on this land...is it public or privately owned? If privately owned, does someone give permission to hunt there?

[tealitup]

Not trying to start a battle of words here.

The part that holds the animals foot had "v" notches cut. So the part which snaps closed onto the animals foot had teeth if you will.

Not on private land - it was on a Wildlife Management Area.

[fishermann222]

Yep they are called teeth, and they are no longer legal in minnesota. Was TIP going to send someone out?

[Hammer Handle]

I am not trying to start a battle either...just trying to get all the facts.

The trap was illegal then, both the teeth and the set. That is probably why it wasn't properly tagged...for the trap is illegal (teeth).

Kind of strange he marked it with a flag....

If privately owned and your dog was actually tresspassing, he was legal...except for the teeth on the traps. You were lucky your dog didn't get caught, that trap is not just make to "hold" an animal...but hurt it!

[tealitup]

OK STOP! We were not tresspassing. I do not TRESSPASS!

If anyone knows the area - it is about 10 miles east of Zimmerman and 3-4 Miles north of Crown. Its called Crown WMA. Backside of the swamp about 200 yards from the parking area.

I left a message on the TIP phone line and no-one has called me back

[Hammer Handle]

Sorry, I was NOT accusing you of tresspassing.

Take it easy....

I was just explaining the rules for all to see.

It is definately an illegal set...and those added "teeth" scare me.

[fishermann222]

Hammerhandle the teeth are not meant to hurt the animal either, they are meant to keep the animal from struggling at all. To the point where if they start to strugle, they the points dig in and they no longer struggle. It was a good idea that has been banned in many places because it is viewed as cruel.

It was not designed TO be cruel, just a side effect.

[xHCxOutdoorsman]

yes but it was a WMA (public land) there fore the following info was needed(one of these)

full name

license #

so on and so forth

[Rainman]

The Trap sounds Illegal. As far as where it was set is legal. Did you look closely down by the stake for the persons tag. I once got accused for not having my traps tagged. But they were. The tags were wrapped around the chain next to the stake. Partially underground. Also, Remember you are not the only one enjoying the great outdoors, Some just enjoy it in different ways than others.

Just my 2 cents.

Fishermann222, How are you man? Lets see some pictures buddy.

Randy

[fishermann222]

Hey rainman I am off to a slow start we had a bad thaw and lost all the snow and everything opened up. WE are froze up again, but just barely, got about 2 inches of snow today with 6 more to come tonight and tomorrow, if it wasn't for the 40mph winds coming i would get out and set after school today. WIth those winds though, no way am i going to set, I will be digging for weeks.

I had some "issues" with the first spot I was trapping this year, someone thought that this area 3 miles out of town was their personal space to walk their dogs. The State troopers have been involved and told me i need to reset the area and if more problems arise they will handle them.

Might be an interesting year up here. Heck I am 3 miles out of town, people trap IN TOWN up here.

We wont' make it up to the Yukon for wolves, wolverine, marten, and lynx until probably January with the ice conditions this year, just not safe, and a mistake up here WILL cost you your life.

[Hammer Handle]

Weren't the teeth banned for they hold the animal better by digging into the skin/meat? That is why they were banned...and it does hurt the animal more than a trap with no teeth.

They can stop the animal from struggled for it hurts them more...but most old traps I saw with teeth go right through the skin.

[fishermann222]

Ok after reading your reply and having many things to say, I withheld my comments until i met with the local ADFG (alaska dept of fish and game) bio's today who are also trappers. This is what they had to say

They were designed to keep the foot from sliding sideways in the jaws and thus cutting the critter. they were an attempt to be more humane. They ARE still legal in Alaska.

The teeth are offset so they do not "meet" but rather are seperated leaving room for hte foot of the animal so the teeth do not push against it unless there is a struggle, and then it stops it from sliding.

Hope that helps.

[Hammer Handle]

I am just going by past experience.

My family has trapped for many years, and I recently started again. We have some very old traps with teeth in them (which I don't use).

I just remember a huge difference on traps with teeth and without. As a kid, the animals caught with teeth had a lot more damage done to the leg.

This year, I happened to catch a Tom Turkey in my trap (happened to step in the wrong place). I was able to let the turkey go and he was fine. I suspect that if my trap had teeth in it, his foot would have been more damaged.

