I don’t know why I am surprised

[JakeLand]

BINGO!!!

[huntingfool7]

It was a 280 set for otter.  It was set at the edge of the river and depending on water level it could have been wet or dry.
I spend time running dogs while bird hunting in North Dakota every year.  I am well aware of the legality of power snares and dry land conis while I'm there. 
As traveling sportsmen, it is our responsibility to be aware of the local laws. 

[GBoyd]

Maybe you guys are right. I definitely can't be sure that the rule changes I'm arguing for would help us keep trapping longer.

But JakeLand, your approach definitely seems like the wrong direction. Yes, trappers were on the land first. Today though we need to constantly justify our presence on the landscape to the general public. If they see trapping as dangerous we are absolutely going to be voted out. So yes, setting a trap in that location was legal, but it created another few hundred people that are against all types of trapping and will vote against us.

Humptulips, what you were saying was more convincing. Maybe restricting the more dangerous traps won't do enough and we should just enjoy using them until we lose them. As someone who understands traps, I definitely would prefer to be caught in a snare or foothold. I can't necessarily assume that the rest of the public knows enough to agree that they're less dangerous.

This is important to me though. If and when Oregon transitions to rules like you have in Washington, I'm out of the game. I just don't see myself lugging huge box traps around the swamps. I'd like to do whatever possible to keep traditional traps legal.

[Humptulips]

I hear what you are saying. I just don't think banning certain traps is the answer. Maybe outlawing situational sets like baited large conibears. I believe this was the focus of the law change in OR a few years ago and that was put in place with the cooperation of hound hunting organizations in the State and the OSTA.
I know in MN there is an ongoing bru haha over baited conis for coon which IMO is asking for trouble. The way to do it though is for the groups to get together and try an solve their concerns.
In this case if it was a 280 blind set any retrievers head would go right over it. Baited it would be a problem but the main trouble is just too public a location. Again I don't know how you legislate common sense.

[JakeLand]

So not to pick a fight because I'm not
But if you've been trapping a spot for X amount of time and then fishermen start using your set location spot do you quit trapping there ?

[Humptulips]

So not to pick a fight because I'm not
But if you've been trapping a spot for X amount of time and then fishermen start using your set location spot do you quit trapping there ?

Maybe you have to change the way you set a place if it gets too public but in the end yes it is trappers who will get elbowed out.
Change your question a little to you've been trapping a spot for years and a school baseball field gets built on the spot (actually happened) and you will see what I mean.
You have to make the decision though.

[Skunk Trapper]

 

Kids baseball field, no choice but to make the decision to move on.

But those granola lovin fly fishers from Portland with the "Free Tibet" sticker on the back of the Volvo wagon who are gonna elbow out trappers....I don't wanna be moving on for them. Hell, add them to the list of furbearers 

I only trap the little spotted stinkers but this kinda stuff still gets my blood boiling...

[JakeLand]

 Baseball field, park YEP gotta change a turd that put his foot in a trap and cries on social media and I'm thinking blew things way outta what it was NOPE I wouldn't apologize one bit . I'm going guess this is the same guy that cries foul until something directly effects him but otherwise wouldn't care

[jackelope]

Reminds me of the dog that got caught in the conibear out here in Cherry Valley a few years back.

[JakeLand]

Reminds me of the dog that got caught in the conibear out here in Cherry Valley a few years back.

ya but if I remember right that was a completely illegal set

[GBoyd]

Yes, I think if more and more people start showing up you eventually have to quit trapping.
I'm going through the same thing at a spot I like to bird hunt. The last couple years, the state of Oregon put up some interpretive signs and cut a trail through. Now my chukar spot has folks dressed up all in bright nylon who glare at me for carrying a shotgun. What do you do though? I just try to be nice to them and hope I have a few more years.

[jackelope]

Reminds me of the dog that got caught in the conibear out here in Cherry Valley a few years back.

ya but if I remember right that was a completely illegal set

Agreed. It was indeed. Who knows how long that trap was there. Could have been legal when it was set there.

[Skunk Trapper]

Yes, I think if more and more people start showing up you eventually have to quit trapping.
I'm going through the same thing at a spot I like to bird hunt. The last couple years, the state of Oregon put up some interpretive signs and cut a trail through. Now my chukar spot has folks dressed up all in bright nylon who glare at me for carrying a shotgun. What do you do though? I just try to be nice to them and hope I have a few more years.

Quit trapping...? Come on now   


What do you do?
Go and scout new chukar spots instead of talking on the internet about how you want to get rid of 330 conibears.

I like conibears 

If they get rid of 330s, next it'll be 280s, then my o'l 110s that I nail dem stinkers with!!