# MI Legal Snares



## Blacksheep2

I started snaring last year with a buddy of mine using these MI legal snares. We were 0-7 on the season. This year I am 0-2 so far. These snares are terrible and flat out don't work. The breakaway gives every single time. The scene is always the same - giant fight circle, torn up saplings, blood, hair and a seriously mangled and non useable snare still anchored to its base. I used to snare with a cousin many years ago and it was not like this. We had a lot of success. But now, I feel like I am just wasting my time. I don't see many posts on snaring - is anyone even doing this anymore? Does the DNR have any plans to review this idiotic design? I don't mean to vent, I am just beyond frustrated. The snaring season in MI is now ruined because of fear my neighbors dog might get into my snare. This infuriates me beyond words. Please PM me if more comfortable. :rant:


----------



## magnumhntr

No, Michigan's snaring season is ruined because a few vocal houndsmen were worried their dogs would get caught and killed ~ never mind snares have never been allowed on public land ~ so the question is why would anyone running their dogs legally on private land need to worry about their dogs becoming caught in a snare when all they had to do is talk to the land owner before hand to make sure no one was trapping/snaring....

-Chris


----------



## wildlife chaser

I run hounds and if my dog got caught in a snare with the new no locking slides my dogs would just set there and wait for me to come get them they don't keep pulling. the break away isn't for the dogs it was put there for deer. I too have tried to snare with no luck on k-9 so I only do it for beaver now.


----------



## Blacksheep2

The 285# breakaway was placed on the snare for deer. The 4 1/4" loop restriction was placed on the snare for dogs (to the best of my knowledge) The 2 work in conjunction with each other to make an ineffective snare. The more the intended target can breathe, the more they fight. They harder they fight, the greater the chance the breakaway gives. I don't see how injuring all of these coyotes is helping anything. I thought I read somewhere that the DNR was going to review this design and its results after 3 years but I have heard of nothing since. The design doesn't work. I do not enjoy either the thought of giving up the practice or using now illegal snares because they will work.


----------



## Sturgeon-man

magnumhntr said:


> No, Michigan's snaring season is ruined because a few vocal houndsmen were worried their dogs would get caught and killed ~ never mind snares have never been allowed on public land ~ so the question is why would anyone running their dogs legally on private land need to worry about their dogs becoming caught in a snare when all they had to do is talk to the land owner before hand to make sure no one was trapping/snaring....
> 
> -Chris


It's "Stupid " ... The design is just what its called , Cable Restraint. I gave up using them . Relaxing washer and No placing where Tree branchs are lower than 4ft , Can't place them near fence crawl unders , Blah Blah Blah. :rant: IMHO it will Never Change. Magnumhntr just said it in a "Nutshell " . Also I have plenty of Good friends that run Hounds for Bear, Yotes, Cats. Most could care less if MI allowed KILLING Snares


----------



## 2 Kids And I Trap

Black Sheep 
are you using the S-hook or the J-hook?

Also we are working on this issue. 

Jon


----------



## Dave Lyons

The BAD is the only thing we should have period.

Also wildlife chaser even with the old regs. dogs did the same thing just sit there and wait.

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## magnumhntr

Dave Lyons said:


> The BAD is the only thing we should have period.
> 
> Also wildlife chaser even with the old regs. dogs did the same thing just sit there and wait.
> 
> Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Ohub Campfire mobile app


The old regs were just fine ~ could hold most fox and all coyotes in the 2 1/4(I think) deer stop. The changes were made to cater to those who were taking advantage of the trespass laws, plain and simple. I would even be happy with a 3" 'deerstop' if it made the bureaucrats happy... but what good are the current regs if they won't hold the majority of coyotes caught, and those that are held have mellonhead so bad they look like a shar pei?

-Chris


----------



## Goosecall1

Y'all crack me up! On day two with one yote. Last year got 28 year before that got 31 with only running around 70 snares and have only had one coyote brake a snare.


