More trapping of dogs...

[Random guy]

LOL had to mistype stuff to beat you.

[jparrucci]

One other question I have been pondering is why are the springs on 220 set so tight and with so much force? To me it seems as the goal is to instantly kill the animal by breaking the animals neck. When I stick a broomstick in mine, it snaps it with unbelievable force. I understand the intent is for the animal to not suffer. If the initial force was less and releasing was easier, I don't think we would have the problems we do now. If I can't budge one with both hands there is no way a targeted species is going to escape. Maybe a design change would be most beneficial for all. Reduce the tension.

[JBar]

LOL had to mistype stuff to beat you.

Ha and the race is on!!

[Random guy]

Its one thing for the trap to come full cycle onto a wooden broom stick 1" in diameter and another onto a 6" wad of muscle fur and critter. I have had Otter and Fisher pull out of 220s and beaver pull out of 330s.

[BRULEDRIFTER]

Thanks JP!

So from what I can interpret from looking at the season dates and animals open to trapping, it appears that for most of the state a 220 can be on the ground from mid/late-Oct through late Feb/mid Mar.

Again, is there a certain time frame that they are more frequently abundant than other times?

[Random guy]

I keep thinking in my head of a way a quick release could be installed. Say a pin or cam lock that could be pulled or something thats breaks the trap open or in half if need be.

[jparrucci]

Never really thought of it in those terms. As the larger the diameter the less force it gets to exert. I just know when I have set my 220 off thinking this would snap my forearm if it got stuck in there.

[JBar]

Many of the body gripping traps are made to meet AIHT standards a Canadian standard in which to measure the affectiveness of a trap for a quick dispatch. Actually the design of the body trap have been moving the other way for a quick humane dispatch.

[Random guy]

Thanks JP!

So from what I can interpret from looking at the season dates and animals open to trapping, it appears that for most of the state a 220 can be on the ground from mid/late-Oct through late Feb/mid Mar.

Again, is there a certain time frame that they are more frequently abundant than other times?

Once again its regional. My 220s are on the ground from opener in Mid October until the close of Fisher season. Sometimes span of no 220s before fisher season if I tag out my Otter quickly like this year where the 220's had me done Otter trapping in three days.

[Ray1]

Ive had my arm in a 330 and it didnt break. But it did hurt like he!!

[Random guy]

Never really thought of it in those terms. As the larger the diameter the less force it gets to exert. I just know when I have set my 220 off thinking this would snap my forearm if it got stuck in there.

It won't snap your forearm but it will tick ya off. I took one on the index finger this fall that woke me up.

[BRULEDRIFTER]

Alright, thanks again.

My old lab and I covered a lot of ground over the years, both in the north and in the south for birds and the whole time I was oblivious to the dangers out there. But, we made it.... In the end a tumor took him out, not a 220. But, I can't help but be extremely paranoid going forward from here on out. I know of a guy who lost his dog up in the Cook area this fall by a trap. I'm sure there are many, many more that go unreported, too.

Really hope some kind of compromise is reached. Really intrigued by a quick release mechanism.

I think I'll be buying a 220 before a new pooch and learning how it works, just so I know.

[Random guy]

I think I'll be buying a 220 before a new pooch and learning how it works, just so I know.

Just wait until the 220 ground set is banned you should be able to buy 220s from trappers for a dime a dozen.

[Eric Wettschreck]

Please educate me! What do you use a 220 for?

Sorry for not replying sooner, dang jobs. Anyhoo, southern guy chiming in now.

For us, the 220 is the most uber awesome trail set trap for coons. They work well for others including red fox, yotes, badger, skunk, opossim, and other small critters but I mostly use them for raccons. Some species like mink, muskrat, and weasel can be trapped with 220 but I usually use a 110 for them due to their body size.

The real cool thing about the 220 is it's instant death for a raccoon. No drowning set, no foothold, no strangle due to snare............It dies right now and that's why I use it.

The 3 legged critter dropping stinkies on the deck comment came from me, not Jon.

The no comprimise question I don't understand. I'm of the feeling everyone is willing to comprimise but the comprimise has to actually accomplish something besides making everyone feel good because they comprimised.

[jparrucci]

I would not support any regulations that ban traps of any type on private lands and would fight tooth and nail with you. I think this needs to be looked at from north and south angle as well. Grouse hunting pressure drops off dramatically once deer season kicks in. Maybe push back the Bobcat and fisher seasons later and not allow ground 220s until later into the grouse season up north? Any trapping laws that trappers don't like that would make sense to reverse to offset this? I think the wpas and wmas in the southern part of the state are a whole different beast. Pheasant hunting pressure is high right up till season close on Jan 1, and there is much less public land. This is also where I have seen some really poorly chosen spots for traps. The species trapped in the south is also much different. I don't see any fishers around here, and few Bobcat. No shortage of yote and foxes and coons. Makes sense to allow for ground traps after Jan 1 on public, and extend the seasons into April or whenever you guys think works.

