Wcs Tube Trap

[IanB 0]

There is a difference tween the bodygripper traps, fenns etc and the more expensive tube and kania type traps.

 

The latter produced for a professional who is getting paid to remove a pest.

 

If a customer pays me to rid a squirrel from their loft, they want it done efficiently, effectively and most importantly humanely.

 

They do not want and I cannot afford to have a mis-catch and the resulting hysteria that ultimately unfolds from such a situation. It needs to be clinical, which is why I will use a trap that kills every time, no messing.

 

I know what several folk are getting at in this thread, but I would urge them to sit back and think, are we as habitual consumers of crap, really prepared to have even more crap thrust upon us, or, shall we improve the tools of our job and be prepared to pay a little more for it?

 

 

Agree John. But I think we should always have different options, horses for courses if you like, These traps are good at what you suggest, I'd not hesitate to use one in the scenario you explained..

My worry is some are trying to push the likes of the Fenn, etc out Saying there not capable...Some of the traps about now, whats the point... the likes of the DOC, what is the actual point?

[John Keswick 119]

Fenns are an exellent trap, i am not saying they are not. I do have some issues with bodygripper sytle traps (this is a personal preference i suppose), but certainly would not suggest they are taken away and replaced with something else.

 

The folk that are trying to get extra legislation in place, are the very same people who want to offer training courses for £100 a day.
Those that can't do, teach.

[moxy 617]

Those that can't do, teach.

Well said.

[IanB 0]

Fenns are an exellent trap, i am not saying they are not. I do have some issues with bodygripper sytle traps (this is a personal preference i suppose), but certainly would not suggest they are taken away and replaced with something else.

 

The folk that are trying to get extra legislation in place, are the very same people who want to offer training courses for £100 a day.

Those that can't do, teach.

 

I agree these mandatory courses are all coming in its out of hand, I read in a copy of Modern Gamekeeping that the new snare course setup in Scotland they had 1000 entries at £45plus vat within days of setting it up to keep within the law, gamekeepers who have been setting snares from the start, pushed into it. As said its getting silly, same as all this DSC junk. You will need a certificate to shoot a rabbit with an airgun and correct paunching method next !!

[moxy 617]

Pure profit and money for old rope.

 

Won't be long before the snares used are approved and only available from the company that bid the highest when it goes out to tender.

[heritage 202]

I think that's pretty much what the gwct wanted to do....., they seemed to be at the forefront of the recent fox snare testing & then as if by coincidence the wire they developed came out as being not only the best one but the only one that met the new criteria......hoping to gain the monopoly perhaps.....

[IanB 0]

I think that's pretty much what the gwct wanted to do....., they seemed to be at the forefront of the recent fox snare testing & then as if by coincidence the wire they developed came out as being not only the best one but the only one that met the new criteria......hoping to gain the monopoly perhaps.....

 

Snaring is a very niche method of control, some would say these organisations like GWCT are a saviour, trying to save snaring/trapping... I say between them and the public will see the demise of many forms of control in the not far future. Certianly in my lifetime.

[OldTrapCollector 377]

I think that's pretty much what the gwct wanted to do....., they seemed to be at the forefront of the recent fox snare testing & then as if by coincidence the wire they developed came out as being not only the best one but the only one that met the new criteria......hoping to gain the monopoly perhaps.....

 

I agree with that entirely - however I do not understand the requirement for them to 'test' a snare or trap that has already been tested in the field.

 

The DOC trap, after passing stringent and very specific tests to be used as a stoat trap in NZ, in an environment where many ground living animals and birds needed to be protected from the trap (hence the complicated tunnel arrangement) was then 'rigorously tested' at Fordingbridge. Why? Did they expect our stoats to be of any difference to the NZ animals? Or was it a demonstration of independence for GWCT to say that 'they' tested the trap and found it to be effective, and therefore suitable for approval. Then miraculously it appeared on the STAO - and GWCT were to be the sole importers of it. Funny that ...

 

http://www.gwct.org.uk/documents/doc_trap_instructions_05_05_10.pdf

 

http://www.gwct.org.uk/research__surveys/predation/predation_control/tunnel_traps/1682.asp

 

OTC

Edited April 4, 2013 by OldTrapCollector

[Phil Lloyd 10,738]

We had the same performance from the 'testing boards' and commitees,.-when the Bodygrippers were brought in...

The Conibear ,.as a type,..has been well tested for years in Canada and the States,...so,..why all the time wasting posturing from our governing bodies...To be honest,..all the waiting and wondering,.whilst these guys were playing silly buggers with traps that were already proven to be effective,..was an expensive and worrying time...

 

My partner and myself had devoted a fair amount of time, money and energy into the project,.and just when the traps were going to be accepted,...the feckers decided to have 'another look' at the entire Spring Traps Approval Order

 

This went on, and on,...ad infinitum,...and our traps remained in their boxes, stacked high on the pallets,..unable to be sold, until the ancient Sawyer and the poxy Lloyd trap, etc, etc,.. had been given one last hoorah

 

These Ministry fellahs are a difficult bunch to deal with,...and you cannot dictate to them what you feel is best,..they just do their own thing, at their own pace...We accepted certain criteria with regards to the BMI 110 and BMI 116,..simply to get the show on the road,..and as for the BMI 55 ,..well,..the listing is plainly foolish...

 

Personaly,..I feel that kill traps in the UK are going to be under close scrutiny in the near future,..and some will live,.and some will die...

 

All the best, CHALKWARREN...

[johnygreenfeet 5]

i realy dont like the bmi had them when they first came out have they changed them i thought every thing about them said poor rubbish. i use springer no6 all the time and i realy dont think anything elce comes near to them just a point i thought that the idear of a body grip was to hold and not to kill

[heritage 202]

No mate the bmi magnum hasent changed at all since its introduction and In my opinion its the best trap of its kind,not only are they an excellent killing trap but there versatility lends itself well to most trapping situations......

Bodygrips were never designed to hold & such a trap would be illegal .

Some do say that the springers have a much stronger spring and more killing power than the fenn but this isn't something I've ever tried myself and as performance goes I believe that even after all this time the Imbra & juby still beat the other "burrow" type traps hands down.

[johnygreenfeet 5]

i think you are wrong i think a body grip is to hold that is why gin traps were out lawed because they killed the idear of a bar is to hold and for the traper to kill or release

[OldTrapCollector 377]

JGF - I don't know a lot but I am pretty sure that gin traps were banned because they caught by the feet - leg-hold traps - and not killed them ...

 

And of the animals Ihave seen caught in bodygrip traps, NONE were in any state to be released ...

 

OTC

[micky 3,325]

i think you are wrong i think a body grip is to hold that is why gin traps were out lawed because they killed the idear of a bar is to hold and for the traper to kill or release

After reading your comments on bgs I doubt that you have ever used them ,that trap will kill anything that can get its head in that's why there are specific rules on where it can used, the comment about gin traps is a bit suspect also , you are telling people that they are wrong when your own knowledge on the topic is non existent , time will tell if you are looney but I think that your a wrong un.

[Phil Lloyd 10,738]

i think you are wrong i think a body grip is to hold that is why gin traps were out lawed because they killed the idear of a bar is to hold and for the traper to kill or release

 

....the Gin was created to hold,..and trust me, hold... it fecking did....

Many folk,.continued to use the Gin trap long after it was banned...

I went with my Father, on many occasions to check the traps,.. and hauled on the chains,...

 

The Conibear is a 'Kill Trap' ....and if the target species enters the trap, as the trapper intends,..then it will kill...

Edited April 4, 2013 by CHALKWARREN