----------



## Dave Lyons

Goose how many did you have dead in the snare

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## 19rabbit52

Goosecall1 said:


> Y'all crack me up! On day two with one yote. Last year got 28 year before that got 31 with only running around 70 snares and have only had one coyote brake a snare.


 You must be misunderstanding the way the restraints are supposed to be built. I don't know anyone who even gets one out of 3 with legal retraints.


----------



## 9

dave lyons said:


> the bad is the only thing we should have period.
> 
> Also wildlife chaser even with the old regs. Dogs did the same thing just sit there and wait.
> 
> Sent from my droid razr hd using ohub campfire mobile app


absolutely!!


----------



## 9

19rabbit52 said:


> You must be misunderstanding the way the restraints are supposed to be built. I don't know anyone who even gets one out of 3 with legal retraints.


Yup, I always find it interesting when folks talk about catch rates with the MI legal CR's. A couple of us, speaking of Dave and myself, snared long, hard, and very successfully with the pre-2005 snares so we've been there, done that! The DNR tested the MI legal cable restraints and found only a 40% successful, 24hr hold rate. I've always wondered how some seem to defy logic and documented testing and incur catch and hold rates comparable to the pre-2005 snares. I don't know, must be just one of those things eh?


----------



## 9

Dave Lyons said:


> The BAD is the only thing we should have period.
> 
> Also wildlife chaser even with the old regs. dogs did the same thing just sit there and wait.
> 
> Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Ohub Campfire mobile app


That was my finding as well. I caught 4 dogs during those pre-2005 years using Gregerson L-4 locks. All of the dogs I caught were large to very large, heavy dogs and NEVER had a single dog even collapse one of the Gregerson locks as all coyote did and are suppose to do with the lethal snare setup I used.


----------



## wildlife chaser

Dave Lyons said:


> The BAD is the only thing we should have period.
> 
> Also wildlife chaser even with the old regs. dogs did the same thing just sit there and wait.
> 
> Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Ohub Campfire mobile app[/QUOTE your right a dog will not choke himself to death and with a gps collar on its not hard to find them. remove the snare and there right back to hunting. as a rule I don't run where I now there are snares but we do have guys that think they can snare anywhere they want


----------



## Dave Lyons

I personally ran (pre-2005) all checkered cam locks with 90-110 BADS on 10-13 ft snares. Released every dog. Biggest was a 130 lb pitbull. Every coyote DEAD just how they should be in a snare. 

I made some NOW michigan legal snares just to see. Never will I set them. Fur damage will be high very high if they even hold them.

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## Dave Lyons

If people would have studied the Alberta snare testing. Thing could be different but because its from Canada.... I could go all night on this topic.

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## Dave Lyons

Seldom you know and I know they are not legal to todays Michigan law.

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## 9

Dave Lyons said:


> Seldom you know and I know they are not legal to todays Michigan law.
> 
> Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Ohub Campfire mobile app


ABSOLUTELY Dave!


----------



## SJC

I have accumulated a fair ammount of empherical data when it comes to Mi snares. I started using them as soon as they were legal. My best season I snared 78 coyotes and 6 foxes in one month. This was with the old regs. When the regs changed, even though I had my doubts, I gave it a go with the new cable restraints. On my first check my partner and i lost six coyotes. Next check we lost 4 more. I have not set one since.

I also have a very hard time believing anyone who tells me they are using Mi legal snares set legally and having a high percentage of captures. I have also caught three dogs including my own in the old snares and none were any worse for wear.


----------



## Blacksheep2

Sorry for the late response. We are having some horrendous weather in SW MI. 
Jon - the snares I am using have the "s" hook breakaway. 
Anyone out there enjoying success is not using the legal restraints. I know this because you can't be successful using these. They don't work. 0-10 in 1.5 seasons. It's not worth doing anymore.