[BrettH]

Rbuker, let's get one thing straight. A trap placed by a trapper is the responsibility of the trapper, if it kills a dog of a hunter it was the action of the trapper that lead to its death. Nothing else, if the trap wasnt there, there would be no dead dog. Who is taking from who? I continue to hear about controlling our dogs, what about the control of the trap? A trapper sets and baits a trap then leaves. What control does he have over his trap then? None. It catches what ever sticks its head in.

Talk about sad to see one outdoorsman not stick up for another, you are sanctioning the cavalier attitude that it's ok to kill our hunting dogs so you can make money.

[Random guy]

Brett what do you do for a living?

[Eric Wettschreck]

jparrucci, the trouble with your suggestions is it seperates the state. Any regulations will be statewide and not North and South regional.

Also, there are many people who will say, as a counter to your southern MN season, let the trappers trap while furbearers are prime in Nov and Dec and the bird hunters can hunt in January.

Pheasants don't hibernate. They can be hunted in February.

Just tossin the other side of the coin out there.

[jparrucci]

I would be ok with flipping December for February. Nicer weather than January. Trap the heck out of then in December. When is the fur at its prime? Is it not still good in March? I would prefer to hunt upland in late winter and early spring compared to December. Waterfowl wears me out, and there is nothing going on in late winter.

[swamptiger]

I think you have the gist of the situation. As far as north/south goes, there already are established north/south trapping zones.

As for the 220 and coons, I won't say the 220 is not a highly effective trail trap, but there are other options that work well also.

[swamptiger]

Quote:

When is the fur at its prime? Is it not still good in March?

There is generally a very short window in the north for prime coon - sometimes hardly any window at all before they go into hibernation..

[BrettH]

Johnny, I own three businesses, a retail business, a manufacturing business and a real estate business. Each one has seen its challenges and have required us to adapt and change stratigy to deal with a changing marketplace. As a small business owner we are constantly under attack by outside forces, as you are well aware. Plus if I was killing pets as a result of my business practice, I would be shut down faster than a newyork minute.

Earlier I read your post inferring that a change in the 220 regs will put you out of business. I don't believe that, you are to smart.

[Random guy]

Earlier I read your post inferring that a change in the 220 regs will put you out of business. I don't believe that, you are to smart.

I never said it was going to run me out of business, I said it is going to cost me a large portion of income. With the 220 gone I lose the most efficient tool in my line I have to replace it with something. Not only does it have to be replaced one for one it needs to be replaced 2-1 to make up for how well it works compared to other methods. Another cost will be the time needed to prefect pan set verses staking down a 220.

[Random guy]

And this is how it goes. Wiger has proposed that ALL body grip traps not just the 220 have to be 5 feet off the ground OR COMPLETELY SUBMERGED in the water! So now we have to figure out how get animals to dive into a trap or climb up five feet. It went from 220 ground sets to ALL body gripping traps not only elevated but submerged, not halfway submerged as the current 330 law states but completely submerged as in fully under the water.

Quote:

Wiger, along with Rep. John Ward of Brainerd, aren’t asking to ban the trap, but rather change how it’s used. They want the traps moved 5 feet off the ground and placed in a way that dogs can’t get to them. Also, if the traps are used in the water to catch muskrats and other animals, they would have to be completely submerged.

Yet another kick in the teeth. People ask us for compromise and want us to understand!? Ya that just went out the window with another sucker punch from behind. Better look out hunters as soon us trappers will be gone and your next.

Basically they are proposing to outlaw the successful use of the body grip trap. Five feet up and fully under the water renders the trap basically useless.

That wipes conibear beaver trapping, muskrat trapping, otters and most water based furbeares. Some beavers can be caught fully submerged under ice but muskrats and Otter the body grip is done.

Now BrettH I most likely will go out of the trapping business if this passes. I cannot see being efficient enough without the water set (the normal halfway submerged) body grip. I have been running the numbers through my head and looking through last year’s log books. NO WAY can I turn a profit if I lose the water set conibear. 96 years of family trapping will die and fade away.

Looks like the wish may be granted. Get ready for repercussions of the trappers finally being pushed out or just [PoorWordUsage] off.

[SneakAttack]

Wow! All conibears to be an underwater set, unbelievable. Ive always read about the bottom edge set for mink and rats and how good it can be, guess i'll find out next fall

Whats next? 12 hour check on footholds?

[swamptiger]

I posted this in the trapping forum, so I'll post it here too.

