traps82
#3 Newhouse
Hope is always alive
Posts: 3,208
|
Post by traps82 on Dec 27, 2013 22:01:57 GMT -5
"I just wanted to know if 550's were legal" Oh yeah It takes less than that to get a thread moving right along!!! The was one called "Fox Dens" that went for 20 pages I think.. How many was it Jim??
|
|
austinp
#3 Newhouse
the next fur season is never far from our minds :)
Posts: 3,008
|
Post by austinp on Dec 27, 2013 23:18:25 GMT -5
I don't know for sure of trap size ! I only interacted with officer for a few minutes and he was very uppity about me sticking my nose in it at all ! My wife said it defiantly was an mb but unsure of the # lol women ! Anyway I hope the party's involved figure it out I just wanted to know if 550's were legal the very first reply here and several others to follow established that the 550s are legal. So from that point on, your question was answered resolute and this thread was done. From there, we continued the conversation in other directions. Many of us here already know the answer to your question 100% and now you do, too as for whether anyone read the pan or not, this story has passed thru too many people for us here to know if it's a 550 or 650. If it is indeed a 650 in this circumstance, what difference does it make if a 550 is legal? Might as well discuss if a 450 is legal, too. The crux of this whole thread and the story that spurred it is, what trap exactly? 550 or 650? the whole point to this thread was if the trap discussed in econ officer's hands is legal or not. We don't know, unless we know for sure what size that specimen is.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Mb 550 ?
Dec 27, 2013 23:24:49 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2013 23:24:49 GMT -5
See, bigger isn't always better!!!! Never have that problem with my Victor #2s!!! Ha! Couldn't resist...
|
|
|
Post by greggwny on Dec 28, 2013 5:31:57 GMT -5
As an archery shop owner I hear a lot of sportsmen talking about their interactions with ECO's and PA Game Wardens. Many times these guys have to actually read through the regulations on the spot to determine if there is a violation. The one big difference between NY and PA seems to be that the NY ECO's are generally professional and courteous...just the opposite of PA. One customer of mine from PA. was fined for baiting when he threw an apple core from an apple that he ate from his treestand. How many of us have done that?
Then when I took my PA Cable Restraint class they talked about a guy who was sited for hunting bear over bait...get this...the bait was almost a mile from where he was hunting but apparently the PGC was able to prove that the guy knew the bear was heading that way therefore he was in violation. In regards to the MB 550/650, the trap is being held in evidence and the guy will get his day in court. Either he will be guilty of using an illegal trap (650) or the ECO will end up look pretty foolish.
|
|
|
Post by silverfox on Dec 28, 2013 5:45:52 GMT -5
hope it works itself out, cant imagine (unless it was a very small breed of dog) enough damage to involve vets and DEC OR ECO officer, caught my neighbors LAB in one of my yote sets (on my property) and thought fer sure there would be an issue like this (new neighbors hadnt met them yet) but the owner was very grateful i was able to release the dog completely unharmed minus some tenderness, and was very apologetic for her dog wandering onto my property and "ruining" my set (and she def loves her dogs as this ones toe nails were painted!!) i was pleasantly surprised by her reaction to say the least
|
|
|
Post by herm on Dec 28, 2013 6:49:49 GMT -5
I once trapped a dog that belonged to a doctor. The dog was only in the trap,1 1/2, a very short time maybe only a few minutes. The doctor called his neighbor whos farm I was trapping on and really chewed him out. This doctor then took his dog to the vet, who happened to be a friend of mine and the vet told me later on when I saw him this doctor is nuts among other things. He knew, or should have known, there was nothing wrong with the dog, the scary thing being this guy worked on people.
|
|
traps82
#3 Newhouse
Hope is always alive
Posts: 3,208
|
Post by traps82 on Dec 28, 2013 10:32:07 GMT -5
I really wish we could find out how this ends/ended....
|
|
|
Mb 550 ?