----------



## winsor.jeremy

I guess I'm just lucky with snares then... I purchased 25 last year, all to Michigan regs and went 7 for 7. I did check my sets every morning first thing so I suppose that had a bit to do with it. Not to mention they were all really close to my house.

Sent from my DROID4 using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## 9

SJC said:


> I have accumulated a fair ammount of empherical data when it comes to Mi snares. I started using them as soon as they were legal. My best season I snared 78 coyotes and 6 foxes in one month. This was with the old regs. When the regs changed, even though I had my doubts, I gave it a go with the new cable restraints. On my first check my partner and i lost six coyotes. Next check we lost 4 more. I have not set one since.
> 
> I also have a very hard time believing anyone who tells me they are using Mi legal snares set legally and having a high percentage of captures. I have also caught three dogs including my own in the old snares and none were any worse for wear.


Welcome to the "Pre-2005 Club" SJC! When I made that one reply mentioning Dave and myself, it certainly wasn't my intent of excluding others who snared extensively during the same time period! Hopefully you felt that you were not being slighted in any way.


----------



## 9

Maybe this is a good thread to do a little math and figure out what constitutes a 4.25" deer stop. 4.25" x 3.14 = 13.345" of cable, deer-stop to end stop, constitutes a 4.25" deer-stop loop.

Now just for the sake of argument someone ordered cable restraints for MI but received maybe WI cable restraints by mistake. I believe they're allowed a 3.5" deer-stopped loop so 3.5" x 3.14 = 10.99"(11"). I understand that this size loop will hold 100% of the coyotes. Even with supposedly holding all, the loop must play hell on the mane fur!


----------



## Blacksheep2

All good points and I appreciate all of the feedback but the loop is only one problem and I believe a much smaller problem. In all 10 coyotes that I lost, it was the breakaway that gave every single time. That "s" hook was completely straightened some times and not even found in others. I think if the breakaway was eliminated or made stronger, the 4.25" loop would get you to the 40 or 50% success rate the DNR supposedly quoted. None of this was an issue under the old regs where a coyote lost was an exception and not the rule. The DNR really dropped the ball on this one.


----------



## winsor.jeremy

I love how everyone on this site is so positive that if they don't have something work for them then there is NO WAY it could happen .

Sent from my DROID4 using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## magnumhntr

winsor.jeremy said:


> I love how everyone on this site is so positive that if they don't have something work for them then there is NO WAY it could happen .
> 
> Sent from my DROID4 using Ohub Campfire mobile app


LOL! So what you are saying is you are calling out guys that have been doing this for years :lol:

I'll tell you guys how the one running 'legal michigan snares' are holding coyotes... they are putting the deer stops on with just enough pressure to keep them firmly on the cable, yet loose enough that when a coyote starts to fight the snare the deer stop 'magically' pops off, and then we all know the result of having no deer stop. BTW, this is not an assumption or wild guess ~ was told to me by someone who is doing it....

It is a proven FACT documented by the MDNR and numerous experienced trappers that if you use a truly legal snare by Mi regulations, you won't catch many coyotes....

-Chris


----------



## Northcountry

Michigans current "cable restraint" regs are the joke of the nation.

Ridiculous loop size and non-entaglement rules notwithstanding, what bugs me the most, is how dog owner concerns trumped individual landowner rights. Snaring has only been legal on private land, not public land, so I dont understand why landowners should be forced to cater to the concerns of dog owners, who allow their pets to roam beyond their control, on lands where they dont have permission.

Every day of the year, people drive their street-legal vehicles down the road, within the speed limit, and end up hitting a dog that is running loose. Probably hundreds each day, across the nation, right? Where are the rules to force us to mount giant chunks of foam on our front bumpers and drive under 10mph everywhere, to protect dogs on the loose? 

Oh, that would be too restrictive and inconvenient for people. It would infringe on the drivers' rights, freedom and be downright impractical. Besides, everyone knows that pets must be kept under control and away from harm. The pet owner made the choice to take on that responsibility.