Issues and solutions I see for the 220/dog problem:

There are three main issues here, as I see it:

1.) The use of the 220 as a trail/dry land set for coon. This would primarily be in the south zone. There are other alternatives available.

2.) The end date of grouse season in the north conflicts with the start date of fisher/marten/bobcat season. These dates could be moved to Dec. 1st.

3.) The use and established methods of 220s for watersets should not be an issue at all, and shouldn't be changed.

[jparrucci]

I would not be in favor of the current proposal. Like others have said, there is no need to change how conibears are used in wetlands. Every bird hunter is capable of keeping their dogs away from those places. If the trap is in or on the water, you should not have to change. It is the ground sets placed in uplands that are of concern. Looks to me like the solution should be to push back the seasons on fishers and Bobcat, and once December rolls around take your dog out ask your own risk up north. Down south may need further compromise.

[swamptiger]

Quote:

I would not be in favor of the current proposal. Like others have said, there is no need to change how conibears are used in wetlands. Every bird hunter is capable of keeping their dogs away from those places. If the trap is in or on the water, you should not have to change. It is the ground sets placed in uplands that are of concern. Looks to me like the solution should be to push back the seasons on fishers and Bobcat, and once December rolls around take your dog out ask your own risk up north. Down south may need further compromise.

+1.

[JBar]

If you go on WCCO's web page and look at the comments under the news cast from last night it's surreal. Mothers out to completely ban the trap in fear of a small infant getting caught. Dog owners with non sporting dogs ganging together to help ban the trap. This worry's me as the voice that will be heard has no reason or compromise. When I was in college my friends to the west called MN a communist state I'm starting to believe this.

[Random guy]

I don't kow what else to do. Very sad indeed, so many sportsman are going to lose a way of life.

Quote:

Gentleman,

I have come to realize I am being faced with what may be an end of a 100 year legacy, a livelihood and just a way of life in Northern Minnesota. Sen. “Chuck” Wiger and Rep. John Ward plan to propose a bill intended to protect dogs from being harmed in the body gripping traps after a tear jerker news broadcast on WCCO TV.

Now I can understand the plight of dog owners as some 220 “body gripping” traps can be set in MN for raccoons in a manner that dogs can enter them and can be harmed. An original suggestion of elevating the 220 or utilizing dog proof boxes for raccoon bait sets has its merits.

Where this has over stepped the bounds is this proposal appears to be targeting ALL sizes of body gripping traps. Not only shocking but what will be a devastating blow to the trapping community, is the request also includes ALL water set body grip traps to be completely submerged, contrasting the current half submerged law that is currently in place for the 330 size body grip trap. These traps will be banned from performing as completely submerged and highly elevated works with very limited success.

Now I can debate the rights of trappers’ verses the rights of dog owners until the cows come home, but another larger problem for Minnesota will start small and grow out of proportion.

This proposal will not only greatly reduce the efficiency of the trappers that attempt to continue to trap, but will be the final straw in pushing many trappers out of the sport. Not only will Minnesota lose licenses and outdoor recreation dollars but our varmint and predator control systems is going to list and capsize. Currently the DNR in conjunction with the trapper work to keep these populations in check, what we will see is a swing in the favor of the varmints and predators. This will include raccoons, coyotes, skunks, muskrats, beavers and many other animals that will become overpopulated becoming a nuisance problem. Senator Skoe I do not need to explain to you the problems that can be created when beaver and muskrat grow over populated or go unchecked; your agriculture background has shown you that first hand. I also will hate to see what happens to small game populations as ground bearing furbearers grow in numbers and start gorging on nesting birds and eggs. Grouse, Sharp-tail, Pheasant, Ducks and a long list of target species for the Minnesota sportsman will come under attack like they have never seen. Lake home owners will lose shoreline due to overpopulated muskrats, road crews will spend endless dollars clearing beaver plugged culverts and flooded roadways. What is the scariest is damage to protective ring dikes, flood diversions and other water control systems. The burrowing of uncontrolled beaver, otter, muskrat and skunk populations will become very apparent when the integrity of flood diversion mechanisms fail. Sadly this will happen when they are needed the most.

This issue as minor as it may be for many is very important to Northern Minnesota. With the body gripping trap only allowed completely submerged or 5 feet off the ground it renders the trap basically useless. Trappers will be forced to return to 1940’s methods of foothold trapping and snares, a very inefficient method that will greatly reduce harvest numbers. Or many trappers will just give up the sport as many have already stated they will do. Loss of efficiency and the cost to replace the body gripping traps with other methods will too much for many to absorb. I as a full time trapper that utilizes Minnesota trapping as a part of my professional income fear this will be too great of a burden, I myself will not be able to continue trapping if this proposal passes.

Please help protect the trapper in Minnesota, we need them.

Jonathan G Petrowske

Outdoors with Jonny P LLC.