16ga.com ~ View topic

A week ago in northern Michigan, a dog was killed by a conibear-type trap http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071018/SPORTS10/710180456/1058. Mrs./Dr. LiverTick, DVM says that you have moments to minutes to release your dog from a trap of this kind. Following is the link to a .pdf page that explains how to compress the springs on these traps. http://www.gundogdoc.com/library/trap_release.pdf

Hopefully, you will never need to use this information.

Edited to fix link to article.

Member Joined: 02 Feb 2006 Posts: 602 Location: western pa

In PA it's illegal to set a Conibear above the water surface. That eliminates 99.9% of unwanted catches. Other sets with paw hold traps are more effective for cats and coyotes and foxes :and dogs can be easily released from them. I'm not familiar with Mich. trapping laws, but I'll bet that was a bonehead set made by an amateur. Shame the guy lost his dog.

Second that for Missouri exactly what Fred said applies here , it is unthinkable to set one up on land , I done a lot of trapping all through school and know a few that did set them on land,

I lost a coon dog to that as well but found out who set the thing and they paid for the dog but it didnt replace the dog , good thing though I never did have a very good coon dog for the guys I hunted with did have good dogs but couldn't shoot worth a lick so that is why we hunted every night for 12 years they had the dogs and I could hit the coon in the tree worked out well ( what it was these boys got tired of climbing trees or attempting to squall the coons out for the dogs to catch)

Regard Charles

Yes, in Michigan a body-grip trap more than 6" at the jaws cannot be set above water on public land (which the area referenced is), unless it is placed at least 4' above the ground or placed in a box or other enclosure that is inaccessible to dogs.

Member Joined: 06 Nov 2006 Posts: 128 Location: NE

"The trap may have been legal, but whoever set it was well aware the Mason Tract draws hundreds, maybe thousands, of bird hunters and their dogs every year, and placing it the way he did was unconscionable."

the trap in and of itself may have been, but it was an illegal set, period.
1. the trap did not have an owner's tag on it as required by law. (article author mentions this)
2. The way it was set was illegal, MI regs. require these traps when on any public land or commercial forest land to be a max 6" jaw spread and either at least 4' off the ground, or in a box that would make it inaccessible to dogs. The Mason Tract is public land. (article author says to show some consideration and mentions that it "should have been" but not that it is the law)

It was not a bonehead set made by an amateur, it was a criminal act.

Almost sounds like an animal rights whacko tactic to further harass trappers. A lot of them wouldn't mind killing a few hunting dogs if it helps to ban all trapping (and of course hunting eventually)

By the way, if you can't figure out how to open a conibear by reading the other article linked to, and if you don't know anybody that traps- then find a store that sells them and have them show you!! This type of set may be legal on private property, or there may be some other ass using illegal sets.

berg

Joined: 18 Mar 2007 Posts: 280 Location: Southern Ohio

Fortunately I know how to release a body grip trap.. If I didn't, and used a dog in areas where trapping is permitted, I would spend $12 on a 260 Conibear and make myself completely familiar with it.. They said it was a legally set trap, set by an illegal trapper so I assume I was less than 6", Those things aren't that strong, but could be difficult to remove from a struggling dog.. Better yet, a pair of setting tongs cost only $9-$10 and could be modified to fit in a hunting coat..MDC

It's impossible to know exactly what the motives were behind the set that killed that dog. But, the only trapping seasons open in that area are raccoon, fox, coyote, and badger. The fact that the trap was (reportedly) around the dog's head and neck would indicate that it had jaws at least 6" wide, which would also be appropriate for the open seasons.

Again, it really is too bad about the dog. That is why I wanted to remind and/or inform the readers here about the danger these traps pose to our dogs along with some information about how to help get the dogs extricated. Time is absolutely critical in this type of situation.

It is my opinion that if you hunt with dogs in any location that MIGHT have a conibear trap in it you would be well advised to know or learn the operation of them. The compression of the springs on a conibear is quite different form a jump spring or v-spring leg hold trap.

I have used them for many years in beaver control work for the public and for different timber companies and they are DANGEROUS! They are designed to kill by crush force and/or suffocation and will do so in quick order. If your dog gets into one you will only have a very brief time to release him if he is not killed outright.

In every location I have ever been associated with the larger sizes are only legal in water sets, but that has no bearing at all when your dog is in the grip of death. Know what to do!!

Mayhap it is poetic justice for the beaver, but as I type this my right arm aches all the way to the shoulder, and I am long overdue for wrist surgery to try to repair the damage done 20 years ago when I let a big ol' 330 conibear get away from me as I tried to set it in a beaver run in waist deep water. Don't take them lightly.

Rooster

Member Joined: 15 Oct 2005 Posts: 40

Below is a copy of an article I wrote in August/September 1998 Gun Dog Magazine Forum concerning snare and conibear traps.

Joined: 18 Mar 2007 Posts: 280 Location: Southern Ohio

Berg: I won't defend this trapper, but I will defend trapping, because when it is banned, all hunting won't be far behind.. They way I read the Michigan Regs, only body grip traps with a spread over 6" need be dog proof or 4' off the ground.. Apparently this trap was 6" or under.and on the ground. I noted in the artical, the conservation officer, said the set would be legal, had the trap been tagged.. It is very unfortunate about the dog, but hunters and trappers should work together for a common cause..MDC

Member Joined: 06 Nov 2006 Posts: 128 Location: NE

M D,

Rereading the regs it looks like I was wrong about the way the trap was set, with only larger than 6" required to be "dogproof" but it still was not tagged as per the regulations and that makes it an illegally set trap.

It does say that the trap (or rather a trap of this type) was legal was in the line:

"The trapping season opened in that area Oct. 15, and body-gripping traps like the one that killed Leigh are legal for raccoons and bobcat."

The linked article was written by a Detoit Free Press staffer, and nowhere in the article does it quote an officer, nor does it say that a conservation officer said the set would be legal.

The only place it even mentions a conservation officer is when the dog owner is quoted saying "When I got her to the (conservation officer), it took three of us to get the jaws off her," he said, his voice breaking."

So, since traps of that type are legal to use, but it was not tagged with the owners name, the trap itself may have been legal, but it was illegally set, and I stand by my statement that it was a criminal act.

I don't have anything against trapping or trappers either. I have a couple dozen traps hanging out in my garage that I used to run 30 years ago. I know quite a few guys that either trap currently or used to when they were younger. Most of these guys were some of the best all-around outdoorsmen that I know.

Around here a lot of the guys that trap are involved in parts of the construction trade that pretty much shut down for the winter, and they support or supplement themselves and families by trapping. Most of them are very conscientious, and would never do anything that would jeapardize anyone's hunting dogs (since most are hunters and dog owners) or damage their own reputation (they take great pride in their skills and abilities), not to mention risking any legal consequences that would result from illegal activities.

I believe that some trapping is absolutely necessary, and is also a valuable public service. As an example of this, there are a couple of areas nearby where beaver dams on streams are causing some problems. They are backing up waterways to the point that some roadbeds are becoming saturated. The state highway department has to go out and clear culverts and ditches, then knock the dams down enough for the water to drain away from the roads. The state spends thousands of dollars a year doing this. A few trappers could take care of the problem for free.

I agree that hunters and trappers need to stand together, the animal rights whackos know that it is easier to pick us off one by one than it is if we are united behind the common front.

berg

Joined: 18 Mar 2007 Posts: 280 Location: Southern Ohio

Berg: very nice response. I can see we're on the same page.. Personally I think even a 6" body grip is too big to be on land. In Ohio, its smaller yet ( I think 4") or in the watr. Take care MDC