Thousands and thousands of dogs get killed by cars and other perils while running loose, and its chalked up to bad luck. A single tresspassing dog, caught in a snare, makes headlines and rule changes. The disparity is obvious and it blows my mind.

-NC


----------



## magnumhntr

Very well put NC. I do have a question as I am not very well versed in the timeframe of the rule changes, but were there dogs killed/harmed in a snare that was documented, or was this changed on the 'concerns' of those wanting the changes? If there was a dog killed/harmed was the owner legal in the manner the dog became entangled? I searched but could not find discussion on the 'why's' when the rules were changed....

-Chris


----------



## 9

Blacksheep2 said:


> All good points and I appreciate all of the feedback but the loop is only one problem and I believe a much smaller problem. In all 10 coyotes that I lost, it was the breakaway that gave every single time. That "s" hook was completely straightened some times and not even found in others. I think if the breakaway was eliminated or made stronger, the 4.25" loop would get you to the 40 or 50% success rate the DNR supposedly quoted. None of this was an issue under the old regs where a coyote lost was an exception and not the rule. The DNR really dropped the ball on this one.


I appreciate your stance but regardless of the accumulative reasons, using trapping equipment that offers me by design, less than 100% hold is worthless to me! Why would anyone set a trap or hang cable knowing that by documented testing, 6 out of every 10 will not be there in the morning due to the equipment being used by law?? How many fur trappers would use as an example, foothold traps for any furbearer knowing the odds were that you would lose 6 out of 10 rats, 6 out of 10 mink, 6 out of 10 ****, etc.????

Furthermore, who as a fur trapper would willingly use trapping equipment that will devalue the fur that the equipment actually held until you checked???

Also, NC made a very valid and thoughtful reply as we would expect of his participation.


----------



## CaptainNorthwood

winsor.jeremy said:


> I love how everyone on this site is so positive that if they don't have something work for them then there is NO WAY it could happen .
> 
> Sent from my DROID4 using Ohub Campfire mobile app


Do you know the difference between opinions and facts. These guys stated facts and not opinions.


----------



## winsor.jeremy

magnumhntr said:


> LOL! So what you are saying is you are calling out guys that have been doing this for years :lol:
> 
> I'll tell you guys how the one running 'legal michigan snares' are holding coyotes... they are putting the deer stops on with just enough pressure to keep them firmly on the cable, yet loose enough that when a coyote starts to fight the snare the deer stop 'magically' pops off


Never had a stop pull off or a yote dead in a snare. Not saying that those who have more experience shouldn't be frustrated. What I am saying is that there are far more variables at play here. Like the fact that I only had 3-4 snares out at a time with no foot traps out to check. I was able to check my sets every morning around 5am and it took me no more than 15 minutes. For someone to say that what they have seen is the only possibility or that it must have only happened if your bending or breaking the rules is just asinine. I don't know why but I've had legal Michigan snares work for me. If I was trapping to make some money and had 100's of sets out I may have a different story. But the fact of the matter is that I have just trapped out of the enjoyment for it, and snaring has been effective for me. 

...Don't know why I'm even explaining myself... my experience apparently didn't happen as I said it did.


Sent from my DROID4 using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## 19rabbit52

I've tried snaring. I checked mine at 5 in the morning also. All I've ever got was a catch circle with half a twisted up chewed up restraints. Total waste of time and I would have to see a catch to believe it.


----------



## SJC

Seldom- I did not feel slighted at all. I was simply putting my 2 cents worth in and agreeing with you and Dave.

Winsor- Sounds like you have been lucky. I have a pretty good idea of what it takes to consistently hold coyotes with cable and the current Mi legal snares do not fit the bill. I have used my own observations along with those of other trappers who have set hundreds of snares at a time to come to this conclusion. Anybody that I know of who knows their stuff will not waste their time setting cable the way we have to now. 