[Trapr]

The location of the trap in an open season for furbearers seams ok. The ethics and of course illegality of a trap with teath and without a tag would have had me pulling this trap so the person who set it illegally could not have done so again.(If I could clearly see there was no tag)(sometimes tages are wrapped on the chain, the trap ring, swivel or frame of the trap.) I then would have called tip or a warden and let them know what and where I found it. I think TIP is great, but I also know they have often not responded to several legitimate calls of a friend of mine. If this trap did not have teeth and you could clearly see the whole trap and chain without disturbing the set, and it had no tag, then it was also illegal, but I would not have pulled it, just reported it.

You should not disturb someone elses legally set traps just to see who the trap belongs to. (just wish them luck and hope they respect the animals they are after) Like someone else said, often the trap and much of the chain is burried and just a trap snapping does not unearth all that is burried. Good trappers go to great care to eliminate scent on their equipment and at the trap site. Unless your animal is accidentally caught, don't ruine his hard work.

I am supprised someone flagged this trap when it was set impropperly, but from a dog hunters perspective, would be gratefull he did so I could keep my pet free of the jaws. Even so, he has a responsibility to know the laws, rules and ethics of trapping. I used to trap and know what happens good and bad when a trap snapps on a foot. I also know that depending on the size of the trap and the size of the dog in question, the outcomes vary.

Good luck to all trapping and hunting in the areas of trappers. Public lands are open to a large group of people and we all need to respect each other.

[Muthagoose]

Well the trap may have been set by a uninformed youth. To me reading it was marked with a flag tells me that there may have been some consideration.Im sure you checked this trap over real good and didnt find a tag.. My self I roll my tags up tight around either the last link or if small enough on the ring.Your name is no longer required your DL# or MNDNR # covers it.

Ground in teeth are far different than the opposing teeth on the #14 jumpers. Foot holds and improper use have given trapping a bad name.

Most damage happens on dry ground sets from a long chain to a stake or a over sized trap in use which is exactly why the BMP guidelines are in place now. To bad it took so long for people to figured out that once a foot is crushed thats when the chewing and wring offs happen. Even worse is to short of a drowner when wet trapping...

My bet is some kid has found some old steel,asked grandpa ect what to do.

I used to hunt roosters around mine and others trap sets. Common sense would tell me that If I saw a flag to stay away and "control my dogs" even if I have the right to hunt whatever..

Ive pulled my lab out of several foot sets and one 220. Its not pretty and its mighty scary..I just accept the fact and move on.

When I did contact the guy trapping with 220's I informed him what happened, he did find a cubbie set messed with.. Considering that I didnt take his trap but only gathered intell from the tag that if would either flag mark them or let me know where to expect I could avoid a repeat..Of course he was hesitant but was obliging..

Personally I think that a bucket set is one of the finest coon sets ever devised and should be the only way a 220 should be allowed on dry ground and with a marker flag .. BUT thanks to Thieves and clowns messing with sets generally a trapper has to take more time in hiding his sets than needed. Too bad to considering the need for predator control..

Just got home from the cities and saw more mink tracks in every ditch along 35w,any waterfowl and upland hunter should be greatfull for anyone out there controlling the main killers of all game birds.....

I called the warden several times on people messing with sets its mighty irritating to see how a personal opinion becomes vindication for action.

With Trapr on that respect..

Tealitup has a good attitude and appreciates trappers, Sounds to me like a learning experience that went better than it could have and that he has control over a puppy which is excellent. Maybe teal should get into to trapping?? Its a good time and $$$ to be made. Just another good reason to be outdoors.

[tcbrookston]

tealitup,

Pita would have a blast with the answers everyone has come up with.

You are right! I have been trapping since the late 70's. Leave the law out of this. (even if the trap was not legal)

Trappers need to think before they place a trap. The hand book doesn't say that. If on public land, they need to understand that they are not the only ones there!

If there is sign that hunters and dogs are in the area, don't set a trap that may catch a dog. (flag or not). If a trapper is actually trapping for a living, they aren't paying enough taxes to claim any steak on public land anyway.

Here is the real deal, If you need to look it up in the trapping manual to see if it is legal, it more than likely isn't. But if it is legal, it is more than likely not ethical. Those that fight this are the ones we can blame when they take our rights away.

[walleye101]

tc is right. There are plenty of places where it is legal to set a trap where only a fool would set one. Unfortunately there are more than enough fools as well.

[beav]

not to say this trapper was right and I would not set a toothed trap on land but toothed traps are still legal in mn.