Dec 28, 2013 21:06:02 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by countryboynwco on Dec 28, 2013 21:06:02 GMT -5
Thanks to someone on this site we recognizing my story I can say for sure it was a 650 ! The dogs will be ok after some rest also the person in question is guilty of not checking their traps on a daily basis ! Hope they hang him high people like him are the reason trappers get a bad name I'm all for people getting out in the field and getting involved but do it right and do it legal !
|
|
austinp
#3 Newhouse
the next fur season is never far from our minds :)
Posts: 3,008
|
Post by austinp on Dec 28, 2013 21:14:31 GMT -5
I would assume that he read the pan. when it comes to public message boards and stories, we can never assume anything... except for the fact that I assume using your stake drivers next season will save me the frustration of bending a half-dozen lesser species into various forms of wrought-iron artwork. You should see what I've created at the end of my hammers at the end of some days here! <lol>
|
|
|
Post by 2labs on Dec 28, 2013 21:16:37 GMT -5
I have sets in my back yard and my neighbor walks his dog on his property but the stupid dog is always in my yard,so I told him I was trapping and I seen the dog in my yard Thursday ! So if he gets caught I am going to be pretty ticked ! We have a leash law in our town!
|
|
|
Post by trashydog on Dec 29, 2013 5:16:15 GMT -5
He was just collecting more traps for his own line ?. i thought the same thing!
|
|
traps82
#3 Newhouse
Hope is always alive
Posts: 3,208
|
Post by traps82 on Dec 29, 2013 11:25:11 GMT -5
Breaking the law not checking traps. MB-650 illegal? Only if it did not have inside lams. It's a shame the cast jaw is not NY legal
|
|
|
Post by erict on Dec 29, 2013 20:37:34 GMT -5
Breaking the law not checking traps. MB-650 illegal? Only if it did not have inside lams. It's a shame the cast jaw is not NY legal Stock MB650 will measure 6 1/8" in NY regardeless if you have inside or outside lams. DEC website says "The Environmental Conservation Law (Section 11-1101[6]) defines how body-gripping traps are measured. You need to measure the inside distance between the outer frames of the trap. The addition of one or more bars to the inside of the frame does not change the way these traps are measured. The measurement is still the maximum distance as shown in this picture."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2013 20:44:34 GMT -5
Yep, that explains body-gripping traps, an MB 650 is a foot hold trap.....
|
|
traps82
#3 Newhouse
Hope is always alive
Posts: 3,208
|
Post by traps82 on Dec 29, 2013 20:54:02 GMT -5
Thank you nyredfox.. Well... The MB-650 COULD be a body grip.. If you use it in a weasel box. Erict... "(13) Measurement of traps.
(i) Body-gripping traps shall be measured in accordance with paragraph 11-1101(6)(b) of the Environmental Conservation Law. The measurement is the maximum distance between pairs of contacting body gripping surfaces, measured from the inside of the gripping surface. The method of measurement is illustrated in the diagrams shown in this subparagraph. In each case, the arrows indicate the dimension that is to be measured for the depicted type of trap. The addition of one or more bars to the INSIDE OF THE FRAME OF A BODY-GRIPPING trap does not alter the dimension to be measured."
So,,, A MB-650 WITH inside lams has an INSIDE spread 5 3/4" which is a NY LEGAL trap!! If not, there a probably 1,000s of illegally set traps out there right now!! Better tell the dealers in NY who are selling inside lam 650s to NYers and selling them as NY legal traps to stop.. Get right on that will ya?
|
|
|
Post by camohoyt340 on Dec 29, 2013 21:14:22 GMT -5
That point was addressed earlier in the post. Adding laminations to foothold traps DOES change the measurement.
Body gripping traps it does NOT.
This has come up numerous times and in the regulations it is clearly stated.
|
|
|
Post by erict on Dec 29, 2013 21:21:39 GMT -5
Ya got me, I was wrong. You learn something new everyday. Not sure why the DEC mixes the foothold and body-grip measurement diagrams on the page with the body-grip measurement instructions. So lams on a land leg-hold reduce the measurement. Where did this thing about bars on body-grip traps come from - was that some loophole they had to close a while ago? Does this refer only to straight metal bars welded on, or does this include any lams welded to the inside of the frame of a body-grip?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2013 21:26:10 GMT -5
Ya got me, I was wrong. You learn something new everyday. Not sure why the DEC mixes the foothold and body-grip measurement diagrams on the page with the body-grip measurement instructions. So lams on a land leg-hold reduce the measurement. Where did this thing about bars on body-grip traps come from - was that some loophole they had to close a while ago? Does this refer only to straight metal bars welded on, or does this include any lams welded to the inside of the frame of a body-grip? Lol. Your usually spot on too!! Your getting rusty!! ECL definitions can be very confusing to understand at times....