I have caught quite a few beaver in #1 longsprings, but i would not want to have to use them for beaver nor would I recommend them as a good beaver trap.


----------



## Beaverhunter2

I'm not a fan of Michigan snares by any means. And I can honestly say I've spent more of my time and money fighting in Lansing, Higgins Lake, and St. Ignace for changes than just about anyone on this thread. (Also keep in mind that I don't land snare and quite possibly never will.) But let's be sure we have our facts straight:



Seldom said:


> Why would anyone set a trap or hang cable knowing that by documented testing, 6 out of every 10 will not be there in the morning due to the equipment being used by law?? How many fur trappers would use as an example, foothold traps for any furbearer knowing the odds were that you would lose 6 out of 10 rats, 6 out of 10 mink, 6 out of 10 ****, etc.????


Mike, You got the numbers backwards. The DNR's testing showed that the Michigan legal "cable restraint" held 62% of coyotes. This result was unfortunate for us because it met (barely) the BMP efficiency standard of 60%. No trapping organization I know of agrees with 60% but it is what it is. 



Seldom said:


> Furthermore, who as a fur trapper would willingly use trapping equipment that will devalue the fur that the equipment actually held until you checked???


Be careful- the same argument could be made against bodygrippers. We've all seen "conibear marks". 


I was there when all this was shaking out. We had Ohio regs for two years (Yep- just 2) and unfortunately a number of dogs were killed. (The DNR tells me they believe the total during the first two seasons was approximately 25. Seems high but there is no doubt some dogs were killed. There was an article with pictures in the Detroit Free Press.) The NRC and DNR's decision was that the regs would be revised to reduce the threat to non-targets. The Michigan Hunting Dog Federation offered to agree to Wisconsin Regs at this time. Trappers opposed moving to Wisconsin Regs. The result of the fight was the loop size was increased and entanglement was eliminated; and we got what we have now.

Now we're fighting to get something as "good" as Wisconsin. Another fact- Missouri and Pennsylvania have adopted Wisconsin regs and have had no issues. 

The NRC has agreed to review the snaring regs once the wolf issue is decided; and the current DNR Furbearer Research Biologist was recently published in a scientific journal supporting a 3 1/2" loop and no entanglement. Based on what we are hearing from other states entanglement seems to be the issue- not loop size. So there is potential for improvement. I just hope when we are able to get some positive changes, we don't end up shooting ourselves in the foot.

One last thing to keep in mind- whether any dog that is killed "belonged there" is irrelevant to the non-sporting people who will one day vote on whether we get to trap in the future. They don't want dogs killed. Period. Whose "fault" it is doesn't really matter to them. 

A total of 5 dogs killed over about as many years cost us bodygrippers on public dry land. That is also a fact. I was there and we barely were able to save them on private land. If the DNR's estimate of dogs killed in our original snares is even close to correct it's surprising that we have any dry land snares at all.

There are five people in this state (especially three) that took effective bodygripper sets out of the hands of public land **** trappers (including me). A couple of careless snaremen combined with a couple of careless dog owners could cost us even more. Two of the three most prominent incidents with bodygrippers took place on private land. At least one of the dogs (and it's owner) were trespassing. In the end that didn't matter.

So whatever regs we are able to get- use them if you want. BUT don't be the guy who kills a dog! You could be responsible for costing all trappers their privileges.


John


----------



## 9

Yes, I certainly could have got the percentages ass-backwards from memory. There again, the question remains, why would anyone use equipment where 40% of animals initially caught are not held in 24hrs? Come on John, I bet you certainly don't expect loosing 4 rats or 4 beaver escaping out of ever 10 you catch in your equipment? If you did, I'd bet the farm you would find different equipment or just plain wouldn't do it!! I personally chose in 2005 to learn and use different equipment and methods rather than use inefficient and in my personal opinion, inhuman and fur damaging equipment! 

