|
Post by kkbait on Mar 4, 2006 21:46:52 GMT -5
Is there any way to add a pan tension device to Montgomery #2 traps to make them legal in NY ??
|
|
|
Post by Dave Leibig on Mar 5, 2006 7:43:19 GMT -5
The dogless traps are legal in NY. You adj the pan tension using a file. The deeper the notch the more pan tension you get. It's not an easy task, just a little practice. Dave
|
|
|
Post by hatch on Mar 5, 2006 13:06:19 GMT -5
I thought their jaw spread was 6" and thats the #2 the 1.5 has 4.5" spread are both legal now or what?thanks hatch
|
|
|
Post by mole on Mar 5, 2006 16:09:28 GMT -5
as long as the trap meets the size restrictions ; I believe all you have to do to meet the pan tension requirements is use like an underall. This is simply a piece of foam,or polyfill , etc. under the pan. Ed
|
|
|
Post by kkbait on Mar 6, 2006 7:02:09 GMT -5
Thanks for the info. I thought it had to be something similiar to a nut and bolt.
|
|
|
Post by mikespring on Mar 6, 2006 7:43:51 GMT -5
I just started using the #3 Montana(great trap buy the way) and before purchasing I talked with a DEC officer and asked him about the pan tensioning device reg.
He said the device had to be attached to the trap.
Its a weired reg....I don`nt believe they mandate a required poundage for land trapping.
Mike Spring
|
|
|
Post by Itrapny on Mar 6, 2006 8:03:12 GMT -5
Mike, So I assume that all dogless traps are covered under the pan tensionsing from your discussion with the CO then, correct??
|
|
|
Post by mikespring on Mar 6, 2006 8:21:33 GMT -5
Yes Wayne... thats the way I understood it.
I can change the tension on a dog-less trap with a file...
if I was ever ticketed for not having a pan tensioning device I would fight it in court.
I will say that the officer said that regulation was not something they were to overly concerned with, jaw spread, 24hr check, distance from dwelling etc,(would love to have that in writing) were their main concerns.
Mike Spring
|
|
|
Post by herm on Mar 6, 2006 15:22:30 GMT -5
newt,apperently the DEC officer you asked has never read or looked a some of their own papers they have passed out in the past showing legal pan tensioning devices.A small stick,dirt under the pan or as mole said are all legal tenioning devices and are not part of the trap.
|
|
|
Post by mikespring on Mar 6, 2006 16:31:52 GMT -5
Herm, where can this info be obtained? I did ask about foam and the DEC officer stated that it had to be ATTACHED to the pan.
Just stating what the officer told me, this by no means makes it right or wrong.
I have already said how I adjust my tension on the dog-less traps, dirt or small sticks would`nt work for me.
Mike Spring
|
|
|
Post by herm on Mar 6, 2006 19:36:08 GMT -5
newt,looked through my stuff I have collected here and can not find it.If seen it though and I am sure others on Itrap have to.With out going into detail if you think about it for a moment I am sure you will see how dirt or a small stick will work just fine for a tension device or PM me.
|
|
|
Post by mikespring on Mar 6, 2006 21:53:54 GMT -5
No need to pm Herm, I have said I have no use for a pan tensioning devise under my trap pan.
Does`nt take much of an imagination to see that a twig or dirt, toothpick under-all etc could be considered a pan tensioning device, but are they legal? You say yes, I need to see it in writing. The regulation booklet we receive when we purchase our license is just a GENERAL guideline to go by- its open to too many interpretations.
I`ll call the DEC tomorrow and see if I can get something in writing.
Mike Spring
|
|
|
Post by charlielambjr on Mar 6, 2006 22:39:42 GMT -5
they even have it listed in the trappers training manuals, even cut up metal tape measures
|
|
|
Post by mikespring on Mar 7, 2006 7:30:19 GMT -5
Charlie, I have not seen a trappers training manuel in years lol.
Does it say that the tape measure is a legal p-t-d?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2006 15:47:06 GMT -5
I have a current copy of the trappers training manual , and it only mentions the tension screw on the pan as a tensioning device. No where did it mention using pieces of tape measure, sticks or twigs to provide for tension to avoid small unwanted catches. Putting something like that under a pan would be a lame thing to do in my opinion. Why do we sift our coverings and try to keep crap from getting under the pan in the first place? The old dogless Montgomery traps I have, have a nut and a treaded post attached to the bottom of the pan. That supposedly regulated how much engagement the notch had when hooked over the jaw. When they corroded up and broke off, I drilled a hole through the pan and replaced it with another bolt and a couple of brass nuts. A tune up with a file as was mentioned really did it better, the screw is for show. I was told when I asked that the pan had to be screw adjustable for tension if it was over the 4" jaw spread limit and set on land. This is one of the reasons that got me started on using the PIT system on the humped frame traps like the #2 and #3 DL springs. I wanted to be sure they were legal with no random personal interpetations. The screw and nut doesn't do much for my purposes but it is there and doesn't hurt function either. I also asked about what Mole said on the ployfil and under-alls, and was told it had to really be attached to the pan and not seperate. Like Newt said, it's maybe not the first thing a CO would look at, but you never know.
|
|
|
Post by mikespring on Mar 7, 2006 18:21:45 GMT -5
Thanks for the reply bobber.
I talked with a co today and it was quite comical. He did`nt know what a dog-less trap was. Nice guy and said he would try to get me the info I needed. I`ll keep ya posted.
Mike Spring
|
|
|
Post by herm on Mar 7, 2006 19:17:36 GMT -5
Environmental Conservation Law 11-1101 6 c Traps exceding 4" (b)Shall be equiped with a pan tensioning device which shall include but not be limited to a bolt and nut,notches grooved in the pan and dog or lever,sheer pins,a spring under the pan or strip of band steel,or other devices or modifications as permitted by regulation of the department.
The statement in the law not be limited to the above says a lot.
|
|
|
Post by mikespring on Mar 7, 2006 21:29:48 GMT -5
Thank you herm.
Mike Spring
|
|