|
|
|
Post by nightstalker1 on Dec 29, 2013 21:44:10 GMT -5
On body grips, it's commonly called a "kill bar". It allows complete closure on bodygrips that do not close tight. I'll post a pic tomorrow...welded hundreds of them. Usually on older bodygrips that have a 1/2" - 3/4" space between the jaws when sprung. Mostly done on 330's in my experiences Inside jaw laminations are the only way to make large, non-conforming traps legal here in NY. They are welded on permanently. A standard 3/16" inside lam will make a MB650 NY legal...I have a few dozen in my shed. On foot holds, measure the largest inside spread perpendicular to the levers (parallel to the dog) Here is a post I made a while ago....it should help nytrappers.proboards.com/thread/13192/foothold-trap-ny-legal
|
|
traps82
#3 Newhouse
Hope is always alive
Posts: 3,208
|
Post by traps82 on Dec 29, 2013 22:52:34 GMT -5
Tom... I have wondered about this. That little gap for the dogless pan in the lams... Could that be a "problem" with the measurement? I have done the same thing to #4 Montys and thought about it a time or two.
|
|
austinp
#3 Newhouse
the next fur season is never far from our minds :)
Posts: 3,008
|
Post by austinp on Dec 29, 2013 23:54:32 GMT -5
erict, I was wrong about the same thing before, myself. I understand the rule about bodygrips... one could make #330s legal on land with inside kill bars. But the foothold regs still perplex me. What stops a guy from making #5 longsprings legal on land if the inside lams were thick enough?
|
|
|
Post by nightstalker1 on Dec 30, 2013 17:38:28 GMT -5
erict, I was wrong about the same thing before, myself. I understand the rule about bodygrips... one could make #330s legal on land with inside kill bars. But the foothold regs still perplex me. What stops a guy from making #5 longsprings legal on land if the inside lams were thick enough? Kill bars do not make the bodygrip opening smaller (see pics below) Trying to make a bodygrip opening smaller would interfere with the trigger. As for a foot hold, there is a limit on how much you can add to the inside before interference with the pan post and the pan. Any extreme jaw lams would slow down the jaws closing I'm sure there is someone out there who has tried some crazy mods on foot holds and body grips but they are not the norm..at least in my experiences and other trap mod friends. Here is an old Victor 330. Before adding the 2 kill bars, there was abouta 3/4" gap between the jaws when sprung preventing full closure. This pics shows that the 2 kill bars do not affect the bodygrip opening This pic show the 2 stock jaws at closure plus the added kill bar. All 3 are on the same plane. I jammed a pen between the kill bar and 1 jaw to help show the 3 separate bars. The stock jaws are round and the kill bar is hex stock Here is a side view. As you can see, all are in the same plane and do not affect the bodygrip stock opening. The kill bar ONLY permits full closure of the jaws on a trap where the jaws could not close completely . The kill bar should touch the opposite jaw thus creating full closure
|
|
|
Post by nightstalker1 on Dec 30, 2013 17:58:11 GMT -5
Tom... I have wondered about this. That little gap for the dogless pan in the lams... Could that be a "problem" with the measurement? I have done the same thing to #4 Montys and thought about it a time or two. Jerry....I guess with the "wrong" guy, it could be a problem I do split lams on the Montys too My thought is that we are do the best we can to modify that speciic trap and make it NY legal. A well intentioned effort to obey the law should have some merit Here is a split lam on a Monty #4 that you questioned
|
|
|
Post by eyehi on Dec 30, 2013 18:08:53 GMT -5
Nightstalker why did you add the killbar ? Did you have a problem losing animals or was it added for a quicker kill ? I have heard of these on bodygrips but was curious what the advantage is .....
|
|
|
Post by nightstalker1 on Dec 30, 2013 18:15:23 GMT -5
Nightstalker why did you add the killbar ? Did you have a problem losing animals or was it added for a quicker kill ? I have heard of these on bodygrips but was curious what the advantage is ..... The kill bars made it a better, more efficient and more humane trap A quick kill even with weak springs
|
|