Also, about the snare marks compared to bodygrip marks. I've received several Top Lot rats AND **** over the years from NAFA caught in a bodygtip! I'm not talking about "marks" to the leather, I'm talking about the rubbing, wear, and abrasion the loose loop causes the mane fur during the coyotes struggle fighting the loop! Two different scenarios completely where body grip holds firmly and in place and a cable restraint slipping around and around the neck and head wearing the fur as the coyote struggles! I mean, coyotes certainly rub with their encounters with brush and briars on their flanks and shoulders, also their manes and ruffs with fence crawl-unders. No, the lethal pre-2005 snares left marks on the leather but none of my grades on coyote appeared to be downgraded due to them or a degradation to the mane caused by a loose loop!!! It was written in a previous post on this thread about observing the hair on the ground. Where and how would somebody figure that came from? A tight loop or a loose loop???


----------



## Beaverhunter2

No argument from me, Seldom! I agree that 40% is an unacceptable loss rate! I just know you are a guy that believes in science and that you would want the numbers to be right.

During one of my many Public Comments to the NRC on snares/cable restraints I made the following analogy:

"Commissioners, I know most of you are hunters so let me explain our [the MTPCA's] issue with the 60% threshold: Let's assume for a moment that you could buy ammunition for your favorite deer rifle or goose gun that was essentially like a guided missile- when the gun went off you were guaranteed of a hit with an instantaneous, humane kill. However, the gun would only go off 6 of every 10 times you pulled the trigger. Would you hunt with this ammo?" More than half of the Commissioners reflexively shook their heads-No. 

I also agree that there are ways to minimize conibear marks. For example, I'm a "trigger-on-the-bottom" guy. And I've seen coyotes with snare marks that could be seen across the room. I also had quite a discussion during a Furbearer Workgroup Meeting _with another trapper_ who opposed open water beaver snares (no stops, of course). His argument- snare marks on the fur. Fortunately we were able to convince the DNR that we could minimize damage by drowning the beaver. We're not going to be able to eliminate snare marks on coyotes- no matter what the loop size and, IMO, lethal snaring is too risky to deer and dogs in Michigan. (JMO!) 

I know a lot of guys have had trouble with current regs and I'm not going to dispute that, but I met a guy at either the K-zoo or March Jay's sale last year that had a couple dozen coyotes he claimed were snared in Michigan legal snares, the snare marks were surprisingly minimal and he claimed his only loss for the year was one chew-out. He approached me at his friend's suggestion and he had no reason to lie. I'm just saying that it appears that some guys are more lucky than others.

We have the opportunity to make changes. Wolves have pushed that (and a lot of other things not trapping or calling-related to the backseat for now. When the wolf issue is resolved we're going to need folks to help us drive that change. And then we're going to really need them to help us keep it (and the rest of trapping).

John


----------



## 2 Kids And I Trap

Cable restraints,

In my opinion they are useless, I am the type of person that has to observe the issue for himself before I believe it. Last year I took a deep plunge into making my own cable restraints. To understand them better and to teach myself every aspect of the cable restraint. 
The 2012-2013 trapping season, I set out 36 cable restraints Jan 1st, out of those cable restraints I connected with 12 Coyotes, 1 chewed out, the rest slipped the loop. 
My total would have been 13 but I have to say I think one of my slips was a really BIG RACCOON. 
I was going to set the same property again this year. But with the snow and storms we have had I think my season is over.


----------



## bay.chris

So what needs to be done to advance to more favorable regs like WI or OH. Where they have just as many dogs out hunting if not more. Hm I keep a xtra snare in my coat pocket in case I forget my leash to lead my mtn.cur out of the woods. Hm maybe I should snare my dogs and film my dogs in a working snare set to show how little they fight it and all with no stress.


----------



## Dave Lyons

Here is what needs to be done. Go back to pre 2005 regs. This snaring was only legal on private land. But now you have bull crap regs and still on private land only. That my friends is a FACT!!!!!!! 

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------

